Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Delta Returns ATL-PVG Slots; Delays Guangzhou Svc  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25506 posts, RR: 50
Posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 9523 times:

Delta Airlines has informed the DOT that it will retun 7 US-China frequencies allocated to Atlanta-Shanghai services back to the DOT.

Additionally Delta seeks DOT approval for additional 1-year delays in resuming service to Guangzhou. Delta now seeks permission to resume NRT-CAN service on June 1, 2013.

Delta further request the flexibility to utilize the 7 frequencies allocated to delayed CAN service on other existing China routes the carrier operates should market demand dictate.

OST-2007-28567
and
OST-2010-0285


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7635 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 9532 times:

Not surprising at all. They gave ATL-PVG two good runs, but it just couldnt work.


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineaznmadsci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3673 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 9478 times:

So who will now go for these slots? Would these slots be good only for PVG or could another airline do PEK?


The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7635 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 9444 times:

Quoting aznmadsci (Reply 2):
So who will now go for these slots?

There is already a pile of unused China slots, so I suspect nobody.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 9366 times:

I still am of the opinion that the Chinese economy (although exploding in growth) is not yet at the point where it has high enough yields to support such long duration flights. I do not believe this is a DL issue, but one that all U.S. based carriers are experiencing.

I think an overwhelming proportion of US-China capacity will be provided by Chinese carriers due to their lower cost structure in the short to mid term. Longer term we may see yields rise to the point where Chinese routes become profitable for US based carriers.

[Edited 2012-05-04 10:38:49]

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25506 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 9293 times:

With the expanded US-China bilateral there are unallocated frequencies available.

Delta could always get a few more if it asks, however this is likely a pragmatic move as it does not expect to make ATL-PVG work anytime soon.
Also Guangzhou has truly been scheduling yo-yo as it has come and gone more times than I can remember.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFSDan From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 755 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 9002 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 1):
They gave ATL-PVG two good runs

I don't know if I would call the second one good... Two weekly flights isn't appealing to many high-yield travelers.



SEA SFO SJC LAX ONT SAN DEN IAH DFW OMA FSD MSP MSN MKE ORD DTW CVG MEM JAN BHM RSW ATL CLT BWI PHL LGA JFK MEX LIM KEF
User currently offlineCentre From Canada, joined Mar 2010, 490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 8831 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
I think an overwhelming proportion of US-China capacity will be provided by Chinese carriers due to their lower cost structure in the short to mid term.

How about better service by Chinese carriers?



I have cut 4 times, and it's still short.
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 8699 times:

Quoting Centre (Reply 7):
Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
I think an overwhelming proportion of US-China capacity will be provided by Chinese carriers due to their lower cost structure in the short to mid term.

How about better service by Chinese carriers?



My opinion and my opinion only, but the rapid and successful expansion of ULCC's leads me to conclude that price matters significantly more than service to more and more people.

Also keep in mind that a vastly larger proportion of passengers to/from China are Chinese (paid in Chinese wages). Therefore, a lower priced option is more important than service.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3095 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8656 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
Delta could always get a few more if it asks, however this is likely a pragmatic move as it does not expect to make ATL-PVG work anytime soon.

Why doesn't DL use the slot to start SEA-PVG? That would give them a lot more connecting traffic from DL's own network and AS/QX.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6610 posts, RR: 24
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8447 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
I do not believe this is a DL issue, but one that all U.S. based carriers are experiencing.

Agreed. On top of that, while China is a big country, the demand between the U.S. and China is still relatively small. It's certainly growing, but the airlines jumped a bit too quickly into China and flooded it with capacity.


User currently offlinePHXA340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 891 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8398 times:

Quoting Centre (Reply 7):
How about better service by Chinese carriers?

Eh, from my experience I would rather fly a US carrier. With the exception of CX of course. Air China was seriously bad. It made the 744 UA flight from LAX - SYD seem luxurious in economy.


User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6184 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8387 times:

Just like India, China has not panned out to be worthy of the gold rush it commanded a few years ago.
Even Brazil has struggled to live up to its promise outside of GIG and GRU.

Only the Arabian bubble seems not to have just yet.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 8308 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 10):
Agreed. On top of that, while China is a big country, the demand between the U.S. and China is still relatively small. It's certainly growing, but the airlines jumped a bit too quickly into China and flooded it with capacity.

Is there any reason why US - China traffic is so difficult compared to Europe - China? I would assume that the US would be able to absorb such capacity as it seems to be a larger market (in absolute numbers) than Europe. Or isn't there much trade between the US and China (at least compared to Europe?).


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9661 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 8282 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):

Why doesn't DL use the slot to start SEA-PVG? That would give them a lot more connecting traffic from DL's own network and AS/QX.

Since they already operate SEA-PEK with the 767, I think SEA-PVG might be worth investigating. A 767 is a lot easier to fill than a 777. However, I'm not sure the 767 has enough range. Also the 767 is not a particularly desirable plane for that long of a flight since it is so much slower than a 777 or 747.

[Edited 2012-05-04 12:49:37]


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6610 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 8249 times:

Quoting LJ (Reply 13):
Is there any reason why US - China traffic is so difficult compared to Europe - China?

There's certainly a lot of trade between the US and China, however there's far less leisure demand. Lots of American's go on vacation to Europe, however vastly fewer go to China on vacation. Even in the reverse direction, the U.S. welcomes more European tourists than Chinese. On top of this, China is a lot further from much of the U.S. population which lies on the East Coast of the U.S., further hurting demand and making it harder to make money...hence why ATL-PVG hasn't worked.


User currently onlineMillwallSean From Singapore, joined Apr 2008, 1256 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 8057 times:

Its not a big difference in total trade between the EU and US with China. The EU is just slighly larger overwall.
But if you look at details the US is exporting a fair bit less to China compared to the EU and US FDI is a fair bit less than EU FDI.

The EU is Chinas largest tradingpartner.
It handles a total of 17% of all trade with China (13.2% of Chinas imports and 20.1% of Chinas exports)

The US is Chinas second largest tradingpartner.
It handles a total of 13.6% of all trade with China (8.0% of Chinas imports and 18.3% of Chinas exports)

Those figures alnone should warrant plenty of traffic. Were talking about alot of money here. But there is plenty of airlines flying and US inbound and outbound tourism to China isnt at all as large as European tourism ties with China.
Chinese airlines seem to compete better on US routes compared to European routes for traffic too.

What we might ask ourselves is whats the connection between SE US and China?
DL does bring in feed from many parts of the US to its ATL hub but I dont think ATL is that well positioned for the US China connections either. Its natural O/D will lack VFR, tourism and to a large degree natural business connections with China. Its larger market surrounding market SE US also lacks VFR, tourism ties and natural business connections.



No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25506 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 8009 times:

China and the US have huge trade links. Just look at all the freighters, ships going back and forth plus all consumer goods sold in America.

However all this trade has not necessarily meant as strong passenger air travel demand. For example in 2011 there was about 1.2mil US visitors to China., this compares with well over 6mil Europeans that visited China. Seems China is simply not as big of an interest for the average American as for European travelers.

Chinese outbound tourism to the US has been growing incredibly fast (up 36%in 2011), and more would love to visit, however the difficulty in obtaining visa’s complicates this. Chinese visitors however indeed tend to fly their own carriers, and while big spenders when the US and have become the new Japanese, they tend to chase after the lowest possible airfare which does not help the case for US airlines.

As far as comments about the quality of Chinese airlines, things are changing fast. I’ve had business dealing with Chinese carriers since the mid 1990s, and they have come a long way, especially as they take delivery of new aircraft with the latest cabins. Also having joined global alliances pushed improvements both in their networks, and service on the ground.

While admittedly most won’t look to Chinese airlines as models of service especially in a very upscale Asian market place, they are moving fast and will over time create growing headaches for US and other foreign carriers.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7983 times:

Quoting LJ (Reply 13):
Is there any reason why US - China traffic is so difficult compared to Europe - China?

Schengen visa is easier to get than U.S visa for Chinese citizens.

[Edited 2012-05-04 13:56:16]

User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8964 posts, RR: 39
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7794 times:

For a lot of people, going through ATL also means a fair bit of backtracking. And you have a lot more choices through other hubs.


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7639 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7220 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 19):
For a lot of people, going through ATL also means a fair bit of backtracking. And you have a lot more choices through other hubs.

   precisely. As much of a hub that ATL is, you can most likely still get to your destination from China via LAX, SEA, etc etc.



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlinebkkair From Thailand, joined Aug 2001, 409 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6701 times:

This market is growing rapidly, fueled by Chinese going to the USA. 1.1 million tourists last year is expected to almost double within 2 years.

Due to hassles getting a USA visa, Chinese are going to Europe to spend their money, but that is changing with Obama speeding up visa procedures for China, India and Brazil:


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/bu...ists.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss

A record number of Chinese visited the United States last year — nearly 1.1 million — and the country accounts for one of the top-growing tourist groups here, according to the Commerce Department. The number of visitors is expected to almost double by 2014, according to the U.S. Travel Association. Chinese visitors spend about $6,000 each on every visit here, versus the $4,000 that visitors from other countries spend on average, the association says, and their top activity is shopping.

Just a few months ago, for example, the wait for a Chinese tourist to the United States was about 180 days; now it is less than a week.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6483 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4143 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 20):
precisely. As much of a hub that ATL is, you can most likely still get to your destination from China via LAX, SEA, etc etc.

For a good connection from the US to China, DTW would still offer a better choice than LAX,SEA or ATL for most of the US>


User currently offlinedtw9 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1160 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3873 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 22):
For a good connection from the US to China, DTW would still offer a better choice than LAX,SEA or ATL for most of the US>

Hard to believe but if you flew DFW-DTW-PEK, it would only be about 100 air miles more then if you flew DFW-LAX-PEK and I'm sure an easier connection


User currently offlinedelta2ual From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 620 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3826 times:

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 23):
Hard to believe but if you flew DFW-DTW-PEK, it would only be about 100 air miles more then if you flew DFW-LAX-PEK and I'm sure an easier connection

  



From the world's largest airline-to the world's largest airline. Delta2ual
25 DTWLAX : DTW will be a better choice if you are on the East Coast, upper Midwest and to some extent South East. LAX, SEA is better for anything west of IAH. M
26 hohd : That is assuming you get the visa. With Schengen visa, if you submit all the required docs, you will get the visa, with US there is no assurance.
27 Flighty : It "could." But US Customs is only going to let people in if they have a really good reason to be here. The vast majority of the market, we reject du
28 jfk777 : AA could fly a 777 from JFK to PVG to go along with their ORD and LAX 777 flight to Shanghai.
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...
Ambitious Delta Applies ATL-PEK/ATL-PVG posted Mon Jul 16 2007 21:05:34 by Jimyvr
Delta To Apply For ATL-PVG Instead Of PEK In 2008 posted Fri Jan 19 2007 10:30:33 by Panamair
Delta Returns Seven Brazil Frequencies To DOT posted Fri Mar 9 2012 16:21:19 by MAH4546
DL Suspending ATL-PVG 1/18/12 (again) posted Tue Nov 22 2011 10:14:01 by PSU.DTW.SCE
DL Restarting ATL-PVG, DTW-PEK, And NRT-CAN? posted Tue Nov 9 2010 20:55:00 by FL787
DL Wants To Delay SEA-PEK And ATL-PVG To 2011 posted Thu Apr 22 2010 06:12:30 by PSU.DTW.SCE
Delta - US Airways Trade Slots (Part 2) posted Thu Aug 13 2009 08:42:54 by EI787
Delta 166 ATL-JFK Diverted posted Wed Aug 12 2009 16:40:00 by AndyGarrett
Delta Resumes ATL-YHZ posted Sat Jun 20 2009 16:24:53 by GhYHZ
Delta DL411 ATL-SJO Today (19th May) Registration posted Tue May 19 2009 07:05:26 by Tomascubero
Delta Returns Seven Brazil Frequencies To DOT posted Fri Mar 9 2012 16:21:19 by MAH4546
DL Suspending ATL-PVG 1/18/12 (again) posted Tue Nov 22 2011 10:14:01 by PSU.DTW.SCE
DL Restarting ATL-PVG, DTW-PEK, And NRT-CAN? posted Tue Nov 9 2010 20:55:00 by FL787
DL Wants To Delay SEA-PEK And ATL-PVG To 2011 posted Thu Apr 22 2010 06:12:30 by PSU.DTW.SCE
Delta - US Airways Trade Slots (Part 2) posted Thu Aug 13 2009 08:42:54 by EI787
Delta 166 ATL-JFK Diverted posted Wed Aug 12 2009 16:40:00 by AndyGarrett
Delta Resumes ATL-YHZ posted Sat Jun 20 2009 16:24:53 by GhYHZ