klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:59 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
This whole thread got really stupid again for a little bit there but maybe can get back to something with a little bit of reality.

The overall problem I see on this thread, and also on many of the other a.net threads that turn into a whine-fest about perceived lack of air service, perceived lack of air service development, or perceived feeling their respective airport is being shunning is the understanding of what drives air service growth in 2017.

Too many people on a.net get too emotional over the thought of "exotic" airline liveries, widebodies, "exotic" routes, prestigue routes (that they will never use) but somehow makes them feel better about themselves, or aspects that aren't relevant to the business drivers in the industry.

Whether you like it or not, airlines are for-profit entities. They will do what is best for their business. They will employ a variety of strategies to achieve their operational and financial objectives. This at times may be at odds with what consumers or advocates of a local market think

People put too much blame on airport management for the perceived lack of air service development. They can only work with in the confines of the resources they are given and have to look after the interests of all stakeholders as well. They can't generate demand at a given price point that doesn't exist. They have to balance the requirements of their long-term tenants and customers versus the need for future business development.

People tend to view this too much as black and white or an either/or situation.

A few other points that we've mentioned in other posts all over the place:

LHR - There is more than sufficient supply (seats) to capture the demand at legacy-carrier pricing. Anyone can fill a plane to Europe in peak summer, but its the other 10 months of the year that determine the overall profitability and viability of the route. There could be more demand of a lower-cost carrier were to enter the market with lower fares to stimulate the market. BA isn't going to change that dynamic, and they have the issue of too many larger and/or premium-heavy aircraft other than really a 763 that could serve the market.

ATL - DL's ATL mega-hub is built on the ability to run a large-scale connecting operation using predominantly large narrow-body aircraft 160-200 seats. This uses lower CASM aircraft to move large volumes of people across a hub in a large O&D market. Simply point, DL can move a lot of people and have a huge number of flights to cover the fixed costs of the large hub operaiton

DTW & MSP - while ATL may be the largest overall profit, it has previously been determine that MSP & DTW have some of the higest profit margins in the industry. DL achieves this by keeping capacity relatively low and changing higher fares for such limited capacity in balance with demand.

B6/AS focus cities / hubs - there really is no scenario where this is becomes realistic. Not sure why some on a.net thing this is viable idea.

I guess I just get tired since people argue this thread on both ends.



I understand what you are saying and I'm sure that in your business learned curriculum this all makes sense but the fact of the matter still is the WCAA is doing a very poor job at selling this airport. Also why should DTW travels be paying higher fares just to subsidize other hubs in the Delta network. Why is the WCAA not out there promoting this airport in the public eye do you hear the repeated ads that constantly play about Bishop Airport in the Detroit area but at the WCAA all is quiet since the EK Dubai petition there has be no public initiative as far as drumming up support or bringing new service conducted by the WCAA so please don't defend them in say they are doing a good job and please don't say airlines don't listen to that because doing something is better than doing nothing in my view. I see nothing in the media about the WCAA wanting to bring more low fare options to Detroit and drumming up support with that imitative. I agree that DTW may be a hard sale it doesn't mean you fold up and do nothing it means you try harder I also bring up the fact that Detroit is one of the biggest manufacturing base in the United States but yet they is not one dedicated cargo flight operating out of this airport and please don't say UPS, FEDEX and DHL because those are not dedicated bulk cargo carriers. We all have our point of views no one person is more right or wrong than the other and since the WCAA is our voice to adding new service to Detroit and presenting it's case that is where the blame must lie. I truly believe that if the WCAA doesn't land one of these low coast European airline for the 2018 summer season that window will also be closed leaving Detroiters no other option but driving to YYZ and ORD to get affordable fares if they want travel with their family back home for a summer vacation with family a very sad thought in this day and age when just 10 to 15 years ago that was not the case so if anything this market has regressed instead of progressed as far as the customer is concerned. One other thing to mention when you don't agree with the point of view expressed here it is silly or irrelevant something which you have never heard me say about your views in this market.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
Midwestindy
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 1:53 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
This whole thread got really stupid again for a little bit there but maybe can get back to something with a little bit of reality.

The overall problem I see on this thread, and also on many of the other a.net threads that turn into a whine-fest about perceived lack of air service, perceived lack of air service development, or perceived feeling their respective airport is being shunning is the understanding of what drives air service growth in 2017.

Too many people on a.net get too emotional over the thought of "exotic" airline liveries, widebodies, "exotic" routes, prestigue routes (that they will never use) but somehow makes them feel better about themselves, or aspects that aren't relevant to the business drivers in the industry.

Whether you like it or not, airlines are for-profit entities. They will do what is best for their business. They will employ a variety of strategies to achieve their operational and financial objectives. This at times may be at odds with what consumers or advocates of a local market think

People put too much blame on airport management for the perceived lack of air service development. They can only work with in the confines of the resources they are given and have to look after the interests of all stakeholders as well. They can't generate demand at a given price point that doesn't exist. They have to balance the requirements of their long-term tenants and customers versus the need for future business development.

People tend to view this too much as black and white or an either/or situation.

A few other points that we've mentioned in other posts all over the place:

LHR - There is more than sufficient supply (seats) to capture the demand at legacy-carrier pricing. Anyone can fill a plane to Europe in peak summer, but its the other 10 months of the year that determine the overall profitability and viability of the route. There could be more demand of a lower-cost carrier were to enter the market with lower fares to stimulate the market. BA isn't going to change that dynamic, and they have the issue of too many larger and/or premium-heavy aircraft other than really a 763 that could serve the market.

ATL - DL's ATL mega-hub is built on the ability to run a large-scale connecting operation using predominantly large narrow-body aircraft 160-200 seats. This uses lower CASM aircraft to move large volumes of people across a hub in a large O&D market. Simply point, DL can move a lot of people and have a huge number of flights to cover the fixed costs of the large hub operaiton

DTW & MSP - while ATL may be the largest overall profit, it has previously been determine that MSP & DTW have some of the higest profit margins in the industry. DL achieves this by keeping capacity relatively low and changing higher fares for such limited capacity in balance with demand.

B6/AS focus cities / hubs - there really is no scenario where this is becomes realistic. Not sure why some on a.net thing this is viable idea.

I guess I just get tired since people argue this thread on both ends.


Oh I'm sorry I guess you know everything about everything, and I guess no one should have discussions on this thread since everyone else's opinions mean nothing. If you get this irritated when people are having these types of discussions, you won't last on this thread. Relax! :roll:
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:08 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
This whole thread got really stupid again for a little bit there but maybe can get back to something with a little bit of reality.

The overall problem I see on this thread, and also on many of the other a.net threads that turn into a whine-fest about perceived lack of air service, perceived lack of air service development, or perceived feeling their respective airport is being shunning is the understanding of what drives air service growth in 2017.

Too many people on a.net get too emotional over the thought of "exotic" airline liveries, widebodies, "exotic" routes, prestigue routes (that they will never use) but somehow makes them feel better about themselves, or aspects that aren't relevant to the business drivers in the industry.

Whether you like it or not, airlines are for-profit entities. They will do what is best for their business. They will employ a variety of strategies to achieve their operational and financial objectives. This at times may be at odds with what consumers or advocates of a local market think

People put too much blame on airport management for the perceived lack of air service development. They can only work with in the confines of the resources they are given and have to look after the interests of all stakeholders as well. They can't generate demand at a given price point that doesn't exist. They have to balance the requirements of their long-term tenants and customers versus the need for future business development.

People tend to view this too much as black and white or an either/or situation.

A few other points that we've mentioned in other posts all over the place:

LHR - There is more than sufficient supply (seats) to capture the demand at legacy-carrier pricing. Anyone can fill a plane to Europe in peak summer, but its the other 10 months of the year that determine the overall profitability and viability of the route. There could be more demand of a lower-cost carrier were to enter the market with lower fares to stimulate the market. BA isn't going to change that dynamic, and they have the issue of too many larger and/or premium-heavy aircraft other than really a 763 that could serve the market.

ATL - DL's ATL mega-hub is built on the ability to run a large-scale connecting operation using predominantly large narrow-body aircraft 160-200 seats. This uses lower CASM aircraft to move large volumes of people across a hub in a large O&D market. Simply point, DL can move a lot of people and have a huge number of flights to cover the fixed costs of the large hub operaiton

DTW & MSP - while ATL may be the largest overall profit, it has previously been determine that MSP & DTW have some of the higest profit margins in the industry. DL achieves this by keeping capacity relatively low and changing higher fares for such limited capacity in balance with demand.

