Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL Delays LAX-GRU Start-up For The Third Time  
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 19
Posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 10030 times:

DOT:

2008 US-Brazil Combination Frequency Allocation Proceeding

OST-2008-0307

April 22, 2009

Motion of Delta Air Lines

Delta looks forward to providing Los Angeles-Sao Paulo passengers with the important new benefit of U.S. flag nonstop service this summer. Delta is pleased that the flight has been well received and exhibits strong bookings during the peak summer period, commencing in July. However, due to the continued global economic recession, May and June traffic has been much weaker than expected, and cannot economically support the launch of new service. Accordingly, Delta requests an amended start date of June 30, 2009, rather than May 21, 2009 as currently authorized. This slight adjustment in Delta’s proposed start date does not affect any of the public interest benefits of the service.

Respectfully submitted,

Alexander Van der Bellen
Managing Director, Government Affairs
& Associate General Counsel
DELTA AIR LINES, INC.


http://www.mediafire.com/file/2yitwinznwg/DL-Mot.pdf

126 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24796 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 10002 times:

You know I heard this last week, but cast the news aside thinking DL would not delay the start up only 30 days out. Guess I was wrong, and they were truly looking for a further delay. Bookings must have been horrendous.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5231 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9980 times:

What were the other 2 delays?


Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 19
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9912 times:

The proposed start-up dates were:

"on or about December 14, 2008, or within 90 days of a final order"

"on or before April 15, 2009, or within 90 days of a final order awarding these frequencies (whichever is later)"

"an amended start date of May 21, 2009, rather than April 15"

and now

"an amended start date of June 30, 2009, rather than May 21, 2009"

[Edited 2009-04-22 14:32:56]

User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5231 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9859 times:



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 3):
"on or about December 14, 2008, or within 90 days of a final order"

Unless I'm mistaken, this start date would have been impossible to meet due to when approval was finally given.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 19
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9821 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 4):
Unless I'm mistaken, this start date would have been impossible to meet due to when approval was finally given.

No, the final order was issued on November 28th, so they would have had time to start the service until February 26th.


User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11416 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9803 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting C010T3 (Thread starter):
Delta looks forward to providing Los Angeles-Sao Paulo passengers with the important new benefit of U.S. flag nonstop service this summer. Delta is pleased that the flight has been well received and exhibits strong bookings during the peak summer period, commencing in July. However, due to the continued global economic recession, May and June traffic has been much weaker than expected, and cannot economically support the launch of new service

As expected, of course July will show strong bookings, for off-season would be terrible in terms of loads and even worst in terms of yields. The flight can perform well for peak July-August season, but i doubt August-November will do good.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
You know I heard this last week, but cast the news aside thinking DL would not delay the start up only 30 days out. Guess I was wrong, and they were truly looking for a further delay. Bookings must have been horrendous.

Yes, for some days the bookings are realy low and the fares, the cheapest ones! You can find from Brazil C for less than US$ 2,700, round trip!



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17322 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days ago) and read 9606 times:

No surprise here. Anyone care to bet how may times they delay ATLBSB Wink?


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently onlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7493 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days ago) and read 9600 times:

Id love to say Im surprised, but Im truly not.


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9562 times:

I really think that AA should seize the opportunity to strip DL from both new frequencies. AA could move quickly to launch a three weekly JFK-GIG with the high season frequencies in July and subsequently request the DOT to strip DL's frequencies in order to sustain it year-round, perhaps by moving one frequency from daylight MIA-GRU.
DL is only flying 4x weekly JFK-GRU in the low season, so AA can argue that DL is able to keep doing so and start LAX-GRU with the other 3 frequencies. In the high season, DL would be able to increase service from both LAX and JFK, since the bilateral allows the carriers to do so.


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9514 times:

problem is that AA doesn't use all of its frequencies year round either so the argument for AA wouldn't go real far.

While it's always fashionable to bash DL for showing caution, you need only look at the financial results that were just released for all major int'l US carriers to see that DL managed to post near break even operational results. All the int'l rights in the world won't do a bit of a good to a company if they can't make money. DL demonstrated that in the midst of what many have called the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression, DL was able to make money on an operational basis. Their network people are making the right calls even while growing DL's int'l network faster than any other US airline.

And, BTW, in the LAX-GRU case, DL has caused no one any harm because AA was the only contender for the frequency; they asked for a single frequency in order to increase MIA-CNF and they got it.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5231 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9453 times:



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 9):
I really think that AA should seize the opportunity to strip DL from both new frequencies.

Due to a 1 month delay? By the time AA files, the DOT reacts, and AA puts things into place, it will be time for DL to begin LAX-GRU. That being said, the DOT is very unlikely to find that it really is a detriment to the public benefit if the route begins one month later than planned.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 19
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9418 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 11):
Due to a 1 month delay? By the time AA files, the DOT reacts, and AA puts things into place, it will be time for DL to begin LAX-GRU. That being said, the DOT is very unlikely to find that it really is a detriment to the public benefit if the route begins one month later than planned.

It's already evolving to a 4-month delay. AA could launch the flight with the temporary rights it's already holding and make the commitment not to discontinue it in August if the both frequencies are granted. I know it's far-fetched, but how can they resist the opportunity to make DL look bad for future applications?


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8397 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9377 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 11):
the DOT is very unlikely to find that it really is a detriment to the public benefit if the route begins one month later than planned.

If not flying the route is not a public detriment, then the route authority should never have been granted. It is funny for them to suggest there is no substantial public benefit to having carried pax LAX-GRU. Then don't ask for the permission!


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9284 times:



Quoting C010T3 (Thread starter):

But wait......with AS DL will be the largest in LAX can will be able to do anything.  Yeah sure.......Next up......SYD.  Wink

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 7):
No surprise here. Anyone care to bet how may times they delay ATLBSB ?

IMO this route may be one of the better ideas. The other 3......not so much.

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 9):

DL would likely just start it at that point.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 10):
problem is that AA doesn't use all of its frequencies year round either so the argument for AA wouldn't go real far.

At least they are using them at some point not asking to push them back.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 15):
What I find funny is that in this case, it seems like whatever they are doing is working...The web cast was quite insightful and the numbers don't lie...

Thats beacause Atlanta has been and always will be printing money for Delta. They are still very much getting there butts kicked in LAX and JFK.



yep.
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9236 times:



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16):
At least they are using them at some point not asking to push them back.

kinda like how DL started its China routes and scaled them back while other carriers have chosen not to start them at all?

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16):
Thats beacause Atlanta has been and always will be printing money for Delta.

I suppose it's an accident that DL has built ATL into the world's largest hub and the most diverse int'l gateway in the US with service to more of the world than any other hub?

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16):
They are still very much getting there butts kicked in LAX and JFK.

Apparently you missed the conference call in which Hauenstein said that it was the interior hubs (read MSP and DTW) that were not performing as well on int'l flights as ATL and JFK which were doing well. No, DL is not getting its butt kicked at JFK. They didn't speak to LAX so neither you or I know.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5231 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9234 times:



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16):
But wait......with AS DL will be the largest in LAX can will be able to do anything. .......Next up......SYD.

First, no one ever claimed any such thing about the DL/AS relationship. Second, did you not hear on the conference call where it was noted that SYD is strategically important since ST is the only alliance without a nonstop US-SYD service? SYD will start despite the fact that you seem to want it to fail.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 16):
They are still very much getting there butts kicked in LAX and JFK.

And your source that proves this is???



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9201 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 18):
And your source that proves this is???

 checkmark 

And as WorldTraveler stated, the web cast would be my proof. I took the time to listen to it. They indicated that JFK along with ATL was doing quite well with the other hubs behind...



What gets measured gets done.
User currently onlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7493 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9163 times:



Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 15):
What I find funny is that in this case, it seems like whatever they are doing is working

When they relase their next round of numbers, we will see if what they are doing is working.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 17):
They didn't speak to LAX so neither you or I know.

I really dont think anyone is doing well at LAX. They carriers are all dukeing it out right now. Right now the hubs that are doing the best are probably the fortress hubs.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9108 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 20):
When they relase their next round of numbers, we will see if what they are doing is working.

DL has indicated for several quarters that it expects to be profitable by the 2nd quarter. I haven't read everyone's guidance but I haven't seen anyone else make that statement.


User currently onlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7493 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9080 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 22):
DL has indicated for several quarters that it expects to be profitable by the 2nd quarter.

Naturally I expect they wont be and point to the economy.

