DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:02 pm

all right, first of all, this is my first post, i have been a long time reader of this board however.

I'm sorry if this has been discussed before. Anyway, here is my idea:

If AA or NW gets the China route authority, it may hurt Delta's case for applying for 2008. So, in a case where the competition would be greater, would it be in the realm of possibility for them to do something rather unexpected and start LAX-PEK/PVG? I have seen a lot of people speculate that Delta will build up LAX, and, if they are going to in fact build it up, why not by-pass the routes with heavier competition (LAX-Japan, Hong Kong, Australia, etc.)?

thanks, and once again, i appoligize if this has been discussed.
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
aircanada014
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:24 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:10 pm

I just hope UA continues to expand overseas to ASIA. I wonder if AA will expand further along with CO and NW.. Its nice to see those four airlines overseas to ASIA...Imagine combining the operation of AC and UA for Pacific route from North America to ASIA...
 
DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:29 pm

Quoting AirCanada014 (Reply 1):
I just hope UA continues to expand overseas to ASIA. I wonder if AA will expand further along with CO and NW.

Well, seeing as how Asia are both UA's and NW's bread and butter, they will continue to expand. AA will probably not expand that much in Asia because of the union rules that limited flying to 14 hours a leg. Also, I read a very good report on AA's utilaization of the 777, and they basically fly 50 T7s to 20 destinations. The growth is very conservative.

But, back to what i asked about before, if AA or NW get the route authority, it will probably make ATL-China less attractive due to the competition on AA and NW. What are the odds that, in the LAX buildup, they initiate LAX-PEK/PVG?
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:37 pm

I don't understand why if AA or NW got authority in this round that DL might not be able to in 2008.

I think that DL will have a good case in 2008. Whoever gets rights this time might not apply again. Whoever doesn't get rights this time will resubmit their application from the 2006 round.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:54 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 3):
I don't understand why if AA or NW got authority in this round that DL might not be able to in 2008.


What I meant was, that the argument for AA and NW is similar to DL's argument for 06'.

I have a good feeling they will get the 08 decision, much on the same basis that CO will get the 06 one. Who said that DL couldn't start a route to china from somewhere outside ATL?

All right, I just remembered that the AA application was re routed to be something like DFW-ORD-PVG-DFW. even still, though, DTW and ORD/DFW would steal quite a bit of DL's connecting market. The main point of DL's last application was connectivity. AA's is also about connectivity. And AA would route someone lets say in Savannah, to DFW-ORD-China. the extra stop would be inconvenient.

AA may have shot themselves in the foot in the eyes of the DOT, because of the 14 hour rules the pilot union imposed upon themselves. However, if AA goes for the application again, the main focus will still be connectivity, and new gateways in the US.

for DL, LAX would be a more viable destination from china for three reasons. CA and MU fly to PEK and PVG respectively. from what i understand about CA, is that the service level on it are fairly disappointing. plus, the flights are either daily or less. CZ, a future sky team member, has a secondary hub in PEK that could provide feed. so, if DL was to apply for LAX-PEK, they would have feed from both internal china, and latin america, two hot destinations with not that many links to each other. DL at LAX could serve as a nice connecting point for lat-am to asia.

[Edited 2007-01-06 08:56:57]
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:59 pm

The round going on right now for USDOT to pick an airline route is only for those that have existing service into China. DL will compete once again for route authority for 2008 when any new carrier can then come in. DL is the only major overseas U.S. carrier that now lacks a China authority. NW or CO getting an additional route shouldn't hurt DL's chances next year to get a route from ATL-PEK/PVG as has been proposed by them. AA getting one from DFW could however be something that isn't good for this proposal (This was recently modified to ORD to satisfy their pilots). After ATL, I think DL will seek an approval from LAX or possibly SEA for either of those two China ports of entry. They will look at JFK as being their port of entry into India with service to BOM they initiated just last month. The reason I elude to SEA is that the Pacific Northwest is one part of the country with strong cultural and ethnic ties to the Chinese mainland that is overlooked particularly by any of the big Chinese National airlines since YVR is just up the road, and the bilateral with Canada is more favorable, hence AC with routes to China from both YYZ and YVR.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:00 pm

I see what you are saying now.

The one thing that NW doesn't have going for it is Latin America. THis is a plus for DL. AA has a good latin route system but as you said AA shot itself in the foot. CO could do more damage than AA or NW for DL due to their EWR hub however CO's latin routes mainly go out of IAH right?