B6/AS focus cities / hubs - there really is no scenario where this is becomes realistic. Not sure why some on a.net thing this is viable idea.

I guess I just get tired since people argue this thread on both ends.


Oh I'm sorry I guess you know everything about everything, and I guess no one should have discussions on this thread since everyone else's opinions mean nothing. If you get this irritated when people are having these types of discussions, you won't last on this thread. Relax! :roll:

I'd hardly call it a discussion. It's all basically the same
DTW fanboy: "DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [WCAA/DL/other airline] is shafting DTW"
Non-fanboy: "No, DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [prestigious service] wouldn't work for DTW"
Then, non-facts and pseudo-facts get thrown around by both sides, and ant vestige of legitimate discussion gets drowned in the flamefight
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
Midwestindy
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:38 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
This whole thread got really stupid again for a little bit there but maybe can get back to something with a little bit of reality.

The overall problem I see on this thread, and also on many of the other a.net threads that turn into a whine-fest about perceived lack of air service, perceived lack of air service development, or perceived feeling their respective airport is being shunning is the understanding of what drives air service growth in 2017.

Too many people on a.net get too emotional over the thought of "exotic" airline liveries, widebodies, "exotic" routes, prestigue routes (that they will never use) but somehow makes them feel better about themselves, or aspects that aren't relevant to the business drivers in the industry.

Whether you like it or not, airlines are for-profit entities. They will do what is best for their business. They will employ a variety of strategies to achieve their operational and financial objectives. This at times may be at odds with what consumers or advocates of a local market think

People put too much blame on airport management for the perceived lack of air service development. They can only work with in the confines of the resources they are given and have to look after the interests of all stakeholders as well. They can't generate demand at a given price point that doesn't exist. They have to balance the requirements of their long-term tenants and customers versus the need for future business development.

People tend to view this too much as black and white or an either/or situation.

A few other points that we've mentioned in other posts all over the place:

LHR - There is more than sufficient supply (seats) to capture the demand at legacy-carrier pricing. Anyone can fill a plane to Europe in peak summer, but its the other 10 months of the year that determine the overall profitability and viability of the route. There could be more demand of a lower-cost carrier were to enter the market with lower fares to stimulate the market. BA isn't going to change that dynamic, and they have the issue of too many larger and/or premium-heavy aircraft other than really a 763 that could serve the market.

ATL - DL's ATL mega-hub is built on the ability to run a large-scale connecting operation using predominantly large narrow-body aircraft 160-200 seats. This uses lower CASM aircraft to move large volumes of people across a hub in a large O&D market. Simply point, DL can move a lot of people and have a huge number of flights to cover the fixed costs of the large hub operaiton

DTW & MSP - while ATL may be the largest overall profit, it has previously been determine that MSP & DTW have some of the higest profit margins in the industry. DL achieves this by keeping capacity relatively low and changing higher fares for such limited capacity in balance with demand.

B6/AS focus cities / hubs - there really is no scenario where this is becomes realistic. Not sure why some on a.net thing this is viable idea.

I guess I just get tired since people argue this thread on both ends.


Oh I'm sorry I guess you know everything about everything, and I guess no one should have discussions on this thread since everyone else's opinions mean nothing. If you get this irritated when people are having these types of discussions, you won't last on this thread. Relax! :roll:

I'd hardly call it a discussion. It's all basically the same
DTW fanboy: "DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [WCAA/DL/other airline] is shafting DTW"
Non-fanboy: "No, DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [prestigious service] wouldn't work for DTW"
Then, non-facts and pseudo-facts get thrown around by both sides, and ant vestige of legitimate discussion gets drowned in the flamefight


Definition of discussion:"a conversation or debate about a certain topic." It seems like a discussion to me.

I beg to differ, I have sat back on this thread for the last couple months watching these discussions take place. If you watch this thread, basically anytime anyone suggests that DTW deserves more service, the same few DTW haters come out and bash the airport and the economic state of the metro. Then the DTW advocates have to defend themselves, and when they provide facts and insight on the actual state of the detroit metro, their facts are accussed of being false (even though they are the ones who are from the city, so therefore they know Detroit better than the average outsider).

This is a Detroit Air Service Discussion, if it irritates you so much that people are discussing Detroit air service you are welcome to leave, no one is stopping you.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:46 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:

Oh I'm sorry I guess you know everything about everything, and I guess no one should have discussions on this thread since everyone else's opinions mean nothing. If you get this irritated when people are having these types of discussions, you won't last on this thread. Relax! :roll:

I'd hardly call it a discussion. It's all basically the same
DTW fanboy: "DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [WCAA/DL/other airline] is shafting DTW"
Non-fanboy: "No, DTW doesn't have [prestigious service] because [prestigious service] wouldn't work for DTW"
Then, non-facts and pseudo-facts get thrown around by both sides, and ant vestige of legitimate discussion gets drowned in the flamefight


Definition of discussion:"a conversation or debate about a certain topic." It seems like a discussion to me.

I beg to differ, I have sat back on this thread for the last couple months watching these discussions take place. If you watch this thread, basically anytime anyone suggests that DTW deserves more service, the same few DTW haters come out and bash the airport and the economic state of the metro. Then the DTW advocates have to defend themselves, and when they provide facts and insight on the actual state of the detroit metro, their facts are accussed of being false (even though they are the ones who are from the city, so therefore they know Detroit better than the average outsider).

This is a Detroit Air Service Discussion, if it irritates you so much that people are discussing Detroit air service you are welcome to leave, no one is stopping you.

I've yet to see anyone bash the airport, only bring up the fact that the city still suffers from high unemployment, urban blight, high crime rates, and poverty. That condition is part of the reason why Detroit is less likely to receive some services than other cities.
We bring it up two times
1: When we need to explain why some prestige route won't work
2: When you think the reason DTW doesn't have some service is some Delta bias against Detroit.
I can't recall seeing a single fact or stat come out of the Detroit fanboys like klm, only "x hates Detroit."
I would love to discuss the viability of actual DTW routes, instead of spending months repeating the same points about why British, WOW, and Norwegian aren't going to serve Detroit.
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
reasonable
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 2:27 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:47 pm

There is a glimmer of reasonable discussion on this thread. I implore those people who are fact-based, objective, and friendly to continue the conversation and to simply ignore those users who troll or try to provoke with juvenile playground tactics.

The WCAA publishes passenger figures each month. There is incredible data in here that can be used to ask relevant questions and to encourage reasonable conversation about the dynamics—economic, social, and otherwise—of DTW and the region that it serves, contributes to, and draws business from.

Whether they're trolls or cheerleaders, the pathetically insecure geekboys who use this board as a proxy for their internal destitution should just be ignored.
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:49 pm

flymco753 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
I've never flown an ME carrier nor do I plan to, but QR doesn't put their money where their mouth is, they'll say that they want to fly somewhere to scare DL, they won't actually do it. Etihad has been done growing for a while, and TK IMHO would more than likely shaft RJ. The only thing is, from data pulled in the MIDT, RJ should try 4x weekly as opposed to 2x weekly.



But the reality is QR has added every city it said it would except Detroit.
Honestly, EK would be the glass slipper to DTW's options for the Arabian Peninsula, and the India area. DXB is a much more appealing airport to connect through as opposed to DOH. If you have a long connection somewhere why not go out and experience what the city has to offer and I think people would choose DXB over DOH. On top of that it would make DL mad which isn't a great thing.


I agree 100% about EK but when it becomes pretty clear they are not adding your city then you should do everything you can to court the airline that is throwing your name out there because a lessor option is better than no option at all at that is where we are at now.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:58 pm

klm617 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
klm617 wrote:


But the reality is QR has added every city it said it would except Detroit.
Honestly, EK would be the glass slipper to DTW's options for the Arabian Peninsula, and the India area. DXB is a much more appealing airport to connect through as opposed to DOH. If you have a long connection somewhere why not go out and experience what the city has to offer and I think people would choose DXB over DOH. On top of that it would make DL mad which isn't a great thing.


I agree 100% about EK but when it becomes pretty clear they are not adding your city then you should do everything you can to court the airline that is throwing your name out there because a lessor option is better than no option at all at that is where we are at now.

This flight isn't the best use of EK resources, which is why it isn't going to happen now. In order for it to happen, WCAA will have to throw incentives at EK to make the flight a better use of resources. The question, then, is whether granting these incentives is the best use of WCAA resources
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
compensateme
Posts: 2000
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 5:29 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
I've yet to see anyone bash the airport, only bring up the fact that the city still suffers from high unemployment, urban blight, high crime rates, and poverty. That condition is part of the reason why Detroit is less likely to receive some services than other cities.
We bring it up two times
1: When we need to explain why some prestige route won't work
2: When you think the reason DTW doesn't have some service is some Delta bias against Detroit.
I can't recall seeing a single fact or stat come out of the Detroit fanboys like klm, only "x hates Detroit."
I would love to discuss the viability of actual DTW routes, instead of spending months repeating the same points about why British, WOW, and Norwegian aren't going to serve Detroit.


1) Many of us have provided you with facts, you've just chosen to ignore them. For example, you've called DTW's recovery "pathetic" whereas I've pointed out that it's remarkable DTW's local traffic fully recovered, despite the hardships the region's faced; it's also pretty remarkable that compered to some hubs like MSP, the gap in O/D hasn't changed much in 20 years despite the two different directions the local economies have taken.

2) Those of us not participating in klm's sidebars have presented well constructed, well articulated posts. Nearly half the threads on the front page of the forum at any given time are dedicated to discussing future airlines / routes / etc. at specific airports. In the many years I've spent on these fourms, I could never understand the foolhardiness in discussing the possibility of CLT becoming a duel-hub while simultaneously making it a sin to discuss the mystery of why UA is avoiding adding DTW/SFO (as was previously the case). Ultimately, this is a discussion forum offered for entertainment purposes and all of us are spending (what should be) free time here.

3) If you can articulate an argument to counter ours, I'd love to hear it. For example, I've long maintained that it was a mystery DTW/LAX has long been a monopoly NW-DL route (with seasonal NK competition, although it's since expanded to year-round) whereas MSY/LAX (at one point) featured five carriers, more flights, more seats (even though it lacked a hub), less than half the local traffic and significantly lower fares. It me or somebody else wants to discuss that, that's our choice. If you want to counter it with fact, that's your choice and I'd love to hear it. Instead, you retort to "duh, I saw on CNN where the city of Detroit went bankrupt and people buy homes for $1. That's part of the reason why." Never mind the fact that Detroit hasn't been the economic engine of Metro Detroit in nearly 40 years, and the city demographics have long trended on the wrong side for air travel. But guess what? There's a whole world outside the city -- something your Google education didn't teach you.

4) Corporate travel is the primary driver for legacy passenger services, not sexy or wealthy cities and certainly not cargo.

ASQ400 wrote:
This flight isn't the best use of EK resources, which is why it isn't going to happen now. In order for it to happen, WCAA will have to throw incentives at EK to make the flight a better use of resources. The question, then, is whether granting these incentives is the best use of WCAA resources


Many of us could easily make an argument that DTW would be a pretty good use of EK's resources.

Just my analogy: in my working career, for awhile I specialized in assisting distressed businesses in Los Angeles -- people who pursued the California dream, overlooking the opportunities that existed elsewhere in the country to be another face in an overly crowded, expensive market to operate in. They were intrigued because Los Angeles offered high risk, high reward. Unfortunately, they underestimate how high that risk is.
You're not the CEO; you were a menial aircraft support mechanic intern, and that was four years ago.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:47 pm

compensateme wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
I've yet to see anyone bash the airport, only bring up the fact that the city still suffers from high unemployment, urban blight, high crime rates, and poverty. That condition is part of the reason why Detroit is less likely to receive some services than other cities.
We bring it up two times
1: When we need to explain why some prestige route won't work
2: When you think the reason DTW doesn't have some service is some Delta bias against Detroit.
I can't recall seeing a single fact or stat come out of the Detroit fanboys like klm, only "x hates Detroit."
I would love to discuss the viability of actual DTW routes, instead of spending months repeating the same points about why British, WOW, and Norwegian aren't going to serve Detroit.


1) Many of us have provided you with facts, you've just chosen to ignore them. For examplqe, you've called DTW's recovery "pathetic" whereas I've pointed out that it's remarkable DTW's local traffic fully recovered, despite the hardships the region's faced; it's also pretty remarkable that compered to some hubs like MSP, the gap in O/D hasn't changed much in 20 years despite the two different directions the local economies have taken.

2) Those of us not participating in klm's sidebars have presented well constructed, well articulated posts. Nearly half the threads on the front page of the forum at any given time are dedicated to discussing future airlines / routes / etc. at specific airports. In the many years I've spent on these fourms, I could never understand the foolhardiness in discussing the possibility of CLT becoming a duel-hub while simultaneously making it a sin to discuss the mystery of why UA is avoiding adding DTW/SFO (as was previously the case). Ultimately, this is a discussion forum offered for entertainment purposes and all of us are spending (what should be) free time here.

3) If you can articulate an argument to counter ours, I'd love to hear it. For example, I've long maintained that it was a mystery DTW/LAX has long been a monopoly NW-DL route (with seasonal NK competition, although it's since expanded to year-round) whereas MSY/LAX (at one point) featured five carriers, more flights, more seats (even though it lacked a hub), less than half the local traffic and significantly lower fares. It me or somebody else wants to discuss that, that's our choice. If you want to counter it with fact, that's your choice and I'd love to hear it. Instead, you retort to "duh, I saw on CNN where the city of Detroit went bankrupt and people buy homes for $1. That's part of the reason why." Never mind the fact that Detroit hasn't been the economic engine of Metro Detroit in nearly 40 years, and the city demographics have long trended on the wrong side for air travel. But guess what? There's a whole world outside the city -- something your Google education didn't teach you.

4) Corporate travel is the primary driver for legacy passenger services, not sexy or wealthy cities and certainly not cargo.

ASQ400 wrote:
This flight isn't the best use of EK resources, which is why it isn't going to happen now. In order for it to happen, WCAA will have to throw incentives at EK to make the flight a better use of resources. The question, then, is whether granting these incentives is the best use of WCAA resources


Many of us could easily make an argument that DTW would be a pretty good use of EK's resources.

Just my analogy: in my working career, for awhile I specialized in assisting distressed businesses in Los Angeles -- people who pursued the California dream, overlooking the opportunities that existed elsewhere in the country to be another face in an overly crowded, expensive market to operate in. They were intrigued because Los Angeles offered high risk, high reward. Unfortunately, they underestimate how high that risk is.

So now I guess reading articles on the Economist and other news outlets about Detroit's recovery is not valid research? If you really want to see why I find the Detroit area (SE Mich and Detroit itself) to be so poor, you can go ahead and look at outer neighborhoods of Detroit, or at Flint. The reason air service in these areas isn't growing is that Detroit, Flint, and the whole rust belt for that matter can't match the growth of other areas.
The one stat I've seen from you or any DTW person is that average wages in Detroit are rising. That stat needs to be considered jointly with the rising unemployment​ rate in order to explain why it's not impressive.
The front page is full of dumb ideas, but the idea that Detroit should be a more important hub than Atlanta is a more prevalent one. The more people repeat a dumb idea (like has been going on in this thread), the more people hate said idea.
As for the EK example, we've been getting strong indication that America isn't good on them. They've downgauged and cut DXB-USA flights left and right (JFK, MCO, SFO, etc), presumably due to US foreign policy. I see no reason why Detroit is immune to the effects their entire NA network seems to be feeling. EK are focusing less on North America and more on Europe, and somehow I doubt Detroit will be the exception.
Now for your long-maintained claim about DTW-LAX. Has anyone made a counterpoint to it? Did you seriously consider that counterpoint?
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:07 pm

Now I'll actually address DTW-LAX.
This route connects a Delta fortress hub, to an airport where US3+AS/VX have hubs, in a metro where basically every US airline has a strong presence. It's a route between DL's hub and everyone's hub.
Normal routes between hubs of different airlines (let's say IAH-SLC) have an even dynamic. UA has the lion's share of IAH point of sale, DL has a similar chunk of SLC point of sale, so they're basically even.
DTW-LAX is different. Delta has a strong grip on DTW point of sale (frustrated mostly by NK), but no other airline has a dominant hold on the LAX end. Thus, the only way anyone can grab up a big chunk of the market is by offering fares so low that they penetrate the shell of DL's base. Only a ULCC can do that.
SFO-DTW service, on the other hand, makes sense because UA has a strong base in the bay area, and has superior connections from SFO to Asia, that can make the route work, especially as DL's TPAC network is getting shaken up
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:24 pm

compensateme wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
I've yet to see anyone bash the airport, only bring up the fact that the city still suffers from high unemployment, urban blight, high crime rates, and poverty. That condition is part of the reason why Detroit is less likely to receive some services than other cities.
We bring it up two times
1: When we need to explain why some prestige route won't work
2: When you think the reason DTW doesn't have some service is some Delta bias against Detroit.
I can't recall seeing a single fact or stat come out of the Detroit fanboys like klm, only "x hates Detroit."
I would love to discuss the viability of actual DTW routes, instead of spending months repeating the same points about why British, WOW, and Norwegian aren't going to serve Detroit.


1) Many of us have provided you with facts, you've just chosen to ignore them. For example, you've called DTW's recovery "pathetic" whereas I've pointed out that it's remarkable DTW's local traffic fully recovered, despite the hardships the region's faced; it's also pretty remarkable that compered to some hubs like MSP, the gap in O/D hasn't changed much in 20 years despite the two different directions the local economies have taken.

2) Those of us not participating in klm's sidebars have presented well constructed, well articulated posts. Nearly half the threads on the front page of the forum at any given time are dedicated to discussing future airlines / routes / etc. at specific airports. In the many years I've spent on these fourms, I could never understand the foolhardiness in discussing the possibility of CLT becoming a duel-hub while simultaneously making it a sin to discuss the mystery of why UA is avoiding adding DTW/SFO (as was previously the case). Ultimately, this is a discussion forum offered for entertainment purposes and all of us are spending (what should be) free time here.

3) If you can articulate an argument to counter ours, I'd love to hear it. For example, I've long maintained that it was a mystery DTW/LAX has long been a monopoly NW-DL route (with seasonal NK competition, although it's since expanded to year-round) whereas MSY/LAX (at one point) featured five carriers, more flights, more seats (even though it lacked a hub), less than half the local traffic and significantly lower fares. It me or somebody else wants to discuss that, that's our choice. If you want to counter it with fact, that's your choice and I'd love to hear it. Instead, you retort to "duh, I saw on CNN where the city of Detroit went bankrupt and people buy homes for $1. That's part of the reason why." Never mind the fact that Detroit hasn't been the economic engine of Metro Detroit in nearly 40 years, and the city demographics have long trended on the wrong side for air travel. But guess what? There's a whole world outside the city -- something your Google education didn't teach you.

4) Corporate travel is the primary driver for legacy passenger services, not sexy or wealthy cities and certainly not cargo.

ASQ400 wrote:
This flight isn't the best use of EK resources, which is why it isn't going to happen now. In order for it to happen, WCAA will have to throw incentives at EK to make the flight a better use of resources. The question, then, is whether granting these incentives is the best use of WCAA resources


Many of us could easily make an argument that DTW would be a pretty good use of EK's resources.

Just my analogy: in my working career, for awhile I specialized in assisting distressed businesses in Los Angeles -- people who pursued the California dream, overlooking the opportunities that existed elsewhere in the country to be another face in an overly crowded, expensive market to operate in. They were intrigued because Los Angeles offered high risk, high reward. Unfortunately, they underestimate how high that risk is.



Thank you for the honorable mention. Please remember it is I who started this Detroit thread when all the others burned out after less than 20 replies. So your welcome in advance of your thank you. We all don't have to agree but we do have to respect each others point of view whether you agree with it or not.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:39 pm

klm617 wrote:
compensateme wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
I've yet to see anyone bash the airport, only bring up the fact that the city still suffers from high unemployment, urban blight, high crime rates, and poverty. That condition is part of the reason why Detroit is less likely to receive some services than other cities.
We bring it up two times
1: When we need to explain why some prestige route won't work
2: When you think the reason DTW doesn't have some service is some Delta bias against Detroit.
I can't recall seeing a single fact or stat come out of the Detroit fanboys like klm, only "x hates Detroit."
I would love to discuss the viability of actual DTW routes, instead of spending months repeating the same points about why British, WOW, and Norwegian aren't going to serve Detroit.


1) Many of us have provided you with facts, you've just chosen to ignore them. For example, you've called DTW's recovery "pathetic" whereas I've pointed out that it's remarkable DTW's local traffic fully recovered, despite the hardships the region's faced; it's also pretty remarkable that compered to some hubs like MSP, the gap in O/D hasn't changed much in 20 years despite the two different directions the local economies have taken.

2) Those of us not participating in klm's sidebars have presented well constructed, well articulated posts. Nearly half the threads on the front page of the forum at any given time are dedicated to discussing future airlines / routes / etc. at specific airports. In the many years I've spent on these fourms, I could never understand the foolhardiness in discussing the possibility of CLT becoming a duel-hub while simultaneously making it a sin to discuss the mystery of why UA is avoiding adding DTW/SFO (as was previously the case). Ultimately, this is a discussion forum offered for entertainment purposes and all of us are spending (what should be) free time here.

3) If you can articulate an argument to counter ours, I'd love to hear it. For example, I've long maintained that it was a mystery DTW/LAX has long been a monopoly NW-DL route (with seasonal NK competition, although it's since expanded to year-round) whereas MSY/LAX (at one point) featured five carriers, more flights, more seats (even though it lacked a hub), less than half the local traffic and significantly lower fares. It me or somebody else wants to discuss that, that's our choice. If you want to counter it with fact, that's your choice and I'd love to hear it. Instead, you retort to "duh, I saw on CNN where the city of Detroit went bankrupt and people buy homes for $1. That's part of the reason why." Never mind the fact that Detroit hasn't been the economic engine of Metro Detroit in nearly 40 years, and the city demographics have long trended on the wrong side for air travel. But guess what? There's a whole world outside the city -- something your Google education didn't teach you.

4) Corporate travel is the primary driver for legacy passenger services, not sexy or wealthy cities and certainly not cargo.

ASQ400 wrote:
This flight isn't the best use of EK resources, which is why it isn't going to happen now. In order for it to happen, WCAA will have to throw incentives at EK to make the flight a better use of resources. The question, then, is whether granting these incentives is the best use of WCAA resources


Many of us could easily make an argument that DTW would be a pretty good use of EK's resources.

Just my analogy: in my working career, for awhile I specialized in assisting distressed businesses in Los Angeles -- people who pursued the California dream, overlooking the opportunities that existed elsewhere in the country to be another face in an overly crowded, expensive market to operate in. They were intrigued because Los Angeles offered high risk, high reward. Unfortunately, they underestimate how high that risk is.



Thank you for the honorable mention. Please remember it is I who started this Detroit thread when all the others burned out after less than 20 replies. So your welcome in advance of your thank you. We all don't have to agree but we do have to respect each others point of view whether you agree with it or not.

Have you heard your point of view? You go around with even less facts than I, accusing everything and anything of wanting to shaft Detroit. That puts you about 1 tier worse than the other fanboys
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
compensateme
Posts: 2000
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:48 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
So now I guess reading articles on the Economist and other news outlets about Detroit's recovery is not valid research? If you really want to see why I find the Detroit area (SE Mich and Detroit itself) to be so poor, you can go ahead and look at outer neighborhoods of Detroit, or at Flint. The reason air service in these areas isn't growing is that Detroit, Flint, and the whole rust belt for that matter can't match the growth of other areas.
The one stat I've seen from you or any DTW person is that average wages in Detroit are rising. That stat needs to be considered jointly with the rising unemployment​ rate in order to explain why it's not impressive.


1) Please cite your research from the Economist or other credible, respected that concludes Metro Detroit's recovery is "pathetic." I can pretty much guarantee you it doesn't exist, you'll try to spin some garbage and when you fall flat on your face you'll retort to comparing Metro Detroit to Dallas Metroplex as a last ditch effort to "prove" your point. Gotta remember, you're dealing with people smarter than you that can call your buff and have been around long enough to know how the games are played.

2) Nobody has ever suggested that DTW is a more important hub than ATL. Some DTW and MSP-based flyers are distaunt over DL's obsession in flowing everything via ATL; reality is, there will be a market correction -- conditions will change (e.g. fuel go up and it will no longer be desirable for DL to flow passengers BWI-ATL-SEA), DL will balk at indirectly paying for billions in expansion cost at ATL, etc.

As for the EK example, we've been getting strong indication that America isn't good on them. They've downgauged and cut DXB-USA flights left and right (JFK, MCO, SFO, etc), presumably due to US foreign policy. I see no reason why Detroit is immune to the effects their entire NA network seems to be feeling. EK are focusing less on North America and more on Europe, and somehow I doubt Detroit will be the exception.


Gee, maybe the problem isn't that "America isn't good on them," maybe the problem is that EK's attempting to dump capacity into already overstaturated markets.

ASQ400 wrote:
Now I'll actually address DTW-LAX.
This route connects a Delta fortress hub, to an airport where US3+AS/VX have hubs, in a metro where basically every US airline has a strong presence. It's a route between DL's hub and everyone's hub.
Normal routes between hubs of different airlines (let's say IAH-SLC) have an even dynamic. UA has the lion's share of IAH point of sale, DL has a similar chunk of SLC point of sale, so they're basically even.
DTW-LAX is different. Delta has a strong grip on DTW point of sale (frustrated mostly by NK), but no other airline has a dominant hold on the LAX end. Thus, the only way anyone can grab up a big chunk of the market is by offering fares so low that they penetrate the shell of DL's base. Only a ULCC can do that.
SFO-DTW service, on the other hand, makes sense because UA has a strong base in the bay area, and has superior connections from SFO to Asia, that can make the route work, especially as DL's TPAC network is getting shaken up


...except that DL does not dominate LAX POS, which is about half the DTW/LAX market.
You're not the CEO; you were a menial aircraft support mechanic intern, and that was four years ago.
 
compensateme
Posts: 2000
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:49 pm

Trying to change the direction of this thread...

For those of you who've beginning for regular DL A321 service, it looks like the type will take over half the DTW/LAX flights next winter, in addition to service to PHX & PDX. Might be others -- I didn't really bother to check.
You're not the CEO; you were a menial aircraft support mechanic intern, and that was four years ago.
 
11725Flyer
Posts: 661
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:57 pm

I really wish I were a moderator. I would delete this thread, start over, then watch it so it becomes an exchange of ideas and information, not insults and accusations.
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:02 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
compensateme wrote:

1) Many of us have provided you with facts, you've just chosen to ignore them. For example, you've called DTW's recovery "pathetic" whereas I've pointed out that it's remarkable DTW's local traffic fully recovered, despite the hardships the region's faced; it's also pretty remarkable that compered to some hubs like MSP, the gap in O/D hasn't changed much in 20 years despite the two different directions the local economies have taken.

2) Those of us not participating in klm's sidebars have presented well constructed, well articulated posts. Nearly half the threads on the front page of the forum at any given time are dedicated to discussing future airlines / routes / etc. at specific airports. In the many years I've spent on these fourms, I could never understand the foolhardiness in discussing the possibility of CLT becoming a duel-hub while simultaneously making it a sin to discuss the mystery of why UA is avoiding adding DTW/SFO (as was previously the case). Ultimately, this is a discussion forum offered for entertainment purposes and all of us are spending (what should be) free time here.

3) If you can articulate an argument to counter ours, I'd love to hear it. For example, I've long maintained that it was a mystery DTW/LAX has long been a monopoly NW-DL route (with seasonal NK competition, although it's since expanded to year-round) whereas MSY/LAX (at one point) featured five carriers, more flights, more seats (even though it lacked a hub), less than half the local traffic and significantly lower fares. It me or somebody else wants to discuss that, that's our choice. If you want to counter it with fact, that's your choice and I'd love to hear it. Instead, you retort to "duh, I saw on CNN where the city of Detroit went bankrupt and people buy homes for $1. That's part of the reason why." Never mind the fact that Detroit hasn't been the economic engine of Metro Detroit in nearly 40 years, and the city demographics have long trended on the wrong side for air travel. But guess what? There's a whole world outside the city -- something your Google education didn't teach you.

4) Corporate travel is the primary driver for legacy passenger services, not sexy or wealthy cities and certainly not cargo.



Many of us could easily make an argument that DTW would be a pretty good use of EK's resources.

Just my analogy: in my working career, for awhile I specialized in assisting distressed businesses in Los Angeles -- people who pursued the California dream, overlooking the opportunities that existed elsewhere in the country to be another face in an overly crowded, expensive market to operate in. They were intrigued because Los Angeles offered high risk, high reward. Unfortunately, they underestimate how high that risk is.



Thank you for the honorable mention. Please remember it is I who started this Detroit thread when all the others burned out after less than 20 replies. So your welcome in advance of your thank you. We all don't have to agree but we do have to respect each others point of view whether you agree with it or not.

Have you heard your point of view? You go around with even less facts than I, accusing everything and anything of wanting to shaft Detroit. That puts you about 1 tier worse than the other fanboys


All you have to do is go out to the airport and see what's going on that should be proof enough. Very little competitive growth not to mention growth by our hub carrier is almost nonexistent and that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to market the airport effectively or maybe they should bring a firm in that can market DTW effectively. There is a lot of potential in this market that is not being captured due to leakage because of lack of low fare options in the Detroit market. Most other airports around the country the size of DTW have more LCC and ULCC seats it their respective markets than Detroit does and as far as movements CVG is way ahead of Detroit and even has more choice now because of Delta greatly reducing service there..
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:06 pm

compensateme wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
So now I guess reading articles on the Economist and other news outlets about Detroit's recovery is not valid research? If you really want to see why I find the Detroit area (SE Mich and Detroit itself) to be so poor, you can go ahead and look at outer neighborhoods of Detroit, or at Flint. The reason air service in these areas isn't growing is that Detroit, Flint, and the whole rust belt for that matter can't match the growth of other areas.
The one stat I've seen from you or any DTW person is that average wages in Detroit are rising. That stat needs to be considered jointly with the rising unemployment​ rate in order to explain why it's not impressive.


1) Please cite your research from the Economist or other credible, respected that concludes Metro Detroit's recovery is "pathetic." I can pretty much guarantee you it doesn't exist, you'll try to spin some garbage and when you fall flat on your face you'll retort to comparing Metro Detroit to Dallas Metroplex as a last ditch effort to "prove" your point. Gotta remember, you're dealing with people smarter than you that can call your buff and have been around long enough to know how the games are played.

2) Nobody has ever suggested that DTW is a more important hub than ATL. Some DTW and MSP-based flyers are distaunt over DL's obsession in flowing everything via ATL; reality is, there will be a market correction -- conditions will change (e.g. fuel go up and it will no longer be desirable for DL to flow passengers BWI-ATL-SEA), DL will balk at indirectly paying for billions in expansion cost at ATL, etc.

As for the EK example, we've been getting strong indication that America isn't good on them. They've downgauged and cut DXB-USA flights left and right (JFK, MCO, SFO, etc), presumably due to US foreign policy. I see no reason why Detroit is immune to the effects their entire NA network seems to be feeling. EK are focusing less on North America and more on Europe, and somehow I doubt Detroit will be the exception.


Gee, maybe the problem isn't that "America isn't good on them," maybe the problem is that EK's attempting to dump capacity into already overstaturated markets.

ASQ400 wrote:
Now I'll actually address DTW-LAX.
This route connects a Delta fortress hub, to an airport where US3+AS/VX have hubs, in a metro where basically every US airline has a strong presence. It's a route between DL's hub and everyone's hub.
Normal routes between hubs of different airlines (let's say IAH-SLC) have an even dynamic. UA has the lion's share of IAH point of sale, DL has a similar chunk of SLC point of sale, so they're basically even.
DTW-LAX is different. Delta has a strong grip on DTW point of sale (frustrated mostly by NK), but no other airline has a dominant hold on the LAX end. Thus, the only way anyone can grab up a big chunk of the market is by offering fares so low that they penetrate the shell of DL's base. Only a ULCC can do that.o
SFO-DTW service, on the other hand, makes sense because UA has a strong base in the bay area, and has superior connections from SFO to Asia, that can make the route work, especially as DL's TPAC network is getting shaken up


...except that DL does not dominate LAX POS, which is about half the DTW/LAX market.

I didn't say it does. I just said no one else dominates LAX as much as DL dominates DTW, which is a handicap on AA/UA/AS/anyone if they choose to fly it
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:12 pm

11725Flyer wrote:
I really wish I were a moderator. I would delete this thread, start over, then watch it so it becomes an exchange of ideas and information, not insults and accusations.


Censorship at it's finniest and where are all those other threads nonresistant that's where they are. No persons point of view counts more than another's.

“The truth is more important than the facts.”
― Frank Lloyd Wright
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:20 pm

klm617 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:


Thank you for the honorable mention. Please remember it is I who started this Detroit thread when all the others burned out after less than 20 replies. So your welcome in advance of your thank you. We all don't have to agree but we do have to respect each others point of view whether you agree with it or not.

Have you heard your point of view? You go around with even less facts than I, accusing everything and anything of wanting to shaft Detroit. That puts you about 1 tier worse than the other fanboys


All you have to do is go out to the airport and see what's going on that should be proof enough. Very little competitive growth not to mention growth by our hub carrier is almost nonexistent and that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to market the airport effectively or maybe they should bring a firm in that can market DTW effectively. There is a lot of potential in this market that is not being captured due to leakage because of lack of low fare options in the Detroit market. Most other airports around the country the size of DTW have more LCC and ULCC seats it their respective markets than Detroit does and as far as movements CVG is way ahead of Detroit and even has more choice now because of Delta greatly reducing service there..

If you'd read any of my post, you'd understand that this is because Michigan and greater Detroit are much weaker markets than other areas.
If you had common sense, you'd also realize that WCAA can't get another airline to put its second-biggest hub in Detroit, so it can't just urinate all over Delta
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:10 am

compensateme wrote:
Trying to change the direction of this thread...

For those of you who've beginning for regular DL A321 service, it looks like the type will take over half the DTW/LAX flights next winter, in addition to service to PHX & PDX. Might be others -- I didn't really bother to check.
I hate to be the dummy downer but actually, the only 321 operation for DTW next winter is LAX twice a day, and that starts on Feb 16 and it's twice daily until April, where it goes 3x daily, BUT the 321 is supposed to be based out of Eastern US hubs and all 321's are quick turns in Detroit, so those 321's will probably disappear when the time comes closer, and no 321's will be regularly scheduled from DTW.
Last edited by flymco753 on Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:13 am

klm617 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:


Thank you for the honorable mention. Please remember it is I who started this Detroit thread when all the others burned out after less than 20 replies. So your welcome in advance of your thank you. We all don't have to agree but we do have to respect each others point of view whether you agree with it or not.

Have you heard your point of view? You go around with even less facts than I, accusing everything and anything of wanting to shaft Detroit. That puts you about 1 tier worse than the other fanboys


All you have to do is go out to the airport and see what's going on that should be proof enough. Very little competitive growth not to mention growth by our hub carrier is almost nonexistent and that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to market the airport effectively or maybe they should bring a firm in that can market DTW effectively. There is a lot of potential in this market that is not being captured due to leakage because of lack of low fare options in the Detroit market. Most other airports around the country the size of DTW have more LCC and ULCC seats it their respective markets than Detroit does and as far as movements CVG is way ahead of Detroit and even has more choice now because of Delta greatly reducing service there..
Surprisingly, DTW has one of the highest domestic LCC exposures in the US behind your usual Dallas, New York, and Orlando markets you can thank NK for that.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:01 am

ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
Have you heard your point of view? You go around with even less facts than I, accusing everything and anything of wanting to shaft Detroit. That puts you about 1 tier worse than the other fanboys


All you have to do is go out to the airport and see what's going on that should be proof enough. Very little competitive growth not to mention growth by our hub carrier is almost nonexistent and that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to market the airport effectively or maybe they should bring a firm in that can market DTW effectively. There is a lot of potential in this market that is not being captured due to leakage because of lack of low fare options in the Detroit market. Most other airports around the country the size of DTW have more LCC and ULCC seats it their respective markets than Detroit does and as far as movements CVG is way ahead of Detroit and even has more choice now because of Delta greatly reducing service there..

If you'd read any of my post, you'd understand that this is because Michigan and greater Detroit are much weaker markets than other areas.
If you had common sense, you'd also realize that WCAA can't get another airline to put its second-biggest hub in Detroit, so it can't just urinate all over Delta



I'm not advocating a second airline hub here what I would like to see is DTW keep pace with other markets o similar size and for Delta to grow this hub at or the same pace as the other hubs in the Delta network. Delta has total lack of commitment of growing Detroit any bigger than what it is so it's up the WCAA to then look elsewhere as far as attracting new service as Delta has no intent in doing that in this market. We can all agree that DTW lacks an LCC to Europe and one of the ME3 which this market can clearly support.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:30 am

klm617 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:

All you have to do is go out to the airport and see what's going on that should be proof enough. Very little competitive growth not to mention growth by our hub carrier is almost nonexistent and that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to market the airport effectively or maybe they should bring a firm in that can market DTW effectively. There is a lot of potential in this market that is not being captured due to leakage because of lack of low fare options in the Detroit market. Most other airports around the country the size of DTW have more LCC and ULCC seats it their respective markets than Detroit does and as far as movements CVG is way ahead of Detroit and even has more choice now because of Delta greatly reducing service there..

If you'd read any of my post, you'd understand that this is because Michigan and greater Detroit are much weaker markets than other areas.
If you had common sense, you'd also realize that WCAA can't get another airline to put its second-biggest hub in Detroit, so it can't just urinate all over Delta



I'm not advocating a second airline hub here what I would like to see is DTW keep pace with other markets o similar size and for Delta to grow this hub at or the same pace as the other hubs in the Delta network. Delta has total lack of commitment of growing Detroit any bigger than what it is so it's up the WCAA to then look elsewhere as far as attracting new service as Delta has no intent in doing that in this market. We can all agree that DTW lacks an LCC to Europe and one of the ME3 which this market can clearly support.

DTW is going to get the service that makes sense for airlines to fly in it. AA, UA, AS, B6, and other non-ULCCs aren't going to dare challenge a DL fortress hub, except from a thick hub of their own, and only if that is profitable. For ME3 to come into DTW, that needs to be the best use of their capacity, and the clear indication is that this isn't going to be US expansion in the post-laptop-ban world. If/when ME3 return, I'd expect to see them raise capacity in the more profitable markets (JFK/SFO, for example) before making a foray into an economic wreck that is also someone else's fortress hub.
DTW has more service than one would normally expect from a city and area that deep in economic s*** (look at CLE and PIT, who got de-hubbed), and that's all thanks to Delta keeping its primary midwest hub in this city.
If WCAA gives thick bonuses to another US airline, and certainly if it gave them to ME3, Delta could and would threaten to shift some ops to MSP or CVG, or even SEA. Would you really want EK ex-DXB and AA ex-LAX, if it means losing PVG and getting heavily downgraded to NRT and ICN?
And one more thing, if PHL (a bigger city with more businesses and more money in the pockets of leisure travelers) can't support any frequency to DXB, why could Detroit?
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:38 am

The thing is tho, the WCAA meets with all airlines including DL, it's just harder to persuade DL since DL likes to use the whole flow over other hubs method. "There may be 300 PDEW to SJC (not really but it's the first highest next to SNA but SNA is happening), we can flow those people over SEA and SLC, we don't feel like it would generate the revenue needed to succeed on a 737-800.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:40 am

flymco753 wrote:
The thing is tho, the WCAA meets with all airlines including DL, it's just harder to persuade DL since DL likes to use the whole flow over other hubs method. "There may be 300 PDEW to SJC (not really but it's the first highest next to SNA but SNA is happening), we can flow those people over SEA and SLC, we don't feel like it would generate the revenue needed to succeed on a 737-800.

And I would think DL has a pretty strong position in those negotiations, because of their huge share of DTW ops.
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
CVGDTWfan
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 4:28 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:01 am

ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
If you'd read any of my post, you'd understand that this is because Michigan and greater Detroit are much weaker markets than other areas.
If you had common sense, you'd also realize that WCAA can't get another airline to put its second-biggest hub in Detroit, so it can't just urinate all over Delta



I'm not advocating a second airline hub here what I would like to see is DTW keep pace with other markets o similar size and for Delta to grow this hub at or the same pace as the other hubs in the Delta network. Delta has total lack of commitment of growing Detroit any bigger than what it is so it's up the WCAA to then look elsewhere as far as attracting new service as Delta has no intent in doing that in this market. We can all agree that DTW lacks an LCC to Europe and one of the ME3 which this market can clearly support.

DTW is going to get the service that makes sense for airlines to fly in it. AA, UA, AS, B6, and other non-ULCCs aren't going to dare challenge a DL fortress hub, except from a thick hub of their own, and only if that is profitable. For ME3 to come into DTW, that needs to be the best use of their capacity, and the clear indication is that this isn't going to be US expansion in the post-laptop-ban world. If/when ME3 return, I'd expect to see them raise capacity in the more profitable markets (JFK/SFO, for example) before making a foray into an economic wreck that is also someone else's fortress hub.
DTW has more service than one would normally expect from a city and area that deep in economic s*** (look at CLE and PIT, who got de-hubbed), and that's all thanks to Delta keeping its primary midwest hub in this city.
If WCAA gives thick bonuses to another US airline, and certainly if it gave them to ME3, Delta could and would threaten to shift some ops to MSP or CVG, or even SEA. Would you really want EK ex-DXB and AA ex-LAX, if it means losing PVG and getting heavily downgraded to NRT and ICN?
And one more thing, if PHL (a bigger city with more businesses and more money in the pockets of leisure travelers) can't support any frequency to DXB, why could Detroit?


I've been reading some of your points about Detroit and it's not all correct. I agree with you that an ME3's best choice is probably not DTW. I can agree that Detroit city proper has had relatively high crime and some high poverty rates, but lots of cities do (look at Chicago). However, that is barely indicative of the metro Detroit economy. I have no idea where you are getting the idea that Detroit is in deep economic trouble as the metro area's GDP was ranked 14th out of all US metro areas. PIT and CLE are ranked 24th and 27th. That shows me that Detroit doesn't have a weak economy. Additionally, metro Detroit is home to more than 10 Fortune 500 companies, with many more companies doing a significant amount of business here. If Detroit's economy was so bad, there would be absolutely no reason for DL to have a hub here. I'm not saying that the occasional cuts here and there aren't warranted but the fact that Detroit is a hell hole in dire straights is just false. The city has emerged from bankruptcy and a significant amount of investment in the area has occurred. Look at what billionaire Dan Gilbert has done for downtown.

GDP source: https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/region ... ro0916.pdf
 
User avatar
N644US
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 2:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:23 am

flymco753 wrote:
The thing is tho, the WCAA meets with all airlines including DL, it's just harder to persuade DL since DL likes to use the whole flow over other hubs method. "There may be 300 PDEW to SJC (not really but it's the first highest next to SNA but SNA is happening), we can flow those people over SEA and SLC, we don't feel like it would generate the revenue needed to succeed on a 737-800.


Either that, or DL is sufficient with flights to SFO (a 30-minute drive) where those flights alone control 63% of the market share from DTW to the Bay Area. It's for a very similar reason why DL doesn't serve OAK -- all 3 airports are in very similar areas and are close to each other. While it may be convenient for Bay Area passengers to have access to DTW from other airports, it isn't feasible to serve such a route when there's a convenient alternative 30 minutes away, with a much higher frequency and equipment size than a potential flight to SJC.

SNA works as a route due to its position away from LAX -- taking the 405 can take 45 minutes in light traffic, however throughout the day traffic increases the time between SNA and LAX to be over an hour, creating incentive to serve such a market that is much more convenient for people living in Irvine, Santa Ana, Huntington Beach, etc. The same reasoning also applies to why airlines often serve multiple airports in one area if one serves a different population base than the other (ex. serving all 3 NYC airports, CGH and GRU, HND and NRT, MIA/FLL/PBI, LIN and MXP, KIX and ITM, IAD and DCA, etc.).

Edit: wording
Aviation: the field where (almost) anything can be solved using math and science.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 1:31 pm

N644US wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
The thing is tho, the WCAA meets with all airlines including DL, it's just harder to persuade DL since DL likes to use the whole flow over other hubs method. "There may be 300 PDEW to SJC (not really but it's the first highest next to SNA but SNA is happening), we can flow those people over SEA and SLC, we don't feel like it would generate the revenue needed to succeed on a 737-800.


Either that, or DL is sufficient with flights to SFO (a 30-minute drive) where those flights alone control 63% of the market share from DTW to the Bay Area. It's for a very similar reason why DL doesn't serve OAK -- all 3 airports are in very similar areas and are close to each other. While it may be convenient for Bay Area passengers to have access to DTW from other airports, it isn't feasible to serve such a route when there's a convenient alternative 30 minutes away, with a much higher frequency and equipment size than a potential flight to SJC.

SNA works as a route due to its position away from LAX -- taking the 405 can take 45 minutes in light traffic, however throughout the day traffic increases the time between SNA and LAX to be over an hour, creating incentive to serve such a market that is much more convenient for people living in Irvine, Santa Ana, Huntington Beach, etc. The same reasoning also applies to why airlines often serve multiple airports in one area if one serves a different population base than the other (ex. serving all 3 NYC airports, CGH and GRU, HND and NRT, MIA/FLL/PBI, LIN and MXP, KIX and ITM, IAD and DCA, etc.).

Edit: wording
The OAK method is true, the reason DL doesnt do it, despite NK being very successful on OAK, is because they offer better equipment and frequency to SFO (6x daily on all 757s!) The way DL is competing with NK on OAK is cheaper connecting fares through SLC.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:19 pm

DL will fly their first A321 service from MCO on July 3rd, and it will be 2 flights. DL2128 and DL2228
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 5:55 pm

I was looking at F9s schedule for June, it looks like for a few weeks DEN will be 2x daily both 320, TTN is a 320, PHX is upgraded to a 321 and MCO is a 321. Interesting.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
iFlyDTW
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:33 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:05 pm

Why doesnt SWA fly MCO nonstop anymore? If I remember correctly AT used to fly 2 daily flights and SWA did 1 because it was an early morning Detroit departure and a late arrival. With SWA having such a large operation and a few connecting opportunities I never understood why it's that way. I don't want to hear any nonsense because EWR, IAD, DCA, and ATL have virtually all the same exposure as DTW, so I don't see why not. They fly it on Saturdays from Jan to Apr but that's it. It can at least be daily year round, there's a market to support it right?
Home of the "Bare Fare" /// Banana Plane Republic
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:08 pm

iFlyDTW wrote:
Why doesnt SWA fly MCO nonstop anymore? If I remember correctly AT used to fly 2 daily flights and SWA did 1 because it was an early morning Detroit departure and a late arrival. With SWA having such a large operation and a few connecting opportunities I never understood why it's that way. I don't want to hear any nonsense because EWR, IAD, DCA, and ATL have virtually all the same exposure as DTW, so I don't see why not. They fly it on Saturdays from Jan to Apr but that's it. It can at least be daily year round, there's a market to support it right?
Couldn't tell you! I don't know why they don't do it. Maybe they don't see it as profitable as EWR which already has every airline and their brother flying it. I used to fly that WN and FL flight, I often used the early morning WN and the mid afternoon FL flight to get back to MCO and I always used the evening WN departure to come to DTW. Always full.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 7:36 pm

iFlyDTW wrote:
Why doesnt SWA fly MCO nonstop anymore? If I remember correctly AT used to fly 2 daily flights and SWA did 1 because it was an early morning Detroit departure and a late arrival. With SWA having such a large operation and a few connecting opportunities I never understood why it's that way. I don't want to hear any nonsense because EWR, IAD, DCA, and ATL have virtually all the same exposure as DTW, so I don't see why not. They fly it on Saturdays from Jan to Apr but that's it. It can at least be daily year round, there's a market to support it right?

Is there a market to support it daily year-round? That's a real question.
It is definitely underserved, and in my opinion seems like it should be a daily flight in winter (nov-apr) at the minimum.
I don't know why service is that sparse. Maybe better a/c uses, or maybe gate space. I can't tell you with any level of certainty.
Or, it might be the competition from Frontier, Spirit, and Delta that makes it hard for SWA to compete effectively
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 8:20 pm

iFlyDTW wrote:
Why doesnt SWA fly MCO nonstop anymore? If I remember correctly AT used to fly 2 daily flights and SWA did 1 because it was an early morning Detroit departure and a late arrival. With SWA having such a large operation and a few connecting opportunities I never understood why it's that way. I don't want to hear any nonsense because EWR, IAD, DCA, and ATL have virtually all the same exposure as DTW, so I don't see why not. They fly it on Saturdays from Jan to Apr but that's it. It can at least be daily year round, there's a market to support it right?



Southwest has virtually dropped al the Florida service that AirTran had from Michigan airports. There was a time when Michigan was well served to Florida but that is no longer the case with only Detroit flights to Florida reaming.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Fri Jun 02, 2017 9:39 pm

klm617 wrote:
iFlyDTW wrote:
Why doesnt SWA fly MCO nonstop anymore? If I remember correctly AT used to fly 2 daily flights and SWA did 1 because it was an early morning Detroit departure and a late arrival. With SWA having such a large operation and a few connecting opportunities I never understood why it's that way. I don't want to hear any nonsense because EWR, IAD, DCA, and ATL have virtually all the same exposure as DTW, so I don't see why not. They fly it on Saturdays from Jan to Apr but that's it. It can at least be daily year round, there's a market to support it right?



