MSP HND has been successful. When Ed was in town this summer he reiterated, to employees and customers alike, that Haneda has performed well and isn't going anywhere, even with the upcoming ICN and PVG flights.

PWMRamper wrote:

MSP HND has been successful. When Ed was in town this summer he reiterated, to employees and customers alike, that Haneda has performed well and isn't going anywhere, even with the upcoming ICN and PVG flights.

As badly as DTW wants another shot with HND, DL is not going to pull it out of MSP. The route is doing just fine.

kavok wrote:

NRT is Tokyo’s version of London Gatwick.

When Delta got LHR slots, DL’s service to LGW ended. Same with Tokyo. For all practical purposes, Delta is 3 HND slots short right now. (HNL service may or may not continue on DL to NRT... but that is another discussion). If the rumored 8 slots are awarded to US carriers, I think DL can make a strong case to the DOT, and will get slots for all of ATL/SEA/DTW.

Honestly, I think if DL only gets two slots than I think they go to SEA/DTW, and DL has to make a tough choice on whether to keep the MSP flight or switch that slot to ATL. DTW and SEA both have a lot more OD to Tokyo and good geography, leaving MSP or ATL as the odd one out. And yes, after AA gets their DFW slot, I am guessing the DOT would let DL move the MSP flight if they wanted.

On the opposite side, if DL somehow got 4 slots, I honestly think they would use it to JFK over HNL. I can’t see DL using a HND slot on HNL. Again, whether HNL-NRT continues on Delta would be interesting to see, but independent of who gets HND slots.

So...keep DTWMSP/SEA nonstop, and put A350s on ATL-DTW/MSP/SEA.

klm617 wrote:

PWMRamper wrote:

MSP HND has been successful. When Ed was in town this summer he reiterated, to employees and customers alike, that Haneda has performed well and isn't going anywhere, even with the upcoming ICN and PVG flights.

We need to keep in mind Ed says a lot of things many of which never come to pass. It's the things he doesn't speak out about that's where the real truth is.

if DL moves one of its services (DTW / ATL / SEA) from NRT to HND, would it leave a free slot in NRT who could grab AF / KL / VS?

The irony of NRT becoming the leisure travel hub vs. HND as the business travel hub, at least in US/JP city pairs.

deleted... "server error"

klm617 wrote:

PWMRamper wrote:

MSP HND has been successful. When Ed was in town this summer he reiterated, to employees and customers alike, that Haneda has performed well and isn't going anywhere, even with the upcoming ICN and PVG flights.

We need to keep in mind Ed says a lot of things many of which never come to pass. It's the things he doesn't speak out about that's where the real truth is.

and away we go.

took longer than I thought though.

PWMRamper wrote:

MSP HND has been successful. When Ed was in town this summer he reiterated, to employees and customers alike, that Haneda has performed well and isn't going anywhere, even with the upcoming ICN and PVG flights.

If successful is consistently having poor loads, sure, it's a success. Airline execs are about the last people to trust when speaking to a local crowd. It's a safe bet to say that MSP-HND is the poorest performing MSP long-haul route, and likely one of the worst performing in the DL system. It only exists to hang on to the HND slot. In that area is the one truth. MSP-HND isn't going anywhere--unless the slot can be moved.

MSPNWA wrote:

If successful is consistently having poor loads, sure, it's a success. Airline execs are about the last people to trust when speaking to a local crowd. It's a safe bet to say that MSP-HND is the poorest performing MSP long-haul route, and likely one of the worst performing in the DL system. It only exists to hang on to the HND slot. In that area is the one truth. MSP-HND isn't going anywhere--unless the slot can be moved.

I have it on very good authority the route is profitable. It certainly didn't start off that way, but over the past year plus it's been fine.

It may indeed be the poorest performing long haul route from MSP (I don't know), but that doesn't mean it's not profitable.

Anyways...didn't the original route allocation decision only have a 2 year window where changes couldn't be made? The route started 10/2016 so if that's the case, would Delta be free now to make changes to this allocation?

