BDL757 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

DL ATL-MAN APR 0>0.3

Well there you have it folks why Delta didn't add DTW-MAN because they had planned all along to add 10 weekly out of ATL rather than flow those passengers over Detroit to the upper Midwest markets. To bad they aren't doing the same thing when they start to decrease the seat out of Detroit to Asia those passenger will be directed away from Detroit in favor of other Delta hubs in their system.

Is this permanent?

Let's look at this realistically, the market for DTW-MAN is there....now, 2 years ago it really wasn't. I honestly don't think DL ever really wanted to be in this market, maybe VS has plans on doing it eventually once the market matures and the PDEW becomes stronger. Thomas Cook wouldn't be a bad option, a 3x weekly A330-200 would be ideal now, but the fear would be DL would do daily on a 76W and take away from that. To conclude that, MAN is a questionable market right now, when or if it'll be added is still the question, were back to square 2.

Thomas Cook is never coming to Detroit.

DL knows the flows to/from MAN over the pond. They know that the vast majority of pax going to/from MAN are connecting to Florida or the West Coast. The only market in the midwest which has any sort of significant O&D to MAN is Chicago, which is served by two airlines daily during the summer nonstop, so DL wouldn't get any of that market.

drdisque wrote:

Thomas Cook is never coming to Detroit.

DL knows the flows to/from MAN over the pond. They know that the vast majority of pax going to/from MAN are connecting to Florida or the West Coast. The only market in the midwest which has any sort of significant O&D to MAN is Chicago, which is served by two airlines daily during the summer nonstop, so DL wouldn't get any of that market.

My question is if an airline thought a route would be profitable, don't you think they'd do it? I'm pretty sure an airline doesn't hates Detroit enough not to fly to it.

I'm not saying that Thomas Cook hates Detroit. It just isn't compatible with their business plan.

They fly to destinations which are popular with the UK Point of Sale, are price sensitive, and are where less-than-daily or seasonal service will work. DTW isn't that kind of destination.

Unlike WOW and Norwegian which sell onward connections in Europe and could theoretically make DTW work (although there is MUCH lower hanging fruit in the US for Norwegian than DTW), Thomas Cook doesn't sell onward connections.

drdisque wrote:

I'm not saying that Thomas Cook hates Detroit. It just isn't compatible with their business plan.

They fly to destinations which are popular with the UK Point of Sale, are price sensitive, and are where less-than-daily or seasonal service will work. DTW isn't that kind of destination.

Unlike WOW and Norwegian which sell onward connections in Europe and could theoretically make DTW work (although there is MUCH lower hanging fruit in the US for Norwegian than DTW), Thomas Cook doesn't sell onward connections.

You're right aboit Thomas Cook not being capatible with DTW, but with DY, FI and WW, I disagree. DTW could've been added for WW over PIT if it didn't come down to $. DTW is a more useful market than TPA for FI. DTW could use a low cost to Eastern Europe more than markets that already have an LCC. This market is well underserved in terms of any lower cost options to Europe without an easy 1 stop connection.

drdisque wrote:

I'm not saying that Thomas Cook hates Detroit. It just isn't compatible with their business plan.

They fly to destinations which are popular with the UK Point of Sale, are price sensitive, and are where less-than-daily or seasonal service will work. DTW isn't that kind of destination.

Unlike WOW and Norwegian which sell onward connections in Europe and could theoretically make DTW work (although there is MUCH lower hanging fruit in the US for Norwegian than DTW), Thomas Cook doesn't sell onward connections.

That just simply isn't true and that mindset keeps the low fare European carriers out of Detroit. This market is untapped as far as a low cost carrier that operates from Detroit to Europe so they have the market completely to themselves and please don't try to tell me that if the operation was marketed correctly it can't succeed. If you come into Detroit and offer one stop connections and reliable service to Europe at half the cost of the current fares in the market that Detroit is not viable to cost conscious travel who are not loyal to any alliance. This airport just needs to be marketed more effectively and you'd be surprised who would land in this market. FI, WW and DY could be successful here if they really wanted to.

flymco753 wrote:

drdisque wrote:

I'm not saying that Thomas Cook hates Detroit. It just isn't compatible with their business plan.

They fly to destinations which are popular with the UK Point of Sale, are price sensitive, and are where less-than-daily or seasonal service will work. DTW isn't that kind of destination.

Unlike WOW and Norwegian which sell onward connections in Europe and could theoretically make DTW work (although there is MUCH lower hanging fruit in the US for Norwegian than DTW), Thomas Cook doesn't sell onward connections.

