Airliners.net

Looks like 7 Delta flights are being cut from ICT including all SLC service to the city as well as all CVG apparently (although it said 2 flights were going and I thought we had 3 dailies to CVG). 4 flights to ATL stay. Very disappointing news, I'm wondering how the city will react to it.

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/11750620.htm

CVG does indeed get 3 flights, and ATL currently gets 6. So, it looks like DL is finally giving ICT officials the finger, and rightfully so.

This goes back to the earlier thread I had started about Delta's complaints over Witchita paying subsidies to Air Tran, but I had heard they were closing the station altogether. I guess cooler heads have prevailed, but I look forward to seeing how the City Council reacts.

Is SRQ's situation the same as ICT? Is it the same kind of subsidy?

Can you blame Delta for this? ICT is paying a primary competitor to compete with DL. Not so bright.

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 3): Is SRQ's situation the same as ICT? Is it the same kind of subsidy?

It is the same kind of subsidiary. In both cases (and TLH and GSO as well, IIRC), FL was awarded subsidies to lure them into those markets for 2 years. However, the 2 years at ICT are long over, yet ICT continues to pay subsidies to FL. So DL has said "Either you pay us subsidies as well, or youdrop those for FL". When ICT wouldn't budge, DL changed that to "Either you pay us subsidies as well, or if you continue to only pay them to FL, you can kiss our southern a$$es." Admittedly the last part is no actual quote   .

I think many who dispute the subsidies forget to ask one question..

Why doesn't Delta get them? Why did Delta charge $1000 fares to bring them into existance? The conclusion is that Air Tran probably would have never serviced ICT if ICT did not notice there was a problem with the fares. If ICT authorities see a problem with FL, they will naturally stop paying them to fly there, plain and simple.

Has Delta officially commented that FL subsidies are the reason? Maybe it really has something to do with its Regional carriers? Kind of funny that DL would pull routes that FL doesn't even serve and keep the ones that FL does if this was so?

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 3): Is SRQ's situation the same as ICT? Is it the same kind of subsidy?

It started out exactly the same. However FL dropped their ICT-MDW flights and the subsidy evolved to just ATL.
In SRQ's case FL is receiving the subsidies to provide service from SRQ-BWI.

Quoting Jrlander (Reply 4): Can you blame Delta for this? ICT is paying a primary competitor to compete with DL. Not so bright.

I wish they pulled out altogether, but I guess you also have to lookout for the employees based there.

Quoting BH346 (Thread starter): 4 flights to ATL stay.

If the city wants their flights back they will have to pay for them, which they won't do.
The 4 flights that are staying are:

4455 7:00am 10:10am CRJ becomes CJ4 in Sep
4419 12:58pm 4:50pm CRJ Becomes CR7 in Aug
4177 4:15pm 7:25pm CR7
4846 7:06pm 10:19pm CJ4 becomes CRJ in Sep

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 6): Why doesn't Delta get them? Why did Delta charge $1000 fares to bring them into existance? The conclusion is that Air Tran probably would have never serviced ICT if ICT did not notice there was a problem with the fares. If ICT authorities see a problem with FL, they will naturally stop paying them to fly there, plain and simple.

Seems you have failed to see what those subsidies where meant to be for. Subsidies are just to get new entrants to start service in a new market, to either offer alternative service (FL at SRQ) or to get any service at all (DL at APF). However, those subsidies are there not only to lure those carriers into the city, but also to make a guarantee to the airline that their service will be profitable, so that the airline doesn't just leave the city again. Just look at TLH for comparison sake: DL dominated and still dominates TLH, especially TLH-ATL. Fares were high, and many people were willing to pay those fares. Yet, airport authorities decided they want an LCC option to ATL, and offered FL subsidies to start service there, which FL also did. And what happened? FL was there, but the pax still continued to fly Delta, because they lowered their prices. And the result was that after the 2 years of suibsidies were over and FL saw that they would lose money in TLH without them, they left TLH. And now TLH is "only" stuck with DL again. GSO had the same thing happen.
And the same thing should have happened at ICT. But the city fathers decided to continue the subsidies, knowing very well that FL would be out of town without them. Right thinking from ICT's point of view, but the fact of the matter is, this is not what those subsidies were meant for. Hence why DL is p!ssed at ICT and decides to significantly reduce their presence there, and maybe later to drop ICT completely.

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 8): And now TLH is "only" stuck with DL again. GSO had the same thing happen.

Exactly what I was saying, ICT does not want to share the same fate so they are willing to pay-up to keep FL whether start-up or not. What is wrong with that as long as FL produces the lower fares? There are no guidelines or laws governing them, so ICT can do as it please.

Comes to show how bad DL was exploiting their small market premium on ICT, Delta should have stayed on top of things and dropped the ball again.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 9): What is wrong with that as long as FL produces the lower fares?

The fact that subsidies are not meant to offered over a time span of more than 2 years, and the fact that the FAA is strictly against such methods.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 9): Comes to show how bad DL was exploiting their small market premium on ICT, Delta should have stayed on top of things and dropped the ball again.

Classic spin from a Citrus fan. Why doesn't ICT support the airline that has had service there all along and give DL the subsidies to lower their fares?

FL gets forked over money to make a profit no matter if they have 3 people on a flight, and the other airlines (that have more to offer as far as routes) have to work for it. That's what it comes down to.

B

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 11): Why doesn't ICT support the airline that has had service there all along and give DL the subsidies to lower their fares?

Well if B is getting involved, I have to. lol. Allow me to make an analogy out of your argument. If a town is being terrorized by a burglar, would you pay the burglar to stop robbing people...or would you pay for more police to keep the burglar from robbing people?

JP

JP, no more buddy passes for you!  

That analogy doesn't quite work, cause Delta was providing a service long before airtran, and the people paid the fares. It's not robbery if people voluntarily pay for the service. It's supply and demand.

Delta has provided the service of transportation for that city and opened up the world to it. Hardly a negative thing.

B

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 10): The fact that subsidies are not meant to offered over a time span of more than 2 years, and the fact that the FAA is strictly against such methods.

Exactly how far does the FAA scope of authority go to competitive issues like this? Typically these issues are handled by the DOT whom I've yet to see any comments from on the issue from? Find the law if there is one?

Quoting DeltaMIA (Reply 7): I wish they pulled out altogether, but I guess you also have to lookout for the employees based there.

It's great that Delta cares so much for its employees and customers in a small market to just break-even or lose money on ATL-ICT by holding on to it. Being realistic, they have to be making money on the route to keep it or ICT is paying them too.

If they are not making money on ICT-ATL, I'm proud not to be a stock-holder there!!

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 14): Being realistic, they have to be making money on the route

Doubt it! Probably losing their shirt! But they can't pull out without losing face vis a vis FL. Better to jettison the bigger money losers to SLC and CVG. This is probably the best loss prevention move DL has made schedule wise all year!

If I were a ICT city father, I would say "Who Cares!" CVG, SLC, no voter could care less! Low fares and Elton to ATL and beyond, now that gets votes!

I would also then start a campaign to raise money to get COEX to EWR. Everybody wants to go to NYC!

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 14): Being realistic, they have to be making money on the route to keep it or ICT is paying them too.

DL is making money in ICT. The thing about the RJ is that DL can put it on another route and still make money, for instance SLC-SGF and MLB-IAD. This move by DL was simply to show the city that DL doesn't need ICT as much ICT will likely need DL. Time will tell who wins out.

B,

I promise the buddy passes will be put to good use. I tried to think of a different way to phrase my analogy, but you're right...it doesn't make total sense. I can see the argument from both sides but unfortunately, I don't think its within the scope of the FAA or DOT to get involved. The city has the legal authority to do what they are doing, as far as I'm aware. I hope it all works out for the city and both airlines in the end.

JP

PS...hopefully Gaddis doesn't get too friendly with the camels.

Quoting DeltaMIA (Reply 16): The thing about the RJ is that DL can put it on another route and still make money,

If Delta has discovered how to make money on an RJ, then Delta has discovered the answer to a question that baffles most airlines.

At DIA, for example, both United and Frontier admit that under GAAP principles RJ's do not make money - not even the CR7's. Their value is as feed to mainline.

cheers

mariner

Quoting Mariner (Reply 18): If Delta has discovered how to make money on an RJ, then Delta has discovered the answer to a question that baffles most airlines

This is a quote worth framing!

Quoting Mariner (Reply 18): If Delta has discovered how to make money on an RJ, then Delta has discovered the answer to a question that baffles most airlines.

At least you used the word "most"

Quoting Xlpants (Reply 15): f I were a ICT city father, I would say "Who Cares!" CVG, SLC, no voter could care less! Low fares and Elton to ATL and beyond, now that gets votes!

Who cares? The people who want to fly from ICT to BQK, GEG, BTR, STR, IST...and on and on. I think they care. You're welcome ICT.

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 17): PS...hopefully Gaddis doesn't get too friendly with the camels.

He gets there and people are already droping dead. Wait till you hear the story!...lol

B

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 21): The people who want to fly from ICT to BQK, GEG, BTR, STR, IST.

That's why DL will keep ATL. To service the 1 person a year that goes to/from ICT and BQK and the 1 person a day that they compete for with AA and CO to BTR and the 1 person a month that goes to IST and STR, combined!

No one will even notice that CVG or SLC are gone!

[quote=NonRevKing,reply=21]I think they care.

I don't!

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 12): If a town is being terrorized by a burglar, would you pay the burglar to stop robbing people...or would you pay for more police to keep the burglar from robbing people?

I would hardly equate Delta's ICT service to being terrorized by a burglar. The fact of the matter is that the City Council is subsidizing Air Tran's low fares by guaranteeing them $2 million a year in profits, which allows Air Tran to artificially deflate fares- not because their cost structure allows them to charge lower fares. I think what Delta is saying is let them compete with us on a level playing field where every year, they, like Delta are guaranteed $0 in profits.

Subsidies are only to be used to lure more competition to a city or to lure any air service to a city. However, in this case, it is completely different. In this case, those subsidies(which are mostly taxpayer money) are being used to basically run out competition. I am sure the citizens of ICT, especially those that do fly Delta, are not too happy with the city driving out "their" airline, while guaranteeing a profit to some of the competition.

ICT's defense of not wanting to offer subsidies to DL is because they are expecting that that would "make the wolf larger, so it can slaughter more sheep." HUH? No, the reason you should offer the subsidies to anyone for new service/lower fares is to level the playing field for everyone. FL can sit on their a$$ and do nothing, but make money, while DL, NW, UA, AA all have to work hard and provide worthwhile service to the customer to make a buck. As mentioned before, ICT seems to think that by feeding the wolf, you are making it bigger to slaughter more sheep. Well, don't they see that they are feeding a badger, but have no control over whether that badger raids the chicken coop or not. They are letting FL use the subsidies as a crutch instead of their intended purpose. Why don't they use that cash to help FL build a customer base in ICT so that FL wouldn't need the subsidies? Billboard advertising, tv ads, airline sponsored movie ticket giveaways, etc. Or maybe they do not have faith that FL could hold their own in ICT? Maybe they are afraid that if they did end service, there is an EXTREMELY likely possibility they would get screwed out of $7million, since FL has a history of doing so once subsidies end.

$2mil a year is hardly the kind of money the wolf would need in order to make a profit in ICT. But it would show DL that the city of ICT apparently cares about its service, and in return Delta would let ICT write its own ticket, so to speak. You give Delta $2mil a year, just ask and Delta will give you whatever you like. You want mainline service? Sure. You want service to MCO or SLC? Sure. You want increased service to CVG? No problem. Instead, ICT prefers to snub the largest carrier there and when the citizens of ICT see the sudden drop of service offered to the city, I am sure the leaders of the city will see their mistake. Considering the mentality the city is using, they would probably offer the badger another $2mil for more service. But pretty soon, that badger is going to associate the city with free food and hang around more, expecting more handouts. Didn't anyone ever tell them not to feed wild animals? LOL

Quote: Why don't they use that cash to help FL build a customer base in ICT so that FL wouldn't need the subsidies? Billboard advertising, tv ads, airline sponsored movie ticket giveaways, etc.

They do that, too. The city pays for quite a bit of AirTran advertising on TV, the radio, the newspaper, billboards, and they've gone up to the airport before asking non-FL passengers why they didn't fly AirTran and they've handed out flyers to folks driving out of the airport (although the last two was a while ago).

Quoting BH346 (Reply 25): they've gone up to the airport before asking non-FL passengers why they didn't fly AirTran and they've handed out flyers to folks driving out of the airport (although the last two was a while ago).

Oh God, that is tacky. Can you get any more tacky? I can see it now.

ICT Rep: Welcome to Wichita airport, who are you flying out on?

Pax(standing at skycap checkin getting boarding passes): I'm flying on Northwest.

ICT Rep: Why are you flying on Northwest, why don't you fly on Airtran.

Pax: I've never flown on Airtran and have enjoyed my flights on NW.

ICT Rep: Well, why not give Airtran a chance to fly you wherever you want to go. We think you will like them.

Pax: Well, does Airtran serve Ancorage?

ICT Rep: Well, no.

Pax: Well, I am going to ANC, so if they don't fly there, there isn't much reason to fly them.

ICT Rep: You should fly them when you get back. Or fly them via ATL to MSP and then take NW, and we think you will like them.

Pax: Listen buddy, they don't fly where I want to go and I am happy who I am flying on, so leave me alone.(walks away)

ICT Rep(shouting to pax): Well, we think you would like them, they fly to Sarasota! (see's another pax) Welcome to Wichita, who are you flying on today?


Funny, but tacky.

Quoting Xlpants (Reply 22): That's why DL will keep ATL. To service the 1 person a year that goes to/from ICT and BQK and the 1 person a day that they compete for with AA and CO to BTR and the 1 person a month that goes to IST and STR, combined! No one will even notice that CVG or SLC are gone!

You know what I mean, stop being ignorant. ANYONE going from ICT westbound will lose service. I don't think we're talking one or 2 people.

They can have fun flying on AirTran, who can't get them anywhere.

Quoting Xlpants (Reply 22): I don't!

Good for you.

B

If you are going to pay for service to your city, paying to one airline is not the best way. Instead, offer to pay any airline to "break even" on their service (within limits), and help with startup costs and initial advertising for new carriers for the first year. The plan could be a five year plan, renewable after that based on negotiation. If DL were to have that offer made to them to start, in that we will make sure that bringing in FL doesn't coss losses, but we do need to help bring other carriers here, they may not have liked it, but they wouldn't have had a big case to gripe. And then, after the first year of startup costs and ads, the other carriers would be on their own to compete, but ALL still with the "service" subsidy. Because every city needs to pay to provide transportation for citizens in various forms. Nothing wrong with that. But playing favorites is never good public policy or business.

From today's Wichita Eagle: http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/busi...s/industries/aviation/11781761.htm

Summation: Delta's (and everyone else's) ridership is up due to AirTran's entry into the market; Delta's high-fares prompted Wichita to lure AirTran in the first place; Delta has no problem with uneven playing fields where Delta is the beneficiary (fuel tax break in Georgia); and Delta's biggest problem is not subsidies to other carriers but it's own outmoded business plan.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

And if I was a decision maker at AA or CO or NW I'd pull more service from ICT as well . Because if this city gets away with funding LCCs at your expense, then it's only a matter of time before your ox gets gored. Better to nip this in the bud.

"Ideally, that will mean many more fliers, more flights, and an end to the need to subsidize AirTran. As Wichita grows stronger as an air market, so should the likelihood that not only AirTran will begin to add routes and flights, but that Delta will, too."


They are already wrong. Sounds to me like this editorial is a little too optimistic. As Wichita grow's stronger? I'm sorry, but who wants to fly to Wichita? I haven't left anything in Wichita that I need to go there for. I would suggest Delta pull out completely. Within a month, Wichita would be begging Delta to come back. Being arguably the largest carrier with the most flights in ICT, customers wouldn't stand for the city to run the airline out, despite how the city management feels about the airline. There certainly wouldn't be anyone to replace Delta there. No other airline has any interest running a route to ATL instead of their own hubs, and FL could never take up the slack. They wouldn't even waste their time utilizing one of those preciously few 737's to try and take up the slack from a 717 by only being able to carry about a dozen more people. ICT would just have to suffer until then.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 31): They are already wrong. Sounds to me like this editorial is a little too optimistic. As Wichita grow's stronger? I'm sorry, but who wants to fly to Wichita?

Ever heard of the Southwest effect? Only exception in this case is that AirTran is making the effects and ICT is willing to pay for it. It is well proven in several studies that LCC's influence fares across the board at the airports they serve resulting in higher passenger numbers, it happend here in RDU.

To add to the benefit of ICT authorities, all those extra passengers are also paying the passenger facility charges and making use of the ICT airport. The new revenue coming in from the increased passengers may even pay for the subsidies off with a profit! Wichita isn't throwing the money away as some may think here!

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 24): In this case, those subsidies(which are mostly taxpayer money)

In many cases, local business interests pick up the tab wanting lower fares for business and clients, it may not be taxpayer money. Anyone know how they are really paid in this case?

Midway2AirTran,

Good post! Many miss the points you just brought up.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 32): Ever heard of the Southwest effect? Only exception in this case is that AirTran is making the effects and ICT is willing to pay for it. It is well proven in several studies that LCC's influence fares across the board at the airports they serve resulting in higher passenger numbers, it happend here in RDU.

No kidding? Who would have thought? What I am saying is, its Wichita. No offense to any natives on here, but WHAT is in Wichita? What would be the point of me going to Wichita? Wichita has been there for a long time and I don't see how they seem to think it will get bigger. It is possible, but doubtful. I could understand if this was someplace like Savannah talking, with a large tourism rate, or Fort Myers, with a large retirement community, but Wichita? Come on.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 32): all those extra passengers are also paying the passenger facility charges and making use of the ICT airport. The new revenue coming in from the increased passengers may even pay for the subsidies off with a profit!

Nice try, but I don't think you've thought it through completely. The passengers are paying a PFC, which is passed on to the airport, not the city, which is where the subsidies are coming from. The revenue coming in from all those "extra"(right) passengers would be used to improve the terminal of ICT and cover costs not associated with the airline's rent space. So for John Doe, who is paying a $2.50 PFC to the airport to cover up the cost of the city giving away $2 mil a year(now $7) would be extremely high and I'm too lazy to do the math. Plus, the airport would have to be willing to give away their PFC's to the city, which is unlikely, the city would have to literally steal it away.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 32): In many cases, local business interests pick up the tab wanting lower fares for business and clients, it may not be taxpayer money. Anyone know how they are really paid in this case?

Given that ICT has never stated that local business are picking up the tab, but have mentioned that they are going to request that they do, right now the money is coming directly from the city's coffers. Until the city can step aside and have local businesses cover the costs, what they are doing is discriminatory.

Besides, aren't we missing the big picture here? The big picture is that Airtran and the city of Wichita are both saying that unless ICT pay's up, there is no Airtran in Wichita. Can't Airtran hold their own in the city, instead of eating off subsidies like a parasite? Hello, you are competing against airlines that are not healthy and can't run you out of town, and you still can't hold your own? Sad.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/kansa...late=contentModules/printstory.jsp

"Marketing to businesses gives AirTran a lift
So far, nearly $500,000 has been pledged by 24 firms to attract more attention to the carrier's frequent flier program."


Seems like its not just the city council that wants AirTran in town...genious.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 34): What would be the point of me going to Wichita?

About as much of a point as there is in going to Valdosta, Dothan, or Albany. But your airline seems okay with raping passengers in those markets so there must be some reason to go there.

JP

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 35): About as much of a point as there is in going to Valdosta, Dothan, or Albany. But your airline seems okay with raping passengers in those markets so there must be some reason to go there.

Touche Groundstop...........

Groundstop,
Thanks for the extra backing of my earlier statement.

Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 34): No kidding? Who would have thought? What I am saying is, its Wichita. No offense to any natives on here, but WHAT is in Wichita? What would be the point of me going to Wichita? Wichita has been there for a long time and I don't see how they seem to think it will get bigger. It is possible, but doubtful. I could understand if this was someplace like Savannah talking, with a large tourism rate, or Fort Myers, with a large retirement community, but Wichita? Come on.

Exactly why ICT needs AirTran to keep fares in check, otherwise they cannot grow their economy and build business with $1000 (Delta like) airfares to even get there! You're nearly defending the need of the AirTran subsidies. Also Wichita does have some pretty good industries, including many aviation interests.

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 35): About as much of a point as there is in going to Valdosta, Dothan, or Albany.

You aren't comparing the same type of air service. In VLD, DHN, and ABY DL is the only one willing to provide service. I don't see any markets that FL serves where they are the only air carrier, however there are dozens on DL's side. Plus last time I checked ICT still had AA, UA, CO, and NW. It wasn't like DL was the only game in town and FL swooped in and saved the day. Unfortunately for these communities the service requested requires paying higher fares to offset the cost. The more seats that can be offered the lower the fares will be. An airline can't afford to have just 100-200 daily seats and sell them for $89. The airline wouldn't be able to stay in the city, for that you can ask FL in ICT. They obviously can cut it doing that in ICT on their own and that is why they need the subsidy.

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 37): Also Wichita does have some pretty good industries, including many aviation interests.

Boeing Military & Commercial - all Boeing 737 fuselages built in ICT.
Raytheon Aircraft (Beech Aircraft) - All Bonanzas, Barons, King Airs, and biz jets built in ICT.
Cessna Aircraft - all Citations business jets and Caravans built in ICT.
Bombardier (LearJet) - flight test center.

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 29): From today's Wichita Eagle: http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/busi...1.htm

So like I said earlier, no one in ICT gives a crap that DL pulled down service!
For DL though, it was the right thing to do.

That article isn't coming up but I assume you're referring to the editorial. Like I said earlier, the Eagle's editorial board has been critical of Delta over the fiasco. I would hardly say that nobody in Wichita cares about Delta leaving. Many people have their travel plans messed up as a result of this and are upset over the deal.

Quoting DeltaMIA (Reply 7): The 4 flights that are staying are: 4455 7:00am 10:10am CRJ becomes CJ4 in Sep 4419 12:58pm 4:50pm CRJ Becomes CR7 in Aug 4177 4:15pm 7:25pm CR7 4846 7:06pm 10:19pm CJ4 becomes CRJ in Sep

What are the four corresponding flights from ATL to ICT?

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 42): What are the four corresponding flights from ATL to ICT?

4419 10:57 12:11 CR7
4177 14:29 15:40 CR7
4846 17:17 18:33 CR4
4456 20:39 21:53 CRJ

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 35): So far, nearly $500,000 has been pledged by 24 firms to attract more attention to the carrier's frequent flier program." Seems like its not just the city council that wants AirTran in town...genious.

Great, now if those firms can generate another 1.5 mil USD a year, the city can stop having to provide handouts to Airtran, right? Probably not, Airtran will take the handouts with the extra cash. Man, I wish I could start an airline that makes more money from city tablescraps than it can actually generate with 2 flights a day and 3 on Sat.

Quoting GroundStop (Reply 35): About as much of a point as there is in going to Valdosta, Dothan, or Albany. But your airline seems okay with raping passengers in those markets so there must be some reason to go there.

Yet, people continue to fly from those markets. Besides, its 2 different types of flying, as stated by DeltaMIA. The passengers flying from those markets apparently do not see themselves being raped, as they can easily drive to TLH from all 3.

Quoting Travatl (Reply 36): Touche Groundstop...........

Trav, I was shocked to hear this: My FL roommate made it apparent that while Leonard takes $5mil in compensation, as compared to the rest of the industry, that was your contract that you could have had 3 years ago. Good to see you have one now. Hearing that, I wouldn't trust your management too much. Just FYI.