For what it's worth, in the last 12 months available (5/2017-4/2018) MSP-HND is at about a 75% load factor, compared to a Delta 2017 System LF of 86%.

Load factor certainly doesn't tell the whole story, but obviously Delta would like to see those HND numbers higher. (It'll be interesting to see what this summer's number end up at.) Now is it profitable at those load factors? I admit I don't know for certain, but I have heard on numerous occasions (from many different sources) that the route works and is profitable, and has improved significantly since October 2016.

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

DL has been pretty clear that the intention is to completely unwind fifth freedom flying to SIN and MNL. I suspect there's no issue in having KE handle pax one-stop to SIN, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see SEA-MNL nonstop in the coming years.

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

What would be the advantage of this? SEA would be at a disadvantage for transporting passengers to Tokyo (particularly if I could just connect in LAX, DTW, or MSP on DL) and other (bigger) hubs would cannibalize traffic, there is no JV partner at the end, and there would be a loss of economies of scale at NRT.

DL is not well positioned in Japan, and I would wager a bet that any route that is not transferred to HND will be dropped. Instead, DL will follow the TATL model--fly the profitable routes to Japan from hubs to get US connecting passengers (including the new SEA-KIX), and for everything else funnel through their JV partners (KE, and maybe more MU in the future).

PWMRamper wrote:

I have it on very good authority the route is profitable. It certainly didn't start off that way, but over the past year plus it's been fine.

It may indeed be the poorest performing long haul route from MSP (I don't know), but that doesn't mean it's not profitable.

"Profitable" is a manipulative term than can still be congruent with significant underperformance (for example, a 1% profit is well under a 10% system average). We know the loads. We have evidence of suspect yields overall to HND. We know there's very little local traffic. Nothing indicates even an average performer in the DL network.

MSPNWA wrote:

PWMRamper wrote:

I have it on very good authority the route is profitable. It certainly didn't start off that way, but over the past year plus it's been fine.

It may indeed be the poorest performing long haul route from MSP (I don't know), but that doesn't mean it's not profitable.

"Profitable" is a manipulative term than can still be congruent with significant underperformance (for example, a 1% profit is well under a 10% system average). We know the loads. We have evidence of suspect yields overall to HND. We know there's very little local traffic. Nothing indicates even an average performer in the DL network.

]

Even if it's profitable but below average, they still wouldn't cancel it unless there was a better use of the resources.

simpv wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

What would be the advantage of this? SEA would be at a disadvantage for transporting passengers to Tokyo (particularly if I could just connect in LAX, DTW, or MSP on DL) and other (bigger) hubs would cannibalize traffic, there is no JV partner at the end, and there would be a loss of economies of scale at NRT.

DL is not well positioned in Japan, and I would wager a bet that any route that is not transferred to HND will be dropped. Instead, DL will follow the TATL model--fly the profitable routes to Japan from hubs to get US connecting passengers (including the new SEA-KIX), and for everything else funnel through their JV partners (KE, and maybe more MU in the future).

Delta is perfectly well positioned in Japan. Remember they likely have a large FF base from the NW days. I recall that back in those days and to a lessor extent now, Delta carries an unusually high number of Japanese travelers due to their long history in the country. This can't be over emphasized, as this part of the reason that the NRT-SIN and NRT-MNL flights have been around for so long. It isn't people double connecting from JFK that keeps these flights going.

klm617 wrote:

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

DL has been pretty clear that the intention is to completely unwind fifth freedom flying to SIN and MNL. I suspect there's no issue in having KE handle pax one-stop to SIN, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see SEA-MNL nonstop in the coming years.

I don't know Manila is the India of Southeast Asia low yielding and that's a long route to fly carrying low yield passengers if they don't fly it from NRT I think they will just drop it or maybe we see something like SEA-TPE-MNL or SEA-KIX-MNL rather than MNL-SEA nonstop.

While this is very true for MNL and those routes make a lot of sense, to winginit's comments, SIN is not the same, and as I said in another thread, DL needs to be in the SIN market if it is going to continue to be a major player in Asia. With UA and SQ approaching 5 daily nonstop flights from the US, DL will need one at some point, either LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN.

mpdpilot wrote:

While this is very true for MNL and those routes make a lot of sense, to winginit's comments, SIN is not the same, and as I said in another thread, DL needs to be in the SIN market if it is going to continue to be a major player in Asia. With UA and SQ approaching 5 daily nonstop flights from the US, DL will need one at some point, either LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN.

Considering DL did not care to maintain link to HKG a top global finance and trade center, SIN even more distant away won't matter for DL at the end of the day.

mpdpilot wrote:

While this is very true for MNL and those routes make a lot of sense, to winginit's comments, SIN is not the same, and as I said in another thread, DL needs to be in the SIN market if it is going to continue to be a major player in Asia. With UA and SQ approaching 5 daily nonstop flights from the US, DL will need one at some point, either LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN.

With what equipment? As far as I know there's nothing in their fleet or in their order book that can make LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN without a custom LOPA that DL has no intention of implementing.

UPlog wrote:

Considering DL did not care to maintain link to HKG a top global finance and trade center, SIN even more distant away won't matter for DL at the end of the day.

Agreed. If DL are content leaving HKG to KE over ICN I imagine they're like-minded with SIN.

TransWorldOne wrote:

I can't imagine on what planet DL would continue serving MNL or SIN on their own metal. Once the NRT tags go away, these routes will almost certainly be served only via ICN on KE. DL is in a very vulnerable position in Asia and it's lunch is in danger of getting eaten in SEA with AS and it's cohort of formidable partners.

...especially with SQ announcing SIN-SEA...

simpv wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

What would be the advantage of this? SEA would be at a disadvantage for transporting passengers to Tokyo (particularly if I could just connect in LAX, DTW, or MSP on DL) and other (bigger) hubs would cannibalize traffic, there is no JV partner at the end, and there would be a loss of economies of scale at NRT.

DL is not well positioned in Japan, and I would wager a bet that any route that is not transferred to HND will be dropped. Instead, DL will follow the TATL model--fly the profitable routes to Japan from hubs to get US connecting passengers (including the new SEA-KIX), and for everything else funnel through their JV partners (KE, and maybe more MU in the future).

HND would be a great hub if DL could develop partners in Japan for connecting traffic. They don’t have even one there.

lavalampluva wrote:

simpv wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Could we also see DTW and ATL get HND slots while HNL/PDX and SEA stay at NRT with onward flights to SIN and MNL reaming giving Delta customers access through the SEA hub to SIN and MNL. Just a thought.

What would be the advantage of this? SEA would be at a disadvantage for transporting passengers to Tokyo (particularly if I could just connect in LAX, DTW, or MSP on DL) and other (bigger) hubs would cannibalize traffic, there is no JV partner at the end, and there would be a loss of economies of scale at NRT.

DL is not well positioned in Japan, and I would wager a bet that any route that is not transferred to HND will be dropped. Instead, DL will follow the TATL model--fly the profitable routes to Japan from hubs to get US connecting passengers (including the new SEA-KIX), and for everything else funnel through their JV partners (KE, and maybe more MU in the future).

HND would be a great hub if DL could develop partners in Japan for connecting traffic. They don’t have even one there.

Who else is there left to partner with in Japan? NH/UA are in Star Alliance, and AA/JL are in OneWorld, which means that Delta is kind of on their own... Hence, why they've added flights from NRT to places like MNL and SIN--because they don't have a partner airline that can fly it for them...

winginit wrote:

Agreed. If DL are content leaving HKG to KE over ICN I imagine they're like-minded with SIN.

NRT/SIN presents DL with a tough choice... the segment has high LFs, with D1 usually full, and traffic mostly US/SIN. The KE/DL JV (as I understand it) is TPAC excluding (i) the beach markets and (ii) any beyond segments from ICN, which means DL would not share in the ICN/SIN revenue. Can DL operate NRT/SIN w/ crew based in the US? Of course they can. When NRT/SIN makes less money than feeding ICN/SIN, DL will cut NRT/SIN. I don't see that happening near term. Same for NRT/MNL. I do think the NRT Sky Club will close, maybe through a downsized phase.

"The KE/DL JV (as I understand it) is TPAC excluding (i) the beach markets and (ii) any beyond segments from ICN, which means DL would not share in the ICN/SIN revenue."

Is that accurate info regarding the KE/DL JV, specifically the segments "beyond" ICN?

SUNCTRY738 wrote:

"The KE/DL JV (as I understand it) is TPAC excluding (i) the beach markets and (ii) any beyond segments from ICN, which means DL would not share in the ICN/SIN revenue."

Is that accurate info regarding the KE/DL JV, specifically the segments "beyond" ICN?

IIRC it includes beyond segments, except for China.

With limited HND slots, what are DLs priorities? SEA & DTW the Asian hubs? ATL, the hub of the world? PDX and HNL seem to be on the outside, unless DL gets a midnight slot and chooses one of them.

WPvsMW wrote:

winginit wrote:

Agreed. If DL are content leaving HKG to KE over ICN I imagine they're like-minded with SIN.

NRT/SIN presents DL with a tough choice... the segment has high LFs, with D1 usually full, and traffic mostly US/SIN.

High load factors yes, but my understanding of the traffic composition is the opposite of yours. I've flown the segment maybe 20 times over the past five years, and while I couldn't know for sure it seemed as though it was very much catering to the local TYO-SIN market. Both Ed and Glen have alluded to as much speaking to all of the NRT hub flights recently.

WPvsMW wrote:

The KE/DL JV (as I understand it) is TPAC excluding (i) the beach markets and (ii) any beyond segments from ICN, which means DL would not share in the ICN/SIN revenue.

That's incorrect. Beyond segments are included within the JV scope countries, so Thailand for example but not Mainland China.

FA9295 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

simpv wrote:

What would be the advantage of this? SEA would be at a disadvantage for transporting passengers to Tokyo (particularly if I could just connect in LAX, DTW, or MSP on DL) and other (bigger) hubs would cannibalize traffic, there is no JV partner at the end, and there would be a loss of economies of scale at NRT.

DL is not well positioned in Japan, and I would wager a bet that any route that is not transferred to HND will be dropped. Instead, DL will follow the TATL model--fly the profitable routes to Japan from hubs to get US connecting passengers (including the new SEA-KIX), and for everything else funnel through their JV partners (KE, and maybe more MU in the future).

HND would be a great hub if DL could develop partners in Japan for connecting traffic. They don’t have even one there.

Who else is there left to partner with in Japan? NH/UA are in Star Alliance, and AA/JL are in OneWorld, which means that Delta is kind of on their own... Hence, why they've added flights from NRT to places like MNL and SIN--because they don't have a partner airline that can fly it for them...

I’m surprised that Skyteam hasn’t picked up a partner in Tokyo. But the other alliances grabbed them all up.

A few years ago at crew forum it was mentioned they wished to offer a Haneda link from both ORD and EWR. In years since, JV partner ANA has managed to connect HND to both Chicago and NYC, so not sure what the priority would be now. Maybe IAD, or looking at pure O&D demand possibly LAX instead?

They also stated at one time, a nighttime slot award could be used for a GUM if it became available.

So my hope of an evening SFO-HND is out of the question?

So my hope of an evening SFO-HND is out of the question?[/quote]

That's what I want to say, I will prefer an evening departure from SFO and arrive in HND in early morning. Currently, I would like to see UA move one daily HND and one daily PVG to late midnight departure.

SIN and MNL are really interesting.

SIN has made sense sticking around, and I have to imagine Delta will continue to serve it... could Delta fly 5th freedom ICN-SIN? Not sure that would make sense, but otherwise the only real option would be SEA, and SQ appears to have beaten them to the punch.

MNL is a market that doesn't seem like it should be profitable, but I have to think they would've ended it when they ended BKK and the beach markets if they were losing money.

Delta used to serve MNL via NGO. If they wanted to keep flying it, could we see them shift it back, or maybe via KIX? I've heard whispers in the past that SEA is a possibility down the road, but I can't imagine that would work.

winginit wrote:

That's incorrect. Beyond segments are included within the JV scope countries, so Thailand for example but not Mainland China.

Thanks for the correction. Do you have a link to the DL/KE JV agreement?

The DL-KE agreement dates back to ATI received in 2002 and now covers 80 airports in Asia. Basically all joint open-skies markets.

Because DL doesn’t have a partner in Japan, they have worked hard to build off the well known heritage of NW. I did research for UA about brand recognition and DL won out. UA lives in NH’s shadow. But gets traffic from the JV.

Japan will become a destination for DL flights. NRT is quickly becoming more popular for LCC and as network carriers get slots at HND new LCC come in.

DL’s MSP flight is always a surprise to me. It is Codeshared with VN and feeds the SGN flight that leaves in the evening. It gets a tiny feed on the mid morning from SGN. But the flight is also kind of pushed as a one-stop to NYC. I’ve spoken to many Japanese customers who were traveling onward to the east coast. Last time I flew (very full flight) I was one of a handful to get off at MSP.

DL will get more slots at HND and I think they will just pull out of NRT unless an Asian partner tries to convince otherwise. But even then most Asian carriers fly to HND so connecting can happen but it isn’t in DL’s interest as much as local.

In general it will be interesting to see how HND grows as many European and Asian carriers want more slots there.

“It isn't people double connecting from JFK that keeps these flights going. ”

That is good, because Delta exited the JFK-Japan market.

winginit wrote:

mpdpilot wrote:

While this is very true for MNL and those routes make a lot of sense, to winginit's comments, SIN is not the same, and as I said in another thread, DL needs to be in the SIN market if it is going to continue to be a major player in Asia. With UA and SQ approaching 5 daily nonstop flights from the US, DL will need one at some point, either LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN.

With what equipment? As far as I know there's nothing in their fleet or in their order book that can make LAX-SIN or SEA-SIN without a custom LOPA that DL has no intention of implementing.

UPlog wrote:

Considering DL did not care to maintain link to HKG a top global finance and trade center, SIN even more distant away won't matter for DL at the end of the day.

Agreed. If DL are content leaving HKG to KE over ICN I imagine they're like-minded with SIN.

As for Equipment, the A350 can do both, and SEA-SIN wouldn't even need to block seats. SEA-SIN is shorter than JFK-HKG. And LAX-SIN is only 700mi further than SEA, so very doable on an A350. Delta could also operate the flight from SEA with a 77E or a 77L, but the A350 is probably better suited for the trip.

I totally agree that it appears that DL is ok with having their passengers connect in ICN, I think that is a mistake. If I am a Seattle based corporation, Alaska, with it's partnerships with everyone is looking more and more appealing.

centrair wrote:

Because DL doesn’t have a partner in Japan, they have worked hard to build off the well known heritage of NW. I did research for UA about brand recognition and DL won out. UA lives in NH’s shadow. But gets traffic from the JV.

Japan will become a destination for DL flights. NRT is quickly becoming more popular for LCC and as network carriers get slots at HND new LCC come in.

DL’s MSP flight is always a surprise to me. It is Codeshared with VN and feeds the SGN flight that leaves in the evening. It gets a tiny feed on the mid morning from SGN. But the flight is also kind of pushed as a one-stop to NYC. I’ve spoken to many Japanese customers who were traveling onward to the east coast. Last time I flew (very full flight) I was one of a handful to get off at MSP.

DL will get more slots at HND and I think they will just pull out of NRT unless an Asian partner tries to convince otherwise. But even then most Asian carriers fly to HND so connecting can happen but it isn’t in DL’s interest as much as local.

In general it will be interesting to see how HND grows as many European and Asian carriers want more slots there.

The other interesting thing about the HND (both MSP and LAX) flights is that they codeshare on ANA to most secondary cities in Japan. You can fly one stop to CTS, KOJ, KMJ, etc.. You can also get to those places via ICN but the ANA codeshares can be quite convenient at times.

mpdpilot wrote:

As for Equipment, the A350 can do both, and SEA-SIN wouldn't even need to block seats. SEA-SIN is shorter than JFK-HKG. And LAX-SIN is only 700mi further than SEA, so very doable on an A350. Delta could also operate the flight from SEA with a 77E or a 77L, but the A350 is probably better suited for the trip.

An A350 can do it, but can Delta's A350 do it as configured? I ask because it was relayed to me that at a recent LAX townhall with Ed the question was asked why the A350 wasn't going to be deployed on LAX-SYD instead of having to wait for a reconfigured 777. It sounds like Ed implied that the A350 as configured by Delta was such that it couldn't make the trip without a penalty, and LAXSYD is about 500 miles shorter than SEASIN.

winginit wrote:

mpdpilot wrote:

As for Equipment, the A350 can do both, and SEA-SIN wouldn't even need to block seats. SEA-SIN is shorter than JFK-HKG. And LAX-SIN is only 700mi further than SEA, so very doable on an A350. Delta could also operate the flight from SEA with a 77E or a 77L, but the A350 is probably better suited for the trip.

An A350 can do it, but can Delta's A350 do it as configured? I ask because it was relayed to me that at a recent LAX townhall with Ed the question was asked why the A350 wasn't going to be deployed on LAX-SYD instead of having to wait for a reconfigured 777. It sounds like Ed implied that the A350 as configured by Delta was such that it couldn't make the trip without a penalty, and LAXSYD is about 500 miles shorter than SEASIN.

According to a few sources, they will be operating LAX-SYD in the future. Now the 77L would be able to carry more than the A350 on the same route, but that means more fuel too.

https://www.ausbt.com.au/delta-eyes-syd ... ass-suites

http://www.airportspotting.com/airbus-a350-routes/

gwrudolph wrote:

What about United? Do we think they might request some slots and start slowly transitioning as well?

United has already requested slots to HND, I don't see any way all the NRT service can get into HND at the moment.

strfyr51 wrote:

United has already requested slots to HND, I don't see any way all the NRT service can get into HND at the moment.

There are no free slots to request.

kavok wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Interesting indeed that PDX is connected to NRT when SLC is not meaning it could continue to be a stand alone flight to NRT along with the HNL flights all of which have no real feed on both ends. I believe we will see SEA and DTW-HND added whether either one remains connected to NRT time will tell. Also I think Delta will try to move the MSP HND slot to ATL thus discontinuing MSP-HND hence the push to start MSP-PVG to compensate for the loss of the HND flight. If they don't succeed in moving the MSP HND slot to ATL it will be interesting to see what they do with ATL-TYO. As far as MNL and SIN I think they will just drop those and use the KE/DL JV to get passengers to those destinations just like they are doing with HKG. I still see Delta at best getting only 2 slots.

With only 4 slots to the US carriers, I would guess:1 to AA, 1 to UA, and 2 for DL because of the AA/UA JVs. DL will still probably argue they should get 3 slots at SEA, DTW, and ATL... but I can't imagine the DOT would completely leave out AA or UA.

FWIW, the current daytime HND slots are 1x HA (HNL), 2x DL (LAX, MSP), 1x UA (SFO), 1x AA (LAX) and 2x JL (SFO, JFK), 3x NH (LAX, ORD, JFK)

I don't think the AA/UA joint ventures are any of Delta's business. The actual routes flown directly by AA and UA are the competition. Delta could open a JV at any time if they choose to and they DO have Asian Partners.. Why should Delta have an advantage just because United and American both have Joint Ventures?? Hell !! That's Business...

strfyr51 wrote:

I don't think the AA/UA joint ventures are any of Delta's business. The actual routes flown directly by AA and UA are the competition. Delta could open a JV at any time if they choose to and they DO have Asian Partners.. Why should Delta have an advantage just because United and American both have Joint Ventures?? Hell !! That's Business...

What other airline IN JAPAN would Delta be able to open a JV with at anytime? They already have a JV in Asia but this is about the Japan market in particular where they compete with immunized United/ANA and American/JAL.