SunsetLimited wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Nola wrote:

I agree with you. My point is that the definition of focus city can't just mean frequency of flights to hubs... there has to be something else to it, either P2P or a much larger number of flights or both.

As for proximity to ATL, I agree with you on that also, but note that the distance between DFW-MSY and ATL-MSY is about the same and AA has ramped up considerably and has TATL service through the JV with BA. DL is falling behind. Admittedly, we are just a backward convention city, not a fast growing future tech behemoth.

Problem with MSY is that there are 11 daily flights to ATL on large narrow-bodies, and not much after that: BOS/SEA is seasonal weekend only, MSP is once daily, RDU is weekend only, and CVG is not served.

To me it appears DL wants to funnel as much traffic as possible on MSY-ATL, at the expense of nonstop service to some of their larger stations/hubs

You are missing the 3 daily LAX, 3 daily JFK, 3 daily LGA, 3 daily DTW, daily SLC, and weekly seasonal CUN. Just FYI.

One would think 3x or more service to 5 hubs would be a focus city . .

ucdtim17 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

SANFan wrote:

Oh come on now 'Tim'. What kind of logic is that?! Oh yeah, sensible and undoubtedly correct, that's what kind! (But does that have any place on A.net?)

Also BoeingGuy, we need to remember that when AA apparently had 4x flights on that route, SJC was a hub for the carrier. The DOT pax traffic reported for 3Q2018 (summer) for the BOS-SJC market was 198 PDEW; for 1Q18 (winter), the figure was 125 PDEW. That's not a huge amount of O&D traffic.

bb

Right. You also know the PDEW is skewed because of leakage to SFO. Just because 125 people travel from SJC-BOS doesn’t mean there isn’t demand for more. There could be many people going to SFO due to lack of options from SJC.

They by both of your logic, an airline should never add a new route? After all, if there was demand someone would already be flying it.

I am sensitive to your latter point and often make it myself. In this case, the flights exist at SFO and the airlines that fly them are unlikely to voluntarily give up market share there to move flights to a secondary airport, where they will still be competing with the cheap SFO flights and therefore likely lose money. If we were starting from scratch, OAK and SJC both likely have demand for multiple BOS flights, but not when there is an existing surplus of supply at SFO.

Does DL fly SFO-BOS?

AirFiero wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

Right. You also know the PDEW is skewed because of leakage to SFO. Just because 125 people travel from SJC-BOS doesn’t mean there isn’t demand for more. There could be many people going to SFO due to lack of options from SJC.

They by both of your logic, an airline should never add a new route? After all, if there was demand someone would already be flying it.

I am sensitive to your latter point and often make it myself. In this case, the flights exist at SFO and the airlines that fly them are unlikely to voluntarily give up market share there to move flights to a secondary airport, where they will still be competing with the cheap SFO flights and therefore likely lose money. If we were starting from scratch, OAK and SJC both likely have demand for multiple BOS flights, but not when there is an existing surplus of supply at SFO.

Does DL fly SFO-BOS?

2x daily. Started as Delta One in 2017 but that ended a year later because they were losing money selling it for $399, $499 on the route.

ucdtim17 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

I am sensitive to your latter point and often make it myself. In this case, the flights exist at SFO and the airlines that fly them are unlikely to voluntarily give up market share there to move flights to a secondary airport, where they will still be competing with the cheap SFO flights and therefore likely lose money. If we were starting from scratch, OAK and SJC both likely have demand for multiple BOS flights, but not when there is an existing surplus of supply at SFO.

Does DL fly SFO-BOS?

2x daily. Started as Delta One in 2017 but that ended a year later because they were losing money selling it for $399, $499 on the route.

To clarify the wording, DL still flies the route. Only the Delta One service was ended. B6 and UA made it pretty hard for DL on SFO-BOS and still do. For a while UA was throwing 777s into the rotation to flood the route with even more capacity.

MIflyer12 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

I can see DL adding the following routes from SJC:
AUS (320), DEN (738), DFW (220), BOS (757), ORD (738), SAN (E75), PDX (E75) and HNL (757).

SJC-ORD isn't coming any time soon. DL doesn't even fly LAX-ORD. I don't think they'll try Hawaii from SJC, in the near-term, either. There's a LOT of Bay Area-Hawaii capacity.

If they do any Hawaii from SJC, I would expect it to be the relocation of the SFO-HNL flight it operates seasonally during peak times. Otherwise DL would be going head to head with AS, HA and WN which I can’t imagine is a winning proposition outside of peak travel.

77H

'tim'.

I, as my screen name might imply, am very familiar with leakage to a mega-airport to the north! And I am also quite familiar with underserved airports. My airport has (finally) reached a point where I feel service (and competition) exist at decent levels. But then we expect to see at least 25M pax this year at SAN!

However, BoeingGuy, when the demand (and yields) get to a certain point, then additional (or new) service will be added. (And btw, I honestly don't think AA has any intention of beginning p-2-p service out of SJC (to BOS or anywhere else.) You and I both know that for the most part, AA doesn't do p-2-p flying.

With DL and this whole "focus city' designation, who knows what that means and what sort of new routes SJC might see? If Delta feels the business is there, and they can (and want to) grab all those SJC-area residents who like the variety of offerings out of that big airport 30 miles away, then DL should add a flight between their newest hub, BOS, and one of their newest focus cities.

But I would expect B6 goes thru the same thought processes. The cx may very well have better opportunities elsewhere that don't have 2 other major airports 30-40 miles away!
And that's why they still offer just a single flight to BOS.

bb

jagraham wrote:

Nola wrote:

jagraham wrote:

DL views focus cities as having frequent service to most hubs. P2P doesn't factor into Delta calculations.

By that measure, wouldn't MSY be a focus city? It has multi-frequencies to all hubs except SEA.... DL is falling behind, though, as AA is now the largest legacy carrier at MSY and UA is building a club that will be larger than DL's SkyClub, which I guess means they intend to add service once the new terminal opens.

The problem with Delta is that they are ignoring the most important opinions in the world - that of a.net posters. Obviously Delta's decision making is horribly deficient.

Back to the real world, from the Delta S19 Departures thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1420613&hilit=delta+departures&start=50
MSY is the 24th largest non-hub station by departures, with 25 daily departures



So unfortunately MSY has to wait a bit before getting promoted. Proximity to ATL doesn't help either.

By no means should MSY come to being close to being called a focus city. But why aren't focus cities shearly not based off of departures. I can see how BNA fits, but why are AUS and SJC defined as focus cities if the likes of ORD, DCA, SFO have more departues

jagraham wrote:

SunsetLimited wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Problem with MSY is that there are 11 daily flights to ATL on large narrow-bodies, and not much after that: BOS/SEA is seasonal weekend only, MSP is once daily, RDU is weekend only, and CVG is not served.

To me it appears DL wants to funnel as much traffic as possible on MSY-ATL, at the expense of nonstop service to some of their larger stations/hubs

You are missing the 3 daily LAX, 3 daily JFK, 3 daily LGA, 3 daily DTW, daily SLC, and weekly seasonal CUN. Just FYI.

One would think 3x or more service to 5 hubs would be a focus city . .

That's a pretty low bar..... 3x daily service to 5 hubs is 15 daily flights.....

Midwestindy wrote:

jagraham wrote:

SunsetLimited wrote:

You are missing the 3 daily LAX, 3 daily JFK, 3 daily LGA, 3 daily DTW, daily SLC, and weekly seasonal CUN. Just FYI.

One would think 3x or more service to 5 hubs would be a focus city . .

That's a pretty low bar..... 3x daily service to 5 hubs is 15 daily flights.....

Yes. But like MSY, there will be a hub or two with much more than 3 flights. MSY has 11 flights to ATL at this time; add 12 flights to 4 other hubs and 1 flight to 2 hubs, you have 25 flights. Which is what MSY has. Nothing but hubs. It is interesting that DL doesn't even do P2P to DFW, IAH, or AUS.

I hope DL adds BNA-IND.

jagraham wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

jagraham wrote:

One would think 3x or more service to 5 hubs would be a focus city . .

That's a pretty low bar..... 3x daily service to 5 hubs is 15 daily flights.....

Yes. But like MSY, there will be a hub or two with much more than 3 flights. MSY has 11 flights to ATL at this time; add 12 flights to 4 other hubs and 1 flight to 2 hubs, you have 25 flights. Which is what MSY has. Nothing but hubs. It is interesting that DL doesn't even do P2P to DFW, IAH, or AUS.

It might make sense to fly MSY-AUS. IAH and DFW are well served by UA and AA and both metros have multiple WN flights as well. If AUS does turn into a DL hub, frequent flights to MSY would open up a lot of the west and PNW in a much more convenient routing (similar to the way DL's DFW hub worked before it was closed), but that will likely be years away.

msyjay wrote:

jagraham wrote:

Nola wrote:

By that measure, wouldn't MSY be a focus city? It has multi-frequencies to all hubs except SEA.... DL is falling behind, though, as AA is now the largest legacy carrier at MSY and UA is building a club that will be larger than DL's SkyClub, which I guess means they intend to add service once the new terminal opens.

The problem with Delta is that they are ignoring the most important opinions in the world - that of a.net posters. Obviously Delta's decision making is horribly deficient.

Back to the real world, from the Delta S19 Departures thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1420613&hilit=delta+departures&start=50
MSY is the 24th largest non-hub station by departures, with 25 daily departures



So unfortunately MSY has to wait a bit before getting promoted. Proximity to ATL doesn't help either.

By no means should MSY come to being close to being called a focus city. But why aren't focus cities shearly not based off of departures. I can see how BNA fits, but why are AUS and SJC defined as focus cities if the likes of ORD, DCA, SFO have more departues

As eloquently explained by jetatlanta, above, focus city is not really about the number of departures. Instead it’s about where DL is focused on growth. People are reading WAY too much into defining a focus city.

southwest1675 wrote:

I hope DL adds BNA-IND.

It would be a good way for Republic to cycle it's Jungle Jets thru the Embraer facility in Nashville.

Cactusjuba wrote:

Fargo wrote:

Cactusjuba wrote:

LOL. I was talking about this very thing in April. But I guess without a citation to an internet media outlet my information will never be credible.

But are AUS, BNA, SJC going to become like CVG/RDU where they see a fair amount of p2p flying and TATL service? That’s what people are wondering.

I don't see that over the next half a decade. There's no room to grow to that scale. Spoke to VP of Network about AUS. I got the impression that upguaging and increased frequencies were the growth tactic at least for the near term.

Honestly, I just don't see BNA and SJC having a lot of p2p service, it is too close and redundant with existing operations (BNA would be redundant with ATL and SJC would be with LAX/SEA).

AUS on the other hand, I have constantly heard that eventually it will become like CVG/RDU, but there is no specific timetable.

pitbosflyer wrote:

It would also be very easy for DL to shift their JFK international 757 operations to BOS to free up room for new JFK expansions. Like Shannon, Reyjkavik, Ponta Delgada, Malaga, and Glasgow. All currently are flown out of JFK with 757s. The smaller planes would not cause the same issues as having a bunch of new wide bodies at Terminal A in BOS.

It doesn't work like that. Can't move a set of flights to another city just because they all happen to be flown by the same equip. All depends on if there is even a market there, and if so, how big is it, maybe bigger, maybe smaller. Ex., could be that the BOS-GLA market for DL is larger than JFK-GLA and a B763 would be more appropriate.

Here is the breakdown of the current DL nonstop routes out of Texas:
AUS - ATL (8), DTW (3), LAX (3), MSP (3), JFK (3), SLC (3), BOS (1), CVG (1), RDU (1), SEA (1)
DFW - ATL (11), MSP (7), LGA (6), SLC (6), DTW (5), LAX (4), CVG (3), JFK (3)
DAL - ATL (5)
IAH - ATL (8), MSP (6), DTW (5), LGA (5), SLC (3), CVG (2)
HOU - ATL (6)
SAT - ATL (7), MSP (3), SLC (3), DTW (2), LAX (2), JFK (1)
ELP - ATL (2)

DFW/DAL - 50 daily departures
IAH/HOU - 35 daily departures
AUS - 27 daily departures
SAT - 18 daily departures
ELP - 2 daily departures

DL is currently bigger by number of daily departures in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston markets than in the Austin market. DL will increase frequencies on some existing DL nonstop routes out of AUS if it is planning on establishing a focus city at AUS.

SANFan wrote:

:checkmark: 'tim'.

I, as my screen name might imply, am very familiar with leakage to a mega-airport to the north! And I am also quite familiar with underserved airports. My airport has (finally) reached a point where I feel service (and competition) exist at decent levels. But then we expect to see at least 25M pax this year at SAN!

However, BoeingGuy, when the demand (and yields) get to a certain point, then additional (or new) service will be added. (And btw, I honestly don't think AA has any intention of beginning p-2-p service out of SJC (to BOS or anywhere else.) You and I both know that for the most part, AA doesn't do p-2-p flying.

With DL and this whole "focus city' designation, who knows what that means and what sort of new routes SJC might see? If Delta feels the business is there, and they can (and want to) grab all those SJC-area residents who like the variety of offerings out of that big airport 30 miles away, then DL should add a flight between their newest hub, BOS, and one of their newest focus cities.

But I would expect B6 goes thru the same thought processes. The cx may very well have better opportunities elsewhere that don't have 2 other major airports 30-40 miles away!
And that's why they still offer just a single flight to BOS.

bb

SFO has something like 4.5-5 times as many passengers as SJC (60mil versus 12mil). It would be interesting to find out how many of those are “leakage” from SJC, and how much of that is potential to pick up (or steal) from SFO.

As for how many flights might be added at SJC, the chart showed (I believe) 30 current flights with a projected 24% growth. That’s only 7-8 flights. Not exactly a hub, and presumably at least some of those flights would be to existing destinations.

SJC only has room at the international facility for TWO widebodies at once (with a third widebody domestic gate). I don’t anticipate many international flights to be added.

Nola wrote:

jagraham wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

That's a pretty low bar..... 3x daily service to 5 hubs is 15 daily flights.....

Yes. But like MSY, there will be a hub or two with much more than 3 flights. MSY has 11 flights to ATL at this time; add 12 flights to 4 other hubs and 1 flight to 2 hubs, you have 25 flights. Which is what MSY has. Nothing but hubs. It is interesting that DL doesn't even do P2P to DFW, IAH, or AUS.

It might make sense to fly MSY-AUS. IAH and DFW are well served by UA and AA and both metros have multiple WN flights as well. If AUS does turn into a DL hub, frequent flights to MSY would open up a lot of the west and PNW in a much more convenient routing (similar to the way DL's DFW hub worked before it was closed), but that will likely be years away.

The problem with virtually abandoning a metro area is that such abandonment can cost corporate travel contracts. If a corporation has a large presence in Dallas or Houston and needs to get to New Orleans often, that can put Delta out of the running. The only intervening factor is that Delta has bigger fish to fry.

AirFiero wrote:

SFO has something like 4.5-5 times as many passengers as SJC (60mil versus 12mil). It would be interesting to find out how many of those are “leakage” from SJC, and how much of that is potential to pick up (or steal) from SFO.

As for how many flights might be added at SJC, the chart showed (I believe) 30 current flights with a projected 24% growth. That’s only 7-8 flights. Not exactly a hub, and presumably at least some of those flights would be to existing destinations.

SJC only has room at the international facility for TWO widebodies at once (with a third widebody domestic gate). I don’t anticipate many international flights to be added.

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

KLMatSJC wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

SFO has something like 4.5-5 times as many passengers as SJC (60mil versus 12mil). It would be interesting to find out how many of those are “leakage” from SJC, and how much of that is potential to pick up (or steal) from SFO.

As for how many flights might be added at SJC, the chart showed (I believe) 30 current flights with a projected 24% growth. That’s only 7-8 flights. Not exactly a hub, and presumably at least some of those flights would be to existing destinations.

SJC only has room at the international facility for TWO widebodies at once (with a third widebody domestic gate). I don’t anticipate many international flights to be added.

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

Do you have any speculation on the leakage numbers?

Thanks for the correct information on the international gates. That’s better than I thought.

I thought the Asia stuff basically needs to be in and out around midday to be effective with the time zone differences and flight duration? How big is the time window on the West Coast for turns to and from Asia? Europe?

AirFiero wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

SFO has something like 4.5-5 times as many passengers as SJC (60mil versus 12mil). It would be interesting to find out how many of those are “leakage” from SJC, and how much of that is potential to pick up (or steal) from SFO.

As for how many flights might be added at SJC, the chart showed (I believe) 30 current flights with a projected 24% growth. That’s only 7-8 flights. Not exactly a hub, and presumably at least some of those flights would be to existing destinations.

SJC only has room at the international facility for TWO widebodies at once (with a third widebody domestic gate). I don’t anticipate many international flights to be added.

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

Do you have any speculation on the leakage numbers?

Thanks for the correct information on the international gates. That’s better than I thought.

I thought the Asia stuff basically needs to be in and out around midday to be effective with the time zone differences and flight duration? How big is the time window on the West Coast for turns to and from Asia? Europe?

I mean I said basically all that was told to me on the leakage front.

If you look at SFO, there's quite a few Asian departures after 2:30, mainly on UA.

soflaflyer wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

It would also be very easy for DL to shift their JFK international 757 operations to BOS to free up room for new JFK expansions. Like Shannon, Reyjkavik, Ponta Delgada, Malaga, and Glasgow. All currently are flown out of JFK with 757s. The smaller planes would not cause the same issues as having a bunch of new wide bodies at Terminal A in BOS.

It doesn't work like that. Can't move a set of flights to another city just because they all happen to be flown by the same equip. All depends on if there is even a market there, and if so, how big is it, maybe bigger, maybe smaller. Ex., could be that the BOS-GLA market for DL is larger than JFK-GLA and a B763 would be more appropriate.

I agree with you, a 757 may not be the correct sized aircraft if the routes were suddenly from Boston. But the idea is that currently DL is connecting traffic thru JFK to fill those flights mixed with the local NYC fliers. Right now if you are in BOS and want to fly DL to GLA they will connect you thru JFK. Thus if they switch the flights to their "newest coastal hub" in BOS the idea is you just switch to connecting passengers thru BOS including flying NYC originating traffic up to BOS to connect. That being said BOS can still handle some more wide-bodies at A once WN moves out, so if it now has to be a bigger plane, that is doable.

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

pitbosflyer wrote:

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

How?

jbs2886 wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

How?

Boston will act as a secondary transatlantic gateway for Delta, says Martin. The carrier will serve six points in Europe – Amsterdam, Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London Heathrow and Paris – from Logan this summer, and as well as Manchester, UK, and Rome with its joint venture partners Virgin Atlantic Airways and Alitalia, schedules show.

"Boston is actually very well positioned geographically to be a connecting point for US passengers going transatlantic," she says. "As we're getting to kind of our maximum capacity at [New York] JFK, using Boston as a secondary transatlantic gateway makes a lot of sense."

From the article that started this whole thread...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... th-458669/

pitbosflyer wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

How?

Boston will act as a secondary transatlantic gateway for Delta, says Martin. The carrier will serve six points in Europe – Amsterdam, Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London Heathrow and Paris – from Logan this summer, and as well as Manchester, UK, and Rome with its joint venture partners Virgin Atlantic Airways and Alitalia, schedules show.

"Boston is actually very well positioned geographically to be a connecting point for US passengers going transatlantic," she says. "As we're getting to kind of our maximum capacity at [New York] JFK, using Boston as a secondary transatlantic gateway makes a lot of sense."

From the article that started this whole thread...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... th-458669/

That doesn't say its intending to *shift* TATL connections to BOS to relieve JFK stress, just that BOS would become a secondary gateway with growth as JFK caps.

ELP is actually 4 departures, 3 ATL and 1 SLC,
Not much of a difference, but.....

KLMatSJC wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

Do you have any speculation on the leakage numbers?

Thanks for the correct information on the international gates. That’s better than I thought.

I thought the Asia stuff basically needs to be in and out around midday to be effective with the time zone differences and flight duration? How big is the time window on the West Coast for turns to and from Asia? Europe?

I mean I said basically all that was told to me on the leakage front.

If you look at SFO, there's quite a few Asian departures after 2:30, mainly on UA.

You are wll dialed in to SJC, I was just wondering if you’d seen any other numbers, or had an educated guess on the leakage.

kavok wrote:

I suspect it is just a matter of time before DL adds, and AA subsequently drops their remaining Upstate New York to Boston flights. Add in some West Jet flights from BOS to Eastern Canada, and DL can grow their new Boston hub.

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

As for WS, they already dropped BOS-YUL and BOS-YHZ because they can't compete against AC. And that's even with the JV already announced. What makes you think things have changed? WS is not competitive in Eastern Canada. If DL wants to compete against AC, it can do it on its own metal.

pitbosflyer wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Does DL fly SFO-BOS?

2x daily. Started as Delta One in 2017 but that ended a year later because they were losing money selling it for $399, $499 on the route.

To clarify the wording, DL still flies the route. Only the Delta One service was ended. B6 and UA made it pretty hard for DL on SFO-BOS and still do. For a while UA was throwing 777s into the rotation to flood the route with even more capacity.

it runs only 1x daily for half of the year. It's interesting that BOS/SEA are both now hubs, but they have 1x daily for most of the winter month.

KLMatSJC wrote:

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

I think it's hard for SJC to have a robust international schedule while UA has such a strong hub 1 hour drive away. It also doesn't help that WN dominates SJC so much, making it impossible for a network carrier to build up an operation to support international flight. With the current WN and AS fare war at SJC, I'm puzzled what DL could possibly add to justify it as a focus city.

pitbosflyer wrote:

I agree with you, a 757 may not be the correct sized aircraft if the routes were suddenly from Boston. But the idea is that currently DL is connecting traffic thru JFK to fill those flights mixed with the local NYC fliers. Right now if you are in BOS and want to fly DL to GLA they will connect you thru JFK. Thus if they switch the flights to their "newest coastal hub" in BOS the idea is you just switch to connecting passengers thru BOS including flying NYC originating traffic up to BOS to connect. That being said BOS can still handle some more wide-bodies at A once WN moves out, so if it now has to be a bigger plane, that is doable.

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

So your solution is to subtract from JFK, where they've spend 15 years building up and is not gate constrained to build up BOS which is gate constrained? Remember, JFK has more O&D, so it requires less connection to fill up the aircraft. Now with B6 adding European flights, it's going to have to defend its JFK hub from B6 taking away passengers on a lot of long and thin routes in the future with a lower capacity aircraft A321.

They are mostly just going to stick with a few more summer routes which run full year out of JFK.

tphuang wrote:

kavok wrote:

I suspect it is just a matter of time before DL adds, and AA subsequently drops their remaining Upstate New York to Boston flights. Add in some West Jet flights from BOS to Eastern Canada, and DL can grow their new Boston hub.

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

As for WS, they already dropped BOS-YUL and BOS-YHZ because they can't compete against AC. And that's even with the JV already announced. What makes you think things have changed? WS is not competitive in Eastern Canada. If DL wants to compete against AC, it can do it on its own metal.

I have not seen the data that shows which BOS routes (if any) are high yielding, and which are not. I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying without that info I can’t tell how well or not BUF, PIT, or any other BOS route are doing.

What I will say is that DL and formerly NW are and were always strong in Upstate NY, but not so much at PIT. So it is entirely possible BUF, SYR, ROC could all perform ok, and PIT not. I also suspect the loads on those flights to be very seasonal, as the demand to connect to a TATL flight is much lower in the winter, and frankly BOS is in a bad geographic location for most domestic connections.

As for WS, since the JV has not been approved, DL/WS can really collaborate on routes. What is slowly changing is that BOS is getting more DL routes to southern and western USA markets. That is an area DL/WS can compete for Canadian traffic with AC, but there also needs to be enough destinations offered from BOS that WS traffic wants to go to, which isn’t there on DL... yet.

kavok wrote:

tphuang wrote:

kavok wrote:

I suspect it is just a matter of time before DL adds, and AA subsequently drops their remaining Upstate New York to Boston flights. Add in some West Jet flights from BOS to Eastern Canada, and DL can grow their new Boston hub.

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

As for WS, they already dropped BOS-YUL and BOS-YHZ because they can't compete against AC. And that's even with the JV already announced. What makes you think things have changed? WS is not competitive in Eastern Canada. If DL wants to compete against AC, it can do it on its own metal.

I have not seen the data that shows which BOS routes (if any) are high yielding, and which are not. I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying without that info I can’t tell how well or not BUF, PIT, or any other BOS route are doing.

What I will say is that DL and formerly NW are and were always strong in Upstate NY, but not so much at PIT. So it is entirely possible BUF, SYR, ROC could all perform ok, and PIT not. I also suspect the loads on those flights to be very seasonal, as the demand to connect to a TATL flight is much lower in the winter, and frankly BOS is in a bad geographic location for most domestic connections.

As for WS, since the JV has not been approved, DL/WS can really collaborate on routes. What is slowly changing is that BOS is getting more DL routes to southern and western USA markets. That is an area DL/WS can compete for Canadian traffic with AC, but there also needs to be enough destinations offered from BOS that WS traffic wants to go to, which isn’t there on DL... yet.

You just kind of have to ignore what he writes. Tphuang constantly comes on here and talks about how just about every route that Delta flies is low yielding, yet they somehow magically keep posting billions in profits each quarter. I guess Atlanta to New Orleans must pull in a few billion a month or something hence the service levels. Who knew?

kavok wrote:

I have not seen the data that shows which BOS routes (if any) are high yielding, and which are not. I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying without that info I can’t tell how well or not BUF, PIT, or any other BOS route are doing.

What I will say is that DL and formerly NW are and were always strong in Upstate NY, but not so much at PIT. So it is entirely possible BUF, SYR, ROC could all perform ok, and PIT not. I also suspect the loads on those flights to be very seasonal, as the demand to connect to a TATL flight is much lower in the winter, and frankly BOS is in a bad geographic location for most domestic connections.

As for WS, since the JV has not been approved, DL/WS can really collaborate on routes. What is slowly changing is that BOS is getting more DL routes to southern and western USA markets. That is an area DL/WS can compete for Canadian traffic with AC, but there also needs to be enough destinations offered from BOS that WS traffic wants to go to, which isn’t there on DL... yet.

I've posted them in several places, but BOS-BUF was the poorest performing of DL routes out of BOS. And that's across all quarters. That may change with their new adds that haven't started yet, but we don't have data on that. I tend to think that DL is far more likely to tolerate losses on BOS-DCA vs BOS-BUF. And given how much capacity has been added on SYR, ROC since B6 entered those markets, these are not exactly good opportunities.

I don't see why WS cut those BOS routes if it think it can compete against AC with DL JV. Westjet is very weak East of Toronto. How many markets does DL fly out of BOS that does not have direct service from YYZ or YUL? And remember, DL's 5 new gates mostly have flights accounted for.

stlgph wrote:

You just kind of have to ignore what he writes. Tphuang constantly comes on here and talks about how just about every route that Delta flies is low yielding, yet they somehow magically keep posting billions in profits each quarter. I guess Atlanta to New Orleans must pull in a few billion a month or something hence the service levels. Who knew?

Check the ASM out of ATL vs total out of LAX/SEA/BOS and then the margins out of ATL. If they get 15% margin out of ATL, they can run negative margins on their domestic projects and still get higher margin than AA/UA. Simple math.

I think it's hard for SJC to have a robust international schedule while UA has such a strong hub 1 hour drive away. It also doesn't help that WN dominates SJC so much, making it impossible for a network carrier to build up an operation to support international flight. With the current WN and AS fare war at SJC, I'm puzzled what DL could possibly add to justify it as a focus city.

UA isn’t the only airline or alliance, and people fly airlines other than United. I don’t think DL will try to build even a domestic hub, let alone one with international connections at SJC. But maybe people are FF with other airlines and alliances or otherwise have no loyalty to UA.

Look at it another way. If UA were the only airline Bay Area people wanted to fly, who is getting on all the planes flown by AA, AS, WN...?

tphuang wrote:

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

BOS-PIT at least is an outlier because its more just another proxy war for DL and B6. DL added it to hit B6 where it hurt, like B6 adding BOS-ATL. B6 had publicly bragged at a investor presentation that BOS-PIT was one of their most profitable routes. Then DL jumped in, dumped capacity on it, and chased off AA. I mean between the two of them there are 11 round trip flights every day. Way more than the market needs. So I wouldn't read too much intro the yields there at least. Its more a see who blinks first situation. With the right amount of capacity the yields would be fine.

tphuang wrote:

kavok wrote:

I suspect it is just a matter of time before DL adds, and AA subsequently drops their remaining Upstate New York to Boston flights. Add in some West Jet flights from BOS to Eastern Canada, and DL can grow their new Boston hub.

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

As for WS, they already dropped BOS-YUL and BOS-YHZ because they can't compete against AC. And that's even with the JV already announced. What makes you think things have changed? WS is not competitive in Eastern Canada. If DL wants to compete against AC, it can do it on its own metal.

pitbosflyer wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

2x daily. Started as Delta One in 2017 but that ended a year later because they were losing money selling it for $399, $499 on the route.

To clarify the wording, DL still flies the route. Only the Delta One service was ended. B6 and UA made it pretty hard for DL on SFO-BOS and still do. For a while UA was throwing 777s into the rotation to flood the route with even more capacity.

it runs only 1x daily for half of the year. It's interesting that BOS/SEA are both now hubs, but they have 1x daily for most of the winter month.

KLMatSJC wrote:

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

I think it's hard for SJC to have a robust international schedule while UA has such a strong hub 1 hour drive away. It also doesn't help that WN dominates SJC so much, making it impossible for a network carrier to build up an operation to support international flight. With the current WN and AS fare war at SJC, I'm puzzled what DL could possibly add to justify it as a focus city.

pitbosflyer wrote:

I agree with you, a 757 may not be the correct sized aircraft if the routes were suddenly from Boston. But the idea is that currently DL is connecting traffic thru JFK to fill those flights mixed with the local NYC fliers. Right now if you are in BOS and want to fly DL to GLA they will connect you thru JFK. Thus if they switch the flights to their "newest coastal hub" in BOS the idea is you just switch to connecting passengers thru BOS including flying NYC originating traffic up to BOS to connect. That being said BOS can still handle some more wide-bodies at A once WN moves out, so if it now has to be a bigger plane, that is doable.

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

So your solution is to subtract from JFK, where they've spend 15 years building up and is not gate constrained to build up BOS which is gate constrained? Remember, JFK has more O&D, so it requires less connection to fill up the aircraft. Now with B6 adding European flights, it's going to have to defend its JFK hub from B6 taking away passengers on a lot of long and thin routes in the future with a lower capacity aircraft A321.

They are mostly just going to stick with a few more summer routes which run full year out of JFK.

JFK is slot and gate constrained in the Summer peak season. Not to mention Delta runs relatively small-gauge equipment. Max out JFK, Max out BOS. Keep going. There is nothing wrong with the strategy at all.

jetlanta wrote:

tphuang wrote:

kavok wrote:

I suspect it is just a matter of time before DL adds, and AA subsequently drops their remaining Upstate New York to Boston flights. Add in some West Jet flights from BOS to Eastern Canada, and DL can grow their new Boston hub.

