User avatar
TransWorldOne
Topic Author
Posts: 313
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 12:13 am

DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:09 pm

Delta is launching (or I guess you could say re-launching) SEA-KIX in April but it is not bookable after October 25th. Does Delta plan on discontinuing the route before it even begins? I don't remember any mention of the route being a seasonal one.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:17 pm

I think it recently got downgraded to seasonal (I'm pretty sure this was mentioned on the Washington State thread not too long ago).
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:35 pm

Wow! Hasn’t it already been tried and discontinued at least twice by both NW and DL?

Is it only Summer season now?
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:52 pm

NW launched SEA-OSA (later moved to KIX) in 1995, then again in 2003. DL tried it in 2010, with a 763 after discontinuing DTW (which operated with a 744).
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:05 pm

Didn't NW have daily 744s flying DTW-NRT, KIX, and NGO back in the day? Was pretty cool seeing the lineup of 747s at DTW.
 
winginit
Posts: 2558
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:12 pm

I'm looking back to see if it was ever announced as anything but seasonal and I'm not finding anything:

Original announcement

Open for bookings

Neither ever allude to the fact that it will be year-round versus Summer seasonal, although I believe in the past seasonal routes have quickly and obviously been identified as such from the get-go.
 
EBiafore99
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:41 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Didn't NW have daily 744s flying DTW-NRT, KIX, and NGO back in the day? Was pretty cool seeing the lineup of 747s at DTW.


Yes they did and yes it was a sight. If I remember correctly:

DTW - NRT x2
DTW - KIX - MNL
DTW - NGO - TPE
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:31 pm

Not surprising. I’m not sure that SFO-KIX is even one of UA’s stronger TPAC routes and SFO is about as good as it gets for TPAC
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 880
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:03 pm

Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
leftcoast8
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:59 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:56 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Didn't NW have daily 744s flying DTW-NRT, KIX, and NGO back in the day? Was pretty cool seeing the lineup of 747s at DTW.


I wonder why NW/DL cut back on their NGO/KIX service? Perhaps expanded Nozomi service on the Tokaido Shinkansen (starting in the mid-2000s) played a role.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14003
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:04 pm

leftcoast8 wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
Didn't NW have daily 744s flying DTW-NRT, KIX, and NGO back in the day? Was pretty cool seeing the lineup of 747s at DTW.


I wonder why NW/DL cut back on their NGO/KIX service? Perhaps expanded Nozomi service on the Tokaido Shinkansen (starting in the mid-2000s) played a role.


NGO never really filled up a 744. Toward the end, the MNL passengers did. But a smaller aircraft with no MNL tag probably always made sense; NW just didn't have the fleet to do that.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
leftcoast8
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:59 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:11 pm

Cubsrule wrote:

NGO never really filled up a 744. Toward the end, the MNL passengers did. But a smaller aircraft with no MNL tag probably always made sense; NW just didn't have the fleet to do that.


And that's another thing! There used to be plenty of service by legacy carriers from the U.S. mainland to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. All sorts of fifth-freedom hops across Asia that don't exist anymore. Heck, TG and CP flew SEA-BKK/YVR-BKK! What happened to U.S. mainland-SE Asia service?
 
klm617
Posts: 4476
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:16 pm

janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.
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...
 
cvgComair
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 3:48 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:20 pm

leftcoast8 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

NGO never really filled up a 744. Toward the end, the MNL passengers did. But a smaller aircraft with no MNL tag probably always made sense; NW just didn't have the fleet to do that.


And that's another thing! There used to be plenty of service by legacy carriers from the U.S. mainland to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. All sorts of fifth-freedom hops across Asia that don't exist anymore. Heck, TG and CP flew SEA-BKK/YVR-BKK! What happened to U.S. mainland-SE Asia service?

Super cheap fares are available through China. Singapore routes hang on because of the business traffic, but places like Thailand/Cambodia/Vietnam/etc don't have the business demand to justify nonstops.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:21 pm

klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.

And where are you getting the impression from that Delta is "failing in SEA"?

SEA-HKG was a marginal route, and they don't have the right kind of aircraft for it. The A332/A333 proved to not make economically sense on the route, the 767 didn't have the proper range, and the 777/A359 was too much plane.

Granted, SEA-KIX is probably a more marginal route than SEA-HKG is, but since KIX is closer to SEA than HKG is, this seems like the right kind of route to try (with the 767, that is). We'll see how it performs overtime.
 
winginit
Posts: 2558
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:43 pm

klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


Something tells me that Delta isn't at all worried about giving off the impression that they're failing in SEA just because they cancelled one route.

Image

Knowing that profitability admittedly remains an unknown, does that SEA capacity graph look like failure to you?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:00 am

klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


Airlines are a business. They don’t add routes just to “throw a bone” or give an “impression”. They add route because they think they’ll make money.
 
B747forever
Posts: 13788
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:07 am

FA9295 wrote:

SEA-HKG was a marginal route, and they don't have the right kind of aircraft for it. The A332/A333 proved to not make economically sense on the route, the 767 didn't have the proper range, and the 777/A359 was too much plane.
.



I don't get your reply. You mention every long haul airplane on the market except the 787. There is nothing else on the market that would make HKG work for Delta.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
User avatar
Keith2004
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:59 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:24 am

B747forever wrote:
FA9295 wrote:

SEA-HKG was a marginal route, and they don't have the right kind of aircraft for it. The A332/A333 proved to not make economically sense on the route, the 767 didn't have the proper range, and the 777/A359 was too much plane.
.



I don't get your reply. You mention every long haul airplane on the market except the 787. There is nothing else on the market that would make HKG work for Delta.


Maybe they were referring to aircraft existing in the fleet....DL has not given any indication it is interested in the 787.
 
LondonXtreme
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:24 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:28 am

Why KIX is struggling to sustain a route to US mainland(except UA's SFO and JL's LAX),we've seen many routes open and close within last 15 years. How come DL serves NGO-DTW for long time?

I can see DL will eventually pull out all the transpacific service from SEA and retain LAX as the gateway to Asia.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4477
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:35 am

LondonXtreme wrote:
Why KIX is struggling to sustain a route to US mainland(except UA's SFO and JL's LAX),we've seen many routes open and close within last 15 years. How come DL serves NGO-DTW for long time?.


Just like France where Paris dominates, Japan is very Tokyo centric where the economic, trade, travel, wealth and political power is concentrated.

NGO-DTW is an auto-industry route. Japans automobile industry is clustered around Nagoya.
mercure f-wtcc
 
717atOGG
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:10 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:47 am

Yeah, I noticed that a while back and found it odd. Japan-USA doesn't strike me as a highly seasonal market like the likes of Italy or Greece can be, so I'd be surprised and slightly disappointed if the route goes seasonal or even gets cut. But then again, non-Tokyo longhaul routes rarely do well, so there's that. Like others have said, the seat maps range from fairly full around spring, to nearly empty in peak summer. Strange.
winginit wrote:
klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


Something tells me that Delta isn't at all worried about giving off the impression that they're failing in SEA just because they cancelled one route.

Image

Knowing that profitability admittedly remains an unknown, does that SEA capacity graph look like failure to you?

Without hijacking this thread into one about DL's performance in SEA, I will say that for some routes, as tphuang has pointed out, the yields suck compared to their competitors, especially AS, but their LFs have been on par with the other airlines in town, and even slightly better sometimes. They have some corporate contracts, a decent-sized ex-NW FF base, and lots of advertising in the Seattle area, but they're really limited by their gate space, and the overcrowded IAF. Unless a bad recession hits, I don't think DL will throw in the towel on SEA just yet though, since it serves a purpose in their network (Secondary Asian gateway, and better PNW coverage), and SEA is arguably too big for just one hub airline at the moment.
Long live the Boeing 757!
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:54 am

Keith2004 wrote:
B747forever wrote:
FA9295 wrote:

SEA-HKG was a marginal route, and they don't have the right kind of aircraft for it. The A332/A333 proved to not make economically sense on the route, the 767 didn't have the proper range, and the 777/A359 was too much plane.
.



I don't get your reply. You mention every long haul airplane on the market except the 787. There is nothing else on the market that would make HKG work for Delta.


Maybe they were referring to aircraft existing in the fleet....DL has not given any indication it is interested in the 787.

Yes. I was referring to their existing fleet. Delta doesn't have the 787, and if they did, then they'd probably still be flying the route.

Delta has flown the A330 and the 777 on SEA-HKG, and those both didn't work out for them. (I just threw in the A359 since it has similar capacity to the 777, IIRC).
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:07 am

janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


JL has great feed in KIX and great feed in LAX (from AA).

Ditto for UA which has great feed in SFO and great feed in KIX (from NH).

DL has small feed in SEA and zero feed in KIX. Unless there's tons of direct O/D SEA-KIX traffic or this route was required as part of a corporate contract, it's hard to see it lasting.
 
717atOGG
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:10 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:59 am

IPFreely wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


JL has great feed in KIX and great feed in LAX (from AA).