Lots of things have been "expected" and have not come to pass. Not just by DL, by everyone. I highly doubt any of the legacies will be profitable until the economy improves. Honestly just because they say it will be that way, it means nothing.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8397 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9075 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 22):
DL has indicated for several quarters that it expects to be profitable by the 2nd quarter. I haven't read everyone's guidance but I haven't seen anyone else make that statement.

Hopefully the fuel gambling losses won't be as harsh as they were for Q1! My goodness. $583 million, or something like that last quarter. They took a huge risk, and it seems on pace to cost them at least $1 billion for the year, maybe quite a bit more.


User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4000 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9041 times:



Quoting C010T3 (Thread starter):
Accordingly, Delta requests an amended start date of June 30, 2009,

Does this mean the flight is not viable in JUNE? We got a market viable for July and August, then probably between December 15 and January 5, and some uptick for Carnival - that is, for a 3 x week frequency. Really not worth trying.

How thin a network does DL want to get? They can fly BOS-GRU Dec 15 and Dec 17 and fill up. Frequency: 2/365.  Wink


User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11416 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8896 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 10):
DL has caused no one any harm because AA was the only contender for the frequency; they asked for a single frequency in order to increase MIA-CNF and they got it

DOT at least could impose the dormant condition but it's sure DL can't run the flight on a year basis. It's just amazing that knowing the current economic situation, DL tried to run such venture instead of trying to connect new markets to ATL like BSB or CNF. I'm sure ATL-BSB would perform better!



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5363 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8638 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 10):
...DL managed to post near break even operational results...... DL was able to make money on an operational basis....

