Land a JetBlue nonstop between Orlando and Detroit http://www.thepetitionsite.com/tell-a-friend/27706037

flymco753 wrote:

Land a JetBlue nonstop between Orlando and Detroit http://www.thepetitionsite.com/tell-a-friend/27706037

Nobody is gonna sign this! Its not going to happen! Its not going to change anyones minds! My suggestion? Drop this Jetblue Orlando Detroit nonsense like a hot potato. You have serious stuff to consider.

This thread is turning into a bickering argument—but about what, exactly? Airports aren't like Tindr; it's not a matter of being statically hot or not, good enough for -this- service or not diva enough for -that- service.

Instead of arguing about whether Detroit "deserves" service, can you try to engage in a thoughtful and informed conversation about the dynamic, symbiotic relationship between Detroit and its airport—in which DTW helps Detroit grow and Detroit helps DTW grow. That is way more interesting, and importantly, far and beyond closer to the way that normal, reasonable people think about this.

So few people here would succeed on staff at WCAA, because they think emotionally, like little boys, about something far more complicated.

So, what would it take for MAN, or DXB, or MCO, or SFO on United, or whatever service you're curious about—what would it take for that service to develop? How would it sustain? What would it bring, and what new opportunities for Detroit (not just its airport) would it bring?

Munich might be a good place to start. WHY did Delta start this route? How do we know it's performing well beyond subjective perceptions? What will it bring to Detroit's economy and community? Etc...

Munich might be a good place to start. WHY did Delta start this route? How do we know it's performing well beyond subjective perceptions? What will it bring to Detroit's economy and community? Etc...

I wondered that too. My guess it has something to do with the auto industry, but are there many auto workers flying between DTW and MUC to fill an aircraft that size. I haven't run the numbers on it.

reasonable wrote:

Munich might be a good place to start. WHY did Delta start this route? How do we know it's performing well beyond subjective perceptions? What will it bring to Detroit's economy and community? Etc...

I'm not sure where I can find information regarding the success of this flight but I can say that MUC was added because International PDEW between both cities was enough to create a direct connection between both cities, as well as frequent travel for auto suppliers in both Germany and the Detroit area. The auto industry has made a comeback and everyone is flying again, the last few summers a lot of folks used DTW-CDG-MUC, DTW-AMS-MUC and DTW-FRA-MUC which helped build on reasons that Detroit could make the case for MUC service. It is linked mostly to the use of the auto industry, and Munich Airport looked for expansion to places that would benefit their airport and region. I think this is a good add for Delta.

I believe that FCO can go year round, they upgraded the aircraft from a 76L to a 764 than to a 333. As this is mostly leisure for both Italian and American families, the auto industry is benefiting from it as well with the Fiat-Chrysler deal. Yes it would make more sense to fly the autos to Turin but with DL's easy access to Alitalia in Rome it makes for an easy connection.

I'm from the Orlando area, of course I'll continue to "woo" any more connections we could possibly get in terms of service to Detroit (I work, have family and go to school here). MCO-DTW is generally a low yield route, I get that. I get their focused mainly on East Coast flying but I believe they've been breaking out of their shell a little bit with MCO after adding places like AUS and SLC. Their FLL-DTW flight is doing well in spite of DL trying to match fares, the load factor continues to prove that. I understand flights to DTW have more competition on this route, there's NK and F9 that run full time and WN seasonal. It's not like B6 would add a crazy amount of flights that would try to chase anybody out or run them out or steal their customers, which is why a once daily flight can suffice on B6. A lot of folks down here are from the Detroit area alone, if we include the Toledo, Lansing and Flint areas than you have a pretty strong case as to why this flight would succeed. Truthfully I fly every airline between the city pairs, sometimes I'll make my way through BOS on B6 just because their brand is good and the people in Detroit and Orlando like it. I use the Saturday WN flight in the winter, I've used F9 twice, I fly a lot on NK and of course if it's available grab my seat on DL. The MCO-DTW could use another carrier that offers the same amenities as DL. I don't treat the Saturday flight on WN as a threat since it isn't daily or year round, it's only 5 Saturday's of the year.

DTW could hit a home run with Icelandair offering service to KEF. For markets that are thinner like WAW, CPH, OSL, HEL, BRU, GLA, and HAM where current PDEW numbers are good but can't justify widebody service it would make pretty good sense. A lot of travelers in the Detroit area are cost conscious travelers when it comes to traveling across the pond, and with FI being a low cost European carrier, it can definitely work. We talked earlier about the Polish population in Detroit, while it's very high, most prefer not to travel back, but there's still plenty that do and could use the KEF connection. WOW would work too but it seems like they think their A320 and A321 couldn't make it to DTW, I don't know if that includes the extended aux. tanks but everybody believes different things about this subject about WOW and their range.

My biggest issue is why is it that flights are only added out of Detroit that would only be of use to premium passenger who's journey originate in Detroit and was is Detroit no longer seen as a transfer point of passengers as it once was in the Delta network. We never seem to get any new routes that use Detroit as a hub anymore even the MUC would never have been added if it was not for the fact that it is aimed at the Auto Industry to fill the front cabin. Why is it that others hubs get flights for their connectivity where Detroit only seems to get anything new that is based on filling the premium cabin up front with O&D passengers out of Detroit. Let's face it before Delta started a lot of market out of Atlanta the O&D on those route was weak to until they built up a customer base. There are many route that are viable out of Detroit for but their just not tried because they don't want to divert passengers away from ATL.

United's issue with running SFO is the Asia market that DTW already presents, so it's hard for UA to make it work. An issue with Virgin America is likely because Detroit is not a tech savvy or mellinial based destination which is what VX claims. Gaining an SFO flight is going to be very difficult, and it works the same with AA going to LAX.

I have no clue how DTW-MAN will work.

EK could make DXB work without affecting RJ AMM flights directly. While Detroit does have a gulf population, that would only fill a small portion of the plane, it's India and Bangladesh that make up a large portion. Roughly 250 people I believe, travel daily between DTW and India.

flymco753 wrote:

Land a JetBlue nonstop between Orlando and Detroit http://www.thepetitionsite.com/tell-a-friend/27706037

Ironic that you, claiming to be a Delta employee, are doing everything you can to undermine your employer - and, in the long run, your own job.

reasonable wrote:

This thread is turning into a bickering argument—but about what, exactly? Airports aren't like Tindr; it's not a matter of being statically hot or not, good enough for -this- service or not diva enough for -that- service. Instead of arguing about whether Detroit "deserves" service, can you try to engage in a thoughtful and informed conversation about the dynamic, symbiotic relationship between Detroit and its airport—in which DTW helps Detroit grow and Detroit helps DTW grow. That is way more interesting, and importantly, far and beyond closer to the way that normal, reasonable people think about this. So few people here would succeed on staff at WCAA, because they think emotionally, like little boys, about something far more complicated.

Amen! So many posters whine about now being able to take a flight from their home airport to wherever they want to go, as if the airlines are there to serve their own personal interests.

As I write this, I am on the island of Mauritius... not a destination offering a plethora of air services. I suppose I could complain, but I am happy that I can even go in-and-out with reasonable access. As I look at DTW's flights, I see lots of destinations that are probably not justified by that area's population or economics, but have been built up over time and remain in spit of, not because of, the Detroit metropolitan area's situation. I wonder why these DTW fans don't appreciate what they have.

There is one simple fact in the airline business: if a new flight or more flights make economic sense, the airline(s) will add them, If they are not justified - if an airline believes it can deploy its resources better somewhere else - those flights will not be added. Period.

alfa164 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

Land a JetBlue nonstop between Orlando and Detroit http://www.thepetitionsite.com/tell-a-friend/27706037

Ironic that you, claiming to be a Delta employee, are doing everything you can to undermine your employer - and, in the long run, your own job.

Mr flymco753 you realize you just put your career in jeopardy? From what I see you want to be a pilot for delta? Your chances of being a delta pilot is now slim to none.

klm617 wrote:

MAN would work because of their close ties with Virgin and the fact that Virgin is building up MAN so a codeshare to Detroit would expand their reach greatly. I see the Detroit market as DTW/DET/FNT and YQG and to a lessor extent YZR

You can include TOL in the market. 80% of the northwest Ohio market uses DTW. Let's face it, service at DTW is pretty accurate for the market. There are some opportunities for growth but travel patterns are pretty well covered. By and large, would we all like to see more international metal at DTW? Of course we would. If it's warranted, it will happen. I think the best shot is a Skyteam partner at the moment.

Overall, the market is starting to slowly grow and so will service.

lavalampluva wrote:

Munich might be a good place to start. WHY did Delta start this route? How do we know it's performing well beyond subjective perceptions? What will it bring to Detroit's economy and community? Etc...

I wondered that too. My guess it has something to do with the auto industry, but are there many auto workers flying between DTW and MUC to fill an aircraft that size. I haven't run the numbers on it.

I actually disagree. Yes, DL claimed that they launched this route due to the business ties between DTW and MUC and it does make sense to have such a route, but it would have made more sense for LH to launch the route as they could benefit from the connectivity in MUC to help feed the flight. Most automotive traffic in the US originates in DTW, especially the traffic which flies to/from Germany, thus the connectivity in DTW for the high yield traffic isn't necessary as they are all going to DTW, whereas German Automotive suppliers are scattered throughout southern Germany and thus the connectivity is important. TRW is being bought by ZF which is based on Lake Constance in the town of Friedrichshafen. LH runs a flight to FRA from FDH. MUC is also a very good connecting point to places in Italy, including TRN, thus I could see LH doing better than DL on this route.

What further perplexes me is why DL is running this route as summer seasonal only. I understand that they have to fill the rear of the plane with tourists which they can easily do through feed at DTW. But automotive corporate traffic lowers in the summer and is really strongest in the shoulder months of Sep-Nov and Mar-May. Of course there is demand in the summer, you can fill almost any flight in the summer months to Europe.

LH/UA/LX/OS/SN over the last year has added a lot of capacity on the North Atlantic, and it is a reason why yields have fallen. I don't think that they could have also added a MUC-DTW. However, since the DL flight is seasonal, there is an opportunity perhaps for LH to take over the route. The viability of the route is definitely there, but the summer of terror in Europe will prove challenging and may affect demand for the flight. In addition, the low interest rates in Europe may onset a slight retraction in the economy next year, so the economic climate is inopportune for a new flight. We will see what DL decides and see if it comes back. Maybe a 763 is a better aircraft for the route if the route has too much capacity. The introduction of the route with a 764 could be because of rotational requirements, but it's also an indicator that there is strong demand up front, as the 764 is more premium configured. I am sure however, that with the launch of DTW-MUC, the PDEW has grown and that there is now a much larger O&D between the cities.

I would like to see FI fly to DTW one day. It serves the thin Europe markets that maybe a nonstop can not warrant. It has that one-stop connection to Warsaw, it has North Germany connections, and it has the Scandinavian destinations that we use. FI is a better option than WOW though. The main problem with this, though is that DTW is bracketed between two cities that have already landed FI, ORD and YYZ. That certainly does not mean that we can not do it, but the WCAA will have to strongly and strategically plead their case to make it happen.

*DL DTW-MUC MAR 0.2>0 APR 1.0>0


Doesn't surprise me at all probably not coming back

klm617 wrote:

*DL DTW-MUC MAR 0.2>0 APR 1.0>0


Doesn't surprise me at all probably not coming back

It's bookable in May 2017, don't loose hope on it, it'll come back. FCO is stretched now to April 1st, a month ahead of previous years.

thedetroitpole wrote:

I would like to see FI fly to DTW one day. It serves the thin Europe markets that maybe a nonstop can not warrant. It has that one-stop connection to Warsaw, it has North Germany connections, and it has the Scandinavian destinations that we use. FI is a better option than WOW though. The main problem with this, though is that DTW is bracketed between two cities that have already landed FI, ORD and YYZ. That certainly does not mean that we can not do it, but the WCAA will have to strongly and strategically plead their case to make it happen.

I think everyone in a fortress hub wants airlines like FI to show up. Delta basically has international routes locked up in DTW wiith no real competition. The unfortunate problem for DTW is that I'm not sure their local Y loads are strong enough to justify any major competition at the moment. You see this manifested in domestic routes to North American warm weather routes as well. As I mentioned earlier, despite being a smaller metro area, MSP has a stronger local tourism base that has warranted a much better selection of alternatives to Delta for domestic and international travel. And DTW really needs to figure out how to recruit new airlines and then find ways to get people outside of DTW to drive to DTW to fly on these new options rather than transiting via local airlines (where they would end up flying on Delta).

With that said, I think either Icelandair and Condor could eventually come. They've certainly targeted smaller markets successfully.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/268168/detroits-rise-set-to-drive-another-new-transatlantic-link-for-2017/

DL 5 weekly DTW-MAN 767 announcement expected. PDEW is 52

David_itl wrote:

[url]http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/268168/detroits-rise-set-to-drive-another-new-transatlantic-link-for-2017/[url]

DL 5 weekly DTW-MAN 767 announcement expected. PDEW is 52

This is indeed great news for Detroit if it happens. Just wish we could've kept VS but you can't have everything.

David_itl wrote:

[url]http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/268168/detroits-rise-set-to-drive-another-new-transatlantic-link-for-2017/[url]

DL 5 weekly DTW-MAN 767 announcement expected. PDEW is 52

Maybe this will calm down the DTW fan boys for a bit.

lavalampluva wrote:

David_itl wrote:

[url]http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/268168/detroits-rise-set-to-drive-another-new-transatlantic-link-for-2017/[url]

DL 5 weekly DTW-MAN 767 announcement expected. PDEW is 52

Maybe this will calm down the DTW fan boys for a bit.

This is great! If it has expanded that much in the past than we'll see PDEW keep climbing. FCO now or will soon have a chance to go year round.

klakzky123 wrote:

thedetroitpole wrote:

I would like to see FI fly to DTW one day. It serves the thin Europe markets that maybe a nonstop can not warrant. It has that one-stop connection to Warsaw, it has North Germany connections, and it has the Scandinavian destinations that we use. FI is a better option than WOW though. The main problem with this, though is that DTW is bracketed between two cities that have already landed FI, ORD and YYZ. That certainly does not mean that we can not do it, but the WCAA will have to strongly and strategically plead their case to make it happen.

I think everyone in a fortress hub wants airlines like FI to show up. Delta basically has international routes locked up in DTW wiith no real competition. The unfortunate problem for DTW is that I'm not sure their local Y loads are strong enough to justify any major competition at the moment. You see this manifested in domestic routes to North American warm weather routes as well. As I mentioned earlier, despite being a smaller metro area, MSP has a stronger local tourism base that has warranted a much better selection of alternatives to Delta for domestic and international travel. And DTW really needs to figure out how to recruit new airlines and then find ways to get people outside of DTW to drive to DTW to fly on these new options rather than transiting via local airlines (where they would end up flying on Delta).

With that said, I think either Icelandair and Condor could eventually come. They've certainly targeted smaller markets successfully.

This possibility is not ruled out, but I know that Detroit has a high potential of making it happen. Norwegian would not be a bad option as well. Their hubs of Oslo and Copenhagen both offer an array of long but thin international destinations that may not be able to warrant a direct flight. Those markets include; Warsaw, Berlin, Krakow, Hamburg, Milan, Prague and Vienna, and more.

David_itl wrote:

[url]http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/268168/detroits-rise-set-to-drive-another-new-transatlantic-link-for-2017/[url]

DL 5 weekly DTW-MAN 767 announcement expected. PDEW is 52

Great news my friend! Great news for the Detroit region.

Article from Crain's last week showing passengers are up 5.1% Also a statement that WCAA has "had 45 meetings with airline route planners this year" and this increased demand data has them interested. So, this goes against the claim and assertion on here that the WCAA does nothing.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20 ... -last-year

There is some other misinformation about some of the routes/flows here:

Regarding DTW-FCO:
FCO is one of the few USA-Europe routes that sees far more US point-of-sale versus Europe point-of-sale, and this demand significantly peaks in the summer months. US-Italy demand is far lower in winter months. FCA traffic between Detroit and Turin isn't going to support year-round FCO and as it is now most of that traffic connects on DL/KL/AF over AMS/CDG or on LH over FRA. DTW-FCO is not at all likely to go year-round.

Regarding DTW-MUC:
MUC, despite what is said in press releases was clearly started summer seasonal to capture peak tourism and leisure demand to help fill the Y cabin. The automotive industry ties between DTW and MUC are negigible as most of the German automotive industry is centered around FRA and DUS. You can make the case that it was natural for DL to add more peak summer capacity from DTW to Europe destinations, and DTW-MUC also preempts LH from flying the route first

alfa164 wrote:

There is one simple fact in the airline business: if a new flight or more flights make economic sense, the airline(s) will add them, If they are not justified - if an airline believes it can deploy its resources better somewhere else - those flights will not be added. Period.

Except that this discussion forum exists purely for entertainment purposes. Many US-based posters driving a Toyota Prius want to use it to whine & complain that their favorite US-based airline bought Airbus instead of Boeing (be American-buy American!!!). Some employees want to use it to whine & complain that they're underpaid. Some people want to discuss whether Richard Anderson or Gordo is the greatest CEO of all-time.

Airlines add and remove routes all the time and if some of us want to discuss this, then what's the problem? That DTW/SFO is the largest market UA hasn't added, and that DTW/LAX lacks the capacity & competition that similar hubs (and smaller) enjoy is worthy of a discussion to some of us. Most airports get their own discussion thread on here, all have their eccentric fan boys and yet none reach the level of bashing as this one.

I can't stand the hypocrisy on these forums. For example, there's one poster -- we'll call him DLWidebodyGuy -- who will respond to even the most educated arguments in these threads with garbage "LOL, whatever, stop playing armchair CEO" but in the ATL treads "JetBlue WILL be here ... it's only a matter of time before DL launches ATL-DEL... the MD-90 WILL be around 15 more years at least" -- stuff that has no factual basis and is simply his guess/vision of the future. Hypocrisy is the primary reason I rarely visit these forums anymore...

Let me point out some cool DL things going on.

It's great to know that DL will be adding MAN, it'll likely be announced in October like MUC was last year. This will likely be on a 76L and 5 days a week, summer seasonal.

This summer alone DL has flown the 757 to markets that don't normally get them from Detroit; BDL, CLT, BNA, AUS, CVG, and STL. GRR, PHL, BWI, RDU, MKE, ORD, JFK also had 757's. Your typical SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX, SAN, LAS, PHX, SLC, ATL, MCO, TPA, RSW, FLL, MSP, and CUN markets has them too.

MUC was upgraded to daily, originally 5x weekly, than 6x, than daily. This service remained a 764

FCO ran a full summer on a 333. FRA and GRU switched to a 332.

