Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Delta Suspends DTW-HKG  
User currently offlinecat3dual From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 73 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 25555 times:

As per the latest published schedule, Delta will suspend flying nonstop DTW-HKG effective September 1, 2012. It is unclear whether or not this is a seasonal suspension.

On a positive note, KIX-GUM goes double daily in the winter; the second frequency is also on the 757.

[Edited 2012-06-23 21:27:11]

117 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 25281 times:

Is there any other route to HKG that DL serves to the US?

This route seems tumultuous, even when it was a NW route.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinelucky777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 25076 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 1):
Is there any other route to HKG that DL serves to the US?

Nope....they will still offer NRT-HKG however. I'm curious if this is a suspension or a straight cancellation?


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 25004 times:

Quoting lucky777 (Reply 2):
Nope....they will still offer NRT-HKG however. I'm curious if this is a suspension or a straight cancellation?

Hmmm Do you think DL will do something from LAX or SEA to NRT or would it not work?



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4784 posts, RR: 43
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 24966 times:

good move by DL as it will result in a total cost savings of US$ 480,000 per flight i.e. 32 hours round trip x US$ 15,000 per hour at Total Operating Cost (which includes Variable/Direct/Indirect Fixed Costs).

Currently DTW-HKG operates 5 times per week hence per week savings is US$ 2.4 million alone !


User currently offlineaviationwiz From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 962 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 24914 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3):
Hmmm Do you think DL will do something from LAX or SEA to NRT or would it not work?

DL currently has daily non-stops to both SEA and LAX from NRT, in addition to several other gateways across the country.



Proudly from the Home of the Red Tail.
User currently onlineGCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1398 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 24502 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 4):
good move by DL as it will result in a total cost savings of US$ 480,000 per flight i.e. 32 hours round trip x US$ 15,000 per hour at Total Operating Cost (which includes Variable/Direct/Indirect Fixed Costs).
Currently DTW-HKG operates 5 times per week hence per week savings is US$ 2.4 million alone !

On that basis, shouldn't they cancel all their flights? The cost savings would be immense.
I think we might also need to consider the revenue loss?

[Edited 2012-06-24 00:53:40]


Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A388,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,B462,(..51 types..),VC10,WESX
User currently offlinemigair54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1723 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 24474 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 4):
good move by DL as it will result in a total cost savings of US$ 480,000 per flight i.e. 32 hours round trip x US$ 15,000 per hour at Total Operating Cost (which includes Variable/Direct/Indirect Fixed Costs).

Currently DTW-HKG operates 5 times per week hence per week savings is US$ 2.4 million alone !

That´s a weird calculation.... was the plane empty?? no pax or cargo??.... of course they will save money but i´m sure they were not losing 2,4million a week....

Any new plans for that spare plane ans slots in Narita??


User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 24207 times:

When I went through HKG last October, I loved seeing all the DL advertisements (even though I was on KL back to LHR). It is truly a shame that the city will only be served through NRT. With cancellations on the mainland and now HKG, it really seems that DL has struggled with China.

I find it even more disappointing considering there are two SkyTeam members based in China. It would seem that DL needs to work more closely with CZ and MU.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlinenwa744tpa From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 67 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 24055 times:

DTW-HKG is to be moved to another city in the near future. I fly this route frequently, but do not have the authoriity to "announce" the location. Most of my flights are full, but apparently there are other cities that may get a better yield. This from the top level management.Sorry, I can't say anymore than that. HKG-DTW has various options. It will be reallocated to a higher yield location. take your pick airliners! (no-it is not just throught NRT)

[Edited 2012-06-24 02:28:26]

User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 23716 times:

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
DTW-HKG is to be moved to another city in the near future. I fly this route frequently, but do not have the authoriity to "announce" the location. Most of my flights are full, but apparently there are other cities that may get a better yield. This from the top level management.Sorry, I can't say anymore than that. HKG-DTW has various options. It will be reallocated to a higher yield location. take your pick airliners! (no-it is not just throught NRT)

Well, I believe we know it isn't going to be CVG, MEM, SLC, or LGA. Also, as DL has tended to favor DTW over MSP, I cannot imagine that they would move the flight there. I also agree with several posters that some difficulty on this route may be caused by backtracking to DTW, which would also toss out ATL and JFK.

That leaves LAX and SEA. I think both are equally good options. LAX afaik only has CX direct, but with economy fares at £400-500 over the summer on AA.co.uk, I am not sure that is necessarily a yield booster. So, if it is higher yields they are looking for, I tend to believe they will choose SEA which already has good feed from their other hubs and AS feed thrown in. Also, SEA has no directs currently. While I would be the first to admit that I do not know the California air market well, there are also several directs out of SFO which could chew into LAX traffic.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlineFlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2089 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 23567 times:

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
It will be reallocated to a higher yield location.

What about JFK-NRT? If DL could get some good corporate traffic could NYC generate some good point-to-point yields compared to DTW, which I'd suspect would be more reliant on transfer traffic?



Let's Go British Caledonian!
User currently offlineOOer From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1466 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 23445 times:

What about JFK-HKG? I know there's already non-stop NYC-HKG flights but it's a big market and DL could make it work.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3256 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 23341 times:

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
DTW-HKG is to be moved to another city in the near future. I fly this route frequently, but do not have the authoriity to "announce" the location. Most of my flights are full, but apparently there are other cities that may get a better yield. This from the top level management.Sorry, I can't say anymore than that. HKG-DTW has various options. It will be reallocated to a higher yield location. take your pick airliners! (no-it is not just throught NRT)

I would think SEA is the natural choice, this is also a past route from NW. If the rumors of DL increasing it's presence in SEA and taking on new overseas flying from SEA are true, then my money is on DL flying SEA-HKG-SEA. The aircraft could be an A-330 instead of a 744, and could offer decent connections via AS/QX and DL metal. Or a 777 ATL-SEA-HKG would be cool too, but more unlikely IMHO.

[Edited 2012-06-24 04:06:58]


AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 22720 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 4):
good move by DL as it will result in a total cost savings of US$ 480,000 per flight i.e. 32 hours round trip x US$ 15,000 per hour at Total Operating Cost (which includes Variable/Direct/Indirect Fixed Costs).

Currently DTW-HKG operates 5 times per week hence per week savings is US$ 2.4 million alone !

How is this savings? You need to add into the equation the revenue from the flight and the loss of income derived from all sources. Your analysis is very weak and needs more information as to where you came up with those figures. Any more information would be welcome.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 972 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 22263 times:

The issue with HKG is that there is already too much competition out of most cities. Although there are no nonstops from SEA currently, I'm not sure there would be enough O&D demand in that market. My bet is on JFK-HKG as the replacement, although it's hard to tell whether DL would be willing to go head-to-head against CX. I'm surprised DL has not tried more nonstops from JFK to Asia thus far, but I suppose they really want DTW to work as the gateway to Asia.

User currently offlineJohnClipper From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2005, 844 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 22230 times:

DL has no consistency in the HKG market. DTW to HKG can be a 77E one day and a 77L the next. NRT to HKG is even worse. One day a 767, the next an A330 then a 77E. My money is on SEA.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8372 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 22093 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sad to see Delta cancel their only mainland US to Hong Kong flight, Detroit is DL's natural place for such a flight. DL should NOT rely on Narita for its only flight to Hong Kong, Asia's second city. IF Detroit will not work then give JFK to HKG a try, the west coast is well covered by Cathay and United.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3256 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 21899 times:

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 15):
Although there are no nonstops from SEA currently, I'm not sure there would be enough O&D demand in that market.

One of the reasons I am sure SEA will get the service, plus that could free up an airframe doesn't it? SEA-HKG requires only 2 frames, does DTW-HKG require 3? The O/D does not need to make or break this flight, connections from AS/QX plus the feed DL can provide into SEA as well, would create enough passengers to make it work.

I guess this route would generate a good amount of cargo, would a 330 or 777 make more sense? I assume the 744 would be too much aircraft. This will free up a few seats everyday on the SEA-NRT and PDX-NRT flights for more O/D or connections to other DL destinations beyond NRT.

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 16):
DL has no consistency in the HKG market. DTW to HKG can be a 77E one day and a 77L the next. NRT to HKG is even worse. One day a 767, the next an A330 then a 77E. My money is on SEA.



Good bet IMO. Sounds like no matter what type they fly on SEA-HKG, it can easily be routed back in and out of the system via NRT. Plus this being an old NW route, DL most likely has the route authority already, if that's still applicable for this situation where DL wants to move to another US city.

[Edited 2012-06-24 06:25:16]


AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinepanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4910 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 21869 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 16):
DTW to HKG can be a 77E one day and a 77L the next.

Why does that matter? The on-board product is the same on both, and AFAIK, they have not had to make any tech stops on the westbound DTW-HKG when using the 77E....


User currently offlineburnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7545 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 21655 times:

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 11):
What about JFK-NRT?

DL already flies JFK-NRT daily with a 744



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineflyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1738 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 21156 times:

Quoting OOer (Reply 12):
What about JFK-HKG? I know there's already non-stop NYC-HKG flights but it's a big market and DL could make it work.

I could see JFK happening:
*New terminal next year, good time to make a splash with a route like this
*Partnership with MU, and CZ-this route will help the overall portfolio from NYC, to China
*This will be another must fly out of NYC served



727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
User currently offlineRobertS975 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 941 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 20953 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Regardless of mild backtracking, DTW allowed a large number of DL stations to enjoy one connection service to HKG. Moving the flight to LAX or SEA makes many more DL stations have to take 2 connections to get to HKG.

User currently offlineDTWLAX From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 794 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 20467 times:

Quoting TeamInTheSky (Reply 10):
I also agree with several posters that some difficulty on this route may be caused by backtracking to DTW,

There is no major backtracking issue with DTW. This flight was mainly used to connect to the East/Southeast USA with a few connections to the Midwest. I think anything west of ORD/MSP would connect through SFO/LAX.

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 22):
Regardless of mild backtracking, DTW allowed a large number of DL stations to enjoy one connection service to HKG. Moving the flight to LAX or SEA makes many more DL stations have to take 2 connections to get to HKG.

Agree. It was very convenient for the smaller town in the Midwest and East Coast for a 1-stop trip to HKG.


User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 20216 times:

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 23):
There is no major backtracking issue with DTW. This flight was mainly used to connect to the East/Southeast USA with a few connections to the Midwest. I think anything west of ORD/MSP would connect through SFO/LAX.

I agree, you would connect through SFO/LAX on a different carrier or be shot through NRT (through Seattle or LAX). I believe a direct from either of those airports would still pick up more feed without having to go way out of the way to Japan.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25362 posts, RR: 49
Reply 25, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 20126 times:

Its been interesting to watch how NW(now DL) and UA experiences play out in the Pacific.

While both were heavily focused on Japan, United long time ago decided to further develop growing number of Japan bypass routes while NW stuck to its Japan launch pad. Also has been interesting to note the quite different marketing drive the airlines have taken – NW work heavily with region top dog travel agencies(consolidators), while UA has focused more on the individual traveler and business to business corporate accounts.

The differences largely remain still today. So while DL for example has worked on developing more bypass service from gateways such as SEA, it is still very heavily focused on Japan, while on the other hand UA continues to shift away from Japan with smaller gauge equipment (ever more 777 vs 747) while continuing to build other Asian services which was only boosted even more by the CO merger.

The Japan centric focus unfortunately does effect DL's posture in other countries as its frequency and market presence can be weaker across the remainder of the region. Also I'm still not sure if the affinity and strong public awareness the Northwest name build in Asia over 60-years has properly transferred to Delta in the hearts and minds of folks.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineExL10Mktg From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 19297 times:

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 16):

DL has no consistency in the HKG market. DTW to HKG can be a 77E one day and a 77L the next. NRT to HKG is even worse. One day a 767, the next an A330 then a 77E. My money is on SEA.

"Consistency" in a market is offering a steady and predictable schedule which I believe Delta does here. While an a aviation enthusiast MIGHT change travel plans to fly on a particular aircraft, the traveling public in general doesn't even know what plane they are on much less care about what it is. Sounds like they are doing a good job of matching aircraft to demand. If they've got the flexibility, why not?


User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 27, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 19811 times:

DL is in a bit of a quandary. They got NRT. They need a thriving non stop Mainland-Beyond as well.
I'm not sure if they have the right equipment to solve this puzzle.

The fact CX owns JFK-HKG doesn't help or shouldn't mean anything to SkyTeam and its customers. SkyTeam needs a JFK-Pacific (besides NRT) presence as well, if DL is serious about NYC. (like it does with offering service to LHR from JFK). I think we may see a move at some point, when facilities/logistics improve at JFK.

SEA would be great from an equipment utilization perspective.

The entrance of Chinese carriers into Skyteam needs to be turned into deepening ties. I'm sure a healthy dose of politics comes into play here (federal governments as well as from the companies itself) and the issues are being worked on.

[Edited 2012-06-24 10:29:40]


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3074 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 19096 times:

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
KG-DTW has various options. It will be reallocated to a higher yield location. take your pick airliners!

I agree with everyone else. It's SEA. My second choice is ATL on a 77L. It's been speculated that DL will add some Asian cities from SEA, with PVG being the nature first guess.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 29, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 18995 times:

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 16):
DL has no consistency in the HKG market.

That's the sad truth. I think UA has more of an edge in HKG.

That said, I see LAX-HKG easily on a 77L or 772. Easy.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7183 posts, RR: 13
Reply 30, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 18832 times:

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 6):
On that basis, shouldn't they cancel all their flights? The cost savings would be immense.
I think we might also need to consider the revenue loss?

LOL Exactly

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
DTW-HKG is to be moved to another city in the near future.
Quoting OOer (Reply 12):
What about JFK-HKG?
Quoting flyguy1 (Reply 21):
I could see JFK happening:
*New terminal next year, good time to make a splash with a route like this

It's definitely moving to JFK. I had already heard they were going to announce a major new int'l route there in conjunction with the promotion of the new terminal.


User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 31, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18270 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 31):
It's definitely moving to JFK. I had already heard they were going to announce a major new int'l route there in conjunction with the promotion of the new terminal.

Makes sense, and there's no backhaul from east coast cities via the polar route. Mileage is not that much more than LAX-HKG either. Would be nice to see DL in both the JFK & LAX/SEA to HKG markets.


User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 32, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18166 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 31):
It's definitely moving to JFK.

It's got my vote!



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23004 posts, RR: 20
Reply 33, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18055 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 32):
Makes sense, and there's no backhaul from east coast cities via the polar route.

No, but there's some backhaul from the central time zone that wasn't an issue before. It's not a huge market, but as an example MSY-JFK-HKG is 600 miles longer than MSY-ORD-HKG, while MSY-DTW-HKG is only 150 miles longer than MSY-ORD-HKG. There's also the issue of, for the foreseeable future, JFK being a far worse connecting experience than DTW and the fact that many cities don't have all that much frequency to JFK.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25362 posts, RR: 49
Reply 34, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18040 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 30):
I think UA has more of an edge in HKG.

You think ?

UA offers 7 flights at HKG -- nonstops to EWR, ORD and SFO along with regional flying to GUM, NRT, SGN and SIN.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineNYCAdvantage From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 17549 times:

I will say that around September DL Should start paying less for Jet A fuel from the north east, in other word they could start competing from JFK with a better cushion than before, plus they will have T4 somewhere in the spring of 2013, if there is a place to run O & D New York is the place.

User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 36, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 17420 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 34):
JFK being a far worse connecting experience than DTW and the fact that many cities don't have all that much frequency to JFK.

But, JFK has the O&D and it doesn't have to all go to CX and UA/ EWR. DL's JFK/LGA presence will probably entice a few defections from CX/UA. There's still a void at LAX for a US carrier in that market to HKG, which DL should fill as well.


User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 17235 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 37):
But, JFK has the O&D and it doesn't have to all go to CX and UA/ EWR. DL's JFK/LGA presence will probably entice a few defections from CX/UA. There's still a void at LAX for a US carrier in that market to HKG, which DL should fill as well.

I still feel that for JFK to work, DL is going to have to sign a good number of corporate contracts that are currently with UA/CX. They will not have enough Northeast feed to make a direct to HKG work, definitely if DTW wasn't working out as well as they hoped.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 17178 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 37):
There's still a void at LAX for a US carrier in that market to HKG, which DL should fill as well.

For DL's core Midwest/Eastern network, connections via NRT would be more sensible than LAX; significantly shorter total trip time with more of it spent in the fancy seats up front. Only the most price-sensitive passengers would consider LAX over NRT.

SEA isn't much larger of a market to Asia than DTW, and has oddles more compeition. Given that SEA-HKG would have to be operated with 332 or 777 coupled with the fact that DL's unlikely to attract many of the high-revenue passengers SFO & LAX, I'd doubt this route would be a go.

If DL does indeed attempt direct service to HKG from another gateway, JFK would be the most logical. I have doubts as to whether the route will come into existance, however.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 39, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 17164 times:

Quoting TeamInTheSky (Reply 38):
DL is going to have to sign a good number of corporate contracts that are currently with UA/CX.

If NYC grows as DL envisions it to grow for them, cities like HKG would have to be in the cards at some point. The fact that CX offers so many flights also gives us a hint that maybe there is room for competition.
As DL's premium base grows, needs will have to be met. It's the only way one can persuade a CX/UA customer to switch carrier.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineflyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1738 posts, RR: 4
Reply 40, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 16999 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 37):
But, JFK has the O&D and it doesn't have to all go to CX and UA/ EWR. DL's JFK/LGA presence will probably entice a few defections from CX/UA. There's still a void at LAX for a US carrier in that market to HKG, which DL should fill as well.

Exactly

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 34):
JFK being a far worse connecting experience than DTW and the fact that many cities don't have all that much frequency to JFK.

Any major east coast city/major mid-western city will connect fine to this potential flight. All the big cities have multiple dailies into JFK.



727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 787 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 16459 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting enilria (Reply 30):
It's definitely moving to JFK. I had already heard they were going to announce a major new int'l route there in conjunction with the promotion of the new terminal.

I find it a bit curious they would start a route like JFK-HKG when you have CX considering cutting it's JFK frequencies. I'd be surpised to see DL start this route if fuel prices start going up again.

I also think that if DL does decide to start JFK-HKG there will be a swift response from CX and with CX's premium draw I'm sure they'd be able to drop prices on those those extra coach seats to make it quite painful for DL.


User currently offlinenomorerjs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14938 times:

UA and CX will be happy to route anyone that went through DTW via ORD.

User currently offlineflyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1738 posts, RR: 4
Reply 43, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14875 times:

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 41):
I find it a bit curious they would start a route like JFK-HKG when you have CX considering cutting it's JFK frequencies. I'd be surpised to see DL start this route if fuel prices start going up again.

I also think that if DL does decide to start JFK-HKG there will be a swift response from CX and with CX's premium draw I'm sure they'd be able to drop prices on those those extra coach seats to make it quite painful for DL.

Supposedly, this is so they can use that plane towards replacing 747-400's into Europe, and its only 3 frequencies per week.



727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
User currently offlinenwa744tpa From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 67 posts, RR: 1
Reply 44, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14457 times:

Ok- you guys (and maybe girls) have figured it out. All other trans-pacs from DTW are good, so no major changes except HKG.

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23004 posts, RR: 20
Reply 45, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14465 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 36):
But, JFK has the O&D and it doesn't have to all go to CX and UA/ EWR. DL's JFK/LGA presence will probably entice a few defections from CX/UA.

Seems like DL wants to have it both ways. They tell shareholders how DTW is strong because of the lack of competition, and pitch their dominance of DTW as an advantage over UA/AA, who have to split Chicago. But then they move international flying from DTW to JFK, which is in no better a competitive situation than ORD.

Quoting flyguy1 (Reply 40):
Any major east coast city/major mid-western city will connect fine to this potential flight. All the big cities have multiple dailies into JFK.

Obviously, I don't know how DL will schedule it, but it's fair to assume that it won't have a terribly different schedule from a TATL flight (noon-ish arrival, mid-afternoon departure). The issue is that when the frequencies are relatively lower at JFK, that makes it harder to plan appropriately for IROPS - most passengers who need to be in HKG on Day X aren't going to take the 45 minute connection but the connection before that. At DTW (or ORD or EWR), that's probably a 2-3 hour connection. At JFK, that earlier flight often doesn't exist. The sole BNA-JFK flight arrives JFK at 1430. The earliest STL-JFK flight arrives JFK at 1400. The sole MSY-JFK flight arrives JFK at 1445. There are many more examples.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 46, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13924 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 45):
But then they move international flying from DTW to JFK, which is in no better a competitive situation than ORD.

It's no secret that DL wants to be #1 in NYC. The sooner that DL gets into terminal 4, the better. As far as connex at JFK, they may need to work on that a bit...perhaps extend the AirTrain to LGA.
 

They'll still be #1 @ DTW regardless of the HKG flight.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23004 posts, RR: 20
Reply 47, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13831 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 46):
It's no secret that DL wants to be #1 in NYC.

Well, sure. But they've argued that it's better to be number one by a mile in a smaller market (DTW) than number one by a bit in a big market (ORD). Why is New York different?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineHOONS90 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 52
Reply 48, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13845 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

On the other hand, DTW-ICN will see a frequency increase for the winter from 5x weekly to daily. First time that DTW-ICN will be daily year-round. Previously it was only daily during the summer.


The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
User currently offlineSquid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 49, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13538 times:

My money is on SEA. I think it is a logical jumping-off point. Traffic can easily be routed through Seattle from NYC as well as other hubs, and I think there is also enough O&D in SEA coupled with Alaska Airlines connections to make SEA work. I also think it will be with either the A330 or the 777.

User currently offlineyeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 882 posts, RR: 14
Reply 50, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13378 times:

Quoting flyguy1 (Reply 40):
Any major ... mid-western city will connect fine to this potential flight.

I'll break it to you gently: That's delusional.  
Perhaps a connection could be made, but to get to HKG why would any right-minded midwesterner do such a thing?
yeo



Yokoso! to my world
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 51, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 12719 times:

Quoting Squid (Reply 49):
My money is on SEA.
Quoting flyguy1 (Reply 40):
Any major east coast city/major mid-western city will connect fine to this potential flight. All the big cities have multiple dailies into JFK.
Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 38):
If DL does indeed attempt direct service to HKG from another gateway, JFK would be the most logical.
Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 32):
Quoting enilria (Reply 31):
It's definitely moving to JFK.

It's got my vote!
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 28):
It's SEA. My second choice is ATL on a 77L.
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 29):
I see LAX-HKG easily on a 77L or 772

Leave it to us to make this sound like a huge gambling bet. Vegas should look to A.net for potential betting ideas.      



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1541 posts, RR: 12
Reply 52, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 12295 times:

Makes sense if they move HKG from DTW to JFK. DTW to Asia ties are predominantly industrial whereas HKG and NYC are obviously world financial centers. And finance types are exactly the kind of passenger DL is looking to capture in NYC. Combined with the new terminal it's sure to go a long way towards helping DL "win" NYC whether the route makes money or not.


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 offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7605 posts, RR: 3
Reply 53, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 12215 times:

What impact will this have on DL operations in DTW?.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3256 posts, RR: 5
Reply 54, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11912 times:

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 22):
Regardless of mild backtracking, DTW allowed a large number of DL stations to enjoy one connection service to HKG. Moving the flight to LAX or SEA makes many more DL stations have to take 2 connections to get to HKG

Unless you live on the west coast, between DL and AS, many cities across America could enjoy DL 1 stop service to HKG via SEA. The feed AS provides would provide enough to fill the plane after the O/D market. Plus as has been stated, DL will then enjoy being the only carrier flying non-stop SEA-HKG, as opposed to competing with CX to JFK, LAX or SFO. Aircraft utilization would be better too.

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 23):
There is no major backtracking issue with DTW. This flight was mainly used to connect to the East/Southeast USA with a few connections to the Midwest. I think anything west of ORD/MSP would connect through SFO/LAX.

By opening a west coast to HKG direct flight, instead of connecting only 1/3 of America to the only DL non-stop to HKG from the US, you can connect 99% of it, again, between AS & DL there would be enough connecting opportunities, if they flew it out of SEA same time BR leaves 12m-1a, you could connect almost every AS & DL SEA flight to this HKG flight.

Quoting enilria (Reply 30):
It's definitely moving to JFK. I had already heard they were going to announce a major new int'l route there in conjunction with the promotion of the new terminal

I almost always agree with you, in fact I hesitated even posting back, but I think SEA is a better option, however this does not mean I'm right, I respectfully disagree with you about JFK.

Quoting NYCAdvantage (Reply 35):
I will say that around September DL Should start paying less for Jet A fuel from the north east, in other word they could start competing from JFK with a better cushion than before, plus they will have T4 somewhere in the spring of 2013, if there is a place to run O & D New York is the place.

I read in another thread the savings from their oil refinery purchase broke down to an average of $3.00 a ticket sold.
I am not informed enough to be sure, just relaying what I read, and wondering if that refinery purchase will really ever be a deciding factor in new routes or aircraft purchases. Of course that info could not be correct as well, guess DL only knows.

Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 9):
DTW-HKG is to be moved to another city in the near future. I fly this route frequently, but do not have the authoriity to "announce" the location. Most of my flights are full, but apparently there are other cities that may get a better yield. This from the top level management.Sorry, I can't say anymore than that. HKG-DTW has various options. It will be reallocated to a higher yield location. take your pick airliners! (no-it is not just throught NRT)
Quoting nwa744tpa (Reply 44):
Ok- you guys (and maybe girls) have figured it out

Figured what out? the city is my guess, it's narrowed to 2 cities, when I go to this city do I need an umbrella or a suit for the theatre?

Quoting Squid (Reply 49):
My money is on SEA. I think it is a logical jumping-off point. Traffic can easily be routed through Seattle from NYC as well as other hubs, and I think there is also enough O&D in SEA coupled with Alaska Airlines connections to make SEA work. I also think it will be with either the A330 or the 777

I think you must have read my post 13, exactly what I was saying, hope we are right.
 

[Edited 2012-06-25 04:17:45]


AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6471 posts, RR: 9
Reply 55, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11864 times:

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 53):
What impact will this have on DL operations in DTW?.

I would say it will have minimal impact on the operation at DTW since is only one flight.


User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 56, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 11309 times:

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 53):
What impact will this have on DL operations in DTW?.

Without HKG, DL/DTW still has more transpacific capacity than any single carrier transpacific gateway except UA/SFO. DTW is a sizeable hub with service to NRT, NGO, HDN, ICN, PEK and PVG.



Allow me to elaborate more on my previous post #27:

Mainland-HKG is NOT going away for DL. DL is merely making some adjustments for things to come. DTW-HKG is likely not doing well enough to keep it going until other plans go into effect or the equipment is better suited elsewhere for now.

I think JFK is very much into play. DL is building NYC because it sees a potential cash cow. Hence the LGA build up. LGA is key for DL in order to sew up the NYC premium market (including corporate contracts).
Couple this with what is going on at JFK. DL also has built up LHR not because it looks pretty on the map; it's what the premium customer simply demands: service to premium markets.
HKG fits into this as well.

Here's how DL will proceed IMHO:

DL pilots are voting on a new contract that includes allowing DL to start a transpacific JV, similar to what they currently have in place with AF/KL.
HKG will likely restart as part of a new JV agreement from JFK and/or SEA and/or LAX.
Likely partners in a JV could be KE and CZ. There are some uncertainties as to what 3rd party code sharing is permitted to/from HKG.

Once DL has a transpacific JV in place, it will be fully ready for a healthy presence beyond Japan. In the current economic environment, DL is not willing to go it alone.

Some folks may gloat at DL's weakness in Mainland-Beyond Japan non stop traffic relative to UA's network. Keep in mind DL is very strong and dominant on its own metal from USA-Japan. About 85% of DL's pacific capacity is to/from Japan.
UA choose to pretty much walk away from NRT years ago in favor of more China flying. If and when China's economy falters a bit, UA will feel that directly in its pockets.
Having a strong presence in a hub (NRT) helps to cut losses during off peak seasons. Also: when the economy outside of Japan is weakening, as it is now, DL still has a strong presence in which to connect passengers from throughout Asia.

Now, both UA and AA have stronger partnerships currently with their Japanese partners so some of DL's NRT advantage will be negated. DL will probably go the JV route with a carrier outside of Japan in order to stay competitive. So in essence: UA is tackling their relative Japan weakness with a Japan centric JV in place. DL will go the other way around: They own Japan already and will tackle beyond Japan with a JV of their own, with KE and/or a Chinese carrier.

In the end, holding on to NRT will prove to be OK. It's important right now though for DL to seek the JV beyond Japan and build on that.

HKG is the largest market from both NYC and LAX that SkyTeam doesn't serve non stop. It's almost a certainty we will see DL metal on one or both of these routes IMO. With or without a JV in place. Most likely with though.

[Edited 2012-06-25 10:18:34]


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 57, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 11052 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 54):
By opening a west coast to HKG direct flight, instead of connecting only 1/3 of America to the only DL non-stop to HKG from the US, you can connect 99% of it


SEA would be a logical connecting point if it were connected to a multitude of cities to the east. UA has a huge advantage with single connects to HKG via EWR/ORD/SFO where DL only has that potential advantage via DTW/MSP/ATL and a lesser degree via JFK. The move away from DTW is kind of surprising as it has connex from everywhere. Unless DL intends to beef up direct flights from SEA across the USA, the move from DTW makes no sense unless DL wants to make a "statement" in NYC. It would be nice if DL were to go to 2 flights, one from each coast.


User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 58, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 11014 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 57):
Unless DL intends to beef up direct flights from SEA across the USA

I still think merger mania isn't over yet. DL likes SEA. With or without AS. They can go organic growth or they can get closer yet with AS. People hate hearing this on a.net.
Let's give it a little more time to see what transpires...  

I will say this: AS would give DL a lot of more reasons to build Asia from LAX and/or SEA or even PDX, for that matter.

[Edited 2012-06-25 10:36:39]


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 59, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10830 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 58):
I will say this: AS would give DL a lot of more reasons to build Asia from LAX and/or SEA or even PDX, for that matter.

You bring up a good point with AS. Every time a friend of mine comes back to the USA from Japan, they go through SEA from NRT and fly AS to here in the valley. It's a really good partnership but people are always saying "Oh, they'll go with AA or US" or something like that. If AS will merge with anybody, it will be DL, and SEA will become a valuable Asian hub (already sort-of is) for DL.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9413 posts, RR: 14
Reply 60, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10762 times:

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 16):
DTW to HKG can be a 77E one day and a 77L the next

Doesn't mean a thing to PAXs unless they would rather hear the T800 over the GE90.



yep.
User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9413 posts, RR: 14
Reply 61, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10704 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):

DL pilots are voting on a new contract that includes allowing DL to start a transpacific JV, similar to what they currently have in place with AF/KL.

Delta can start a JV with or without the TA. The TA supposedly makes it harder for Delta to cut capacity while the other airlines grow or stay the same as we have seen with the AF/KL/AZ JV.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
Likely partners in a JV could be KE and CZ.

CZ and MU would be out unless US/China hit an open Skies(which IIRC they were suppose to start talking about this year)

Quoting peanuts (Reply 58):

AS almost has to happen at this point(if Delta wants to grow out west) SEA doesn't have the gate space for much growth and they are already having to remote park at LAX due to lack of space.

AS merger fixes both problems and give Delta a little room to grow at both places.


I'm just going to point out, I would be a little shocked to see LAX or SEA- HKG before PEK from LAX and PVG from SEA.



yep.
User currently offlinecargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1271 posts, RR: 8
Reply 62, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10524 times:

We're always hearing about how AS will merge with this or that carrier and what an advantage that would be. I, for one, don't believe that will happen anytime soon with any carrier, and that DL/AA/US have no real interest in taking on AS' network. Whatever AS does, absorbing into DL wouldn't do it better, more profitably, or easier.

That said, I firmly believe AS will continue to partner with AA and DL, and to favor partnerships with Skyteam and OW carriers (Korean, AF, LAN, BA).

It would be fantastic and practical for DL to bring a 77L between HKG and SEA every day or even semi-daily. It would also potentially poach some southeast-Asia connection traffic from EK, LH, and BA.

That said, I'll believe it when I see it.


User currently offlineANA787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10521 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 58):

I will say this: AS would give DL a lot of more reasons to build Asia from LAX and/or SEA or even PDX, for that matter.

The only thing I can see being added from PDX is CDG and restarting HNL. Maybe also restarting Seoul nonstop from PDX.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3074 posts, RR: 7
Reply 64, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10472 times:

Quoting cargolex (Reply 62):
We're always hearing about how AS will merge with this or that carrier and what an advantage that would be. I, for one, don't believe that will happen anytime soon with any carrier, and that DL/AA/US have no real interest in taking on AS' network. Whatever AS does, absorbing into DL wouldn't do it better, more profitably, or easier.

That said, I firmly believe AS will continue to partner with AA and DL, and to favor partnerships with Skyteam and OW carriers (Korean, AF, LAN, BA).

Well said, and I agree. Does DL really want to fly to SCC or routes like SJC-LIH (that work for AS)? I still contend that most of AS's route structure would disappear if they were ever let DL buy them out. DL isn't stupid either (I hope). I think they would be smart to leave well enough alone, let AS do what they do best, and reap the benefits of a strong code sharing partnership of an independent AS.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10044 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 54):
By opening a west coast to HKG direct flight, instead of connecting only 1/3 of America to the only DL non-stop to HKG from the US, you can connect 99% of it, again, between AS & DL there would be enough connecting opportunities, if they flew it out of SEA same time BR leaves 12m-1a, you could connect almost every AS & DL SEA flight to this HKG flight.

x 3/4 of the population, and all of DL's core Eastern/Midwestern markets, is better served through DTW rather than SEA.

x For DL's core Eastern/Midwestern markets, transiting through SEA is a longer travel experience than DTW; adding the second connection adds significantly more time.

x The sole advantage of travel through SEA is access to the SFO & LAX markets (SEA itself has little local traffic), but primarily price-sensitive passengers would consider the DL flight.

x DL & AS operate a code-share agreement, not a joint-venture. Given that, for DL's core Eastern/Midwestern markets, travel via NRT will be as fast as SEA, why would DL want to push these passengers through SEA and split revenue with AS?

x HKG has ample direct service from LAX/SFO and SEA-HKG is a very small market.

If DL couldn't make DTW-HKG work, I can't see why they'd try SEA-HKG - especially since it's out of the range of the 767.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3074 posts, RR: 7
Reply 66, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 9986 times:

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 61):
AS almost has to happen at this point(if Delta wants to grow out west) SEA doesn't have the gate space for much growth and they are already having to remote park at LAX due to lack of space.

That's a great reason for a merger, just to gain some gate space at an airport. I'm sure DL would love to get into intra-Alaska flying and up-and-down West Coast flying (not to mention loose a significant amount of AA and OneWorld codeshare revenue) and go through the major hassles of an airline merger just to gain a few gates at SEA and LAX.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 67, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 9970 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
Some folks may gloat at DL's weakness in Mainland-Beyond Japan non stop traffic relative to UA's network. Keep in mind DL is very strong and dominant on its own metal from USA-Japan. About 85% of DL's pacific capacity is to/from Japan.
UA choose to pretty much walk away from NRT years ago in favor of more China flying.

First, I would hardly say Delta is "dominant on its own metal from USA-Japan." In terms of schedule presence, United has just as good if not better of a Japan network, including nonstop flights from basically all of the largest U.S. O&D markets to NRT, plus SFO-KIX. Delta has a larger presence in non-NRT Japan, but in NRT, it's essentially a wash. (And that's critical, of course, since NRT is the Delta "hub.")

Second, I would hardly say United chose to "walk away" from NRT. Again, United has essentially the same U.S.-NRT network that Delta has. The only difference is that United now uses NRT as a hub only for those markets where it makes sense, either for economic or operational reasons. Everything else has largely shifted to nonstops. The key difference here isn't that United chose to walk away from NRT, but rather, United had viable alternatives to NRT because of the advent of longer-range aircraft (i.e., 777s) and United's exceptionally well-placed hubs for Asia (SFO, ORD, LAX, EWR). Delta has no such alternative - outside of some flying from DTW and SEA, NRT is it for them. So Delta's reliance on NRT doesn't represent some larger commitment on Delta's part, but rather a simple lack of many viable alternatives.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
If and when China's economy falters a bit, UA will feel that directly in its pockets.

Well, such is the nature of the beast. When any airline is big anywhere, they will naturally be more exposed when things go badly in that place.

United may feel it as things inevitably continue to slow down in China, but Delta felt it when Japan had a tsunami. AA will feel it when inflationary pressures slow things down in Brazil, but Delta is feeling it now as things collapse in the Eurozone.

Again, such is the nature of the beast - that doesn't really represent any great strategic advantage or disadvantage for any particular airline in any particular place. Short of being dominant everywhere, which no airline can or will be, this is what it is - for United, Delta, and every airline.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
Also: when the economy outside of Japan is weakening, as it is now, DL still has a strong presence in which to connect passengers from throughout Asia.

I'm not sure I buy that. Delta has a "presence in which to connect passengers from throughout Asia" with or without a strong or weak economy anywhere else. Again - they have no alternative, so that's what they have. But that's hardly a hedge. If things slow in the Pacific Rim in general, Delta will definitely feel it - whether they hub in NRT or SEA or anywhere else. The argument could be made that Delta might be at a slight advantage in that hubbing over NRT leads to somewhat shorter (i.e., less fuel-intensive) sectors within Asia, but the countervailing argument is that those sectors are also generally more competitive, with typically 3-4 or other airlines flying the same routes ex-NRT, and in which Delta is often the smallest player.

And that, of course, leads to the larger question, which is as Delta continues to shrink capacity in the intra-Asia ex-NRT markets, as has been happening pretty much continuously since before the merger, at what point do they fall below a certain critical mass beyond which some of these markets are simply not sustainable. Some might argue that is what has already happened with PUS. What about PEK or PVG? With Delta increasingly facing greater and greater competition in the nonstop U.S.-PEK/PVG markets, and with Delta certainly not seeing any big abatement of competition in the local NRT-China markets, how long can Delta continue to make these once-daily 757s/767s/A330s work?

Indeed, it has long been my prediction that Delta's long-term end-state will in many ways come to resemble United's "walking away" from NRT: nonstops from NRT to U.S. hubs plus a few big O&D markets, and then connections beyond NRT to the largest Asian markets that cannot be served nonstop from Delta's U.S. hubs either because of economic, operational or competitive reasons. By that I mean, specifically: BKK, SIN, TPE, MNL. I could see markets like PEK, PVG, HKG and ICN (especially post Delta-Korean ATI/JV) shifting towards nonstop flights to Delta's U.S. hubs.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
Now, both UA and AA have stronger partnerships currently with their Japanese partners so some of DL's NRT advantage will be negated. DL will probably go the JV route with a carrier outside of Japan in order to stay competitive.

Korean will be an exceptional ATI/JV partner. They and Delta already have a strong relationship, which the ATI/JV will only enhance, plus ICN is an exceptional hub for connections.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
HKG is the largest market from both NYC and LAX that SkyTeam doesn't serve non stop. It's almost a certainty we will see DL metal on one or both of these routes IMO. With or without a JV in place. Most likely with though.

I could see JFK - LAX seems like a stretch. I agree with some others that Delta may well attempt JFK-HKG because it is a huge local market, very business-heavy, and generally high-yielding. Nonetheless, I think Delta will have to work to make that market work: Cathay is absolutely entrenched, with a massive amount of lift, an excellent onboard product, strong connections at both ends, and the AA/oneworld tie-in.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 9934 times:

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 61):
AS almost has to happen at this point(if Delta wants to grow out west) SEA doesn't have the gate space for much growth and they are already having to remote park at LAX due to lack of space.

Wouldn't it have been cheaper to retain the gates it relinquishment from the NW hook-up rather than pursing another merger?



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinenetjetandy From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 52 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9528 times:

Please make it Atlanta! I am absolutely shocked by this announcement. I also fly this at least 3 or 4 times a year and the flight is always full..completely full.

DTW one would think is the logical home though. It usually leaves Detroit and flies right over the North Pole.

It's always about a $6k ticket for Business Class. They have to be making money!


User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 70, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9480 times:

Quoting flyguy1 (Reply 40):
Any major east coast city/major mid-western city will connect fine to this potential flight. All the big cities have multiple dailies into JFK.

So I am flying from BNA, STL, IND, MEM, CVG, CLE or even ATL and I want to fly to HKG - how is it benefitting me to fly through JFK? Now I am going an extra couple hours out of my way and flying into a delay prone airport. Other than the blizzards in 1999/2000 before the McNamara Terminal was built you don't see massive delays at DTW whenever there is a little sprinkle or a snowflurry like you get in the NYC area. You don't get the ground stops due to too much traffic in the airspace like you get around JFK because there aren't any major airports for over 100 miles around DTW. I would rather transfer thru DTW any day than JFK. I would rather get a root canal, colonoscopy, hernia check and a prostate exam at the same time than transfer through one of the NYC airports when there is weather.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 56):
I think JFK is very much into play. DL is building NYC because it sees a potential cash cow

DL should have never posponed the delivery of those Northwest 787s. JFK-HKG would have been a great point to point route for the 787.


User currently offlineSR117 From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 797 posts, RR: 1
Reply 71, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9343 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 70):
So I am flying from BNA, STL, IND, MEM, CVG, CLE or even ATL and I want to fly to HKG - how is it benefitting me to fly through JFK? Now I am going an extra couple hours out of my way and flying into a delay prone airport. Other than the blizzards in 1999/2000 before the McNamara Terminal was built you don't see massive delays at DTW whenever there is a little sprinkle or a snowflurry like you get in the NYC area. You don't get the ground stops due to too much traffic in the airspace like you get around JFK because there aren't any major airports for over 100 miles around DTW. I would rather transfer thru DTW any day than JFK. I would rather get a root canal, colonoscopy, hernia check and a prostate exam at the same time than transfer through one of the NYC airports when there is weather.

Completely agree with you, however, unfortunately, despite the wonderful connecting opportunities and the great facilities at DTW, it just wasn't enough to make it profitable. JFK on the other hand, despite all the problems you mention, is where the money is, so it just might work if that's where it gets switched to.


User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9317 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I will put my money on JFK. They need more Asia converge to better compete with UA. And like some of the others have said its connecting two huge financial centers of the world. I bet this route transfer had allot to do with getting a few big corporate contacts that wanted HKG non stop before making a commitment to DL.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3256 posts, RR: 5
Reply 73, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 9062 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 58):
I will say this: AS would give DL a lot of more reasons to build Asia from LAX and/or SEA or even PDX, for that matter.

This is what I've been saying, I think both AS & DL are lucky to have the bond they do.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 61):

AS merger fixes both problems and give Delta a little room to grow at both places.

Any merger would kill what is the spirit of Alaska, and DL wouldn't be into flying to OME or operate a BLI-HNL flight.
AS is best left AS. AS & DL merging would fix nothing, but it would create things that would need to be fixed later.

Quoting ANA787 (Reply 63):
The only thing I can see being added from PDX is CDG and restarting HNL. Maybe also restarting Seoul nonstop from PDX.

I'd love to see the HNL flight come back, but there are already 2 flights a day currently, it may be too much lift. I would love to see a CDG flight, but doubt it will happen, when they can just fly pax to SEA on AS and catch the n/s from there.
I think if a SEL flight happens it will be on OZ or KE a few days a week, Cargo ICN-PDX has been strong in the past.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 64):

Well said, and I agree. Does DL really want to fly to SCC or routes like SJC-LIH (that work for AS)? I still contend that most of AS's route structure would disappear if they were ever let DL buy them out. DL isn't stupid either (I hope). I think they would be smart to leave well enough alone, let AS do what they do best, and reap the benefits of a strong code sharing partnership of an independent AS.

I 100% agree, Thanks for the correct insight. AS is AS because they are AS, I believe AS has said before they are not interested in any type of merger, they are quite successful doing exactly what they are doing, why ever mess with that which is golden already?



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineANA787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9014 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 73):
I think if a SEL flight happens it will be on OZ or KE a few days a week, Cargo ICN-PDX has been strong in the past.

   PDX-ICN on KE A330 would have the greatest potential IMO. Alaska, as a codeshare partner, would also provide feed for such a flight.


User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9169 posts, RR: 15
Reply 75, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 8917 times:

I suppose the new route can be SEA-HKG or LAX-HKG or JFK-HKG. Maybe MSP-HKG? They did it before. What about ATL-HKG?

User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9413 posts, RR: 14
Reply 76, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 8762 times:

Sorry, not getting into the DL/AS pissing match. I think it will happen. some don't. No need to talk about it again.

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):
First, I would hardly say Delta is "dominant on its own metal from USA-Japan." In terms of schedule presence, United has just as good if not better of a Japan network, including nonstop flights from basically all of the largest U.S. O&D markets to NRT, plus SFO-KIX. Delta has a larger presence in non-NRT Japan, but in NRT, it's essentially a wash. (And that's critical, of course, since NRT is the Delta "hub.")

not even a wash. UAL has more flights and seats to NRT this summer. (1 extra flight ~300 more seats) *note Mainland only.*
If HNL was added in Delta would be a bit larger.

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):

Korean will be an exceptional ATI/JV partner. They and Delta already have a strong relationship, which the ATI/JV will only enhance, plus ICN is an exceptional hub for connections.

they already have the ATI, so a JV just seems right.

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):

I'm not sure I buy that. Delta has a "presence in which to connect passengers from throughout Asia" with or without a strong or weak economy anywhere else. Again - they have no alternative, so that's what they have. But that's hardly a hedge. If things slow in the Pacific Rim in general, Delta will definitely feel it - whether they hub in NRT or SEA or anywhere else. The argument could be made that Delta might be at a slight advantage in that hubbing over NRT leads to somewhat shorter (i.e., less fuel-intensive) sectors within Asia, but the countervailing argument is that those sectors are also generally more competitive, with typically 3-4 or other airlines flying the same routes ex-NRT, and in which Delta is often the smallest player.

agreed

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):

Indeed, it has long been my prediction that Delta's long-term end-state will in many ways come to resemble United's "walking away" from NRT: nonstops from NRT to U.S. hubs plus a few big O&D markets, and then connections beyond NRT to the largest Asian markets that cannot be served nonstop from Delta's U.S. hubs either because of economic, operational or competitive reasons. By that I mean, specifically: BKK, SIN, TPE, MNL. I could see markets like PEK, PVG, HKG and ICN (especially post Delta-Korean ATI/JV) shifting towards nonstop flights to Delta's U.S. hubs.

agreed



yep.
User currently offlinepanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4910 posts, RR: 25
Reply 77, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8646 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 76):
not even a wash. UAL has more flights and seats to NRT this summer. (1 extra flight ~300 more seats) *note Mainland only.*
If HNL was added in Delta would be a bit larger.

Actually, NRT-Mainland is kind of a wash. Taking peak season (say last half of July)

NRT-Mainland:

DL total weekly flights: 56
UA total weekly flights: 56

DL total weekly seats: 16,793
UA total weekly seats: 16,632


NRT-USA (Mainland + HNL):

DL total weekly flights: 77
UA total weekly flights: 63

DL total weekly seats: 23,758
UA total weekly seats: 19,250

Basis for calculations:

DL: NRT-HNL (3x daily); NRT-SFO / LAX / SEA / PDX / MSP / DTW / ATL / JFK
UA: NRT-HNL / SFO (2x daily) / LAX / SEA / IAH / ORD / EWR / IAD

For UA, sUA 3-class 777s come in many configs, so I used the one with largest number of seats - 269
sCO 2-class 777s come in two configs, I used the largest one (276 seats)
sUA 744: 374 seats

For DL: used the lower capacity 74S (376 seats) for NRT-JFK/ATL, and the 'old' 744 (393 seats) for NRT-HNL / DTW

Of course, if one looked at all of Japan - USA, then DL is quite a bit larger:

DL: 37,051 seats weekly
UA: 21,133 seats weekly


User currently offlineDTWPurserBoy From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 1629 posts, RR: 6
Reply 78, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8642 times:

My money is on DTW-MNL. Lots of O& D traffic.


Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8471 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting panamair (Reply 77):

Don't forget the two daily flights into HND for DL. DTW/LAX-HND both on A332 I believe.


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9413 posts, RR: 14
Reply 80, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8320 times:

Quoting panamair (Reply 77):
UA: NRT-HNL / SFO (2x daily) / LAX / SEA / IAH / ORD / EWR / IAD

Oh crap. Ha your right. I misread the UA timetable. I had ORD-NRT as 2x daily 777/744 but the 777 is ANA. So that put them on the same number of flights and very close in seats. sorry about that.
Anyways, I thought DL was larger and they would have had LAX/SFO/PDX been what they were right after the merger(74 for LAX and 332s for SFO/PDX)

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 79):

Both are daily 332s for now.



yep.
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 81, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7944 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):
I would hardly say United chose to "walk away" from NRT

On NRT Interport flying DL has 41% more flights than UA. That's huge. UA clearly walked away from most of it. Granted, UA was also in the position to walk away from it due to some great and strong O&D opportunities that NW, and later DL, did not have.

NRT-PUS will go away. And I believe NRT-ICN will go as well, once a KE JV is in place. So we will see a transition of some sorts for DL at NRT, but not as big as what UA has done. DL may actually replace some of that flying by adding NRT-CGK and a few others, depending on gov't approvals.

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):
Delta has no such alternative - outside of some flying from DTW and SEA, NRT is it for them. So Delta's reliance on NRT doesn't represent some larger commitment on Delta's part, but rather a simple lack of many viable alternatives.

This will change over the next 3 yrs. If DL is to go full circle on its NYC plans, it will have to include flying beyond NRT.
LAX will play a big part once a JV is in place with an asian carrier(s).
DL has viable alternatives alright, I just don't think they wanna go about it without a JV in place.

Quoting commavia (Reply 67):
I'm not sure I buy that. Delta has a "presence in which to connect passengers from throughout Asia" with or without a strong or weak economy anywhere else. Again - they have no alternative, so that's what they have. But that's hardly a hedge.

But it is a hedge, in a way. As opposed to investing resources into 3 non stop Mainland-HKG flights, it has one from NRT. All the 8 Mainland-NRT flights funnel transfers into NRT-HKG. In an economic difficult climate, how is that hardly a hedge?
Granted, when the economy and competition heats up, DL would have to make a move. With regards to Mainland-HKG I believe they will, again.

Like I said, DL is in a bit of a quandary, it's not a perfect world for them, by any stretch. I'm still not sure if they have the right equipment for all the opportunities they may have.
I do believe that in our current economic situation, DL's interport flying remains relevant. UA believes that as well, but they did put more emphasis on overflying NRT.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineANA787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 7713 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
NRT-PUS will go away. And I believe NRT-ICN will go as well, once a KE JV is in place. So we will see a transition of some sorts for DL at NRT, but not as big as what UA has done. DL may actually replace some of that flying by adding NRT-CGK and a few others, depending on gov't approvals.

Let's get a NRT-CGK, NRT-KUL and NRT-KHH.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 83, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 7529 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
On NRT Interport flying DL has 41% more flights than UA. That's huge.

And both JAL and ANA have more than double the flying of Delta. That's even more huge. But it's all irrelevant. The key is that the local Tokyo-Asia market is, has been, and always will be secondary for what is, has been, and always will be a U.S. airline. Sure, Delta (and United) can carry local passengers in these markets, but all of them (with the exception of the beach markets) are oriented expressly for U.S. connections. As such, the fact that Delta has more capacity in the local Tokyo-Asia market is hardly a measure of strength - to the contrary, it is a measure of United's superior U.S. network that has better-oriented hubs for nonstop flights overflying Tokyo, and it's a measure of Delta's disadvantage in being exposed to farflung markets in which they are neither the local, nor dominant, carrier at either end. Again - I think the fact that United managed to operate essentially the same size network U.S.-Tokyo as Delta and also operate a vastly large U.S.-Asia network over Tokyo speaks volumes.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
UA clearly walked away from most of it. Granted, UA was also in the position to walk away from it due to some great and strong O&D opportunities that NW, and later DL, did not have.

Well that's the key. You can say "walk away," bit it was really "walking towards" something far superior. I have not a single doubt in my mind that Delta, too, would be "walking away" from most of its Tokyo-Asia network in a split second if they had the opportunity. The problem is that Delta's hubs simply aren't as well-oriented as United's to replace the Tokyo connections, and thus Delta is - at least for now - stuck with what it has, while United has moved on ("walked away").

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
NRT-PUS will go away. And I believe NRT-ICN will go as well, once a KE JV is in place. So we will see a transition of some sorts for DL at NRT, but not as big as what UA has done. DL may actually replace some of that flying by adding NRT-CGK and a few others, depending on gov't approvals.

Well I respectfully disagree. Again - I think Delta will do just as United has done: move the flights to nonstops from U.S. hubs that can support them, and keep everything else connected over Tokyo. PEK, PVG, HKG and ICN can all be served - operationally and economically - nonstop from the U.S. SIN, BKK, MNL and TPE cannot.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
This will change over the next 3 yrs. If DL is to go full circle on its NYC plans, it will have to include flying beyond NRT.

True, although I question how much Delta would be able to profitably support. New York to Asia - particularly beyond Japan - is a long, fuel-intensive flight. I'm not saying Delta won't try it, and I'm not saying it will fail if they do, but I think it will be quite a task for them.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
LAX will play a big part once a JV is in place with an asian carrier(s).

Yeah - I've been hearing that for years and have the same doubts about it now that I have had. Delta is already the weakest of the three major U.S. carriers in Los Angeles, with arguably the weakest international partners in the market overall (at least when it comes to Asia/Europe). A JV with Korean will help, but I still question just how much non-Japan Asia Delta could make work nonstop from LAX. I think they'd be better off focusing on the markets where they are (a) stronger and/or (b) less likely to face much competition. That means SEA, DTW, ATL, and, yes, even JFK.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
DL has viable alternatives alright, I just don't think they wanna go about it without a JV in place.

Perhaps that is what they're waiting for.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 81):
But it is a hedge, in a way. As opposed to investing resources into 3 non stop Mainland-HKG flights, it has one from NRT. All the 8 Mainland-NRT flights funnel transfers into NRT-HKG. In an economic difficult climate, how is that hardly a hedge?

I still don't get the logic. It's not a hedge - it's just a function of being bigger or smaller in a certain market. AA is more exposed to South America and less exposed to Europe. That doesn't mean AA has "hedged" their presence in Europe - it just means they're smaller there. Thus, when things are going badly in Europe, and better in South America, like today, AA will benefit. Same here. As things slow in China, the airlines most exposed there will feel it more. But that's just the nature of being big or small somewhere - not a hedge. Conversely - using your example - funneling everything over NRT means Delta is more exposed to Japan, and so will do worse when Japan does worse (Exhibit A: tsunami). Again - it's not a hedge, it's just being big or small here vs there.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 7361 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 83):
to the contrary, it is a measure of United's superior U.S. network that has better-oriented hubs for nonstop flights overflying Tokyo, and it's a measure of Delta's disadvantage in being exposed to farflung markets in which they are neither the local, nor dominant, carrier at either end.

Yeah, and AA's going to launch a 773ER on the gold mine that is DFW-HKG, further forcing DL to rescind capacity. We've read the rhetoric on these forums before, specificity from our MIA-based friend. (DFW's no larger a market than DTW into HKG, and heck, that's a lot of premium seats to fill... especially among many OneWorld faithful who will always prefer CX.)

We don't know UA's or DL's actual performances. For the interim, DL may have decided it is more beneficial to exploit the Narita hub. Asia's still a niche market, and in the future DL may pursue another strategy. Don't underestimate the Narita operation status quo -- it consistently contribution more than 25% of NW's total revenue.

[Edited 2012-06-26 16:54:20]


Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 85, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7287 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
Yeah, and AA's going to launch a 773ER on the gold mine that is DFW-HKG, further forcing DL to rescind capacity. We've read the rhetoric on these forums before, specificity from our MIA-based friend. (DFW's no larger a market than DTW into HKG, and heck, that's a lot of premium seats to fill... especially among many OneWorld faithful who will always prefer CX.)

Well I'm not going to compare DFW-HKG to DTW-HKG, or predict what impact any hypothetical AA DFW-HKG operation might or might not have on Delta, but I'm not sure DFW-HKG is quite as hopeless an enterprise as you imply. There is a large amount of commercial linkages between Texas and China, and the market currently has no nonstop service. DFW is a massive hub - the largest in the world after ATL - and that would be the single only flight from China to the American South (which is among the most economically vibrant regions in the U.S. these days). And, of course, DFW and HKG are both huge oneworld hubs and the connectivity over the two would be massive - there are some "faithful" who will "always prefer" CX, but there is certainly also plenty of "faithful" who will "always prefer" AA - I know many of them.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
For the interim, DL may have decided it is more beneficial to exploit the Narita hub.

Well again - I don't think anybody is disputing that. They don't really have much option at the moment, so there best option is to exploit the Narita hub for all they can. But I suspect they will find steadily declining returns as the competitive landscape continues to evolve - and nearly entirely in the favor of Delta's competitors, not Delta itself.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
Asia's still a niche market

No it's not.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
and in the future DL may pursue another strategy.

I don't think they'll have much choice. And I think they know it.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
Don't underestimate the Narita operation status quo

Well, define "status quo," because the Narita hub operation has been "evolving" (generally, "shrinking") for over a decade - before the merger. Northwest began the trend when they began parking the venerable old 747-200s and began transitioning more and more of the Narita flying to A330s, and in some cases 757s. Post-merger, that has continued, with some of the former A330 markets moving to 767s, and several of the 757 markets being dropped altogether. All I foresee, personally, is the continuation of this trend: less capacity, and more focus on nonstops overflying Narita.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
it consistently contribution more than 25% of NW's total revenue.

That seems high, but doesn't seem implausible for revenue for the old Northwest. I doubt it contributes 25% of the revenue for Delta, and I highly doubt it contributes 25% of the profits.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 86, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7194 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 85):
No it's not.

Yes, it is. From the USA, its traffic flows are heavily segregated; and tourism between the USA and Asia (especially among USA POS) is weaker than most would expect.

Quoting commavia (Reply 85):
DFW is a massive hub - the largest in the world after ATL - and that would be the single only flight from China to the American South (which is among the most economically vibrant regions in the U.S. these days).

If traffic flows between the South and China were strong, why did DL move its service to DTW? Why isn't DL re-attempting these flights from the world's largest hubs? And AA would be attempting such service with a larger three-cabin aircraft.

Quoting commavia (Reply 85):
Well, define "status quo," because the Narita hub operation has been "evolving" (generally, "shrinking") for over a decade - before the merger. Northwest began the trend when they began parking the venerable old 747-200s and began transitioning more and more of the Narita flying to A330s, and in some cases 757s. Post-merger, that has continued, with some of the former A330 markets moving to 767s, and several of the 757 markets being dropped altogether. All I foresee, personally, is the continuation of this trend: less capacity, and more focus on nonstops overflying Narita.

You do realize DL's flying about the same number of seats from the Continental USA to NRT today that the combined NW+DL operation were pre-merger? That doesn't even consider that PDX gave NW a subsidy to continue service, and service may have been discontinued once it expired had it not been for the 763.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 87, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7147 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 86):
Yes, it is.

No, it's not.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 86):
From the USA, its traffic flows are heavily segregated

I have no idea what that means, but it doesn't matter - the market from the U.S. to Asia in general is hardly "niche." It's anything but - it is massive, high-volume, and highly diverse, with an enormous amount of not only business and ethnic/VFR traffic, but also a good amount of leisure/tourism demand as well. Is it as being as U.S.-Europe? No. But that doesn't make it "niche." U.S.-Africa? One might call that "niche." U.S.-Asia. No way.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 86):
and tourism between the USA and Asia (especially among USA POS) is weaker than most would expect.

Allegedly "weak" tourism does not a "niche" market make.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 86):
If traffic flows between the South and China were strong, why did DL move its service to DTW? Why isn't DL re-attempting these flights from the world's largest hubs?

Detroit was better-positioned among Delta's hubs. That tells us nothing about AA. Plus, ATL-PVG is not the same as DFW-HKG - AA would have huge hubs at both ends of the route (something Delta did not have), and DFW is also further west, and thus less circuitous for many routings.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 86):
You do realize DL's flying about the same number of seats from the Continental USA to NRT today that the combined NW+DL operation were pre-merger?

I wasn't referring solely to U.S.-NRT capacity, but also NRT-Asia capacity. And as I said, this shrinkage has by no means been solely as a result of Delta or the merger - this process began years before the merger was ever even being discussed.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 88, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7108 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 87):
I wasn't referring solely to U.S.-NRT capacity, but also NRT-Asia capacity. And as I said, this shrinkage has by no means been solely as a result of Delta or the merger - this process began years before the merger was ever even being discussed.

What shrinkage?

- The total Narita operation is about the same size today that it was pre-merger.

- Capacity between CONUS to Narita has remained consistent for over a decade. Sure, there's been some route & aircraft shuffling, but the end result is the same.

To say DL is smaller at Narita today than NW was in the past is dead wrong.

Quoting commavia (Reply 87):
I have no idea what that means, but it doesn't matter -

You don't know what it means, but you're going to argue it?

[Edited 2012-06-26 18:21:03]


Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineDTWLAX From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 794 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6949 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 87):
DFW is also further west, and thus less circuitous for many routings.

How is DFW less circuitous than DTW?
DFW can connect only to the south and south east. DTW can connect to the northeast, the entire eastern seaboard, midwest, southeast.


User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 90, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6783 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 88):
What shrinkage?

- The total Narita operation is about the same size today that it was pre-merger.

- Capacity between CONUS to Narita has remained consistent for over a decade. Sure, there's been some route & aircraft shuffling, but the end result is the same.

To say DL is smaller at Narita today than NW was in the past is dead wrong.
DL/NW is down 12% in terms of seats at NRT versus where they were at 10 years ago, so no its not dead wrong to say that. If you consider only DL/NW NRT-Asia capacity, seats are down over 25% versus levels they were at 10 years ago.

[Edited 2012-06-26 20:20:06]

User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6753 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 87):
Detroit was better-positioned among Delta's hubs. That tells us nothing about AA. Plus, ATL-PVG is not the same as DFW-HKG - AA would have huge hubs at both ends of the route (something Delta did not have), and DFW is also further west, and thus less circuitous for many routings.

ATL-PVG was also Skyteam hub-to-hub (DL + MU) ... unless you're arguing MU @ Shanghai is a tiny niche operation ??


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 92, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6723 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 88):
- Capacity between CONUS to Narita has remained consistent for over a decade. Sure, there's been some route & aircraft shuffling, but the end result is the same.

And yet again, and for the last time - I was not referring only to CONUS-NRT, I was referring to NRT overall. Ten years ago, NW was still operating mostly 747s. Would you like me to list the routings and flight numbers? I have the timetable right in front of me. Every single Northwest flight out of NRT on June 1, 2002 was operated by a 747 with the exception of the A320s (which had just been introduced to NRT soon before) and were operating to TPE, KHH and PUS. Many of the flights that were then being operated by 400+ seat 747s have now been transitioned to 250-300-seat A330s or 777s, and some are now operated with 757s and 767s.

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 89):
How is DFW less circuitous than DTW?

I was comparing DFW to ATL, not DTW.

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 90):
DL/NW is down 12% in terms of seats at NRT versus where they were at 10 years ago, so no its not dead wrong to say that. If you consider only DL/NW NRT-Asia capacity, seats are down over 25% versus levels they were at 10 years ago.

Thank you.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 93, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6705 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
ATL-PVG was also Skyteam hub-to-hub (DL + MU) ... unless you're arguing MU @ Shanghai is a tiny niche operation ??

Nope - no need to put words in my mouth in order to conjure ridiculous things to then pull apart (per usual). China Eastern was a member of SkyTeam for about the last six months of Delta's three-year on-and-off ATL-PVG service. For the vast majority of the time that flight operated, it was not an alliance hub-to-hub route.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 94, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6686 times:

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 90):
DL/NW is down 12% in terms of seats at NRT versus where they were at 10 years ago, so no its not dead wrong to say that.

It's darn close to being even; let's compare the pre-9/11 schedule (summer 2001) to this summer:

CONUS - Narita

2001:
JFK daily 744
DTW 11-weekly 744
MSP 9-weekly 742
LAX daily 742
SFO daily 742
SEA daily 742

2012:
JFK daily 744
DTW daily 744
ATL daily 744
MSP daily 777
LAX daily 777
SFO daily 763
PDX daily 763
SEA daily 333

Beach Market - Narita

2001:
HNL 14-weekly 742
GUM daily 742
SPN daily 742

2012:
HNL 14-weekly 744, 3-weekly 763
GUM 14-weekly 757, 7-weekly 763
SPN 14-weekly 757
ROR 3-weekly 757

Interport

2001:
BKK daily 744
HKG daily 744
MNL daily 744
PEK 3-weekly 742
PVG 4-weekly 742
ICN daily 742
SIN daily 742
TPE daily 742

2012:
BKK daily 333
HKG daily 777
MNL daily 744
PEK daily 767
PVG daily 333
SEL daily 757
SIN daily 777
TPE daily 744



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 95, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6674 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 92):
And yet again, and for the last time - I was not referring only to CONUS-NRT, I was referring to NRT overall.

I went ahead and did it for you.

Capacity into NRT today is most definitely similar to what it was 10 years ago.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 96, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6678 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 94):
CONUS - Narita

2001:
JFK daily 744
DTW 11-weekly 744
MSP 9-weekly 742
LAX daily 742
SFO daily 742
SEA daily 742

... and let us not forget the 20x weekly M11s Delta was operating on NRT-ATL/LAX/JFK in 2001. If you want to get a true apples-to-apples, pro forma comparison back to then, you have to include Delta in the '2001' numbers as well.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6647 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 96):
... and let us not forget the 20x weekly M11s Delta was operating on NRT-ATL/LAX/JFK in 2001. If you want to get a true apples-to-apples, pro forma comparison back to then, you have to include Delta in the '2001' numbers as well.

If we're discussing DL's dependence on the Narita hub, how do any of DL's per-merger flights -- especially a pair discontinued for nearly a decade prior to the close of the merger -- have any impact?



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17499 posts, RR: 45
Reply 98, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6652 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 84):
DL may have decided it is more beneficial to exploit the Narita hub.

It doesn't have a choice. From where else are they going to fly to Asia beyond Japan? ATL hasn't worked outside of NRT, DTW has been hit and miss outside of PVG, CVG/SLC/MEM/MSP? Not going to happen. NW had the real estate in NRT for a solid hub, but not the hubs in the US to overfly Japan; the addition of DL's hubs didn't make it much easier, hence the build up in JFK and SEA.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 99, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6599 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 94):

It's darn close to being even; let's compare the pre-9/11 schedule (summer 2001) to this summer:

CONUS - Narita

The parity between 2001 and 2012 in terms of frequencies is pretty interesting. The gauge changes, especially in the transpacific/interport sectors, certainly reflect the trend of overflying NRT, which was embraced by UA. NW also historically did brisk business with volume sales to Asian consolidators and travel agents, which was probably why Northwest had 747 service virtually everywhere at that time.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 100, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6582 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 97):
If we're discussing DL's dependence on the Narita hub, how do any of DL's per-merger flights -- especially a pair discontinued for nearly a decade prior to the close of the merger -- have any impact?

Dear God. If you want to compare the size of this hub from 11 years ago to today, but you don't include Delta's flights in and out of NRT back then, you're essentially then just capturing the "growth" of a merger - that says nothing about the hub itself. Isn't that sort of obvious? Yeah - guess what - Delta's "hub" in Detroit has grown since 2001, since Delta didn't have a hub in Detroit in 2001! Give me a break. Where you got confused was (seeming to) put the words in my mouth, "To say DL is smaller at Narita today than NW was in the past is dead wrong." Trouble is - I never said that. What I said was the hub is smaller than it used to be. It's sort of obvious that when you merge two airlines, the combined carrier gets bigger, but in order to make a fair comparison, you have to do a pro-forma comparison.

So, to do that pro forma comparison, using your own numbers on schedule/frequency - and using the seating configurations from back then in 2001 - Delta and Northwest collectively then had 52,490 seats per week (I assumed the highest-density NW 747 configurations I could find). Today, using Delta's configurations on their website, they collectively have 45,997 weekly seats. That's a drop of about 12.4% - and again, that was assuming all of NW's 747 flights back in 2001 were on the highest-density configurations, which is unlikely, so it is probably actually a slightly larger decline than that.

However, to your point about including Delta's numbers from 2001 in the calculation or not, even if you exclude Delta's 20 weekly NRT departures from 2001, you still have a net decline from 2001 to today of 2.4%. That's right - the combined Delta hub today at NRT is smaller than the NW hub there 11 years ago.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 99):
NW also historically did brisk business with volume sales to Asian consolidators and travel agents, which was probably why Northwest had 747 service virtually everywhere at that time.

 checkmark 

Northwest was well-known in Asia as the low-fare consolidator leader - high-volume, low-yield. Thus witness why they began, pre-merger, to transition to lower capacity in an effort to increase yields - a trend Delta has only continued.

[Edited 2012-06-26 21:23:46]

User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 432 posts, RR: 3
Reply 101, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6583 times:

If DL thought DTW-HKG was hard, JFK-HKG will be a nightmare. The local market is huge, but CX controls it, particularly up front. Coach yields are trash, so you have to have the Wall st. guys sitting up front to make it work. 4x daily vs 1x daily...it'll be a mess for DL. HKG nonstop will be like DL's attempt at BOM nonstop.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 98):
It doesn't have a choice. From where else are they going to fly to Asia beyond Japan? ATL hasn't worked outside of NRT, DTW has been hit and miss outside of PVG, CVG/SLC/MEM/MSP? Not going to happen. NW had the real estate in NRT for a solid hub, but not the hubs in the US to overfly Japan; the addition of DL's hubs didn't make it much easier, hence the build up in JFK and SEA.

  

...And PVG only works because it's a decent premium local market size, similar to NGO, with limited nonstop competition for the size of the premium market. Also, there's little to no foreign flag nonstop competition. Honestly, I don't see a way DL can serve HKG nonstop from the US with their current hubs. This is why DL and NW before it maintained NRT when so many other carriers began to overfly Japan.



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 102, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6604 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 100):
Trouble is - I never said that. What I said was the hub is smaller than it used to be. It's sort of obvious that when you merge two airlines, the combined carrier gets bigger, but in order to make a fair comparison, you have to do a pro-forma comparison.

Only on airliners.net would somebody argue that a hub is shrinking, then when proven wrong, say "well, if you count DL's two flights that operated a decade ago, it has shrunk." Although mergers are often about growth, synergies will be a part of every one of them.

Quoting commavia (Reply 100):
that was assuming all of NW's 747 flights back in 2001 were on the highest-density configurations, which is unlikely, so it is probably actually a slightly larger decline than that.

The 742 held about 10% fewer passengers than the 744. If you used the 744's capacity against all 747 flights, then your numbers would project a larger -- not smaller -- decline than that of what actually occurred.

[Edited 2012-06-26 21:36:03]


Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 103, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6529 times:

Quoting SR117 (Reply 71):
Completely agree with you, however, unfortunately, despite the wonderful connecting opportunities and the great facilities at DTW, it just wasn't enough to make it profitable. JFK on the other hand, despite all the problems you mention, is where the money is, so it just might work if that's where it gets switched to.

The point is, I don't want to go an hour out of my way and back (adding on 2 hours) if I am starting at CVG backtracking to JFK to then take my trip to HKG. JFK is so delay prone even in good weather as well as crowded customs I am sure. Delta should not have put off delivery of those 787s - they could do a direct HKG-JFK with a 787. Someone said a direct MNL-DTW, another good route for the 787 as well as those Middle Eastern routes that Delta should be operating out of DTW.


User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 104, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6424 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 94):
It's darn close to being even; let's compare the pre-9/11 schedule (summer 2001) to this summer:

CONUS - Narita

I did compare (using summer 2002) - it's a 12% reduction. If that qualifies as "darn close," then yes, it's "darn close." Otherwise, it's not. I'm not really familiar with what qualifies as darn close and what does not though.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 102):
Only on airliners.net would somebody argue that a hub is shrinking, then when proven wrong, say "well, if you count DL's two flights that operated a decade ago, it has shrunk." Although mergers are often about growth, synergies will be a part of every one of them.

A pro-forma comparison is absolutely what you should use here, inconvenient as that might be. In any event, the only DL flight in the base (summer 2002) is ATL. Can you honestly tell me it would make sense to include ATL in the 2012 figures but not in the 2002 figures?


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 105, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6431 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 102):
then when proven wrong

Ha! Only on A.net could you think you've proven me wrong.

Whether you want to admit it or not - my original statement was correct: the capacity of the hub has shrunk. The shrinkage began before the merger, and it has continued since. If you want to do the comical intellectual gymnastics of only counting Northwest flights in 2001 but counting both legacy Northwest and legacy Delta flights in 2012, that's fine - whatever you need to justify.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 102):
The 742 held about 10% fewer passengers than the 744. If you used the 744's capacity against all 747 flights, then your numbers would project a larger -- not smaller -- decline than that of what actually occurred.

I didn't use the 747-400 capacity for the 747-200 flights. At that time, Northwest was in the process of transitioning from a 3-class to 2-class configuration on their 747s, and as such, their website included both configurations for the 747-400, and about 5-6 different configurations for the 747-200 (most of the configurations were quite similar). If I changed my approach, and went with the least-dense configuration for all the 747s - which would also be unrealistic because some of the beach markets were using the higher-density 747-200 configuration - the hub has still shrunk.


