CokePopper From United States, joined May 2008, 493 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26478 times:
Thanks Panamair. Been waiting for this info for awhile now.
This announcement free's up a few 777's. I wonder if they will
replace some routes with the 777 or park a few?
Interesting that CVG is left with only CDG, killing CVG to LGW surprised me tremendously.
ATL to ICN is well served by Korean Air. ATL to PVG could mean the 777 moves to the DTW to PVG route in the fall, DTW is better positioned as for such a flight as the 777 takes 15 hours and 50 minutes to get there from ATL.
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3781 posts, RR: 26 Reply 8, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26332 times:
Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 3): Could they lose their PVG authority if it remains suspended for too long? I am certain DL already evaluated that, but I am just curious.
Only if someone challenges DL for the authority and given current conditions I doubt anyone will.
LHCVG From United States, joined May 2009, 229 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26302 times:
Why are they cutting CVG-FRA if it supposedly has such good yields? I have seen several mentions on here about how DL does rather well on CVG-FRA (and I believe CVG-CDG as well), so why are they cutting that would seem to be moneymakers? I will freely admit that I've considered it a "gift" for a while now that DL has maintained transatlantic service beyond CDG out of CVG, so I'm not just bitching about losing service.
Jetlanta From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1710 posts, RR: 19 Reply 11, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26227 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 8): Only if someone challenges DL for the authority and given current conditions I doubt anyone will.
I think you are surely right here. We are actually returning to a time where carriers hold significant "dormant" authorities.
I think the most interesting thing here is that these are pretty major cuts in terms of capacity, but the network connectivity isn't diminished much. The advantage of having such a vast network of hubs. ATL-PVG for example was clearly not needed from a network connectivity perspective, once DTW-PVG was added. At the end of the day, the footprint is still big.
It's also interesting that EDI is the only announced international station closure. This indicates that they intend to maintain the footprint, though I'm sure we'll see some heavy capacity reductions in terms of frequency and aircraft size.
It will be interesting to follow what the other carriers do. This is clearly the tip of the iceberg.
Jetlanta From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1710 posts, RR: 19 Reply 13, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26153 times:
Quoting LHCVG (Reply 10): Why are they cutting CVG-FRA if it supposedly has such good yields? I have seen several mentions on here about how DL does rather well on CVG-FRA (and I believe CVG-CDG as well), so why are they cutting that would seem to be moneymakers? I will freely admit that I've considered it a "gift" for a while now that DL has maintained transatlantic service beyond CDG out of CVG, so I'm not just bitching about losing service.
Because times change and Delta has changed. CVG-CDG has long been the cash cow. The role of CVG-FRA has diminished over the years as:
A) SkyTeam connectivity has become more important
B) CVG has shrunk
C) JFK has grown
D) DTW is in play
Keep in mind that a lot of the CVG-FRA traffic is actually connecting beyond FRA on an interline basis. Canceling it forces that traffic over SkyTeam hubs at CDG, AMS, JFK, DTW and ATL.
Panamair From United States, joined Oct 2001, 3552 posts, RR: 27 Reply 14, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 26126 times:
Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 11): I'm sure we'll see some heavy capacity reductions in terms of frequency and aircraft size.
Agreed and they will likely come sooner this year (i.e., starting in September) than in previous years (usually not till November). There will probably also be some suspensions for a few weeks to some destinations during the deep winter (end of January till mid-February for example)
Avconsultant From United States, joined Feb 2006, 1191 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 25901 times:
Quoting LHCVG (Reply 10): Why are they cutting CVG-FRA if it supposedly has such good yields? I have seen several mentions on here about how DL does rather well on CVG-FRA (and I believe CVG-CDG as well), so why are they cutting that would seem to be moneymakers? I will freely admit that I've considered it a "gift" for a while now that DL has maintained transatlantic service beyond CDG out of CVG, so I'm not just bitching about losing service.
There were previous threads, from last Fall, where DL stated they were committed to CVG through the Summer of '09 and would have a better idea of CVG future as the merger progresses. As you know, there is a lot of speculation CVG would be scaled back to a focus city given the proximity of DTW. We know MSP is going no where with the agreement between DL & the state of Minnesota.
IMO, CVG might buy time based on DTW economic condition; however, CVG & DTW sit too close together to be efficient. In the 90's US was competing with itself with overlapping hubs. DTW and CVG would easily fall into this category.
