Drgmobile From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 502 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2978 times:
OK, so the Wall Street Journal reports that Delta plans to start merger talk with both United and Northwest and ultimately pick one. I am mulling over which combo would be good for Canada. Some things to consider:
1) If it were DL/UA, a decision would have to be made about alliance. If they went for Star, that would be good for AC (although perhaps not for the consumer). Since UA is larger than NW and Star already has US Airways, then for the merger to get approval, alliance membership could be a factor. If the merged carriers went with SkyTeam.
2) UA already is the #2 carrier transborder after AC. NW is third and Delta a few pokes behind. And some route consolidation certainly can be expected.
3) With NW, Memphis/Atlanta, Detroit/Cincinnati and Minneapolis/Salt Lake City are somewhat duplicate hubs. But Cincinnati already has been downsized and Salt Lake and Minneapolis do different things. With UA, its O'Hare/Cincinnati and Denver/Salt Lake.
Overall, me thinks DL/NW would be a better mix for Canada (as well as for the U.S.)
ATCtower From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 481 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2803 times:
Both UA, and NW would be able to provide adaquete service to Canada through their respective northern hubs, ORD, and DTW respectively... From a passenger's standpoint, I think UA would be better equipped to handle the passenger flow. The Mileage Plus program is much more established than WorldPerks, and UA has the Star Alliance to back them up when earning and redeeming miles...
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2755 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1): But NW serves more destinations in Canada (13 currently I believe) than any other US carrier.
NW does well on the flights to small Canadian markets from DTW, and it's unlikely that a merger would change that. I think UA might be able to have similar success ex-ORD if it didn't have AC as a partner. If DL and UA merge, the combined carrier will likely remain in Star and the effect on Canada will be minimal IMO.
Similarly, if DL and NW merge, the consolidation will likely impact CVG and MEM, neither of which is an important hub or destination for Canadian traffic, so I doubt there would be much change.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2627 times:
Quoting Drgmobile (Thread starter): With NW, Memphis/Atlanta, Detroit/Cincinnati and Minneapolis/Salt Lake City are somewhat duplicate hubs. But Cincinnati already has been downsized and Salt Lake and Minneapolis do different things. With UA, its O'Hare/Cincinnati and Denver/Salt Lake.
They would probably keep these double hubs, it would be pretty hard to put mephis and atlanta together in atlanta, would be insanely busy and not enough room, they would probably need both hubs to accomodate the traffic
The biggest problem between DL and UA is the fact that both are major players in opposite alliances and i doubt either would want to change. It would make more sense for UA and US and DL and NW (as much as i dislike NW) and eventually CO and AA (either could switch alliances).
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6520 posts, RR: 11 Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2507 times:
Especially with Delta recently strengthening their partnership with AirFrance. It would almost be perfect from that stand-point. with NW so close to KLM that is...
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2442 times:
Quoting DL767captain (Reply 4): The biggest problem between DL and UA is the fact that both are major players in opposite alliances and i doubt either would want to change.
For any cooperation that requires government approval, there would be serious issues with NW, CO, and a combined DL/UA together in an alliance. That alone would likely lead them to pick *A.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7411 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2394 times:
Quoting Drgmobile (Thread starter): 2) UA already is the #2 carrier transborder after AC. NW is third and Delta a few pokes behind. And some route consolidation certainly can be expected.
NW is far larger then UA accross the border. NW is the largest US Airline to Canada by far.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Drgmobile From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 502 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2345 times:
NW is far larger then UA accross the border. NW is the largest US Airline to Canada by far.
Has there been a significant change recently? Because the flight stats I have are within a year old and NW had just over half the weekly seats that UA has.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2287 times:
Quoting Drgmobile (Reply 8): Has there been a significant change recently? Because the flight stats I have are within a year old and NW had just over half the weekly seats that UA has.
No, but thanks to lots of Saabs, I think NW does have more flights and Canadian destinations.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3556 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2265 times:
NWA serves more destinations in Canada than any other US carrier. UA perhaps could carry more passengers, but NWA and its Airlink partners serve more cities. It seems that no matter what happens a merger, Canada would still be well served. In a merged carrier, why wold they drop cities if there is money to be made?
MKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1111 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2222 times:
Quoting Drgmobile (Thread starter): OK, so the Wall Street Journal reports that Delta plans to start merger talk with both United and Northwest and ultimately pick one. I am mulling over which combo would be good for Canada.
It will have a minimal affect on Canada compared to what it will have on the US. I don't think you guys have much to worry about.
Drgmobile From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 502 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2158 times:
The measure of a company's "size" is its capacity. United has almost twice as many seats into Canada than NW. That makes it the larger, and measurably more important, carrier.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3556 posts, RR: 30 Reply 13, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2043 times:
Size doesn't always matter. While UA may bring more seats to Canada, NWA serves more destinations. By serving more destinations NWA connects more of Canada to the world and the world to Canada. I bet the people in YKF, YQR and YXE and other smaller Canadian markets probably view NWA as important to their local economies and their costs of air travel. THe bottom line is that NWA serves more of Canada than any other US carrier, large or small.
You asked how Canada would be affected... the answer is minimal IMO. Of course if Canadians don't find the scope of service NWA provides to their provinces as important, then they'll vote with their feet. Until then, I have a feeling Canadians like the competiton and access to the world that NWA provides.
Iflyatldl From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1936 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1981 times:
Quoting Drgmobile (Thread starter): 3) With NW, Memphis/Atlanta, Detroit/Cincinnati and Minneapolis/Salt Lake City are somewhat duplicate hubs. But Cincinnati already has been downsized and Salt Lake and Minneapolis do different things. With UA, its O'Hare/Cincinnati and Denver/Salt Lake.
Quoting DL767captain (Reply 4): They would probably keep these double hubs, it would be pretty hard to put mephis and atlanta together in atlanta, would be insanely busy and not enough room, they would probably need both hubs to accomodate the traffic
In the cases of both CVG and MEM, they would both make great reliever airports, especially CVG, since it has the facilities in place to handle diversions and over-flow. And both MEM-ATL and CVG-DTW are basically forty minute legs, so in some ways it has some merit. And the same would be true of the regionals.
Ah, Summer, Fenway Park, Boston Red Sox and Beer.....
SLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 3861 posts, RR: 11 Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1874 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 10): In a merged carrier, why wold they drop cities if there is money to be made?
I might have forgotten one, but you get the point.
While SLC service to YWG tanked last September, I think that in adition to serivce to YVR, YYC and YEG, if SLC improves the U.S. Customs and Border Protection area and DHS hires more officers to serve SLC, service could eventually at least be tried to YQR, YXE and possibly YQL (large amount of O&D to SLC in the first place) could be tried on DLI/OO.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7411 posts, RR: 9 Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1768 times:
United serves (these are based off of January 21 schedule and do not include seasonal upgrades and added flights)
Calgary- SFO (3x CR7), DEN (1x CR2, 2x 733, 1x A320)- 656 Daily Seats
Vancouver- DEN (2x 319), SFO (1x 752, 1x 735, 1x 733, 1x 319), LAX (2x CR7), ORD (2x 319, 1x 752) 1380 Daily Seats
Edmonton- ORD (2x E170, DEN (3x CR7), SFO (2x CR7)- 520 Daily Seats
Winnipeg- DEN (3x CR2), ORD (3x CR2, 1x CR7) 376 Daily Seats
Toronto- SFO (1x 319), DEN (1x E170, 1x 319), ORD (3x 319, 3x 733, 1x E170), IAD (5x ER4, 1x E170) 1460 Daily Seats
Montreal- IAD (3x CR2, 2x E170), ORD (4x E170, 1x CR2) 540 Daily Seats
Ottawa- ORD (3x CR7, 1x E170), IAD (3x CR2, 2x ER4) 548 Daily Seats
NW's summer schedule increases far more then UA bringing the two close in terms of seats. Of course most of UA's traffic is due to Star Alliance partner Air Canada.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 502 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 481 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