Additional frequency and capacity added to several route, while 1 regional jet destination ended.

MBJ and PUJ runs all summer.

Aside from DL, AS added a 2nd daily SEA (convinces me PDX or SAN is next), B6 flies an A320 to BOS all year round. UA will be flying A LOT of mainline in the next few months, UA DEN flights are all mainline now and UA flew mainline weekly to IAD, NK added additional capacity on some routes or increased frequency on others, WN is bringing back Saturday MCO flights, Frontier started PHX and will bring back RSW. Good things have gone on and I'm sure there's more to come.

It appears the MAN route will be 5 times daily, seasonal service operated by DL's 763ER. Still pending approval however: http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/bre ... -for-2017/

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Article from Crain's last week showing passengers are up 5.1% Also a statement that WCAA has "had 45 meetings with airline route planners this year" and this increased demand data has them interested. So, this goes against the claim and assertion on here that the WCAA does nothing.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20 ... -last-year

There is some other misinformation about some of the routes/flows here:

Regarding DTW-FCO:
FCO is one of the few USA-Europe routes that sees far more US point-of-sale versus Europe point-of-sale, and this demand significantly peaks in the summer months. US-Italy demand is far lower in winter months. FCA traffic between Detroit and Turin isn't going to support year-round FCO and as it is now most of that traffic connects on DL/KL/AF over AMS/CDG or on LH over FRA. DTW-FCO is not at all likely to go year-round.

Regarding DTW-MUC:
MUC, despite what is said in press releases was clearly started summer seasonal to capture peak tourism and leisure demand to help fill the Y cabin. The automotive industry ties between DTW and MUC are negigible as most of the German automotive industry is centered around FRA and DUS. You can make the case that it was natural for DL to add more peak summer capacity from DTW to Europe destinations, and DTW-MUC also preempts LH from flying the route first

First of all 45 meetings is OK but how many were with Delta verses airlines that would directly compete with Delta. Begging Delta to add a route over lunch once a month is not aggressive marketing and as we all know just because it's in print doesn't mean it actually happened as it was made out to sound. I still stand behind my comments on the fact that the WCAA has done nothing exceptional to gain new service at Detroit it's not like this market beat any body out to get a new flight these are all natural adds by the airlines or the next logical step. It not like PHL getting QR or AUS getting BA with some out of the box thinking to gain new flights in this market. The QR thing really perplexes me as they have mentioned Detroit numerous time yet the WCAA can seem to land that flight here how many trips has the WCAA made to the offices of QR to make this happen. I doubt that they haven't made one trip to Doha but again it's only speculation on my part but until they are putting hard evidence out there to show they are achieving anything other but normal additions than I still have to challenge their effectiveness in bringing better options to Detroit for the traveling public. Now that Volaris has filed applications to serve Detroit lets see how attractive the WCAA marketing will be to bring this airline to Detroit the proof will be in the pudding. You may say the Mexican carriers do this all the time but since an application has been filed let's go after that airline aggressively to make it happen for the Mexican community here in Detroit so that they can affordably go home to visit family rather than being subject to Delta's extremely high fares in the Detroit market to Mexico.

klm617 wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Article from Crain's last week showing passengers are up 5.1% Also a statement that WCAA has "had 45 meetings with airline route planners this year" and this increased demand data has them interested. So, this goes against the claim and assertion on here that the WCAA does nothing.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20 ... -last-year

There is some other misinformation about some of the routes/flows here:

Regarding DTW-FCO:
FCO is one of the few USA-Europe routes that sees far more US point-of-sale versus Europe point-of-sale, and this demand significantly peaks in the summer months. US-Italy demand is far lower in winter months. FCA traffic between Detroit and Turin isn't going to support year-round FCO and as it is now most of that traffic connects on DL/KL/AF over AMS/CDG or on LH over FRA. DTW-FCO is not at all likely to go year-round.

Regarding DTW-MUC:
MUC, despite what is said in press releases was clearly started summer seasonal to capture peak tourism and leisure demand to help fill the Y cabin. The automotive industry ties between DTW and MUC are negigible as most of the German automotive industry is centered around FRA and DUS. You can make the case that it was natural for DL to add more peak summer capacity from DTW to Europe destinations, and DTW-MUC also preempts LH from flying the route first

First of all 45 meetings is OK but how many were with Delta verses airlines that would directly compete with Delta. Begging Delta to add a route over lunch once a month is not aggressive marketing and as we all know just because it's in print doesn't mean it actually happened as it was made out to sound. I still stand behind my comments on the fact that the WCAA has done nothing exceptional to gain new service at Detroit it's not like this market beat any body out to get a new flight these are all natural adds by the airlines or the next logical step. It not like PHL getting QR or AUS getting BA with some out of the box thinking to gain new flights in this market. The QR thing really perplexes me as they have mentioned Detroit numerous time yet the WCAA can seem to land that flight here how many trips has the WCAA made to the offices of QR to make this happen. I doubt that they haven't made one trip to Doha but again it's only speculation on my part but until they are putting hard evidence out there to show they are achieving anything other but normal additions than I still have to challenge their effectiveness in bringing better options to Detroit for the traveling public. Now that Volaris has filed applications to serve Detroit lets see how attractive the WCAA marketing will be to bring this airline to Detroit the proof will be in the pudding. You may say the Mexican carriers do this all the time but since an application has been filed let's go after that airline aggressively to make it happen for the Mexican community here in Detroit so that they can affordably go home to visit family rather than being subject to Delta's extremely high fares in the Detroit market to Mexico.

Well my friend, I actually had a quite intelligent conversation with a member of the WCAA, no bickering nor arguing. I am not going to spill any beans, but it's more than Delta. Actually DAL route planners asses the market regularly and come up to meet with the WCAA, plus would you want to sever a relationship and a hub that is producing a lot of money for the Detroit region? By adding Emirates or Etihad wouldn't be as bad, but DAL pulled sponsorships in Atlanta for facilities that QR used. It's preferred actually by most people that EK come to Detroit. You can only sell so much to airlines until they find it annoying, kind of like a mosquito. I am very confident that the WCAA will do what they can on their side to provide the necessary incentives and information that Volaris will need to come to Detroit as well. Remember how Mister Ed Bastian said he would like to provide an option for access to Guadalajara and Leon? Also when you look at it, one of the largest international markets from Detroit that are monopolized is Mexico City, that can fulfill both a Low Cost Carrier and competition needs. British Airways sees it the same, whether there is 5 virgin flights and 1 delta or vice versa, they still need to take into account that it's still like dealing with Delta or Virgin, whoever dominates the route.

flymco753 wrote:

...It's great to know that DL will be adding MAN, it'll likely be announced in October like MUC was last year. This will likely be on a 76L and 5 days a week, summer seasonal.This summer alone DL has flown the 757 to markets that don't normally get them from Detroit; BDL, CLT, BNA, AUS, CVG, and STL. GRR, PHL, BWI, RDU, MKE, ORD, JFK also had 757's. Your typical SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX, SAN, LAS, PHX, SLC, ATL, MCO, TPA, RSW, FLL, MSP, and CUN markets has them too. MUC was upgraded to daily, originally 5x weekly, than 6x, than daily. This service remained a 764 FCO ran a full summer on a 333. FRA and GRU switched to a 332. Additional frequency and capacity added to several route, while 1 regional jet destination ended. MBJ and PUJ runs all summer. Aside from DL, AS added a 2nd daily SEA (convinces me PDX or SAN is next), B6 flies an A320 to BOS all year round. UA will be flying A LOT of mainline in the next few months, UA DEN flights are all mainline now and UA flew mainline weekly to IAD, NK added additional capacity on some routes or increased frequency on others, WN is bringing back Saturday MCO flights, Frontier started PHX and will bring back RSW. Good things have gone on and I'm sure there's more to come.

And klm617 is still whining?

alfa164 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

...It's great to know that DL will be adding MAN, it'll likely be announced in October like MUC was last year. This will likely be on a 76L and 5 days a week, summer seasonal.This summer alone DL has flown the 757 to markets that don't normally get them from Detroit; BDL, CLT, BNA, AUS, CVG, and STL. GRR, PHL, BWI, RDU, MKE, ORD, JFK also had 757's. Your typical SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX, SAN, LAS, PHX, SLC, ATL, MCO, TPA, RSW, FLL, MSP, and CUN markets has them too. MUC was upgraded to daily, originally 5x weekly, than 6x, than daily. This service remained a 764 FCO ran a full summer on a 333. FRA and GRU switched to a 332. Additional frequency and capacity added to several route, while 1 regional jet destination ended. MBJ and PUJ runs all summer. Aside from DL, AS added a 2nd daily SEA (convinces me PDX or SAN is next), B6 flies an A320 to BOS all year round. UA will be flying A LOT of mainline in the next few months, UA DEN flights are all mainline now and UA flew mainline weekly to IAD, NK added additional capacity on some routes or increased frequency on others, WN is bringing back Saturday MCO flights, Frontier started PHX and will bring back RSW. Good things have gone on and I'm sure there's more to come.

And klm617 is still whining?

Yup I will not be happy until I see diversification and choice in this market and will continue to push this topic until there is customer fairness in this market not one airline that can charge whatever it wants just because it can. In a free market economy choice keeps all parties honest where there is lack of choice the customer suffers. I'm not saying we should see $99 one way fares to Europe but $1000 or more round trip is a bit outrageous not to mention I was quotes a fare of $900 round trip to TPA for the flights I wanted 6 months out that's just crazy. Not to mention when a cheaper fare comes up you are charged a change fee to get the difference refunded.

klm617 wrote:

[. I'm not saying we should see $99 one way fares to Europe but $1000 or more round trip is a bit outrageous not to mention I was quotes a fare of $900 round trip to TPA for the flights I wanted 6 months out that's just crazy. Not to mention when a cheaper fare comes up you are charged a change fee to get the difference refunded.

Poor baby! I guess I missed that part of the Constitution - or was it the Bill or Rights? - that said you, especially you, are entitled to cheap flights wherever you want to go. And I am sure you deserve those "flights you wanted"; any other schedule - and god forbid having to make a connection! - is well beneath your dignity.

And here I am, in Mauritius today, just grateful that I can find air service. It appears to me that DTW has been given - and continues to add - more air service than its own traffic would justify. You can chalk that up to its hub status; getting feed form many cities justifies an airline offering extensive service from a second-tier (at best) airport, and to the ability of its major carrier to actually make money (soemthing that wasn't happening so long ago).

So go work your little butt off and bring in all those Ryan Air wannabes... and watch all those full service options you enjoy now disappear. You can't have it both ways; when Walmart comes to town, so many of the honorable, local merchants who has served a community start to disappear. Airlines work the same way. But, hey, who cares - it may be detrimental to DTW, but you will get your cheap flight to Tampa.

alfa164 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

[. I'm not saying we should see $99 one way fares to Europe but $1000 or more round trip is a bit outrageous not to mention I was quotes a fare of $900 round trip to TPA for the flights I wanted 6 months out that's just crazy. Not to mention when a cheaper fare comes up you are charged a change fee to get the difference refunded.

Poor baby! I guess I missed that part of the Constitution - or was it the Bill or Rights? - that said you, especially you, are entitled to cheap flights wherever you want to go. And I am sure you deserve those "flights you wanted"; any other schedule - and god forbid having to make a connection! - is well beneath your dignity.

And here I am, in Mauritius today, just grateful that I can find air service. It appears to me that DTW has been given - and continues to add - more air service than its own traffic would justify. You can chalk that up to its hub status; getting feed form many cities justifies an airline offering extensive service from a second-tier (at best) airport, and to the ability of its major carrier to actually make money (soemthing that wasn't happening so long ago).

So go work your little butt off and bring in all those Ryan Air wannabes... and watch all those full service options you enjoy now disappear. You can't have it both ways; when Walmart comes to town, so many of the honorable, local merchants who has served a community start to disappear. Airlines work the same way. But, hey, who cares - it may be detrimental to DTW, but you will get your cheap flight to Tampa.

Just one question sir is the car you drive made by an American based corporation. Excuse me but what full service options are you talking about at the base coach fare. Guess you should vacation in Las Vegas or Orlando you'd have more flight options your comparison as if I moved from Detroit to Alpena and expect the same level of air service.

klm617 wrote:

Just one question sir is the car you drive made by an American based corporation. Excuse me but what full service options are you talking about at the base coach fare. Guess you should vacation in Las Vegas or Orlando you'd have more flight options your comparison as if I moved from Detroit to Alpena and expect the same level of air service.

I am sure that all makes sense in some language... but to me, it makes no more sense than the rest of your rants.

And my car? Why ask? Are you planning to come and steal it? You don't want to pay for your flights... I guess you don't want to pay for a car, either...

I would like to point out some things and maybe clarify some confusion. First I will discuss low cost Europe options, than domestic options, and some other predictions that have came to mind.

First off, Detroit has the market for a low cost flight to Europe. As I may have stated before, the low cost carriers could cover long but thin international markets, the best candidates being Icelandair and Norwegian. Can we have both? Absolutely! Remember both airlines generally do not run daily, so you could likely see three weekly flights via Icelandair and 2 flights via Norwegian. When I embark to Warsaw, I look for low cost options and am confident we will soon have this connection available for us, it is not a matter of if, but when.

Domestically, UAL to SFO and AAL to LAX will be a difficult strategy for the airlines. They generally link these passengers with an onward connection to Asia, the airlines will have to figure out what they can do to focus on creating a fare for local travelers as opposed to making connections onward and it interfering with DAL's transpacific flying.

I predict that Detroit will gain service again on British Airways, it is also one of the few markets from DTW that are monopolized including the DL/VS joint-venture. London and Detroit are becoming closer, there is actually a tourism demand in the UK for Detroit right now, as well as business investment. Condor could provide another connection to Frankfurt. It is the same concept as the UK, but includes autos. I can see Delta adding Dublin, Hong Kong, and Barcelona or Madrid in the future. These routes have a pretty good demand from DTW, and if they continue to trend upward than that will justify a direct flight.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Domestically, UAL to SFO and AAL to LAX will be a difficult strategy for the airlines. They generally link these passengers with an onward connection to Asia, the airlines will have to figure out what they can do to focus on creating a fare for local travelers as opposed to making connections onward and it interfering with DAL's transpacific flying.

This is perhaps the biggest misnomer on a.net. You do realize that LAX & SFO are huge business markets? There's simply not enough flow traffic to secondary Asian gateways to support or justify the services UA & AA are adding to their Western gateways -- it's all about the local market.

flymco753 wrote:

United's issue with running SFO is the Asia market that DTW already presents, so it's hard for UA to make it work. An issue with Virgin America is likely because Detroit is not a tech savvy or mellinial based destination which is what VX claims. Gaining an SFO flight is going to be very difficult, and it works the same with AA going to LAX.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Domestically, UAL to SFO and AAL to LAX will be a difficult strategy for the airlines. They generally link these passengers with an onward connection to Asia, the airlines will have to figure out what they can do to focus on creating a fare for local travelers as opposed to making connections onward and it interfering with DAL's transpacific flying.

I'm not sure it's quite that far-fetched at all. Indeed, I would not be at all surprised if - within the next couple of years - both of these routes (AA DTW-LAX and United DTW-SFO) were operating at least once daily.

compensateme wrote:

This is perhaps the biggest misnomer on a.net. You do realize that LAX & SFO are huge business markets? There's simply not enough flow traffic to secondary Asian gateways to support or justify the services UA & AA are adding to their Western gateways -- it's all about the local market.

Precisely. As said, DTW is now the largest population center in the U.S. without a nonstop AA link to AA's growing LAX hub, and while I'm not positive, I suspect the same is probably true for United at its SFO hub. Both of these local markets are quite large, and from a network airline perspective, Delta has both of these markets all to itself. I think it's entirely plausible if not probable that this will come to an end in the not too distant future. The beyond-LAX/SFO connectivity to Asia and Australia can no doubt help, but these are both, indeed, quite large O&D markets as well.

commavia wrote:

The beyond-LAX/SFO connectivity to Asia and Australia can no doubt help, but these are both, indeed, quite large O&D markets as well.

UA or AA flying DTW-SFO/LAX would be like said mostly for the O&D and not for Asia connectivity primarily due to the out-of-the-way routing and flight times. Flying to California onward to Asia add many hours on to the trip. Even if someone doesn't want to fly via DL there are numerous connecting options over ORD.

klm617 wrote:

Show me facts that Delta didn't add the DTW tag onto its AMM-JFK flight so that it would show up in the reservation system to attract passengers away from the RJ's DTW-AMM flights. Otherwise my point is a valid as yours.

It is amazing to me how little understanding of this industry you have.

Lets just play your stupid game for a second, Okay. Delta did that.
now, what idiot expects an HVCs to take a connection (and at JFK) over a non-stop flight?

more importantly I am sure DL was trying to tap into some traffic in the DTW market simply because its a somewhat large market and NW had a big FF base there at the time.

But this big grand conspiracy theory that DL was trying to lock down a hub they didn't even have when they decided to start the route is one of the stupidest things I have seen from you. That is saying a lot....

klm617 wrote:

Yup I will not be happy period

FIFY

alfa164 wrote:

And klm617 is still whining?

and will keep on because clearly nothing or no one is going to stop it.

I have investigated some domestic markets that airlines may look into in our market. I will be talking about legacy and low cost.

I agree with several comments above about AAG pursuing a nonstop from Detroit to San Diego and Portland, both routes suffer from fares that are a premium. There is a demand for both routes, but with Portland it is inconveniently timed and the fares are very high, a properly timed flight via Alaska could work since this flight would be mostly O&D. San Diego has fairly healthy passenger numbers, some competition on this route will not hurt.

I am also confident that B6 could begin a daily route to Detroit from Orlando. Minneapolis flies to Orlando ten times daily whereas Detroit only does nine times, and there is certainly more of a demand in Detroit is there not? Yields are generally low, yes but the success of Fort Lauderdale and Boston on B6 should be able to justify a daily flight to one of Detroit's top three O&D markets. Frontier and Spirit would have lower fares, but B6 could easily price one way fares for less than one-hundred dollars.

Spirit, I think, is not done adding Detroit flights, but they want to add smaller markets. I think that is a load of bologna, because Spirit could easily add the low cost service we need for Newark and Seattle. Phoenix wouldn't be a bad addition, neither would San Diego or Daytona Beach. Even some of our shorter markets like Nashville Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, and Saint Louis would not be bad options because most of us, or the travelers embarking from those destinations do not prefer to drive.

Delta has a lot of growth planned internationally for Detroit. Dublin, Dusseldorf, Barcelona and Madrid are just a few European markets that have a lot of daily passengers each way but no nonstop flight. Delta will take advantage of these before another airline does because not only could Delta fill a plane with business and leisure from Detroit, but can provide feed on both sides of the pond. Do not forget either, Buenos Aires, Hong Kong, and Aruba are other international markets that could easily fill local business and leisure passengers from Detroit and provide feed from both sides. Detroit also should have some more Caribbean destinations, but I am not complaining about the options we already have.

Volaris has applied for a route to Detroit from several Mexico cities, I can only see Mexico City, Guadalajara and Monterrey happening, do not forget these will likely be flights that are not daily. Delta has applied for Manchester, another market that is exploding in Detroit, which is why the five times daily and seasonal flight will occur, of course pending DOT approval.

I'm just curious.

Regarding the Manchester route and 'awaiting DOT approval', given the UK and USA have an open skies policy, and this is a long standing American carrier, what exactly do the DOT need to approve?

Like I say, just curious?

User001 wrote:

I'm just curious.

Regarding the Manchester route and 'awaiting DOT approval', given the UK and USA have an open skies policy, and this is a long standing American carrier, what exactly do the DOT need to approve?

Like I say, just curious?

In my belief, it may just be waiting on a government decision because of Brexit.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Minneapolis flies to Orlando ten times daily whereas Detroit only does nine times, and there is certainly more of a demand in Detroit is there not?

Apparently not, or Detroit would have more flights than Minneapolis. That is the law of supply-and-demand.

In all probability, MSP makes for an easier connection from most mid-west cities, and thus justifies more flights to MCO.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Delta has a lot of growth planned internationally for Detroit. Dublin, Dusseldorf, Barcelona and Madrid are just a few European markets that have a lot of daily passengers each way but no nonstop flight..

How many daily passengers? Do you have any numbers? DTW does seem to be becoming a major option for travelers to Germany - one would assume the auto business has something to do with this - so DUS (or even STR) might be possible, but I doubt BCN or MAD would be viable. Those are mostly leisure destination, with traffic confined to three months of the year, and reliant on collecting traffic from a large catchment area to succeed. DTW isn't as well-positioned as airports located on the East coast to collect traffic headed to Europe, and will probably be limited to markets where O&D is stronger.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Do not forget either, Buenos Aires, Hong Kong, and Aruba are other international markets that could easily fill local business and leisure passengers from Detroit and provide feed from both sides. Detroit also should have some more Caribbean destinations, but I am not complaining about the options we already have..

EZE is a long, thin route, and the eastern half of South America is still not-quite-in-turmoil-but-not-quite-stable economically. DL tried Hong Kong; their problem is they are simply not strong on the HKG side of the market; UA's long-term investment there, and AA's partnership with CX, leaves DL as a perennial also-ran. Still, I could see it if the Asian market strengthens - which probably won't be anytime soon.

I am surprised DL doesn't fly from DTW to AUA, at least weekly. That could be a good add.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Delta has applied for Manchester, another market that is exploding in Detroit, which is why the five times daily and seasonal flight will occur, of course pending DOT approval.

I suspect you mean five times weekly... unless you are talking about Manchester, NH.

thedetroitpole wrote:

Volaris has applied for a route to Detroit from several Mexico cities, I can only see Mexico City, Guadalajara and Monterrey happening, do not forget these will likely be flights that are not daily..

It is hard to know how many of those routes Volaris could seriously add - they really seemed to take the throw-a-dart-at-a-map approach - but I think Mexico City and maybe even Monterrey (again, because of the auto-business connections - although I am not sure how many auto executives would choose Volaris) might be viable. The problem is that, if they want to capture a substantial segment of the business travel, they will need daily flights; that may not be what they have in mind.

alfa164 wrote:

I suspect you mean five times weekly... unless you are talking about Manchester, NH.

Thank you my friend for catching that, yes five times weekly!

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

The automotive industry ties between DTW and MUC are negigible as most of the German automotive industry is centered around FRA and DUS.

With all due respect, the automotive industry is absolutely NOT centered primarily around DUS and lesser extent FRA. The only automotive company in that area would happen to be Ford which has its European headquarters in Cologne, but given that CGN is just 1 hour train ride from Frankfurt Airport, CGN is well captured in FRA's catchment area.

The German automobile industry is most definitely centered in Southern Germany spreading from Frankfurt, Mannheim, Stuttgart to Munich. The industry is primarily in the two states Baden-Württemburg and Bavaria. In BW you have Robert Bosch, Porsche, Daimler, Mahle, Behr Automotive, BASF Automotive and then a whole bunch more in the regions outside Stuttgart like AMG, ZF. (http://www.bw-invest.de/.../Branchenueb ... 014_EN.pdf
In Bavaria, you have BMW, Siemens, Audi and many smaller suppliers. The last cluster is near Wolfsburg/Hannover where you have Continental and VW headquarters. Close to Frankfurt is GM's European HQ in Rüsselsheim where Opel is manufactured.

For this reason MUC was launched as opposed to DUS. DUS was tried on the 757 in the summer of 2007, and although that summer proved challenging due to overcapacity (LH started a 2nd daily LH 486/487 - the flight number still used for the 2nd flight during the Auto Show) and NW also retaliated, so DTW went 4x daily to FRA. In addition NW added BRU and DUS. This obviously was too much capacity and we all know that it was in the summer of 2007 when the housing bubble popped which directly affected the auto industry in that credit dried up and no one was buying cars nor did GM or Chrysler have the liquidity to continue operating (regardless of how mismanaged they also were). So although DL added MUC also for the summer tourist season, MUC was strategically chosen due to the automotive connections.

In regards to the forthcoming MAN service, I'm quite surprised. I wasn't aware that there was any demand to the British Isles from DTW other than LON, and LON is one of the weaker performing European O&Ds (demand wise - not sure about yield) out of DTW. Does anyone think that DTWs first low cost long-haul carrier could be Aer Lingus. Wouldn't this give AA/BA/IE the token presence that they lack on TATL?

In regards to the DTW catchment having suppressed or low O&D demand to Europe. Part of the reason for this suppression are the high priced fares out of DTW discouraging or pushing people to seek cheaper alternatives elsewhere. Flying to Europe is simply too expensive and as the 13th largest MSA in the United States saddled between ORD and YYZ, DTW still has a fair share of service to Europe. In fact, DTW has service to 4.5 continents which is quite impressive.

hjulicher wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

The automotive industry ties between DTW and MUC are negigible as most of the German automotive industry is centered around FRA and DUS.

In regards to the forthcoming MAN service, I'm quite surprised. I wasn't aware that there was any demand to the British Isles from DTW other than LON, and LON is one of the weaker performing European O&Ds (demand wise - not sure about yield) out of DTW. Does anyone think that DTWs first low cost long-haul carrier could be Aer Lingus. Wouldn't this give AA/BA/IE the token presence that they lack on TATL?

In regards to the DTW catchment having suppressed or low O&D demand to Europe. Part of the reason for this suppression are the high priced fares out of DTW discouraging or pushing people to seek cheaper alternatives elsewhere. Flying to Europe is simply too expensive and as the 13th largest MSA in the United States saddled between ORD and YYZ, DTW still has a fair share of service to Europe. In fact, DTW has service to 4.5 continents which is quite impressive.

About those statements, Aer Lingus would be a good option, it could fill that DUB gap, but Delta could add DUB too, so Norwegian or Icelandair would most likely not have competition, but of course, it would be interesting to see what Delta would do if Aer Lingus added Dublin, or Icelandair added Reykjavik, or if Norwegian added Oslo and Copenhagen.

On MCO's website (www.orlandoairports.net) it says under new service that Southwest will fly 1x weekly to Detroit with no note saying it's a seasonal flight. Maybe Southwest will do Detroit on Saturday's for a whole year? Or they're waiting for the next schedule extension to see whether it's seasonal or not?

Detroit-Orlando Saturday service on Southwest will continue through April.

In regards to the DTW catchment having suppressed or low O&D demand to Europe. Part of the reason for this suppression are the high priced fares out of DTW discouraging or pushing people to seek cheaper alternatives elsewhere. Flying to Europe is simply too expensive and as the 13th largest MSA in the United States saddled between ORD and YYZ, DTW still has a fair share of service to Europe. In fact, DTW has service to 4.5 continents which is quite impressive.

Exactly and this is where the WCAA is failing miserably because they are not perusing low cost international options for Detroit aggressively because they know Delta would not react favorably to a carrier entering the Detroit market to offer lowers fares airlines like Icelandair, WOW and Norwiegn. While yes it may take some passengers away from Delta the main customer base for these types of flights would be those who are driving to ORD, YYZ or using YQG. Let's see now what happens with the Volaris application and see if the WCAA is up to task in making that happen again an airline that would cater to the large Detroit Mexican population that everyone seems to be dismissing here. Not everyone that lives in Detroit is a business exec whose company can afford to pay $500 to $1000 dollars for fares there are a lot of working class people who just want to go home and visit family and why should they have to drive 3 to 4 hours just to get something they can afford. To the best of my knowledge DTW is a publicly owned airport and therefore all parties must be considered when making service decisions for this airport and right now the customer has taken a back seat verses the corporate giant that makes this airport it's hub. I still insist that the WCAA is not in favor and doesn't pursue any new service to Detroit that would directly compete with Delta in any way and until proven otherwise by new service additions that benefit the customer or proof of meetings with airline route planners that would bring low cost options to the Detroit market to keep Delta honest I will not believe otherwise

alfa164 wrote:

DL tried Hong Kong; their problem is they are simply not strong on the HKG side of the market; UA's long-term investment there, and AA's partnership with CX, leaves DL as a perennial also-ran. Still, I could see it if the Asian market strengthens - which probably won't be anytime soon.

Oodles of unsuccessful routes are subsequently relaunched. DL knows this better than anybody else, considering that ATL and JFK may house more routes today that were unsuccessful in their first incarnation than any other hub.

DL attempted HKG during the height of the local downturn. Maybe they've learned some lessons from SEA & their first attempt at HKG. Maybe a 10-abreast 77L will help -- AC has discussed how moving from 9-abreast to 10-abreast changed some of its most unprofitable routes to its most profitable. Or maybe a 359 would be better suited. One thing's for certain: DL's Asian network is at a disadvantage to its competitions given that one-stop HKG access is not available from the crux of the DL network, and for many double-connecting via SEA is just not appealing (or competitive).

BTW, this is my favorite example of hypocrisy on these forums. None of us have any idea of whether DTW/HKG will return, but instead of ceding that it's a possibility, posters like "DLWidebodyGuy" will insist it'll never return... then in their next posting, say it's only a matter of when SEA/KIX comes back -- a route that came after DTW/HKG and whose performance was so poor, it barely lasted a year. Yet some how, some way people think he's credible...

klm617 wrote:

In regards to the DTW catchment having suppressed or low O&D demand to Europe. Part of the reason for this suppression are the high priced fares out of DTW discouraging or pushing people to seek cheaper alternatives elsewhere. Flying to Europe is simply too expensive and as the 13th largest MSA in the United States saddled between ORD and YYZ, DTW still has a fair share of service to Europe. In fact, DTW has service to 4.5 continents which is quite impressive.

Exactly and this is where the WCAA is failing miserably because they are not perusing low cost international options for Detroit aggressively because they know Delta would not react favorably to a carrier entering the Detroit market to offer lowers fares airlines like Icelandair, WOW and Norwiegn. While yes it may take some passengers away from Delta the main customer base for these types of flights would be those who are driving to ORD, YYZ or using YQG. Let's see now what happens with the Volaris application and see if the WCAA is up to task in making that happen again an airline that would cater to the large Detroit Mexican population that everyone seems to be dismissing here. Not everyone that lives in Detroit is a business exec whose company can afford to pay $500 to $1000 dollars for fares there are a lot of working class people who just want to go home and visit family and why should they have to drive 3 to 4 hours just to get something they can afford. To the best of my knowledge DTW is a publicly owned airport and therefore all parties must be considered when making service decisions for this airport and right now the customer has taken a back seat verses the corporate giant that makes this airport it's hub. I still insist that the WCAA is not in favor and doesn't pursue any new service to Detroit that would directly compete with Delta in any way and until proven otherwise by new service additions that benefit the customer or proof of meetings with airline route planners that would bring low cost options to the Detroit market to keep Delta honest I will not believe otherwise

It is a very long process to add an international carrier, my friend. The authority could have had regularly scheduled meetings with Norwegian for two years, and service would not be announced until maybe next year or 2018. It's not like a domestic service where an airline can call the air service team and state, "hi, we want to buy this landing slot for a flight to New York, okay come an discuss legal agreement than announce service a few weeks after". Landing international carriers take time, and I believe that a new airline is around the corner.