|Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 6):|
DL taking on AS's SEA hub would be like WN taking on FL's ATL hub, or going back to other West Coast examples like AA at SJC, US at LAX, etc. The acquiring carrier would be forced to dismantle the established hub for no other reason than an higher cost structure and different network strategy. The status quo is perfect - DL gets lots of feed (and local FFers) without the costs and challenges that come with providing it. Obviously their mutually beneficial partnership with AS at SEA, and also PDX, even LAX appears to be working MUCH better than DL's futile attempts to provide its own domestic feed for new international flights out of other spoke/focus city/international gateway markets like BOS and MIA...
|Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 7):|
Well said. I've been saying this all along. If DL or AA bought AS, most of AS's route structure would be gone so fast it would make your head spin. I strongly doubt that DL would want AS's niche routes such as SJC-LIH, BLI-HNL, SEA-KTN, etc. Why would they want all those non-stop flights out of SEA to places like MCO, MCI, SAT etc when they can start routing this traffic through their existing hubs at SLC, ATL and MSP.
Why is it that every time a question of merger surrounding AS
comes up the first thing everyone says is that "any merger would be the end of AS
network"? Yes AS
has a total cost structure that is lower then DL
(the most likely merger partners), but that is overall not on a specific opperational basis. Alaska Airlines doesn't offer an extensive network of flights to Alaska because they like the state, it is because they make money. If I had to hasard a quess I would say they make pretty good money on it. Sure DL
might not be able to make some of the more touristy routes AS
flies work, I am not saying nothing would get cut. However, I just don't see how DL
for example merging with AS
would mean the end of a large part of their network.
To another point, DL
doesn't want to route passengers through their Hubs because they like to, you understand right? It is because the route does not work on its own. When DL
, or any airline for that matter, decide to end a route they end it because it is not making money, or the aircraft can make more money doing something else. It is not a guy looking at a map and saying "we can route those passengers over MSP
merged with AS
, the combined company would continue to evaluate each route the same as AS
do now. They may find that there are some routes that no longer make sense, they may find some new routes that make sense now that didn't before. For example if AS
merge, the combined company may add more SEA
service because without AS
can sustain 4 dailies but AS
can now sustain 3 instead of 2.
You just don't know.
And remember CASM is a value that takes all of the expenses of an airline and divides it by all the Available Seat Miles flown. Just because DL
's is like ~16.5 cents and AS
is ~13.5 cents doesn't mean for each flight that AS
flies it cost them less than DL
operating the same flight. DL
's 737s might be just as cost effective as AS
's 737s, but DL
's overall costs are higher because they operate MD
-88s and DC-9's. It just depends.
If you have facts that dispute this please do share I would love to learn but otherwise you just don't know.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.