Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/2559663/

Topic: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-20 04:19:18 and read 5576 times.

http://news.delta.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=10042

Personally, after the kind of relationship ICT has chosen to have with legacy carriers, I would have left them out of the bunch, buuuuuut......


Delta Adds Seasonal Non-Stops to Orlando for Customers in Five East Coast, Midwest Markets


New flights available just in time for summer travel from Bloomington, Moline, Rochester, Newport News/Williamsburg, and Wichita


ORLANDO, Jan. 19, 2006 – Delta Air Lines’ customers in five cities across the East Coast and Midwest will enjoy the ease of non-stop flights between their hometowns and one of the world’s favorite vacation destinations – Orlando – just in time for summer travel. Effective from late May through early September 2006, Delta will offer customers in Bloomington, Ill., Moline, Ill., Rochester, N.Y., Newport News/Williamsburg, Va., and Wichita, Kan., new non-stop, round-trip flights to Orlando International Airport, complementing existing connecting service between these cities and Orlando via Delta’s hubs.
“Delta is excited to offer our customers in these markets increased choices for travel to their favorite attractions in Orlando directly from their hometown airports,” said Bob Cortelyou, vice president – Network Planning. “Delta has long been known as Florida’s airline, offering the most flights to the most Florida destinations from more U.S. states than any other airline, and it is especially gratifying to expand this convenience to customers in five more new markets.”
With the increased service, customers in Bloomington, Moline, Rochester, Newport News/Williamsburg and Wichita will be able to choose to fly non-stop to the heart of Florida for summer travel as well as continue to enjoy the convenience of year-round flights to Delta’s hubs where they can connect hundreds of worldwide destinations. Delta’s summer schedule features six daily round-trip flights to the world’s largest airline hub in Atlanta from Newport News and Rochester, three daily round-trip flights between Bloomington and Atlanta, and four daily round-trip flights between Moline and Atlanta. Additionally, customers in Rochester will continue to enjoy round-trip flights to Delta’s Cincinnati hub with three daily flights.
Delta’s new flights to Orlando will be operated by Delta Connection carriers Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Comair and Freedom Airlines using 50-seat regional jets. These quiet, comfortable aircraft feature a seating configuration where every seat is a window or an aisle, with no middle seats.
With its summer schedule, Delta will operate 121 daily flights from Orlando to 52 destinations in the United States and the Bahamas. Additionally, Delta offers daily service to 17 other Florida cities.
Delta’s new daily service* between Bloomington, Ill. and Orlando, effective
May 25 through Sept. 4, 2006 Flight
Departs
Arrives

6139
Bloomington at 12:03 p.m.
Orlando at 3:28 p.m.

6139
Orlando at 10:00 a.m.
Bloomington at 11:38 a.m.


*Operated by Delta Connection carrier Freedom Airlines
Delta’s new daily service* between Moline, Ill. and Orlando, effective
May 25 through Sept. 4, 2006 Flight
Departs
Arrives

5176¹
Moline at 7:30 a.m.
Orlando at 11:06 a.m.

5172
Orlando at 11:05 a.m.
Moline at 12:50 p.m.


*Operated by Delta Connection carrier Comair
¹Flight operates May 26 through Sept. 5, 2006
Delta’s new daily service* between Newport News/Williamsburg, Va. and Orlando, effective May 25 through Sept. 4, 2006 Flight
Departs
Arrives

6091¹
Newport News at 7:45 a.m.
Orlando at 9:43 a.m.

6142
Orlando at 5:21 p.m.
Newport News at 7:17 p.m.


*Operated by Delta Connection carrier Freedom Airlines
¹Flight operates May 26 through Sept. 5, 2006
Delta’s new daily service* between Rochester, N.Y. and Orlando, effective
May 25 through Sept. 4, 2006 Flight
Departs
Arrives

5221¹
Rochester at 7:55 a.m.
Orlando at 10:42 a.m.

5224
Orlando at 4:58 p.m.
Rochester at 7:38 p.m.


*Operated by Delta Connection carrier Comair
¹Flight operates May 26 through Sept. 5, 2006
Delta’s new Saturday service* between Wichita, Kan. and Orlando, effective
May 27 through Sept. 2, 2006 Flight
Departs
Arrives

4150
Wichita at 10:45 a.m.
Orlando at 2:30 p.m.

4150
Orlando at 3 p.m.
Wichita at 5 p.m.


*Operated by Delta Connection carrier Atlantic Southeast Airlines
A portion of travel on some itineraries may be provided by the Delta Connection® carriers: Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Comair or Freedom Airlines.
Delta Air Lines (Other OTC: DALRQ) is the world’s second-largest airline in terms of passengers carried, offering daily flights to 503 destinations in 94 countries on Delta, Song, Delta Shuttle, the Delta Connection carriers and its worldwide partners. In summer 2006, Delta will be the world's leading carrier across the Atlantic as it launches flights on 11 new European routes from its Atlanta and New York-JFK hubs. Delta also is a major carrier to Mexico, South and Central America and the Caribbean, with more than 35 routes announced, added or applied to serve since Jan. 1, 2005. Delta's marketing alliances also allow customers to earn and redeem SkyMiles on more than 14,000 flights offered by SkyTeam and other partners. Delta is a founding member of SkyTeam, a global airline alliance that provides customers with extensive worldwide destinations, flights and services. Customers can check in for flights, print boarding passes and check flight status at delta.com.




OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Quickmover
Posted 2006-01-20 04:24:52 and read 5554 times.

Could this be a little bit of retaliation for Airtrans ATL-SEA announcement yesterday?

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-20 04:27:27 and read 5536 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Thread starter):
Personally, after the kind of relationship ICT has chosen to have with legacy carriers, I would have left them out of the bunch, buuuuuut......

As soon as I saw the headline to this post, competition to AirTran cities came into my head (duh) but Bloomington and Moline were two cities that came instantly to my mind.

This definitely stirs the pot for a few airports that are doing whatever it takes to court AirTran, even if it is just for summer seasonal service.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DocChaos
Posted 2006-01-20 04:28:00 and read 5533 times.

I did not know about AirTran's announcement, but I could see that.

DL is going after FL... BMI-ATL and MLI-ATL and now both cities to MCO as well.

DocChaos

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-20 04:31:13 and read 5518 times.

Quoting DocChaos (Reply 3):
DL is going after FL... BMI-ATL and MLI-ATL and now both cities to MCO as well.



Quoting Quickmover (Reply 1):
Could this be a little bit of retaliation for Airtrans ATL-SEA announcement yesterday?

Perhaps, but I think an announcement for nonstop into Orlando had to be in the works for some time, especially after Delta set up shop in Bloomington and Moline with their service through Atlanta.

Wichita, Newport News, and Rochester were just add-ons to the cake.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: 73G
Posted 2006-01-20 04:38:08 and read 5484 times.

You know what they say...'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.' AirTran is the #1 carrier at PHF. Its been well-documented how the citizens of Wichita, Bloomington, and Moline feel about Delta. There are currently two daily 717's in the ROC-MCO market, where AirTran also has a strong presence. But hey, if DL wants to compete with CRJ's against 717's, so be it. With all those gates they just gave up, maybe the two will become neighbors in MCO.

Quoting OttoPylit (Thread starter):
Personally, after the kind of relationship ICT has chosen to have with legacy carriers, I would have left them out of the bunch, buuuuuut......

Not all legacy carriers, just one...that cried foul.

[Edited 2006-01-20 05:09:09]

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: BH346
Posted 2006-01-20 04:42:06 and read 5466 times.

For ICT, it is definitely a direct respone to AirTran's service since I'm certain that their ICT-MCO flights are also Saturday-only. I have a feeling that the airport authority and city officials will be less than welcoming to the new Delta Connection service. It will be interesting to see the official news release from the airport on the service.

[Edited 2006-01-20 04:48:54]

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Quickmover
Posted 2006-01-20 05:01:33 and read 5392 times.

Can they make any money running a 50 seat RJ in a small market already served by a LCC ? Maybe the fares will be high enough to offset the lack of traffic. Looks like overkill to me.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DCA-ROCguy
Posted 2006-01-20 05:26:30 and read 5324 times.

AirTran's picking up the pace in Rochester. Last winter they had 7 dailies after then-holiday seasonal FLL ended--3x BWI; 2x ATL; 1x MCO; 1x TPA.

Jan. 30, '06 shows 9 dailies: an additional MCO daily plus FLL nonstop is continuing. This summer they're going to 10 dailies at ROC--the most they've ever run (they've had 9 the past two summers). June 19 shows 3x ATL, 3x BWI, 2x MCO, 1x TPA and 1x FLL. Don't know if that includes any 73G's.

Delta's not going to get much additional market share with one 50-seat RJ added to their existing 9-daily all-RJ schedule at ROC (which, according to the press release, isn't increasing). But the ROC market will probably absorb 50 additional seats during the summer just fine, and both sides of A concourse should do well.

Jim

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-20 05:36:14 and read 5296 times.

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 7):
Can they make any money running a 50 seat RJ in a small market already served by a LCC ? Maybe the fares will be high enough to offset the lack of traffic. Looks like overkill to me.

Just on average, from what I've noticed, the one stop airfares seem to be averaging about $220. The nonstop airfares seem to be into the higher $200's, almost at the $300 range.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: MD90fan
Posted 2006-01-20 05:43:29 and read 5269 times.

Looks like these are all FL markets. Why does DL send little RJ's up against FL's 717's? To piss away yields? Do these kind of flights make money? But either way good news for DL expanding MCO

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2006-01-20 06:38:21 and read 5187 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Thread starter):
Delta Adds Seasonal Non-Stops to Orlando for Customers in Five East Coast, Midwest Markets

For God's sake STOP WITH THE RJS TO MCO! Sending high cost airplanes to low yield markets doesn't work!!

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Apodino
Posted 2006-01-20 15:34:25 and read 4988 times.

First Delta want's to get rid of a lot of gates in MCO, now they want to add a bunch of flights to new destinations? No wonder some of these airlines are in chapter 11.

And legacies, you complain about all the excess capacity and unprofitable routes. Retaliating against LCC's is not helping anything. If you guys want to be profitable STOP RETALIATING AGAINST LCC's, you aren't hurting them you are hurting yourself. If you want to compete out of your own hubs to defend your territory that is one thing, but this is totally different. Its no different than NW running DC9's from FAR-LAS, and then complaining that they are too much in the red. That is the big problem with the legacy carriers, they try to retaliate too much against the LCC's and then when they lose money as a result, instead of cutting the route against the LCC, they go to the unions for wage cuts. Hello Mr. Steenland or Grinstein, try cutting unprofitable routes first and save money that way and then go to the unions.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Surfdog75
Posted 2006-01-20 23:05:56 and read 4678 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
For God's sake STOP WITH THE RJS TO MCO! Sending high cost airplanes to low yield markets doesn't work!!

You are so right.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: TOLtommy
Posted 2006-01-20 23:36:06 and read 4618 times.

DL dropped a CRJ on MCO-CAK a few months back, again hoping to poach some FL customers. Anyone know how DL is doing in the market? CRJ is no match to the 717...

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Corey07850
Posted 2006-01-20 23:44:21 and read 4601 times.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
First Delta want's to get rid of a lot of gates in MCO, now they want to add a bunch of flights to new destinations? No wonder some of these airlines are in chapter 11.

My sentiments exaclty....

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DAL767400ER
Posted 2006-01-20 23:58:22 and read 4578 times.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
First Delta want's to get rid of a lot of gates in MCO, now they want to add a bunch of flights to new destinations? No wonder some of these airlines are in chapter 11.

Nevermind the fact that DL currently uses 24 gates for less than 50 mainline flights, and that these new additions are all RJs, which will use the 13 RJ positions  Yeah sure . Yeah, I see, keeping 16 mainline gates because 5 RJ flights are being added is absolutely logical. Brilliant.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: FCYTravis
Posted 2006-01-21 00:18:22 and read 4550 times.

They don't have anything else to do with the RJs other than send them to the desert, so might as well slap 'em on low-yield Florida routes.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: LawnDart
Posted 2006-01-21 00:26:35 and read 4532 times.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
If you guys want to be profitable STOP RETALIATING AGAINST LCC's,

Huh? Okay - so when should the legacy carriers stop competing with LCCs...after the LCCs have taken over the market?

Listen, if the LCCs want to compete, then they need to compete...against the legacies (who've been competing with each other for, what, 80 years?), as well as with other LCCs...and that's where the real blood bath is going to be.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
If you want to compete out of your own hubs to defend your territory that is one thing, but this is totally different.

How so? Was FL in MCO before DL? DL has had a major presence in MCO before the original AirTran and Valujet ever thought of merging...wait, I mean before the original AirTran even existed...oh, hold on...what was that previous low-cost, Orlando-hubbing carrier called? That's right...Braniff 3 ever exist...one moment please...oh, yeah...before Florida Express ever existed.

So, how is it you think DL is picking on FL in their own market? And if that's the standard you think airlines should use to select markets, then what the hell is AirTran doing in ATL anyway?

I'm so tired of people whining about the response legacy carriers have towards LCCs...AA and NW are far more ruthless when it comes to that, and history will repeat itself over and over...anyone starting a new airline needs to know that before they go into business...watch out, Virgin America.

If I had been in DL management, I would have pushed FL over when they were teetering on the edge of total liquidation a couple of years ago...

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: TinPusher007
Posted 2006-01-21 01:25:13 and read 4471 times.

The cost structure of RJ's on low-yielding routes and the onboard product are significantly inferior to that of FL B6, WN, etc. How much more money and market share does DL need to lose to understand that? For my money, if Im planning a vacation and FL is $50 more to fly on a 717 from ROC to MCO instead of the requisite CRJ, FL will get my money, every time.
Then, when they can't make money on it, they'll have a press release saying they are looking for new Regional partners because Freedom is too expensive for them. If having a workforce of pilots that qualify for foodstamps is too much for DL to operate with and make some money then why bother? Okay, went off a tangent there...just had to vent.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-21 01:52:14 and read 4436 times.

I also have to vent... why do they feel a need to start MCO-MLI?? FL already serves that. They switched over CVG-MLI to ATL-MLI to compete against FL. This is clearly to grab marketshare from FL. If they wanted a decent yield and loads they could fly MCO-OMA. That airport doesn't even have MCO service n/s, and really could use it.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: MD90fan
Posted 2006-01-21 03:54:54 and read 4182 times.

Will DL ever add some mainline service out of MCO? They have been adding too many RJ's nowadays. Also they can add a ton of flights with 24 gates  wink 

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: GSPITNL
Posted 2006-01-21 04:04:44 and read 4144 times.

Quoting MD90fan (Reply 21):
Will DL ever add some mainline service out of MCO? They have been adding too many RJ's nowadays. Also they can add a ton of flights with 24 gates

I agree but then DL don't have that many open jets to add mainline. They have cut several cities from CRJ's or reduced them and this free's up many CRJ's for other places. Until things go back into the Black or a lighter color of red and they get delivery of the rest of the remaining 738's, I don't see DL doing much other than International expansion mainline speaking. I see more CR7 routes as ASA and Sky West have bigger jets coming. I also see a few more E170's taking over for some of the older Comair CRJ's that are on heavy traveled routes that really need bigger service.

As for the MCO expansion, I think its crap with the exception of Rochester and Newport News. The rest can go piss themselves for as much good as there going to do.

My 2cents.....

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Kbmiflyer
Posted 2006-01-22 03:44:41 and read 3881 times.

Well, The folks here in Bloomington aren't exactly jumping for joy for the new service.

Http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2006/01/21/news/104346.txt

I am a little on the fence personally. AA, NW, and even FL have reduced service in the last year here at BMI, we need to replace the capacity somewhere. The concern of many here is that if DL does manage to force FL out, then they will pack up and leave also. Hopefully we won't have to find out.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-22 03:56:08 and read 3863 times.

Quoting Kbmiflyer (Reply 23):

Well, The folks here in Bloomington aren't exactly jumping for joy for the new service.

It's the same way in Flint. NW duplicates there service to Florida and LAS, and DL switches FNT over to ATL only service and cuts CVG. That's got to be very frusterating to them. Like I said in my other post on this thread, if they were interested in making money, they would send that flight somewhere like OMA, where there is no n/s to MCO, and also has a much larger O&D market than BMI.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: CIDflyer
Posted 2006-01-22 04:15:19 and read 3841 times.

Quoting Kbmiflyer (Reply 23):
Well, The folks here in Bloomington aren't exactly jumping for joy for the new service

I would imagine that the folks in MLI will be concerned about this as well as they were not too pleased when DL switched the CVG service to ATL to go head to head with FL. Can markets of these size really support up to 11x weekly service to MCO? What really stinks, like Iowaman said, is that airports like OMA would probably love to see the service and could support it. I for one, wish the daily CRJ from MLI to MCO would be switched to CID-ATL. I am still perplexed as to why we have not seen non stop ATL service to ATL yet in CID, especially after GRB amd MSN received it.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-22 21:40:26 and read 3713 times.

Quoting CIDflyer (Reply 25):
am still perplexed as to why we have not seen non stop ATL service to ATL yet in CID, especially after GRB amd MSN received it.

Basically because CID has no AirTran is the only reason I can come up with, even though GRB and MSN don't. I don't get it really. CID-ATL would be so much better, there is more O&D and many more connections available.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: FlyPeoria
Posted 2006-01-22 22:33:21 and read 3670 times.

PIA had SFB service in May - November 2005 on G4 (discontinued because of competition from FL, and the fact that FL flies to much-more-convenient MCO). Strange that DL didn't offer PIA-MCO instead of BMI-MCO.