One of your contradictory claims sort of has to be wrong, no?. Considering that the operating loss was $483 million, some nitpicker might even say they are both wrong.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
25 Panamair : I believe that Delta is the only legacy that gives an Operating Margin guidance for the following quarter at each quarter's earnings release. AMR, UA
26 MAH4546 : AA uses all but five of their unrestricted frequencies year-round. The five frequencies they do not use year-round, they still use approximately 40 o
27 Hardiwv : This is good news for KE which in the meanwhile operates GRU-LAX all for itself using the B772. All in all, the delay in the start up is just marginal
28 WorldTraveler : Thank you for finally admitting that AA uses only 90% of its frequencies on a year round basis. Somehow DL's reduction of even 2 of its 21 GIG/GRU fr
29 LipeGIG : Do you have any info on the hedge agreements, how much of the consumption for Q2 is protected and the average price ? As per DOT approval, CO has up
30 MaverickM11 : I wonder how well that is doing since it's barely two-thirds full and most of the non-local traffic seems to double connect to Japan.
31 Mcdu : Funny that you say that this is "caution" by DL but it is irrational and scurrilous that other carriers treat route authority like a hen in lean time
32 Mcdu : Worldtraveler, There seems to be some interesting information in reviewing some of your previous post. Your words recently: " DL's international commi
33 ATTart : Thank you and Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
34 Hardiwv : Thanks for the clarifcation and cofirmation CO and US have not loaded their services to GIG. CO could start the flight on 01 June 2009 since they hav
35 LipeGIG : WT, it's not only 2, now it's 3. CO probably wont like the idea of a small period of time to deal with a good advance bookings record. The fact is th
36 MasseyBrown : The one-time specials were employee termination fees and merger-related costs. It's very debatable whether these are properly called one-time, when t
37 Hardiwv : Good to know CO flight will start GIG nonstop 01 July. US has plenty of time to market the flight so as to start as scheduled in October. Rgs,
38 4EVERVARIG : I have a feeling that DL is seriously studying KE's numbers on the LAX-GRU segment, and given the fact that KE is only transporting 100 passengers at
39 WorldTraveler : and given the losses at every US int'l airline, there are unsustainable city pairs at every airline. Other carriers will be cutting too or they will
40 FlyPNS1 : Domestically, you are correct. Internationally, not so much. DL has not reacted fast enough in cutting transatlantic capacity and they took a hit for
41 Cubsrule : To be honest, I think it's a fiction to separate any hedging profits or losses from operating profit or loss. You need fuel to operate an airline, an
42 MasseyBrown : Legal doesn't mean honest. DL isn't the only guilty party; but they're amazingly blatant about it. If you look at the press reports, you'll notice ne
43 Travelin man : How many people here think DL will never start this route (LAX-GRU)? I raise my hand. (And it's not a knock on DL, just facing the reality of the econ
44 WorldTraveler : DL can't study KE's LAX-GRU numbers because DL and KE don't have antitrust immunity to Latin America. KE can't tell DL what it is doing in that regio
45 Cubsrule : It's not really financial, though. Planes don't go without fuel.
46 WorldTraveler : But what you pay for fuel does indeed affect finances. The operations people didn't buy the fuel and the network people didn't either. The finance pe
47 Cubsrule : Right. So should AA break out "pilot hedge" losses because they pay their pilots more than the market rate as a result of entering into less-than-ide
48 LipeGIG : Of course, JFKGRU runs on Saturday, Sundays, Tuesday, Fridays GRUJFK runs on Sunday, Monday, Wednesday, Saturday But probably in my view, US will tak
49 FlyPNS1 : Correct, but you previously said DL was ahead of the industry in reacting, but clearly they were not judging by the results.
50 MaverickM11 : From another thread when DL was benefitting from fuel hedges...
51 LipeGIG : And that's a problem. Why overhedging ? Which airline sells more than 20% in advance for tickets that in fact will be used in more than 180 days ? Th
52 WorldTraveler : But labor contracts cannot be hedged and there is no accounting provision for noting that you are paying above average labor costs. Currency and comm
53 Cubsrule : What's in a name? Entering into a long-term pilot contract is an agreement that pilots will provide X services for Y dollars at time Z. Entering into
54 FlyPNS1 : On transatlantic DL WAS NOT ahead....they were behind. DL actually INCREASED transatlantic capacity this past quarter.
55 LipeGIG : That's exactly why they can't hedge based on the current level of "activity". The market change so quick that does not give time to produce a good st
56 Flighty : Absolutely they should report a hedging loss on Coca-Cola, if they are in fact engaging in a bizarre financial derivatives strategy in Coca-Cola. Inv
57 Cubsrule : Hedges aren't really "bizarre," though. They are essentially a tool to lock in a price, the same as any other contract for any other input.
58 DeltaL1011man : huh? DTW-LHR,ATL-LHR,JFK-LHR,MSP-LHR DTW-FRA,ATL-FRA,JFK-FRA MSP-CDG,ATL-CDG DTW-FCO(seasonal)ATL-FCO,JFK-FCO. and all the AMS routes. Thats about it
59 Rafabozzolla : With all do respect... You love to post C fares as indicator of bookings, fair enough. But have you ever bothered to think that the vast majority of
