Revenue Management illogic

Old Sep 20, 19, 5:13 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: DL DM, MM; Marriott Plat
Posts: 395
Revenue Management illogic

I understand Married Segment pricing versus individual segment pricing but this one has me baffled. Looking at PSC-MSP-DLH on 9/23 (DL3984, DL3636). Each segment can be purchased as an M fare so availability on each leg is not an issue but DL will not sell the complete trip. It is not available on either DL.com or Expedia. So why would they not sell the through fare, even at Y prices, when seats are available on the individual flights? As a double check, you can get those flights on PSC-EWR (DL3984 to MSP) and EWR-DLH (DL3636 FROM MSP).
Paplover is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 5:17 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); still teleworking with the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.3MM; AS MVPG 75K
Posts: 15,901
the simple reason is that DL doesn’t have a published fare between PSC and DLH (or so I thought; see moondog’s later post); therefore, pricing is additive (by segment)

Last edited by jrl767; Sep 20, 19 at 7:27 pm Reason: parenthetical
jrl767 is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 5:17 pm
  #3  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 91,854
Is MCT violated? Also, does DL publish a through fare from PSC to DLH? Alternatively, would it make sense to drive to Duluth from MSP if you're going to need a car there anyway?

I don't understand your point about EWR as this wouldn't be a logical routing, and probably wouldn't be a legal routing either.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 5:19 pm
  #4  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); still teleworking with the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.3MM; AS MVPG 75K
Posts: 15,901
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
... I don't understand your point about EWR as this wouldn't be a logical routing, and probably wouldn't be a legal routing either.
those were examples of routings where the two segments (i.e., those two specific flights) were available as part of a thru fare
jrl767 is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 6:59 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 33,831
Originally Posted by jrl767 View Post
the simple reason is that DL doesnt have a published fare between PSC and DLH; therefore, pricing is additive (by segment)
Looking at google flights, it appears that they definitely have published fares on that route, but for some reason they aren't selling 3636 in conjunction with 3984 are on 9/23 (they are on other days).
moondog is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 7:54 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 2,708
No married segment inventory despite DL3984 being Y2. The horrors!
xliioper is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 8:01 pm
  #7  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: DL DM, MM; Marriott Plat
Posts: 395
Originally Posted by moondog View Post
Looking at google flights, it appears that they definitely have published fares on that route, but for some reason they aren't selling 3636 in conjunction with 3984 are on 9/23 (they are on other days).
Actually, I am booked on those flights as a through fare. I was checking looking at chances for a VDB. Earlier there were multiple one stop options, now only 1. Both individual flights are selling M fares so not yet full.
Paplover is offline  
Old Sep 20, 19, 8:06 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 2,708
We get it. DL3984 is Y2 B1 M1 (and J0). Given the very few seats available on that flight, DL not wanting to provide any inventory on DL3984/DL3636 is hardly surprising.
xliioper is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 5:34 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by xliioper View Post
No married segment inventory despite DL3984 being Y2. The horrors!
There is married segment inventory on DL3984. EWR, BOS, and BNA all return married segment inventory with an M fare. Act fast and you can pick up the H1 on DL3984 if you go to MSN for only $549. But DLH (along with at least FAR and RST) are blocked on DL3984 yet available on the later DL3519 departure (Z4,Y3,L1) as a B fare for $599.

As inventory runs low, does DL prohibit married segments on short hops as a rough proxy for a logic is that longer flights will be higher fares? As a DL regional flyer myself, my experience has often been that distance and price are inversely related on Delta.
ajggiant is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 6:06 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 2,708
Not really seeing your point. Yes, they decided to release some inventory on DL3984 when paired with some other flights. The whole point of married segment inventory is that it can vary between flight pairs. DL3984 alone has no married inventory as the term is only relevant when you consider which flights it is married with. At any rate, these decided to release Y1 now on 3984 for the 3984/3636 married pair with a $1099 price for the full Y fare. Many of the other married pairs are now down to B1 (despite DL3984 having H1 inventory).

Who knows what the algorithms are programmed for in terms of what inventory level to release in the married pairs. It could be the DLH market is considered more captive and DL figures those flyers will be willing to take some less convenient alternative routings, while DL is offering some inventory in more competitive markets where flyers might be more likely to consider DL alternatives.

Last edited by xliioper; Sep 21, 19 at 6:14 am
xliioper is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 7:48 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by xliioper View Post
Who knows what the algorithms are programmed for in terms of what inventory level to release in the married pairs. It could be the DLH market is considered more captive and DL figures those flyers will be willing to take some less convenient alternative routings, while DL is offering some inventory in more competitive markets where flyers might be more likely to consider DL alternatives.
That was mostly my point, to speculate on the algorithm that blocks faring DLH. Although given that FAR and RST are similarly blocked, Id guess this is a rough radius based restriction rather than specific to DLH (in some ways it resembles geographically the pattern of not publishing connecting fares between nearby city pairs, but that issue is different in a lot of ways and may well be coincidence).