AV8AJET From United States, joined Sep 2003, 959 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 25832 times:
Very sad about JFK-EDI...I have flown that route along with ATL-EDI and wished it had stayed in ATL. I guess this means little hope for a DL into GLA? Shame sorry Scotland, I enjoyed the flight while we had it.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 25728 posts, RR: 76 Reply 22, posted (5 months 6 days ago) and read 25833 times:
Obviously Delta needs to do what they need to do, and there is nothing wrong with these cuts in this economy. Its just funny that four of the routes being suspended - ATL-PVG/ICN and CVG-FRA/LGW - are four routes that many used to defend to death.
Quoting FFlyerWorld (Reply 15): This will be interesting to see what CO and AA do specifically.
AA already released their European winter schedule. A few seasonal frequency reductions and capacity cuts (smaller planes), but no current plans to suspend any routes. That can change, of course.
MaverickM11 From United States, joined Apr 2000, 11881 posts, RR: 51 Reply 23, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25724 times:
Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 20): I was not expecting this route to go...I am sure KE will be happy.
The route is a big one but not that big to support a daily KE 744 and additional capacity. Plus, the KE hub competes with the NRT hub, so even before the additional ATLNRT capacity you don't drive much incremental flow traffic but rather shif it between hubs.
Jetlanta From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1710 posts, RR: 19 Reply 24, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25656 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 22): ATL-PVG/ICN and CVG-FRA/LGW - are four routes that many used to defend to death.
Frankly, all of these are merger-related to a significant degree.
Things changed VERY quickly with Asia due to the economy and the H1N1 Flu. ATL-PVG never made as much sense once DTW-PVG was operating anyway. No one at DL would have argued otherwise. I certainly wouldn't have either.
ATL-ICN was performing well..then the economy and flu hit it as well. But most importantly, ATL-ICN was added to improve connectivity to Asia. After the merger, it makes far more sense for Delta to keep that traffic on its own metal via NRT. In a sense, it could have still been a profitable route, but a strategic negative for the carrier. As every pax sent over ICN is a potential pax that could have flown on DL equipment beyond NRT.
LAXdude1023 From United States, joined Sep 2006, 4378 posts, RR: 22 Reply 25, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25629 times:
Im not surprised at all. I was just saying in another thread that I thought CVG-FRA would be affected somehow. CVG-LGW does surprise me a bit, but I bet that one will come back during the summer.
ATL-PVG doesnt surprise me one bit. Its been awful from the beginning. Plus DTW is better suited for Asia traffic.
ATL-ICN doesnt surprise me either since there seems to be an emphasis more on NRT now, but we werent told that is the "shineing star of the Pacific network"?
Also I dont know if this has been brought up, but ATL-NRT will be operating daily with a 744 instead of 11x weekly.
Alitalia744 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 4296 posts, RR: 48 Reply 26, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 27085 times:
Quote: Panamair (Reply 19):
The "swine flu" hasn't helped and has had a significant impact on transpacific travel (as evidenced by the large drop in LF in May).
No, swine didn't help at all. Mex beach traffic will be affected in seasonal suspensions harder this year than before.
Quote: Jetlanta (Reply 24):
Things changed VERY quickly with Asia due to the economy and the H1N1 Flu. ATL-PVG never made as much sense once DTW-PVG was operating anyway. No one at DL would have argued otherwise. I certainly wouldn't have either.
Bingo - writing was on the wall with the NW merger and DTW-PVG launching. Not surprised on this one.
Quote: LAXdude1023 (Reply 25):
ATL-ICN doesnt surprise me either since there seems to be an emphasis more on NRT now, but we werent told that is the "shineing star of the Pacific network"? Wink
The route was well in better times. All airlines are hurting. Only Delta's the one that gets the sh*t from this board.
There are additional seasonal changes that will be made. No different than years past.
Cba From United States, joined Jul 2000, 4454 posts, RR: 5 Reply 27, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 27063 times:
Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 7): ATL to PVG could mean the 777 moves to the DTW to PVG route in the fall, DTW is better positioned as for such a flight as the 777 takes 15 hours and 50 minutes to get there from ATL.
I think that we may see a lot of Asia service shifted to DTW in the future, while ATL remains the domestic super hub, and serves Europe and LatAm. DTW is much better positioned to capture connecting traffic going to Asia than ATL is, and NW has had a strong Asian network from this hub for decades going back to Northwest Orient. ATL-Asia service is still relatively new. ATL will be best suited for expansion into Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
I could be extrapolating a tad too much here, but it seems that DL may be reversing its initial post-merger behavior to grab NW resources (planes, routes, etc) and throw them all into ATL. Now I think that they are realizing that NW's network brings a lot to the table that they can build off of, rather than packing everything into ATL.
