DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8256 times:
It would be rather interesting to think of how a DL-NW merger would look like taking after a AF-KL then all of them working together so here's how i see it.
Fleet and Cabin:
Fleets would obviously remain separate, although it would be interesting to see them try and get some commanality out of the fleet to make maintenance a little easier but i'm sure that would take a while. But the cabin is what could be very similar. To give people the experience of flying on the same airline, let's say a usual DL passenger that needs to fly NW to asia, they could make the cabin almost identical. Both NW and DL have a 2 class cabin which makes commanality even easier, the new DL bizelite seat seems very nice (i haven't seen NW's new first class or if they will be getting new seats any time soon) and DL's new slim coach seats with AVOD could become standard between the carriers. DL and NW have their own color schemes for cabins and could remain the same, so DL could have their classic blue bizelite seats while NW could have their own color, but still remain the same seat. So when a usual DL or NW passenger needs to fly on the other airline and are used to their usual seats and avod system it would be the same (just with NW or DL logos and colors)
Route Structure:
I don't think their hubs overlap too much but if any of them seem too close they could be restructured. But NW does pretty well with the Asia routes, and DL has the Europe routes pretty covered. So NW operates most of the Asian routes, DL can use their 772LR's for routes that NW can't make with their aircraft. NW's aircraft could be moved around to make better use of them for europe routes. Domestic routes could be sorted out to utilize fleets to their maximum potential. Would make for a very efficient airline. Another A.net member posted this picture (BOStonsox) which shows how routes with AF-KL-NW-DL would work
Frequent Flier Program:
If they could just merge the two, rules and everything, that way there is one miles program that the user can use on either NW or DL, same amount of points on routes no matter which airline. For example US domestic is 25,000 points no matter if the airline is DL or NW.
BOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1887 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8164 times:
Whoa, check out that awesome map! I wonder who did that? Oh yeah, that's right, ME. Sorry. I just had to brag. Actually, the Atlantic on my map became a jarbled mess which I tried to avoid and for a second I thought I forgot to include MSP-AMS (A pretty big route to miss).
I wonder if a merger like this would still mean CVG and MEM will go as hubs. I think that with the TATL deal in place NW could focus on the Pacific side and connect major cities to NRT. Some cities (BOS being one example) could be connected to the network there. BOS-NRT won't happen until the 787s come out, however. It would be nice to see DL/NW do something with Korean and other Asian skyteam members like they are doing with AF/KL/maybe AZ.
I think a merger like this would be easier to do and if the pilots can't come up with a deal then this is the way to go. However I saw in Today In The Sky that both DL and NW have started talking and are trying to merge regardless of what the pilots say.
Pilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8083 times:
Just a note: lately, I've been seeing a lot of NW tagged bags coming into DAB. I'd say it's about 30/70. Not that it had anything to do with plans - it's just odd to see so many of them.
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8064 times:
Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 1): Whoa, check out that awesome map! I wonder who did that? Oh yeah, that's right, ME
Sorry i tried sending you a message but i just kept getting error messages so i gave you credit in the post, i hope that's ok...
Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 1): TATL deal in place NW could focus on the Pacific side and connect major cities to NRT
I was thinking that NW could even somehow "give" their europe routes to DL and concentrate their planes on asia routes, kind of make DL the Europe airline and NW the Asian airline, all assuming they would share profits
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8064 times:
Orlando is still a focus city for Delta and has connections to Europe on SkyTeam. I know DL doesn't really call MCO a focus city anymore, but a check of their interactive route map tells the real story...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Hjulicher From Liechtenstein, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 7949 times:
I don't think that it makes sense for NW to become the Asia carrier and DL the European one. In fact, I think they should both have market share in each geographic region. NW is tied with KL, so would be more logical for that relationship to stay as is, and AF-DL ditto. However, DL and NW could restructure the routes they serve to better serve their clients. The best route that I can think of is ATL-STR should probably move to DTW for ease to businesses, while other routes should be moved from DTW/MSP to ATL. In the end, I see ATL losing and DTW gaining a lot because of how underutilized DTW is and overused ATL is. There's not much you can take away from DTW in terms of flights. Europe is limited service as is, and DTW doesn't see many flights to South America and Mexico.
I think that the best scenario in the end would be a AF-KL type deal, which would keep corporate identities equal, yet labor issues different. For how different the Netherlands and France are, one could arguably make the same case for the difference between Michigan/Minnesota and Georgia and the South.
I see SLC gaining a role though as an important hub, and it easily could overtake DEN as the ski gateway to the west.
I also see the potential for a joint effort in the NYC and LA markets. I think that together DL and NW can make these cities into proper focus cities which get the O/D passengers to their destinations while giving them ample connections to smaller markets from the traditional hubs. NYC and LA should change from hubs/focus cities, to purely O/D points where point to point flying is maximized. Stop funneling passengers through there, that's why there are DTW, ATL, and SLC.
Nwaesc From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 3324 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 7890 times:
Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2): Just a note: lately, I've been seeing a lot of NW tagged bags coming into DAB.
Spring break? Those North Dakota and wisconsin kids gotta go somewhere to thaw out!
Quoting Hjulicher (Reply 5): I think that the best scenario in the end would be a AF-KL type deal, which would keep corporate identities equal, yet labor issues different. For how different the Netherlands and France are, one could arguably make the same case for the difference between Michigan/Minnesota and Georgia and the South.
Amen.
As much as some people on here would like to see DL rule the world, the fact is that the culture clash between the 2 carriers during an (full) integration would destroy almost all-if not all- synergies that there are to be gained.
If this does come to pass, I'd like to see MTX be covered under one roof. As a "tea in the ocean" example, a city like BOS could have the DL AMT's cover both carriers, while shedding the costs of NW's 3rd party vendor.
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
Aisak From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 757 posts, RR: 11 Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7847 times:
Quoting DL767captain (Thread starter): Frequent Flier Program:
If they could just merge the two, rules and everything, that way there is one miles program that the user can use on either NW or DL, same amount of points on routes no matter which airline. For example US domestic is 25,000 points no matter if the airline is DL or NW.
Just a thought if anyone wants to add opinions
I'll add a couple of things. That new FFP, let's call it FlyingRed (AFKLM got FlyingBlue and obviously both delta and NW have the red in common) would make things easier for FFs. As there won't be any NW or DL members, all are treated equal for upgrades so effectively that would create a single airline for FFs
Also Lounges. Delta has begun closing down some lounges around the US. If DLNW owns the lounges, instead of DL owning lounges and NW owning lounges, maybe a mere spoke station can become a focus city and make a lounge worthwhile (LGW comes to mind)
Quoting DL767captain (Reply 3): I was thinking that NW could even somehow "give" their europe routes to DL and concentrate their planes on asia routes, kind of make DL the Europe airline and NW the Asian airline, all assuming they would share profits
For routes it's not all that simple. Several factors play in. It's the same with the AF-DL, NW-KLM and AF-KL relationships.
*AF-KL can talk to each other and the parent company can decide what's better for the whole group, but they don't swap planes. KLM planes fly excusively out of NL and AF ones out of France.
*AF-DL can talk to each other about new routes and who will operate them. JFK-CDG, ATL-CDG and even LAX-LHR could be flown by the two of them, but they lock one beancounter each in a room and they come with the most profitable solution (availability of aircraft, suitabale aircraft, that aircraft being positionesd at either end.....).
*NW-KLM works in a similar way but NW even has a large base-hub-whatever at AMS to operate to the US and KLM and NW swap routes as needed.
DL-NW would work in a similar way but having all the advantages. They could talk about what's more profitable (less costly) for routes such as JFK-AMS or ATL-NRT. And being both airlines based in the US, routes can be (almost) swapped at will. Winter season DL can do NRT-ATL with all the connections at NRT, but maybe they need the aircraft for the summer and then NW takes over.
And that wouldn't create labor problems with unions, the same way those 3 other examples above haven't.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3555 posts, RR: 30 Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7847 times:
I think what would best most realistic is that the following happens on a general scale:
International: NWA operates most the Asia flying, with the DL 77Ls and 772s flying the routes that need that range and lift. They can right size the Pacific network in this manner. Continuing to serve NRT and the important Japanese market, the interport market as well as the overflying opportunities that Asia presents. As for Europe, NWA continues to feed the AMS hub and DL continues to serve the CDG hub and its JFK o&d flying. The 4 way JV is about to be approved and AMS/CDG is an integral part of the AF/KL group, therefore will be an integral part of the 4 way JV. NWA would be secondary in providing service to CDG, the way DL would be secondary in providing service to AMS. Both would serve CDG/AMS from their own hubs to maximize a/c and crew efficiencies, much like we see today.