60 LipeGIG : Y fares are almost the same from Brazil, from US also they are very similar. C is the only major difference and it's not about any financial/banking
61 WorldTraveler : And since a significant portion of DL's transatlantic capacity is not to western Europe where everyone else flies, but instead to Africa, where no on
62 Cubsrule : If that's the case, then regardless of what the accountants want to see, we ought to add the hedging profit/loss to the "operating" profit/loss to ge
63 LipeGIG : Which is in fact not a smart move. But how they can plan schedule so far in advance ? They can't predict a major change on a market, they can't predi
64 Post contains links C010T3 : Apparently, the South Korean Ministry for Transportation has just announced that the bilateral agreement with Brazil has been expanded, allowing from
65 Hardiwv : I think US will start in October. Dont they have the authority to start flying in October, why delay the flight to November or December? GIG is such
66 WorldTraveler : I'm sorry but apparently you fail to appreciate the amount of advance planning that airlines must do; they can't built their network just a couple mo
67 LipeGIG : US need to set up the entire operation before asking for ANAC for the slots and frequencies. They got DOT approval, not ANAC. Also, to set up a compa
68 Hardiwv : So lets hope CO put the idea in pratice GIG-EWR plus IAH-GIG B764 starting 01 July, and since GRU does not have demand CO will reduce IAH-GRU to 3 we
69 LipeGIG : Newark/New York is not energy capital. May be in 2010 they apply for EWR-GIG. I'm just using the information provided on the topic and the fact that
70 Hardiwv : I think KE request for an expansion of the bilateral is already an indication they are satisfied with the route, and I assume it is also a warning to
71 Incitatus : That is one factor that should be taken into account but that is not the only one. I regard it as the second most important. The major factor in hedg
72 LipeGIG : Agree Incitatus, but again, you have to consider that when you do not take into consideration the revenue, you might be facing a huge profit or a hug
73 Hardiwv : As you mentioned hedging does not come without its own pitfalls and it is far from being a fully reliable instrument to protect airlines from oil pri
74 LipeGIG : Yes, because almost all major airlines are getting loss with fuel hedge, and the current environment protects them against new competitors. And we ke
75 Hardiwv : I fully agree, and this is what I consider really unfair, airlines shifted the oil volatility bill to consumers with surcharges/fees, and now that oi
76 LipeGIG : In fact their hedge is against the customers, not against the futures of oil. That's why i said the best hedge is to consider advance bookings, becau
77 4EVERVARIG : I think that the logic after it is that KE would be more competitive against other airlines as far as schedule is concerned on the short term. Offeri
78 WorldTraveler : that is true but even with the hedge problems which US airlines faced, they didn't hedge more than their advance bookings. It truly is just not smart
79 Cubsrule : The more interesting question to me is whether DL and KE ought to codeshare once DL starts the service. For DL, there are advantages and disadvantage
80 WorldTraveler : LAX-GRU is a relatively small portion in the much larger relationship between DL and KE. You must look at this route and the limited opportunities fo
81 Cubsrule : I think you misread what I said...
82 C010T3 : The DOT granted DL's request today. Apparently there are no objections from other carriers.
83 WorldTraveler : I did read what you said... but if KE is going to increase their service to 7 flts/week, then it doesn't seem they need to or want to codeshare on DL
84 Cubsrule : How sure a bet is this increase?
85 Flighty : Hedging does not ensure you stay competitve. If everyone hedges, you could unhedge and make huge profits when oil prices fall. So, then they would hav
86 LipeGIG : I wouldn't expect any airline to object as they could need to use the same measure to delay their future new operations. So as mentioned, DL should f
87 WorldTraveler : Hedging has yielded far more positive than negative results for the industry. Looking at what is happening now as proof of whether hedging makes sens
88 Cubsrule : One thing that they'd have to ask themselves is if there is another market where they could profitably use the frequencies. There isn't one that spri
89 MaverickM11 : There's no restriction on USFrance flights. DL cut JFKCDG back to the point where there was no longer any point to flying the route (see also AMS, LH
90 Slcdeltarumd11 : I am thinking this "delay" for the third time might end up being more like cancelled. I could honestly see SYD being cancelled down the road also. How
91 WorldTraveler : Since everything between N. America and France is a joint venture flight, it is no less or more profitable for DL than for AF. Whether you want to be
92 MAH4546 : Except two of them must be used on LAXGRU. Delta can ask to re-allocate them, but that opens up other carriers to ask for them. Glad to see you are f
93 Incitatus : There are not. DL now has more frequencies than it can use. Right now it is using only 75% of its allocated pool. As I've shown before, it is much lo
94 Viscount724 : I would think the percentage of DL's total transatlantic capacity to Africa, even with planned new routes, must still be quite a small number.
95 WorldTraveler : I am not admitting it is a folly. I'm simply saying that if the Korea-Brazil bilateral is expanded to allow KE to serve the route every day, then it
96 LAXdude1023 : Thats not saying that much since: 1) DFW and IAH arent primary gateways to Europe for their respective airlines. 2) DFW has 6 flights a day to Europe
97 WorldTraveler : Oh, we're talking about revenue. Africa traffic is much more valuable than European traffic by about a 2 to 1 margin. But on a capacity basis, DL does
98 LipeGIG : Yes, one of them is to fly ATL-BSB asap.
99 MaverickM11 : There still is no incentive to cancel profitable flights, and every incentive to cancel unprofitable flights. Basic economics don't go out the window
100 WorldTraveler : In a JV, the revenue is yours and your partners regardless of who operates. It really is basic economics that you deploy your resources where they ma
101 LipeGIG : The effect on passengers are clear: 20% less in price is equal to at least 20 to 30% more in demand from the Brazilian side, which means a good 10-20
102 Hardiwv : This is also my point, KE already operates the route, it now got additional frequencies and could operate daily flights, and in addition KE has an ex
103 Bobnwa : Being very familiar with the NW/KL joint venture, it makes absolutely no difference which carrier flies the route. All decisions are made by a commit
104 MasseyBrown : This isn't true at all. In a joint venture the profit (or loss) participation is dependent on many factors, such as percent of flying performed by ea
105 LAXintl : Not quite. See below Indeed. Things are prorated on a host of measures, one of the more critical being ASM/ASKs.
106 Incitatus : Is it serious that you want to make this argument? DL is only using 4 out its 6 JFK-GRU frequencies right now, That is 66%. ATL-MAO is at 66% too, an
107 MaverickM11 : So in a JV it's a good idea to cancel profitable flights?
108 LipeGIG : Incitatus, perfect but just be in mind that seasonal flights are limited. Of course seems that there will be no extra flights for IATA summer 2009 wh
109 Incitatus : I am not aware of any limitation on number of flights. Within the limited peak period any side can request any increase in frequencies for any segmen
110 Bobnwa : On any given flight the profit and loss for each carrier is exactly the same. As an example NW does not fly to Europe out of Canada yet it splits the
111 AirNZ : Now surely that's a new way to use spin! Something is either profit or loss........so can you explain what parameters are used to decide when somethi
112 WorldTraveler : Yes, you and I get it but unfortunately some people want to argue about a JV that is longer than in the industry and one which they know nothing abou
113 Cubsrule : How do these JVs calculate profits for an individual flight? Seems like that requires a lot of pro-rating...
114 Commavia : As oh-so-many others have already said, LAX-GRU still remains - in my view - a total waste of time and resources by Delta. Since even the most battle-
115 LAXintl : You both are over simplyfying the JV. Yes things are sold blindly, however cost and revenues are not distributed blindly 50/50. There are a host of a
116 LipeGIG : Agree 100%. LAX is not a gateway for Brazil, lacks the strong VFR and O&D places like NYC and MIA have, and will just reduce current operations to Br
117 Bobnwa : I think you are overcomplicating the JV. Of course if one carrier flies 9 trips and the other carrier flies 1 trip, the carrier flying 9 trips will h
118 WorldTraveler : That may be true but the whole point of the discussion abut JVs is that DL has a partner that does fly LAX-GRU hile no other alliance does the same t
119 MaverickM11 : ...Nor the fact that the goal is to fly profitable flights and drop unprofitable ones, no matter who flies it or how the revenue is shared.
120 LipeGIG : If they decide not to begin the flight will be a very smart decision. On this i agree 100% with you. DL current fleet gives them the biggest advantag
121 Bobnwa : I don't think myself or WT are in disagreement with that. Do you think we are?
122 MaverickM11 : I'm really not sure what WT is talking about to be honest. See for yourself...
123 Bobnwa : The financial results of any flight in a joint venture are what they are regardless of what metal is being used. If the flight is unprofitable it sho
124 Cubsrule : It does and it doesn't. AF doesn't have 763s. If a 763 is the right aircraft for the job, DL needs to be flying the flight, and the flight will perfo
125 Bobnwa : Agreed, the joint venture decides what aircraft is the right size for a particular flight and then parcels it out to either partner.
126 HB-IWC : This thread has wandered considerable off topic into topics that are no longer related to the original thread topic. The discussion of the Delta LAX G
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Possibly Another New Start Up For The YYZ Market? posted Tue Sep 23 2003 16:15:17 by 1world
Did AA Security Fail For The Third Time? posted Sun Dec 23 2001 18:21:59 by Bobcat
Got To See The A380 For The First Time. posted Thu Nov 20 2008 11:57:01 by Contrails15
CRJ-1000 Flies For The First Time Today posted Wed Sep 3 2008 09:12:15 by YULspotter
B6 To Reduce Capacity For The First Time posted Fri May 16 2008 12:42:11 by MOBflyer
Will Sales Pick Up For The CRJ-900 In 2007? posted Sun Dec 31 2006 05:16:53 by CRJ900X
DL (Comair) To Run DAB-LGA For The Holidays posted Tue Dec 19 2006 21:26:00 by PVD757
A320-100 To Be Scrapped For The First Time (ex-BA) posted Sun Nov 12 2006 14:09:42 by PlaneHunter
Flying With JetBue For The First Time posted Thu Oct 19 2006 03:31:14 by DZ09
Which Jetliners Stored For The Longest Time? posted Sat Sep 2 2006 10:25:29 by Cumulus