Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
FLLspotter747
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:05 pm

Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:41 pm

Delta has loaded FLL-LAX into their schedules starting mid-November operated on a Boeing 737-800. A long awaited route if you ask me. Minus SEA, Delta will now have service to all it's hubs from FLL.

Schedule:
DL 1952 LAX-FLL Dep 2125 Arr 0543 +1
DL 1951 FLL-LAX Dep 0700 Arr 0930
Last edited by FLLspotter747 on Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
ojjunior
Posts: 1022
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:31 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:48 pm

What aircraft?
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1922
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:54 pm

ojjunior wrote:
What aircraft?

OP said 737-800

But to be all honest I thought this would be for A223.

Michael
 
USAirALB
Posts: 2548
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:57 pm

IIRC they flew this route with Song for a bit and then continued after Song was folded into mainline.

I vaguely remember FLL-LAS as well but I could be wrong.
RJ85, F70, E135, E140, E145, E70, E75, E90, CR2, CR7, CR9, 717, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 744ER, 752, 753, 762, 763ER, 772, 77E, 77W, 789, 319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343, 359, 388
 
User avatar
NWAESC
Posts: 1693
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:58 pm

Might've been a plane that was going to RON anyway. If DL can cover the direct operating costs, then why not try it?
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9421
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:14 pm

There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'
 
clipperlondon
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 4:43 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:20 pm

eamondzhang wrote:
ojjunior wrote:
What aircraft?

OP said 737-800

But to be all honest I thought this would be for A223.

Michael


Yes the A223 would be ideal for this route. Plenty of legroom on a fine new aircraft.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:21 pm

clipperlondon wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
ojjunior wrote:
What aircraft?

OP said 737-800

But to be all honest I thought this would be for A223.

Michael


Yes the A223 would be ideal for this route. Plenty of legroom on a fine new aircraft.


If it were ideal, it would have been selected to operate the route. Clearly, at this point in time, it's not ideal.
Whatever
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1889
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:23 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
clipperlondon wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
OP said 737-800

But to be all honest I thought this would be for A223.

Michael


Yes the A223 would be ideal for this route. Plenty of legroom on a fine new aircraft.


If it were ideal, it would have been selected to operate the route. Clearly, at this point in time, it's not ideal.

With DL keeping middle seats open, doesn't the 2-3 aircraft take a bigger hit than 3-3?
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1352
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:27 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'

Well DL did fly LAX-MIA very recently and just could not make it work with its limited schedule vs AA's broad offering of flights. I do wish them well on LAX-FLL. it will be nice to have a legacy in the market.
 
whpbur
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:14 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:37 pm

Yep, Song definitely operated FLL-LAX. They competed with AA on the route.
 
IFlyVeryLittle
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:41 pm

With a new O&D flight, would the travel websites ever offer a routing from, like say TPA, to FLL and onward to LAX via two different airlines or is that kind of itinerary simply blocked out from happening by the site software.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22009
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:02 pm

As someone who flies to Florida fairly often, more routes are great news! I'll keep this in mind when cruises restart.

Lightsaber
6 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
User avatar
downtown273
Posts: 330
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:00 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:02 pm

NWAESC wrote:
Might've been a plane that was going to RON anyway. If DL can cover the direct operating costs, then why not try it?


Exactly. It's great aircraft utilization (departs LAX at 2125, arrives back at 0930), and the schedules gives pax full days in Miami area / Los Angeles with overnight / early morning flight times.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:12 pm

This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1792
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:16 pm

Great news. I genuinely wished they'd build up FLL kind of like Boston, but not happening with the new LATAM partnership.
@DadCelo
 
aaflyer777
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:19 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


Perhaps they're going after passengers on the LAX end as opposed to FLL? DL is definitely stronger in LAX than B6 or NK. Given the restrictions that are in place for Hawaii I'd imagine people in California are looking for alternative vacation destinations, Florida seems like a strong option.
 
MIAFLLPBIFlyer
Posts: 561
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:25 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:20 pm

They're bringing it back at the same time as AS is going double-daily I believe. And B6 as everyone mentions above.