And honestly, the CVG reductions make perfect sense. CVG will probably be a focus city in the next 5 years due to its proximity to DTW. The only thing that will hold the focus city is DL's monopoly on the market there... but then again as DL pulls back we may see the Air Trans, Southwests and Jet Blues of the world creep in.
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 26770 times:
The domestic economy will most likely recover well before the rest of the world economy. Why not reallocate some assets to the domestic market? Down guaging to increase yield only works if no one comes in and fills the void which hasn't seemed to be the case. When DL cuts many times the capacity is backfilled by another carrier. Why not work towards building route structure where you are lacking (West), replacing RJ routes with mainline, and prepare for the future. A side benefit would be putting pressure on your competition in a tough economic environment.
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3781 posts, RR: 26 Reply 32, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 26757 times:
Quoting Avconsultant (Reply 18): IMO, CVG might buy time based on DTW economic condition; however, CVG & DTW sit too close together to be efficient. In the 90's US was competing with itself with overlapping hubs. DTW and CVG would easily fall into this category.
There was an article not too long about how DL's management saw DTW. They were very excited about DTW and viewed it as having the potential to become a "superhub" despite all the economic woes of the area. While nothing was said specifically about CVG, the talk about growing DTW to be a superhub doesn't portend well for CVG.
Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 13): Because times change and Delta has changed. CVG-CDG has long been the cash cow. The role of CVG-FRA has diminished over the years as:
A) SkyTeam connectivity has become more important
B) CVG has shrunk
C) JFK has grown
D) DTW is in play
I agree with your analysis and I would add one more point. Rising fuel prices will kill a lot of RJ flying. CVG relies heavily on this RJ flying. By shifting capacity toward DTW, they can upgauge to more cost effective flying.
LipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 7836 posts, RR: 63 Reply 33, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 26661 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 25): Im not surprised at all. I was just saying in another thread that I thought CVG-FRA would be affected somehow. CVG-LGW does surprise me a bit, but I bet that one will come back during the summer.
Agree with you, seems that the CVG-CDG connecting the main SkyTeam hub in Europe and allowing more and easy connections, would even demand a larger plane.
For DL it's good because they can reduce seat offer and increase yields.
CO58 From United States, joined Nov 2008, 32 posts, RR: 1 Reply 34, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 26633 times:
Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 26): Only Delta's the one that gets the sh*t from this board.
Oh please! Go read a few threads that do not have "DL" in the title and you will see almost every airline gets its fair share of bashing on these boards, not just poor innocent Delta.
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 28): I'm surprised one of the BOM trips didn't get cut, either ATLBOM or AMSBOM.
I was surprised too. Hopefully KLM can take the AMS-BOM flight soon and let DL use the spare 763 to start something wonderful like SLC-ICN or downgauge an existing NW 330 flight.
AABB777 From United States, joined Oct 2007, 155 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 26680 times:
More information on Delta cuts...
Delta is requesting the following relief:
Dormancy waiver of seven (7) U.S.-China frequencies, Atlanta-Shanghai,
from September 1, 2009 to September 1, 2010.
Dormancy waiver of four (4) U.S.-South Africa frequencies,
Atlanta-Capetown via Dakar, from September 1, 2009 to September 1,
2010.
Convert remaining three (3) of five (5) U.S.-Ukraine direct service
frequencies (New York-Kiev) from year-round to seasonal service,
effective September 1, 2009.
Convert remaining four (4) of seven (7) U.S.-Russia direct service
frequencies (Atlanta-Moscow) from year-round to seasonal service,
effective September 1, 2009.
Dormancy waiver of five (5) U.S.-Argentina seasonal frequencies, New
York-Buenos Aires, permitting Delta to resume JFK-Buenos Aires
seasonal service on December 18, 2010, rather than in December, 2009.
Tu154m From United States, joined Oct 2001, 629 posts, RR: 8 Reply 37, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 26657 times:
Recap:
Market changes
· ATL-BOM service ends 10/24/09
o Last op. 24OCT EB, 23OCT WB
o JFK-BOM starts 25OCT EB, 26OCT WB
· ATL-ICN service ends 8/30/09
o Last op. 30AUG WB, 31AUG EB
o Daily NRT-ICN remains
· ATL-PVG service ends 9/1/09
o Last op. 1SEP WB, 2SEP EB
4/week DTW-PVG and Daily NRT-PVG remain
· CVG-FRA service ends 8/29/09
o Last op. 29AUG EB, 30AUG WB
o Daily ATL-FRA, DTW-FRA and JFK-FRA remain
· CVG-LGW service ends 8/29/09
o Last op. 29AUG EB, 30AUG WB
o Daily ATL-LGW remains (plus LHR service)
Suspended Service various dates through March 2010
· ATL-PRG service suspended 9/26/09-3/27/10
o Last op. 25SEP EB, 26SEP WB
o JFK-PRG remains 3x weekly
· ATL-SVO service suspended 9/29/09-3/26/10
o Last op. 28SEP EB, 29SEPWB
o Daily JFK-SVO remains
· JFK-AGP service suspended 10/18/09-3/27/10
o Last op. 17OCT EB, 18OCT WB
· JFK-KBP service suspended 9/12/09-3/27/10
o Last op. 11SEP EB, 12SEP WB
· JFK-PSA service suspended 10/19/09-3/27/10
o Last op. 18OCT EB, 19OCT WB
· JFK-SNN service suspended 10/4/09-3/26/10
o Last op. 3OCT EB, 4OCT WB
· JFK-VLC service suspended 10/11/09-3/26/10
o Last op. 10OCT EB, 11OCT WB
· ATL-ARN service suspended 8/23/08-3/27/10
o Last op. 22AUG EB, 23AUG WB
Seasonal Service ending early
· MSP-CDG seasonal service ends 8/30/09
o Last op. 30AUG EB and WB
· JFK-OTP seasonal service ends 9/6/09
o Last op. 6SEP EB, 7SEP WB
· CVG-AMS seasonal service ends 8/15/09
o Last op. 15AUG EB, 16AUG WB
o ATL only remaining DL-coded service, multiple gateways with NW-code flights
· ATL-VCE seasonal service ends 10/10/09
o Last op. 10OCT EB, 11OCT WB
o Daily JFK-VCE remains
Discontinued Service
· ATL-CPT service ends 8/29/09
o Last op. 29AUG (28AUG ATL originator)
· JFK-EDI service ends 9/19/09
o Last op. 19SEP EB, 20SEP WB
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2737 posts, RR: 9 Reply 38, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 26471 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 31): The domestic economy will most likely recover well before the rest of the world economy. Why not reallocate some assets to the domestic market?
I would say the opposite is true. I expect the rest of the world's economies to do better than the USA economy over the next few years.
MogandoCI From United States, joined Jun 2009, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 26449 times:
If I were DL I would attempt to build up LAX and SEA as the Asian gateways (since UA's SFO fortress is nearly impossible to penetrate). NW chose DTW and DL chose ATL to route their traffic only because they had limited options in their existing hub structures.
Going to Asia and Europe via ATL involves major backtracking for most people within the US, and DTW's catchment area's economy has been on a long-term downtrend (so O&D and yields can only continue to deteriorate).
LipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 7836 posts, RR: 63 Reply 43, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 26284 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting AABB777 (Reply 35): Dormancy waiver of five (5) U.S.-Argentina seasonal frequencies, New
York-Buenos Aires, permitting Delta to resume JFK-Buenos Aires
seasonal service on December 18, 2010, rather than in December, 2009
Wow... one year waiver ?!
Quoting Tu154m (Reply 37): ATL-CPT service ends 8/29/09
o Last op. 29AUG (28AUG ATL originator)
That's a surprise, i was thinking that it was a good performer
Quoting Tu154m (Reply 37): ATL-SVO service suspended 9/29/09-3/26/10
o Last op. 28SEP EB, 29SEPWB
And also SVO has been downgraded from the previous expected 764 with flat beds to a 763.
Where the 764 will be used ?
Jetlanta From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1710 posts, RR: 19 Reply 47, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 26099 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 46): 2) Can we confirm that ATL-PVG/ICN and CVG-FRA/LGW are gone for good and not just seasonal?
They are "suspended". Its not seasonal. I'd not be surprised to see ATL-PVG back some day. CVG-LGW would be a reasonable summer seasonal. I suspect they will reevaluate that one as they go into the summer planning period.
Yup, that's the word. Apparently the AI pullout on the non-stop make it look good again.
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 46): 2) Can we confirm that ATL-PVG/ICN and CVG-FRA/LGW are gone for good and not just seasonal?
• Atlanta-Seoul: indefinite suspension after Aug. 30
• Atlanta-Shanghai: indefinite suspension after Sept. 1
• Cincinnati-Frankfurt: indefinite suspension after Aug. 29
• Cincinnati-London-Gatwick: indefinite suspension after Aug. 29
You will have to tell me what "Indefinate suspension" means.
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 49, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25890 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 38): I would say the opposite is true. I expect the rest of the world's economies to do better than the USA economy over the next few years.
Possibly, but recent recessions have all began in the US and spead to the world, like this one, and the recovery began when the US recovery was well underway. Like it or not the US economy still drives the world economy. It would be nice if the airlines could be more proactive instead of constantly reactive. There are a lot of side benefits to reallocating to domestic including: reduced exposure to the pandemic de jour, reduced crew training, the ability to get rid of high frequency RJ routes and fill holes in the domestic network, to name a few.
MaverickM11 From United States, joined Apr 2000, 11881 posts, RR: 51 Reply 53, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25498 times:
Quoting AABB777 (Reply 52): ....well according to DL's temporary dormancy request, this is atually suspended until September 1, 2010...
It is the airline industry so anything can happen in a year, but I don't see DL bringing back a bunch of terrible routes in the worst month of the year.
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2737 posts, RR: 9 Reply 54, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25484 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 49): Like it or not the US economy still drives the world economy.
Not the way it used to. Look to China, Europe, and South America to lead the way out of this one.
The USA screwed up bad over the last 20 years, and continues to make all the wrong economic moves.
The rest of the world would not have had such problems this time, except that they held alot of worthless paper issued by Freddie and Fannie.
DL (and other airlines) have trimmed capacity both domestically and internationally over the past couple of years. To dump capacity into the domestic market as was done in the past will only exacerbate their own (and everyone elses) problems by depressing yield to the point where a 100%LF will still lose money.
....well according to DL's temporary dormancy request, this is atually suspended until September 1, 2010...
Dormancy requests for more than one year are only granted in extraordinary circumstances. Absent a dramatic shift in travel that sees the need to re-start these routes during the slowest travel period of the year, Delta will once again request dormancy waiver extensions to spring 2011 for routes they would like to resume.
Panamair From United States, joined Oct 2001, 3552 posts, RR: 27 Reply 56, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25445 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 49): but recent recessions have all began in the US and spead to the world, like this one, and the recovery began when the US recovery was well underway
Getting OT here but if the US tries to "consume" and spend its way out of this crisis, like we did with others, we'll be back in another crisis in no time. Basically, it's time for others to consume more and for the U.S. to actually produce and save more...
Mayor From United States, joined Mar 2008, 4105 posts, RR: 11 Reply 57, posted (5 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 25396 times:
Quoting MogandoCI (Reply 40): If I were DL I would attempt to build up LAX and SEA as the Asian gateways (since UA's SFO fortress is nearly impossible to penetrate). NW chose DTW and DL chose ATL to route their traffic only because they had limited options in their existing hub structures.
Going to Asia and Europe via ATL involves major backtracking for most people within the US, and DTW's catchment area's economy has been on a long-term downtrend (so O&D and yields can only continue to deteriorate).
Yeah, it makes you wonder how DL was successful all those years, doesn't it??
''Life's tough . . . It's even tougher if you're stupid..'' The Duke -- John Wayne
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 58, posted (5 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 25363 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 54): Not the way it used to. Look to China, Europe, and South America to lead the way out of this one.
We'll see I guess. The US consumer is still the power behind the world economy in my opinion.
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 54): DL (and other airlines) have trimmed capacity both domestically and internationally over the past couple of years. To dump capacity into the domestic market as was done in the past will only exacerbate their own (and everyone elses) problems by depressing yield to the point where a 100%LF will still lose money.
The problem is that as you reduce domestic capacity it is often quickly back-filled by others. See post 9-11 actions by DL that allowed many competitors grow and thrive. DL's post BK cost structure is among the lowest in the industry. I'm saying DL should learn and be that competitor instead of following the cut, cut, cut,...oh crap where did they come from, mentality of the past.
Mayor From United States, joined Mar 2008, 4105 posts, RR: 11 Reply 61, posted (5 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 25015 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 59): Quoting Mayor (Reply 57):
Yeah, it makes you wonder how DL was successful all those years, doesn't it??
Not really. The only trans-Pacific route that Delta has operaetd from ATL for more than two years is Tokyo.
Perhaps you didn't notice the sarcasm in my statement, in reference to the poster implying that DL hasn't been successful out of ATL, or anywhere, for that matter.
''Life's tough . . . It's even tougher if you're stupid..'' The Duke -- John Wayne
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2737 posts, RR: 9 Reply 62, posted (5 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 24982 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 58): The problem is that as you reduce domestic capacity it is often quickly back-filled by others. See post 9-11 actions by DL that allowed many competitors grow and thrive. DL's post BK cost structure is among the lowest in the industry. I'm saying DL should learn and be that competitor instead of following the cut, cut, cut,...oh crap where did they come from, mentality of the past.
One needs to look closer at the USA market and the fragmentation of that market since deregulation.
Since deregulation, the largest change to the USA's aviation market has been the introduction of the LCC. The LCCs have split the market with a partially fungable alternative to the legacy carrier. The LCCs have captured about 35% or so of the market.
What you describe as "backfill" has been the LCC picking up market share and the legacies cutting in response. Since the LCCs have been picking up domestic market share (as they can with lower costs), the amount of domestic passengers left for the legacy carriers to carry has decreased, requiring legacies to reduce domestic capacity.
What has been needed is a reduction in the number of legacy carriers in the long run as the market is no longer able to support so many. Thus the calls by many for legacy mergers.
727forever From United States, joined Jan 2006, 610 posts, RR: 6 Reply 63, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24716 times:
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 60): Cuts, cuts, cuts. It's getting old to hear. At least they're coming almost entirely from the DL side and not the NW side.
True enough. It certainly looks more and more everyday like a wolf in Delta's coloring. I knew we were headed for trouble when Anderson was brought on board with DL. I haven't believed a word he's said yet and thus far haven't been surprised.
I am disappointed to see all of this. I have defended the CVG flights, I'll admit the errors of my ways. I still believe that the market is there, but DL has mismanaged this operation for the last 15 years and I fully expect the NW management to finish it off. I agree now that it will be nothing more than a focus city in 2 years and maybe even less than that in 5 years. Think DFW and PDX. I now expect WN to slide on in and DL will give up like they have been getting really good at lately.
RafflesKing From Singapore, joined Mar 2007, 270 posts, RR: 0 Reply 64, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24750 times:
So does this just leave CVG with CDG non-stop year round? Are AMS and FCO even seasonable destinations any longer?
I'm not seeing the ATL-MEX cuts yet. Before piggy flu, it was 4x daily on DL metal, now its 2x, and 3x in October.
-------
Mah - why do you seem to always bicker with so many? I swear this is the third thread in a row I've read where you and some other poster spend 4 posts taking shots.
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24651 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 62): What has been needed is a reduction in the number of legacy carriers in the long run as the market is no longer able to support so many. Thus the calls by many for legacy mergers.
DL's cost structure aligns favoably with the LCCs since BK. I believe they need to leverage the benefits of a world-wide route structure and start taking back market share from them.
727forever From United States, joined Jan 2006, 610 posts, RR: 6 Reply 67, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24624 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 65): DL's cost structure aligns favoably with the LCCs since BK. I believe they need to start taking back market share from them.
Mega Ditto. With DL's CASM the time is right but if it isn't capable of high RSMs they seem to be running for it.
MogandoCI From United States, joined Jun 2009, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 68, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24411 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 62): What you describe as "backfill" has been the LCC picking up market share and the legacies cutting in response. Since the LCCs have been picking up domestic market share (as they can with lower costs), the amount of domestic passengers left for the legacy carriers to carry has decreased, requiring legacies to reduce domestic capacity.
What has been needed is a reduction in the number of legacy carriers in the long run as the market is no longer able to support so many. Thus the calls by many for legacy mergers.
Perhaps the cutting of hubs plus a more coherent hub strategy. The combined giant has NRT, SLC, MSP, DTW, MEM, CVG, ATL, JFK, AMS, and CDG (not the mention official and unofficial focus cities of LGA, SEA, LAX, BOS/DCA [due to presence of Delta Shuttle]). Do you really need 10 hubs and 3/5 focus cities?
I'd say (1) do to MEM what AA did to STL, (2) rename CVG as "focus" and blame it on the economy, (3) pick either AMS or CDG, (4) build out SEA+LAX, (5) decide whether you want to leverage the SkyTeam's ICN fortress, invade KE's turf by doing all the fllying out of NRT, or route everything using 787s out of SEA, (6) pick either SLC or MSP if you need connectivity to BigSky and the Plains (I know they're far apart, but I'd say that's the only portion of the map that SEA+LAX+DTW+ATL can't handle).
After all that, the new DL should be much more lean with only SEA, LAX, SLC, DTW, ATL, JFK, CDG, and either ICN or NRT. 8 (6 domestic + 2 intl) hubs is way more manageable.
Something's wrong when the only true SkyTeam hub in Asia is ICN, and with the suspension of ATL-ICN, DL doesn't fly nonstop to ICN from continental US at all. (And how many people want to connect in CAN instead )
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2737 posts, RR: 9 Reply 69, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24330 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 65): DL's cost structure aligns favoably with the LCCs since BK. I believe they need to leverage the benefits of a world-wide route structure and start taking back market share from them.
Source? They are called Low Cost Carriers for a reason.
It is alot more expensive to maintain multiple aircraft types, multiple employee type certifications, multiple ticket distribution systems, international route authorities, code-shares, interlining.........
Joe Sixpack doesn't care about world-wide route structures, only who will give him the cheapest ticket from BWI to MDW.
DL (or any other legacy carrier) does not care so much about marketshare as they do about profitability. RASM is much more important than marketshare.
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3781 posts, RR: 26 Reply 70, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 24308 times:
Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 65): I believe they need to leverage the benefits of a world-wide route structure and start taking back market share from them.
DL's costs are certainly improved, but trying to duke it out for domestic marketshare with the LCC's is a losing proposition. Adjusting for stage length, carriers like B6, FL and WN still have a good 20% cost advantage over DL on domestic flying.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2015 posts, RR: 16 Reply 77, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23830 times:
Quoting Mayor (Reply 61): Perhaps you didn't notice the sarcasm in my statement, in reference to the poster implying that DL hasn't been successful out of ATL, or anywhere, for that matter.
I'm quite sure he understood it and was replying directly to you in saying that DL has, in fact, been quite unsuccessful in their ATL-Asia attempts.
LipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 7836 posts, RR: 63 Reply 78, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23808 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 54): Not the way it used to. Look to China, Europe, and South America to lead the way out of this one.
Very true. But even BRICs are getting in trouble. I see only a few bigger markets with ability to recover faster: China, Brazil and India.
Quoting MogandoCI (Reply 68): Perhaps the cutting of hubs plus a more coherent hub strategy. The combined giant has NRT, SLC, MSP, DTW, MEM, CVG, ATL, JFK, AMS, and CDG (not the mention official and unofficial focus cities of LGA, SEA, LAX, BOS/DCA [due to presence of Delta Shuttle]). Do you really need 10 hubs and 3/5 focus cities?
Agree, but excpet for ATL, NRT and AMS, all they can do is try to release which hubs they can eliminate. JFK, DTW, MSP, SLC, MEM, MSP and CVG is for sure too much even for the world's largest airline (as you mentioned, not to forget about 5 focus cities)
Mayor From United States, joined Mar 2008, 4105 posts, RR: 11 Reply 81, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23696 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 77): Quoting Mayor (Reply 61):
Perhaps you didn't notice the sarcasm in my statement, in reference to the poster implying that DL hasn't been successful out of ATL, or anywhere, for that matter.
I'm quite sure he understood it and was replying directly to you in saying that DL has, in fact, been quite unsuccessful in their ATL-Asia attempts.
Ah, but the original statement I was replying to also mentioned they were unsuccessful to Europe out of ATL. I just made a blanket, sarcastic statement in response.
''Life's tough . . . It's even tougher if you're stupid..'' The Duke -- John Wayne
IrishAyes From Chile, joined Jan 2008, 131 posts, RR: 0 Reply 82, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23663 times:
Quoting MogandoCI (Reply 40): If I were DL I would attempt to build up LAX and SEA as the Asian gateways (since UA's SFO fortress is nearly impossible to penetrate). NW chose DTW and DL chose ATL to route their traffic only because they had limited options in their existing hub structures.
Going to Asia and Europe via ATL involves major backtracking for most people within the US, and DTW's catchment area's economy has been on a long-term downtrend (so O&D and yields can only continue to deteriorate).
That's not gonna happen.
If DL couldn't make a LatAm hub work from LAX, what makes them think that a transpacific one would? I highly doubt DL is going to add more flights from SEA other than the markets it currently serves, and who knows, you may even see some of those get chopped as well.
It is not prudent to build international capacity in small-to-non-hub markets that have little connecting feed or traffic in this economic climate. For now, Delta's best strategy in its Asian operations is to rely heavily on its NRT hub rather than open up a US West Coast gateway, or even add more nonstops to Asian markets from its existing US hubs like DTW, MSP, ATL, SLC, etc. As long as DL provides plenty of good connections from US gateways through NRT and onward to large markets in the Asia/Pacific basin, the carrier will be in much better shape.
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 48): Yup, that's the word. Apparently the AI pullout on the non-stop make it look good again.
Last I checked, both nonstop AI flights to BOM and DEL are still there from JFK. I don't know where you got your info from. You might be confusing it with the discontinuation of the AI JFK-LHR segments.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 51):
Sort of how like RDU-CDG won't be starting next summer, either.
Does that surprise you at all?
How do you become a millionaire? Be a billionaire and start an airline.
Jetlanta From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1710 posts, RR: 19 Reply 84, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23597 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 70): DL's costs are certainly improved, but trying to duke it out for domestic marketshare with the LCC's is a losing proposition. Adjusting for stage length, carriers like B6, FL and WN still have a good 20% cost advantage over DL on domestic flying.
Very true.
Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 71): AA made a similar announcement today, without specific route impacts.
It should be pointed out again that Delta is probably the strongest network carrier. These cuts are intended to keep it that way. We will be hearing similar things from the rest...just as we have from around the world. Given Delta's new scale, the shear number of routes is high, but the actions are not out of line with what we are seeing on a global scale.
Most of these moves are preemptive, given the outlook. Many of them will be back, just as many of the post-9/11 cuts were eventually reinstated. (Most will be back for Summer 2010) The strategy hasn't changed, but the environment has.
What has also changed is Delta's ability to adapt. It's new network structure gives it flexibility to cut, while still maintaining a footprint. CO has that in the sense that many of its EWR markets are double-daily. They can reduce frequency without damaging the network.
Delta doesn't serve as many O&D's with more than daily service, but they do operate many markets from multiple gateways. So the destination doesn't necessarily disappear.
On the whole, its sad to see this, but I'd much prefer the the entire industry did this and weather the storm than retain too much capacity and end up back at the courthouse.
LAXdude1023 From United States, joined Sep 2006, 4378 posts, RR: 22 Reply 85, posted (5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 23474 times:
Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 84): On the whole, its sad to see this, but I'd much prefer the the entire industry did this and weather the storm than retain too much capacity and end up back at the courthouse.
Amen brother!
Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 84): Most of these moves are preemptive, given the outlook.
I could definately see CVG-LGW as a 757 flight during the summer.
AA already announced the details of a 6.5% cut in international capacity and now theyre saying 7.5%. So they only have 1% left they have to announce the details on (Im guessing AA might make ORD-DME seasonal)
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 86, posted (5 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 23289 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 70): DL's costs are certainly improved, but trying to duke it out for domestic marketshare with the LCC's is a losing proposition. Adjusting for stage length, carriers like B6, FL and WN still have a good 20% cost advantage over DL on domestic flying.
I'll agree with that but DL still maintains a RASM advantage. Overall CASM could be cut with larger aircraft flying routes. RASM advantage could be maintained with first class, BOB, WIFI and TV sales etc. The opposite of what DL has been doing as it tries to cut capacity to increase revenue only to watch it backfilled by low cost carriers. Could larger aircraft flown less frequently be the key to giving the customer what they want.....a good product at a fair price? Or is the only alternative to throw up your hands and try to fly where the LCCs don't.....yet.
FFlyerWorld From United States, joined Apr 2008, 236 posts, RR: 0 Reply 88, posted (5 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 22998 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 22): AA already released their European winter schedule. A few seasonal frequency reductions and capacity cuts (smaller planes), but no current plans to suspend any routes. That can change, of course.
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 25): AA already did. Just a few frequency cuts. No route cuts.
Well, yet again, nowadays - Where Delta leads - Others will follow...
And there will be much more down the pipe from others (in my opinion)!
American already anncounced they were cutting 6.5% of their international capacity. They released the details and no routes were cut, just capacity reductions. Now they are upping that number to 7.5%. Thats only one more percentage point than what they have already announced. That means whatever else is being cut, wont be drastic at all.
And there will be much more down the pipe from others (in my opinion)!
Come on man...they announced the cuts the SAME DAY at the SAME EVENT. AA wasn't following Delta. They were both making the same sound business decision. Others will as well. These plans takes weeks, if not months, to formulate. Pretty much all the carriers have indicated they would reduce capacity further if necessary. It's necessary.
The one big difference is that, due to the merger, Delta has some extra weight it can shed and still be in fighting condition. Some of the others are already pretty lean and cuts might be more painful.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 25728 posts, RR: 76 Reply 91, posted (5 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 22804 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 89): American already anncounced they were cutting 6.5% of their international capacity. They released the details and no routes were cut, just capacity reductions. Now they are upping that number to 7.5%.
The 6.5%/7.5% being cut is total capacity, not just international.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Oct 2001, 3552 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2004, 7494 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 25728 posts, 
From Brazil, joined May 2005, 7836 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2007, 270 posts, 
)
From Italy, joined Apr 2008, 436 posts, 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2009, 780 posts, 
From India, joined Mar 2008, 1008 posts, 
From Chile, joined Jan 2008, 131 posts,