Ditto for UA which has great feed in SFO and great feed in KIX (from NH).

DL has small feed in SEA and zero feed in KIX. Unless there's tons of direct O/D SEA-KIX traffic or this route was required as part of a corporate contract, it's hard to see it lasting.

Not arguing with the SFO/LAX feed and SEA being smaller than that, but the amount of feed on the KIX end is almost nonexistent. For NH, there's only 9 unique destinations that can't already be reached nonstop from SFO, and for JL, only 4 that aren't nonstop from LAX.

The problems with SEA-KIX are the smaller local market, competition, and less feed, but there's still a reasonable amount of connections to a good portion of the country (LAX, SFO, SAN, DEN, LAS, ORD, and JFK, plus more). Not saying that this route will be a success right out of the gate, but it's not exactly doomed to fail either. Time will tell.
Long live the Boeing 757!
 
klm617
Posts: 4476
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:06 am

klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


So for the sake of discussion then why would Delta add SEA-KIX at the same time they dropped SEA-HKG why wasn't SEA-KIX attempted earlier if it's so viable because I think the dynamics of the SEA-KIX market haven't really changed that much in the last 5 years
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: 2558
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:19 am

klm617 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


So for the sake of discussion then why would Delta add SEA-KIX at the same time they dropped SEA-HKG why wasn't SEA-KIX attempted earlier if it's so viable because I think the dynamics of the SEA-KIX market haven't really changed that much in the last 5 years


As mentioned - IAF constraints that are particularly strained during TPAC banks.

Additionally, SEA-KIX was operated by DL as recently as 2014, so it has been attempted earlier.

Finally, Japan is within the scope of the DL/KE JV (Hong Kong is not, so SEA-HKG would have been excluded), so the back end financials are a whole new ballgame with profitability settled via transfer payments. Transfer payments can very quickly turn what was previously an nonviable route viable.
 
goboeing
Posts: 2561
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:05 am

EBiafore99 wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
Didn't NW have daily 744s flying DTW-NRT, KIX, and NGO back in the day? Was pretty cool seeing the lineup of 747s at DTW.


Yes they did and yes it was a sight. If I remember correctly:

DTW - NRT x2
DTW - KIX - MNL
DTW - NGO - TPE


Just a slight correction to that,

DTW - NRT x2 NWA11 NWA25
DTW - NGO - MNL NWA71
DTW - KIX NWA69
 
leftcoast8
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:59 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:29 am

cvgComair wrote:
Super cheap fares are available through China. Singapore routes hang on because of the business traffic, but places like Thailand/Cambodia/Vietnam/etc don't have the business demand to justify nonstops.


Thinking about it, you're probably right. I just checked fares out of YVR to SIN BKK KUL CGK and it seems the lowest fares are invariably from CZ or MU. Followed closely by BR, CI and sometimes JAL/ANA.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:35 am

winginit wrote:
Something tells me that Delta isn't at all worried about giving off the impression that they're failing in SEA just because they cancelled one route.

Image

Knowing that profitability admittedly remains an unknown, does that SEA capacity graph look like failure to you?


Did you notice how DL buried the SEA-HKG cancellation behind the announcement of SEA-KIX? They were obviously trying to bury the bad news that the "industry leading global network" doesn't fly to the one of the top markets in the world. Now the bone is being trimmed before it starts.

Capacity =/= success or failure, and a graph of TPAC capacity yields a different picture. So far the SEA TPAC network has struggled to grow (or even maintain service levels), which was the context behind it.

BoeingGuy wrote:
Airlines are a business. They don’t add routes just to “throw a bone” or give an “impression”. They add route because they think they’ll make money.


Airlines absolutely throw bones at times or make impressions. The evidence was pretty clear that the restart of SEA-KIX was related to the loss of SEA-HKG. That's a bone.

There's also the possibility of JV capacity minimums to watch out for as well. I know that''s the case over the Atlantic.

winginit wrote:
As mentioned - IAF constraints that are particularly strained during TPAC banks.

Additionally, SEA-KIX was operated by DL as recently as 2014, so it has been attempted earlier.

Finally, Japan is within the scope of the DL/KE JV (Hong Kong is not, so SEA-HKG would have been excluded), so the back end financials are a whole new ballgame with profitability settled via transfer payments. Transfer payments can very quickly turn what was previously an nonviable route viable.


The IAF excuse needs to end its circulation.

The dynamics have changed--not the in the favor of flying SEA-KIX. SEA-KIX being part of the JV means that DL has even less incentive to fly the route. Routes like SEA-ICN-KIX is what the JV was made for.
 
klm617
Posts: 4476
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:41 am

MSPNWA wrote:
winginit wrote:
Something tells me that Delta isn't at all worried about giving off the impression that they're failing in SEA just because they cancelled one route.

Image

Knowing that profitability admittedly remains an unknown, does that SEA capacity graph look like failure to you?


Did you notice how DL buried the SEA-HKG cancellation behind the announcement of SEA-KIX? They were obviously trying to bury the bad news that the "industry leading global network" doesn't fly to the one of the top markets in the world. Now the bone is being trimmed before it starts.

Capacity =/= success or failure, and a graph of TPAC capacity yields a different picture. So far the SEA TPAC network has struggled to grow (or even maintain service levels), which was the context behind it.

BoeingGuy wrote:
Airlines are a business. They don’t add routes just to “throw a bone” or give an “impression”. They add route because they think they’ll make money.


Airlines absolutely throw bones at times or make impressions. The evidence was pretty clear that the restart of SEA-KIX was related to the loss of SEA-HKG. That's a bone.

There's also the possibility of JV capacity minimums to watch out for as well. I know that''s the case over the Atlantic.

winginit wrote:
As mentioned - IAF constraints that are particularly strained during TPAC banks.

Additionally, SEA-KIX was operated by DL as recently as 2014, so it has been attempted earlier.

Finally, Japan is within the scope of the DL/KE JV (Hong Kong is not, so SEA-HKG would have been excluded), so the back end financials are a whole new ballgame with profitability settled via transfer payments. Transfer payments can very quickly turn what was previously an nonviable route viable.


The IAF excuse needs to end its circulation.

The dynamics have changed--not the in the favor of flying SEA-KIX. SEA-KIX being part of the JV means that DL has even less incentive to fly the route. Routes like SEA-ICN-KIX is what the JV was made for.


I agree the IAF fallacy needs to stop it didn't stop CX and JL from adding flights that is an a.net myth that Delta itself spun as a reason for not internationally growing at SEA to Asia.
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...
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:13 am

My son & family at Christmas (they flew out the 26th) saved nearly $500 a seat x 5 going to KIX from YVR R/T on ANA compared to DL from Seattle. Made it worth driving past SEA, cross the border, stay the night (got 2 weeks free parking for a 1 night stay) and fly out in the morning.
 
BA
Posts: 10472
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:23 am

klm617 wrote:
I agree the IAF fallacy needs to stop it didn't stop CX and JL from adding flights that is an a.net myth that Delta itself spun as a reason for not internationally growing at SEA to Asia.


It's not a fallacy. The capacity constraints of the existing international arrivals facility are very real during peak hours at the airport.

I just flew in on Saturday on LH and unless you have Global Entry or Mobile Passport, you were being held in the hallway corridor because the passport control lines were jampacked. Luckily I have Global Entry, so I didn't have to wait, but I saw how crowded the lines and baggage claim area was.

CX is arriving in SEA at 9PM, a calm time for international arrivals, so they will not face any issues.

JL should be okay as long as it arrives on time to SEA, if it's late, it risks running into the peak traffic hours.

DL can add international flights into SEA, but is restricted in schedule flexibility of reliability at all times of the day until the new IAF opens next year.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:27 am

717atOGG wrote:
Not arguing with the SFO/LAX feed and SEA being smaller than that, but the amount of feed on the KIX end is almost nonexistent. For NH, there's only 9 unique destinations that can't already be reached nonstop from SFO, and for JL, only 4 that aren't nonstop from LAX.

The problems with SEA-KIX are the smaller local market, competition, and less feed, but there's still a reasonable amount of connections to a good portion of the country (LAX, SFO, SAN, DEN, LAS, ORD, and JFK, plus more). Not saying that this route will be a success right out of the gate, but it's not exactly doomed to fail either. Time will tell.


SFO has service to 77 North American cities on UA, LAX has service to 57 North American cities on AA, and SEA has service to 38 North American cities on DL.

For connections this means:

UA connects 77 North American cities to KIX with 1-stop service, 9 Japanese cities to SFO with 1-stop service thru KIX, and has the SFO-KIX direct market.

AA connects 57 North American cities to KIX with 1-stop service, 4 Japanese cities to LAX with 1-stop service thru KIX, and has the LAX-KIX direct market.

DL connects 38 North American cities to KIX with 1-stop service, 0 Japanese cities to SEA with 1-stop service thru KIX, and has the SEA-KIX direct market.

One of these will dominate and one will struggle to survive. DL might be better off flying DTW-KIX where they could offer some unique 1-stops that aren't available from the west coast. Or they might be better off bailing out of KIX altogether.
 
User avatar
SeaEagle8
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2018 8:59 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:39 am

This is an interesting thread to read.

There are rumours that QF may start flights to SEA from Australia.

Since the IAF seems to be constrained and not allowing DL to add international flights from SEA at the times they would need to operate an efficient hub, what would be other target destinations DL could consider from SEA? I just looked and saw there are daily flights to ICN, PEK and PVG on 767s and NRT on A350s. Since HKG was pulled, would that be an expected resumption if maybe an A350 were used? Any other viable targets?
NSW based avgeek
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:46 am

BA wrote:
It's not a fallacy. The capacity constraints of the existing international arrivals facility are very real during peak hours at the airport.

I just flew in on Saturday on LH and unless you have Global Entry or Mobile Passport, you were being held in the hallway corridor because the passport control lines were jampacked. Luckily I have Global Entry, so I didn't have to wait, but I saw how crowded the lines and baggage claim area was.

CX is arriving in SEA at 9PM, a calm time for international arrivals, so they will not face any issues.

JL should be okay as long as it arrives on time to SEA, if it's late, it risks running into the peak traffic hours.

DL can add international flights into SEA, but is restricted in schedule flexibility of reliability at all times of the day until the new IAF opens next year.


It's apparently not stopping other airlines from meeting demand. SEA's international arrivals were up 6% last year. They're up over 40% since 2014, around the time DL stopped growing over the Pacific and started blaming the IAF as the reason.

A poor arrivals experience isn't the same as not physically being able to meet growing demand. The evidence strongly points to it as an excuse.
 
EvanWSFO
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2018 9:22 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:55 am

klm617 wrote:
janders wrote:
Crazy. Wonder why DL ever opted to bring it back if its so marginal.

JL seems to be doing good on KIX-LAX. Its getting upgauged to 787-9 this year from -8.


To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


They aren't failing in SEA. KIX has been a black hole for virtually every airline that has tried it. Would it work if transferred to DTW?
I have been on this site 15 years. A unrecoverable email account led me to starting over. Those of you who call me a rookie, you may stop ok?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12506
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 8:30 am

IPFreely wrote:
JL has great feed in KIX

If by "great feed" you mean a grand total of 7 routes (excluding HNL and LAX), most of which require overflying TYO from the north.... then sure. :lol:



FA9295 wrote:
Delta doesn't have the 787, and if they did, then they'd probably still be flying the route.

Based on what?

787s are efficient, but they're made of plastic not magic... they still require revenue to exceed cost; and a new 787 (read that: "acquisition cost") versus a paid-off 77E or amortized A332, isn't likely to change the cost equation all THAT much, for a single route. If it was, then there's little chance DL would've turned them down.

SEA-HKG's problems were (1) SEA's comparatively small HK demand, (2) it attempted to supplement that with the also-comparatively-small demand of non-California US p.o.s. to HK and (3) California p.o.s. that didn't want to pay the yield for a nonstop. That's a tough proposition, and ultimately, a failed one.

CX will face a different set of factors, as it too will be chasing SEA's HK demand, but can supplement that with SEA's far more widespread travel to eastern, southeast, and south Asia in general. With no partner in HKG, DL didn't have that ability.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Oliver2020
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:39 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:17 am

LAX772LR wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
JL has great feed in KIX

If by "great feed" you mean a grand total of 7 routes (excluding HNL and LAX), most of which require overflying TYO from the north.... then sure. :lol:



FA9295 wrote:
Delta doesn't have the 787, and if they did, then they'd probably still be flying the route.

Based on what?

787s are efficient, but they're made of plastic not magic... they still require revenue to exceed cost; and a new 787 (read that: "acquisition cost") versus a paid-off 77E or amortized A332, isn't likely to change the cost equation all THAT much, for a single route. If it was, then there's little chance DL would've turned them down.

SEA-HKG's problems were (1) SEA's comparatively small HK demand, (2) it attempted to supplement that with the also-comparatively-small demand of non-California US p.o.s. to HK and (3) California p.o.s. that didn't want to pay the yield for a nonstop. That's a tough proposition, and ultimately, a failed one.

CX will face a different set of factors, as it too will be chasing SEA's HK demand, but can supplement that with SEA's far more widespread travel to eastern, southeast, and south Asia in general. With no partner in HKG, DL didn't have that ability.


I don't know much about running an airline but the former ceo Richard Anderson and the current ceo Ed Bastion do.
Ed knows which planes delta needs and I highly doubt he would have added 10 additional a330 neo to the previous order if the 787 would have been the better choice.

Just because the 787 works great for one airline doesn't mean it's perfect for Delta, and I'm sure the Delta has ran the numbers several times and they select the best aircraft for their missions.

As LAX772lr just posted acquisition cost are a big factor at Delta. If the route doesn't work with a paid off aircraft the price take it would take to purchase a new 787
( approximately 120 million dollars) isn't going to improve the revenue
Last edited by Oliver2020 on Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
TheEuphorian
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 9:35 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:48 am

leftcoast8 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

NGO never really filled up a 744. Toward the end, the MNL passengers did. But a smaller aircraft with no MNL tag probably always made sense; NW just didn't have the fleet to do that.


And that's another thing! There used to be plenty of service by legacy carriers from the U.S. mainland to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. All sorts of fifth-freedom hops across Asia that don't exist anymore. Heck, TG and CP flew SEA-BKK/YVR-BKK! What happened to U.S. mainland-SE Asia service?

Well, three things:
1. CZ,HU,MF,3U,HX,CA,MU all entered the TPAC market, increasing competition.
2. CP got swallowed up by AC and AC quickly terminated YVR-BKK after the merger.
3. TG's TPAC operations back then were flown by the 747, which is too large for the market.
 
SUNCTRY738
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 3:39 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:34 pm

klm617 wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
winginit wrote:
Something tells me that Delta isn't at all worried about giving off the impression that they're failing in SEA just because they cancelled one route.

Image

Knowing that profitability admittedly remains an unknown, does that SEA capacity graph look like failure to you?


Did you notice how DL buried the SEA-HKG cancellation behind the announcement of SEA-KIX? They were obviously trying to bury the bad news that the "industry leading global network" doesn't fly to the one of the top markets in the world. Now the bone is being trimmed before it starts.

Capacity =/= success or failure, and a graph of TPAC capacity yields a different picture. So far the SEA TPAC network has struggled to grow (or even maintain service levels), which was the context behind it.

BoeingGuy wrote:
Airlines are a business. They don’t add routes just to “throw a bone” or give an “impression”. They add route because they think they’ll make money.


Airlines absolutely throw bones at times or make impressions. The evidence was pretty clear that the restart of SEA-KIX was related to the loss of SEA-HKG. That's a bone.

There's also the possibility of JV capacity minimums to watch out for as well. I know that''s the case over the Atlantic.

winginit wrote:
As mentioned - IAF constraints that are particularly strained during TPAC banks.

Additionally, SEA-KIX was operated by DL as recently as 2014, so it has been attempted earlier.

Finally, Japan is within the scope of the DL/KE JV (Hong Kong is not, so SEA-HKG would have been excluded), so the back end financials are a whole new ballgame with profitability settled via transfer payments. Transfer payments can very quickly turn what was previously an nonviable route viable.


The IAF excuse needs to end its circulation.

The dynamics have changed--not the in the favor of flying SEA-KIX. SEA-KIX being part of the JV means that DL has even less incentive to fly the route. Routes like SEA-ICN-KIX is what the JV was made for.


I agree the IAF fallacy needs to stop it didn't stop CX and JL from adding flights that is an a.net myth that Delta itself spun as a reason for not internationally growing at SEA to Asia.


How about you two stop your constant DL fallacies! You both, you and MSPNWA, are ridiculous in your twisted slanted views against DL.

I say that with a bit of humor, but seriously, come on, DL has been by far the profitable major global US airline for sometime. They did a fantastic job by every financial and performance measure with the merger of NW. And they took a risky move in building a new Paciific NW hub in SEA. And it has worked for them. If DL was so worried about making an "impression" regarding the success of SEA, wouldn't they have continued flying SEA-HKG at a loss?
 
SUNCTRY738
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 3:39 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:43 pm

I actually think DL could make the 787 work well in their fleet and if Boeing makes a great offer as the ramp up 787 production, I can still see DL adding 787 aircraft to their fleet. Especially as the IAF project inches closer to being completed. They will have the extra gate space in both SEA and LAX after 2020-2023 for some additional long-thin routes that the 787 would be the perfect aircraft for including SIN and a return to HKG.

Speaking of the SEA IAF, anyone have any first hand updates on the project status?
 
tphuang
Posts: 3247
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:48 pm

SUNCTRY738 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:

Did you notice how DL buried the SEA-HKG cancellation behind the announcement of SEA-KIX? They were obviously trying to bury the bad news that the "industry leading global network" doesn't fly to the one of the top markets in the world. Now the bone is being trimmed before it starts.

Capacity =/= success or failure, and a graph of TPAC capacity yields a different picture. So far the SEA TPAC network has struggled to grow (or even maintain service levels), which was the context behind it.



Airlines absolutely throw bones at times or make impressions. The evidence was pretty clear that the restart of SEA-KIX was related to the loss of SEA-HKG. That's a bone.

There's also the possibility of JV capacity minimums to watch out for as well. I know that''s the case over the Atlantic.



The IAF excuse needs to end its circulation.

The dynamics have changed--not the in the favor of flying SEA-KIX. SEA-KIX being part of the JV means that DL has even less incentive to fly the route. Routes like SEA-ICN-KIX is what the JV was made for.


I agree the IAF fallacy needs to stop it didn't stop CX and JL from adding flights that is an a.net myth that Delta itself spun as a reason for not internationally growing at SEA to Asia.


How about you two stop your constant DL fallacies! You both, you and MSPNWA, are ridiculous in your twisted slanted views against DL.

I say that with a bit of humor, but seriously, come on, DL has been by far the profitable major global US airline for sometime. They did a fantastic job by every financial and performance measure with the merger of NW. And they took a risky move in building a new Paciific NW hub in SEA. And it has worked for them. If DL was so worried about making an "impression" regarding the success of SEA, wouldn't they have continued flying SEA-HKG at a loss?


DL has added a bunch of routes at SEA and most of them are vastly underperforming vs rest of their system. Looking at their yield gap vs AS at SEA, it hasn't really moved much in the past year or so. So there is basically no path for them to become more profitable at SEA unless AS implodes. I don't see how they took a "risky move" and it has "worked for them". They squeeze every bit of profit out of MSP and DTW possible and have thrown a chunk of that at SEA. It made no sense for them to just sit on that level of profit without investing. So they made a move makes sense and it worked out about as one would expect. I don't think they are over or under performing expectations. If AA had the same resources and made the same move, it would most likely have yielded about the same results. SEA is certainly not turning out ot be a major TPAC hub for them given that their TPAC strategy is to go through ICN. TPAC as a whole is a huge low yielding quagmire. Going through ICN allows them to at least do well on the Korean bound traffic. They are likely to be not doing great to every other major markets in Asia though.
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:57 pm

tphuang wrote:
SUNCTRY738 wrote:
klm617 wrote:

I agree the IAF fallacy needs to stop it didn't stop CX and JL from adding flights that is an a.net myth that Delta itself spun as a reason for not internationally growing at SEA to Asia.


How about you two stop your constant DL fallacies! You both, you and MSPNWA, are ridiculous in your twisted slanted views against DL.

I say that with a bit of humor, but seriously, come on, DL has been by far the profitable major global US airline for sometime. They did a fantastic job by every financial and performance measure with the merger of NW. And they took a risky move in building a new Paciific NW hub in SEA. And it has worked for them. If DL was so worried about making an "impression" regarding the success of SEA, wouldn't they have continued flying SEA-HKG at a loss?


DL has added a bunch of routes at SEA and most of them are vastly underperforming vs rest of their system. Looking at their yield gap vs AS at SEA, it hasn't really moved much in the past year or so. So there is basically no path for them to become more profitable at SEA unless AS implodes. I don't see how they took a "risky move" and it has "worked for them". They squeeze every bit of profit out of MSP and DTW possible and have thrown a chunk of that at SEA. It made no sense for them to just sit on that level of profit without investing. So they made a move makes sense and it worked out about as one would expect. I don't think they are over or under performing expectations. If AA had the same resources and made the same move, it would most likely have yielded about the same results. SEA is certainly not turning out ot be a major TPAC hub for them given that their TPAC strategy is to go through ICN. TPAC as a whole is a huge low yielding quagmire. Going through ICN allows them to at least do well on the Korean bound traffic. They are likely to be not doing great to every other major markets in Asia though.


I’ll agree with you here, the SEA hub is probably not profitable but considered a work in progress by DL. Long term, I doubt SEA will be able to support two large hubs.
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:59 pm

TheEuphorian wrote:
leftcoast8 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

NGO never really filled up a 744. Toward the end, the MNL passengers did. But a smaller aircraft with no MNL tag probably always made sense; NW just didn't have the fleet to do that.