Yes some petulance from DL on this. But the FF base DL has in south Florida is still pretty massive, and should be able to support a single daily from MIA or FLL to LAX. FLL probably being the better bet minus LATAM connections. Given this is a red eye return, maybe that's the reason for FLL over MIA? Catering exclusively to local O&D?

DL can make things messy in So Fla if they want given their FF base and long-term brand loyalty. Interesting move, let's see if this is a one-off or just the beginning.
 
DaCubbyBearBar
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:29 pm

USAirALB wrote:
IIRC they flew this route with Song for a bit and then continued after Song was folded into mainline.

I vaguely remember FLL-LAS as well but I could be wrong.

SONG had a couple of LAS routes.. this was one and I believe BOS was 1 also... think there were 2 others
I am me and no one else...so my opinions are mine
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22009
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:30 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.

I would argue LAX-FLL has more potential to break even. In particular once cruising restarts.

For the LATAM venture, no one flies South America to MIA onward to LAX. That is an absurd routing that could never compete with flights from IAH or DFW or the great direct options from LAX.

MIA is a hub from South America to Europe and the Eastern Half of the USA. Once west of the Mississippi, passengers are not going to be blindly loyal due to the long tcon flights.

DL needs to build up MIA, but mostly the Eastern seaboard and a few key markets.

Lightsaber
6 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9421
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:54 pm

lightsaber wrote:
For the LATAM venture, no one flies South America to MIA onward to LAX. That is an absurd routing that could never compete with flights from IAH or DFW or the great direct options from LAX.

MIA is a hub from South America to Europe and the Eastern Half of the USA. Once west of the Mississippi, passengers are not going to be blindly loyal due to the long tcon flights.

DL needs to build up MIA, but mostly the Eastern seaboard and a few key markets.

Lightsaber


GRU-MIA-LAX is trivially farther than GRU-IAH-GRU (or even a non-stop), 6,414 sm vs. 6,281 sm. Yes, an origin like SCL is more efficient thru a more western hub - but LATAM has the non-stop for that. A LOT of South America is east of MIA.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9421
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:06 pm

NWAESC wrote:
Might've been a plane that was going to RON anyway. If DL can cover the direct operating costs, then why not try it?


tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.



They've got a couple hundred surplus aircraft. They've got two thousand surplus pilots. Anything that does even a little better than covering marginal costs is good.

I don't think they want to compete against AA's 9x frequency loaded for an early November Monday.
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:08 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'


tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


It may still be too early to go back into LAX-MIA. There's nothing to stop DL from serving both FLL and MIA as separate nonstops from LAX. FLL and MIA are both clearly targeting beaches and cruise passengers, but MIA also has the benefit of targeting connections to/from South America supporting the LATAM JV. Right now airlines are chasing the passengers, and right now the passengers want sun and beaches. As the pandemic evolves and eventually peters out, travel patterns will change and more people will feel confident branching out to other parts of the world again. But not yet.
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:17 pm

DL747400 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'


tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


It may still be too early to go back into LAX-MIA. There's nothing to stop DL from serving both FLL and MIA as separate nonstops from LAX. FLL and MIA are both clearly targeting beaches and cruise passengers, but MIA also has the benefit of targeting connections to/from South America supporting the LATAM JV. Right now airlines are chasing the passengers, and right now the passengers want sun and beaches. As the pandemic evolves and eventually peters out, travel patterns will change and more people will feel confident branching out to other parts of the world again. But not yet.

I don’t want to stray too off topic, but I’d assume LAX is a big enough market it can get direct South American service via Delta/LATAM for more major cities as the JV develops, rather than connecting through MIA. Connections LAX-MIA might not be needed, and as LAX grows for Delta, it makes sense to have direct LAX-South America as part of the JV. MIA works better for East coast connections.

Good to see airlines adding routes back, even as piecemeal.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10358
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:26 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV..

Since I can't remember what routes existed pre-pandemic, what would LAX-MIA offer in terms of LatAm connections that LAX-ATL and LAX-LIM don't offer already?
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:31 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


It's a spit ball route for sure, and likely won't be very profitable until travel comes back to pre-pandemic levels. No one is getting on a cruise ship any time soon but a 737-800 once a day is a low risk entry for a marginal route. As for LAX-MIA vs. LAX-FLL on Delta, AA owns the market between LAX and MIA and DL's focus should it really build up a MIA focus operation is to capture East Coast connections, not West Coast, where much of that goes through DFW and IAH over MIA. But to call it "childish" because Delta is venturing into a B6 market and applying the logic of it being a grudge is just plainly idiotic. NK and B6 in the market will depress the yields on DL no doubt, but airlines are trying anything and everything to survive and when it comes to DL, it would stand to reason, they've done some homework on this one.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:56 pm

clipperlondon wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
ojjunior wrote:
What aircraft?

OP said 737-800

But to be all honest I thought this would be for A223.

Michael


Yes the A223 would be ideal for this route. Plenty of legroom on a fine new aircraft.


That is a long route, 738 is probably as low as that will go.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:09 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
They've got a couple hundred surplus aircraft. They've got two thousand surplus pilots. Anything that does even a little better than covering marginal costs is good.

I don't think they want to compete against AA's 9x frequency loaded for an early November Monday.


AA hasn't made their reduction for November yet. For October, we have 4x to MIA on AA and 3x from B6 and 1x from NK on FLL. And in November, AS is supposedly coming back here. It's hard to argue that FLL has less competition than MIA.

airbazar wrote:
tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV..

Since I can't remember what routes existed pre-pandemic, what would LAX-MIA offer in terms of LatAm connections that LAX-ATL and LAX-LIM don't offer already?


When you make a large commitment like they did to establish JV with LA and continue to support LA throughout the chapter 11 process, you'd think supporting the predominant market to South America would be quite important. Especially, if they want to battle AA adding new routes from MIA to secondary Brazilian market.

What was the point of them adding routes like MIA-TPA/MCO/RDU and bringing back MIA-SLC if they didn't want to build on their presence in MIA?

Cointrin330 wrote:
It's a spit ball route for sure, and likely won't be very profitable until travel comes back to pre-pandemic levels. No one is getting on a cruise ship any time soon but a 737-800 once a day is a low risk entry for a marginal route. As for LAX-MIA vs. LAX-FLL on Delta, AA owns the market between LAX and MIA and DL's focus should it really build up a MIA focus operation is to capture East Coast connections, not West Coast, where much of that goes through DFW and IAH over MIA. But to call it "childish" because Delta is venturing into a B6 market and applying the logic of it being a grudge is just plainly idiotic. NK and B6 in the market will depress the yields on DL no doubt, but airlines are trying anything and everything to survive and when it comes to DL, it would stand to reason, they've done some homework on this one.


I don't think you've actually seen the numbers in the LAX to South Florida. In the last couple of years, JetBlue has flipped the table here. It is now the high fare carrier in this market. This is now a top 10 profitable route for JetBlue in their system. Definitely not the case for AA. This is an obvious retaliation. And there are no shortage of reasons for DL wanting to retaliate. But to me at least, right now is not the time for this.

Everyone on this board expected them to add LAX-MIA. Nobody here expected them to add LAX-FLL. So clearly, the logical move for them to add here is LAX-MIA for network building purposes.
 
maverick4002
Posts: 417
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:12 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


Lol is this because this is an attack against Jetblue? B6 is attacking them and they do one route and its child-ish?
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:13 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


What an asinine and ridiculous statement. Delta, nor any other airlines are just adding a route to be 'childish'. There are people who want to go from LAX to FLL and Delta believe they can make it work. They didn't just pull the route out of their hiney last night. Delta, again, like any other airline that starts a route, have done their homework and believe it will work. Please, grow up and think before you make such a goofy and outlandish post. We need quality in this forum, not this kind of conjecture from someone who has no clue. Sit back, listen to others and learn.
Whatever
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 5104
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:22 pm

Seems like a route with alot of competition , but these are weird times. Airlines seem willing to try anything to use planes outside of the normal business routes.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:23 pm

maverick4002 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


Lol is this because this is an attack against Jetblue? B6 is attacking them and they do one route and its child-ish?


JetBlue will be fine here. They already have 2 competitors at FLL and 1 competitor at MIA on this route. DL brings nothing here that would be threatening to JetBlue. An AA move to add more lie flat on MIA-LAX would be something that actually threatens JetBlue here.

I just think that if they wanted to get into South Florida to LAX, MIA-LAX is far and away the most logical route to add. Did anyone here think they'd add FLL-LAX rather than MIA-LAX?

FriscoHeavy wrote:
What an asinine and ridiculous statement. Delta, nor any other airlines are just adding a route to be 'childish'. There are people who want to go from LAX to FLL and Delta believe they can make it work. They didn't just pull the route out of their hiney last night. Delta, again, like any other airline that starts a route, have done their homework and believe it will work. Please, grow up and think before you make such a goofy and outlandish post. We need quality in this forum, not this kind of conjecture from someone who has no clue. Sit back, listen to others and learn.

Personal attacks are never the way to go.

This is clearly a retaliation at a time when airlines are otherwise busy reducing cash burns or making moves to build their network for future. And if DL wanted to build their network, they should've added MIA-LAX. That's where their JV partner is heavily at. That's where they added routes to SLC/RDU/MCO/TPA-MIA. Unless they've given up on their JV partner in MIA, it doesn't make sense from a network building point of view to add this before MIA.
Last edited by tphuang on Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:32 pm

tphuang wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
They've got a couple hundred surplus aircraft. They've got two thousand surplus pilots. Anything that does even a little better than covering marginal costs is good.

I don't think they want to compete against AA's 9x frequency loaded for an early November Monday.


AA hasn't made their reduction for November yet. For October, we have 4x to MIA on AA and 3x from B6 and 1x from NK on FLL. And in November, AS is supposedly coming back here. It's hard to argue that FLL has less competition than MIA.

airbazar wrote:
tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV..

Since I can't remember what routes existed pre-pandemic, what would LAX-MIA offer in terms of LatAm connections that LAX-ATL and LAX-LIM don't offer already?


When you make a large commitment like they did to establish JV with LA and continue to support LA throughout the chapter 11 process, you'd think supporting the predominant market to South America would be quite important. Especially, if they want to battle AA adding new routes from MIA to secondary Brazilian market.

What was the point of them adding routes like MIA-TPA/MCO/RDU and bringing back MIA-SLC if they didn't want to build on their presence in MIA?

Cointrin330 wrote:
It's a spit ball route for sure, and likely won't be very profitable until travel comes back to pre-pandemic levels. No one is getting on a cruise ship any time soon but a 737-800 once a day is a low risk entry for a marginal route. As for LAX-MIA vs. LAX-FLL on Delta, AA owns the market between LAX and MIA and DL's focus should it really build up a MIA focus operation is to capture East Coast connections, not West Coast, where much of that goes through DFW and IAH over MIA. But to call it "childish" because Delta is venturing into a B6 market and applying the logic of it being a grudge is just plainly idiotic. NK and B6 in the market will depress the yields on DL no doubt, but airlines are trying anything and everything to survive and when it comes to DL, it would stand to reason, they've done some homework on this one.


I don't think you've actually seen the numbers in the LAX to South Florida. In the last couple of years, JetBlue has flipped the table here. It is now the high fare carrier in this market. This is now a top 10 profitable route for JetBlue in their system. Definitely not the case for AA. This is an obvious retaliation. And there are no shortage of reasons for DL wanting to retaliate. But to me at least, right now is not the time for this.

Everyone on this board expected them to add LAX-MIA. Nobody here expected them to add LAX-FLL. So clearly, the logical move for them to add here is LAX-MIA for network building purposes.


Yes, I am aware. You're JetBlue's #1 fan.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:37 pm

tphuang wrote:
maverick4002 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


Lol is this because this is an attack against Jetblue? B6 is attacking them and they do one route and its child-ish?


JetBlue will be fine here. They already have 2 competitors at FLL and 1 competitor at MIA on this route. DL brings nothing here that would be threatening to JetBlue. An AA move to add more lie flat on MIA-LAX would be something that actually threatens JetBlue here.

I just think that if they wanted to get into South Florida to LAX, MIA-LAX is far and away the most logical route to add. Did anyone here think they'd add FLL-LAX rather than MIA-LAX?


Well, you thought wrong. That's all there is to it.
Whatever
 
tphuang
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:47 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
tphuang wrote:
maverick4002 wrote:

Lol is this because this is an attack against Jetblue? B6 is attacking them and they do one route and its child-ish?


