questions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 560 posts, RR: 1 Posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 11402 times:
After DL conquers New York with it's LGA expansion and new JFK facilities, which market will be its next? Granted there is a lot of operational work to get the dual hub system working and a ton of marketing efforts to get the revenue stream on target. Just wondering what they might go after next. What holes could DL reasonably shore up in its network. Which current alliance partners could indicate an underserved opportunity? What will be the next strategic push?
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 6550 posts, RR: 16 Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 11396 times:
Well given the fact that their earnings have grown significantly, you think they may re-add flights to CVG again? I've heard people tell me that the lobbying for more service out of CVG has been upped since these profitability reports have come out. In particular, service to larger cities which has been shed by the cuts is being lobbied strongly by the greater Cincy business community. According to my dad though it's fallen upon deaf ears- until now. You think after they're done expanding at NYC they'll begin adding back to CVG?
One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6876 posts, RR: 11 Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 11338 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 1): According to my dad though it's fallen upon deaf ears- until now. You think after they're done expanding at NYC they'll begin adding back to CVG?
As it is, DL is pitting LGA against CVG. I don't see them "reviving" anything. There are more and more connection opportunities being offered through LGA that traditionally flew through CVG.
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3): Personally, I think Milwaukee, seeing as they already announced that they would have a greater presence there. Probably not a hub, but maybe a focus city.
MKE is small potatoes. DL saw an opportunity to swallow a very large portion of passengers that had no where to go with the continued downfall of F9 and WN's continued draw-down of FL's "hub" shifting capacity to MDW. Very smart move but dont read too much into what DL's doing there.
Ive said it before and i'll say it again. Once the Concrete Jungle dust settles after 2013, I think DL will refocus on LAX in a bigger way than they have. Marketing wise, it's sort of taken a back seat to the money being dumped into NYC and key European markets. Namely LHR. Having their PR so focused was genius IMHO. They're slowly making strides in LAX although on a small low-key scale. The big sponsorships have been in place for a while. The T5 check-in lobby and gates are currently getting a much needed face-lift that will be ongoing through next year. The network is O.K. They are flying to where people want to go and although very quiet about it, some time back, LAX went all two-class. There are no scheduled 50 seater flights though LAX on DL. They've also been hinting that LatAm and South America will be the new battleground.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
I agree. I feel that both LAX and South/Latin America is the next thing on the 'to do' list. It'll be interesting to see if they start to build up each area simultaneously or not. Most of the "highlights" on dlnet have been about different media/PR events going on in South America and improvements being made in LAX so it's clear they are gearing up for something.
CompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 904 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 11118 times:
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 4): I think DL will refocus on LAX in a bigger way than they have...They've also been hinting that LatAm and South America will be the new battleground.
DL's already pursued LAX unsuccessfully (inaugurating & dropping BDL, RDU, GRU, etc.; even classic markets such as MEX were dumped). Like any other market, LAX will continue to be tinkered with, but I strongly doubt there will be a "big" focus. As it is, the development of NYC and re-creation of the network (with larger jets) are two daunting tasks that will suck capital for years.
Focusing on LatAm & South America from JFK would suck even additional funds. The two markets are largely tapped out from ATL, and DL isn't going to be pursing a FLL/MIA strategy. Development takes time and MIA has too many constraints - not to mention exploding costs within the next few years that would make any venture into S.FL risky.
Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
usdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 826 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 10920 times:
The problem with LAX is that there is little corporate traffic in that area compared to other cities up the coast. Unlike SFO, it does not have the big IT firms to help drive business to Asia, so I'm not sure where the growth will come from. Also, there are so many carriers in LAX competing for both domestic and international business that I'm not sure if new flights (especially domestic) would be that profitable. It seems to me that it might be better for DL to focus on maximizing the flights it has out of NYC and ensuring they are getting the premium business. That might be a more profitable use of resources than a new investment in LAX, especially if those efforts were to attract a lot of low fares that trash yields.
As far as new cities go, I see DL continuing to build its presence in SEA and PDX (what it will do with AS is up in the air). It could also consider strengthening its position at RDU. Those markets are likely more profitable than LAX, although I'm not sure it has had that much luck out of RDU beyond its hub flying.
NWAESC From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 3363 posts, RR: 9 Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 10722 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 1): you think they may re-add flights to CVG again?
I personally don't see it happening. I think they've got CVG optimized to about where it needs to be as far as meeting traffic needs. As others have noted, a lot of the flying that was once done ex- CVG is now done thorugh other hubs.
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3): Personally, I think Milwaukee, seeing as they already announced that they would have a greater presence there.
Maybe a targeted new city or two, and an increase in A/C size, but not much else. JMHO...
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10641 posts, RR: 62 Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 10461 times:
I agree that Delta is like to focus more energy in coming years on LAX and Latin America, although I question how successful they will be at either.
LAX is going to be an uphill climb because that market is just like New York - huge, but highly fragmented with several other very large, strong players, but unlike New York Delta cannot realistically "buy" their market share as they have done to some extent in New York with the slot swap.
In Latin America, I think Delta is going to try and do what every U.S. airline has done, which is to further develop their business in one of the fastest-growing and economically strongest regions in the world in recent years. The challenge I think they will face, however, is that I see little potential for organic growth in ATL beyond the already-substantial growth Delta has had there in the last 10-15 years, which leaves growth from other markets, but all of those other hypothetical markets (like JFK, LAX or, as some on A.net regularly suggest, MIA) area also highly competitive.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 13): UA serves 7 million more passengers per year in the NYC market then DL.
