SteelChair
Posts: 1229
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:30 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
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:


Semantics. If i said future bookings were weak, would that be more accurate? Bottom line is that they could see it wasnt gonna be profitable.
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:18 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.


I think it's perfectly understandable. AC has the Canada-KIX market, while probably small, completely to themselves. Very few people will transit in the US en route from Canada to Japan. And AC is a Star Alliance partner with feed from NH and onward connections with NH in KIX.

In the US, DL is fighting a losing battle. UA (SFO) and AA (LAX) likely have much more O/D traffic to KIX than DL (SEA). Both UA and AA connect far more US cities to KIX with 1-stop service than DL does. And UA and AA have feed from and connections with partner airlines in KIX; DL does not.

The handwriting on the wall is clear. DL has put all their eggs in the "connect to Asia in ICN" basket. Their days in KIX are numbered.
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:23 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
The route haven't even started yet and people are already saying that it "struggled" :banghead:


Technically the route has started, failed, started again, and failed again, before this "start". Since nothing has changed that would suggest a different outcome this time, I think "struggled" is an appropriate term.
 
klm617
Posts: 4625
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 4:30 pm

Everyone knew this route was a dud from the start just like DTW-HNL and the impending new BOM route. They really added the only thing they could reach that could be done with their smallest aircraft in the hopes that it would work. Again I know a lot won't agree but they gambled with this to take attention away from them ending SEA-HKG. Now I never said SEA was failing but by adding a new international route while taking one away minimizes the negativity of the situation and as we all know Delta likes to put it self out there in a most positive way even when they are doing something that is going to negatively impact the market they are serving.
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: 2593
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:29 pm

klm617 wrote:
Again I know a lot won't agree but they gambled with this to take attention away from them ending SEA-HKG.


So what you're saying is that the sole reason DL launched SEA-KIX, a route that they've served for years at a time in the past without a JV and are now able to serve under the umbrella of JV scope, is because they wanted to soften the blow of cancelling SEA-HKG? You believe that? That's nonsense.

MSPNWA wrote:
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.


You have a poor understanding of JV economics if you think a route like SEA-KIX (or BOS-ICN for KE) isn't more viable for the operating carrier under a JV umbrella. Profits (and losses) are shared on the back end and split by density adjusted ASMs. Thus, having more skin in the game from a capacity standpoint increases the share of distributed scope profitability, and routes that are otherwise lackluster and even loss-making can be made whole via a transfer payment with the benefit being that the JV otherwise wouldn't serve the market. These mechanics couldn't be applied to SEA-HKG because as there is no Open Skies agreement between Hong Kong and the United States, HKG is not included within the DL/KE JV scope. That being the case, yes, it's probably no coincidence that a route that could not be included in JV scope was dropped to re-start a route that is now included in JV scope.
Last edited by winginit on Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:41 pm, edited 5 times in total.
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 487
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:43 pm

See DL keep advertising the new route in Osaka by TV and Bus stop, which never see before in Hong Kong
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:07 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
Umm...MU investment and that PVG hub is there and plays a huge role for Delta in mainland PRC.


The KE JV and ICN operation is DL's biggest asset in terms of servicing interior China.
 
leftcoast8
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:59 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:12 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
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.


YVR-FRA-DXB on Lufthansa can be $500 CAD cheaper R/T than flying out of SEA on the nonstop Emirates flight. How does the direct flight cost more than connecting through Europe?!

YVR-SIN is $200-300 R/T cheaper through China/Taiwan than via the nonstop SQ flight out of Sea-Tac (UA out of SFO is even cheaper, but I refuse out of principle to subject myself to U.S. customs preclearance)
Last edited by leftcoast8 on Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
winginit
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:12 pm

UA772IAD wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
Umm...MU investment and that PVG hub is there and plays a huge role for Delta in mainland PRC.


The KE JV and ICN operation is DL's biggest asset in terms of servicing interior China.


Is it? China is excluded from JV scope due to the lack of Open Skies, and as US carriers aren't permitted to place their code on non-CN carriers into China you can't even have the DL*KE ICN-CTU for example that would be necessary for proper through pricing. Thus, in the GDS, options would likely appear in the following order assuming all else is equal on the availability/pricing/trip time fronts (which is admittedly a big assumption):

Example NDOD: LAX to CTU

1. DL LAXPVG connecting to DL*MU PVGCTU
2. DL*MU LAXPVG connecting to DL*MU PVGCTU
3. (tie) DL*MU LAXPVG connecting to MU PVGCTU
3. (tie) DL*KE LAXICN connecting to KE ICNCTU
Last edited by winginit on Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:18 pm, edited 5 times in total.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:12 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
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.


