It appears that it has been removed from the Summer 2018 schedule along with JFK-ARN...

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

ARN is a market that Delta has came and went multiple times over the years. Why can't they make it work?

I'm sure someone will come on here and say that it would work from DTW.

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

777Mech wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

I think they mean on the other end. Lets do a little critical thinking here. What is an AA hub: Paris or Philadelphia?

jubguy3 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

I think they mean on the other end. Lets do a little critical thinking here. What is an AA hub: Paris or Philadelphia?

So the only hub that counts is AA's PHL, the DL/AF hub in CDG doesn't?


That would be 777mech's point. In other words, DL doesn't have "very little feed" and the route is no different than DL operating PHL-ATL or PHL-DTW. (as far as feed goes, obviously CDG is a longer flight)

jubguy3 wrote:

I think they mean on the other end. Lets do a little critical thinking here. What is an AA hub: Paris or Philadelphia?

Anyone else notice the irony here...?

KICT wrote:

ARN is a market that Delta has came and went multiple times over the years. Why can't they make it work?

UA,DY and SK cover the market already quite well and I think the U.S-Sweden market is also a bit oversaturated at the moment causing DL to axe ARN.

deltal1011man wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

I think they mean on the other end. Lets do a little critical thinking here. What is an AA hub: Paris or Philadelphia?

So the only hub that counts is AA's PHL, the DL/AF hub in CDG doesn't?


That would be 777mech's point. In other words, DL doesn't have "very little feed" and the route is no different than DL operating PHL-ATL or PHL-DTW. (as far as feed goes, obviously CDG is a longer flight)

With respect... one flight is from a large American hub city to Paris, France. The other flight is from a French city to the destination of Philadelphia, PA. I see it as quite different actually

DL inherited the PHL-CDG route from Air France, since DL flies 752s and AF doesn't, and that's how much traffic the route could support. That after a few years of seasonal trading off between DL 752s in winter and AF 744s in summer.

Terminating this route entirely in summer strikes me as very odd. More likely: this may presage the return of AF metal to PHL after an eight year absence.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

DL inherited the PHL-CDG route from Air France, since DL flies 752s and AF doesn't, and that's how much traffic the route could support. That after a few years of seasonal trading off between DL 752s in winter and AF 744s in summer.

Terminating this route entirely in summer strikes me as very odd. More likely: this may presage the return of AF metal to PHL after an eight year absence.

While I am not ready to predict that this could be followed by AF's return, I would certainly like to see it happen. As said before, the 757 made more sense on the route hence DL took it over. Their loads have been atrocious in recent summers (loads also have not been particularly good for AA and they recently downsized from the 333 to the 332). But is this because of the nature of the route and competition? Or is there some reason to think that if the flight were flown by AF directly it would perform better and therefore could actually justify switching to AF 332 for example?

Just throwing out the question. Unfortunately, my gut says that the nature of aviation today with many more TA routes and competition means that the PHL-PAR route will be hard to sustain both oneworld and SkyTeam services. But I would certainly be happy to see AF return to PHL.

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Except that Philly is a top-10 US city, Delta generally connects their largest markets to their largest hubs, plus CDG is one of the largest hubs in the EU never mind one of the most visited cities in the world. Other than that, you're right in the modern era US/AA has had a strangle hold on PHL originating traffic for most of the past 10 years and has successfully pushed out other players. If DL/AF aren't able to get a lot of traffic destined for PHL on that flight, I could see a situation where its tough. There has long been chatter on this and other boards about how AF has struggled on Paris-Philly over the years (at least compared to Boston, NYC and DC).

If they really are going to drop this and the LHR route, maybe it justifies my wishful thinking of DL bringing back BOS-PHL to feed at least LHR/CDG/AMS/FCO and avoid the PHL-JFK mess of a route.... I know, but a boy is at least allowed to dream!

N717TW wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Except that Philly is a top-10 US city, Delta generally connects their largest markets to their largest hubs, plus CDG is one of the largest hubs in the EU never mind one of the most visited cities in the world. Other than that, you're right in the modern era US/AA has had a strangle hold on PHL originating traffic for most of the past 10 years and has successfully pushed out other players. If DL/AF aren't able to get a lot of traffic destined for PHL on that flight, I could see a situation where its tough. There has long been chatter on this and other boards about how AF has struggled on Paris-Philly over the years (at least compared to Boston, NYC and DC).

If they really are going to drop this and the LHR route, maybe it justifies my wishful thinking of DL bringing back BOS-PHL to feed at least LHR/CDG/AMS/FCO and avoid the PHL-JFK mess of a route.... I know, but a boy is at least allowed to dream!

PHL is a smallish aviation market for its size, but its size is larger than people usually remember. And Skyteam has been competing fairly aggressively for TATL in even middle to smaller markets, as endlessly covered in other threads, vis. DL adding IND-CDG, and possibly [other focus cities] -CDG or -AMS. Moreover, there just isn't a reasonable Skyteam hub on the American side to route a connection through. BOS doesn't have the breadth of connections, and is a miserable city for O&D because margins are razor-thin between Amtrak and B6 as competitors. If PHL-BOS is thin, PHL-JFK should probably cost the job of any DL route planner who puts it on the schedule. Backhauling to/from DTW, CVG, or ATL might be more desirable from DL's perspective, but is such a large time penalty that it would surrender the PHL market to Oneworld entirely; the Skyteam FF base in PHL is tiny, and only dedicated FFs would choose that connection. Not out of the question that Skyteam might do that, but as long as they can get decent yields out of a 752, I don't see why they would.

It is hard to believe that the SkyTeam JV would completely exit the transatlantic market out of PHL - PHL is obviously no JFK, WAS or BOS, but it's not exactly a tiny market. That said, I guess it's not that shocking - AA is adding material new capacity on PHL-Europe next year, including new routes (BUD, PRG) and larger aircraft on several routes (AMS, LIS). It's plausible that this has undermined all but the very strongest non-oneworld network carrier capacity in the market (which often seems to be Lufthansa to FRA).

As for ARN - it's not that dissimilar a story: the market is large but it's dominated by a competing network carrier alliance/JV.

It's hard for me to believe that with corporate contracts, Skyteam won't serve CDG-PHL. The pharmaceutical industries alone in the Philly / Jersey / Delaware area and in France should provide a decent amount of support for the route.

Time for me to retire from my armchair CEO gig.

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

There really isn't much that AA can kick DL's a$$ in. While AA might have finally, after years of neglect, caught up to the benchmark of business class flying and having flat bed seats across their international fleet, the soft product still lags way behind that of DL. DL sets very high standards for itself for routes that make a profit or conversely, doesn't make a profit. And remember, DL dominates the east coast market to CDG so one less flight from the east coast won't really dampen their feed into CDG.

tlecam wrote:

It's hard for me to believe that with corporate contracts, Skyteam won't serve CDG-PHL. The pharmaceutical industries alone in the Philly / Jersey / Delaware area and in France should provide a decent amount of support for the route.

I agree - it is hard to believe, that Delta would exit PHL-CDG or, more broadly, PHL-Europe in general. That said, again, it isn't hard to believe that AA would have a near-absolute lock on PHL-originating longhaul business demand, and perhaps the extra capacity that's coming into the PHL transatlantic market is enough to push Delta (and the SkyTeam JV) out. PHL isn't a small market, but perhaps it's just small enough, and just dominated enough by a rival, that Delta doesn't think it's worth dedicating a longhaul aircraft anymore.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHL-JFK should probably cost the job of any DL route planner who puts it on the schedule.

DL apparently feels differently: http://flightaware.com/live/findflight? ... ation=KJFK

Yields from Philly are really not great, and the route was not a particularly good performer. Plus of course AA is so big in the local market... kind of makes sense.
The other non-hub served by DL transatlantically don't generally see that level of service from another competitor, hence why these are staying.

tlecam wrote:

It's hard for me to believe that with corporate contracts, Skyteam won't serve CDG-PHL. The pharmaceutical industries alone in the Philly / Jersey / Delaware area and in France should provide a decent amount of support for the route.

Time for me to retire from my armchair CEO gig.

The 5 major pharma's with a sizeable presence in the immediate PHL area that I can think of off the top of my head are GSK, Merck, J&J's oncology unit, Teva, and AstraZeneca. GSK and AZ go to AA/BA with their service to the UK.

BMS, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Otsuka, J&J main office, Novartis all have offices in NJ between Princeton and Morristown which likely makes EWR a more convenient option.


It might come down to the overall strategy. DL might rather take a run at markets like IND, RDU, AUS, MSY, STL, BNA than maintaining PHL.

Something else that doesn't feel right is that DL will have just cut PHL-LHR in March. Presumably that capacity reduction will still be working its way through the PHL market; even if PHL-CDG is underperforming now, why not wait and see how many LHR passengers switch to CDG?

Sightseer wrote:

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHL-JFK should probably cost the job of any DL route planner who puts it on the schedule.

DL apparently feels differently: http://flightaware.com/live/findflight? ... ation=KJFK

Not only that, but DL is rotating the 752 on JFK-PHL. It could simply be for aircraft utilization on the LHR/CDG flights. But there is likely an effort to pull some international traffic connecting in JFK.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

Something else that doesn't feel right is that DL will have just cut PHL-LHR in March. Presumably that capacity reduction will still be working its way through the PHL market; even if PHL-CDG is underperforming now, why not wait and see how many LHR passengers switch to CDG?

PHL-LHR is basically all local traffic for DL, they don't have a hub on either end for passengers to connect to. Few are likely to switch to DL's CDG flight, at least at acceptable yields for DL.

If this indeed proves true, my theory is that DL would rather deploy the 75Es on transcon routes between JFK and SFO/LAX, potentially freeing up one or two low-J 763s needed to cover additions such as MCO-AMS and IND-CDG. If PHL-CDG was performing well for the JV, we'll probably see AF step in (I'd guess the 332 would be the most appropriate aircraft). Otherwise, these may just be straight cuts.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

Moreover, there just isn't a reasonable Skyteam hub on the American side to route a connection through. BOS doesn't have the breadth of connections, and is a miserable city for O&D because margins are razor-thin between Amtrak and B6 as competitors. If PHL-BOS is thin, PHL-JFK should probably cost the job of any DL route planner who puts it on the schedule. Backhauling to/from DTW, CVG, or ATL might be more desirable from DL's perspective, but is such a large time penalty that it would surrender the PHL market to Oneworld entirely; the Skyteam FF base in PHL is tiny, and only dedicated FFs would choose that connection. Not out of the question that Skyteam might do that, but as long as they can get decent yields out of a 752, I don't see why they would.

Connecting in DTW from PHL to head to Europe isn't such a bad backhaul either. It's shorter than Chicago, and UA, AA and even WN sell a lot of PHL-CHI-back east type itineries.

Question: If DL is exiting PHL-CDG and there's nothing from AF about returning to PHL, might this be a prime candidate for JOON? When US left Star Alliance, LH transitioned its daily PHL-FRA rotation to its lower-cost, higher Y-configured Jump! subsidiary, so might AF be thinking the same idea?

EMB170 wrote:

Question: If DL is exiting PHL-CDG and there's nothing from AF about returning to PHL, might this be a prime candidate for JOON? When US left Star Alliance, LH transitioned its daily PHL-FRA rotation to its lower-cost, higher Y-configured Jump! subsidiary, so might AF be thinking the same idea?

FWIW, LH is converting FRA-PHL back to a mainline larger premium cabin 343 this winter.

lesfalls wrote:

KICT wrote:

ARN is a market that Delta has came and went multiple times over the years. Why can't they make it work?

UA,DY and SK cover the market already quite well and I think the U.S-Sweden market is also a bit oversaturated at the moment causing DL to axe ARN.

DL also effectively has very easy ARN access via AMS on KLM, and going via AMS is easier and more direct from most DL hubs. JFK-ARN only worked for certain northeastern markets for which ATL or DTW would be doubling-back, or for NYC O&D, for which DL was competing with Star Alliance hub-to-hub services on UA & SAS.

KICT wrote:

ARN is a market that Delta has came and went multiple times over the years. Why can't they make it work?

You aren't joking. I can't even keep track of how many times since the PA Atlantic Division was bought JFK-ARN has come and gone. I want to say 4 or 5 times which seems ludicrous but I think it has come and gone that many times.

jumbojet wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

There really isn't much that AA can kick DL's a$$ in. While AA might have finally, after years of neglect, caught up to the benchmark of business class flying and having flat bed seats across their international fleet, the soft product still lags way behind that of DL. DL sets very high standards for itself for routes that make a profit or conversely, doesn't make a profit. And remember, DL dominates the east coast market to CDG so one less flight from the east coast won't really dampen their feed into CDG.

What are you the DL PR firm? We are talking about one route, 2 cities, and you try and change it to a different picture entirely.Guess your, as they say on this site, a "DL fan boy."

727200 wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

There really isn't much that AA can kick DL's a$$ in. While AA might have finally, after years of neglect, caught up to the benchmark of business class flying and having flat bed seats across their international fleet, the soft product still lags way behind that of DL. DL sets very high standards for itself for routes that make a profit or conversely, doesn't make a profit. And remember, DL dominates the east coast market to CDG so one less flight from the east coast won't really dampen their feed into CDG.

What are you the DL PR firm? We are talking about one route, 2 cities, and you try and change it to a different picture entirely.Guess your, as they say on this site, a "DL fan boy."

It could be that this is another great example of the potential of a MoM sized airplane. PHL is a large city, CDG is a Huge hub. 757 numbers as well as 767s will continue to dwindle. They need to use them where they have the most financial and operational impact.

You're* point about AA kicking DLs behind on this route, not sure that is what is happening.

Thought this was already discussed?

Interestingly, the flights still show in DL's online timetable, but they aren't available when trying to book.

SCHATC422 wrote:

Thought this was already discussed?

You are probably thinking of PHL-LHR, which is ending in March when DL is allowed to use the LHR slot elsewhere. That was revealed earlier this summer.

MIAFLLPBIFlyer wrote:

KICT wrote:

ARN is a market that Delta has came and went multiple times over the years. Why can't they make it work?

You aren't joking. I can't even keep track of how many times since the PA Atlantic Division was bought JFK-ARN has come and gone. I want to say 4 or 5 times which seems ludicrous but I think it has come and gone that many times.

Certainly not that many. There was the nonstop DL inherited from PA, which was dropped sometime in the early/mid 90s. They then restarted the route in the early 2000's and it lasted a few years. It was then restarted some years ago and was flown seasonally.

jubguy3 wrote:

I think they mean on the other end. Lets do a little critical thinking here. What is an AA hub: Paris or Philadelphia?

What a dumb reply. Talk about not doing critical thinking

777Mech wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

They do have this little thing called a JV. There's no "dependency" going on. In that case UA and AA are making "unwise" choices as well. Sheesh.

tlecam wrote:

It's hard for me to believe that with corporate contracts, Skyteam won't serve CDG-PHL. The pharmaceutical industries alone in the Philly / Jersey / Delaware area and in France should provide a decent amount of support for the route.

Time for me to retire from my armchair CEO gig.

It was also seasonal and not year round which leads me to be assume higher correlation to leisure oriented than pulling the type of traffic you mention.

777Mech wrote:

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

They do have this little thing called a JV. There's no "dependency" going on. In that case UA and AA are making "unwise" choices as well. Sheesh.

Wow, that is one of the craziest comments I've seen on a.net. Although I haven't seen numbers, given the constant adds to AMS and CDG, I bet DL would disagree. Of course, by the same token, AA and UA also have problems relying on LHR and FRA, respectively.

lavalampluva wrote:

I'm sure someone will come on here and say that it would work from DTW.

They would, but their parents grounded them and took away their tablet!

777Mech wrote:

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

They do have this little thing called a JV. There's no "dependency" going on. In that case UA and AA are making "unwise" choices as well. Sheesh.

JV does indeed mean dependency, go ahead an look it up, I'll wait. Please enlighten me on these routes at AA and UA.

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

atypical wrote:

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

They do have this little thing called a JV. There's no "dependency" going on. In that case UA and AA are making "unwise" choices as well. Sheesh.

JV does indeed mean dependency, go ahead an look it up, I'll wait. Please enlighten me on these routes at AA and UA.

What are you making a point of contention? Are you contesting that airlines use/rely on the hub and spoke model? JV is sharing of cost and profit...metal neutral.

CDG is a DL Hub. http://news.delta.com/paris-charles-de-gaulle-airport or look at their route map where it is shown in a "triangle" that all their other hubs are shown in.

Opportunity cost. DL probably figures they can make more $ flying to their hub at CDG with a spoke at IND compared to PHL. Only so many aircraft to go around.

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

atypical wrote:

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

They do have this little thing called a JV. There's no "dependency" going on. In that case UA and AA are making "unwise" choices as well. Sheesh.

JV does indeed mean dependency, go ahead an look it up, I'll wait. Please enlighten me on these routes at AA and UA.

Uh, what? A JV is metal neutral, so to say DL is dependent on AF in CDG is stupid when it's all of the costs and profits are split.

atypical wrote:

777Mech wrote:

727200 wrote:

With little feed, and a AA hub, DL just asking to get their a$$ kicked on this one.

Little feed? DL has a hub in CDG..

If an airline is dependent on its foreign partner's hub to feed a route to be profitable then it has made an unwise choice.

this can't be real life

AF/KL/AZ and the DL/VS joint ventures using the smaller capacity DL equipment in weaker markets or to add new spokes to the CDG, FCO, AMS and LHR is a very smart choice. Also the DL/AF/KL/AZ and DL/VS JVs using the best point of sale metal (i.e. a stronger AF branded market or a stronger DL branded market) isn't stupid at all. The other option would be to drop the markets completely (read stupid) or for those airlines to add equipment and thus extra cost (again, stupid)

but hey AA/UA don't do it.....of course they also don't post the financial results DL is...... so it MUST be wrong.


I honestly can't believe someone would post something on this site that would cause me to defend the DL/AF/KL/AZ joint venture. Man the fall that is happening here......

DL financials are posted BEFORE taxes in an attempt to make it look much larger than it really is. Must be a 'Southern thing."

As for JV, tell all of us what feed DL has at PHL? Since none of the JV partners you mention fly say MEM, or ROC, or MLI to PHL I have no idea what feed you would be talking about. But if you have some unknown feed into PHL that we all have missed please do share it with us. Or are you trying to change the city pairs to CDG only? If that is the case, then what airline genius including yourself would only have feed on one side and not the other? Perhaps that is why this flight isn't making it and is being cancelled. But then, it could be that 'Southern thing" again.

727200 wrote:

DL financials are posted BEFORE taxes in an attempt to make it look much larger than it really is. Must be a 'Southern thing."

As for JV, tell all of us what feed DL has at PHL? Since none of the JV partners you mention fly say MEM, or ROC, or MLI to PHL I have no idea what feed you would be talking about. But if you have some unknown feed into PHL that we all have missed please do share it with us. Or are you trying to change the city pairs to CDG only? If that is the case, then what airline genius including yourself would only have feed on one side and not the other? Perhaps that is why this flight isn't making it and is being cancelled. But then, it could be that 'Southern thing" again.

When AA flies a route like CLT-FRA or UA flies a route like EWR-FCO, does it not have "have feed on one side and not the other?"

The big question is where the point of sale is dominated by on the route. If the route is dominated by the American point of sale then AA, with their hub in PHL, has an advantage over DL despite DL's AF/CDG hookup.

While I have no data I suspect there are more Americans heading to Paris than Europeans heading to Philadelphia. AA can supplement the local Philadelphian O&D traffic they capture (which are more likely to be loyal to AA than DL) with connecting traffic from Americans heading to Paris. AA can put European connecting traffic on other flights such as via LHR.