You're right aboit Thomas Cook not being capatible with DTW, but with DY, FI and WW, I disagree. DTW could've been added for WW over PIT if it didn't come down to $. DTW is a more useful market than TPA for FI. DTW could use a low cost to Eastern Europe more than markets that already have an LCC. This market is well underserved in terms of any lower cost options to Europe without an easy 1 stop connection.

It seems that some certain posters (or, at least, one) can't grasp the fact that there has to be demand on both sides of the pond for most trans-Atlantic flights to be successful. Although FI might be able to make DTW work - based on the tremendous increase in traffic to Iceland alone - the other airlines seem to be looking for popular destinations at both ends (PIT was the exception, but you already mentioned why WW is trying it. Once the subsidies expire, I am sure it will disappear).

Despite Detroit's many popular attractions (and I am sure there are some... but I am still trying to think of one), I have never heard a foreigner - any foreigner - ask about how to get there for a holiday.

alfa164 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

drdisque wrote:

I'm not saying that Thomas Cook hates Detroit. It just isn't compatible with their business plan.

They fly to destinations which are popular with the UK Point of Sale, are price sensitive, and are where less-than-daily or seasonal service will work. DTW isn't that kind of destination.

Unlike WOW and Norwegian which sell onward connections in Europe and could theoretically make DTW work (although there is MUCH lower hanging fruit in the US for Norwegian than DTW), Thomas Cook doesn't sell onward connections.

You're right aboit Thomas Cook not being capatible with DTW, but with DY, FI and WW, I disagree. DTW could've been added for WW over PIT if it didn't come down to $. DTW is a more useful market than TPA for FI. DTW could use a low cost to Eastern Europe more than markets that already have an LCC. This market is well underserved in terms of any lower cost options to Europe without an easy 1 stop connection.

It seems that some certain posters (or, at least, one) can't grasp the fact that there has to be demand on both sides of the pond for most trans-Atlantic flights to be successful. Although FI might be able to make DTW work - based on the tremendous increase in traffic to Iceland alone - the other airlines seem to be looking for popular destinations at both ends (PIT was the exception, but you already mentioned why WW is trying it. Once the subsidies expire, I am sure it will disappear).

Despite Detroit's many popular attractions (and I am sure there are some... but I am still trying to think of one), I have never heard a foreigner - any foreigner - ask about how to get there for a holiday.

Honestly, while I find certain Detroit area posters to be quite obstinate, this is one area where I actually agree. Fl, WW and DE fly to multiple destinations that really only have one way leisure traffic. Hell Condor flies to Whitehorse in the Yukon. You can't possibly think there's demand to fly there from Europe. MSP has both a seasonal Condor flight and a year round Icelandair flight. DTW isn't quite as strong a leisure market as MSP but its certainly large enough to warrant a European leisure carrier and I suspect at some point it will get one.

To the people in Detroit, be patient. One of the three will show up in DTW at some point. This isn't a conspiracy against Detroit. The long haul leisure carriers are being fairly smart about their growth options and all three are focusing on cities that have some level of two way traffic. But they do have destinations that are focused on O&D from the US and eventually they'll shift focus back to those types of cities once the options for two way traffic dry up.

Nowhere did I say that a ULCC that sells onward connections like WW, FI, or DY couldn't work at DTW - in fact I said that they COULD.

I said that an airline that doesn't sell onward connections, like TCX, could not.

I grew up in Detroit and go there several times a year. Don't accuse me of being ignorant about it. Most Europeans don't even know where Detroit is, let alone want to go there on vacation. Nearly all European POS travel to DTW is business.

lavalampluva wrote:

My question is if an airline thought a route would be profitable, don't you think they'd do it?

My questions are:
(1) If your logic was accurate, would any airline ever expand?
(2) Why do we see these types of comments in threads about DTW, CLE, PIT, etc. but the SFO, MSP, etc. threads are full of "next airline to...." and "next route to..." ??? Why don't we see them in "most underserved routes," etc. Hint: there are a handful of undeserved routes at large hubs; the legacies intentionally restrict capacity to increase yield...

^which is why DTW's top 3 unserved domestic markets; SMF, SNA, and SJC will probably never be served by a nonstop flight on DL because you overfly MSP and SLC. Or for Canada, unless DL and WS do a JV, they won't do YYC, YEG or YWG to protect MSP flights. They won't do DAB, MLB or TLH to protect ATL flights. I find it interesting that all DL hubs other than DTW has HNL flights, but I guess the one market that stands out is NGO.

The addition of new routes at DTW is going to be difficult, the really only ones that are a matter of time is WN to HOU, AA to LAX, and AS to PDX or SAN.

Any additions could go both ways, either G4 will start JAX and DL won't respond, or they will completely obliterate G4. Or someone will start new flights to Timbuktu and NK will too, and yields take a dump.