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17499 posts, RR: 45
Reply 106, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6082 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 102):
The 742 held about 10% fewer passengers than the 744. If you used the 744's capacity against all 747 flights, then your numbers would project a larger -- not smaller -- decline than that of what actually occurred.
Quoting commavia (Reply 105):
counting Northwest flights in 2001 but counting both legacy Northwest and legacy Delta flights in 2012

For the record, JUL01-JUL12, total OAG NRT DL/NW seats are down 17%, departures are up 21%, and ASMs are down 24%. In other words capacity is down a quarter from JUL01. Adding in HND, which is not really relevant to the NRT hub, the numbers are -11%, +31%, -15% respectively. Aaaaand *scene*.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 107, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6043 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 106):
For the record, JUL01-JUL12, total OAG NRT DL/NW seats are down 17%, departures are up 21%, and ASMs are down 24%. In other words capacity is down a quarter from JUL01. Adding in HND, which is not really relevant to the NRT hub, the numbers are -11%, +31%, -15% respectively. Aaaaand *scene*.

In addition, the original point I was making was that the Narita hub overall has not only seem capacity come down, but most specifically, and most importantly and relevantly to the conversation, the Narita-Asia flying has seen capacity come down. The combined carrier has indeed increased frequency and capacity in some markets - but nearly all of them have been from Narita heading east (just about all have been beach markets like HNL/GUM/SPN as well). On the contrary, nearly every single Narita-Asia market has seen capacity continually decline in the last decade, as Northwest's 747s have been steadily replaced with 777s, A330s, 767s or even 757s.


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5998 times:

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 104):
A pro-forma comparison is absolutely what you should use here, inconvenient as that might be.
Quoting commavia (Reply 105):
the capacity of the hub has shrunk. The shrinkage began before the merger, and it has continued since. If you want to do the comical intellectual gymnastics of only counting Northwest flights in 2001 but counting both legacy Northwest and legacy Delta flights in 2012, that's fine - whatever you need to justify.

If you're comparing capacity trends to argue the relevance of the Narita hub, then it makes no sense to include PMDL's flights from the early 2000s as DL had zero participation in the Narita hub. The only "convenience" is using this information to skew an assertion that isn't true.

As DL not not feed or participate within NW's NRT hub in 2001-2002, I'm not certain how one could argue that the presence of those flights is meaningful in measuring capacity trends / reliance on NRT through the years.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 106):
For the record, JUL01-JUL12, total OAG NRT DL/NW seats are down 17%, departures are up 21%, and ASMs are down 24%. In other words capacity is down a quarter from JUL01. Adding in HND, which is not really relevant to the NRT hub, the numbers are -11%, +31%, -15% respectively. Aaaaand *scene*.

More numbers that include PMDL. I compared the actual numbers above; only rough seat counts can be estimated as in 2001 - as mentioned - NW was standardizing the 742 fleet, much like DL's doing with the 744 today. I don't believe there were any beach market 742 at the time, as there was a lapse in between the retirement of the remaining 741 (which were configured for beach markets) and the conversion of a trio of 742.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 109, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5986 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 87):
Plus, ATL-PVG is not the same as DFW-HKG - AA would have huge hubs at both ends of the route (something Delta did not have),
Quoting commavia (Reply 93):
Nope - no need to put words in my mouth in order to conjure ridiculous things to then pull apart (per usual). China Eastern was a member of SkyTeam for about the last six months of Delta's three-year on-and-off ATL-PVG service. For the vast majority of the time that flight operated, it was not an alliance hub-to-hub route.

Sorry ... read your own post. You claim it was something DL "did not have" - an unconditional statement implying did not have during the entirety of operation, then you flip-flop and say DL did not have during "vast majority" of the time.

No need to put words in your mouth when you refuse to acknowledge what you've posted just minutes prior.

You're right in claiming they're not the same, since ATL-PVG is nearly 500 miles shorter, flown with a more capable plane (77L IIRC), from a larger hub (ATL) to a much larger city (PVG), but you're entirely wrong that DL had no feed on PVG side for 2.5 years : China Southern has a large focus city operation out of PVG, and has been in SkyTeam since 2007.


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17499 posts, RR: 45
Reply 110, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5955 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 108):
More numbers that include PMDL

OK we can play this game. Comparing NW in JUL01 to DL in JUL12 @ NRT yields seats down 8% and ASMs down 10%. We are done here.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 109):
you're entirely wrong that DL had no feed on PVG side for 2.5 years

Chinese carriers aren't particularly good at anything, especially flowing traffic onto other carriers. It's nice to have a partner but at the same time, it's also nice to have a competent one.

Quoting commavia (Reply 107):
On the contrary, nearly every single Narita-Asia market has seen capacity continually decline in the last decade

It's a really tough operation to maintain longterm. They don't have the Japan point of sale penetration for it, and they don't have the hubs in the US to overfly it, while other Asian and US carriers *do* overfly the NRT hub.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 111, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5920 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 110):
OK we can play this game. Comparing NW in JUL01 to DL in JUL12 @ NRT yields seats down 8% and ASMs down 10%. We are done here.

What game are we playing? Above I copied & compared the two timetables, which yield a different answer than your source.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7183 posts, RR: 13
Reply 112, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5920 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 54):
Quoting enilria (Reply 30):
It's definitely moving to JFK. I had already heard they were going to announce a major new int'l route there in conjunction with the promotion of the new terminal

I almost always agree with you, in fact I hesitated even posting back, but I think SEA is a better option, however this does not mean I'm right, I respectfully disagree with you about JFK.

I'm not right 100% of the time when I guess, but my sources usually are. This one isn't a guess. If I'm not mistaken, they have not filed an application regarding the route being discontinued, so it's almost definitely being moved because once they file that document with DOT it will wipe away the value of a media blitz to announce it. If they were simply dropping it they would have filed something already. The only reason to wait to announce the new route is because the announcement is tied to something else...e.g. the terminal opening media blitz. I will grant it is possible they are reallocating the HKG authority to PVG or PEK. I *think* that is allowed under the bilateral, but I don't think that is the case in terms of the plan here...


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7603 posts, RR: 24
Reply 113, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5858 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 109):
China Southern has a large focus city operation out of PVG, and has been in SkyTeam since 2007.

DL has no codeshares on CZ out of PVG.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 114, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5817 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 113):
DL has no codeshares on CZ out of PVG.

As long as they're bookable under a single fare quote then it's fine to the traveler. Just because a particular TAP flight does not contain a SQ code-share doesn't mean it's phantom from the SIN pax's viewpoint.

If I were on delta.com and ATL-DL-PVG-CZ-CTU shows up correctly, then there's no fuss.


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9413 posts, RR: 14
Reply 115, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5835 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 112):
I'm not right 100% of the time when I guess, but my sources usually are. This one isn't a guess. If I'm not mistaken, they have not filed an application regarding the route being discontinued, so it's almost definitely being moved because once they file that document with DOT it will wipe away the value of a media blitz to announce it. If they were simply dropping it they would have filed something already. The only reason to wait to announce the new route is because the announcement is tied to something else...e.g. the terminal opening media blitz. I will grant it is possible they are reallocating the HKG authority to PVG or PEK. I *think* that is allowed under the bilateral, but I don't think that is the case in terms of the plan here...

HKG isn't under the same bilateral as PEK/PVG. It is much, much more easy to get into. (China is easy right now, but normally they have to do DOT route bids)

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 113):

Didn't DL/MU codeshare before MU joined Sky? Thought they did but I may be wrong. (MU also codeshared with AA)



yep.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11623 posts, RR: 61
Reply 116, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5303 times:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 108):
If you're comparing capacity trends to argue the relevance of the Narita hub, then it makes no sense to include PMDL's flights from the early 2000s as DL had zero participation in the Narita hub.

It makes total sense, because otherwise you're claiming that the hub has grown merely because two airlines become one - which is erroneous and false logic.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 108):
As DL not not feed or participate within NW's NRT hub in 2001-2002, I'm not certain how one could argue that the presence of those flights is meaningful in measuring capacity trends / reliance on NRT through the years.

Again - because otherwise the hub has grown merely because two airlines merged. Has Northwest's hub in Memphis shrunk any less because now that hub also has a few more flights per day to ATL, CVG, SLC, etc? Of course not.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 109):
You claim it was something DL "did not have" - an unconditional statement implying did not have during the entirety of operation, then you flip-flop and say DL did not have during "vast majority" of the time.

You're right. I was wrong. For less than 1/5 of the time ATL-PVG operated on and off, Delta had some form of partner at the PVG end. For more than 4/5 of the time the route operated on and off, my statement was accurate - there was no partner hub at the other end. Delta interlined, but of course, every network airline does that just about everywhere.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 114):
As long as they're bookable under a single fare quote then it's fine to the traveler. Just because a particular TAP flight does not contain a SQ code-share doesn't mean it's phantom from the SIN pax's viewpoint.

So mere weeks ago you were arguing that you couldn't combine AA and JAL's joint U.S.-Tokyo schedules because those two airlines only coordinate fares, schedules, pricing and marketing, and split the revenue of their joint schedule evenly, but now the mere presence of an interline - not even a codeshare - is enough to count as a partner hub. Hysterical - but certainly par for the course (reminds me of a certain other person who used to post here).   


User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 117, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4633 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 116):

It makes total sense, because otherwise you're claiming that the hub has grown merely because two airlines become one - which is erroneous and false logic.
Quoting commavia (Reply 116):

Again - because otherwise the hub has grown merely because two airlines merged. Has Northwest's hub in Memphis shrunk any less because now that hub also has a few more flights per day to ATL, CVG, SLC, etc? Of course not.

If DL and AA were to merge, and somebody asserted that DFW hub is one of the few to sustain growth during the 2000s, you'd argue they're wrong since DL's folded hub needs to be taken into consideration?

LOL, the only person it makes "total sense" to is somebody who's attempting to stretch a faux argument. But I do admire your creativity  Smile.

[Edited 2012-06-30 15:12:50]


Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
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...
Delta Suspends JFK-ATH; No US-Greece Service W12? posted Fri May 4 2012 10:22:39 by LAXintl
Delta Suspends New York JFK - Rome posted Fri Apr 27 2012 07:01:06 by miaami
Delta Suspends LAX-RDU posted Sat Sep 25 2010 12:40:18 by MAH4546
Delta - ABQ-DTW A Possibility? posted Sat Aug 7 2010 09:52:31 by 1337Delta764
Delta HNL-DTW Flights posted Wed Mar 3 2010 07:20:25 by TYCOON
Delta Suspends Pilot Charged In Plane Assault posted Thu Nov 12 2009 15:01:11 by 71Zulu
Delta Suspends NRT - Ho Chi Minh City posted Thu Nov 12 2009 12:31:40 by CokePopper
Delta Suspends MCO-MEX posted Thu Oct 30 2008 11:04:00 by MAH4546
Delta Gates @ DTW? posted Wed Nov 30 2005 01:23:44 by Capt.Fantastic
Delta At DTW posted Sat Feb 26 2005 06:45:14 by Masonaries