And that's another thing! There used to be plenty of service by legacy carriers from the U.S. mainland to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. All sorts of fifth-freedom hops across Asia that don't exist anymore. Heck, TG and CP flew SEA-BKK/YVR-BKK! What happened to U.S. mainland-SE Asia service?

Well, three things:
1. CZ,HU,MF,3U,HX,CA,MU all entered the TPAC market, increasing competition.
2. CP got swallowed up by AC and AC quickly terminated YVR-BKK after the merger.
3. TG's TPAC operations back then were flown by the 747, which is too large for the market.


TG's service to CONUS was never all that profitable (if it ever make any money, that is) anyway. High cost of flying ULH flights with low yields = a financial disaster in the making.

LAX772LR wrote:
If by "great feed" you mean a grand total of 7 routes (excluding HNL and LAX), most of which require overflying TYO from the north.... then sure.


More like zero connection (Ok, 1, to OKA) as all the JL flights, and flights that codeshare with JL out of KIX (CX, MU, KE, etc.) doesn't connect to the LAX flight.

That flight is for O&D from Osaka to CONUS (LA and beyond), nothing more.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
SEA
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:21 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:10 pm

klm617 wrote:
To throw SEA and bone for ending SEA-HKG Delta doesn't want to give the impression it is failing in SEA.


Airlines are businesses. They aren't going to start a route to "throw a bone" or give an "impression." They see a market so they are going with it. SEA-HKG didn't work, mainly because of the aircraft DL had available for the route.
 
raylee67
Posts: 703
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:35 pm

It's quite incredible that DL cannot make KIX-SEA work, whereas AC seems to be quite successful in YVR-KIX, which started with Rouge seasonally first, then quickly upgraded to all-year, and now it's on mainline, which means AC is even seeing high-yield passengers who are willing to pay for real business class.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:39 pm

raylee67 wrote:
It's quite incredible that DL cannot make KIX-SEA work, whereas AC seems to be quite successful in YVR-KIX, which started with Rouge seasonally first, then quickly upgraded to all-year, and now it's on mainline, which means AC is even seeing high-yield passengers who are willing to pay for real business class.


YVR-KIX is still seasonal AFAIK, although it was moved to mainline as AC wanted to focus Rouge operation at YYZ and YUL. Meanwhile YVR-NGO (Which was also seasonal) is not returning this year, so not everything is working 100% well for AC, either.

P.S. As mentioned many times, DL just doesn't have a large long-haul fleet compare to UA and AA. Their "workhorse" A333 (along with B763/764) is range-limited on TPAC, and they simply doesn't have enough A359 yet. That greatly limited their options on SEA-HKG.
Last edited by zakuivcustom on Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:44 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1173
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:07 pm

Alliances. DL SEA-KIX struggled due to no Japanese partner.

Ref. AC YVR-KIX, AC is in Star, which has ANA as a member.

Ref. SEA-HKG, DL had no alliance partner in HKG to feed them traffic. They don't throw good money after bad for prestige.

DL is relatively weak in the Pacific vis a vis UAL and AA because those airlines have Japanese partners, not because of mismanagement or hatred of all things NWA. The real ? is when or if their existing alliance partners/network will provide enough customers at high enough yields to facilitate growth in the Pacific. In the meantime, they continue minting $$ with the rest of their network, continue smashing UAL and AA operationally and in customer service scores, and slowly rebuild the fleet (the 350 burns almost 50% less block fuel than a 744, the 330neo is much more efficient than the legacy NWA 330s).
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:21 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Alliances. DL SEA-KIX struggled due to no Japanese partner.


The route haven't even started yet and people are already saying that it "struggled" :banghead:
tphuang wrote:
DL has added a bunch of routes at SEA and most of them are vastly underperforming vs rest of their system. Looking at their yield gap vs AS at SEA, it hasn't really moved much in the past year or so. So there is basically no path for them to become more profitable at SEA unless AS implodes. I don't see how they took a "risky move" and it has "worked for them". They squeeze every bit of profit out of MSP and DTW possible and have thrown a chunk of that at SEA. It made no sense for them to just sit on that level of profit without investing. So they made a move makes sense and it worked out about as one would expect. I don't think they are over or under performing expectations. If AA had the same resources and made the same move, it would most likely have yielded about the same results. SEA is certainly not turning out ot be a major TPAC hub for them given that their TPAC strategy is to go through ICN. TPAC as a whole is a huge low yielding quagmire. Going through ICN allows them to at least do well on the Korean bound traffic. They are likely to be not doing great to every other major markets in Asia though.


Umm...MU investment and that PVG hub is there and plays a huge role for Delta in mainland PRC.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!

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