Southwest has virtually dropped al the Florida service that AirTran had from Michigan airports. There was a time when Michigan was well served to Florida but that is no longer the case with only Detroit flights to Florida reaming.

That indicates that SWA had more profitable routes to fly.
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 4:37 am

How are AM flights doing? DL finally placed the codeshare on MEX flights, and some flights are subbed from a 737 to a 738.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 7487
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:33 am

flymco753 wrote:
How are AM flights doing? DL finally placed the codeshare on MEX flights, and some flights are subbed from a 737 to a 738.

Summer is not really a test. Fall/Winter is the crucible for a new flight to anywhere that's not a beach.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:57 am

enilria wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
How are AM flights doing? DL finally placed the codeshare on MEX flights, and some flights are subbed from a 737 to a 738.

Summer is not really a test. Fall/Winter is the crucible for a new flight to anywhere that's not a beach.

Aside from business-focused, premium-heavy routes. But Mexico isn't really one of those, is it?
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 12:09 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
enilria wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
How are AM flights doing? DL finally placed the codeshare on MEX flights, and some flights are subbed from a 737 to a 738.

Summer is not really a test. Fall/Winter is the crucible for a new flight to anywhere that's not a beach.

Aside from business-focused, premium-heavy routes. But Mexico isn't really one of those, is it?
MEX is premium heavy thanks to the auto industry and with the codeshare bookings are accepted via connections.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 12:44 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
enilria wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
How are AM flights doing? DL finally placed the codeshare on MEX flights, and some flights are subbed from a 737 to a 738.

Summer is not really a test. Fall/Winter is the crucible for a new flight to anywhere that's not a beach.

Aside from business-focused, premium-heavy routes. But Mexico isn't really one of those, is it?
Include BJX, GDL, and ZLO in that. I've always speculated that AM or Y4 was going to add GDL. Y4 could cater right to auto and local traffic with a 4x weekly A320 or AM/DL could benefit a daily service on a 737. The Mexican population in Detroit, if you ever visit Mexicantown seem to be mostly from Guadalajara and Monterrey.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 3:09 pm

Irrelevant, deleted.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 3:27 pm

flymco753 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
enilria wrote:
Summer is not really a test. Fall/Winter is the crucible for a new flight to anywhere that's not a beach.

Aside from business-focused, premium-heavy routes. But Mexico isn't really one of those, is it?
Include BJX, GDL, and ZLO in that. I've always speculated that AM or Y4 was going to add GDL. Y4 could cater right to auto and local traffic with a 4x weekly A320 or AM/DL could benefit a daily service on a 737. The Mexican population in Detroit, if you ever visit Mexicantown seem to be mostly from Guadalajara and Monterrey.
Replace ZLO with QRO, my mistake.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
iFlyDTW
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:33 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sat Jun 03, 2017 11:41 pm

flymco753 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
Aside from business-focused, premium-heavy routes. But Mexico isn't really one of those, is it?
Include BJX, GDL, and ZLO in that. I've always speculated that AM or Y4 was going to add GDL. Y4 could cater right to auto and local traffic with a 4x weekly A320 or AM/DL could benefit a daily service on a 737. The Mexican population in Detroit, if you ever visit Mexicantown seem to be mostly from Guadalajara and Monterrey.
Replace ZLO with QRO, my mistake.
I think Volaris would be the best off for gdl. It would be another lcc exposed in the Detroit market, and an international lcc.
Home of the "Bare Fare" /// Banana Plane Republic
 
klm617
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:47 am

iFlyDTW wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Include BJX, GDL, and ZLO in that. I've always speculated that AM or Y4 was going to add GDL. Y4 could cater right to auto and local traffic with a 4x weekly A320 or AM/DL could benefit a daily service on a 737. The Mexican population in Detroit, if you ever visit Mexicantown seem to be mostly from Guadalajara and Monterrey.
Replace ZLO with QRO, my mistake.
I think Volaris would be the best off for gdl. It would be another lcc exposed in the Detroit market, and an international lcc.


The thing is how far will the WCAA go in attracting a LCC from Mexico being it would indirectly effect DL yields negatively some thing that would not be well received by our hub carrier.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:56 am

klm617 wrote:
iFlyDTW wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Replace ZLO with QRO, my mistake.
I think Volaris would be the best off for gdl. It would be another lcc exposed in the Detroit market, and an international lcc.


The thing is how far will the WCAA go in attracting a LCC from Mexico being it would indirectly effect DL yields negatively some thing that would not be well received by our hub carrier.

And since pissing off your hub carrier could result in Detroit actually being shafted by DL, it might not be such a smart idea for WCAA to court them.
They might still come, if yields appeal to them enough
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:00 am

ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
iFlyDTW wrote:
I think Volaris would be the best off for gdl. It would be another lcc exposed in the Detroit market, and an international lcc.


The thing is how far will the WCAA go in attracting a LCC from Mexico being it would indirectly effect DL yields negatively some thing that would not be well received by our hub carrier.

And since pissing off your hub carrier could result in Detroit actually being shafted by DL, it might not be such a smart idea for WCAA to court them.
They might still come, if yields appeal to them enough
I've averaged one-way yields for a month for the 3 cheapest airlines, nothing lingers below $320, Y4 could do $150 both ways, $350 in total and local people will pay for it. That's one of the things about this DTW network, there's a fine line between low fare and premium paying passengers, and I think Y4 could help those who don't necessarily want to pay $680 RT to make 2 stops or travel time that's horrendous. I think $360-$500 max is acceptable, if people are proactive in booking, they could get a whole family down for $1K. Or auto makers sending people to Jalisco could benefit with lower cost, nonstop options, and shorter travel time.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
ASQ400
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:57 am

flymco753 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
klm617 wrote:

The thing is how far will the WCAA go in attracting a LCC from Mexico being it would indirectly effect DL yields negatively some thing that would not be well received by our hub carrier.

And since pissing off your hub carrier could result in Detroit actually being shafted by DL, it might not be such a smart idea for WCAA to court them.
They might still come, if yields appeal to them enough
I've averaged one-way yields for a month for the 3 cheapest airlines, nothing lingers below $320, Y4 could do $150 both ways, $350 in total and local people will pay for it. That's one of the things about this DTW network, there's a fine line between low fare and premium paying passengers, and I think Y4 could help those who don't necessarily want to pay $680 RT to make 2 stops or travel time that's horrendous. I think $360-$500 max is acceptable, if people are proactive in booking, they could get a whole family down for $1K. Or auto makers sending people to Jalisco could benefit with lower cost, nonstop options, and shorter travel time.

Then there is a chance for them to make the market, even without WCAA giving them hefty bonuses
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD
 
flymco753
Posts: 912
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 2:40 pm

ASQ400 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
ASQ400 wrote:
And since pissing off your hub carrier could result in Detroit actually being shafted by DL, it might not be such a smart idea for WCAA to court them.
They might still come, if yields appeal to them enough
I've averaged one-way yields for a month for the 3 cheapest airlines, nothing lingers below $320, Y4 could do $150 both ways, $350 in total and local people will pay for it. That's one of the things about this DTW network, there's a fine line between low fare and premium paying passengers, and I think Y4 could help those who don't necessarily want to pay $680 RT to make 2 stops or travel time that's horrendous. I think $360-$500 max is acceptable, if people are proactive in booking, they could get a whole family down for $1K. Or auto makers sending people to Jalisco could benefit with lower cost, nonstop options, and shorter travel time.

Then there is a chance for them to make the market, even without WCAA giving them hefty bonuses
After looking at what kind of expansion they have been doing and the kind of market trends they've been doing, even if the WCAA goes to discuss with Volaris potential plans they could very well be interested.
Welcome to the city beautiful.
 
iFlyDTW
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:33 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Part 5

Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:26 pm

Jetblue should fly more out of Detroit I think, because when you have an airline that's going up against Spirit, it's tough to get fully recognized in a market so the only 2 places I can think of that Jetblue could add soon would be a daily MCO A320 and a 2 times daily JFK E190, on top of the daily FLL A320 and 3 times daily BOS with 2 E190 and an A320. The times could easily coincide with their gate, D15 but the problem is, BOS and FLL leave early in the morning so for MCO they would have to have a 3rd Ron gate if they really want to cater to local traffic.
Home of the "Bare Fare" /// Banana Plane Republic

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos