• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 22
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:30 am

Antoli0794 wrote:
Fargo wrote:
compensateme wrote:

Given DL’s opposition toward further expansion of ATL, one would expect that as certain flight banks reach capacity, DL will shift capacity toward DTW and MSP, where it’s already paying for oodles of capacity it’s not using. In fact, capacity restraints at ATL likely factored into why DL boosted its midday banks at DTW this past summer for the first time since the merger.

Reality is, the economics of the “ATL Superhub” vs. spreading capacity among its hubs would collapse if DL were (indirectly) paying debt servicing toward the estimated ~$10B expansion cost. Especially with interest expenses rising.

That said... with a ton of 321 on order to replace the MD-88/90, and a recession likely in the near future... we’ve got a ways to go before ATL is truly “at capacity.”


I didn't know DL is opposed to the further expansion of ATL, do you have a link or something where it says that? Everything I've heard is grow ATL.

Even if ATL isn't fully "at capacity", there will come a point where it just won't be feasible to expand anymore there. This is where DTW can come and provide a better northern connecting point. Yes, I understand the Detroit economy is not the best at the moment, but after ORD, it is the best geographically positioned airport for E/W flows. Plus, if ORD shows us anything, the surrounding economy does not necessarily have to be the best for the airport to thrive.

Additionally, and I know I'll probably get some angry responses for this....... DL is eventually going to need to choose between DTW and MSP. Given the evolution of their network since the NW merger, it makes no sense today to have two midwest hubs that overlap. While MSP has (arguably) the better economy at the moment, DTW has the better (far superior actually) airport and geography. Therefore, MSP ought to be cut down to a focus city and that capacity should be shifted to bulking up DTW and finish building out SEA (once more gates are built there). What purpose does MSP serve in DL's network that cannot be accomplished by bulking up DTW and SEA?

I also have another thought as to what DL should do, but I won't post it here because it will lead to a ton of angry responses.



DTW only serves better East coast flows. MSP handles west flows and Canada better. That’s why both airport coexist.


DTW and SLC could handle those flows fine.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:33 am

flymco753 wrote:
Not too mention DL has a decent showing in MCO so they got their Florida void filled. The only carrier of the 3 majors that doesnt is UA.


This is why it would not surprise me if UA buys B6 at some point. UA needs to bulk up domestically big time and absent a merger, they have limited opportunities to do so beyond expanding their interior hubs (ORD, IAH, DEN).
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:35 am

Fargo wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:
Fargo wrote:


It's a long term ploy just like DL's push into LGA/JFK ~10-15 years ago was stretching it for the time.
DL seems to want it all.
Almost done with LAX/NYC/SEA they're now working on BOS and will probably come back for RDU later maybe AUS. DTW's already won.


But what purpose does BOS serve in their network? They are getting killed yield wise and that isn't going to change (B6 isn't going anywhere). Is JFK/LGA not sufficient for the NE? They could use the resources their wasting in BOS to bulk up JFK/LGA and DTW.

Also, they still have a ways to go in SEA. They need to get to 250 to 300 flights before being truly finished there. RDU is fine as it is with a few tweaks here and there. And if DL truly wants it all, they need to address their big Lone Star shaped hole.



Remember Delta is an airline run on ego it needs to be number one in all the top markets. As long as it can fund that nonsense with the extra high fares it charges out of ATL, DTW and MSP it will continue to do so.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:40 am

klm617 wrote:
Fargo wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:

It's a long term ploy just like DL's push into LGA/JFK ~10-15 years ago was stretching it for the time.
DL seems to want it all.
Almost done with LAX/NYC/SEA they're now working on BOS and will probably come back for RDU later maybe AUS. DTW's already won.


But what purpose does BOS serve in their network? They are getting killed yield wise and that isn't going to change (B6 isn't going anywhere). Is JFK/LGA not sufficient for the NE? They could use the resources their wasting in BOS to bulk up JFK/LGA and DTW.

Also, they still have a ways to go in SEA. They need to get to 250 to 300 flights before being truly finished there. RDU is fine as it is with a few tweaks here and there. And if DL truly wants it all, they need to address their big Lone Star shaped hole.



Remember Delta is an airline run on ego it needs to be number one in all the top markets. As long as it can fund that nonsense with the extra high fares it charges out of ATL, DTW and MSP it will continue to do so.


Alright man, I knew you were going to say something like this, but let's not go there. I know they aren't perfect, but I do like them and their willingness to take risks, even though I don't always agree with their strategy. Let's stick to discussing the finer points.
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:40 am

Antoli0794 wrote:
Fargo wrote:
compensateme wrote:

Given DL’s opposition toward further expansion of ATL, one would expect that as certain flight banks reach capacity, DL will shift capacity toward DTW and MSP, where it’s already paying for oodles of capacity it’s not using. In fact, capacity restraints at ATL likely factored into why DL boosted its midday banks at DTW this past summer for the first time since the merger.

Reality is, the economics of the “ATL Superhub” vs. spreading capacity among its hubs would collapse if DL were (indirectly) paying debt servicing toward the estimated ~$10B expansion cost. Especially with interest expenses rising.

That said... with a ton of 321 on order to replace the MD-88/90, and a recession likely in the near future... we’ve got a ways to go before ATL is truly “at capacity.”


I didn't know DL is opposed to the further expansion of ATL, do you have a link or something where it says that? Everything I've heard is grow ATL.

Even if ATL isn't fully "at capacity", there will come a point where it just won't be feasible to expand anymore there. This is where DTW can come and provide a better northern connecting point. Yes, I understand the Detroit economy is not the best at the moment, but after ORD, it is the best geographically positioned airport for E/W flows. Plus, if ORD shows us anything, the surrounding economy does not necessarily have to be the best for the airport to thrive.

Additionally, and I know I'll probably get some angry responses for this....... DL is eventually going to need to choose between DTW and MSP. Given the evolution of their network since the NW merger, it makes no sense today to have two midwest hubs that overlap. While MSP has (arguably) the better economy at the moment, DTW has the better (far superior actually) airport and geography. Therefore, MSP ought to be cut down to a focus city and that capacity should be shifted to bulking up DTW and finish building out SEA (once more gates are built there). What purpose does MSP serve in DL's network that cannot be accomplished by bulking up DTW and SEA?

I also have another thought as to what DL should do, but I won't post it here because it will lead to a ton of angry responses.



DTW only serves better East coast flows. MSP handles west flows and Canada better. That’s why both airport coexist.



MSP has no need to worry it's has much more relevance in the Delta network than DTW has. There are more routes that over fly DTW from MSP to the east than flights from DTW that over fly MSP to the west. If YYZ and YUL can be flown out of MSP then YVR and YYC should be just as viable out of DTW
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
blockski
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:58 am

Fargo wrote:
blockski wrote:
No, Delta doesn’t “need to choose” between MSP and DTW. They just don’t.

The merger was ten years ago - not to mention that MSP and DTW already coexisted for several decades before that under NW.


Things have changed a lot in the 10 years since the merger, and they sure aren't the same as they were in the NW days. MSP has been made redundant with the buildup of SEA. DTW alone covers the midwest just fine, and is much better for connections with its geography and better layout.


This strikes me as a big misreading of the role MSP plays in DL’s network. SEA doesnt replace MSP’s domestic role in particular. DL uses MSP for a lot more east-west...
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:58 am

Fargo wrote:
DL is eventually going to need to choose between DTW and MSP. Given the evolution of their network since the NW merger, it makes no sense today to have two midwest hubs that overlap.


I'm sorry but respectfully - that is nonsense, and doesn't make financial sense to boot. If you have two fortress assets that are both generating high yields and sizeable profits you never need to choose between the two unless the payoff for doing so outweighs the cost, which is clearly not the case with DTW and MSP.

Fargo wrote:
BOS on the other hand makes zero sense to me. Every move DL makes in BOS is a head scratcher, why do they feel the need to burn tons of $$$ there when it serves no purpose in your network and those resources could be better utilized elsewhere?


Would you argue the same for their rapid expansion at LAX? While BOS is obviously of much smaller scale, DL's rationale for a strong presence in BOS is virtually the same, and it's not too different from when they staked their flag in NYC years back. BOS is a highly lucrative local market whose economy continues to grow at a disproportionate clip for metro areas of it's size. With their hub chess pieces now in place, DL has been very clear that they're investing in focus cities of the future that include BOS, AUS, RDU, and BNA. Whether the investment pays off in a few years time is an unanswered question, but they have a decent track record with NYC and are on their way towards replicating that result in SEA.

Fargo wrote:
This is why it would not surprise me if UA buys B6 at some point


It is doubtful that regulatory authorities would allow such an acquisition without sizeable slot divestitures in NYC specifically given all three airports are looked at as one city code from a regulatory perspective.

klm617 wrote:
DTW is the very last when it comes to expansion at the Delta hubs It has lost over 30 destinations in the last 10 years and is the least protected hub in the Delta network


MEM and CVG would get a kick out of that statement, but you're correct in saying that DTW has had the lowest 10-year growth rate of existing hubs. It's worth pointing out that over the same time period DTW also experienced a disproportionate economic decline and a slower recovery that warranted more drastic capacity rationalization.

Capacity by Seats, 2018 vs. 2008 || In Parenthesis I've added the three year capacity change between 2016 and 2018

SEA: +185% (+20%)
LAX: +87% (+2%)
JFK: +39% (+5%)
ATL: +19% (+2%)
SLC: +11% (+10%)
BOS: +10% (+32%)
Hub / Focus City Average: +5% (+5%)
MSP: -8% (+2%)
DTW: -10% (+2%)
CVG: -72% (+8%)
MEM: -87% (+1%)
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:02 am

winginit wrote:
I'm sorry but respectfully - that is nonsense, and doesn't make financial sense to boot. If you have two fortress assets that are both generating high yields and sizeable profits you never need to choose between the two unless the payoff for doing so outweighs the cost, which is clearly not the case with DTW and MSP.


So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?

Personally, I believe the real reason DL keeps both MSP and DTW is they don't want to abandon one and have AA move out of ORD into one of them (which they most likely would). It is in their best interest to keep AA/UA battling at ORD so they get better yields for the midwest.

winginit wrote:
Would you argue the same for their rapid expansion at LAX? While BOS is obviously of much smaller scale, DL's rationale for a strong presence in BOS is virtually the same, and it's not too different from when they staked their flag in NYC years back. BOS is a highly lucrative local market whose economy continues to grow at a disproportionate clip for metro areas of it's size. With their hub chess pieces now in place, DL has been very clear that they're investing in focus cities of the future that include BOS, AUS, RDU, and BNA. Whether the investment pays off in a few years time is an unanswered question, but they have a decent track record with NYC and are on their way towards replicating that result in SEA.


No, because LAX and NYC are actual, banked, connecting hubs for DL and serve a purpose in their network. LAX connects California traffic (largest state in the union and largest state economy) and is a secondary TPAC gateway while NYC is a TATL gateway. BOS is not a hub and as of now, they do not plan to make it a full hub. As it is not a hub and not an underserved market, it serves no purpose to their overall network and they are just burning money chasing traffic which they could just route through JFK/LGA. And no, it would not make a good secondary TATL gateway as international connections at BOS are difficult due to the separation of A and E.

Yes, time will tell about all of those focus cities, but to your last point, NYC and SEA are hub buildups while BOS/RDU are simple focus cities (BNA isn't a one and never will be due to its proximity to ATL and the large WN focus city). Rather than continuing to chase BOS, the next order of business for DL needs to be filling their Lone Star shaped hole, which I will say is the second largest economy in the country, has tons of high yielding business traffic and is projected to double in population within 20-30 years (which would make it surpass all of New England and NY state combined).

winginit wrote:
It is doubtful that regulatory authorities would allow such an acquisition without sizeable slot divestitures in NYC specifically given all three airports are looked at as one city code from a regulatory perspective.


True. I'm sure with EWR right down the road, UA would only be interested in keeping enough JFK slots to operate to their hubs, some of them at least. But they'd gain sizable focus cities in BOS, MCO and FLL plus a decent sized fleet, which would go a long way in helping them shore up their domestic network.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:49 am

DL is not moving out of either DTW or MSP. So that rumor can be put to rest.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:53 am

Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
I'm sorry but respectfully - that is nonsense, and doesn't make financial sense to boot. If you have two fortress assets that are both generating high yields and sizeable profits you never need to choose between the two unless the payoff for doing so outweighs the cost, which is clearly not the case with DTW and MSP.


So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?

Personally, I believe the real reason DL keeps both MSP and DTW is they don't want to abandon one and have AA move out of ORD into one of them (which they most likely would). It is in their best interest to keep AA/UA battling at ORD so they get better yields for the midwest.

winginit wrote:
Would you argue the same for their rapid expansion at LAX? While BOS is obviously of much smaller scale, DL's rationale for a strong presence in BOS is virtually the same, and it's not too different from when they staked their flag in NYC years back. BOS is a highly lucrative local market whose economy continues to grow at a disproportionate clip for metro areas of it's size. With their hub chess pieces now in place, DL has been very clear that they're investing in focus cities of the future that include BOS, AUS, RDU, and BNA. Whether the investment pays off in a few years time is an unanswered question, but they have a decent track record with NYC and are on their way towards replicating that result in SEA.


No, because LAX and NYC are actual, banked, connecting hubs for DL and serve a purpose in their network. LAX connects California traffic (largest state in the union and largest state economy) and is a secondary TPAC gateway while NYC is a TATL gateway. BOS is not a hub and as of now, they do not plan to make it a full hub. As it is not a hub and not an underserved market, it serves no purpose to their overall network and they are just burning money chasing traffic which they could just route through JFK/LGA. And no, it would not make a good secondary TATL gateway as international connections at BOS are difficult due to the separation of A and E.

Yes, time will tell about all of those focus cities, but to your last point, NYC and SEA are hub buildups while BOS/RDU are simple focus cities (BNA isn't a one and never will be due to its proximity to ATL and the large WN focus city). Rather than continuing to chase BOS, the next order of business for DL needs to be filling their Lone Star shaped hole, which I will say is the second largest economy in the country, has tons of high yielding business traffic and is projected to double in population within 20-30 years (which would make it surpass all of New England and NY state combined).

winginit wrote:
It is doubtful that regulatory authorities would allow such an acquisition without sizeable slot divestitures in NYC specifically given all three airports are looked at as one city code from a regulatory perspective.


True. I'm sure with EWR right down the road, UA would only be interested in keeping enough JFK slots to operate to their hubs, some of them at least. But they'd gain sizable focus cities in BOS, MCO and FLL plus a decent sized fleet, which would go a long way in helping them shore up their domestic network.



There are some very political reasons why MSP will never go away plus will always be a Delta hub a bit larger than Detroit and a lot has to do with the fact that Northwest was based there and Delta does not want to upset the powers that be. As far as your argument about DTW being a Delta megahub that is very true why not replicate what ATL does for North south traffic at ATL why not reduce costs and create DTW as the Delta east west megahub. As far as the worst Delta hubs I have never transferred at MSP but I feel ATL is much worse every connection I have made there is a foot race knowing that Delta would not hesitate to leave me behind if my inbound was running late. As long as Delta can maintain it's power in Detroit there is no reason to think this market will ever grow. If the WCAA wants to grow the market they need to bring in alternative options to force Delta's hand to up their game in Detroit.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4146
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:33 pm

klm617 wrote:
As far as your argument about DTW being a Delta megahub that is very true why not replicate what ATL does for North south traffic at ATL why not reduce costs and create DTW as the Delta east west megahub. As far as the worst Delta hubs I have never transferred at MSP but I feel ATL is much worse every connection I have made there is a foot race knowing that Delta would not hesitate to leave me behind if my inbound was running late. As long as Delta can maintain it's power in Detroit there is no reason to think this market will ever grow. If the WCAA wants to grow the market they need to bring in alternative options to force Delta's hand to up their game in Detroit.


Because MSP and SLC already handle a lot of east-west traffic.

DL is adding 4 new routes from DTW in the coming months, which is more routes than they are adding at MSP, SLC, LAX, SEA, e.t.c and you still act like DL has forgotten about DTW.

DL could add 50-100 flights from DTW and you still wouldn't be satisfied....

Fargo wrote:
But what purpose does BOS serve in their network? They are getting killed yield wise and that isn't going to change (B6 isn't going anywhere). Is JFK/LGA not sufficient for the NE? They could use the resources their wasting in BOS to bulk up JFK/LGA and DTW.


Both AA and UA have large presences in the mid-atlantic/northeast, AA has PHL, LGA/JFK, and DCA hubs plus a large BOS operation. UA has the hubs in EWR and IAD. DL wants a diverse presence in the NE/Mid-Atlantic as well.

Also JFK/LGA are limited in terms of growth, so all they can do there are marginal increases in flights and/or upguaging, which they are already doing.
Fargo wrote:
Also, they still have a ways to go in SEA. They need to get to 250 to 300 flights before being truly finished there. RDU is fine as it is with a few tweaks here and there. And if DL truly wants it all, they need to address their big Lone Star shaped hole.


They used to have a hub in DFW, it isn't like DL hasn't tried to be big in Texas before.
Last edited by Midwestindy on Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7318
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:39 pm

It’s not even worth my time to respond to this silly debate that DL is going to de hub DTW or MSP.

Why does this nonsensical debate continue to come up?
 
User avatar
flymco753
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:21 pm

Fargo wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Not too mention DL has a decent showing in MCO so they got their Florida void filled. The only carrier of the 3 majors that doesnt is UA.


This is why it would not surprise me if UA buys B6 at some point. UA needs to bulk up domestically big time and absent a merger, they have limited opportunities to do so beyond expanding their interior hubs (ORD, IAH, DEN).
Not sure it would go to that extent. I think DL hasn't set MCO up to the potential that it could be. I can see it being a secondary Latin American market to compliment ATL. I don't see why DTW cant do the same for MSP. MSP can get south east and Florida routes but DTW cant get a rocky mountain type destination or something like ABQ or TUS where its claimed that DTW cant have it daily if MSP only has 2 flights during peak.

Same goes for SJO, DTW cant have it because it's only 3x daily from ATL and isnt flown from MSP yet. In reality SJO is actually I think around 5 to 10 PDEW larger than MSP.
...the carriage of liquids, gels, and aerosols are prohibited through the screening checkpoint except for travel size toiletries of 3 ounces or less...
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:30 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
Fargo wrote:
But what purpose does BOS serve in their network? They are getting killed yield wise and that isn't going to change (B6 isn't going anywhere). Is JFK/LGA not sufficient for the NE? They could use the resources their wasting in BOS to bulk up JFK/LGA and DTW.


Both AA and UA have large presences in the mid-atlantic/northeast, AA has PHL, LGA/JFK, and DCA hubs plus a large BOS operation. UA has the hubs in EWR and IAD. DL wants a diverse presence in the NE/Mid-Atlantic as well.

Also JFK/LGA are limited in terms of growth, so all they can do there are marginal increases in flights and/or upguaging, which they are already doing.


That’s fair. But if they are going to spend the time building up BOS, why not make it a true hub?

Midwestindy wrote:
Fargo wrote:
Also, they still have a ways to go in SEA. They need to get to 250 to 300 flights before being truly finished there. RDU is fine as it is with a few tweaks here and there. And if DL truly wants it all, they need to address their big Lone Star shaped hole.


They used to have a hub in DFW, it isn't like DL hasn't tried to be big in Texas before.


Things have changed a lot since 2005, DL is in far superior financial shape and is in expansion mode if BOS, RDU, SEA are any indication. Why not address your hole in Texas, which is a pretty significant market?
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:54 pm

flymco753 wrote:
Fargo wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Not too mention DL has a decent showing in MCO so they got their Florida void filled. The only carrier of the 3 majors that doesnt is UA.


This is why it would not surprise me if UA buys B6 at some point. UA needs to bulk up domestically big time and absent a merger, they have limited opportunities to do so beyond expanding their interior hubs (ORD, IAH, DEN).
Not sure it would go to that extent. I think DL hasn't set MCO up to the potential that it could be. I can see it being a secondary Latin American market to compliment ATL. I don't see why DTW cant do the same for MSP. MSP can get south east and Florida routes but DTW cant get a rocky mountain type destination or something like ABQ or TUS where its claimed that DTW cant have it daily if MSP only has 2 flights during peak.

Same goes for SJO, DTW cant have it because it's only 3x daily from ATL and isnt flown from MSP yet. In reality SJO is actually I think around 5 to 10 PDEW larger than MSP.



Keep in mind that other than SLC DTW is the least diverse market in the Delta hub and focus city network so there is really no need to do anything significant here. In order to create better options and growth here as I said in my post above the WCAA has to cultivate more diverse options at DTW for Delta to make any significant additions here case and point JAX. The path way into DTW is not made very easy for competitive carriers and new route additions here because of the bureaucratic BS of having Delta as our hub carrier.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:58 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
klm617 wrote:
As far as your argument about DTW being a Delta megahub that is very true why not replicate what ATL does for North south traffic at ATL why not reduce costs and create DTW as the Delta east west megahub. As far as the worst Delta hubs I have never transferred at MSP but I feel ATL is much worse every connection I have made there is a foot race knowing that Delta would not hesitate to leave me behind if my inbound was running late. As long as Delta can maintain it's power in Detroit there is no reason to think this market will ever grow. If the WCAA wants to grow the market they need to bring in alternative options to force Delta's hand to up their game in Detroit.