The other observation Id note is that most of the married segment inventory discussions Ive been a part of have been about releasing inventory at cheaper fare classes, Z fares and so forth, based on competitive vs captive markets etc. But in this case DL is pulling all inventory on those pairs, even at full fare.
ajggiant is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 9:03 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 2,708
Originally Posted by ajggiant View Post
That was mostly my point, to speculate on the algorithm that blocks faring DLH. Although given that FAR and RST are similarly blocked, I’d guess this is a rough radius based restriction rather than specific to DLH (in some ways it resembles geographically the pattern of not publishing connecting fares between nearby city pairs, but that issue is different in a lot of ways and may well be coincidence).

The other observation I’d note is that most of the married segment inventory discussions I’ve been a part of have been about releasing inventory at cheaper fare classes, Z fares and so forth, based on competitive vs captive markets etc. But in this case DL is pulling all inventory on those pairs, even at full fare.
No, that's not usually how they are used. Fares are already priced based on competitiveness of markets. Cheapest PSC-MSP V fare is $249 while PSC-DLH is $219. All-in-all, DL would rather sell a $249 V fare on PSC-MSP to one pax and a $129 V fare on MSP-DLH to another pax rather than a single $219 V fare on PSC-MSP-DLH to one pax. So it'd be fairly normal to see V on PSC-MSP and MSP-DLH, but only X or higher available for PSC-MSP-DLH when married. It can be the reverse depending on the competition and the fare premium they enjoy on the O&D fares, but I wouldn't say that's the norm.
xliioper is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 3:57 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 2,179
I mean, there's plenty of nominal inanity to go around. When Delta pulled NYC-Virginia connections via ATL earlier this year, it had the (for me infuriating) effect off yanking the ability to fly into PHF (ORF and RIC are still doable). For a while, I believe the rules stated "flight must be direct or nonstop"...but since the only airport DL serves from PHF is ATL, this passive-aggressively barred such tickets.

(The way this combines with the erratic equipment allocations on JFK-ORF/RIC meant that instead of flying home on Delta, I took the train home on Amtrak. I was coming in from a BA flight and I had absolutely no desire to mess around with a domestic coach baggage allowance after a week-and-a-half international trip, and AA is just annoyingly expensive. As an aside: Yes, Delta, I'd happily pay for a nominal "First Class" seat in the first row of Satan's Chariot to attach all of the associated privileges to the fare, and if that had been on offer you might have actually gotten my business on that trip.)
GrayAnderson is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 5:28 pm
  #14  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 33,831
Originally Posted by GrayAnderson View Post
I mean, there's plenty of nominal inanity to go around. When Delta pulled NYC-Virginia connections via ATL earlier this year, it had the (for me infuriating) effect off yanking the ability to fly into PHF (ORF and RIC are still doable). For a while, I believe the rules stated "flight must be direct or nonstop"...but since the only airport DL serves from PHF is ATL, this passive-aggressively barred such tickets.

(The way this combines with the erratic equipment allocations on JFK-ORF/RIC meant that instead of flying home on Delta, I took the train home on Amtrak. I was coming in from a BA flight and I had absolutely no desire to mess around with a domestic coach baggage allowance after a week-and-a-half international trip, and AA is just annoyingly expensive. As an aside: Yes, Delta, I'd happily pay for a nominal "First Class" seat in the first row of Satan's Chariot to attach all of the associated privileges to the fare, and if that had been on offer you might have actually gotten my business on that trip.)
Why didn't you fly BA to PHL and onward to PHF on AA? That would surely be more convenient than the train drill, and I'd be surprised if the price differential was especially great.
moondog is offline  
Old Sep 21, 19, 8:16 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 2,179
(1) It was an award seat on AA and I don't think there was LHR-PHL availability.
(2) Notwithstanding (1), I'm fairly sure there wasn't BA availability LHR-PHL in F on a 744. So there was definitely a "bucket list" angle here.
(3) Also notwithstanding (1) and (2), it was an AS award seat and I couldn't find space into PHF (and I don't think ORF or RIC) that "played well", and to boot I would've been socked for additional miles (AA space on AS is a bit "touchy"). Doing it on a unified award is a non-starter (AS won't sell joint AA/BA awards) so I'd have been out an additional 25k miles or cash.
GrayAnderson is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: