Cloudboy From United States, joined Jan 2004, 486 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3199 times:
As part of the the new SYD route, Delta is flying a 777LR between ATL and LAX. Are they planning to do this permanently, or is this just for the summer only and will eventually be downgraded?
"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2071 posts, RR: 16 Reply 2, posted (5 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3057 times:
Not to mention, DL is having to dead-head crews on EVERY flight, both LAX-ATL and ATL-LAX. The cost of this SYD flight is going to be astronomical compared to other carriers.
Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.
C767P From United States, joined Oct 2008, 362 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3005 times:
Wow, such anticompetitive comments. I don't understand why some people absolutely hate it when carriers enter new markets. Competition is always good for the consumer. Delta just started SYD, let's see how it performs before judging them. I doubt that Delta thinks they are going to recieve the same kind of yields that Qantas is getting and I'm sure they did their research before taking the risk of operating the flight. Of all the airlines Delta has certainly reached the furthest in expanding their route network since their bankruptcy restructuring. I would think people would appreciate that as it gives them more travel options. Some new markets have worked very well and some have not, that's just how it works.
DeltAirlines From United States, joined May 1999, 7344 posts, RR: 16 Reply 4, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3001 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3): Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.
I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.
Luckyone From United States, joined Aug 2008, 425 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2978 times:
Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 5): I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.
That would make sense, or will we see some W routings? The 744's are rumoured to be gone sooner than later and their likely replacement is a 777 of some sort.
AA737-823 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 4041 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2955 times:
Quoting C767P (Reply 4): Wow, such anticompetitive comments. I don't understand why some people absolutely hate it when carriers enter new markets. Competition is always good for the consumer. Delta just started SYD, let's see how it performs before judging them. I doubt that Delta thinks they are going to recieve the same kind of yields that Qantas is getting and I'm sure they did their research before taking the risk of operating the flight. Of all the airlines Delta has certainly reached the furthest in expanding their route network since their bankruptcy restructuring. I would think people would appreciate that as it gives them more travel options. Some new markets have worked very well and some have not, that's just how it works.
People here know their history well enough to know that HUNDREDS of "well researched" route launches have UTTERLY FAILED.
Not get the same yields as Qantas, you say? What about United? Or ANZ? I think there are even several other carriers offering service on the route.
See, this stuff is why the airline industry invented CODE-SHARING. Sadly, SkyTeam doesn't really have a lot going for it in that region of the world.
Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?
Anyhow, in a less negative tone, I'd love to fly this route. 777-2LR isn't a bird you see every day. But, alas, I'm a Continental guy, and the SkyTeam days for CO are numbered.
For unto us a Child is born- unto us a Son is given!
C767P From United States, joined Oct 2008, 362 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2907 times:
I guess Delta should just go back to Monroe, LA where they started. Expansion is silly... Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network to feed their international flights, which is not the case with Delta. Has Delta made some bad moves with new routes? Definately yes, particularly with domestic flights such as DAL-MEM and trying to go head to head with Airtran on some routes. It baffles me to think about why DL would want to fool around in competing for low yield leisure routes with the likes of FL and B6.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2071 posts, RR: 16 Reply 8, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2885 times:
Quoting C767P (Reply 4): Competition is always good for the consumer.
And there are a lot of us who are airline employees who like to see our companies do well. What's best for the consumer is often counter-productive to the growth of the company. Lower fares obviously equal lower margins and revenues.
Why would us airline employees like or embrace that??
Quoting C767P (Reply 8): Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network
Try non-existent, prior to 1978
Quoting C767P (Reply 8): particularly with domestic flights such as DAL-MEM
You're judging a flight before it's started?? I'll also venture a guess you have zero info about its advance booking numbers.
C767P From United States, joined Oct 2008, 362 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2851 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 9): You're judging a flight before it's started?? I'll also venture a guess you have zero info about it's advance booking numbers.
Seems like a flight based on pride to me. Aside from ATL, CVG, SLC Delta abandoned the Dallas market back in 2004. They tried DAL-ATL and it didn't work, not sure what makes them think MEM would. Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.
NZ has not operated nonstop LAX-SYD in a number of years.
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7): Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?
I'm sure that you are well aware that you're comparing apples to oranges. Until deregulation PA didn't have a domestic network. Even with the NA buyout, their domestic network really didn't complement their international network and was many many times smaller than the combined domestic network of NW/DL.
C767P From United States, joined Oct 2008, 362 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (5 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2817 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 9): And there are a lot of us who are airline employees who like to see our companies do well. What's best for the consumer is often counter-productive to the growth of the company. Lower fares obviously equal lower margins and revenues.
Are you in favor of airline regulation then? As a consumer I am certainly glad that I have options to who I give my money to. If one airline controls a route then who is going to keep them honest in pricing? Who is going to make sure they provide adequate customer service? Competition keeps companies in check. With just one airline controlling that market segment I have no choice but to fly with them and they can give me the screw every which way they want. If I have several options in that market segment then that will force the airlines to compete for my service and my money.
Perhaps other industries feel the same way. Maybe we should let Ford have a monopoly in dealerships in some states, GM in another, Toyota..., etc... Afterall I'm sure care sales associates want to see their companies do well and if that's the only option to the consumer then no worries.
Jbmitt From United States, joined Jan 2002, 425 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (5 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2715 times:
any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.
Packcheer From United States, joined Nov 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (5 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2703 times:
I wonder if DL could find a way to make some profitable runs with the 777LR between ATL-JFK-LAX, and then have their crews overnight/stay put somewhere instead of having to deadhead them on every flight into LAX.....
Jetstar From United States, joined May 2003, 1266 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (5 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2664 times:
Quoting C767P (Reply 8): I guess Delta should just go back to Monroe, LA where they started. Expansion is silly
Using that rational, IBM would still be a small business machine maker, McDonalds would still be a small hamburger joint and Microsoft would still be a small software company.
Quoting C767P (Reply 8): Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network to feed their international flights, which is not the case with Delta.
That was in the days of regulation, the government would not let Pan AM set up a domestic network, that’s why they overpaid and bought National Airlines, so they would have a domestic network feeding their international flights.
ThegreatRDU From United States, joined Mar 2006, 699 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2640 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3): Not to mention, DL is having to dead-head crews on EVERY flight, both LAX-ATL and ATL-LAX. The cost of this SYD flight is going to be astronomical compared to other carriers.
Man, there seems to be absolutely no logic for DL to start this flight.
Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.
V Australia, Qantas, United.....
Honestly, Where's the logic in this DL?
Your entering a bloodbath, is there another route where this 77L could be better served?
Quoting C767P (Reply 10): Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.
Cloudboy From United States, joined Jan 2004, 486 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2558 times:
And is suppose that dead-heading a crew from ATL is adding so much to the cost that it turns an otherwise highly profitable route in a big money drain. Honestly, this is like canceling a flight because the cost of a bag of peanuts went up by half a cent.
I agree that a LAX base is likely - as NW and Delta combine, it makes sense that they will start consolidating planes, and that might mean more 777s through LAX. But even if not, why does the whole plane need to go to ATL? The crew can just as easily deadhead on a 757.
"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 5): I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.
Don't worry about that. If NYC got a 777 base and it stayed open with no 777s flights........it likely LAX is next in line for a 777(abit small) base
Quoting C767P (Reply 10): Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.
Agree.
Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 13): any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.
very unlikely. ATL-LAX on the T7 will do pretty good with loads............JFK-LAX.....not so much. I do think that on the few weeks LAX-GRU runs the 767 comes from JFK.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States, joined Sep 2007, 2199 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2318 times:
Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 13): any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.
I would say near zero. Way to much a/c for the route.
Quoting Jetstar (Reply 15): Using that rational, IBM would still be a small business machine maker, McDonalds would still be a small hamburger joint and Microsoft would still be a small software company.
You don't take sarcasm to well .
Quoting Jetstar (Reply 15): That was in the days of regulation, the government would not let Pan AM set up a domestic network, that's why they overpaid and bought National Airlines, so they would have a domestic network feeding their international flights.
The post was precisely geared towards deregulation when carriers grew international operations overnight and Pan Am was no longer the monopoly. Now, there were carriers with descent domestic ops and a competitive product across the post and Pan Am, for a time, didn't offer both so their clock began...
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2782 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2304 times:
Quoting Jhooper (Reply 2): Delta is going to get their butt kicked on the LAX-SYD run. I'd be surprised if it lasts a year.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3): Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.
Delta only needs to fill some 250 or so seats per day. The least amount of any carrier serving the route. DL should have the least problem sustaining the route, given the other carriers are much more exposed on this route from a financial perspective
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7): People here know their history well enough to know that HUNDREDS of "well researched" route launches have UTTERLY FAILED.
Not get the same yields as Qantas, you say? What about United? Or ANZ? I think there are even several other carriers offering service on the route.
See, this stuff is why the airline industry invented CODE-SHARING. Sadly, SkyTeam doesn't really have a lot going for it in that region of the world.
Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?
Anyhow, in a less negative tone, I'd love to fly this route. 777-2LR isn't a bird you see every day. But, alas, I'm a Continental guy, and the SkyTeam days for CO are numbered.
You just made the point of why DL will be successful on the route. Skyteam is not small. Delta will have the only reasonable Skyteam alternative from the USA (ICN is not reasonable). By your own admission, you would be likely to use DL on the route of CO stayed in Skyteam.
Delta does not need to drive any other airline off the route to be successful. Delta needs only to fill 250 or so seats per day profitably from their existing Skyteam base that is currently being forced to fly on other carriers. Compare that with the break even seats sales needed per day for all the other carriers on the route.
Delta will survive on the route. The profitability level is questionable with the current yields, but DL is better situated to outlast the others.
Cragley From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 421 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2283 times:
Well I'm all booked for my flight on DL from SYD to LAX and am looking forward as to how they compare.
I have flown QF, UA and NZ on the route and I doubt they could be any worse than UA so whatever the outcome, I'm sure it will be a success.
If anyone is going to go, it's UA! If DL can tie up connections in LAX through Detroit, Atlanta, Minneapolis then they will be laughing. Not all people travelling to the states finish in LAX. QF only really offers JFK additionally or codeshares with AA which are diffiult to get cheaper fares on.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States, joined Dec 2006, 751 posts, RR: 9 Reply 23, posted (5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2247 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 22): You just made the point of why DL will be successful on the route. Skyteam is not small. Delta will have the only reasonable Skyteam alternative from the USA
It helps f the Skyteam members have flight to connect to.
Aeroflot connect times westbound 5:45, eastbound 12:20
AF conncect time westbound 3:40 east 8:20
KL connect time westbound 7:25 eastbound 11:40
Alitalia donesn't serve LAX
Copa - have they left for CO and Star?
Asia carriers wouldn't connect to SYD via LAX
TYCOON From United States, joined Feb 2007, 199 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2162 times:
Sorry, but I don't understand the last post by CALPSAFltSkeds, can you explain better?
Also, AF has nearly three flights a day from CDG to LAX (arriving in LAX 13h00, 16h00 and 19h00). And you forgot the largest Skyteam player in LAX after DL (in terms of flights at least) Aeromexico. Could be some connecting traffic from Mexico to SYD, especially since AM and DL share the same terminal in LAX.
The flight will get feed from A) sky FFs B) O/D C) people who are willing to fly XXX-ATL/SLC-LAX-SYD. Also the (abit small) networks in LAX of AS and DL. I don't see SkyTeam really helping on this one to much. IMO the only one that may is AM. Per GCM its fast for PAX to fly AF/KL to ICN the KE to SYD.
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3075 posts, RR: 5 Reply 26, posted (5 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2246 times:
Quoting ThegreatRDU (Reply 15): Your entering a bloodbath, is there another route where this 77L could be better served?
This is the bit I really, really don't understand. With basically all the world to play in DL chooses to send one of the worlds most expensive airliners on to one of the worlds longest/thinnest routes, that has turned into a bloodbath, that is a totally new market for it! There is NO better route (ROI basis) for DL to deploy it on???
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 21): Skyteam is not small. Delta will have the only reasonable Skyteam alternative from the USA
I don't know how valid this is, in the short term anyway. Anybody who already regularly flies North America/Australia is already a Oneworld or Star Alliance FF member, who ever else they fly elsewhere.
VirginFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4279 posts, RR: 54 Reply 27, posted (5 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2025 times:
Quoting OA412 (Reply 10): NZ has not operated nonstop LAX-SYD in a number of years.
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 26): Quoting ThegreatRDU (Reply 15):
Your entering a bloodbath, is there another route where this 77L could be better served?
This is the bit I really, really don't understand. With basically all the world to play in DL chooses to send one of the worlds most expensive airliners on to one of the worlds longest/thinnest routes, that has turned into a bloodbath, that is a totally new market for it! There is NO better route (ROI basis) for DL to deploy it on???
I suspect the logic for Delta is along the lines that long term the route will return to 2 or maybe 3 non-stop players, and as such return to being relatively profitable, and that they will stay around to be one of those 2 or 3...
V/F
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large. Then make the dream real. - Donald Douglas Snr
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 6091 posts, RR: 48 Reply 28, posted (5 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1677 times:
Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 12): any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.
Exactly. It's not all about costs, its also about revenue. You put a decent plane on the route and that's a competitive advantage. Unfortunately, DL's 757s aren't exactly that great for things the average Joe cares. Not having to change planes is another plus too.
And does it really cost more to add an extra 757/767/737 on the route rather than simply combining two flights into one?
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States, joined Dec 2006, 751 posts, RR: 9 Reply 29, posted (5 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1491 times:
Quoting TYCOON (Reply 24): Sorry, but I don't understand the last post by CALPSAFltSkeds, can you explain better?
Also, AF has nearly three flights a day from CDG to LAX (arriving in LAX 13h00, 16h00 and 19h00). And you forgot the largest Skyteam player in LAX after DL (in terms of flights at least) Aeromexico. Could be some connecting traffic from Mexico to SYD, especially since AM and DL share the same terminal in LAX.
Sorry, I did take into affect the three AF flights and picked the closest one to the DL to get the best connection, which is 3 hours 40 mins on the westbound and 8 hours 20 mins on the eastbound direction. KL and Aeroflot connections are too poor to consider. Sorry, I left off Aeromexico, which has good connections on some cities they serve out of LAX.
DeltAirlines From United States, joined May 1999, 7344 posts, RR: 16 Reply 30, posted (5 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1455 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 29): Sorry, I did take into affect the three AF flights and picked the closest one to the DL to get the best connection, which is 3 hours 40 mins on the westbound and 8 hours 20 mins on the eastbound direction. KL and Aeroflot connections are too poor to consider. Sorry, I left off Aeromexico, which has good connections on some cities they serve out of LAX.
I really doubt a passenger from Europe is going to route over both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to get to Sydney rather than flying via DXB/East Asia/Kangaroo Route. The LAX route is a good 2,500 miles longer, and if you're a FB member in Europe, you can still get miles via the KE/ICN route (2432 miles shorter) or via partner Malaysia Airlines and KUL (2577 miles shorter).
DLDTW1962 From United States, joined May 2009, 120 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (5 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
I think DL will have a chance with this new flight. Give it some time. With Qantas scaling back alot of their international routes including SYD-USA,Asia flights. DL may be coming in at the
right time. So lets just see what happens. If it does not work, I'm sure DL will get out before allot of damage is done.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States, joined Dec 2006, 751 posts, RR: 9 Reply 32, posted (5 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1049 times:
Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 30): Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 29):
Sorry, I did take into affect the three AF flights and picked the closest one to the DL to get the best connection, which is 3 hours 40 mins on the westbound and 8 hours 20 mins on the eastbound direction. KL and Aeroflot connections are too poor to consider. Sorry, I left off Aeromexico, which has good connections on some cities they serve out of LAX.
I really doubt a passenger from Europe is going to route over both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to get to Sydney rather than flying via DXB/East Asia/Kangaroo Route. The LAX route is a good 2,500 miles longer, and if you're a FB member in Europe, you can still get miles via the KE/ICN route (2432 miles shorter) or via partner Malaysia Airlines and KUL (2577 miles shorter).
I agree, but was just responding to posts that somehow Skytyeam will boost connections to this flight that many think is adding capacity to an overserved market and is added as some type of statement from DL. Skyteam won't do much for DL LAX-SYD, so the flight will depend on local traffic, ATL 1-stops and other DL connects at LAX, mostly from AM, AS and regionals plus SLC, CVG and NW hubs. Maybe CO will provide some connections prior to leaving for Star. IF DL can get 100 throughs from the Southeast via ATL, maybe they have a chance of making this flight work. Most likely, the yields will be low from local boards.
DLPMMM From United States, joined Apr 2005, 2782 posts, RR: 8 Reply 34, posted (5 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 797 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 23): It helps f the Skyteam members have flight to connect to.
Aeroflot connect times westbound 5:45, eastbound 12:20
AF conncect time westbound 3:40 east 8:20
KL connect time westbound 7:25 eastbound 11:40
Alitalia donesn't serve LAX
Copa - have they left for CO and Star?
Asia carriers wouldn't connect to SYD via LAX
Who said anything about connections to lots of other Skyteam member flights? I said Skyteam FFers. Lots of them in the S Cal area. Lots of them throughout the USA and N America. DL only needs a couple of hundred pax per day to be successful. With feed from the DL hubs plus the local DL FFCer population, I don't think it is that out of reach.
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 26): I don't know how valid this is, in the short term anyway. Anybody who already regularly flies North America/Australia is already a Oneworld or Star Alliance FF member, who ever else they fly elsewhere.
Gemuser
Well Cragley from Australia in post 22 seems to disprove your premise. Some people fly to more places than just Australia.
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 32): I agree, but was just responding to posts that somehow Skytyeam will boost connections to this flight that many think is adding capacity to an overserved market and is added as some type of statement from DL. Skyteam won't do much for DL LAX-SYD, so the flight will depend on local traffic, ATL 1-stops and other DL connects at LAX, mostly from AM, AS and regionals plus SLC, CVG and NW hubs. Maybe CO will provide some connections prior to leaving for Star. IF DL can get 100 throughs from the Southeast via ATL, maybe they have a chance of making this flight work. Most likely, the yields will be low from local boards.
I live in the Southeast, and would have to make a 2 stop connection to SYD regardless of the carrier I use to Australia. DL is the largest carrier in NYC (with all their FFers). 100+ feed pax per day for ATL and NYC, another 50-100 for the local LAX-SYD traffic, plus another 50 or so from all the other DL hubs around the USA. The numbers can easily add up.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States, joined Dec 2006, 751 posts, RR: 9 Reply 35, posted (5 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 653 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 34): I live in the Southeast, and would have to make a 2 stop connection to SYD regardless of the carrier I use to Australia. DL is the largest carrier in NYC (with all their FFers). 100 feed pax per day for ATL and NYC, another 50-100 for the local LAX-SYD traffic, plus another 50 or so from all the other DL hubs around the USA. The numbers can easily add up.
Maybe it will work, but has someone looked at the O&D counts from the Southeast to SYD? How about the total O&D to SYD from east of the Mississippi?
I'd be surprised if DL could muster up anything close to 50 daily NYC-SYD connections. Of course, with low yields DL can pull in more traffic but is that profitable. Sure there will be FF traffic, but how many will be using miles?
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3075 posts, RR: 5 Reply 36, posted (5 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 592 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 34): Quoting Gemuser (Reply 26):
I don't know how valid this is, in the short term anyway. Anybody who already regularly flies North America/Australia is already a Oneworld or Star Alliance FF member, who ever else they fly elsewhere.
Gemuser
Well Cragley from Australia in post 22 seems to disprove your premise. Some people fly to more places than just Australia.
Now read Cragley post again. It's not really relevant to FFs. Sure many people fly to more places than Oz, BUT IF they fly North America/Oz REGULARLY, they are ALREADY a member of a 1W or *A FF scheme. What is the incentive (in FF terms) to switch to DL if they already get points on a competitor? Sure they'll try it out, but some will stay, some won't and there'll be a drift over time, so FF program may be important in the long run, but short term, I still have my doubts.
Lufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2263 posts, RR: 11 Reply 37, posted (5 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 573 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 34): 100+ feed pax per day for ATL and NYC, another 50-100 for the local LAX-SYD traffic, plus another 50 or so from all the other DL hubs around the USA. The numbers can easily add up.
I want to question this 100 PAX a day thing. Everybody keeps on quoting it like its Delta's birthright... but has anybody thoguht of how many of these PAX are actually Qantas customers connecting to Delta...not Delta Customers forced to use Qantas? The reason I ask was I used to work in MSP...and at that point i'd connect from QF93 to NWA because NWA had the only LAX-MSP nonstop option. If given the choice of DL i still would have picked QF because im a member of their program and that's far too longer flight for a more basic offering. If i could have flown United or American LAX-MSP nonstop I probably would have done it... it was just after coming in all the way from Melbourne i didn't feel like making yet another connection so NWA (and now dL) would have got my domestic business. There would be plenty of other australian business travellers who would have made the exact same decision, figuring they get the miles on the really long haul segment on QF so that's probably enough.
My point is... I would have been included in that 100 pax a day being passed on to Qantas whenever i returned to Austarlia...but I was very much a Qantas customer not a NW/DL customer. How many other of that 100 is also like that? if its say even something like 40%... that makes it just 60 PAX a day that are DL's real customers.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jan 2004, 486 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
.
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2005, 1369 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 421 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 6091 posts, 
From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2263 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