4 flights a day just up the road between YVR-HKG probably didn't help matters either.
 
BA
Posts: 10474
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:32 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
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.


You didn't read my post.

MSPNWA wrote:
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.


A poor arrivals experience is very relevant for DL, if it cares about satisfied customers making onward connections in SEA.

If a flight arrives during peak hours, and passengers are held in the hallway for 30 minutes to 1 hour before being allowed to queue up for passport control, it's likely many that have tight connections will miss their connections and DL will have to make accommodations to rebook them.

DL, more than any other airline that serves SEA, is affected the most by the congestion of the current IAF facility, due to the operational difficulties it causes of missed connections and onward connections for its customers.

For other airlines that rely little on onward connections, there isn't as much at stake for them.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2848
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 7:50 pm

UA772IAD wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
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.


4 flights a day just up the road between YVR-HKG probably didn't help matters either.


And CX have no problem announcing SEA-HKG literally a week after DL announce that they're ending that flight. So there's definitely a market.

UA772IAD wrote:
The KE JV and ICN operation is DL's biggest asset in terms of servicing interior China.


It's not. DL is clearly trying to focus their China traffic at PVG. Why else would they restart ATL-PVG (for the 3rd time) and trying to start MSP-PVG otherwise?
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3498
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 8:26 pm

BA wrote:
You didn't read my post.

A poor arrivals experience is very relevant for DL, if it cares about satisfied customers making onward connections in SEA.

If a flight arrives during peak hours, and passengers are held in the hallway for 30 minutes to 1 hour before being allowed to queue up for passport control, it's likely many that have tight connections will miss their connections and DL will have to make accommodations to rebook them.

DL, more than any other airline that serves SEA, is affected the most by the congestion of the current IAF facility, due to the operational difficulties it causes of missed connections and onward connections for its customers.

For other airlines that rely little on onward connections, there isn't as much at stake for them.


I read your post. The evidence doesn't support it.

winginit wrote:
You have a poor understanding of JV economics if you think a route like SEA-KIX (or BOS-ICN for KE) isn't more viable for the operating carrier under a JV umbrella. Profits (and losses) are shared on the back end and split by density adjusted ASMs. Thus, having more skin in the game from a capacity standpoint increases the share of distributed scope profitability, and routes that are otherwise lackluster and even loss-making can be made whole via a transfer payment with the benefit being that the JV otherwise wouldn't serve the market. These mechanics couldn't be applied to SEA-HKG because as there is no Open Skies agreement between Hong Kong and the United States, HKG is not included within the DL/KE JV scope. That being the case, yes, it's probably no coincidence that a route that could not be included in JV scope was dropped to re-start a route that is now included in JV scope.


How is SEA-KIX more viable for DL to operate under a JV? Have you seen what has happened with DL's JVs in Europe? Is DL flying to more secondary spokes in Europe that are covered by AMS and CDG?

Secondary markets like KIX are exactly what this JV was designed to cover. DL now gets their full share of revenue for a customer flying XXX-ICN-KIX no matter the carrier. Before that wasn't the case, and instead DL had to take the full cost of SEA-KIX to earn the associated revenue. There's less incentive to fly SEA-KIX when additional customers can be flown through ICN at a low marginal cost. For SEA-KIX to make sense, the same revenue stream as before now has to cover the additional cost of flying directly to it instead of the low cost of adding capacity over ICN. The economics are even worse for DL. There's even less incentive. That may still mean that DL will fly the route, but the long-term outlook is even worse than before.
 
BA
Posts: 10474
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:04 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
BA wrote:
You didn't read my post.

A poor arrivals experience is very relevant for DL, if it cares about satisfied customers making onward connections in SEA.

If a flight arrives during peak hours, and passengers are held in the hallway for 30 minutes to 1 hour before being allowed to queue up for passport control, it's likely many that have tight connections will miss their connections and DL will have to make accommodations to rebook them.

DL, more than any other airline that serves SEA, is affected the most by the congestion of the current IAF facility, due to the operational difficulties it causes of missed connections and onward connections for its customers.

For other airlines that rely little on onward connections, there isn't as much at stake for them.


I read your post. The evidence doesn't support it.


What evidence are you talking about? The evidence of queues and backups resulting in long immigration processing times at Sea-Tac's crowded IAF during mid-day peak hours?

This is not fiction, this is actually happening, and I experienced it myself this past Saturday. Two flights were held in the hallway of the South Satellite including the flight I arrived on.