I'm quite aware of the aviation companies in Wichita. Quite aware! But like I said, with the exception of 4 aviation-related companies, why would I need to go to ICT? I don't. Nor do I need to go to VLD or ABY. Did go to DHN to see my brother get his wings pinned at Rucker.

Quoting BH346 (Reply 41): I would hardly say that nobody in Wichita cares about Delta leaving. Many people have their travel plans messed up as a result of this and are upset over the deal.

Then I would say they do care. Their travel plans were messed up. They should pay more attention next time. The only people hurting from this are the citizens themselves. Pity.


Otto

Ottopylit, your crack me up! You've had AirTran go from being the crappy little upstart forcing it's way to the trough to the bully picking on poor, sick Delta. I do admire your tenacity and your perseverance, though. What you and the other Deltoids will not or cannot acknowledge is that Wichita is willing to go to great lengths to keep AirTran in town for a very good reason. When AirTran enters a market fares fall across the board and traffic increases an average of 150%. Maybe Wichita is not a huge tourist destination (neither is Atlanta, for that matter) but lower fares encourage locals to fly out of ICT rather than driving to MCI or elsewhere. It also encourages established businesses to stay in the community and grow and new and outside businesses to consider locating in the area. The beneficiaries are everyone who lives and works in Wichita.

The bottom line here is that AirTran is not competing against Delta (actually ASA, Comair & Skywest in this case) but against Skymiles, an example of one of the most ingenious devices to restrain free trade ever developed. Due to these loyalty programs potential customers are less willing to give their business to a newcomer offering superior service at a lower price at the expense of their blind pursuit of "miles." When I was a corporate travel agent a while back I had clients regularly turn down Kiwi flights from ATL to MCO even though Kiwi offered a full meal, increased legroom, friendlier service and better times in favor of a bag of peanuts and center seat on a Delta L-1011 full of kids at a much higher fare so they could get their points. I think the inability to compete with gargantuan loyalty programs was the major reason airlines like Kiwi, Legend, Midway and many others failed. What's the first thing a legacy does when a LCC comes to town? They offer triple miles!

AirTran and the other LCCs have had an easy time in the more price-sensitive leisure market but continue to struggle for the business traveler. As has been mentioned many times the business traveler thanks the LCC for the low fares as they walk past their counter on the way to hop on the legacy that has matched the cheaper rate. Wichita's efforts, like it or not, are mainly to get the local business community to break the Skymiles habit and patronize the carrier that is doing the most to promote growth in the area. It is starting to unravel, however. More and more travelers are realizing that picking up points at the gas station, making a cellphone call or paying higher fares make less sense when they are so hard to redeem.

Delta needs to stop shadowing AirTran at every turn (I'm sure if we started flying to Timbuktu, there would be an ASA CRJ parked next to us within a week) and get their own house in order. If Delta stopped subsidizing it's losses protecting market share and trying to constantly stifle AirTran by screwing travelers everywhere else all the Wichitas out there wouldn't have to go to such extremes to bring in competition. Bigger is not always better.

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 45): Delta needs to stop shadowing AirTran at every turn (I'm sure if we started flying to Timbuktu, there would be an ASA CRJ parked next to us within a week)

I think you are confusing DL/FL with Song/JetBlue. When was the last time DL shadowed FL?

When was the last time DL shadowed FL?

Flint, Freeport, Newport News, Los Angeles & Richmond to name a few.

[Edited 2005-06-03 16:36:06]

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 45): The bottom line here is that AirTran is not competing against Delta (actually ASA, Comair & Skywest in this case) but against Skymiles,

Bingo. Look at Vanguard at CVG...everybody in CVG complained about being held hostage by Delta and United...Vanguard starts service, and the good citizens of CVG hollered out "Thanks" to Vanguard as they headed for their Delta or United flight that now had a competitive fare. All because of the miles. Vanguard pulled out, fares went up, and folks in Cincy wonder "what happened?".

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 47): Los Angeles

You can't be serious about that.

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 47): Flint, Freeport, Newport News...& Richmond to name a few.

In that case FL has been shadowing Delta on ATL-LAS, ATL-DEN, ATL-SRQ, ATL-CLT, etc   .