On a brighter note, DL is scheduling the 321 early, this March it'll be a late departure and arrival from ATL and early departure from DTW.

flymco753 wrote:

^which is why DTW's top 3 unserved domestic markets; SMF, SNA, and SJC will probably never be served by a nonstop flight on DL because you overfly MSP and SLC. Or for Canada, unless DL and WS do a JV, they won't do YYC, YEG or YWG to protect MSP flights. They won't do DAB, MLB or TLH to protect ATL flights. I find it interesting that all DL hubs other than DTW has HNL flights, but I guess the one market that stands out is NGO.

The addition of new routes at DTW is going to be difficult, the really only ones that are a matter of time is WN to HOU, AA to LAX, and AS to PDX or SAN.

Any additions could go both ways, either G4 will start JAX and DL won't respond, or they will completely obliterate G4. Or someone will start new flights to Timbuktu and NK will too, and yields take a dump.

I agree 100% with this comment but my frustration is Delta does not do this with it's Detroit hub. I does not protect routes at it's Detroit hub like it does at other hubs it's more than happy to divert flights away from Detroit to protects the routes at other hubs where the reverse is not true. There is really no unique route at Detroit that it tries to protect in the Detroit market by not offering flights from any of the other hubs. The last time I can think that Delta favored Detroit is when it split the MSP-HNL route but other than that it doesn't really care to flow traffic over Detroit that may impact loads negatively at the other hubs. Detroit is an unprotected hub and is left to fend for itself in the Delta network.

klakzky123 wrote:

Honestly, while I find certain Detroit area posters to be quite obstinate, this is one area where I actually agree. Fl, WW and DE fly to multiple destinations that really only have one way leisure traffic. Hell Condor flies to Whitehorse in the Yukon. You can't possibly think there's demand to fly there from Europe.

Well,...yes, I do. Do you really think Whitehorse (population, about 28,000) generates enough traffic to support the flight to Europe? Whitehorse is a highly-marked "adventure" destination by Condor. But let Condor speak for itself:

"We have had quite a good season," says Jens Boyd, a director with Condor's parent company, the Thomas Cook Group. "The peak is very, very strong for, let's say, the key six to eight weeks when it's really warm and really attractive to come." Boyd says about 3,500 people took the direct flight to Whitehorse this year, and several hundred more took indirect flights, through Vancouver or other centres.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/con ... -1.3237375

Of course, maybe Detroit could also be sold as an "adventure" destination... certainly spending a weekend downtown would be a real adventure...

flymco753 wrote:

^which is why DTW's top 3 unserved domestic markets; SMF, SNA, and SJC will probably never be served by a nonstop flight on DL because you overfly MSP and SLC. Or for Canada, unless DL and WS do a JV, they won't do YYC, YEG or YWG to protect MSP flights. They won't do DAB, MLB or TLH to protect ATL flights. I find it interesting that all DL hubs other than DTW has HNL flights, but I guess the one market that stands out is NGO.

The addition of new routes at DTW is going to be difficult, the really only ones that are a matter of time is WN to HOU, AA to LAX, and AS to PDX or SAN.

Any additions could go both ways, either G4 will start JAX and DL won't respond, or they will completely obliterate G4. Or someone will start new flights to Timbuktu and NK will too, and yields take a dump.

I'm sure every hub has this problem. But you can fly from DTW to FSD, FAR, OMA. But you can't fly from MSP to YOW, BTV, CIU. I'm sure there are even some cities that you can't fly non-stop from ATL because of their proximity to DTW, MSP, and SLC.

I'm sure every hub has this problem. But you can fly from DTW to FSD, FAR, OMA. But you can't fly from MSP to YOW, BTV, CIU. I'm sure there are even some cities that you can't fly non-stop from ATL because of their proximity to DTW, MSP, and SLC.

It's a pretty long list in the upper Midwest.

Here in DLH we used to have 1x to DTW in addition to our 4-6x to MSP. Lost that in favor of routing more people through MSP, shame really DTW is a terminating destination for me and one of my favorite airports to connect through.

For me to get to CHA, I now need to double connect to get there if I want to fly DL (Now that UA started ORD-CHA) . Not the end of the world, but just another day in the life of hub's in this country. It makes little sense to overfly hubs unless the yields are there.

lavalampluva wrote:

I'm sure every hub has this problem. But you can fly from DTW to FSD, FAR, OMA. But you can't fly from MSP to YOW, BTV, CIU. I'm sure there are even some cities that you can't fly non-stop from ATL because of their proximity to DTW, MSP, and SLC.

You can't fly nonstop from DTW to FSD or FAR.

I guess I'm missing your point, once again..........

tys777 wrote:

Here in DLH we used to have 1x to DTW in addition to our 4-6x to MSP. Lost that in favor of routing more people through MSP, shame really DTW is a terminating destination for me and one of my favorite airports to connect through.

DL has no plans on bringing DLH to DTW back unfortunately, same with RST and ROA, they're gone for good.

The traffic to SMF, SNA and SJC are there, ultimately the issue is that NW used to fly to SNA and that was short lived. DL did SMF and that was also short lived, and they assume the same results with SJC, though I'm not sure if SJC was ever flown nonstop. Even though these are the top 3 domestic destinations, SLC and MSP give easy and reliable connections virtually throughout the day, I have no confidence DL will ever introduce either of these 3 routes.

compensateme wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

I'm sure every hub has this problem. But you can fly from DTW to FSD, FAR, OMA. But you can't fly from MSP to YOW, BTV, CIU. I'm sure there are even some cities that you can't fly non-stop from ATL because of their proximity to DTW, MSP, and SLC.

You can't fly nonstop from DTW to FSD or FAR.

I guess I'm missing your point, once again..........

I was sure that that service existed, maybe one time it did which does make the a moot point.

flymco753 wrote:

tys777 wrote:

Here in DLH we used to have 1x to DTW in addition to our 4-6x to MSP. Lost that in favor of routing more people through MSP, shame really DTW is a terminating destination for me and one of my favorite airports to connect through.

DL has no plans on bringing DLH to DTW back unfortunately, same with RST and ROA, they're gone for good.

The traffic to SMF, SNA and SJC are there, ultimately the issue is that NW used to fly to SNA and that was short lived. DL did SMF and that was also short lived, and they assume the same results with SJC, though I'm not sure if SJC was ever flown nonstop. Even though these are the top 3 domestic destinations, SLC and MSP give easy and reliable connections virtually throughout the day, I have no confidence DL will ever introduce either of these 3 routes.

Northwest did serve SJC nonstop from Detroit but it to was short lived.

lavalampluva wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

^which is why DTW's top 3 unserved domestic markets; SMF, SNA, and SJC will probably never be served by a nonstop flight on DL because you overfly MSP and SLC. Or for Canada, unless DL and WS do a JV, they won't do YYC, YEG or YWG to protect MSP flights. They won't do DAB, MLB or TLH to protect ATL flights. I find it interesting that all DL hubs other than DTW has HNL flights, but I guess the one market that stands out is NGO.

The addition of new routes at DTW is going to be difficult, the really only ones that are a matter of time is WN to HOU, AA to LAX, and AS to PDX or SAN.

Any additions could go both ways, either G4 will start JAX and DL won't respond, or they will completely obliterate G4. Or someone will start new flights to Timbuktu and NK will too, and yields take a dump.

I'm sure every hub has this problem. But you can fly from DTW to FSD, FAR, OMA. But you can't fly from MSP to YOW, BTV, CIU. I'm sure there are even some cities that you can't fly non-stop from ATL because of their proximity to DTW, MSP, and SLC.

There are many secondary markets in the Midwest that overfly DTW to get to ATL they are very few if any secondary markets in the south east or southwest that over fly ATL to get to MSP or DTW.

klm617 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

There are many secondary markets in the Midwest that overfly DTW to get to ATL they are very few if any secondary markets in the south east or southwest that over fly ATL to get to MSP or DTW.

DTW-DAB and DTW-TLH have the market, but those are the secondary markets that would interfere with ATL service. PBI, JAX and SRQ are all eyesore routes, why fly a CR9 to JAX when the PDEW clearly indicates the capacity for a mainline aircraft? Or PBI being 1x M88, that could be 2x M88 if anything, but I'm not in the networking and route planning department so what do I know?

Hey all, does anyone know about a potential domestic 744 for DL or is it all going to be International.

FedexL1011 wrote:

Hey all, does anyone know about a potential domestic 744 for DL or is it all going to be International.

I haven't heard of anything specific, but I'd be surprised if the last one didn't do some mixture of a DTW-MSP-ATL routing before going to the desert. They did that with the last DC9-50.

lavalampluva wrote:

FedexL1011 wrote:

Hey all, does anyone know about a potential domestic 744 for DL or is it all going to be International.

I haven't heard of anything specific, but I'd be surprised if the last one didn't do some mixture of a DTW-MSP-ATL routing before going to the desert. They did that with the last DC9-50.

DTW-MSP is a for sure that I've heard because it's a nostalgic NW route that the bird used to fly. Where it goes from MSP is ATL for retirement.

[

alfa164 wrote:

Of course, maybe Detroit could also be sold as an "adventure" destination... certainly spending a weekend downtown would be a real adventure...

Geeee Wizzzzz you're a comedian have you ever been to south eastern Michigan. It is exactly people like you that give Detroit a bad name hope you also have the same negative opinion of Chicago because their situation is ten times worse than what's going on in the tri county area. For someone who likes facts you make some really baseless comments about the Detroit area in general.

flymco753 wrote:

BDL757 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

DL ATL-MAN APR 0>0.3

Well there you have it folks why Delta didn't add DTW-MAN because they had planned all along to add 10 weekly out of ATL rather than flow those passengers over Detroit to the upper Midwest markets. To bad they aren't doing the same thing when they start to decrease the seat out of Detroit to Asia those passenger will be directed away from Detroit in favor of other Delta hubs in their system.

Is this permanent?

Let's look at this realistically, the market for DTW-MAN is there....now, 2 years ago it really wasn't. I honestly don't think DL ever really wanted to be in this market, maybe VS has plans on doing it eventually once the market matures and the PDEW becomes stronger. Thomas Cook wouldn't be a bad option, a 3x weekly A330-200 would be ideal now, but the fear would be DL would do daily on a 76W and take away from that. To conclude that, MAN is a questionable market right now, when or if it'll be added is still the question, were back to square 2.

The market for DTWMAN is not there. More people fly between Orlando and Manchester is one week than between Detroit and Manchester in one year. Small market, albeit bigger than the even small Detroit-Warsaw market.

Where is the data? People here just make subjective claims about quantifiable things like how many people fly between Detroit and Manchester compared to Orlando and Manchester.

Where's the data?

reasonable wrote:

Where is the data? People here just make subjective claims about quantifiable things like how many people fly between Detroit and Manchester compared to Orlando and Manchester.

Where's the data?

The data is generally not available publicly, although many here have access it. But 2011 data is public, and it's here:

https://www.brookings.edu/interactives/ ... n-america/

Tiny market that actually shrunk in the 2000s.

MAH4546 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

BDL757 wrote:

Is this permanent?

Let's look at this realistically, the market for DTW-MAN is there....now, 2 years ago it really wasn't. I honestly don't think DL ever really wanted to be in this market, maybe VS has plans on doing it eventually once the market matures and the PDEW becomes stronger. Thomas Cook wouldn't be a bad option, a 3x weekly A330-200 would be ideal now, but the fear would be DL would do daily on a 76W and take away from that. To conclude that, MAN is a questionable market right now, when or if it'll be added is still the question, were back to square 2.

The market for DTWMAN is not there. More people fly between Orlando and Manchester is one week than between Detroit and Manchester in one year. Small market, albeit bigger than the even small Detroit-Warsaw market.

Less we forget Detroit is a major international hub for Delta with 100's of onward connections not to mention IS/DL are building up Manchester flight options. I pretty sure that many of the international connection that were added at Atlanta had very little or no O/D traffic but were added anyway to give Delta market share in those cities. I would also believe that possible so of the Charlotte-Europe flights also have very little O/D but yet they are flown for the connection opportunities they provide in the American Airlines network. We are not talking about point to point traffic you have to look at the bigger picture a DTW-MAN connection would provide passenger convenience for the upper Midwest and Ohio valley area that makes it viable but Delta wants that traffic all flower over Atlanta no matter the inconvenience or how far people have to fly out of their way if they want to chose Delta as their preferred carrier.

MAH4546 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

BDL757 wrote:

Is this permanent?

Let's look at this realistically, the market for DTW-MAN is there....now, 2 years ago it really wasn't. I honestly don't think DL ever really wanted to be in this market, maybe VS has plans on doing it eventually once the market matures and the PDEW becomes stronger. Thomas Cook wouldn't be a bad option, a 3x weekly A330-200 would be ideal now, but the fear would be DL would do daily on a 76W and take away from that. To conclude that, MAN is a questionable market right now, when or if it'll be added is still the question, were back to square 2.

The market for DTWMAN is not there. More people fly between Orlando and Manchester is one week than between Detroit and Manchester in one year. Small market, albeit bigger than the even small Detroit-Warsaw market.

What is the CLT-BCN verses the DTW-MAN PDEW

When someone comments that the Detroit Poland market is small it totally invalidates any point they are trying to make. The perfect example of when numbers lie. I live in the Detroit market and am deeply entrenched in the Polish community and I know that that is simply not true. The Michigan to Poland market may not be as big as the Chicago or New York market but I guarantee that without all the people taking to the roads to Chicago and Toronto those numbers would be significant lower. To get a true indication of the real market you need to know where people's tickets are purchased not from the airport of departure.

alfa164 wrote:

Of course, maybe Detroit could also be sold as an "adventure" destination... certainly spending a weekend downtown would be a real adventure...

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... /97875992/

I rest my case.

I definitely agree that the yields out of Detroit are quite high in comparison to other metro areas, the question remains whether lowered yields will stimulate enough traffic to make up the lost revenue. I definitely think that there is room for low-cost competition in Detroit to tap new customer segments, stimulate existing flows and absorb leakage to nearby YYZ and ORD. If you look on Air France's or Lufthansa's website, you will notice that DTW-CDG or DTW-FRA often have promotional fares significantly higher than those of comparable markets.

Airline managers must ensure that no down-sells are generated on the existing passenger traffic, while capturing new passenger segments. This is hard to do. However, I believe that a low coster could definitely do well in this market, especially given the lack of options.

I believe Icelandair has the best product and business strategy for the Detroit market. Plus they can open the route with a 757. Wow Air doesn't have a suitable aircraft for DTW, and Norwegian focuses far more on POS Scandinavia to chose their destinations in the US. Should WOW have the right aircraft, their model would also work in DTW.

In my honest opinion, once one comes, I think the rest will see that their is a market here. I think too many airlines are unfamiliar with Detroit and are afraid to test the waters due to the terrible image the city has. The recent positive promotion (New York Times #9 Destination, etc) will help improve the city's image. I do wish the WCAA would hype Detroit a bit more as a destination (and not by using cash incentives, but really promotion the positive change and economic climate in Detroit and using creative means to show how dynamic the region can be).

alfa164 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Of course, maybe Detroit could also be sold as an "adventure" destination... certainly spending a weekend downtown would be a real adventure...

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... /97875992/

I rest my case.

These stories come about all the time. Whether you can give such a study much credibility to be honest is debatable. It's sensationalist. That's all. At the same time, Detroit is rated as #1 in metrics that promote health, like per capita bike production, miles of bike lanes, acres of parks etc.). And what does it really mean to be unhealthiest city? Using what metrics? What sample population? It's just sensationalist media to get clicks. So Alfa164, you're case in point isn't very valid. And whether going to 'America's Unhealthiest City' is an 'adventure' in and of itself is also perplexing. I don't follow your logic.

When I think of unhealthy food, I think of Philly Cheesesteak, Cheesecake (from the Cheesecake Factory - the city of Detroit doesn't have one), oversized portions, fried everything, all-you-can-eat buffets. To me unhealthy food options exist everywhere and the same could be said about Philadelphia, New Orleans, Las Vegas, Chicago, New York, Orlando etc.

klm617 wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

Let's look at this realistically, the market for DTW-MAN is there....now, 2 years ago it really wasn't. I honestly don't think DL ever really wanted to be in this market, maybe VS has plans on doing it eventually once the market matures and the PDEW becomes stronger. Thomas Cook wouldn't be a bad option, a 3x weekly A330-200 would be ideal now, but the fear would be DL would do daily on a 76W and take away from that. To conclude that, MAN is a questionable market right now, when or if it'll be added is still the question, were back to square 2.

The market for DTWMAN is not there. More people fly between Orlando and Manchester is one week than between Detroit and Manchester in one year. Small market, albeit bigger than the even small Detroit-Warsaw market.

What is the CLT-BCN verses the DTW-MAN PDEW

According to MIDT BCN-CLT has 59% more traffic.

News article with new CEO of DTW (with video interview). He scrupulously mentions Delta and "our other carriers" over and over.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... /97928906/

alfa164 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Of course, maybe Detroit could also be sold as an "adventure" destination... certainly spending a weekend downtown would be a real adventure...

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... /97875992/

I rest my case.

And Detroit rest it's case. Coming in at number 9 in the World

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... .html?_r=0

alfa164 wrote:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2017/02/13/study-detroit-unhealthiest-big-city-america/97875992/

I rest my case.

Shame on you (and a handful of other posters)!!! Do you really think it's appropriate to disparage a community for the sole purpose of getting your rocks off playing with a troll?

Some of us are trying to have a healthy discussion. If you don't want to join us, go away.

Unfortunately it's not about what The NY Times writes, people around the world know Detroit as a bombed out political corruptness, and until they visit, they'll see differently. It's harder for EK or FI to come here so often times to court their service, you have to travel to them. They won't believe you in the word of mouth, pictures don't do a justice, so it's hard to encourage international airlines to want to fly to DTW. I believe EK and FI will happen after 2020, it'll be a long process.

Here are the largest 40 O&Ds (to Europe incl. TR) with DTW on one end vv. Source MIDT (time frame Jan16-Dec16).
1 FRA 70152
2 LON 47780
3 PAR 27621
4 AMS 22664
5 MUC 21874
6 ROM 16849
7 STR 13947
8 TLV 10098
9 BCN 9364
10 DUS 9160
11 TRN 8788
12 DUB 8370
13 MIL 7941
14 BUD 7566
15 TIA 7481
16 VCE 6183
17 ZRH 5952
18 PRG 5813
19 ATH 5715
20 BRU 5541
21 BER 5534
22 MAD 5405
23 IST 5299
24 VIE 5223
25 MAN 5116
26 STO 5112
27 CPH 4581
28 HAJ 4549
29 BUH 3987
30 IEV 3531
31 NUE 3507
32 WAW 3345
33 HAM 3262
34 GOT 3117
35 KRK 3014
36 MOW 2943
37 BHX 2864
38 LYS 2682
39 GVA 2520
40 LIS 2482

So WAW and MAN are not happening anytime soon.... MUC could go year-round. BA could start LHR (if and when). Maybe EK will start MXP-DTW using 5th freedom. The market (MIL + TRN) is large enough and will secure the loads and yields they will need.

I'm not surprised TLV is so large, the late departure to JFK is full of TLV connections, I'm not sure DL wants to do it, so I can set his market left untapped.

BCN and DUB is different, I think these can easily be seasonal on DL, but again, they don't want to do it so it would pave a way for DUB on an EI 757. BCN will be left untapped.

DUS won't happen, NW did it and pulled it shortly after on a 757, in that case, untapped.

Virtually the only market I can see ever happening on this list is DUB on an EI 757. Do you happen to have Asia, Oceana, Africa and Latin numbers?

BRU - NW operated briefly in 2007 with its TATL 757 experiment
DUS - NW operated a little bit longer in 2007-2008 with its TATL 757 experiment
MXP - NW operated in 2000 with a DC-10-30, when they co-launched FCO & MXP service that summer and an alliance with Alitalia, MXP lasted one summer
MAD - NW announced service in 2002 with a DC-10-30, cancelled before it ever started service

Pretty amazing how quickly the numbers fall-off outside of the top 5.

An interesting side note would be to look at the amount of TATL service to secondary markets that UA and in particular AA used to operate out of ORD. Back in the 90s and early 2000's they have a significant number of secondary markets in the UK and Scandinavia that are no longer flown in this era.

hjulicher wrote:

Here are the largest 40 O&Ds (to Europe incl. TR) with DTW on one end vv. Source MIDT (time frame Jan16-Dec16).
1 FRA 70152
2 LON 47780
3 PAR 27621
4 AMS 22664
5 MUC 21874
6 ROM 16849
7 STR 13947
8 TLV 10098
9 BCN 9364
10 DUS 9160
11 TRN 8788
12 DUB 8370
13 MIL 7941
14 BUD 7566
15 TIA 7481
16 VCE 6183
17 ZRH 5952
18 PRG 5813
19 ATH 5715
20 BRU 5541
21 BER 5534
22 MAD 5405
23 IST 5299
24 VIE 5223
25 MAN 5116
26 STO 5112
27 CPH 4581
28 HAJ 4549
29 BUH 3987
30 IEV 3531
31 NUE 3507
32 WAW 3345
33 HAM 3262
34 GOT 3117
35 KRK 3014
36 MOW 2943
37 BHX 2864
38 LYS 2682
39 GVA 2520
40 LIS 2482

So WAW and MAN are not happening anytime soon.... MUC could go year-round. BA could start LHR (if and when). Maybe EK will start MXP-DTW using 5th freedom. The market (MIL + TRN) is large enough and will secure the loads and yields they will need.

Interesting numbers indeed it would be nice to see the STR-ATL numbers verse the DTW-STR numbers. On other observation is that if there is nonstop service in a market the numbers will be higher at that certainly is proven by the number of passengers that fly DTW-AMS as there is no way that big a Dutch community to support that traffic my guess is that people use those flights to get all over Europe as the get off in AMS and travel onward by train to central Europe for cost and convenience reasons. Just imagine how many more passengers there would be say if Delta operated 4 dailies on the Detroit Brussels route how those numbers would be artificially inflated So again I'm saying that while yes these numbers can serve as a reference of so kind they don't give you the total picture. How many fly DTW-LHR and then travel by road or train to Manchester for a better priced flight and quicker transit times. Because let's face it if you're traveling skyteam from DTW-MAN you probably transiting at AMS which you over fly Manchester by over an hour and then have to fly that hour or so back up to Manchester.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

BRU - NW operated briefly in 2007 with its TATL 757 experiment
DUS - NW operated a little bit longer in 2007-2008 with its TATL 757 experiment
MXP - NW operated in 2000 with a DC-10-30, when they co-launched FCO & MXP service that summer and an alliance with Alitalia, MXP lasted one summer
MAD - NW announced service in 2002 with a DC-10-30, cancelled before it ever started service

Pretty amazing how quickly the numbers fall-off outside of the top 5.