I sent an email to the PIA airport authority about this yesterday and hopefully, will get a response tomorrow.

DPJ

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Cidflyer
Posted 2006-01-22 23:31:53 and read 3623 times.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 26):
Basically because CID has no AirTran is the only reason I can come up with, even though GRB and MSN don't. I don't get it really. CID-ATL would be so much better, there is more O&D and many more connections available.

I totally agree, and I think DL is really missing the boat by not adding ATL service here. I think it would be immediately successful, much like when AA added DFW here six years ago. The connections would be tremendous as well as the higher O & D. Its a shame DL feels they need to grow other cities that probably really can't handle all that capacity to stave off competition from FL, when they could have a golden opportunity trying to gain market share in cities that they under serve. As FlyPeoria noted, PIA had the G4 service to Orlando/SFB and DL didn't try to compete with that like they haven't decided to compete with G4 in CID to Orlando. The situation sounds similar at PIA and BMI like it is here between CID and MLI.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-23 01:32:03 and read 3548 times.

Quoting 73G (Reply 5):
Its been well-documented how the citizens of Wichita, Bloomington, and Moline feel about Delta.

Not the citizens, just the airports.

Quoting 73G (Reply 5):
Not all legacy carriers, just one...that cried foul.

Nope all. ICT refused to give any support to any legacy carrier. DL just happened to be the one that brought the FAA into it and is going to fine ICT for the practice, if they haven't already.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
Sending high cost airplanes to low yield markets doesn't work!!

Geesh, your starting to sound like PNSguy.  Wink

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
If you guys want to be profitable STOP RETALIATING AGAINST LCC's, you aren't hurting them you are hurting yourself. If you want to compete out of your own hubs to defend your territory that is one thing, but this is totally different

If legacies are only hurting themselves, then why does FL have a section of the company devoted to complaining to airports. For instance, if another airline announces service to a city that may hurt FL, FL immediately starts lobbying the airport, saying that the airport should try to stop it or refuse it, or else FL will be forced to leave and guarantees that the other airline will raise fares to rediculous levels. Why, if legacies would only hurt themselves, does Airtran have a whole department who does that job?

And, if they are only hurting themselves, why are start-ups like Legend and Vanguard, for instance, no longer in business. AA and NW are much more vicious in regards to LCC's and have done a pretty good job of either running them out of markets, or keeping them extremely limited in service.

Quoting TOLtommy (Reply 14):
DL dropped a CRJ on MCO-CAK a few months back, again hoping to poach some FL customers. Anyone know how DL is doing in the market?

Its been running with a steady 80-85% LF using Freedom/Mesa ERJ's, NOT CRJ's.

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 18):
So, how is it you think DL is picking on FL in their own market? And if that's the standard you think airlines should use to select markets, then what the hell is AirTran doing in ATL anyway?

Bingo!



Quoting Iowaman (Reply 20):
They switched over CVG-MLI to ATL-MLI to compete against FL. This is clearly to grab marketshare from FL

Duh! Why is it that FL can set up shop in ATL and its called competition, but if DL competes on similar routes, its complained and bitched about? Its all competition, and with DL being in bankruptcy, it has protection from paying bills in order to compete heavily without really losing much. And if these are profitable routes, most people will choose DL over FL anyway, therefore giving DL one more profitable route to keep. Simple.

Quoting Kbmiflyer (Reply 23):
Well, The folks here in Bloomington aren't exactly jumping for joy for the new service.

Http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2...6.txt

See my reply to APODINO about FL, here is proof. FL probably called that report into the BMI news and faxed them an already written article. LOL




OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-23 01:50:16 and read 3522 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 29):
Duh! Why is it that FL can set up shop in ATL and its called competition, but if DL competes on similar routes, its complained and bitched about?

Because these routes where announced after FL came to these cities, and the other cities where they could get better yields and could fill the planes up they don't bother with. DL is not interested in competiting, they are trying to hurt FL, and if they did want the yields, they would of stuck with CVG-BMI/MLI and not high cost RJ's on MCO-BMI/MLI.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-23 06:04:14 and read 3406 times.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 30):
DL is not interested in competiting, they are trying to hurt FL, and if they did want the yields, they would of stuck with CVG-BMI/MLI and not high cost RJ's on MCO-BMI/MLI.

But they cut down on CVG, so sole CVG-BMI flights wouldn't really cut it. And if MCO-BMI or MLI makes a profit for FL, why wouldn't DL be able to have a piece of the pie? Hell, B6 tried to make its mark in ATL and everyone was thrilled by the "competition" until it left with its tail between its legs. How do we know that it wasn't trying to make a profit, but just to hurt DL's yields? And FL's, for that matter, since they had to wet-lease A320's to compete. I don't see anyone making that claim?

Just because an airline finds a profitable route doesn't mean others can't compete for it. This is capitalism at work. And who ever provides the better service and more convenience for the customers will come out the winner, simple as that.



OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-23 06:20:15 and read 3389 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31):
Just because an airline finds a profitable route doesn't mean others can't compete for it. This is capitalism at work. And who ever provides the better service and more convenience for the customers will come out the winner, simple as that.

There is no winners when FL pulls out and DL does too.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31):
And if MCO-BMI or MLI makes a profit for FL, why wouldn't DL be able to have a piece of the pie?

FL's CASM are much lower than a CRJ here. Much much lower. There is no way that DL can make money of these new routes.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31):
Hell, B6 tried to make its mark in ATL and everyone was thrilled by the "competition" until it left with its tail between its legs

And I bet fares got jacked up too after they left.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: FlyPNS1
Posted 2006-01-23 06:46:22 and read 3362 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31):
And if MCO-BMI or MLI makes a profit for FL, why wouldn't DL be able to have a piece of the pie?

Because DL has bloated high costs and this route is relatively low-yield.