Like I said in my original post, off-peak hours are not an issue. It's the mid-day peak hours, and if one or two international flights from earlier in the morning are delayed and end up arriving during this mid-day peak hour period, it only exasperates the problem.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/sea-ta ... /724529811

At midday, almost every day, Sea-Tac Airport's passport control is jammed.

Airline schedules mean many planes from overseas arrive at nearly the same time.

"We are over capacity for that time of day," said Mark Wilkerson, Seattle Area port director for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Luggage carousels for customs in the 43-year-old facility are so overcrowded, the airport pays workers just to move bags to make room.

Miguel Vilar flew in from Paris, and had to wait in a crowded corridor before even reaching passport control.

The airport holds people in a hallway between the gate and passport control to manage congestion.


This is not a good situation for an airline that cares about onward connections from its international flights.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
winginit
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:46 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
How is SEA-KIX more viable for DL to operate under a JV? Have you seen what has happened with DL's JVs in Europe? Is DL flying to more secondary spokes in Europe that are covered by AMS and CDG?

Secondary markets like KIX are exactly what this JV was designed to cover. DL now gets their full share of revenue for a customer flying XXX-ICN-KIX no matter the carrier. Before that wasn't the case, and instead DL had to take the full cost of SEA-KIX to earn the associated revenue. There's less incentive to fly SEA-KIX when additional customers can be flown through ICN at a low marginal cost. For SEA-KIX to make sense, the same revenue stream as before now has to cover the additional cost of flying directly to it instead of the low cost of adding capacity over ICN. The economics are even worse for DL. There's even less incentive. That may still mean that DL will fly the route, but the long-term outlook is even worse than before.


Have you checked out a map recently? While your logic holds up for secondary Asian destinations that are logical flows over ICN, KIX is a two-hour backtrack from ICN; and thus DL clearly finds it worthwhile to serve the destination nonstop from SEA at least seasonally. With that in mind and under the assumption that SEA-KIX was in the past loss-making when previously operated, those losses now being able to be split with / subsidized by KE improves the financial standing of the route.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3498
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:55 pm

winginit wrote:
Have you checked out a map recently? While your logic holds up for secondary Asian destinations that are logical flows over ICN, KIX is a two-hour backtrack from ICN; and thus DL clearly finds it worthwhile to serve the destination nonstop from SEA at least seasonally. With that in mind and under the assumption that SEA-KIX was in the past loss-making when previously operated, those losses now being able to be split with / subsidized by KE improves the financial standing of the route.


Do you honestly think that customers don't backtrack? What do you think DL customers are doing right know when they fly to KIX? The Europe JVs are filled with routes that backtrack to large secondary cities. Same with DL's domestic hubs. It's not ideal, but often it's the best option. That option now exists for DL to earn full revenue on.

Splitting losses now makes a route viable in the long-run? That's a new one. I thought DL doesn't fly routes that lose money...
 
klm617
Posts: 4625
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:11 pm

BA wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
BA wrote:
You didn't read my post.

A poor arrivals experience is very relevant for DL, if it cares about satisfied customers making onward connections in SEA.

If a flight arrives during peak hours, and passengers are held in the hallway for 30 minutes to 1 hour before being allowed to queue up for passport control, it's likely many that have tight connections will miss their connections and DL will have to make accommodations to rebook them.

DL, more than any other airline that serves SEA, is affected the most by the congestion of the current IAF facility, due to the operational difficulties it causes of missed connections and onward connections for its customers.

For other airlines that rely little on onward connections, there isn't as much at stake for them.


I read your post. The evidence doesn't support it.


What evidence are you talking about? The evidence of queues and backups resulting in long immigration processing times at Sea-Tac's crowded IAF during mid-day peak hours?

This is not fiction, this is actually happening, and I experienced it myself this past Saturday. Two flights were held in the hallway of the South Satellite including the flight I arrived on.

Like I said in my original post, off-peak hours are not an issue. It's the mid-day peak hours, and if one or two international flights from earlier in the morning are delayed and end up arriving during this mid-day peak hour period, it only exasperates the problem.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/sea-ta ... /724529811

At midday, almost every day, Sea-Tac Airport's passport control is jammed.

Airline schedules mean many planes from overseas arrive at nearly the same time.

"We are over capacity for that time of day," said Mark Wilkerson, Seattle Area port director for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Luggage carousels for customs in the 43-year-old facility are so overcrowded, the airport pays workers just to move bags to make room.

Miguel Vilar flew in from Paris, and had to wait in a crowded corridor before even reaching passport control.

The airport holds people in a hallway between the gate and passport control to manage congestion.


This is not a good situation for an airline that cares about onward connections from its international flights.


While all that may be true that doesn't or hasn't stopped anyone else from adding international flights out of SEA. Delta just choses not to and uses that as it's excuse for not expanding their international offerings to Asia from 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...
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4683
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:28 pm

Please keep this thread on topic. The same small group of posters is taking this thread very far off topic. If this continues, warnings and/or bans will be issued.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
winginit
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:49 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Splitting losses now makes a route viable in the long-run? That's a new one. I thought DL doesn't fly routes that lose money...


I certainly didn't say that. Did you think that? DL very obviously flies numerous routes that lose money year after year but they maintain for strategic purposes. They're certainly not alone, and I would argue that SEA-KIX is in that category.
 
n7371f
Posts: 1588
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:10 am

The current set-up at S doesn't allow DL to add anything Intl that would fit within the structure of its hub. Could they add a nonstop at 2300? Sure. But for the time(s) that DL projects additional Intl service, there isn't space. With that, who knows what will happen in 2 years. DL is clearly building its Asian hub in Seoul. SEA still plays into their plans but given the added competition it could derail their plans from a few years back.

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.
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:35 am

BA wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
BA wrote:
You didn't read my post.

A poor arrivals experience is very relevant for DL, if it cares about satisfied customers making onward connections in SEA.

If a flight arrives during peak hours, and passengers are held in the hallway for 30 minutes to 1 hour before being allowed to queue up for passport control, it's likely many that have tight connections will miss their connections and DL will have to make accommodations to rebook them.

DL, more than any other airline that serves SEA, is affected the most by the congestion of the current IAF facility, due to the operational difficulties it causes of missed connections and onward connections for its customers.

For other airlines that rely little on onward connections, there isn't as much at stake for them.


I read your post. The evidence doesn't support it.


What evidence are you talking about? The evidence of queues and backups resulting in long immigration processing times at Sea-Tac's crowded IAF during mid-day peak hours?

This is not fiction, this is actually happening, and I experienced it myself this past Saturday. Two flights were held in the hallway of the South Satellite including the flight I arrived on.

Like I said in my original post, off-peak hours are not an issue. It's the mid-day peak hours, and if one or two international flights from earlier in the morning are delayed and end up arriving during this mid-day peak hour period, it only exasperates the problem.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/sea-ta ... /724529811

At midday, almost every day, Sea-Tac Airport's passport control is jammed.

Airline schedules mean many planes from overseas arrive at nearly the same time.

"We are over capacity for that time of day," said Mark Wilkerson, Seattle Area port director for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Luggage carousels for customs in the 43-year-old facility are so overcrowded, the airport pays workers just to move bags to make room.

Miguel Vilar flew in from Paris, and had to wait in a crowded corridor before even reaching passport control.

The airport holds people in a hallway between the gate and passport control to manage congestion.


This is not a good situation for an airline that cares about onward connections from its international flights.


The idea that the FIS has prevented DL from expanding its network is false. Do you really think DL said in a planning meeting ‘we think SIN would do very well for us, but we’ll let SQ develope the route instead and sign all the corporate contracts because we believe the overcrowded FIS will create a negative impression with our consumers that we don’t want?’

KIX has been a dud for years, and it was only recently that UA and JL found some level of success. Even AC operated it seasonally via Rouge. DL May have been too late to the game.
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
BTV290
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:33 pm

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:30 am

MSPNWA wrote:

The idea that the FIS has prevented DL from expanding its network is false. Do you really think DL said in a planning meeting ‘we think SIN would do very well for us, but we’ll let SQ develope the route instead and sign all the corporate contracts because we believe the overcrowded FIS will create a negative impression with our consumers that we don’t want?’

KIX has been a dud for years, and it was only recently that UA and JL found some level of success. Even AC operated it seasonally via Rouge. DL May have been too late to the game.


I don't think that's how the conversation went. I do think it could have gone "SIN would do very well for us, but at the time we'd have to operate it, in order to actually get enough connecting traffic onto it to make any sort of money, we can't fit it into the FIS..." We're seeing pax every day miss their connections due to the poor FIS situation. During peak travel in the summer, when there are few seats available to book protection for those pax who do misconnect, then you're paying out hotels as well, because the next available seat to their destination is the next day. It's hard to emphasise enough how bad the situation is between like 11am and 3pm.

That being said--I don't think SIN would have ever been on DL's radar, and I think KIX will be a one-season-wonder, as well.
 
717atOGG
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:10 am

Re: DL already ending SEA-KIX?

Sat Feb 09, 2019 6:35 pm

Looks like KIX-SEA will be seasonal, according to this DL newsletter about SEA.

http://deltaupandaway.com/sea-winter-2019/5/
Long live the Boeing 757!

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