An interesting side note would be to look at the amount of TATL service to secondary markets that UA and in particular AA used to operate out of ORD. Back in the 90s and early 2000's they have a significant number of secondary markets in the UK and Scandinavia that are no longer flown in this era.

Joint Ventures have largely killed off the need for direct flights to secondary cities (unless there's a clear business case for that type of flight). It also helps that with the Schengen Area, you clear immigration in the country that you land in as part of the transfer process.

What was the market between MSP-KEF before FI launched service? Now MSP has two daily flights seasonally. Sometimes direct service can stimulate a market...

I'm still somewhat surprised DL hasn't attempted a seasonal DTW-DUB flight. There's generally excess slack in the 757 long-haul fleet, and DTW offers connectivity to a handful of mid-sized markets that ATL doesn't (not to mention Midwest - ATL - DUB is a really, really silly routing ... of course, DL carries a large chunk of the market like this anyway since that's where the capacity + low fares are).

And while seasonal travel DTW/DUB is not large, I generally suspect it's under-reported -- peak summer fares from DTW are often double those from JFK, BOS, etc. DL recently offered ~RT$150 to JFK & BOS this summer; many online booking agencies will price a DTW-JFK-DUB-JFK-DTW ticket with split tariffs (1 RT DL, 1 RT OAL) and often this is reported as the person having flown RT DTW-JFK and RT JFK-DUB...

That said, transatlantic fares are the lowest they've been in years. For the peak summer stretch, you can travel nonstop to LHR, CDG, AMS or FCO for less than $1500 -- for the past several years, these fares were trending over $2,200. If you're willing to make a connection, you can get tickets for sub-$1000 (many are split tariffs). If you're willing to make the drive to YYZ, you can travel for less than the cost of a DTW-LAX ticket. I recommend driving to YYZ -- at most, it's 4 hours and closer to 3.5 for most people -- but tickets from YQG go for ~$200.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

BRU - NW operated briefly in 2007 with its TATL 757 experiment
DUS - NW operated a little bit longer in 2007-2008 with its TATL 757 experiment
MXP - NW operated in 2000 with a DC-10-30, when they co-launched FCO & MXP service that summer and an alliance with Alitalia, MXP lasted one summer
MAD - NW announced service in 2002 with a DC-10-30, cancelled before it ever started service

Pretty amazing how quickly the numbers fall-off outside of the top 5.

An interesting side note would be to look at the amount of TATL service to secondary markets that UA and in particular AA used to operate out of ORD. Back in the 90s and early 2000's they have a significant number of secondary markets in the UK and Scandinavia that are no longer flown in this era.

Sabena operated Detroit to Brussels for almost 10 years.

compensateme wrote:

What was the market between MSP-KEF before FI launched service? Now MSP has two daily flights seasonally. Sometimes direct service can stimulate a market....

MSP got FI service in 1998. They don't even need to market in MSP anymore. They just sort of built their own following for low cost European travel organically. The cost of acquiring customers today is quite a bit higher and DL will probably be far more aggressive than NW was in MSP. All of the legacy carriers are aware of the impact of Icelandair, WOW and Norwegian (especially if you're operating a fortress hub).

Also as pointed out, you do need some minimum level of bi-directional traffic. It isn't quite true anymore but in the 90s, Mall of America was a big deal as far as travel to Minneapolis. Back then, the mall was filled with tourists. The Japan flights carried quite a few people who literally flew in for a weekend to shop at the mall. MoA still has some pull as far as tourism but international service to MSP back then benefited tremendously from having the world's largest mall. Condor claimed that MoA was still important enough to justify its flights when it launched in 2014 but I'm slightly skeptical of whether that was actually true.

AA trimmed DTW on its spring schedule. DFW stays at 5x instead of increasing to 6x, ORD downgauged from 4xE75, 3xM80 to 5xCR7, 2xM80 and some minor changes elsewhere.

On a positive note (for me, anyway, since I'm on it pretty often), the late ORD-FNT and morning return has been upgauged to the CR7. This is the first time AA's offered a two-cabin product at FNT, and the lowest first class fares are less than the lowest economy fares for a similar flight from DTW (until WN withdraws from the market, unfortunately). That said, I wouldn't pay an extra $75 for it, but the CR7 is still a much nicer ride in the back than the CRJ they've been using.