The only reason DL is launching these routes is because DL has excess RJ capacity and needs a place to stuff these planes. And if DL is going to lose money flying these planes, they may as well take a swipe at Airtran in the process.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-23 06:51:15 and read 3354 times.

wow, it's fun to see the type of people who work for Delta Air Lines.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 29):
See my reply to APODINO about FL, here is proof. FL probably called that report into the BMI news and faxed them an already written article. LOL

umm....no.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31):

But they cut down on CVG, so sole CVG-BMI flights wouldn't really cut it.

they'd offer non out of the way connections that are being offered in Atlanta and might be able to do much *much* better in competing against AirTran, American, United, Northwest, etc.

but that idea hasn't crossed anybody's heads, so let them continue to tinker away against 717's with CRJ's in leisure low fare markets.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Flymli
Posted 2006-01-23 20:24:12 and read 3241 times.

There is no doubt a concern for BMI and MLI with the recent DL announcement to MCO for the Summer season. I think the seasoned traveler will prefer a 717 vs. a 50 seat RJ. But as you all know, the leisure person looks at price, price, price. Their is no logic behind DL except for a blatant attack on FL. Yes, it is true, DL from CID-ATL is a market that I can't believe they aren't in and their is alot of O & D traffic there. All 5 of the announced cities to MCO are good FL markets to ATL.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-24 02:16:44 and read 3107 times.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 32):
There is no winners when FL pulls out and DL does too.

Delta never said anything about pulling out. If this market is profitable for FL, then it COULD also profitable for DL, and if it is, they would obviously keep it.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 32):
There is no way that DL can make money of these new routes.

Apparently someone with a Master's degree in economics at Delta's Revenue Management Department thinks so. An RJ may have higher CASM, but it is also easier to break a profit on. Delta can make money on the route, even if its a smaller margin, just by filling the smaller plane.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 32):
And I bet fares got jacked up too after they left.

Nope. Available fares for Delta on ATL-LAX are $181 OW and $312 RT. That is cross country flights on widebody aircraft mind you. Not exactly what you can call "jacked up."

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 33):
The only reason DL is launching these routes is because DL has excess RJ capacity and needs a place to stuff these planes. And if DL is going to lose money flying these planes, they may as well take a swipe at Airtran in the process.

Welcome to the discussion. You missed class the day that Comair had to ditch over 30 RJ's and furlough 150 pilots because of the cut, and are in the process of trying to drop more if they can get out of the leases. Delta HAD excess RJ capacity, but is dropping a lot of that as fast as they can and is looking into turboprops for many short or low yield routes. But you make a good point, if you going to lose money on those flights, why not take someone else's yield with you? Hell of a business move, in my opinion.

Quoting STLGph (Reply 34):
umm....no.

Eh, that statement was more of a bit of sarcasm more than anything else, but the rest of the post was true. That was why I had put "LOL" at the end. Get some humor man, geesh.

Quoting STLGph (Reply 34):
they'd offer non out of the way connections that are being offered in Atlanta and might be able to do much *much* better in competing against AirTran, American, United, Northwest, etc.

Your thought process is way outdated. Why do that, take the chance, and then let FL come in and sop up some of the revenue? That happened back in the 90's. Delta has turned the tables and the hunted has now become the hunter. Instead of starting routes and then defending them, let someone else take the chance to start them, and then attack the route yourself. Joe Schmoe could care less if he is on a 717 or a CRJ when he can get a round trip to MCO for $100.

Quoting Flymli (Reply 35):
But as you all know, the leisure person looks at price, price, price.

Bingo!




OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Db373
Posted 2006-01-24 04:06:10 and read 3054 times.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
That is the big problem with the legacy carriers, they try to retaliate too much against the LCC's and then when they lose money as a result, instead of cutting the route against the LCC, they go to the unions for wage cuts.

But aren't the legacy carriers simply modelling the payscales of the LCC? And for this specific case, your argument it worthless because DL employees make more than Airtran employees anyway.

I don't understand what the big fuss is over this. If so many people don't think these flights will hurt Airtran, then why the heck are they on this thread complaining about it? It's funny to read the same person say "There's no way this will hurt FL" and "This is just going to force FL to leave the market" in the same post. Give a break.....  Yeah sure

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: ChrisNH
Posted 2006-01-24 04:33:46 and read 3034 times.

These are simply and accurately 'let's-fly-the-route-until-the-competition-gives-up' flights. Obviously and factually. They are taking a page out of AA's 'Let's-Fly-To-Long-Beach-Now-That-JetBlue-Wants-to-go-There' strategy.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-24 04:51:51 and read 3015 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Delta never said anything about pulling out.

I know they didn't, I did.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Apparently someone with a Master's degree in economics at Delta's Revenue Management Department thinks so. An RJ may have higher CASM, but it is also easier to break a profit on. Delta can make money on the route, even if its a smaller margin, just by filling the smaller plane.

No, they just love to steal $$ away from AirTran, even if DL takes a loss. They can't make a profit off of those fares on those CRJ's.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Nope. Available fares for Delta on ATL-LAX are $181 OW and $312 RT. That is cross country flights on widebody aircraft mind you. Not exactly what you can call "jacked up."

ATL-LAX has to do with what again? FL has multiple daily ATL-LAX, that's why it's so cheap.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: CitationJet
Posted 2006-01-24 05:10:45 and read 2999 times.

Quoting BH346 (Reply 6):
It will be interesting to see the official news release from the airport on the service.

The Wichita Airport website doesn't even mention the new Delta non-stop MCO service. It does however mention the new AirTran service from ATL to Cancun.

http://www.flywichita.com/About/NewsReleases/08-25-2005.htm

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-24 05:13:06 and read 2997 times.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 39):
I know they didn't, I did.

And it doesn't pertain to the conversation. Please stick to the topic at hand.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 39):
They can't make a profit off of those fares on those CRJ's.

Let me guess, because you and your calculator just can't add it up, right?  sarcastic 

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 39):
ATL-LAX has to do with what again? FL has multiple daily ATL-LAX, that's why it's so cheap.

