ANA787 wrote:

PDX-ICN on KE makes more sense than DL. KE would benefit from AS feed from PDX. AS can no longer feed DL at PDX, correct?

And PDX is not a DL hub.

JV would allow KE to get more creative with North American destinations, I would think. Now that 789 is coming in to service.

BOS comes straight to mind.

Sightseer wrote:

I am not a JV expert by any means, but I had always thought/assumed the DOT only allowed JVs to cover countries that had Open Skies with the US. Is that not the case? I do know what can happen when you assume ...

theasianguy wrote:

HeeseokKoo wrote:

No open skies between US and China is the main reason why the proposed DL/KE JV will not include the 28 Chinese routes. Neither UA/NH nor AA/JL include them. However, HKG is included in both, as it does have open skies.

Here is AA's argument in the LAX/PEK route case for why it cannot codeshare with JAL to China via Tokyo:

The U.S.-China bilateral agreement does not allow codesharing on U.S. service to China through a third country like Japan without the participation of a China airline. JAL currently codeshares on service between Tokyo and China with Delta’s SkyTeam alliance partners China Eastern and China Southern, making any potential codeshare between American and JAL for Tokyo-China service highly impracticable. Without either a revised U.S.-China bilateral agreement or a fundamental restructuring of the existing China-Japan codeshare relationships, American cannot “serve China via Tokyo.” (Reply of American Airlines - June 6, 2016, 20-21)

The practical considerations notwithstanding, AA suggests that even without a restructuring of the US-China bilateral "codesharing on U.S. service to China through a third country" would be possible just with changes to the China-Japan codeshare relationship. It is an either-or proposition.

I suspect the China-Korea "codeshare relationship" has similar restrictions.

mercure1 wrote:

Good news for Delta if such a venture becomes reality.

I do wonder however what DL will do with Japan as it shifts focus on Korea? Japan still one of the worlds largest travel markets in the world (2nd in Asia after China), and its US rivals will be left with a huge advantage in such a large market still.

It'll continue serving Japan just as it already does. Like you mentioned, it's a large market and DL isn't going to abandon it. Sure some routes might get cut the way JFK-NRT did, but I doubt we're going to see much cutting. I'm sure DL will aggressively pursue moving other NRT routes to HND as more slots become available. In terms of the beyond NRT stuff, that's certainly going away if a JV with KE goes forward, other than maybe the beach routes.

flyboy80 wrote:

N644US wrote:

Of course, in complement to the pre-existing services to ATL, ORD, DFW, HNL, IAH, LAS, LAX, MIA, JFK, SFO, SEA, and IAD. Maybe a shifting of some of the current NRT services, but not all of them. PDX comes to mind especially with such a largeness percentage of connection traffic.

I thought PDX- Tokyo was largely O/D? I wonder how Seoul compares to Tokyo in terms of O&D from PDX.

I had no idea KE had service to 28 cities in China from ICN. Does OZ have a similar presence in China? I'm also curious what will become of KE/AS in an DL/KE JV scenario.

Last time when I checked in (and when all bags were offloaded due to a diversion in HND instead of NRT), I saw that about 80% of all bags were bound for connecting destinations (SIN, MNL, PUS, SPN, CTS, etc) while only about 20% were actually bound for NRT. While passengers may not necessarily be transferring to the same points as all those bags, there is quite the percentage. Even if only half of people on the flight checked a bag, that still represents about 40% of the total passengers on the plane making their way on connections rather than to NRT.

I can now search from MCO to multiple cities in SE Asia on delta.com and one or two segments are on KE and I earn full MQM. It didn't use to be possible at least the beginning of last year. For example, KUL would show as no flights available.

Hopefully this will provide better access to Bangkok.

Delta's international footprint is taking shape.
Hubs in Amsterdam, Paris,Seoul,Mexico City,Shanghai, and eventually São Paulo.
Strong presence in London and the U.K via
Virgin Atlantic.

N644US wrote:

downdata wrote:

N644US wrote:

If this works I'm finally going to actually earn decent MQMs on my flights to Asia (seriously, Category 4 is the worst)! Nice to see 2 SkyTeam partners work to improve their relations. But what will happen to their partnership with MU? Do they really need 2 Asian partners?

Eh well yes until KE starts to fly to 30 chinese cities or Australia i dont see why the relationship is mutually exclusive.

KE flies to 28 Chinese cities and 2 destinations in Australia (SYD+BNE).

28 is not 30

But seriously, China is 15 mins away from Korea, i doubt many passengers would find the need to route through ICN for that extra 3 hour stopover + more expensive fare.

flyboy80 wrote:

Does OZ have a similar presence in China?

According to Wiki 22 cities in mainland China.

I imagine this is the end of the AS/KE relationship. Recent AS addition of JL, existing partnership with CX and possible addition of SQ (current VX Elevate partner) will help soften the loss of KE.

thekorean wrote:

ANA787 wrote:

PDX-ICN on KE makes more sense than DL. KE would benefit from AS feed from PDX. AS can no longer feed DL at PDX, correct?

And PDX is not a DL hub.

JV would allow KE to get more creative with North American destinations, I would think. Now that 789 is coming in to service.

BOS comes straight to mind.

I would think in North America BOS is clearly their largest hole.

thekorean wrote:

ANA787 wrote:

PDX-ICN on KE makes more sense than DL. KE would benefit from AS feed from PDX. AS can no longer feed DL at PDX, correct?

And PDX is not a DL hub.

JV would allow KE to get more creative with North American destinations, I would think. Now that 789 is coming in to service.

BOS comes straight to mind.

JV also allows you to fine tune your offerings as DL/AF have done with BOS-CDG.

BOS-ICN could start off as 789 but then require something bigger seasonally (either upgauge to KE 77W/A380 or 2nd seasonal DL service with a A359)

alfa164 wrote:

[
Are those codeshare flights? I believe you always earn full credit when you are flying on any flight - codeshare or not - that has a DL flight number.

The issue is flying on a KE flight, as a KE passenger. Eve though they are Skyteam partners, the qualifying mileage credit falls sharply.

if its booked on delta.com than you earn full MQM as per Delta MQM policy.

As early as this October, ICN terminal 2 opens. It is confirmed that only 4 airlines - KE, DL, AF, and KL - are moving to the new terminal. Hope JV begins before then.

global1 wrote:

Delta's international footprint is taking shape.
Hubs in Amsterdam, Paris,Seoul,Mexico City,Shanghai, and eventually São Paulo.
Strong presence in London and the U.K via
Virgin Atlantic.

I would not call CDG, MEX or PVG "DL hubs". They are simply the hubs of very close partners to which DL has some operations (in some cases substantial like CDG and in other cases not so much). They'd be "hubs" if DL had flights to places other than the U.S. originating from those airports, as is the case with NRT.

How will OZ react? If they push to join the UA/ANA JV how will each of those parties respond?

I imagine ANA has the most to lose if OZ joins.

rbavfan wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

N644US wrote:

Also, what is the 8th DL partner? I see MU, CI, CZ, GA, MF, VN, and KE (7 partners).

Actually 9, hit the wrong number.

SV and ME, in the MidEast.

SV & ME are middle east, not Asian.

9W Jet Airways India is a DL Tier 1 partner.

Middle East is a part of Asia not a separate continent. So SV and ME are Asian partners for DL

Now KE needs JV with KLM/AF, they really need to shore up their European operation.

EddieDude wrote:

global1 wrote:

Delta's international footprint is taking shape.
Hubs in Amsterdam, Paris,Seoul,Mexico City,Shanghai, and eventually São Paulo.
Strong presence in London and the U.K via
Virgin Atlantic.

I would not call CDG, MEX or PVG "DL hubs". They are simply the hubs of very close partners to which DL has some operations (in some cases substantial like CDG and in other cases not so much). They'd be "hubs" if DL had flights to places other than the U.S. originating from those airports, as is the case with NRT.

Delta would disagree with you. http://news.delta.com/paris-charles-de-gaulle-airport

jbs2886 wrote:

Delta would disagree with you. http://news.delta.com/paris-charles-de-gaulle-airport

Then I agree to disagree with DL.

EddieDude wrote:

global1 wrote:

Delta's international footprint is taking shape.
Hubs in Amsterdam, Paris,Seoul,Mexico City,Shanghai, and eventually São Paulo.
Strong presence in London and the U.K via
Virgin Atlantic.

I would not call CDG, MEX or PVG "DL hubs". They are simply the hubs of very close partners to which DL has some operations (in some cases substantial like CDG and in other cases not so much). They'd be "hubs" if DL had flights to places other than the U.S. originating from those airports, as is the case with NRT.

By that logic AMS is not a hub as well for DL since DL does not have any flights originating from AMS to other places outside of the U.S.

If this deal is done, they can finally OFFICIALLY announce the death of the NRT hub.

I'd imagine DL would maintain NRT service to HNL and any other US flights that can't fit into HND. Maybe GUM. They'll still have a major presence in Tokyo, but it will be almost all terminating in Japan. HND/NRT to LAX, DTW, ATL, SEA from the mainland should remain. Given how terribly MSP-HND is doing, they could move it to MSP-ICN to feed KE the intra-Asia connections that used to make up the majority of the flight. Everything else at NRT (PVG, MNL, SIN, SPN, PDX) should be axed.

DL could possibly add LAX, MSP, and JFK to ICN in addition to SEA, DTW, and ATL. That would make them the largest US airline to Korea.

Would DL have been better off with JL as a JV partner? Or is KE a better choice?

rbavfan wrote:

SV & ME are middle east, not Asian.

Awesome... pull up a map and show us where this continent called "Middle East" is located.
Are you sure you're not confusing it with "Middle Earth," because they both only exist in an academic sense.

Those are west Asian airlines. Might not be common/popular to refer to them as such, but it doesn't change the fact of what they are.

Both have their advantages. Delta did, after all, make a concerted effort to woo JAL from OneWorld. However, anyone who has been through ICN realizes that no airport in Japan offers the connectivity and facilities of ICN. ICN has the potential of becoming the 'AMS' of Asia for Delta. .Many Japanese secondary cities Japan routes will be primarily O&D routes along with Hawaii/Micronesia and Palau beach markets.

PVG (and PEK) are long term investments that will bear fruit over time as new airports open in those cities and air service agreements liberalize between the two countries. The size of the China market is mind boggling and will, over time, eclipse the Japanese market by leaps and bounds.

DTWLAX wrote:

rbavfan wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Actually 9, hit the wrong number.

SV and ME, in the MidEast.

SV & ME are middle east, not Asian.

9W Jet Airways India is a DL Tier 1 partner.

Middle East is a part of Asia not a separate continent. So SV and ME are Asian partners for DL

To expand on this a little, the Middle East is a region that includes Turkey, with a small section in Europe, and Egypt, with the majority in Africa, minus the Sinai peninsula of course.

theasianguy wrote:

HeeseokKoo wrote:

OA412 wrote:

Actually if you look above at the reply from LAXIntl, China is excluded because it does not have an open-skies agreement in place with the US. Other countries without open skies are also precluded from being added to the JV.

I thought that blocks JV between US carrier and Chinese carrier. I wonder whether UA-NH or AA-JL JV also exclude Chinese routes?

No open skies between US and China is the main reason why the proposed DL/KE JV will not include the 28 Chinese routes. Neither UA/NH nor AA/JL include them. However, HKG is included in both, as it does have open skies.

HKG is not China anyway. (At least for aviation, it is entirely foreign to China)

The discussion in this thread is regarding a potential new JV between Delta and Korean. It is not a discussion on Detroit or their plans in Detroit. A discussion on that topic can take place in its own thread should anyone wish to start one. In the mean time, please keep this thread on topic.

✈️ atcsundevil

Here is a comparison of how the US carriers would stack up across Pacific if DL/KE were to enter into a JV.




=

theasianguy wrote:

DL could possibly add LAX, MSP, and JFK to ICN in addition to SEA, DTW, and ATL. That would make them the largest US airline to Korea.

I would very much suspect this as well. I would also expect PDX-NRT to get shifted to PDX-ICN as well.

That would leave SEA, DTW, ATL, HNL, and GUM as the only US destinations served by DL at NRT... and effectively ICN becomes the new NRT with all DL onward flights to SE Asia ticketed on KE Metal via ICN.

theasianguy wrote:

If this deal is done, they can finally OFFICIALLY announce the death of the NRT hub.

I'd imagine DL would maintain NRT service to HNL and any other US flights that can't fit into HND. Maybe GUM. They'll still have a major presence in Tokyo, but it will be almost all terminating in Japan. HND/NRT to LAX, DTW, ATL, SEA from the mainland should remain. Given how terribly MSP-HND is doing, they could move it to MSP-ICN to feed KE the intra-Asia connections that used to make up the majority of the flight. Everything else at NRT (PVG, MNL, SIN, SPN, PDX) should be axed.

DL could possibly add LAX, MSP, and JFK to ICN in addition to SEA, DTW, and ATL. That would make them the largest US airline to Korea.

I am not sure DL would add LAX-ICN. KE has enough seats into LAX.

Exciting times ahead for DL in Asia.

DTWLAX wrote:

theasianguy wrote:

If this deal is done, they can finally OFFICIALLY announce the death of the NRT hub.

I'd imagine DL would maintain NRT service to HNL and any other US flights that can't fit into HND. Maybe GUM. They'll still have a major presence in Tokyo, but it will be almost all terminating in Japan. HND/NRT to LAX, DTW, ATL, SEA from the mainland should remain. Given how terribly MSP-HND is doing, they could move it to MSP-ICN to feed KE the intra-Asia connections that used to make up the majority of the flight. Everything else at NRT (PVG, MNL, SIN, SPN, PDX) should be axed.

DL could possibly add LAX, MSP, and JFK to ICN in addition to SEA, DTW, and ATL. That would make them the largest US airline to Korea.

I am not sure DL would add LAX-ICN. KE has enough seats into LAX.

I would suspect that under a JV, the majority of flights between ICN and Delta Hubs would be operated on DL metal. This would help balance capacity, with the remaining ICN-North America flights to non-Delta hubs (ORD, DFW, SFO, etc) on KE metal.

Logistics are more straight forward in connecting DL metal to DL metal at SEA, DTW, ATL, MSP, etc. That being said, I would fully expect KE to still keep a presence on the key NYC and LA markets, but would imagine most of the extra frequencies to be on DL metal to balance the JV capacities between the two airlines.