DL has worked hard for ATL to make it what it is and using it as a focus is important. That being said, if they were to not only get the authority for LAX-PEK but also launch a few other routes out of LAX then it might be worth it. I would say...SYD or HKG would be good.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:04 pm

I'll say that a US carrier should certainly operate to China from LAX. There are 3 mainland Chinese carriers versus no US presence on the route.

I'll reserve my judgement whether this should be DL or not. I'm still not sold on the long term viability on DL's LAX build up especially the RJ flying.

Both UA or AA could make a better case in my view with their established presence and networks at the airport.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
aq737
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2000 10:47 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:23 pm

However, just thinking outside the box:

AA does a good job of connecting most business centers and major cities with both DFW and ORD. There are some airports that receive DFW or ORD service but most sizeable airports receive service from both. Thus, unless you are originating from DFW, the stop in ORD doesn't matter because you can be routed from Origin-ORD-PEK rather than Origin-DFW-ORD-PEK as stated earlier. On the return, you can be routed DFW-Origin, thus maintaining a one-stop connection to most destinations.

However, it does seem absurd and AA won't get the rights.

Aq737
 
DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:29 pm

The reason why I don't see SEA working for DL is because of the relatively small presence they have in SEA. They only fly to SLC, CVG, ATL, and JFK. They do have a codeshare agreement with AS, but, I would think that DL would have more then just flights to the hubs going international. I could see NW adding SEA-China before DL would. However, DL could codeshare with NW on that flight.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 7):

I'll reserve my judgement whether this should be DL or not. I'm still not sold on the long term viability on DL's LAX build up especially the RJ flying.
Both UA or AA could make a better case in my view with their established presence and networks at the airport.

I believe the RJ flying is short term, DL is stretched on aircraft afaik

Although they both do have decent networks at LAX, the fact of the matter is DL is regretting there de-hubbing and downsizing of LAX. AA and UA have been pretty dormant in LAX too, not much new. UA focuses its operations across the pacific at SFO. AA hasn't done to much with LAX, the international services they offer are limited, SJD,SJO,LHR,NRT,SAL,YYZ, plus San Luis Potosi on American Eagle.
Domestic, they fly to SAT, AUS, DFW, LAS, MIA, FLL, MCO, BNA, XNA, STL, ORD, BOS, IAD, JFK, Lihue, KOA, HNL, DEN, Vail (seasonally) and OGG. plus intra-california on American Eagle. (FAT, SAN, SBA, San Luis, Monterey, SFO, SJC).

the fact of the matter is, DL could overtake AA easily in LAX. UA will defend LAX until they realize that the assets in SFO lean toward UA's favor, and having two large operations 300 miles apart haven't exactly proved to be complimentary to each other.

(Not trying to sound like a smart a$$, just my view of it all).
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:52 pm

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
I believe the RJ flying is short term,

I tend to believe so also. I'm just not sure if the markets they are/will be serving with RJs will be viable to accept mainline equipment after being stuck with the medicore equipment in the mean time.

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
DL is regretting there de-hubbing and downsizing of LAX.

I bet they are now. Outside of the AirCal's & PSA, LAX for the longest time was United and Delta(Western) territory. DL assumed a well sized presence at the airport and a large and loyal frequent flyer base in California.

While UA walked away with all the DL Skywest flying, I'd say the DL downsizing really awakened AA to focus more on LA. Besides transcon services, AA really only consistently maintained service to its hubs from LA historically but with DL departure they grew into many new cities and also grew the Eagle network.

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
the fact of the matter is, DL could overtake AA easily in LAX.

I would not say easily. For the first 10 months of 2006, DL carried about 3.6 million passengers thru LAX, while AA had 7.7 million.
It would take incredible huge growth on DL's part to boost its volume and market share while at the same hoping AA and UA would be willing to concede a little.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
fun2fly
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:38 pm

More importantly, another week's gone by w/o the DOT telling us who gets the new 2007 US - China authority. Amazing, really. I think every A.netter could have reviewed the case and made the right decision by now!
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:23 am

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
The reason why I don't see SEA working for DL is because of the relatively small presence they have in SEA. They only fly to SLC, CVG, ATL, and JFK. They do have a codeshare agreement with AS, but, I would think that DL would have more then just flights to the hubs going international. I could see NW adding SEA-China before DL would. However, DL could codeshare with NW on that flight.

Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
102IAHexpress
Posts: 898
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:33 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:13 am

Quoting DL777LAX (Thread starter):
So, in a case where the competition would be greater, would it be in the realm of possibility for them to do something rather unexpected and start LAX-PEK/PVG?

I doubt it. I wonder if their international product could compete with the Asian carriers that fly into LAX. DL best bet in 2008 is via ATL.
 
LawnDart
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 11:33 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:54 am

Quoting FUN2FLY (Reply 11):
another week's gone by w/o the DOT telling us who gets the new 2007 US - China authority. I think every A.netter could have reviewed the case and made the right decision by now!

 laughing  rotfl  laughing  rotfl  laughing  rotfl  laughing 

I can see it now...a.netters deciding who wins the 2007 US-China route authority...AA...no, wait...CO! Yes, CO! Hold on...NW...no, NW sux...UA...UA's got authority already, and no AVOD...CO...wait, CO doesn't offer First Class...AA...no, AA shot themselves in the foot with the duty-limit required reroute thru ORD...UA...UA sux...CO, they're the best international service...EWR sux...NW...no, they have DC9s...

Hey, FUN2FLY, thanks for the laugh...
 
DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:47 am

Quoting 102IAHexpress (Reply 13):
I doubt it. I wonder if their international product could compete with the Asian carriers that fly into LAX.

I believe there was a thread on there new first, but I cant find it. So, here is the next best thing: http://news.delta.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=10405.

Besides, MU and CA are the only direct flights from PEK/PVG to LAX, and, reading what others have to say, http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/air_china.htm, and http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/c_eastrn.htm.

reading through, it sounds like DL would get a lot of customers who would fly UA, NW, NH, or JL through NRT, KE or OZ through ICN or CX through HKG (go south to go back north?) because it would be the only nonstop, besides those mentioned (CA/MU), to PEK/PVG. Many passengers look at connecting as a pain, if there is a non-stop available, chances are they would take it If the service isn't worth the convince of skipping a layover, which sounds like the case here, they flock to other carriers.
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
rwsea
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:23 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:16 am

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii.

Um, don't forget AMS and NRT too! Plus, have you seen the frequencies and size of equipment on SEA-MSP, especially in Summer?

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.

Agreed. We had China Eastern to PVG until a few years ago. My higher priority at the moment would be CX to HKG. NW couldn't pull it off with a 742, but I think the route could be extremely successful with a smaller plane (such as A340 or 787).
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:51 am

It is hard to believe that the DOT hasn't made a decision by now. You almost have to wonder if any airlines really want a China route because they have to start it with so little notice. There is no reason why the DOT can't make a decision so airlines have at least 6 months and ideally 9 months of time to properly market and prepare for a flight. That the DOT doesn't understand that speaks volumes about how detached they are from how airlines operate.

I don't think what happens with the 2007 decision will affect DL at all. DL will undoubtedly push for a route from ATL... they have had the mayor and several business groups lobbying on their behalf.

The only real decision is whether DL will apply for PVG or PEK service. If the 2007 award is to PEK, DL will probably apply for PVG service and vice versa. DFWPEK would reduce the value of ATLPEK but would leave the east coast to PVG underserved. Likewise if CO gets EWRPVG for 2007, then there is opportunity for the east coast to PEK.

My gut says that DL prefers PEK because of the Olympics and the shorter flight which could allow use of the 777ER. They do have 777LRs to be delivered by the time the new China route is awarded and I expect that DL could argue, esp. for PVG, that the 777LR would provide more cargo lifting capability than any other Asia to midwest/central or eastern US destination. The LR could be an advantage for DL in this route case.

I do think you will see DL add China service from Asia. Right now, AA is in lockdown mode because of their pilots footdragging so even if AA wanted to add China service, it's likely their pilots would try to get something in return for flying the route - something AA mgmt is not willing to do.
 
aircanada014
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:24 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:56 am

I can see DOT award to UA and NW... as for CO who knows maybe they will expand.. As for DL I dont know if they deserve to get it since they didn't expand their ASIA route in early 90s and 80s..
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:05 am

And of course we know that AA has NEVER pulled out of an Asia route nor has NW... not sure about CO but it's a stretch to say that any airline has ever not pulled down a limited access route. (which incidentally most of DL's Asia routes in the 90s were to destinations that any airline could have served). Note how little service there is to Japanese regional cities (other than NRT) from the US even today. Hard to condemn DL when other airlines have yet to be able to make those routes work. South Korea and Taiwan have open skies agreements with the US and Thailand and Hong Kong both have unused route authorities available to US airlines. DL hasn't kept any airline from expanding in Asia - so your argument is pretty weak, Air Canada. Not all airlines have a practical international monopoly from their country as AC does.
 
