Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL At LAX The Largest US Transpac Carrier  
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9694 times:

With all the talk about how DL can't compete in LAX transpac, it might be time to look at a few statistics.

DOT data for the 3rd quarter of 09 is available....

DL and UA each operated 2 transpac nonstop destinations. AA operates only to NRT.

DL/NW's total revenue to NRT was almost twice as much as UA's and almost three times larger than AA's. Further, DL/NW's average on the LAX-NRT segment was more than 15% higher than both AA and UA.

UA had more revenue to SYD than DL by a factor of about 50%.

When combined, DL's total transpac revenue from LAX is more than 31% higher than UA's and more than 3 times larger than AA's.

So much for the notion that DL can't compete at LAX... these numbers also make it pretty clear that DL has the potential to develop LAX to Asia much more than alot of people here want to acknowledge.

It is also interesting to note that despite JFK-NRT being a new route for DL and both AA and DL operated a 772ER, DL/NW had an average fare more than 10% higher than AA and almost 15% higher than CO from EWR. DL/NW's total onboard revenue was more than 40% more than AA's (who operated a 3 class aircraft) and more than 10% higher than CO's (who has the highest density 772ERs among US operators).

A quick check of other Asian routes shows merger synergies at DL/NW on the Pacific that translated into above average revenue performance.
Some will be surprised to note that DL's average fare on ATLPVG was higher than DL/NW from DTW or AA from ORD and slightly below CO from EWR. UA from ORD was the clear standout to PVG... but DL is clearly putting its PVG eggs into DTW where it can more effectively compete against UA at ORD.

These numbers - which occurred in the mdst of a downturn - indicate that DL will aggressively expand its presence in the Pacific using synergies from the DL/NW merger.

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5310 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9630 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
UA had more revenue to SYD than DL by a factor of about 50%.

Whoa that's a large gap. Obviously it's a new route and needs time to develop, but hopefully DL is working on closing the revenue gap with UA. Obviously, revenues should improve if/when the JV with VA is approved.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
It is also interesting to note that despite JFK-NRT being a new route for DL and both AA and DL operated a 772ER, DL/NW had an average fare more than 10% higher than AA and almost 15% higher than CO from EWR. DL/NW's total onboard revenue was more than 40% more than AA's (who operated a 3 class aircraft) and more than 10% higher than CO's (who has the highest density 772ERs among US operators).

Well that would explain the switch to the 744 on this route. It's also nice to see the naysayers who said that DL would be the bottom-feeder on this segment proven wrong. Things should only improve if JL joins Skyteam.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3529 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9583 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
DL/NW's total revenue to NRT was almost twice as much as UA's and almost three times larger than AA's.

Do you have a link to the stats?

Since UA's LAX-NRT was operated by a 744 (and then swtiched to a 772 at some point last year), I am having a hard time understanding how DL/NW's revenue would be TWICE that of UA, since DL/NW has been operating a 744/332 (again, not sure of the exact aircraft type during the specified time frame of Q3 09).

Unless UA was operating half-empty to NRT?

Or do the revenue statistics not include connecting passengers on LAX-NRT (which would mean, of course, that UA would have "less" revenue, since they operate a bigger connecting operation at LAX than does DL/NW).

I have to say I am surprised about the LAX-NRT stats you provided.


User currently offlineSESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3489 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9584 times:

Good job for DL at LAX. In spite of LAX-GRU's lack of success, DL seems to have a solid foundation set up at LAX, despite quite a few recent missteps. I'm presuming there will be a few more (maybe) positive comments before this thread is hijacked and turned into an AA/DL, UA/DL, CO/DL thread.

Jeremy


User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8906 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9565 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 1):
Whoa that's a large gap. Obviously it's a new route and needs time to develop, but hopefully DL is working on closing the revenue gap with UA. Obviously, revenues should improve if/when the JV with VA is approved.

A large gap, but UA has several things going for it - (a) they are using a 747-400 (374 seats) vs. a 777-200LR (278 seats) - 34.5% more capacity; (b) United has 21 more premium seats on the 747, including an international F product; and (c) and likely a huge reason is that United has been on the LAX-SYD route for a very long time - they have a FF base in Australia, plus a large base in Los Angeles. Delta is the new guy who had absolutely nothing on the Sydney end. Just that historical presence would tip a large part of the scale to United.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9564 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
So much for the notion that DL can't compete at LAX... these numbers also make it pretty clear that DL has the potential to develop LAX to Asia much more than alot of people here want to acknowledge.

How, exactly, do the numbers demonstrate that? They show that DL is not (yet) competing successfully against UA on LAX-SYD and that DL is doing well on a route it has flown for decades. Neither data point is surprising.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5310 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9519 times:



Quoting Travelin man (Reply 2):
Since UA's LAX-NRT was operated by a 744 (and then swtiched to a 772 at some point last year), I am having a hard time understanding how DL/NW's revenue would be TWICE that of UA, since DL/NW has been operating a 744/332 (again, not sure of the exact aircraft type during the specified time frame of Q3 09).

DL has also been operating a 744 LAX-NRT. They will switch to a mix of A332/772 this summer.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5):
They show that DL is not (yet) competing successfully against UA on LAX-SYD and that DL is doing well on a route it has flown for decades. Neither data point is surprising.

The LAX-NRT numbers, however, do show that DL can compete effectively on intercontinental routes contrary to the A.net myth that DL is always the bottom feeder in competitive international markets.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9467 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 6):
The LAX-NRT numbers, however, do show that DL can compete effectively on intercontinental routes

 checkmark  (although the smart aleck might retort that LAX-NRT isn't really Delta's route)

They do not, however, show potential to develop LAX.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3529 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9445 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 6):
DL has also been operating a 744 LAX-NRT. They will switch to a mix of A332/772 this summer.

So I guess I still don't understand how it is possible that DL had TWICE the revenue of United, if they were flying the same planes (744s). Even if UA had a 772 and DL was flying the 744 during Q3, I wouldn't understand the revenue gap.


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9315 times:



Quoting Travelin man (Reply 2):
Since UA's LAX-NRT was operated by a 744 (and then swtiched to a 772 at some point last year), I am having a hard time understanding how DL/NW's revenue would be TWICE that of UA, since DL/NW has been operating a 744/332 (again, not sure of the exact aircraft type during the specified time frame of Q3 09).

First, NW's 744s hold more pax and NW/DL's average fare over the segment was almost 20% higher.
NW's LF was 4 points higher than UA's and 10 points higher than AA.

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 2):

Or do the revenue statistics not include connecting passengers on LAX-NRT

it includes all revenue that flows over the LAX-NRT segment - either connecting at LAX or NRT.... DL/NW simply carries a whole lot of valuable connecting traffic over NRT - despite what alot of people think.

BTW, DL/NW on LAX-NRT generates about as much revenue as UA does on SFO-NRT which is one of UA's highest revenue markets per flight.
In comparison, DTWNRT which is NW/DL's highest revenue market per flight generates about 40% more revenue than DL on LAXNRT - which makes DTWNRT one of the highest revenue flights in the US... and clearly explains why DL is willing to commit resources to expand DTW to Asia flying.

The fact that DL is doing as well as it is from JFK says that DL's future in Asia - even from the most competitive markets is very strong.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 7):
(although the smart aleck might retort that LAX-NRT isn't really Delta's route)

the money went straight into DL's bank accounts...

It is precisely because of the revenue that NW generates to Japan that DL merged w/ them. DL will continue to aggressively grow Asia using the resources that DL has available to it now...


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9254 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 9):
the money went straight into DL's bank accounts...

It did - but how does that demonstrate an ability to grow LAX? Looks like DL is 1 for 2 on new long haul routes ex-LAX (1 for 3 if you count LAX-LHR).



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineUSFlyer MSP From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9192 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
DL/NW's total revenue to NRT was almost twice as much as UA's and almost three times larger than AA's. Further, DL/NW's average on the LAX-NRT segment was more than 15% higher than both AA and UA.

That is not a fair comparison! DL flows ALL of its LAX-Asia traffic over NRT while UA has its SFO hub that sees most Asia connections...plus UA codeshares on NH's LAX-NRT flights so UA pax have more choices than the sole UA flight. The LAX-NRT route serves different purposes for each airline and is hard to compare on an apples-to-apples basis.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39907 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 9143 times:



Quoting USFlyer MSP (Reply 11):
That is not a fair comparison! DL flows ALL of its LAX-Asia traffic over NRT while UA has its SFO hub that sees most Asia connections...plus UA codeshares on NH's LAX-NRT flights so UA pax have more choices than the sole UA flight. The LAX-NRT route serves different purposes for each airline and is hard to compare on an apples-to-apples basis.

I was thinking the same.
Also, Delta's numbers are artificially inflated because of the Northwest Airlines takeover.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17672 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 9093 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
Some will be surprised to note that DL's average fare on ATLPVG was higher than DL/NW from DTW or AA from ORD and slightly below CO from EWR. UA from ORD was the clear standout to PVG...

Yet most are not surprised to have their suspicions reconfirmed that you again are using the right data to come to the wrong conclusions 

Quoting USFlyer MSP (Reply 11):
That is not a fair comparison! DL flows ALL of its LAX-Asia traffic over NRT while UA has its SFO hub that sees most Asia connections...plus UA codeshares on NH's LAX-NRT flights so UA pax have more choices than the sole UA flight. The LAX-NRT route serves different purposes for each airline and is hard to compare on an apples-to-apples basis.

 checkmark 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8996 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Quoting USFlyer MSP (Reply 11):
That is not a fair comparison! DL flows ALL of its LAX-Asia traffic over NRT while UA has its SFO hub that sees most Asia connections...plus UA codeshares on NH's LAX-NRT flights so UA pax have more choices than the sole UA flight. The LAX-NRT route serves different purposes for each airline and is hard to compare on an apples-to-apples basis.


I'm so glad that you brought this up....
in fact, DL/NW and UA carried almost the same amount of passengers from LAX to Asia.. however, DL/NW got more than 15% more revenue driven by higher average fares.

So, UA does in fact carry traffic via SFO but DL gets higher quality revenue and still obtains more revenue.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 12):
Also, Delta's numbers are artificially inflated because of the Northwest Airlines takeover.

uh, no.
These are actually NW only numbers because NW operated the flight and it was reported by them. If you add DL ticketed revenue, the gap between UA and DL/NW widens by another 5%.

wanna try again or would you simply like to acknowledge that DL is in fact now the largest US transpac carrier at LAX?


User currently offlineSteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1689 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8994 times:

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 9):
It is precisely because of the revenue that NW generates to Japan that DL merged w/ them. DL will continue to aggressively grow Asia using the resources that DL has available to it now...

I think we all understand this to be the premise, the problem is that the data and analysis you presented does nothing to show that DL will be able to facilitate (let alone sustain) that aggressive growth.

The ultimate success of DL on LAX-SYD may be a signal of DL's ability to compete on intercontinental routes from LAX. However, LAX-NRT provides no such signal because, while new to the Delta banner specifically, it is not a new route at all since it just moved over from NW. It's strong performance is a display of the status quo, not of new competitiveness by DL at LAX.

Clearly this makes post-merger DL a stronger international carrier at LAX than pre-merger DL was, but it does nothing to indicate that DL would now be successful flying entirely new transpac routes from LAX. Mind you, I'm not saying that I don't think they could successfully start new routes - I think they probably can - but I don't think the particular data you've chosen demonstrates that.

[Edited 2010-02-02 15:44:04 by steex]

User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8927 times:



Quoting Steex (Reply 15):
The ultimate success of DL on LAX-SYD may be a signal of DL's ability to compete on intercontinental routes from LAX.

DL does need to succed in SYD and will given the Virgin partnership but SYD will not be indicative of what DL can do in Asia which is clearly where the strength of the NW merger comes from.
DL will build Asia from the west coast based on strength; Australia is being developed from a clean sheet of paper.

Quoting Steex (Reply 15):
LAX-NRT provides no such signal because, while new to the Delta banner specifically, it is not a new route at all since it just moved over from NW

it most certainly does demonstrate that DL is a very strong player at LAX to Asia... if they can generate almost twice the revenue as UA, they can clearly shuffle their revenue around on new flights.

BTW, if you add all of DL/NW's west coast flights (SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX) and compare them to all of UA's, DL/NW still has 70% of the revenue from these 4 cities to Asia despite the fact that UA has a hub at SFO and operates transpac revenue from 3 of the 4 cities NW/DL does.
The notion that UA is so far ahead of anyone else in the west coast to Asia market is clearly not supported by data.
Even in SFO, NW obtained 20% of the Asia revenue that UA did... not bad considering the size of UA's hub.


User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1969 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8890 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
UA had more revenue to SYD than DL by a factor of about 50%.

That's the fairest comparison in the stats, and it confirms what a.net has been saying all along. DL is going to have trouble with UA on that route.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Thread starter):
It is also interesting to note that despite JFK-NRT being a new route for DL and both AA and DL operated a 772ER . . .

That's not a "new" route for the "new" DL.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 14):
wanna try again or would you simply like to acknowledge that DL is in fact now the largest US transpac carrier at LAX?

Uh, that should be a given considering the combined the DL/NW network. It's not noteworthy.


User currently offlineSteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1689 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8876 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 16):

it most certainly does demonstrate that DL is a very strong player at LAX to Asia... if they can generate almost twice the revenue as UA, they can clearly shuffle their revenue around on new flights.

BTW, if you add all of DL/NW's west coast flights (SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX) and compare them to all of UA's, DL/NW still has 70% of the revenue from these 4 cities to Asia despite the fact that UA has a hub at SFO and operates transpac revenue from 3 of the 4 cities NW/DL does.
The notion that UA is so far ahead of anyone else in the west coast to Asia market is clearly not supported by data.
Even in SFO, NW obtained 20% of the Asia revenue that UA did... not bad considering the size of UA's hub.

I don't disagree with any of this, but I guess my point is I don't think DL is really in a position to do anything that NW wasn't already in a position to do. The success of those routes, as you mention, stood for NW before DL was in the picture. Given that NW hadn't expanded beyond NRT flights from these cities, I don't think DL's success with the same NRT flights is a clear signal that other Asia flights would be a slam dunk.

Of course, as you also mention, DL+NW has more resources than DL alone had and DL+NW seems to put more focus on diversifying the Asian flight portfolio than NW did alone. I think DL probably can be successful with well chosen Asian flying from the west coast (and frankly, NW likely could have been as well). I just don't happen to think the specific data at hand shows anything new.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39907 posts, RR: 75
Reply 19, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8878 times:



Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 17):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 14):
wanna try again or would you simply like to acknowledge that DL is in fact now the largest US transpac carrier at LAX?

Uh, that should be a given considering the combined the DL/NW network. It's not noteworthy.

 checkmark 

...and I'd still take United over Delta any day!  talktothehand 



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8812 times:



Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 17):
That's the fairest comparison in the stats, and it confirms what a.net has been saying all along. DL is going to have trouble with UA on that route.

given that UA is using a larger a/c, is established on the route while DL is flying it for the first time, I don't think it portends trouble for DL at all. It means they have to work... but the Virgin Blue agreement will all of a sudden make DL and Virgin a larger carrier to Australia than UA.. that will surely affect customer choice and revenue.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 17):
That's not a "new" route for the "new" DL.

Since DL and NW both dropped the route and it hasn't been operated for several years, it is as new as any other route.
But you apparently missed the point that despite the fact that AA has flown it for years and CO has flown from EWR to NRT even longer, DL/NW managed to outperform both in just the first summer of operation.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 17):
Uh, that should be a given considering the combined the DL/NW network. It's not noteworthy.

i see you're relatively new on this board... you might want to go back and read what people have been saying about DL/NW's ability to compete in LAX against UA... the thinking around here is that UA can't be touched in LAX... the stats clearly say otherwise.

sounds like you aren't too fond of where your paycheck is coming from.


User currently offlineUSFlyer MSP From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8771 times:

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20):
Since DL and NW both dropped the route and it hasn't been operated for several years, it is as new as any other route.

Considering it is now a hub to hub route, I don't know of anyone who expected JFK-NRT to perform poorly.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20):
i see you're relatively new on this board... you might want to go back and read what people have been saying about DL/NW's ability to compete in LAX against UA... the thinking around here is that UA can't be touched in LAX... the stats clearly say otherwise.

As far as I can remember the consensus is that all US carriers perform poorly on LAX-ITNL routes. The foreign carriers dominate. The only reason UA has acceptable returns is because of their extensive domestic network out of LAX, something DL and AA cannot really match.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20):
sounds like you aren't too fond of where your paycheck is coming from.

Perhaps he is not a fanboy who has mastered the art of "spin"

[Edited 2010-02-02 16:10:16]

User currently offlineAAExecPlat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 636 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8674 times:

Can someone please post a link to the stats if they have it handy? I can't find the specific data for DL at LAX. Beyond that, I don't understand what the fuss is all about...DL runs two flights daily (LAX+SYD) and are therefore the biggest baddest US airline over the Pacific? Nevermind, Qantas has five flights daily on a mix of 744 and A380.

I just don't know if there's enough data on DL to suggest they can somehow rule LAX at some point in the future. That said, they should certainly try.


User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1546 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 8652 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20):
the thinking around here is that UA can't be touched in LAX

I guarantee you can't come up with a quote of someone saying something even remotely close to this. But whatever it takes to talk about how DL will soon control all four oceans and seven continents...

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 7):
They do not, however, show potential to develop LAX.

This thread shows us nothing besides what we already knew: LAX-NRT is a good DL/NW route, DL has work to do in SYD, and no airline can turn threads on A.net into heated arguments faster than DL.



717,72S,732/3/4/5/G/8/9,744,752/3,763/4,772/3,D9S/5,M8/90,D10,319/20/21,332/3,388,CR2/7/9,EM2,ER4,E70/75/90,SF3,AR8
User currently offlineUnitedTristar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 8652 times:



Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 22):
Can someone please post a link to the stats if they have it handy? I can't find the specific data for DL at LAX. Beyond that, I don't understand what the fuss is all about...DL runs two flights daily (LAX+SYD) and are therefore the biggest baddest US airline over the Pacific? Nevermind, Qantas has five flights daily on a mix of 744 and A380.

I just don't know if there's enough data on DL to suggest they can somehow rule LAX at some point in the future. That said, they should certainly try.

he "claims" that they are the largest US carrier, but he cannot produce where he is coming up with these numbers

-m

 airplane 


25 MAH4546 : Somebody want to run data on who the largest trans-Atlantic U.S. carrier from LAX is? Is it UA with its daily to Heathrow or AA with its daily to Heat
26 MAH4546 : If AA can't match it, why is AA mainline the largest airline at LAX? Embraers to Bakersfield and Carslbad are great and all, but its not really impor
27 AAExecPlat : Bingo. That was my point a well. SP
28 WorldTraveler : now you're talking.... and DL+NW is large enough in LAX to begin to develop routes which NW could not... the DL twin engine a/c and DL's use of the 3
29 AAExecPlat : Thanks. What program do you use? Is it freeware or payware?
30 MaverickM11 : So basically what you're telling us is that nothing has changed, except now DL is losing money on SYD. Congrats. And I bet DL wasn't doing any favors
31 Travelin man : I still don't see the math adding up. DL 744 = 403 seats UA 744 = 374 seats I didn't see any load factors posted, so I'll have to use assumptions. If
32 STT757 : Nicely put. A year ago CO was leaving Skyteam, lets see what the new Trans-Pacific joint venture with NH and UA do for CO's NRT flights.
33 Post contains links UnitedTristar : According to http://www.transtats.bts.gov/ for first 7 months of 2009 for LAX pax (pulled based on T100 Market Data) Carrier - Month - Domestic - Intl
34 Post contains images Laxintl : I'm not too sure what the gittyness is or the point of this post really. Yes Delta assumed NWA's long running Tokyo flight, and commenced a SYD servic
35 DeltaL1011man : And hopefully when DL gets the rights back in sept. ATL-PVG will be coming back. Lets hope this time(if they don't try to move it) that fuel doesn't
36 Laxintl : I assume you are looking for LAX totals? If so here they are for Jan-Dec 2009. United(incl UAX) Dom - 9,536,557 Intl - 793,564 Delta Dom - 4,030,782
37 OA412 : Indeed. And shock/horror, I'm going to say that both sides are partly at fault for that. There I said it.
38 Post contains links Commavia : I don't know why you guys are even arguing. Delta is now the largest U.S. airline from LAX to Asia, which means that soon they could be flying nonstop
39 UnitedTristar : the data I was looking at was missing the international numbers for months 8 - 10 and there was not data for 11/12 -m
40 LACA773 : Where can we view LFs for all the carriers in the LAX-NRT market? I beleive DL also codeshares on KE's daily 772 LAX-NRT flight. No. They have utiliz
41 Post contains images Peanuts : Huh? Artificially? It's one and the same airline. "Powerful" input. That just confirms it's just a pissing contest for some posters on here...with no
42 Cubsrule : But, again, how can we know that?
43 Post contains images DeltaL1011man : not in Q3, again DL only ran the 744 on LAX-NRT.
44 LACA773 : Something else that people seem to have forgotten is how much UA has pulled back @ LAX in general. JL will play a very big part in this regarding the
45 FlyPNS1 : Amen. It's the usual propaganda from DL's own version of Baghdad Bob. Even worse, the data source he is using is highly questionable as it depends on
46 WorldTraveler : yes... but DOT stats use the operating carrier... DL doesn't get to count the KE passengers. according to you, it does if it's Brazil... apparently i
47 Cubsrule : Like this one?
48 FlyPNS1 : It's only wealth if the revenue exceeds the cost to operate. A basic principle you don't seem to grasp.
49 Laxintl : Since we are talking about LAX, I was just asked for a rundown on the top carrier passenger totals and revenue operations at the airport in 2009. 1. U
50 STT757 : The aircraft they are currently flying to NRT. Well as Jeff said they are now in a real Alliance with the biggest airline in Europe (LH), the best ai
51 OA412 : Last I checked, Skyteam is also a real alliance.
52 STT757 : How can it be an "alliance" when one of the members (DL) is trying to kill you and steal business away, the alliance CO is in now is made up of super
53 Post contains images MaverickM11 : I'll just add "codeshares" to the list of things you don't understand. What mythS? NW had a high average fare for LAXNRT before, during, and after DL
54 OA412 : You really think that CO wasn't trying to take business away from DL? It's called business. As to DL trying to kill CO, give me a break. Those are Sm
55 RoyalService : Long ago it used to be a battle between Eastern and Delta, at least here in Atlanta. OH HOW I MISS THOSE DAYS! For a long time I used to scream, Down
56 OA412 : As far as I remember DL management themselves expected the route to run at a loss in the beginning. Whether or not they can turn it into a profitable
57 Gemuser : Can you break all the US airlines pax numbers down into international & domestic, if possible, please? It seems from the numbers in replies 37 & 50 t
58 DeltaL1011man : So if UA and CO both have a hub in NYC you don't think they would be going at it. Oh and FYI, 95% of the shots that were taken were shots from CO. I
59 STT757 : What ever the exact opposite meaning of "lightning fast" is would apply to DL's JFK redevelopment.
60 Laxintl : Sure, here you go. Alaska/Horizon Dom - 2,194,258 Intl - 997,578 American/AE Dom - 8,841,287 Intl - 492,567 Continental Dom - 2,234,808 Intl - 2,152
61 Toobz : Can folks just be happy for an airline that's doing good!? it doesn't matter if your a CO AA US AY BA VS UA fan. I'm a DL fan sure, but I've always gi
62 Post contains images LAXdude1023 : Well Ill be! Who would have guessed. A whole thread dedicated to DL grandstanding over 2 destination at LAX. Its like Christmas came early. When DL is
63 MAH4546 : Which is perfectly acceptable. It's the same thing that American, for example, is doing with its new Brazil routes - taking losses for long-term gain
64 ManuCH : This thread has turned into a name calling fest among a few members, therefore it is being locked. Any additional posts that are made to this thread a
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...
AA Still The Largest US International Airline? posted Mon Sep 28 2009 12:07:31 by Seatback
Any Possible Expansion For DL At LAX? posted Sat Feb 9 2008 11:45:37 by DL777LAX
DL At ATL : USA's Largest Tatl Gateway posted Sat Aug 26 2006 01:35:29 by WorldTraveler
Delta No Longer Largest US Transatlantic Carrier posted Mon Jun 30 2003 19:28:29 by Bestwestern
Domestic Vs Intl Size At Largest US Carrier Hubs posted Thu Dec 20 2007 13:35:04 by WorldTraveler
Will DL Be The Only US Carrier To IST? posted Fri Jul 14 2006 17:57:56 by Gokmengs
Spirit Is The Largest International Carrier At FLL posted Tue Jun 13 2006 00:10:45 by Belizexp
Questions About The Largest At EWR And JFK posted Sat Jun 13 2009 17:52:44 by BACCALA
DL Delays LAX-GRU Start-up For The Third Time posted Wed Apr 22 2009 14:03:31 by C010T3
Questions About DL/NW At LAX posted Fri Apr 10 2009 00:58:41 by DeltaL1011man