JetBlue will be fine here. They already have 2 competitors at FLL and 1 competitor at MIA on this route. DL brings nothing here that would be threatening to JetBlue. An AA move to add more lie flat on MIA-LAX would be something that actually threatens JetBlue here.

I just think that if they wanted to get into South Florida to LAX, MIA-LAX is far and away the most logical route to add. Did anyone here think they'd add FLL-LAX rather than MIA-LAX?


Well, you thought wrong. That's all there is to it.


So I guess everyone who previously commented on this are wrong then or DL is doing this just as a retaliation. Keep in mind, some route additions are retaliations and also make sense from network building point of view.

If you agree with the former, it'd be curious what kind of argument you can make for FLL over MIA.

If you agree with the latter, then its a matter of whether you think airlines should make moves that are obvious retaliations.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:52 pm

tphuang wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:
tphuang wrote:

JetBlue will be fine here. They already have 2 competitors at FLL and 1 competitor at MIA on this route. DL brings nothing here that would be threatening to JetBlue. An AA move to add more lie flat on MIA-LAX would be something that actually threatens JetBlue here.

I just think that if they wanted to get into South Florida to LAX, MIA-LAX is far and away the most logical route to add. Did anyone here think they'd add FLL-LAX rather than MIA-LAX?


Well, you thought wrong. That's all there is to it.


So I guess everyone who previously commented on this are wrong then or DL is doing this just as a retaliation. Keep in mind, some route additions are retaliations and also make sense from network building point of view.

If you agree with the former, it'd be curious what kind of argument you can make for FLL over MIA.

If you agree with the latter, then its a matter of whether you think airlines should make moves that are obvious retaliations.


You're conflating different issues.

1. Are routes sometimes in response to another airline's move to protect marketshare? Yes. But that's not childish and not retaliation.
*Retaliate: verb (used without object), re·tal·i·at·ed, re·tal·i·at·ing.
to return like for like, especially evil for evil:
to retaliate for an injury.

That is not happening here - it's not out of evil or childishness.

2. You don't know (and neither do I, nor anyone else on here) if DL has enough traffic or revenue potential to make FLL work or not. It's obvious that they believe they can make enough marginal revenue on plane that would otherwise be sitting overnight to make it worthwhile. Again, they do their homework, not retaliate.
Whatever
 
flyfresno
Posts: 1294
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: Delta Network Thread - 2020

Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:40 pm

MastaHanky wrote:
DLASFlyer wrote:
On the topic of Western expansion, two routes I would love to see from SLC are Durango (DRO) and Flagstaff (FLG). Surprised these are not flown already.


DL flew SLC-DRO a while back. It was initially daily, and they came out and said it was performing above expectations and increased to 2x. Then it was suddenly killed. That and BFL are the two regional routes I’m surprised never returned.


BFL is tough because the airport's pax totals have been pretty stagnant over the last 10 years, with a slight bump coming from DFW being re-added. I think the airport will be hard-pressed to even add SEA within 5 years without another grant, let alone SLC.
 
Capn
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:14 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:46 pm

tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV.

But instead of doing the logic move, they are stuck on the pre-pandemic mode of holding grudges against other airlines, in this case JetBlue. They are going to get slaughtered here. JetBlue will continue to capture the premium crowd around FLL + whoever is willing to trek up from around MIA for flat bed. The presence of NK and B6 will keep the Y fares really low.

Really strange to see something like this at a time when other airlines are making moves to conserve cash and/or taking strategic actions for future.


“Why are you picking on Delta?“
I am truly amazed at how in your mind, everything that Delta does is always wrong, or purposely done to pick on B6.
They must be doing something right, they have been consistently the most profitable airline the last several years.
As an unabashed DL. fan I suggest you give their network planning a little more credit...
Just thankful you have nothing to do with running DL.
NO OFFENSE .
UH-1 DEHAVILAND HERON MARTIN 404 DC-9 CHALLENGER 601 FALCON 50 & 900EX
 
maverick4002
Posts: 417
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:59 pm

Well if JetBlue will be fine just leave it as is. We all know you are the biggest Jetblue fanboy on here. Literally everything they do is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Me thinks you protest too much about this one add, but again, if you think B6 will be fine, just leave DL to lose their money and B6 can continue as is. I think you said they were the fare leader on this segment? If they can maintain then good for them!
Last edited by maverick4002 on Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
phllax
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:53 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:09 pm

Route was last flown on pretty much the same schedule and aircraft and cut after 2010-2011 winter holidays. Frequently the plane would do LAX-FLL-LAX-MSY-LAX routing.
 
MIAFLLPBIFlyer
Posts: 561
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:25 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:17 pm

Another point:

I am sure DL has tracked lots of connecting flows via ATL since dropping LAX-FLL nonstop. With lots of idle planes sitting around and the need to counter others in the MIA/FLL-LAX market flying nonstop why not try this add. It's low risk, and a market where DL has a FF base and O&D potential on BOTH ends.
 
Lootess
Posts: 608
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:19 pm

I used to take this flight as a red eye. I can't remember if it was 752. We all know ATL-FLL is quite a performer so the ancillary non-stops means they did their homework.
Last edited by Lootess on Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ojjunior
Posts: 1022
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:31 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:19 pm

BTW, is that the longest domestic flight in continental US?
 
B752OS
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:30 pm

MIAFLLPBIFlyer wrote:
Another point:

I am sure DL has tracked lots of connecting flows via ATL since dropping LAX-FLL nonstop. With lots of idle planes sitting around and the need to counter others in the MIA/FLL-LAX market flying nonstop why not try this add. It's low risk, and a market where DL has a FF base and O&D potential on BOTH ends.


Good point. I am sure we'll see Delta add a second daily, year round frequency at some point in early to mid 2021.
 
onwFan
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:12 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'

Well, I don’t think there will be any need for their MIA hub anymore. EZE-MIA already gone, next is turn are the MIA-secondary Brazil (a total of currently loaded 10x weekly) to disappear. In all likelihood, LA will be left with 1x daily on MIA-SCL and MIA-GRU and probably 1-2x daily on MIA-LIM; especially if they have the intention to launch ATL. Anything more will be an excellent option to burn money for the next few years... By that time, G3 will be in a better position to serve most NE Brazil markets to MIA with their B737MAX vs LA’s B767s. LATAM will be a shadow of what they were in MIA - just another Latin American carrier with its own share of flights to their hubs...
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:34 pm

onwFan wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
There will be brutal fare competition from Spirit and B6.

Observe it's to FLL, not to MIA 'to build a MIA hub for LATAM connections.'

Well, I don’t think there will be any need for their MIA hub anymore. EZE-MIA already gone, next is turn are the MIA-secondary Brazil (a total of currently loaded 10x weekly) to disappear. In all likelihood, LA will be left with 1x daily on MIA-SCL and MIA-GRU and probably 1-2x daily on MIA-LIM; especially if they have the intention to launch ATL. Anything more will be an excellent option to burn money for the next few years... By that time, G3 will be in a better position to serve most NE Brazil markets to MIA with their B737MAX vs LA’s B767s. LATAM will be a shadow of what they were in MIA - just another Latin American carrier with its own share of flights to their hubs...


Delta and LATAM recommitted to the MIA hub operation not too long ago. It’s not going anywhere and your expectations of what LATAM will do at MIA are way off base. And with LATAM Argentina gone this is a perfect example of how the synergy will work - Delta can use its own metal on MIAEZE.
a.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:46 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
tphuang wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:

Well, you thought wrong. That's all there is to it.


So I guess everyone who previously commented on this are wrong then or DL is doing this just as a retaliation. Keep in mind, some route additions are retaliations and also make sense from network building point of view.

If you agree with the former, it'd be curious what kind of argument you can make for FLL over MIA.

If you agree with the latter, then its a matter of whether you think airlines should make moves that are obvious retaliations.


You're conflating different issues.

1. Are routes sometimes in response to another airline's move to protect marketshare? Yes. But that's not childish and not retaliation.
*Retaliate: verb (used without object), re·tal·i·at·ed, re·tal·i·at·ing.
to return like for like, especially evil for evil:
to retaliate for an injury.

That is not happening here - it's not out of evil or childishness.

2. You don't know (and neither do I, nor anyone else on here) if DL has enough traffic or revenue potential to make FLL work or not. It's obvious that they believe they can make enough marginal revenue on plane that would otherwise be sitting overnight to make it worthwhile. Again, they do their homework, not retaliate.


1) Moves that are made to hit back at another airlines happens all the time To say that airlines do not retaliate is simply not true. In some cases, those moves actually make sense from network point of view. You didn't see me making any claims when DL added its other LAX routes. This move is not logical from network building point of view when compared to MIA What they did here is a textbook retaliation move in response to what B6/AS have added at LAX.

2) I've followed this market for a long time with all the fare data. MIA is simply the higher yielding airport. That's why DL operated MIA-LAX seasonally until 2018. There is more competition at FLL. There is better premium product at FLL. And there is no Latam JV partner at FLL. And, cruise traffic is dead at the moment. All logic would dicatate that if they want to get into SoFla to LAX market, MIA is the way to go. That's why everyone on this forum predicted MIA-LAX. Go back and read previous threads related to DL/Latam/Mia.

Capn wrote:
“Why are you picking on Delta?“
I am truly amazed at how in your mind, everything that Delta does is always wrong, or purposely done to pick on B6.
They must be doing something right, they have been consistently the most profitable airline the last several years.
As an unabashed DL. fan I suggest you give their network planning a little more credit...
Just thankful you have nothing to do with running DL.
NO OFFENSE .


Just yesterday, I praised DL for the attention it has paid to SLC.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1438137&start=400#p22440617
so your assessment is clearly off.

If DL wants to continue strengthen its Latam JV, it needs to focus on adding more to MIA.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10358
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:50 pm

tphuang wrote:
airbazar wrote:
tphuang wrote:
This is a rather childish move from Delta. If they wanted to build their LAX hub and support their JV with Latam, LAX-MIA is clearly the route they should've brought back. That's the higher yielding airport and actually helps their JV..

Since I can't remember what routes existed pre-pandemic, what would LAX-MIA offer in terms of LatAm connections that LAX-ATL and LAX-LIM don't offer already?


When you make a large commitment like they did to establish JV with LA and continue to support LA throughout the chapter 11 process, you'd think supporting the predominant market to South America would be quite important. Especially, if they want to battle AA adding new routes from MIA to secondary Brazilian market.

What was the point of them adding routes like MIA-TPA/MCO/RDU and bringing back MIA-SLC if they didn't want to build on their presence in MIA?

All good points but they don't answer my question. What does MIA add for pax traveling to/from LAX, instead of other DL/LATAM hubs? If I'm traveling between S.America and LAX, MIA isn't exactly the most direct route.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:56 pm

airbazar wrote:
tphuang wrote:
airbazar wrote:
Since I can't remember what routes existed pre-pandemic, what would LAX-MIA offer in terms of LatAm connections that LAX-ATL and LAX-LIM don't offer already?


When you make a large commitment like they did to establish JV with LA and continue to support LA throughout the chapter 11 process, you'd think supporting the predominant market to South America would be quite important. Especially, if they want to battle AA adding new routes from MIA to secondary Brazilian market.

What was the point of them adding routes like MIA-TPA/MCO/RDU and bringing back MIA-SLC if they didn't want to build on their presence in MIA?

All good points but they don't answer my question. What does MIA add for pax traveling to/from LAX, instead of other DL/LATAM hubs? If I'm traveling between S.America and LAX, MIA isn't exactly the most direct route.

I would agree. I think any LAX-SA travel will be eventually handled by direct additions from LAX, rather than a connect to MIA again. Opens up the LAX hub for one stop connections, rather than a double connect as in ???-LAX-MIA-???. Perhaps LAX-GRU. Already have LATAM on LAX-LIM/SCL.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Delta Announces FLL-LAX

Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:00 pm

ojjunior wrote:
BTW, is that the longest domestic flight in continental US?



No, a quick review on Great Circle Mapper will show you that BOS-SFO, for example, is 361 miles further. ORD-ANC is 503 miles further. Then there is PHX-ANC, MIA-SEA, etc.

These are just ones off the top of my head.
Whatever

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