That all sounds good until you look at their yields on BOS-BUF/PIT, which are the worst out of their BOS routes and probably some of the worst in their network. And then see that BOS-SYR will have too much capacity even if AA drops out. BOS-ROC is a little different, but then that would hurt their performance on BUF even more.

As for WS, they already dropped BOS-YUL and BOS-YHZ because they can't compete against AC. And that's even with the JV already announced. What makes you think things have changed? WS is not competitive in Eastern Canada. If DL wants to compete against AC, it can do it on its own metal.

pitbosflyer wrote:

To clarify the wording, DL still flies the route. Only the Delta One service was ended. B6 and UA made it pretty hard for DL on SFO-BOS and still do. For a while UA was throwing 777s into the rotation to flood the route with even more capacity.

it runs only 1x daily for half of the year. It's interesting that BOS/SEA are both now hubs, but they have 1x daily for most of the winter month.

KLMatSJC wrote:

SJC is pushing 15 million, not 12. I heard from a WN executive that only recently did they start getting true numbers about leakage, and they have acted accordingly (large adds this year and last).

SJC can handle three international widebodies at a time (gates 15, 16, and 18--17 can't be used with a widebody in 18). There have been three there at a time with Hainan, Air China, and ANA. They also have Gate 3 for widebody flights. Hawaiian had been using it for a long time before they moved to 15/16. It was also the famous NRT gate for AA before the international terminal was open. The international terminal is also almost vacant after 2:30 when Hainan leaves, save for a few Volaris flights which aren't daily. Theoretically, a European or an Asian flight can easily fit in the afternoon.

I think it's hard for SJC to have a robust international schedule while UA has such a strong hub 1 hour drive away. It also doesn't help that WN dominates SJC so much, making it impossible for a network carrier to build up an operation to support international flight. With the current WN and AS fare war at SJC, I'm puzzled what DL could possibly add to justify it as a focus city.

pitbosflyer wrote:

I agree with you, a 757 may not be the correct sized aircraft if the routes were suddenly from Boston. But the idea is that currently DL is connecting traffic thru JFK to fill those flights mixed with the local NYC fliers. Right now if you are in BOS and want to fly DL to GLA they will connect you thru JFK. Thus if they switch the flights to their "newest coastal hub" in BOS the idea is you just switch to connecting passengers thru BOS including flying NYC originating traffic up to BOS to connect. That being said BOS can still handle some more wide-bodies at A once WN moves out, so if it now has to be a bigger plane, that is doable.

DL has made is pretty clear their intention is to take some stress off of JFK to allow for further growth by shifting some TATL connections to BOS.

So your solution is to subtract from JFK, where they've spend 15 years building up and is not gate constrained to build up BOS which is gate constrained? Remember, JFK has more O&D, so it requires less connection to fill up the aircraft. Now with B6 adding European flights, it's going to have to defend its JFK hub from B6 taking away passengers on a lot of long and thin routes in the future with a lower capacity aircraft A321.

They are mostly just going to stick with a few more summer routes which run full year out of JFK.

JFK is slot and gate constrained in the Summer peak season. Not to mention Delta runs relatively small-gauge equipment. Max out JFK, Max out BOS. Keep going. There is nothing wrong with the strategy at all.

Also BOS isn't gate constrained.....yet. But it could be soon. The expansion at Terminal E couldn't come soon enough. But still enough space currently for DL and B6 to expand some more.

Hey guys, new poster here, but I saw an article that seems prettty applicable to this discussion, seems like Flightglobal has been reading this thread

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ta-458775/

"ANALYSIS: What makes a focus city for Delta?"

"We've chosen these focus cities based on a strong economic environment and, really, areas where we think the Delta product will really make a difference," she said.

"Delta has three classifications for cities it considers more than a spoke. Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis/St Paul and Salt Lake City are its "core hubs" where it focuses on driving connectivity, says Martin."

"Boston – upgraded from a focus city just this year – Los Angeles, New York John F Kennedy and LaGuardia, and Seattle Tacoma are "coastal hubs" for Delta, she says. These are top 10 markets in the USA where the airline operates more than 150 peak day flights and offers some level of connectivity."




"We've really selected markets that have a lot of youthful presence, strong corporate standing, and where we've seen above average growth for the industry," says Martin when asked how Delta selects its focus cities.

"The cities the airline has selected generally meet these criteria. San Jose – at the centre of Silicon Valley – is a dynamic technology hub in one of the richest and rapidly growing regions in the USA, while Austin and Raleigh are both growing tech hubs in their own right. Nashville is a dynamic city in the US South with above average growth, and Cincinnati a former Delta hub that retains a strong local corporate base.

Passenger traffic at the five airports grew as much as 15% at Cincinnati in 2018, US Department of Transportation data shows. Austin traffic was up 13%, Nashville up 8%, Raleigh up 9.7% and San Jose up 9.2%."

"Delta sees an opportunity to capture share with its product and schedules, for example connecting more travellers to its global network, says Martin."



"Delta's strategy differs by focus city. It serves both its hubs and numerous spokes from Cincinnati and Raleigh with up to 80 peak day flights, while routes from Austin, Nashville and San Jose are limited almost entirely to hubs and other focus cities, Cirium schedules data shows. Flight operations peak at 28 in Austin, 42 in Nashville and 31 in San Jose this summer."

"A lot of the focus is just trying to, for example Raleigh, really understand where the Raleigh business traveller needs to go, the times they need to go, what's their travel preferences and then trying to figure out how we tailor our network to be able to make sure we have good connectivity," says Martin.

"Memphis, a former Northwest Airlines hub that Delta closed in 2013, is no longer considered a focus city, she says when asked. However, she adds that the airline is watching the market for growth opportunities."

Hope this explained a few things

Rumor over at SNA is that DL will add 1 Daily SNA-BNA A220 and 1 Daily SNA-BOS Red eye A220 in April 2020.
(Why April? SNA calendar year seat Allocation is April-April)
I'm gonna guess same aircraft with daily rotation.
Morning departure BOS-SNA-BNA-SNA-BOS(Red Eye).

Flyguy

wnflyguy wrote:

Rumor over at SNA is that DL will add 1 Daily SNA-BNA A220 and 1 Daily SNA-BOS Red eye A220 in April 2020.
(Why April? SNA calendar year seat Allocation is April-April)
I'm gonna guess same aircraft with daily rotation.
Morning departure BOS-SNA-BNA-SNA-BOS(Red Eye).

Flyguy

BNA-SNA on DL would be an oddball route for sure, I doubt this is true.

Fargo wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Rumor over at SNA is that DL will add 1 Daily SNA-BNA A220 and 1 Daily SNA-BOS Red eye A220 in April 2020.
(Why April? SNA calendar year seat Allocation is April-April)
I'm gonna guess same aircraft with daily rotation.
Morning departure BOS-SNA-BNA-SNA-BOS(Red Eye).

Flyguy

BNA-SNA on DL would be an oddball route for sure, I doubt this is true.

Except, this is exactly the type of route the A220 will Excel in opening!

I have no idea if this particular route will happen, but expect a flurry of such new routes in later years as DL, B6, and Moxie bulk up their A220 fleets.

The A220 has the range and reliability to do this. Thanks to dramatically lower fuel burn and thus cost per passenger, we should have already seen this type of route from DL. Oh well, they needed enough A220 to have confidence in the type.

If I put this route into www.gcmap.com, I see it is 7,584nm (still air). If I use a 420 kts flight speed (just a SWAG), I arrive at 18 hours of utilization!

If I assume 1 hour for taxi time and gate time, this is 23 hours if a 24 hour day!

Just because this is at the limit of flight planning, I want to see it happen.

Lightsaber

Fargo wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Rumor over at SNA is that DL will add 1 Daily SNA-BNA A220 and 1 Daily SNA-BOS Red eye A220 in April 2020.
(Why April? SNA calendar year seat Allocation is April-April)
I'm gonna guess same aircraft with daily rotation.
Morning departure BOS-SNA-BNA-SNA-BOS(Red Eye).

Flyguy

BNA-SNA on DL would be an oddball route for sure, I doubt this is true.

Who knows. Nashville is looking for another reliever LAX flight.

BDLtoORD wrote:

Hey guys, new poster here, but I saw an article that seems prettty applicable to this discussion, seems like Flightglobal has been reading this thread

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ta-458775/

"ANALYSIS: What makes a focus city for Delta?"

"We've chosen these focus cities based on a strong economic environment and, really, areas where we think the Delta product will really make a difference," she said.

"Delta has three classifications for cities it considers more than a spoke. Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis/St Paul and Salt Lake City are its "core hubs" where it focuses on driving connectivity, says Martin."

"Boston – upgraded from a focus city just this year – Los Angeles, New York John F Kennedy and LaGuardia, and Seattle Tacoma are "coastal hubs" for Delta, she says. These are top 10 markets in the USA where the airline operates more than 150 peak day flights and offers some level of connectivity."




"We've really selected markets that have a lot of youthful presence, strong corporate standing, and where we've seen above average growth for the industry," says Martin when asked how Delta selects its focus cities.

"The cities the airline has selected generally meet these criteria. San Jose – at the centre of Silicon Valley – is a dynamic technology hub in one of the richest and rapidly growing regions in the USA, while Austin and Raleigh are both growing tech hubs in their own right. Nashville is a dynamic city in the US South with above average growth, and Cincinnati a former Delta hub that retains a strong local corporate base.

Passenger traffic at the five airports grew as much as 15% at Cincinnati in 2018, US Department of Transportation data shows. Austin traffic was up 13%, Nashville up 8%, Raleigh up 9.7% and San Jose up 9.2%."

"Delta sees an opportunity to capture share with its product and schedules, for example connecting more travellers to its global network, says Martin."



"Delta's strategy differs by focus city. It serves both its hubs and numerous spokes from Cincinnati and Raleigh with up to 80 peak day flights, while routes from Austin, Nashville and San Jose are limited almost entirely to hubs and other focus cities, Cirium schedules data shows. Flight operations peak at 28 in Austin, 42 in Nashville and 31 in San Jose this summer."

"A lot of the focus is just trying to, for example Raleigh, really understand where the Raleigh business traveller needs to go, the times they need to go, what's their travel preferences and then trying to figure out how we tailor our network to be able to make sure we have good connectivity," says Martin.

"Memphis, a former Northwest Airlines hub that Delta closed in 2013, is no longer considered a focus city, she says when asked. However, she adds that the airline is watching the market for growth opportunities."

Hope this explained a few things

Thank you for sharing this BDLtoORD!

A quick thought... The criteria DL has described for how they have selceted their focus cities makes sense, however the cities they have chosen (actually not chosen) doesn't. AUS, BNA, and SJC all three make sense per the critieria but there are other cities that meet this criteria which have not been named as focus cites (at least not yet). LAS and MCO instantly come to mind. Has DL passed over these cities due to their low yielding nature? Both of these cities meet the oultined focus city criteria and DL already flies a hand full of point-point routes from both of them. It seems to me that DL isn't staying completely true to their own definition of a focus city. Also what's the point of labeling a city as a focus city if they only intend on flying to their hubs and other focus cities? Yes DL is focusing their marketing efforts on growing their market share in AUS, BNA, and SJC, however shouldn't they be doing that at all of their destinations?

BDLtoORD wrote:

Hey guys, new poster here, but I saw an article that seems prettty applicable to this discussion, seems like Flightglobal has been reading this thread

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ta-458775/

"ANALYSIS: What makes a focus city for Delta?"

"We've chosen these focus cities based on a strong economic environment and, really, areas where we think the Delta product will really make a difference," she said.

"Delta has three classifications for cities it considers more than a spoke. Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis/St Paul and Salt Lake City are its "core hubs" where it focuses on driving connectivity, says Martin."

"Boston – upgraded from a focus city just this year – Los Angeles, New York John F Kennedy and LaGuardia, and Seattle Tacoma are "coastal hubs" for Delta, she says. These are top 10 markets in the USA where the airline operates more than 150 peak day flights and offers some level of connectivity."




"We've really selected markets that have a lot of youthful presence, strong corporate standing, and where we've seen above average growth for the industry," says Martin when asked how Delta selects its focus cities.

"The cities the airline has selected generally meet these criteria. San Jose – at the centre of Silicon Valley – is a dynamic technology hub in one of the richest and rapidly growing regions in the USA, while Austin and Raleigh are both growing tech hubs in their own right. Nashville is a dynamic city in the US South with above average growth, and Cincinnati a former Delta hub that retains a strong local corporate base.

Passenger traffic at the five airports grew as much as 15% at Cincinnati in 2018, US Department of Transportation data shows. Austin traffic was up 13%, Nashville up 8%, Raleigh up 9.7% and San Jose up 9.2%."

"Delta sees an opportunity to capture share with its product and schedules, for example connecting more travellers to its global network, says Martin."



"Delta's strategy differs by focus city. It serves both its hubs and numerous spokes from Cincinnati and Raleigh with up to 80 peak day flights, while routes from Austin, Nashville and San Jose are limited almost entirely to hubs and other focus cities, Cirium schedules data shows. Flight operations peak at 28 in Austin, 42 in Nashville and 31 in San Jose this summer."

"A lot of the focus is just trying to, for example Raleigh, really understand where the Raleigh business traveller needs to go, the times they need to go, what's their travel preferences and then trying to figure out how we tailor our network to be able to make sure we have good connectivity," says Martin.

"Memphis, a former Northwest Airlines hub that Delta closed in 2013, is no longer considered a focus city, she says when asked. However, she adds that the airline is watching the market for growth opportunities."

Hope this explained a few things

So "focus city" in this sense refers to "a market we really like and want to be #1 in" akin to WN's "Hometown Airline" thing, then? It also sounds to me like they might add more cities to this classification.

theasianguy wrote:

Congratulations to Delta for transitioning to a stronger P2P carrier in the cities with the hottest economies in the US recently. It's amazing to track Delta's route network realignment since the NW merger. Delta's hubs then were ATL, DTW, MSP, CVG, SLC, JFK, MEM, NRT, AMS. Since then, DL seems to have grown far more than they have cut. New hubs in LGA, LAX, SEA, BOS, new focus cities in RDU, AUS, SJC, BNA. CVG has been downgraded to focus city, while MEM and NRT have been cut.

I am wondering which hubs will see reductions to fuel this growth?

You could also ask the same question of all these focus hubs when the US Economy tanks.....A lot of these focus cities will be gone.

Plenty of people (2+mil) in Santa Clara County(Palo Alto & South) to make SJC thrive, plus no weather delays like SFO. If the AA hub still existed, it would be thriving. DL is currently gate constrained in SFO due to limited space in T-2 for AA. People in the South Bay are just "trained" to use SFO. Due to auto traffic, SJC could benefit by better rail service to Santa Clara with a people mover to SJC and the BART extension from the East Bay.

Seems like with Delta's definition of focus city, PDX should qualify. They have anywhere from 30-40 daily flights (depending on the season), connections to two major international markets year-round with a 3rd daily seasonal (LHR which is non-hub) and most flights to MSP, ATL, DTW, JFK are on 739s. They also will be switching the NRT flight to the highly coveted HND and upguaging the equipment.

Did Delta operate a hub at BOS Prior to its 2005 Bankruptcy?

TWA85 wrote:

A quick thought... The criteria DL has described for how they have selceted their focus cities makes sense, however the cities they have chosen (actually not chosen) doesn't. AUS, BNA, and SJC all three make sense per the critieria but there are other cities that meet this criteria which have not been named as focus cites (at least not yet). LAS and MCO instantly come to mind. Has DL passed over these cities due to their low yielding nature? Both of these cities meet the oultined focus city criteria and DL already flies a hand full of point-point routes from both of them. It seems to me that DL isn't staying completely true to their own definition of a focus city. Also what's the point of labeling a city as a focus city if they only intend on flying to their hubs and other focus cities? Yes DL is focusing their marketing efforts on growing their market share in AUS, BNA, and SJC, however shouldn't they be doing that at all of their destinations?

I wouldn't say DL has passed over LAS and MCO, they just added LAS-LGB and MCO has 25 destinations on DL plus the VS network from MCO.

I don't think just because DL hasn't explicitly called LAS and MCO focus cities, that they are less important to DL:
"We've really selected markets that have a lot of youthful presence, strong corporate standing, and where we've seen above average growth for the industry"
"We've chosen these focus cities based on a strong economic environment and, really, areas where we think the Delta product will really make a difference"

Something to consider here is: 1. Whether or not they are already the strongest legacy in the airport? Which I believe DL is at MCO and LAS.
2. Will DL's product make a real difference in the market? With regards to LAS and MCO, I don't think DL's product makes a huge difference in each market considering each is by nature a leisure market where the majority of travelers are more focused on price rather than product.

CV880 wrote:

Plenty of people (2+mil) in Santa Clara County(Palo Alto & South) to make SJC thrive, plus no weather delays like SFO. If the AA hub still existed, it would be thriving. DL is currently gate constrained in SFO due to limited space in T-2 for AA. People in the South Bay are just "trained" to use SFO. Due to auto traffic, SJC could benefit by better rail service to Santa Clara with a people mover to SJC and the BART extension from the East Bay.

SJC is doing well now because of the healthy economy. Recessions have been brutal to the tech industry, which causes reductions at SJC. And is why AA couldn't sustain a hub at SJC.

southwest1675 wrote:

Fargo wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Rumor over at SNA is that DL will add 1 Daily SNA-BNA A220 and 1 Daily SNA-BOS Red eye A220 in April 2020.
(Why April? SNA calendar year seat Allocation is April-April)
I'm gonna guess same aircraft with daily rotation.
Morning departure BOS-SNA-BNA-SNA-BOS(Red Eye).

Flyguy

BNA-SNA on DL would be an oddball route for sure, I doubt this is true.

Who knows. Nashville is looking for another reliever LAX flight.

Didn't WN just launch BNA-BUR today? I'm pretty sure they'd launch BNA-ONT/SNA before DL would get enough A220's to launch the route.

Austin787 wrote:

CV880 wrote:

Plenty of people (2+mil) in Santa Clara County(Palo Alto & South) to make SJC thrive, plus no weather delays like SFO. If the AA hub still existed, it would be thriving. DL is currently gate constrained in SFO due to limited space in T-2 for AA. People in the South Bay are just "trained" to use SFO. Due to auto traffic, SJC could benefit by better rail service to Santa Clara with a people mover to SJC and the BART extension from the East Bay.

SJC is doing well now because of the healthy economy. Recessions have been brutal to the tech industry, which causes reductions at SJC. And is why AA couldn't sustain a hub at SJC.

The entire airline industry was laid waste post-9/11. It took years to recover, not just from the resulting recession but also the direct impact on air travel.