Because MSP and SLC already handle a lot of east-west traffic.

DL is adding 4 new routes from DTW in the coming months, which is more routes than they are adding at MSP, SLC, LAX, SEA, e.t.c and you still act like DL has forgotten about DTW.

DL could add 50-100 flights from DTW and you still wouldn't be satisfied....

Fargo wrote:
But what purpose does BOS serve in their network? They are getting killed yield wise and that isn't going to change (B6 isn't going anywhere). Is JFK/LGA not sufficient for the NE? They could use the resources their wasting in BOS to bulk up JFK/LGA and DTW.


Both AA and UA have large presences in the mid-atlantic/northeast, AA has PHL, LGA/JFK, and DCA hubs plus a large BOS operation. UA has the hubs in EWR and IAD. DL wants a diverse presence in the NE/Mid-Atlantic as well.

Also JFK/LGA are limited in terms of growth, so all they can do there are marginal increases in flights and/or upguaging, which they are already doing.
Fargo wrote:
Also, they still have a ways to go in SEA. They need to get to 250 to 300 flights before being truly finished there. RDU is fine as it is with a few tweaks here and there. And if DL truly wants it all, they need to address their big Lone Star shaped hole.


They used to have a hub in DFW, it isn't like DL hasn't tried to be big in Texas before.



Keep in mind thought that those new additions aren't as significant as they were since they were first announced due to the cuts that followed so basically a wash. We still haven't seen the ORH schedule that I really don't think will ever happen as several new flights have been loaded post Sept 2019 such as the new ATL-HHH flights.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:02 pm

The WCAA should be having some heavy duty meetings with the Indian business community here to put together a package to snatch BOM away from ATL or JFK. DTW has listed BOM as one of it's target destinations and this is a great opportunity the most economical aircraft is already based at DTW the A350.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
blockski
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:22 pm

Fargo wrote:
So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?

Personally, I believe the real reason DL keeps both MSP and DTW is they don't want to abandon one and have AA move out of ORD into one of them (which they most likely would). It is in their best interest to keep AA/UA battling at ORD so they get better yields for the midwest.


More cost-effective to do what? What is the ultimate goal of this strategy you propose? Delta surely isn’t looking to build a mega hub just for the sake of doing so.

Delta’s current goal is to be a profitable airline, and keeping hubs at both MSP and DTW serves that goal well. Both hubs have well defined roles for connecting traffic, they both serve large local markets with lucrative traffic that they have a serious advantage in serving. They don’t need to build either one into a ‘mega hub’ to meet their goals. Thus, it is not more cost effective to close a hub.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:48 pm

Fargo wrote:
So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?


This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.

Fargo wrote:
No, because LAX and NYC are actual, banked, connecting hubs for DL and serve a purpose in their network. LAX connects California traffic (largest state in the union and largest state economy) and is a secondary TPAC gateway while NYC is a TATL gateway. BOS is not a hub and as of now, they do not plan to make it a full hub. As it is not a hub and not an underserved market, it serves no purpose to their overall network and they are just burning money chasing traffic which they could just route through JFK/LGA. And no, it would not make a good secondary TATL gateway as international connections at BOS are difficult due to the separation of A and E.


So there's no benefit in establishing focus cities that aren't full-fledged hubs?

Fargo wrote:
Yes, time will tell about all of those focus cities, but to your last point, NYC and SEA are hub buildups while BOS/RDU are simple focus cities (BNA isn't a one and never will be due to its proximity to ATL and the large WN focus city). Rather than continuing to chase BOS, the next order of business for DL needs to be filling their Lone Star shaped hole, which I will say is the second largest economy in the country, has tons of high yielding business traffic and is projected to double in population within 20-30 years (which would make it surpass all of New England and NY state combined).


BOS, RDU, AUS, and yes, BNA are announced focus cities by DL.

Fargo wrote:
True. I'm sure with EWR right down the road, UA would only be interested in keeping enough JFK slots to operate to their hubs, some of them at least. But they'd gain sizable focus cities in BOS, MCO and FLL plus a decent sized fleet, which would go a long way in helping them shore up their domestic network.


So this bit is interesting, because just earlier you were questioning DL's build up of BOS as a focus city and yet here you're saying that in buying B6 UA would gain a BOS focus city? I'm confused.
Last edited by winginit on Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:55 pm

klm617 wrote:
Delta does not want to upset the powers that be.


The powers that be are who now? Apart from shareholders and possibly employees? That's an honest question I'm not sure who you're referring to.

klm617 wrote:
Keep in mind that other than SLC DTW is the least diverse market in the Delta hub and focus city network so there is really no need to do anything significant here.


What do you mean when you say 'least diverse'? I'm not tracking. Again - honest question.

klm617 wrote:
Keep in mind thought that those new additions aren't as significant as they were since they were first announced due to the cuts that followed so basically a wash.


Let's please make this a year where we speak factually and with data to back our claims. DL's 2019 DTW adds are not 'basically a wash' on accounts of cuts. Compared to 2018, DL will increase DTW capacity by 5% when measured by seats in and out of the market per the currently published schedule. That is not 'basically a wash'. Again - let's be factual.

klm617 wrote:
The WCAA should be having some heavy duty meetings with the Indian business community here to put together a package to snatch BOM away from ATL or JFK. DTW has listed BOM as one of it's target destinations and this is a great opportunity the most economical aircraft is already based at DTW the A350.


Aside from the fact that Ed has been clear in that it's a race between ATL and JFK, what would such a 'package' look like specifically? Know that it would be very much illegal for it to involve bags of cash or something of the like.
 
AA321T
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 9:22 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:00 pm

I’m here at the DTW airport and there’s a Delta Connection CRJ-900 that just returned to the field and is surrounded by about 10 emergency vehicles. Anyone know what’s going on?
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:23 pm

winginit wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Delta does not want to upset the powers that be.


The powers that be are who now? Apart from shareholders and possibly employees? That's an honest question I'm not sure who you're referring to.

klm617 wrote:
Keep in mind that other than SLC DTW is the least diverse market in the Delta hub and focus city network so there is really no need to do anything significant here.


What do you mean when you say 'least diverse'? I'm not tracking. Again - honest question.

klm617 wrote:
Keep in mind thought that those new additions aren't as significant as they were since they were first announced due to the cuts that followed so basically a wash.


Let's please make this a year where we speak factually and with data to back our claims. DL's 2019 DTW adds are not 'basically a wash' on accounts of cuts. Compared to 2018, DL will increase DTW capacity by 5% when measured by seats in and out of the market per the currently published schedule. That is not 'basically a wash'. Again - let's be factual.

klm617 wrote:
The WCAA should be having some heavy duty meetings with the Indian business community here to put together a package to snatch BOM away from ATL or JFK. DTW has listed BOM as one of it's target destinations and this is a great opportunity the most economical aircraft is already based at DTW the A350.


Aside from the fact that Ed has been clear in that it's a race between ATL and JFK, what would such a 'package' look like specifically? Know that it would be very much illegal for it to involve bags of cash or something of the like.


Government officials in Minnesota where Northwest was based.
DTW and SLC have the least amount of choice as far as the market goes. ATL, MSP, BOS, SEA and JFK have more customer choice than DTW or SEA do.
Again we view that differently while seats my be up departures and destinations are down and these two factors are used to rank airports so they are more relevant in my eyes. Not to mention when you reduce frequency and destinations it puts DTW at a disadvantage when customers are using a hub to transfer at.
As far as a package something like what was being done in Pittsburgh to lure new service. My question would be what is holding Delta up now from choosing either JFK or ATL other than they are trying to get those airports to come up with better incentive packages to start the route. I still believe that DTW is the best choice to launch this route limited service to India from the interior US plus no low fare competition from the ME3 that both JFK and ATL have which is going to effect pricing and in ATL the low fare competition already has a two your lead on Delta gaining market share. I will go back to my opinion that a lot of India traffic from Michigan drives to Chicago and Toronto for better fares but again there is no way to prove that.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:39 pm

klm617 wrote:
Again we view that differently while seats my be up departures and destinations are down


STOP.

Stop it right there. We're in a new year, and let's please make it a goal for you to not spread misinformation without factual backing. Enough is enough and we shouldn't tolerate misinformation in this thread or on this forum.

DL's DTW Departures are NOT down. In 2018 DL had 143,630 departures out of DTW. Per the current schedule in 2019 they will have 147,000. That's an increase.

DL's DTW Destinations are NOT down. In 2018 DL had 134 destinations from DTW. Per the current schedule in 2019 they will have 135. That's an increase.

Stop. Lying.
Last edited by winginit on Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7318
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:43 pm

Flying out of DTW this morning, noticed they have started putting up a construction barrier and fencing around the airside of the Smith terminal and the old concourse B. The beginning of the end for the old terminal is getting closer.
 
evank516
Posts: 1961
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:56 pm

Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
I'm sorry but respectfully - that is nonsense, and doesn't make financial sense to boot. If you have two fortress assets that are both generating high yields and sizeable profits you never need to choose between the two unless the payoff for doing so outweighs the cost, which is clearly not the case with DTW and MSP.


So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?



I connect in MSP A LOT. I mean A LOT. In fact I've probably connected in MSP more than I did in ATL this past year. The only issue with MSP is that everything is a schlep, but it is certainly not a bad place to connect in any way, shape, or form and they have a tram that takes you from the beginning of C down to concourse A which relieves some of the walking. I actually prefer it to DTW and I've connected in both. Not to say DTW isn't an easy connection, it is, but MSP is far from the worst airport to connect. I'd say that title probably goes to ATL if we're being exclusive to Delta's route network.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:50 am

winginit wrote:
This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.


How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.

And since no one is answering the question, what connecting flows does MSP serve that cannot be served via DTW or even SLC/SEA? UA and AA seem to be just fine with one Midwest hub, why can't DL?

winginit wrote:
So there's no benefit in establishing focus cities that aren't full-fledged hubs?


Absolutely not. However, an airline should establish focus city if an airport meets one or both of the following criteria.

1. It is an underserved market

2. It is a gap in the said airline's network

BOS does not meet either of those criteria. It is a well established air market that has an almost 200 flight B6 focus city with their foreign codeshare partners; full spoke legacy service that is 90%+ mainline and includes hourly shuttle service to NYC and DC and transcontinental flights to LAX and SFO; a plethora of LCC service and foreign international carriers. Additionally, BOS does not serve any strategic purpose in DL's network, they already have a TATL hub in JFK (as well as ATL) and establishing a TATL hub in BOS would be difficult since Terminal A does not have FIS facilities. DL themselves have stated they do not intend to make BOS a full hub, but it will be a "strong focus" market.

RDU on the other hand, meets the first criteria. It does not serve a strategic purpose in DL's network, but it is (at least was historically) an underserved market due to the revolving door of hub carriers. AUS would meet the second criteria, filling DL's gap in the huge and fast growing Texas market. And I know it's blasphemous to say this on this site, but it wouldn't surprise me if the AUS focus city evolved into a full hub over time (NOT saying it will though).

winginit wrote:
BOS, RDU, AUS, and yes, BNA are announced focus cities by DL.


That is inaccurate, they meant to say CVG. See the DL investor day presentation from last year. BNA has never been a DL focus city and never will due to its close proximity to ATL. And technically, AUS has not been officially established yet by DL, that article was just stating DL's intention to establish AUS as one.

Fargo wrote:
So this bit is interesting, because just earlier you were questioning DL's build up of BOS as a focus city and yet here you're saying that in buying B6 UA would gain a BOS focus city? I'm confused.


Well, B6 is the largest carrier at BOS, so if UA bought up B6, they'd be the largest carrier in BOS. And it would be much more difficult for DL to go up against a fellow legacy that has much deeper pockets than B6.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:57 am

evank516 wrote:
Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
I'm sorry but respectfully - that is nonsense, and doesn't make financial sense to boot. If you have two fortress assets that are both generating high yields and sizeable profits you never need to choose between the two unless the payoff for doing so outweighs the cost, which is clearly not the case with DTW and MSP.


So let me get this straight (and I am not saying this in a sarcastic/condensing way, I'm curious), you are saying consolidating midwest ops at DTW would cost a lot? How would it not be more cost effective to build one "mega(ish)hub" at DTW for the midwest in space that is far more effective for connections than MSP (MSP is arguably the worst airport in the DL network for connections)?



I connect in MSP A LOT. I mean A LOT. In fact I've probably connected in MSP more than I did in ATL this past year. The only issue with MSP is that everything is a schlep, but it is certainly not a bad place to connect in any way, shape, or form and they have a tram that takes you from the beginning of C down to concourse A which relieves some of the walking. I actually prefer it to DTW and I've connected in both. Not to say DTW isn't an easy connection, it is, but MSP is far from the worst airport to connect. I'd say that title probably goes to ATL if we're being exclusive to Delta's route network.


Let me be clear, MSP is far from a bad airport, it is great for O&D, but most people I know prefer the simple layout of pier concourses with an underground tunnel/tram. Keeps things much more centralized. I'm glad you have a good experience connecting in MSP, but myself and most everyone I know prefer an ATL/DTW layout. Maybe if MSP had relocated to Dakota County back when they could have, they'd have a better layout. Now it's too late for that.
 
blockski
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:24 am

Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.


How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.

And since no one is answering the question, what connecting flows does MSP serve that cannot be served via DTW or even SLC/SEA? UA and AA seem to be just fine with one Midwest hub, why can't DL?


[/quote]

But... why? What purpose does this serve? Why would Delta be better off doing this? What makes this option more profitable for DL than the current setup?

You can make the case that Delta only ‘needs’ one Midwest hub if things were really bad, if there was a massive recession and they had to cut their network somewhere... but that’s just not the case.

You ask what flows couldn’t be served by DTW instead of MSP, but that’s the wrong question to ask. The right question is why would it be more profitable to cut back one hub at the expense of the other?
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:48 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
It’s not even worth my time to respond to this silly debate that DL is going to de hub DTW or MSP.

Why does this nonsensical debate continue to come up?


That $200M+ WCAA has spent over the past decade operating, maintaining and (eventually) building a replacement facility for management offices certainly paid off!!! Just think, they could’ve spent that cash toward principle debt and saved $300M (or more) in interest expense... nah, we’d prefer to save the demolition cost....

*When the North Termianal was conceived, management offices were intended to be relocated in the former Marriott; later, they selected an off-site commericial location with a lower buildout cost. Ultimately, they decided to keep the offices as is, with film revenue covering the operational expenses of the terminal...
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:31 am

blockski wrote:
Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.


How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.

And since no one is answering the question, what connecting flows does MSP serve that cannot be served via DTW or even SLC/SEA? UA and AA seem to be just fine with one Midwest hub, why can't DL?


But... why? What purpose does this serve? Why would Delta be better off doing this? What makes this option more profitable for DL than the current setup?

You can make the case that Delta only ‘needs’ one Midwest hub if things were really bad, if there was a massive recession and they had to cut their network somewhere... but that’s just not the case.

You ask what flows couldn’t be served by DTW instead of MSP, but that’s the wrong question to ask. The right question is why would it be more profitable to cut back one hub at the expense of the other?


Because if ATL is any indication, putting your resources into a single hub for the region and maximizing connecting opportunities in an efficiently layed out airport is very profitable, rather than spreading your resources across two, somewhat redundant hubs.

Plus, the leftover resources taken from MSP that aren't transferred to DTW can be used elsewhere in the DL network, such as building out SEA, potentially building up AUS, etc.

MSP wouldn't need to fret though, AA would likely leave ORD for MSP if it opened up, so they wouldn't lose hub status.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:40 am

Fargo wrote:
How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.


As others have pointed out since this was posted, there is simply no reason to do so, which is why it is never going to happen. There is no incremental profitability to be gained that would warrant the cost of shifting the necessary resources.

Fargo wrote:
That is inaccurate, they meant to say CVG. See the DL investor day presentation from last year. BNA has never been a DL focus city and never will due to its close proximity to ATL.


You are incorrect. Know any Delta employees? Ask them what their focus cities are. Every single one of them will come back and tell you it's BOS, AUS, RDU, BNA. It's no coincidence that DL has posted positions for and hired dedicated sales executives into AUS, RDU, and BNA where they didn't previously exist. This has been well discussed in the AUS focus city thread.
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:48 am

blockski wrote:
Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.


How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.

And since no one is answering the question, what connecting flows does MSP serve that cannot be served via DTW or even SLC/SEA? UA and AA seem to be just fine with one Midwest hub, why can't DL?




But... why? What purpose does this serve? Why would Delta be better off doing this? What makes this option more profitable for DL than the current setup?

You can make the case that Delta only ‘needs’ one Midwest hub if things were really bad, if there was a massive recession and they had to cut their network somewhere... but that’s just not the case.

You ask what flows couldn’t be served by DTW instead of MSP, but that’s the wrong question to ask. The right question is why would it be more profitable to cut back one hub at the expense of the other?[/quote]



For the same reason it was more profitable to move connecting traffic from DTW to ATL. The same argument could be made about moving flow from MSP to DTW hypothetically speaking. Don't misquote me not advocating moving MSP flights to DTW but stating an example.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:52 am

winginit wrote:
Fargo wrote:
How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.


As others have pointed out since this was posted, there is simply no reason to do so, which is why it is never going to happen. There is no incremental profitability to be gained that would warrant the cost of shifting the necessary resources.


You have yet to point out how it will cost a fortune to shut down a hub and shift resources elsewhere. I guess it cost a fortune to shut down CVG and MEM and transfer those resources to SEA, they clearly lost a ton of money doing that, :roll:

winginit wrote:
Fargo wrote:
That is inaccurate, they meant to say CVG. See the DL investor day presentation from last year. BNA has never been a DL focus city and never will due to its close proximity to ATL.


You are incorrect. Know any Delta employees? Ask them what their focus cities are. Every single one of them will come back and tell you it's BOS, AUS, RDU, BNA. It's no coincidence that DL has posted positions for and hired dedicated sales executives into AUS, RDU, and BNA where they didn't previously exist. This has been well discussed in the AUS focus city thread.


Do you even know what the definition of a focus city is? Clearly not based on this answer. Please refer to slide 24 of this presentation

http://s1.q4cdn.com/231238688/files/doc_presentations/2017/Delta-Air-Lines-Investor-Day_2017.pdf

Other than a Saturday seasonal CUN, BNA has no p2p flying on DL. They only operate 40 or so flights a day, all to hubs/focus cities. Even AA is still ahead of them in total operations. Please provide a reliable source stating BNA is a focus city for DL.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:25 am

Fargo wrote:
You have yet to point out how it will cost a fortune to shut down a hub and shift resources elsewhere. I guess it cost a fortune to shut down CVG and MEM and transfer those resources to SEA, they clearly lost a ton of money doing that, :roll:


In this absurd hypothetical, just for starters they would have to pay to relocate the employees in MSP that would be needed in DTW yes? As a reminder, Delta has 8,000 MSP-based employees. Or would you sack them all and re-hire what you need in DTW? Severance for the ones who don't want to move? Sounds cheap! Re-basing the pilots and FAs? I'm sure they'll be cool with it because Detroit has such a great reputation?

Or how about Delta TechOps' MRO at MSP? You know, 350,000 sq feet in hangar space? 12 engine bays and all of the back office support needed to tend to everything from Engine/APU Overhaul to painting and line maintenance? Are you going to move all that to DTW? No? The lost synergies of not having your second largest maintenance facility behind ATL at a hub alone would likely not be offset by any hypothetical incremental profits through DTW consolidation.

The above doesn't even touch on the increased risk of hub consolidation. We've already seen nightmare scenarios when ATL goes down for one reason or another on account of DL's concentration in that hub, and you'd be replicating that risk by consolidating MSP into DTW, which, again, will never happen.

Fargo wrote:
Please provide a reliable source stating BNA is a focus city for DL.


Took me a whole... 30 seconds of Google searching... Is the Delta NewsHub a reliable enough source for you?

As a focus city for the airline, Delta is committed to investing in the Nashville community through a variety of organizations.
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:41 am

winginit wrote:
Fargo wrote:
You have yet to point out how it will cost a fortune to shut down a hub and shift resources elsewhere. I guess it cost a fortune to shut down CVG and MEM and transfer those resources to SEA, they clearly lost a ton of money doing that, :roll:


In this absurd hypothetical, just for starters they would have to pay to relocate the employees in MSP that would be needed in DTW yes? As a reminder, Delta has 8,000 MSP-based employees. Or would you sack them all and re-hire what you need in DTW? Severance for the ones who don't want to move? Sounds cheap! Re-basing the pilots and FAs? I'm sure they'll be cool with it because Detroit has such a great reputation?

Or how about Delta TechOps' MRO at MSP? You know, 350,000 sq feet in hangar space? 12 engine bays and all of the back office support needed to tend to everything from Engine/APU Overhaul to painting and line maintenance? Are you going to move all that to DTW? No? The lost synergies of not having your second largest maintenance facility behind ATL at a hub alone would likely not be offset by any hypothetical incremental profits through DTW consolidation.

The above doesn't even touch on the increased risk of hub consolidation. We've already seen nightmare scenarios when ATL goes down for one reason or another on account of DL's concentration in that hub, and you'd be replicating that risk by consolidating MSP into DTW, which, again, will never happen.

Fargo wrote:
Please provide a reliable source stating BNA is a focus city for DL.


Took me a whole... 30 seconds of Google searching... Is the Delta NewsHub a reliable enough source for you?

As a focus city for the airline, Delta is committed to investing in the Nashville community through a variety of organizations.


So San Jose is a focus city too for Delta according to this article about donating money for children's playgrounds. This reference does not pertain to BNA as a focus city when it comes to flight operations.

As a focus city for the airline, Delta is committed to investing in the Nashville community through a variety of organizations. Focus cities for 2016 also include Raleigh–Durham, Indianapolis and San Jose.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:52 am

klm617 wrote:
So San Jose is a focus city too for Delta according to this article about donating money for children's playgrounds.


I'm sorry were you going to acknowledge or address that you were spreading misinformation about DL's DTW departure and destination presence earlier in this thread or no? I'd like to see that addressed pleased. I'll recap below in case you've forgotten:

winginit wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Again we view that differently while seats my be up departures and destinations are down


STOP.

Stop it right there. We're in a new year, and let's please make it a goal for you to not spread misinformation without factual backing. Enough is enough and we shouldn't tolerate misinformation in this thread or on this forum.

DL's DTW Departures are NOT down. In 2018 DL had 143,630 departures out of DTW. Per the current schedule in 2019 they will have 147,000. That's an increase.

DL's DTW Destinations are NOT down. In 2018 DL had 134 destinations from DTW. Per the current schedule in 2019 they will have 135. That's an increase.

Stop. Lying.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:57 am

winginit wrote:
In this absurd hypothetical, just for starters they would have to pay to relocate the employees in MSP that would be needed in DTW yes? As a reminder, Delta has 8,000 MSP-based employees. Or would you sack them all and re-hire what you need in DTW? Severance for the ones who don't want to move? Sounds cheap! Re-basing the pilots and FAs? I'm sure they'll be cool with it because Detroit has such a great reputation?

Or how about Delta TechOps' MRO at MSP? You know, 350,000 sq feet in hangar space? 12 engine bays and all of the back office support needed to tend to everything from Engine/APU Overhaul to painting and line maintenance? Are you going to move all that to DTW? No? The lost synergies of not having your second largest maintenance facility behind ATL at a hub alone would likely not be offset by any hypothetical incremental profits through DTW consolidation.

The above doesn't even touch on the increased risk of hub consolidation. We've already seen nightmare scenarios when ATL goes down for one reason or another on account of DL's concentration in that hub, and you'd be replicating that risk by consolidating MSP into DTW, which, again, will never happen.


A. You could relocate them to DTW or elsewhere and severance the rest, you know, like companies do all the time? It's part of the cost of doing business.

B. You realize companies open/close/relocate facilities all the time? It happens all over the country. What's the big deal if DL builds a new facility at DTW, they could actually put an even bigger facility in because they aren't landlocked like MSP. But I forgot, DL is a special exception and it will somehow cost them $1 billion+ to relocate maintenance facilities to DTW.

C. If anything, ATL is the reason DL needs another hub that has more than 450 flights. Having multiple large hubs reduces the risk of a nightmare meltdown. Think of this as CLT is to DFW for AA. Having another hub with bigger connectivity provides a backup.

Finally, do you have a crystal ball predicting the future? What if Almighty Delta Air Lines falls on hard times in the future? You know, all great companies usually experience turmoil sooner or later.

winginit wrote:
Took me a whole... 30 seconds of Google searching... Is the Delta NewsHub a reliable enough source for you?


You obviously didn't read the whole paragraph

Focus cities for 2016 also include Raleigh–Durham, Indianapolis and San Jose.


So I guess IND, SJC are focus cities now too?

Try again.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:01 am

Fargo wrote:
A. You could relocate them to DTW or elsewhere and severance the rest, you know, like companies do all the time? It's part of the cost of doing business.

B. You realize companies open/close/relocate facilities all the time? It happens all over the country. What's the big deal if DL builds a new facility at DTW, they could actually put an even bigger facility in because they aren't landlocked like MSP. But I forgot, DL is a special exception and it will somehow cost them $1 billion+ to relocate maintenance facilities to DTW.

C. If anything, ATL is the reason DL needs another hub that has more than 450 flights. Having multiple large hubs reduces the risk of a nightmare meltdown. Think of this as CLT is to DFW for AA. Having another hub with bigger connectivity provides a backup.


You asked for reasons it would be expensive for Delta to consolidate MSP operations in DTW. I have provided those. This is the part where you show that the incremental profits generated by such a move would more than offset those costs. Or we could abandon this pointless debate as this hypothetical scenario is never going to come to fruition. Your call.

Fargo wrote:
So I guess IND, SJC are focus cities now too?

Try again.


Yes... it would appear that they are wouldn't it. You know, per Delta Air Lines. Or did your opinions/interpretations supersede explicit statements from the company? That'd be a neat trick!
 
seanpmassey
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:22 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:07 am

Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
This is a nonsensical debate in that, as I mentioned and for the reasons I mentioned, DL will never have to choose between DTW and MSP. It would cost a fortune to build up a mega(ish) hub at DTW the incorporated the profitability of MSP and you'd be putting the profits generated by MSP at risk. You can't just stitch two and two together and expect four when it comes to aviation hubs and their profitability.


How would adding 150 flights from MSP to DTW, bringing the total up to 600 from the current 450, cost a fortune? I only used the term mega(ish) because some people on this site consider 600 flight hubs and up a megahub.

And since no one is answering the question, what connecting flows does MSP serve that cannot be served via DTW or even SLC/SEA? UA and AA seem to be just fine with one Midwest hub, why can't DL?


It's not just a question of adding flights from one hub to another. Changing the network has follow-on effects, and you might not just be moving flights. There are equipment and capacity changes that need to be made. There are facilities that go along with the hub. Maintenance facilities that would need to be relocated. Repositioning crew bases.

Delta works well with two Midwest hubs, and it is profitable for them. It also provides them with great coverage of the Upper Midwest,and it doesn't require passengers to go through O'Hare where their two main competitors are hubbed.

Fargo wrote:
winginit wrote:
So there's no benefit in establishing focus cities that aren't full-fledged hubs?


Absolutely not. However, an airline should establish focus city if an airport meets one or both of the following criteria.

1. It is an underserved market

2. It is a gap in the said airline's network

BOS does not meet either of those criteria. It is a well established air market that has an almost 200 flight B6 focus city with their foreign codeshare partners; full spoke legacy service that is 90%+ mainline and includes hourly shuttle service to NYC and DC and transcontinental flights to LAX and SFO; a plethora of LCC service and foreign international carriers. Additionally, BOS does not serve any strategic purpose in DL's network, they already have a TATL hub in JFK (as well as ATL) and establishing a TATL hub in BOS would be difficult since Terminal A does not have FIS facilities. DL themselves have stated they do not intend to make BOS a full hub, but it will be a "strong focus" market.

RDU on the other hand, meets the first criteria. It does not serve a strategic purpose in DL's network, but it is (at least was historically) an underserved market due to the revolving door of hub carriers. AUS would meet the second criteria, filling DL's gap in the huge and fast growing Texas market. And I know it's blasphemous to say this on this site, but it wouldn't surprise me if the AUS focus city evolved into a full hub over time (NOT saying it will though).


I disagree with this. A focus city should be any market that the airline feels they can add some point-to-point service to that will generate them profit. Delta has been adding a few of those because they have customer demand for additional service in those markets, and they feel they can make a profit by offering that point-to-point service.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:21 am

winginit wrote:
You asked for reasons it would be expensive for Delta to consolidate MSP operations in DTW. I have provided those. This is the part where you show that the incremental profits generated by such a move would more than offset those costs. Or we could abandon this pointless debate as this hypothetical scenario is never going to come to fruition. Your call.


Lol, you need to look no further than ATL to see how profitable it is for DL. Numbers speak for themselves. And the current size of the operation was made possible by closing DFW and downsizing CVG. Consolidation and connections = profit.

You’re right, it isn’t any use to carry on this conversation, because we aren’t getting anywhere. You haven’t given me a rational explanation as to why it will cost a fortune to consolidate. You will probably say the same for me, that I haven’t given a reason, but the fact is DL is no different than any other company across America. The reasons you have are all part of the cost of doing business. Companies do it all the time. By the logic you gave, the auto makers shouldn’t have left Detroit for the South because building a new plant and severancing/relocating employees is obviously too dang expensive.......

Fargo wrote:
So I guess IND, SJC are focus cities now too?

Try again.


Yes... it would appear that they are wouldn't it. You know, per Delta Air Lines. Or did your opinions/interpretations supersede explicit statements from the company? That'd be a neat trick![/quote]

Or maybe it’s your interpretations that’s supersede company statements? Do you see a red dot over BNA in the above investor day presentation? Do you see any true p2p flying out of BNA? Do you see TATL flying out of BNA? Do you see any other explicit sources stating BNA is a focus city?

Heck, do you even realize what that sentence means? Obviously not. That sentence is stating BNA is a focus city for 2016, meaning they are focusing on the market for charitable purposes, not the focus city in terms of airline service. Why in the heck would BNA be a focus city when ATL is a 50 minute plane ride away?
 
User avatar
flymco753
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:09 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:43 am

Hubs are BOS, JFK, LGA, CVG, ATL, DTW, MSP, SEA, SLC, & LAX. Focus cities are MCO, RDU, & LAS.
...the carriage of liquids, gels, and aerosols are prohibited through the screening checkpoint except for travel size toiletries of 3 ounces or less...
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:48 am

flymco753 wrote:
Hubs are BOS, JFK, LGA, CVG, ATL, DTW, MSP, SEA, SLC, & LAX. Focus cities are MCO, RDU, & LAS.


It seems everywhere you look you get a different list. The 'Hubs' section of Delta News Hub identifies the below as hubs with dedicated infographics to boot:

TYO, SEA, SLC, CDG, NYC, MSP, LAX, DTW, BOS, ATL, AMS. No CVG.

Focus Cities, as I think we've shown here, are all over the map and vary by year but currently or have at one point consisted of:

LAS, SJC, CVG, MCO, RDU, AUS, BOS, BNA, IND
Last edited by winginit on Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7318
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:49 am

Stop the madness.....just stop, please stop.
I don't even know what some of you are arguing anymore.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:50 am

flymco753 wrote:
Hubs are BOS, JFK, LGA, CVG, ATL, DTW, MSP, SEA, SLC, & LAX. Focus cities are MCO, RDU, & LAS.


No, hubs are ATL, DTW, MSP, JFK, LGA, SLC, LAX and SEA. Focus cities are BOS, CVG and RDU.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7318
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:53 am

WHO CARES.....this dick measuring contest the has run rampant over a.net about the fetish of hubs, focus cities, mergers, and de-hubbing has gotten old fast.

This thread about DTW has already gone way off the rails.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4146
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:58 am

Congrats guys, you ruined the DTW thread again this year, and it is only the second week of January....
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
bkflyguy
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:08 am

MSP prints money for DL. It is extremely profitable. It also has the second largest TechOps shop. Believe me, the hub is more than safe.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7318
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:09 am

compensateme wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
It’s not even worth my time to respond to this silly debate that DL is going to de hub DTW or MSP.

Why does this nonsensical debate continue to come up?


That $200M+ WCAA has spent over the past decade operating, maintaining and (eventually) building a replacement facility for management offices certainly paid off!!! Just think, they could’ve spent that cash toward principle debt and saved $300M (or more) in interest expense... nah, we’d prefer to save the demolition cost....

*When the North Termianal was conceived, management offices were intended to be relocated in the former Marriott; later, they selected an off-site commericial location with a lower buildout cost. Ultimately, they decided to keep the offices as is, with film revenue covering the operational expenses of the terminal...

Why didn't they build the new airport adminstration office building at the same time they built the North Terminal instead of paying for the maintenance and upkeep of their offices in the Smith for an additional 8 years after they closed the terminal from passenger use?
 
N292UX
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 7:08 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:10 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
Flying out of DTW this morning, noticed they have started putting up a construction barrier and fencing around the airside of the Smith terminal and the old concourse B. The beginning of the end for the old terminal is getting closer.

That's a shame. I have a lot of memories of flying NW DC9/A320/757s into DTW and would always taxi by the Smith terminals and see airlines like NK, UA, US, FL, US300, and many other airlines parked there. It was always an amazing sight to me. Will be a shame to see it go.

What is the future plans for that space? RON Parking? Offices? New terminal?
 
klm617
Posts: 4430
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Detroit Air Service Discussion Thread - 2019

Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:37 am

N292UX wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
Flying out of DTW this morning, noticed they have started putting up a construction barrier and fencing around the airside of the Smith terminal and the old concourse B. The beginning of the end for the old terminal is getting closer.

That's a shame. I have a lot of memories of flying NW DC9/A320/757s into DTW and would always taxi by the Smith terminals and see airlines like NK, UA, US, FL, US300, and many other airlines parked there. It was always an amazing sight to me. Will be a shame to see it go.

What is the future plans for that space? RON Parking? Offices? New terminal?


It is very sad to see that terminal go as I spent many many hours there as a kid collecting airline times and sitting in the end of the A concourse watching planes come and go when the departures and the arrivals came from the south. Does anyone here besides me remember when DTW had two observation decks on over the C concourse and one on the E concourse. I also remember before there was an international terminal when D was used for domestic charters watched an ONA DC10 taxi in there from the observation platform above the E gates. But time moves on from what was arguably the most glorious time in commercial aviation.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 22

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos