Yes, WOW isn't the most reliable in the world, but my trips are generally a few days and if something gets screwed up, I can adjust. I haven't been able to justify PIT-CDG for well over a year now, and I have to wonder if maybe I'm not the only one.
Oddly enough, when I was traveling to Europe over the summer, DL came in as cheaper than WOW, and that's before you start counting all of their add on's.
It is my conjecture that the ACAA had long and hard discussions that they would be putting the CDG flight at risk by offering incentive to BA, but that the authority decided year round BA was more desirable and lasting (especially given how low yields appear to be on the CDG flight). Better to be in bed with BA.
I feel this way because Delta's reaction of cancelling CDG is 100% predictable, one would have to be asleep not to at least consider that outcome.
What I can't speculate on is whether ACAA tried approaching DL ahead of time to fend off a cancellation.
Those are great points you bring up, and I whole hardheartedly agree. The ACAA is not stupid and I'm sure has been well aware of any potential repercussions on adding BA. I'd be really curious to learn what (if any) conversations they had with DL, DE, and WW about pursuing the BA service ahead of time as a courtesy. Perhaps they felt all four flights would be successful, perhaps they saw the writing on the wall for DL, we have no idea.
As I said in the other thread, if BA remains year round after the subsidies end, then PIT wins, if they go down to less than daily/seasonal, then it's just exchanging one airline for another.