Um, YOU were the one that mentioned that fares got jacked up after B6 left the ATL market. And where did they fly from ATL? Long Beach and Oakland. Oops, I guess I missed out on OAK originally, which btw, fares start at $211 and its not served by FL. Besides, if FL has "multiple" flights to LA, if 3 flights can be considered "multiple", why didn't you pick up on that in the first place?



OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Warszawa
Posted 2006-01-24 05:21:54 and read 2980 times.

Part of the reason people bitch about Delta's competition against AirTran is that it is, as Iowaman stated, just a direct attack on AirTran. AirTran is very well known for taking secondary markets, and leaving primary markets alone. When they do this - Legacies retaliate, despite the fact its not a direct attack on the legacies. FNT-LAS was announced with AirTran, a route not operated with any carrier. Northwest announces FNT-LAS for the same price and same times, clearly a direct shot at FL. The result? AirTran starts DTW-ATL, DTW-SRQ, DTW-MCO. I hope Northwest is happy. The thing that pisses me off is that, hopefully, AirTran has more loads, because if AirTran leaves, I know with 99% certainty that Northwest would discontinue FNT-LAS.

AirTran left FNT-FLL, with Northwest operating the same route. Freaking a week or so after Northwest leaves FNT-FLL. Now we dont have FLL service any longer. Fortunately so, AirTran started FNT-RSW. Guess who the hell jumped on the route, Northwest, again. Annoying as hell and I can guarantee you i'm giving my service to AirTran. You cant say this is AirTran beating on Northwests door, FNT-RSW was never served. Northwest can easily sustain DTW-RSW along with Spirit with no need to enter FNT-RSW, they could have left AirTran alone.

For me it personally pisses me off because AirTran brings service to destinations that were previously not served. The legacies could give a rats ass about these destinations, ONLY until someone else takes them and they find out that that airline is making money on the route - THEN they compete.

The legacies come into BMI-MCO for example, and, while theoretically I think Delta will get owned on this route, regardless of their CRJ's, lets say Delta brought in 737-800's or MD-88's for this route. Lower fares and specials than AirTran. 7 Months pass and Delta is starting to succeed and AirTran is losing money on the route (I doubt this would be possible but, just an example). AirTran discontinues BMI-MCO. A week later "Delta announces cancellation of BMI-MCO".

Dont tell me it wouldent happen because thats all that this is about, and the examples are there to prove it. Northwest is the same way. Get into the market, try to drive the carrier out, once they leave, shut your doors and that market is closed.

Signed, Northwest, Delta.  mad 

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Warszawa
Posted 2006-01-24 05:26:59 and read 2976 times.

Iowaman

Damn me and you pretty much share the exact same opinions on this

FYI the FNT-CVG Delta route remains. It was cancelled though I recall reading that they reinstated it. Its still operating today (there was a discussion somewhere on it here in airliners.net), however the frequency was reduced to 2x daily, used to be 3x, could be seasonal however. I added you to my RR list by the way  

From the Pantagraph article:

"We are not surprised. These are the last remaining cities served by AirTran that were not served by Delta," said Judy Graham-Weaver, AirTran spokeswoman. "We have no plans for changes at CIRA. We are pleased with the response to the market."

<---Smells something brewing  stirthepot   box 

[Edited 2006-01-24 05:30:35]

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DL787932ER
Posted 2006-01-24 05:38:30 and read 2954 times.

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 42):
Part of the reason people bitch about Delta's competition against AirTran is that it is, as Iowaman stated, just a direct attack on AirTran.

This gets said so much, and I just have to call nonsense on it. Which of the following possible explanations for these new routes seems more likely?

1) An airline in severe financial trouble, in bankruptcy, facing difficult cuts in labor costs and extreme pressure by creditors to cut losses, opens a route on which they do not believe they can make money just because another carrier they view as an "enemy" opened it, with no regard to profitability, loads, or yields, as though airline senior management were just teenage boys playing "chicken" in their dads' cars.

Or...

2) A bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, an LCC, has run the numbers and determined that a given route will be profitable, so it should be started. At the same time, another bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, a legacy, runs the same numbers regarding O&D, connections, yields, loads, etc. and also finds that a given route will be profitable and should be started.

The answer to any unbiased person is obvious. And for those to whom it is not, consider that you are also likely the people who say, when an LCC opens a route established by a legacy, that it is "introducing competition" and "lowering fares", but when a legacy opens a route established by an LCC it is an "attack" and "retaliation." Hint: your bias is showing.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-24 06:44:09 and read 2916 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Your thought process is way outdated. Why do that, take the chance, and then let FL come in and sop up some of the revenue? That happened back in the 90's. Delta has turned the tables and the hunted has now become the hunter. Instead of starting routes and then defending them, let someone else take the chance to start them, and then attack the route yourself. Joe Schmoe could care less if he is on a 717 or a CRJ when he can get a round trip to MCO for $100.

It's not about Joe Schmoe paying $100. It's about an airline already losing its tail continuing to lose its tail with sending CRJ's into low yield leisure markets.

Independence Air, anyone?

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: STLGph
Posted 2006-01-24 06:46:11 and read 2915 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Quoting STLGph (Reply 34):
umm....no.

Eh, that statement was more of a bit of sarcasm more than anything else, but the rest of the post was true. That was why I had put "LOL" at the end. Get some humor man, geesh.

it's supposed to be humor but one of the only arguments you can repeatedly come up with for anything to give AirTran good publicitiy.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Iowaman
Posted 2006-01-24 06:48:26 and read 2912 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 41):
And it doesn't pertain to the conversation. Please stick to the topic at hand.

How does it not?

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 41):
Let me guess, because you and your calculator just can't add it up, right?

No, because it's not going to happen with those kind of fares on a high cost RJ.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 41):
Um, YOU were the one that mentioned that fares got jacked up after B6 left the ATL market. And where did they fly from ATL? Long Beach and Oakland. Oops, I guess I missed out on OAK originally, which btw, fares start at $211 and its not served by FL. Besides, if FL has "multiple" flights to LA, if 3 flights can be considered "multiple", why didn't you pick up on that in the first place?

I don't see what your getting at. The reason ATL-LAX is so cheap is because of FL.

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 42):
For me it personally pisses me off because AirTran brings service to destinations that were previously not served. The legacies could give a rats ass about these destinations, ONLY until someone else takes them and they find out that that airline is making money on the route - THEN they compete.

 checkmark 

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 43):
FYI the FNT-CVG Delta route remains. It was cancelled though I recall reading that they reinstated it. Its still operating today (there was a discussion somewhere on it here in airliners.net), however the frequency was reduced to 2x daily, used to be 3x, could be seasonal however. I added you to my RR list by the way

Which of course, FNT-CVG is being cut.

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 44):
2) A bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, an LCC, has run the numbers and determined that a given route will be profitable, so it should be started. At the same time, another bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, a legacy, runs the same numbers regarding O&D, connections, yields, loads, etc. and also finds that a given route will be profitable and should be started.

I would agree with on that, however if DL was interested in making money, they would go to places where they don't have to compete, such as OMA, where they could get better yields.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Warszawa
Posted 2006-01-24 08:04:03 and read 2884 times.

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 44):
And for those to whom it is not, consider that you are also likely the people who say, when an LCC opens a route established by a legacy, that it is "introducing competition" and "lowering fares", but when a legacy opens a route established by an LCC it is an "attack" and "retaliation." Hint: your bias is showing.

We're talking about AirTran here, not Southwest. Southwest goes for the gut and into many primary markets. AirTran goes mostly for secondary markets. There is a fine definition of competition, and i'm not saying competition is bad, or what ticks me off, thats not the fact. The fact is that Delta doesnt care nor do any of the legacies about these smaller markets, and they want them gone. A couple of the legacies are the same way (especially NWA).

Competition:

BMI-MCO AirTran
BMI-MCO Delta Connection

AirTran discontinues route due to lost sales. Delta continues to serve route for xxx amount of years yielding profits.

Attack:

AirTran discontinues route due to lost sales. Delta says "We win - game over". Delta discontinues route 1 week later. The City of BMI has lost all nonstop Orlando service. Now people must connect or travel to another city because of Delta.

And this is why I support AirTran in this regard. If it was the other way around (Delta first scored BMI-MCO) and AirTran came into the market, then I would support Delta.

AirTran starts ATL-SEA again. Do I support Delta? No. AirTran? No. Whoever has the lowest price i'll book. Why? Because its a common primary market with a hell of a lot of airlines in SEA already.

It has nothing to do with the LCC factor or "being biased" towards an LCC. Its the fact that AirTran happens to be an LCC that also happens to care about smaller markets and sees potential in them, unlike a majority of the legacies.

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 44):
2) A bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, an LCC, has run the numbers and determined that a given route will be profitable, so it should be started. At the same time, another bevy of well-paid and well-educated MBAs working in yield management for, say, a legacy, runs the same numbers regarding O&D, connections, yields, loads, etc. and also finds that a given route will be profitable and should be started.

If it was about the numbers Delta would have started it a long time ago.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DL787932ER
Posted 2006-01-24 08:25:59 and read 2874 times.

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 48):
We're talking about AirTran here, not Southwest.

Nonsense. WN goes into markets where they think they can make a profit. So does FL. And - this is the part that you might have to sit down for - so does DL. The rest of your fantasy is irrelevant in the real world.

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 48):
If it was about the numbers Delta would have started it a long time ago.

Um, because the numbers don't change? By that reasoning, DL shouldn't be serving SVO or KBP, because they're in the Soviet Union.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: FlyPNS1
Posted 2006-01-24 14:41:13 and read 2827 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
and are in the process of trying to drop more if they can get out of the leases.



Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
Delta HAD excess RJ capacity

If they are still trying to dump more RJ's, then cleary DL HAS excess RJ capacity. If they didn't have excess capacity, they wouldn't be trying to dump more RJ's.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 36):
But you make a good point, if you going to lose money on those flights, why not take someone else's yield with you? Hell of a business move, in my opinion.

Yeah, it's a hell of a business move until you lose so much money that you end up in bankruptcy. Oh wait a minute, DL is in bankruptcy. Maybe DL needs to spend a little more time trying to make money and less time trying to force Airtran to lose money.

I know you believe that DL can lose money for an eternity, but someday DL does have to actually make money.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Warszawa
Posted 2006-01-24 18:32:56 and read 2773 times.

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 49):
Nonsense. WN goes into markets where they think they can make a profit. So does FL. And - this is the part that you might have to sit down for - so does DL. The rest of your fantasy is irrelevant in the real world.

Nonsense? I didnt mention about WN going into markets where they can make a profit. I mentioned the fact that they go into primary markets, to obviously make profits.

What Fantasy? Nothing I have mentioned of the sort is anywhere near a fantasy, nor is anyones fantasy. Its facts buddy, and i'm sorry you're nieve to not even see it in front of your own eyes.

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 49):
Um, because the numbers don't change? By that reasoning, DL shouldn't be serving SVO or KBP, because they're in the Soviet Union

The numbers dont change? So running BMI-MCO in the 1980's would yield the same profit margin as today? The population density of BMI doesnt change? The number of people wanting to travel doesnt change?  rotfl 

The numbers change every day by some small degree. In regards to your comment about the Soviet Union, not only do I have no idea what that comment is supposed to mean, but its completely irrelavent to this thread and discussion.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-25 03:32:55 and read 2662 times.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 47):
How does it not?

Because you admitted yourself that DL never said that, only you did, which is off topic and a violation of a.net rules.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 47):
No, because it's not going to happen with those kind of fares on a high cost RJ.

And how do you know that for sure? Once again, your speculating because "RJ's are high cost." But you have nothing to back up your claim.

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 47):
I don't see what your getting at. The reason ATL-LAX is so cheap is because of FL.

Then why didn't you bring it up in the original argument?

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 47):
I would agree with on that, however if DL was interested in making money, they would go to places where they don't have to compete, such as OMA, where they could get better yields.

Why, so FL could come in and take our yield. Delta is done playing that game. Time to go in and take THEIR yield.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 50):
If they are still trying to dump more RJ's, then cleary DL HAS excess RJ capacity

Ok, I'll give you that, but not for long.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 50):
Maybe DL needs to spend a little more time trying to make money and less time trying to force Airtran to lose money.

I know you believe that DL can lose money for an eternity, but someday DL does have to actually make money.

They are, by taking Airtran's business and money! God I love this business!



OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Ejmmsu
Posted 2006-01-25 03:48:25 and read 2650 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 52):
They are, by taking Airtran's business and money! God I love this business!

Alright.. I finally get it! Obviously, the Queen Mother of the Regional Jet has been making considerable profits by sending an RJ from MCO to every city imaginable, and deciding to throw token RJ's onto routes DL didn't give a d@mn about until FL put them on there. This strategy is clearly making loads of chash for DL and driving FL into insolvency. What a briliant business strategy!

What!? I just checked google news and DL is in bankruptcy! FL is expanding, solvent, and umm... at least breaking even.

I guess I still don't understand !! Please teach me to understand, oh great guru Ottopylit !

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-25 03:58:43 and read 2635 times.

Quoting Ejmmsu (Reply 53):
Obviously, the Queen Mother of the Regional Jet has been making considerable profits by sending an RJ from MCO to every city imaginable, and deciding to throw token RJ's onto routes DL didn't give a d@mn about until FL put them on there. This strategy is clearly making loads of chash for DL and driving FL into insolvency. What a briliant business strategy!

Exactly.  Wink

Quoting Ejmmsu (Reply 53):
Please teach me to understand, oh great guru Ottopylit !

For free? Even I know not to do that. Spell my name correctly and pony up some cash and maybe I will. I took that from Airtran's cookbook on how to make money.


OttoPylit

[Edited 2006-01-25 03:59:11]

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: DL787932ER
Posted 2006-01-25 03:58:50 and read 2635 times.

Quoting Warszawa (Reply 51):
The numbers dont change? So running BMI-MCO in the 1980's would yield the same profit margin as today?

Swing and a miss, but thanks for playing. Follow me real close, now:

YOU stated that if the new DL route was about the numbers, they would have started it a long time ago. Obviously, that's a ridiculous statement, because the numbers DO change over time - not just city population, O&D, etc. but also costs, like more fuel-efficient airframes and lower labor costs. So I made a SARCASTIC statement in response to your argument that if the numbers work now, they would have worked "a long time ago." I then used the silly comparison of DL's flights to ex-Warsaw Pact cities as the most obvious example of how things do in fact change over time.

I'm glad that you completely reversed your position in your followup post because you didn't pick up on the sarcasm, and that you now realize it makes no sense to claim that DL would have started the route long ago if the numbers work now.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Ejmmsu
Posted 2006-01-25 04:12:01 and read 2619 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 54):
For free? Even I know not to do that. Spell my name correctly and pony up some cash and maybe I will. I took that from Airtran's cookbook on how to make money.

I am quite certain i spelled it the same way you spell it, Ottopylit .

You chose to ignore the real kicker in what I said:

Quoting Ejmmsu (Reply 53):

What!? I just checked google news and DL is in bankruptcy! FL is expanding, solvent, and umm... at least breaking even.

Which really means that what DL is trying has not been working.

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: OttoPylit
Posted 2006-01-25 04:33:31 and read 2601 times.

Its OttoPylit. Capital P, capital P.

Quoting Ejmmsu (Reply 56):
Which really means that what DL is trying has not been working.

Delta has only started trying this since they've been bankrupty. They have planes flying BWI-BOS, now MLI-ATL, BMI-ATL, and now out of MCO. It's gonna be a bloodbath! LOL Just kidding, that just sounded cute to say. Like I said, its time the tables have turned. Get back with me in about 8 or 9 months. If DL has pulled the flights by then and said it was because of a loss, then I'll concede to your statement. Until then, I prefer to wait and see.



OttoPylit

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Ejmmsu
Posted 2006-01-25 05:34:37 and read 2567 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 57):
Delta has only started trying this since they've been bankrupty. They have planes flying BWI-BOS, now MLI-ATL, BMI-ATL, and now out of MCO. It's gonna be a bloodbath! LOL Just kidding, that just sounded cute to say. Like I said, its time the tables have turned. Get back with me in about 8 or 9 months. If SA)">DL has pulled the flights by then and said it was because of a loss, then I'll concede to your statement. Until then, I prefer to wait and see.

SA)">DL has a very difficult time getting their RASM up since they cater to so many low yielding leasure routes. They have a very difficult time getting their CASM down, because they have so many regional jets. The solution is to cut RJ flying and cut some leasure routes right?

Well, SA)">DL is not only not doing of either of those, they are compounding the problem by doing the opposite of BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. Flying high CASM jets on low RASM routes, against a competitor with much lower CASM.

You can get back to me in 9 months. It is possible that a magical fairy will come down and somehow make this profitable, but I'm not counting on it. SA)">DL needs to get its house in order before it gets into money-losing pissing matches at airports where they aren't even wanted.

[Edited 2006-01-25 05:43:43]

Topic: RE: DL Adds 5 More Destinations From MCO
Username: Warszawa
Posted 2006-01-25 18:19:17 and read 2491 times.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 57):
Its OttoPylit. Capital P, capital P.

Thats grammar not spelling...

Quoting DL787932ER (Reply 55):
Swing and a miss, but thanks for playing

Sigh...look bro, i'm tired of playing games here, so i'll leave it at this: Your entitled to your own opinion - and i'm entitled to mine. I'm not going to sit here for the next week in a tug of war match between you and I with (supposed) sarcasm games and speculations.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/