102IAHexpress
Posts: 898
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:33 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:05 am

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 17):
It is hard to believe that the DOT hasn't made a decision by now. You almost have to wonder if any airlines really want a China route because they have to start it with so little notice. There is no reason why the DOT can't make a decision so airlines have at least 6 months and ideally 9 months of time to properly market and prepare for a flight. That the DOT doesn't understand that speaks volumes about how detached they are from how airlines operate.

Not so hard to believe really, for the 2005/2006 route authorities the DOT also took it’s time. I think those authorities were awarded in February of 2005 and CO subsequently started their PEK route in June of that year.
In any event I think for the 2008 route authorities we could see DL AA and CO propose routes from the South.
 
USPIT10L
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:24 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:07 am

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.

NW has far more FF loyalty at SEA than DL does. SEA has to be in the top 5 for WorldPerks customer cities (behind MSP and DTW of course).

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 17):
Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.

I'd love to see DL get the authority, particularly ATLPEK.
It's a Great Day for Hockey!
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:15 am

You didn't quite quote the right people, USPIT, but I think we get to the same conclusion. DL is in the driver's seat in returning to be a powerhouse in LAX. AA is the only likely force that could challenge DL but they are in labor lockdown right now which is keeping them from moving anything forward. It's sad that AA is missing out on so much int'l expansion right now but it leaves more opportunities for other carriers - and probably leaves LAX completely to DL to expand.
 
DL777LAX
Topic Author
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:21 pm

So, to sum up what a lot of people are saying, a lot are saying that if DL was to be awarded the route authority, they would start it up through ATL, before starting a route to LAX? But, a lot believe LAX will happen eventually, correct?

In that case, hopefully DL gets awarded the china route four times in a row. (ATL/LAX-PEK/PVG)
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:15 pm

I am frustrated by the whole procedure. It totally ignores any marked forces.

In an ideal world every US carrier could fly to China as often as they wont. That's obviously not the case. But does anyone really believe DL could compete in an open market with a flight ATL-PEK or AA with DFW-PVG?
There is no way these routes would be flown. They would be crashed by the competetion from SFO, LAX, ORD, DTW and NYC and the likes of UA, NW and CO.
The proposed routes from ATL and DFW could only work because much more viable routes are prevented and long established carriers are not allowed to fly them. Instead newcommers with arcward routes are choses.

There is a reason why NW does not fly to Brazil. The competition in MIA, ATL, HOU, nad DFW is much too strong. NW would get a bloody nose. But if Brazil would be as much restricted as China is, DTW-GRU would a gold mine.

So why doesn't the US authorithies just make an auction for the traffic rights? This way the the bidder with the most viable route option would win. Sounds much more logical too me
 
MastaHanky
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 7:02 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:26 pm

Out of curiosity, does anybody see a possibility of a ATL-CAN or a LAX-CAN in the future? I wouldn't expect them to apply for this route in the first round of authorities, but maybe in the future to hook up with Skyteam (soon to be?) associate China Southern?
 
DAL767400ER
Posts: 5084
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:47 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:20 pm

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
But does anyone really believe DL could compete in an open market with a flight ATL-PEK or AA with DFW-PVG?

Well, the AA folks in Dallas do, as do the DL folks in Atlanta, and last I heard, those folks were actually responsible for making an airline work and didn't just comment about it on internet boards.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
There is no way these routes would be flown. They would be crashed by the competetion from SFO, LAX, ORD, DTW and NYC and the likes of UA, NW and CO.
The proposed routes from ATL and DFW could only work because much more viable routes are prevented and long established carriers are not allowed to fly them. Instead newcommers with arcward routes are choses.

And you believe in that because?!?

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
There is a reason why NW does not fly to Brazil.

Yes, it's called focusing on Asia and Amsterdam? Do you see NW flying to Europe outside of AMS? Yes, a few single daily flights to a handful of destinations. Does NW fly to the Caribbean and LatAm? Sure, a very limited number of markets. Are all those places underserved by NW because they are restricted? Umm, most certainly not. NW does not not fly to Brazil because of restrictions, it doesn't fly to Brazil because it doesn't want to.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
The competition in MIA, ATL, HOU, nad DFW is much too strong.

Boy, those flights from JFK must be bleeding money then.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
But if Brazil would be as much restricted as China is, DTW-GRU would a gold mine.

Brazil is still restricted as hell. Had it not been for RG's failure, neither AA nor DL would have gotten their 7 (temporary!) additional weekly frequencies for US service. If Brazil was so unrestricted, AA would be serving at least 5 destinations from Brazil now, not just 3.
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:52 pm

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 26):
Well, the AA folks in Dallas do, as do the DL folks in Atlanta, and last I heard, those folks were actually responsible for making an airline work and didn't just comment about it on internet boards.

Maybe we should talk German. It seems you have completely misundertsood me. DL and AA believe that they can do in the current market, which is heavily restricted. But it is hard to believe these routes would work if UA, NW and CO could fly as often as economicably viable form their hubs.
In fact AA would not a moment think about flying to China from DFW when they could do it from ORD. But the current way of route allocation forces them to try routes that looks attractive to some politicians. The same happens with UA and their proposal for IAD-PEK. They would never fly this route if they would be free in flying from wherever they want.

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 26):
And you believe in that because?!?

Yes.

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 26):
Yes, it's called focusing on Asia and Amsterdam? Do you see NW flying to Europe outside of AMS? Yes, a few single daily flights to a handful of destinations. Does NW fly to the Caribbean and LatAm? Sure, a very limited number of markets. Are all those places underserved by NW because they are restricted? Umm, most certainly not. NW does not not fly to Brazil because of restrictions, it doesn't fly to Brazil because it doesn't want to.

Have you ever thought about why an airline focuses on certain routes? Obviously not, otherwise you would have find out, that from some hubs certain routes are not viable just due to their location.

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 26):
Boy, those flights from JFK must be bleeding money then.

Geschenkt grandpa. But that does not contradict my argument.

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 26):

Brazil is still restricted as hell.

Well, compared with USA-China, Brazil-USA is an single sky. Nevertheless, it has still restrictions.
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Mon Jan 08, 2007 5:25 am

So why does DL operate a larger transatlantic gateway from ATL than any other airline does outside of the NE (and that would be CO) since ATL is so far out of the way to so many European destinations?

Maybe it's because ATL is a powerhouse of a hub and a few hundred miles out of the way on a 7000 mile journey doesn't really matter.

How many airlines are flying to ICN nonstop from interior hubs in the US? obviously DL thinks pretty strongly that it can make ATLICN work. Same thing can be said about DXB. And why in the world would anyone in their right mind fly to TLV via ATL when they could go through NYC or other more northern hubs, or even European hubs that are probably more "on the way?"

Given that DL has managed to defy everyone's logic about what kind of int'l markets ATL should have and is now one of the largest gateways to every region of the world except for Asia, maybe it's not too far fetched to believe ATL to east Asia can work too.
 
DAL767400ER
Posts: 5084
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:47 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:20 am

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
But it is hard to believe these routes would work if UA, NW and CO could fly as often as economicably viable form their hubs.

That is strictly your opinion and not proven by any facts.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
In fact AA would not a moment think about flying to China from DFW when they could do it from ORD. But the current way of route allocation forces them to try routes that looks attractive to some politicians.

Oh yeah? Better tell that to the folks in Dallas, looks like they are about to make a disastrous mistake wanting to link their 700+-flight hub with China.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
The same happens with UA and their proposal for IAD-PEK. They would never fly this route if they would be free in flying from wherever they want.

BS. Political traffic is reason enough for this flight to be operated.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
Have you ever thought about why an airline focuses on certain routes?

I could have sworn I did, but

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
Obviously not,

seeing as how you supposedly know more about what I am thinking than I do myself...

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
otherwise you would have find out, that from some hubs certain routes are not viable just due to their location.

Yeah, no sh!t Sherlock! You might have also found out that some airlines just tend to focus on certain markets and ignore others, but I am probably just thinking that, and seeing as how what I am thinking is wrong anyway...

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
But that does not contradict my argument.

Oh really? Let me quote you again:

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 24):
The competition in MIA, ATL, HOU, nad DFW is much too strong

Sounds like a contradiction to me.

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
Well, compared with USA-China, Brazil-USA is an single sky

Yeah great, and compared with USA-Russia, USA-China is open sky, whoopdee-friggin-do. Face the facts. Number of flights doesn't mean a thing, both markets are restricted, and both markets would see considerably more flights if it weren't for restrictions.
 
DCAYOW
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:24 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:54 am

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 27):
The same happens with UA and their proposal for IAD-PEK. They would never fly this route if they would be free in flying from wherever they want.

IAD-PEK would work, just as IAD-NRT has worked for 25 years and now up to double daily!
Retorne ao céu...
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:22 pm

Quoting DCAYOW (Reply 30):
IAD-PEK would work, just as IAD-NRT has worked for 25 years and now up to double daily!

I also think that IAD-PEK will work. But largely bacause there is a lack of seats to PEK. Due to the heavy restrcitions nearly every route to China would work. Even US from PIT would make money.

In regards to UA I am sure they would make more money by offering a 2nd flight from ORD or SFO. The problem is, that they would not be awarded for a 2nd flight from an exiting gateway therefore they apply for a political attractive route like IAD-PEK. And that is the whole problem of this whole route allocation process.

Auction the rights to the airline that thinks it can make the most money out of it! That is also in the best interest of American consumers.
 
B2443
Posts: 586
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:17 am

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 31):
In regards to UA I am sure they would make more money by offering a 2nd flight from ORD or SFO

Say if AA or UA did get the authority, would they be able to change its originating city or add a stop in between? For example, AA's DFW-PEK eventually became DFW-ORD-PEK, or IAD-PEK -> IAD-ORD-PEK so it would fit the airlines' network better? If that happens, arguments about DFW vs DTW, or IAD vs EWR would seem to be pointless to me.
 
DFWEagle
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 8:12 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:10 am

Quoting B2443 (Reply 32):
Say if AA or UA did get the authority, would they be able to change its originating city or add a stop in between? For example, AA's DFW-PEK eventually became DFW-ORD-PEK, or IAD-PEK -> IAD-ORD-PEK so it would fit the airlines' network better? If that happens, arguments about DFW vs DTW, or IAD vs EWR would seem to be pointless to me.

When AA was given their frequency for ORD-PVG, they were only given the ORD-PVG authority so they cannot fly any other city pairs or add any stops in between. I would expect the same for DFW-PEK if they are awarded it (which would be a huge surprise).
However, UA already has the authority to fly from JFK, ORD, LAX, SFO, SEA and HNL to PEK, PVG and CAN, so unless DOT puts a specific restriction on that particular new frequency, which they may very well do, UA could do it.
Ryan / HKG
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:23 am

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 22):
AA is the only likely force that could challenge DL

I am fairly confident that United can put up quite a challenge to Delta at LAX, being the largest carrier there.

NS
 
DCAYOW
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:24 am

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:15 pm

Quoting JoFMO (Reply 31):
In regards to UA I am sure they would make more money by offering a 2nd flight from ORD or SFO. The problem is, that they would not be awarded for a 2nd flight from an exiting gateway therefore they apply for a political attractive route like IAD-PEK. And that is the whole problem of this whole route allocation process.

Auction the rights to the airline that thinks it can make the most money out of it! That is also in the best interest of American consumers.

I agree wholeheartedly with your first paragraph. I have no doubt that is likely true. However, what the DOT likes to see is new gateways to destinations. This is done for many reasons, they recognize that ORD (being slot constrained) cannot be a growth airport for the future. Additionally, they recognize that international flights bring enormous economic benefits (indirect benefits to the local population) to the regions that have them. Therefore, there is an interest in devolving those benefits to the "less-developed" regions. They recognize that in addition to airline competition, there is gateway competition. For instance, does a flight from Norfolk to Beijing via IAD improve the travel time for the person from Norfolk vis a vis going through ORD. Or does Washington create new one-stop markets that don't exist from ORD? What are all the elapsed times on flights through Washington and how is that different from ORD - are there improvements in schedules for smaller markets that collectively add up to many pax. This is of interest to the national government and the consumers that don't have a voice individually.

[Edited 2007-01-09 05:17:05]
Retorne ao céu...
 
United777atGU
Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:41 pm

RE: DL And The China Authorities For 2008

Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:33 am

Quoting DCAYOW (Reply 30):
IAD-PEK would work, just as IAD-NRT has worked for 25 years and now up to double daily!

I was skeptical about UA's service on top of NH's, but boy Tilton's crew must have some Japanese blood in the family because they know what they're doing (in terms of route planning)!

IAD-PEK will do well too.
Speechless

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: coairman, grbauc, hoya, kimshep, Miami, pugman211, rbavfan, Revelation, SInGAPORE_AIR, tcaeyx, TheF15Ace, zkncj and 282 guests