Domestically I forsee rationalization in hubs, such as CVG/MEM being reduced to large market o&d service only and going the way of IND as a "focus city." MEM perhaps could be a reliever for ATL. ATL, JFK, DTW, MSP and SLC would remain the primary hubs, with SLC being reduced to provide to the west what MSP cannot. Ridiculous point to point low yielding RJ flying would go away helping reduce the 50 seat fleets (HELLO DELTA!)
Airlink/Connection - massive overhaul in this arena, shedding most 50 seat RJs and building a large fleet of 76 dual class a/c within each airlines scope limitations. Some 50 seat a/c would still be required, but they would be relegated to the markets that are high yielding low competition thin markets. A large contingent of Q400s would be acquired to replace many 50 seat markets and 34 seat markets. In time the saab would be replaced by the Q400. If they can't make money flying the Q, they won't fly there. Leave the EAS markets to the likes of Great Lakes, or make them drive.
MX - as NWAESC mentioned, out station mx can be dramatically rationalized and then each airlines respective main mx based would continue.
FF - a merged plan taking the best of both plans. NWA has arguably the best plan at this point. "Skyperks."
Product - a synergy of both airlines best practices. Perhaps the domestic product of DL can be rolled out between both airlines, but keeping their specific branding. Red vs. Blue. International Y class, can take a page from NWA and a complete refurb of the 744s to reflect AVOD. International premium cabins can once again, synergize best practices of both airlines combining catering, product sourcing etc... much like NWA/KL do now.
Fleet - speaks for itself. DC9s are on the way out and are in need of replacement. DL needs a 100 seat a/c and perhaps a joint purchase of the EMB195 to be flown at MAINLINE is in order. Their respective fleets are so large, economies of scale will previal... ie airbus vs. boeing. More 73Gs/738s are sourced to eventually replace the mad dogs. Jointly sourced 787s (if it ever flies) to grow NWAs 787 fleet and replace the 763/764 fleet at DL. Perhaps the 77W to eventually replace and rightsize capacity at NWA as the NRT hub vs. overflight is rationalized.
Back of the house: The overseas call centers get canned, in favor of expanding as necessary the NWA res centers in the USA. More jobs = better. Revenue mgmt, yield mgmt, IROP, Eservice, website, IT capabilities are taken from NWA and employed by both carriers, but maintaining separate websites. ATL can be the official HQs but many of the MSP facilities can be maintained for obvious benefits. "NATCO" etc... would stay.
I can't think of anything else and need to get to bed. When they first started flirting, this was what I predicted would be the end game... a AF/KL tie up. Just based on labor issues alone, IMO this is the best way. The savings of a full blown merger would be lost in a disgruntled, drawn out marriage yielding more pissed off workers is not worth it. Save that money, sacrifice those "savings" and merge on paper, but operate separately, synergizing where possible. Just a few ideas I was kicking around. Discuss. And please lets not turn this into a Delta is better than NWA bash fest.
EMB170 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 635 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7658 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 8): Airlink/Connection - massive overhaul in this arena, shedding most 50 seat RJs and building a large fleet of 76 dual class a/c within each airlines scope limitations. Some 50 seat a/c would still be required, but they would be relegated to the markets that are high yielding low competition thin markets. A large contingent of Q400s would be acquired to replace many 50 seat markets and 34 seat markets. In time the saab would be replaced by the Q400. If they can't make money flying the Q, they won't fly there. Leave the EAS markets to the likes of Great Lakes, or make them drive.
Interesting...but I disagree on the Qs. Personally, I don't think DL/NW would go prop. A lot of folks on here are crazy over props (I'm not one of them), but if (and this is a big if) a combined DL/NW would go for large props, look for an ATR-72 order...think commonality with EV's existing AT7 fleet. Saabs, though, I don't think are going anywhere...they're right sized (as much as possible) for NW's upper midwest/great plains small and EAS markets, and they fill a need...only problem is what happens as these SF3s get long in the tooth...
I agree with the 50 seat RJ downsizing, though. With DL/NW as one carrier, the conflict of interest over 9E flying CR9s for DL goes away, so I say that's probably the place to do the cutting (as well as at OH). I see RW making out like a bandit, especially with the possibility of CP (and its 36-strong E75 fleet) being sold off to them.
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 8): Fleet - speaks for itself. DC9s are on the way out and are in need of replacement. DL needs a 100 seat a/c and perhaps a joint purchase of the EMB195 to be flown at MAINLINE is in order. Their respective fleets are so large, economies of scale will previal... ie airbus vs. boeing. More 73Gs/738s are sourced to eventually replace the mad dogs. Jointly sourced 787s (if it ever flies) to grow NWAs 787 fleet and replace the 763/764 fleet at DL. Perhaps the 77W to eventually replace and rightsize capacity at NWA as the NRT hub vs. overflight is rationalized.
Agree here as well. When/if the 737RS or A320RS rolls out sometime in the mid 2010s, I could see an order to wipe out some of the (by that time aging) 319s/320s/757-200s at NW and 73Gs/738s/757-200s at DL...but that's another good 8-10 years down the road, if not more. Don't see NW getting rid of all 747 a/c though...if only for the fact that they need it for cargo.
Can passenger jets fly as fast as my feet do? Let's find out...
VictorKilo From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7586 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 8): A large contingent of Q400s would be acquired to replace many 50 seat markets and 34 seat markets. In time the saab would be replaced by the Q400. If they can't make money flying the Q, they won't fly there. Leave the EAS markets to the likes of Great Lakes, or make them drive.
Are the Q200 and Q400 common enough that there would be economies of scale for one carrier to fly both - the Q400 as a RJ replacement and a small Q200 fleet for thin and/or EAS routes?
Beaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 26 Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7565 times:
It would fit into the topic to mention that ADP and Air France have launched works on yet another new terminal to be ready by 2012 on CDG airport,handling 7 million Skyteam passengers.The terminal would be called Terminal 4 .
BOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1887 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7428 times:
Quoting DL767captain (Reply 3): Sorry i tried sending you a message but i just kept getting error messages so i gave you credit in the post, i hope that's ok...
Oh, don't worry. Anyone can use it, and I am really glad you did. I was saying that in a proud, if that's the word I'm looking for, kinda way. You know, like saying, "Yeah, that map's mine. I'm the man". I think it's great when somebody likes my work.
I think that DL should start looking into tapping into the Asia market and they could easily do that with Northwest. Neither airline serves Austrailia or New Zealand either, and while those markets are small it is the only continent they don't serve yet (other than Antartica, of course).
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3555 posts, RR: 30 Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7213 times:
EMB170 - I maintain the acquisition of the Q400, or perhaps even the ATR72, but given the relationship both carriers have with BBD, I'd give the nod to the Q. Perhaps a combo deal for the Q200 and 400. Yes, the saabs serve their niche, but a full flight is often weight restricted to sometimes no more than 28/29 people. THe costs of IDBs and late bags can't be cheap. With the inability to get 34 people and their bags to their destinations at the same time is a problem that needs to be solved. Hopefully as more 50 seat a/c become available as more 76 seat a/c are brought into the fleet, the heaviest saab routes can be replaced by the CRJ200. There are many short hops though that could use the increased capacity but not the high CASM the CRJ200 brings with it. I'll expand my initial thought of the Q400, to replace the saabs to the Q family to do so.
ASA is retiring their turboprops at the end of the year and Skywest is phasing the EMBs out as well. That leaves Mesaba and Colgan (horror) the main turbo prop operators. I fear that Colgan will be used as a whipsaw against Mesaba when it comes time for the saabs to be retired. They're getting new seats and paint, but the first ones come off lease in under 4 years. Curiously, the Mesaba pilot contract is amendable in less than 4 years too. Hmmm...
The Airlink/Connection carriers will be the brunt of a lot of shuffling and a nasty game of musical chairs.
EA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10 Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6702 times:
I agree with most of your post. Very well thought out and logically seems like a great possible outcome. The only thing I am unsure about is NW taking on 77Ws. I think that with their fleet of 787s and having operated the 747s for so long, they could replace many of their 744s with 748Is as it would offer a nice size jump of about 30+ seats and have commonality with the 787s (even though NW ordered Trent1000s). Then again, NW could also possibly order the 77W for commonality with DLs 77Ls...who knows!
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
Jouy31 From France, joined May 2003, 446 posts, RR: 11 Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6563 times:
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 11): t would fit into the topic to mention that ADP and Air France have launched works on yet another new terminal to be ready by 2012 on CDG airport,handling 7 million Skyteam passengers.The terminal would be called Terminal 4 .
Actually, it is called Satellite 4, as it is a boarding area, without checkin desks, just as S3 today. CDG Terminal 4 is another project altogether, located to the North, with a first phase scheduled for 2016. CDG4 should ultimately have a capacity of 30 million pax yearly and would allow CDG to reach overall a capacity of 100 million pax.
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5918 times:
Why do the post keep coming up?
Ok here is the deal AF is keeping the KL name around because the HAVE TOO!!!! DL and NW IF they merge will be one company. Be it Northwest or Delta it WILL be one company. (sorry DL767 for raining on your post)
On a side note AF had to keep the KL name for 4 or 5 years and that time is about up. I wounder just how long KLM will live on?
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3555 posts, RR: 30 Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5869 times:
The reason I mention the 77W as a candidate for 744 replacement is because of the changing dynamics in their route network. We all know that NWA is a dominant carrier to Japan, from the US as well as within Asia. But beyond the Japanese market, is their connecting traffic that just transit their NRT hub to continue to points within Asia. As the 787 enters the fleet more NRT overflying will occur for the people that are willing to pay the premium. When this happens there will be less need for 744 capacity to NRT, as fewer people will be needing to transit. NWA can then right-size the capacity to NRT to include a sufficient amount of lift to continue to serve the Japan market as well as the remaining amount of connections that will HAVE to continue through NRT (SIN, BKK, KUL perhaps). That's why I think NWA could use something in the 350 seat range that have great cargo capabilities as well as capacity that will be needed.
Perhaps the 744 can be their freighter replacement, but I believe the freighter replacement will be a smaller gauge a/c... something like the 77F or 33F. I just don't see NWA as a 380 or a 748 customer.
Folks complain about NWA "abusing" their China route authorities and being behind the rest of the industry in continuing to rely on NRT as a connecting point. What these people fail to realize is that Japan is a very important market for NWA. NWA is using their China authorities to best serve ALL their customers, including those on the West coast and within Asia. THose customers would be completely abandoned if NWA chose to overfly NRT at this point to China from DTW. IN the future, NWA will perform overfly options via the 787 to key points in Asia, but continue to serve the very important and lucrative Japan market.
DL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2039 posts, RR: 5 Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5262 times:
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5210 times:
the short answer to the question is that if DL-NW pilots do not come to an agreement, the combined airline would look more like US now....one brand, one certificate, but two labor groups (remains to be seen what NW's other labor groups will choose to do).
BOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1887 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5086 times:
I made a similar map for the combined Asia network, but I couldn't upload it due to space constraints. What shocks me most is the fact that while NW serves about a dozen destinations in Asia from NRT, from the US only 6 destinations are served from DTW, with Mumbai being served via AMS. And aside from the JFK-Mumbai flight, all 4 destinations served by DL in Asia are from ATL only. NW does a lot of flying goes out of Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo-Narita, but to get there you have to stop in DTW or MSP. I think they should work with Korean and China Southern to build up a stronger presence in Asia. SEA, MSP, DTW, LAX and even SLC could make good connecting points. They should also build up their NRT operations to include more cities, like JFK, ORD, DEN, BOS, LAS, PHX, and maybe MEM. MIA and ANC might work as well.
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5044 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20): the short answer to the question is that if DL-NW pilots do not come to an agreement, the combined airline would look more like US now....one brand, one certificate, but two labor groups (remains to be seen what NW's other labor groups will choose to do).
Jetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2903 posts, RR: 28 Reply 22, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5012 times:
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, RR: 25 Reply 23, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4957 times:
Quoting Hjulicher (Reply 5): I see ATL losing and DTW gaining a lot because of how underutilized DTW is and overused ATL is. There's not much you can take away from DTW in terms of flights. Europe is limited service as is, and DTW doesn't see many flights to South America and Mexico.
That would make sense, but Im not sure that what would happen. DTW wont ever see flights to South America, ATL will always handle that. I think that DTW and MSP both are much better suited to handle Asian traffic than ATL. As far as Europe goes, you could make a stong case for either. I think DTW would handle the majority of the Asia traffic as opposed to ATL. If DL and NW do merge it doesnt make sense to focus everything at one hub like DL has been doing. They should be able to utilize the stengths of the hubs they will have.
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5977 posts, RR: 9 Reply 24, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4892 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16): Why do the post keep coming up?
Ok here is the deal AF is keeping the KL name around because the HAVE TOO!!!! DL and NW IF they merge will be one company. Be it Northwest or Delta it WILL be one company. (sorry DL767 for raining on your post)
On a side note AF had to keep the KL name for 4 or 5 years and that time is about up. I wounder just how long KLM will live on?
And you know this how. You are misinformed about this just like most other topics dealing with NWA and DL. Suggest a little research before posting again. How is the Airline Finance 101 class going, particularly the part about stock swaps?
25 EMB170: Didn't realize EV was finally getting around to retiring the AT7 fleet at the end of this year. They've been saying they were going to for quite some
26 BSBIsland: US-Brazil bilateral just allows 4 carriers from each country, so it is impossible for NW to operate to Brazil (in case they were interested). Also AA
27 EMB170: Just in case you didn't see all of my post, it read: Perfect way to side step that little problem. Given that JJ is climbing into bed with Star, get
28 Bucky707: If the pilots cannot come to an agreement, management could choose to press ahead on the merger. The seniority list would ultimately end up in arbitr
30 DL Widget Head: My count is 6 destinations in Asia, 2 being served from JFK and 5 from ATL: JFK-TLV JFK-BOM ATL-DXB ATL-NRT ATL-SEL ATL-PVG ATL-TLV Another Asian cit
31 WorldTraveler: the problem is not the idea of operating a single airline with two separate pilot groups but that US/HP cut so many corners in the early days after t
32 BOStonsox: When I made my Asia map I included future routes, so Shanghai, Manila, Hong Kong, and Taipei were added as well (so it is actually seven). But I also
33 WorldTraveler: NW's Pacific operations based on DOT data have been on and off when it comes to profitability. Asking every passenger to connect through Japan enrout
34 DL Widget Head: The point you're missing is, ATL is a fantastic connecting hub to Asia especially from Central and South America where a lot of DL's Asian traffic or
35 LAXdude1023: I dont think anyone is trying to argue that ATL is a poor hub. It clearly isnt. However if this merger goes through why would further Asia (far East)
36 DL Widget Head: Again, why is eveyone only thinking of domestic connectivity from the USA to Asia? DL connects various continents through ATL. Indeed, on my last NRT
37 LAXdude1023: There really arent that many more markets that ATL can serve profitably in the Far East (PEK and HKG). Beyond that I cant think of any other expansio
38 BOStonsox: DL and NW have hubs and focus cities in LAX, SEA, MSP, and SLC. SFO wouldn't be a bad place for Asia flights either. That's why I think DL having flig
39 EMB170: This is a fact pointed out by Mike Boyd in his analyses for future international traffic flows...he often speaks of LatAm- Pacific Rim transit via IA
40 Jfk777: Whatever happens with NW/DL, JFK to NRT will return with a 777/744 & a massive expansion of NRT to USA flying will occur. HKG, PVG,PEK and other point
41 Azjubilee: Unless there are more slots acquired or a major shuffling of the current slot portfolio, it is next to impossible for a "massive" expansion at NRT. DT
42 Aisak: It doesn't have to be like that. If that were true, Britair and Régional would have merged long long time ago. Maybe it's just better to keep two se
43 ABXX75: Has anyone thought what would happen when DL, NW and UA, CO merge, what would be in the future for all airlines? I was having a serious thought about
45 Bobnwa: What regional routes for any carrier are making money? NWA already has a massive route system to NRT.Larger than any other US carrier. Other than JFK
46 BOStonsox: I looked at the list of cities served by KE and the only one without service to Japan is LAS. They serve MIA but it is cargo only. BOS is one city th
47 WorldTraveler: DL could care less where the plane touches down; they do care about how much revenue it carries. If DL can generate higher RASMs flying to ATL than D
48 Nwaflyer: Hello All, Each airline has a specific market that they serve. It seems like everyone thinks that overflying NRT is the only way to go. I dont know if
49 DL Widget Head: Why not? ATL is a much bigger city than MSP and yet MSP seems to be able to support service to Asia. The only way MSP and ATL can do this is because
50 Nwaflyer: This logic must also be applied to flights from ATL to Asia. Lots of corporate accounts and huge companies are based in ATL and these business flyers
51 LAXdude1023: And if DTW was more profitable than ATL for Asia flights? MSP's connections are mostly domestic. ATL has alot of domestic but international connectio
52 MasseyBrown: When posting on financial matters, your reliability rate has not been good. For the benefit of all, you'll have to cite numbers.
53 MAH4546: MNL, HKG, and TPE are not future routes. They are tag-ons to the existing services. PVG is a future route, but the other three are not served non-sto
55 Davidlc3: I like where this is going.... How would the new airline divvy up new a/c and new flying (i.e. new routes for crews, new hire crews, etc.?) If the red
56 DL767captain: As for fleet i could see DL-NW ordering fleets much like they do now, what serves their routes the best. I think with DL being so into getting rid of
57 Jfk777: Given NW has PDX, SEA, SFO and LAX on the west coast plus MSP & DTW in the Midwest, the east coast needs some help. IF a merger with DL happens, it s
58 Azjubilee: Worldtraveler - You consistently ignore the fact that there are one or two Japanese people that may want to travel within Asia. Why in the heck would
59 LAXdude1023: THANK YOU!!!!!!! The west coast gets ignored constantly when this arguements are presented. The NRT hub allows us to get from here to many places in
60 Bobnwa: Well put, but I am afraid it will fall on deaf ears because a certain carrier doesn't have the rights.
61 Davidlc3: I remember having a NW Orient (yes, it was back then) jumpseater right after the Republic merger...she was planning and plotting on how to mess over t
62 WorldTraveler: yet MSP really only supports 1 transpac route per day and none to South/Southwest Asia again, DL at ATL is the only US carrier hub that has a sizable
63 LAXdude1023: DL doesnt have as many options as NW in terms of hubs, so ATL always comes up the best option. However NW has more hubs (including NRT). So when its
64 BAW716: I've been advocating something very similar in concept to this for awhile now...it seems that the powers that be are following the same path. This is
65 Bobnwa: The more recent numbers 3rd qtr 2007show NWA having a profit margin of 8.8% t-pac and 23.1% t-atl. Same time period show DL having a profit margin of
66 WorldTraveler: thank you for the 3rd quarter update, Bob. As you well know, though, DL has been adding capacity at a far faster rate to it international rate than an
67 LAXdude1023: Im just pointing out that NW does have more hubs and therefore more options to add flights at different places. I do like it that NW has the NRT hub
68 Azjubilee: Worldtraveler - with the exception of UA and NW, no other airline even have the ability to do a NRT type hub, therfore are forced into a point to poin
69 Bobnwa: In the 3rd quarter 2007 the intl ranking for profit margin for US carriers was as follows Atlantic CO-+28.5 NW-+23.1 UA-+19.7 US-+10,5 AA-+14.7 DL-+4
70 MasseyBrown: As stated in other posts, I don't think the numbers in the P-12 data base are 100% comparable - invalidating the basis for comparing airlines, but th
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, 
, 21029 posts, 
From Liechtenstein, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, 
From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 757 posts, 
From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, 
The only thing I am unsure about is NW taking on 77Ws. I think that with their fleet of 787s and having operated the 747s for so long, they could replace many of their 744s with 748Is as it would offer a nice size jump of about 30+ seats and have commonality with the 787s (even though NW ordered Trent1000s). Then again, NW could also possibly order the 77W for commonality with DLs 77Ls...who knows!
From France, joined May 2003, 446 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