Exactly. 20% of a market constitutes having it "sewn up," especially when another competitor has 25% market share and two others both have more than 10% each?
Again the reason DL is profitable is because theyve abandon places like BOS as focus cities. Expand in BOS and take on JetBlue and Delta loses money. Delta should just keep doing what they're doing and ignore a.net advice and predictions.
commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10641 posts, RR: 62 Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 10219 times:
Quoting panamair (Reply 18): That gap obviously does not reflect the result of the US-DL slot swap.
True, but even with that, Delta still likely won't be as large as United, and JetBlue and AA will still both have substantial market share in New York. Nobody is debating that Delta's market share in New York has been, and is, growing, but calling the market "sewn up" for Delta is just not factual.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1422 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 10116 times:
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 4): As it is, DL is pitting LGA against CVG. I don't see them "reviving" anything. There are more and more connection opportunities being offered through LGA that traditionally flew through CVG.
Quoting NWAESC (Reply 12): I personally don't see it happening. I think they've got CVG optimized to about where it needs to be as far as meeting traffic needs. As others have noted, a lot of the flying that was once done ex- CVG is now done thorugh other hubs.
These are the keys to CVG's coffin being nailed shut - that flying has been replaced by substitute hubs that work just as well if not better for them (esp. DTW, but also spread across the others). Of course DL COULD go back and add flights, but I think substantial additions are out of the question because they've simply gone so far away from that at this point. Shuttering OH is yet another indication. In other words, DL has moved on after the "breakup" with CVG, and has learned how to live without them.
Now all of that said, more service from other carriers is a definite possibility. It will be very interesting to watch how this plays out between the incumbents and new entrants (the long-rumored "inevitable" WN arrival, possible B6, etc.). The key as a CVG fan is to realize that CVG is not and will not be a focus city or otherwise a major station for anyone. However, the future is most certainly looking bright, as DL's stranglehold has been broken, and we are likely to see additional service and new carriers going forward. Eventually CVG will become much more like CMH, where there isn't a hegemonic carrier, but where the overall service offered is excellent and diverse across carriers. But that is a good thing for us. I've said this before and I'll say it again: DL's pulldown leaves numerous opportunities for other carriers to begin making inroads on various routes like DCA, SFO, PHX, ORD, etc. where DL is relatively less strong than LGA, LAX, BOS, and the like.
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 7): With AA in shambles, I smell a MIA hub takeover soon
This was mentioned the other day by someone on here, but the truth is that MIA (both the market and the airport itself) has enough spare capacity for someone else to step up a focus city or minihub anytime they want. It would just take a little effort to do so. Not to say it isn't necessarily more likely due to bk and distraction at AA, but there hasn't been and isn't still anything stopping someone else from doing so.
yellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 5615 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 10070 times:
THere was a long debate in another thread about it ....but MIA MIA MIA......DL wants it bad. Personally, i think they will make a move on it if at all possible, in addition to slowly expanding LAX....
NYC gives them Europe, MIA will give them LatAm/Caribbean and Africa, LAX will give them Asia.....ATL, SLC, DTW and MSP take care of the domestic with some overflow international. And CVG gives them a little gravy.
THat to me sounds like a nice well rounded plan that can withstand shock events that don't involve the entire world. FOr example, crisis in Europe? Lat Am keep the profit going. Asian SARS....Europe keeps DL afloat.
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 3): They've also been hinting that LatAm and South America will be the new battleground.
It already is.
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
OOer From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1410 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9977 times:
My guess is that DL will focus on SEA and BOS next. But there's still lot's of work to do in NYC. Once the economy picks up we can expect some international markets to come back that have gotten the axe in the past 2-3 years.
25 WA707atMSP: When have facts ever gotten in the way of peoples' beliefs on ANet?
26 LHCVG: Word on here is that UA and AA also have qualitative advantage in corporate contracts vs. DL in NYC. This continues to shrink as well, but I think DL
27 CompensateMe: I've never seen any evidence to suggest DL's interested in MIA -- just some ramblings on a.net. ATL can serve most all the non-Florida bound traffic
28 LHCVG: For sure. I never said it would be easy, or that DL specifically would go after it, but MIA could handle another focus city. I agree DL still sits on
29 B727FA: My guess is that at most CVG could see some limited up-gauging of some "major" routes currently run with LRJ's...but it's profitable at its current st
30 Bobloblaw: The days of legacy airlines opening new hubs are over. Delta would lose a bucketload in MIA competing against AA. AA has all the corporate contracts
31 LHCVG: I agree. The point of the statement I referenced was that there doesn't have to be a formal takeover of AA's MIA hub - another airline could simply a
32 yellowtail: I have....unfortunately I cannot share. MLT (DL Vacations) usually negotiates discounts/comissions/net rates 30-40% off the rack...but by they time t
33 totesen: The sad part is that Alaska now has the MEX rights, and they will not get them back. But their parthner AM, has nearly 5 daily from MEX. plus GDL, MT
34 jetlanta: How about posting O&D numbers after a full year of DL LGA ops? The numbers you posted are about as worthless as comparing Pan Am's share to TWA's
35 fxramper: what is this grand expansion you speak of at JFK? outside of a new terminal (not even sure what that is) they dump routes like the flavor of the week.
36 STT757: How much more narrow does DL have to get to "win New Yok"? By excluding EWR they "Win", by not counting O&D they "Win", by coming second place wi
37 Deltal1011man: No. Still has flights to LAX. in the 90s.....hope your not using that to compare anything. errr Delta was already number 2 in NYC before the slot swa