Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 44
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1548
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:08 am

hpff wrote:
AirFiero wrote:
Wow. I se it as the exact opposite. A short term scare/panic over a virus that isn’t Ebola or the thing that turns people into zombies like the Walking Dead. Air travel demand was strong and growing until a few weeks ago. Now the world is coming to an end? Jesus, people, has humanity become that cynical?


Less than three weeks ago, most of my friends were employed.

This isn't going away tomorrow. Will it be short term? Yes, but it depends on how you define short term. It could be up to a year, and the economic impacts of this will last longer, especially since western governments can't quite seem to be able to figure any of this out.


Why do you think this will take a year to sort out?
 
aaway
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:16 am

Midwestindy wrote:
LAX is extremely important in the aviation world, it is a hub for AA, UA, & WN. If DL were to draw it down, they would be at a significant disadvantage in corporate travel.

They also have significant investment in LA, they just spent $400 million to sponsor the 2028 Olympics, in addition they just spent (or planned to spend) over a billion on Modernizing LAX.


Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) has hastily scheduled a meeting with DL's real estate folks regarding the T2 / T3 revamp. I only have speculation, so I'll leave it that.

I'll just add that LAWA also scheduled a meeting with AA's real estate folks as well.
"The greatest mistake you can make in life is to continually be afraid you will make one." - Elbert Hubbard
 
aaway
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:21 am

[/quote]
Byrdluvs747 wrote:
flyboy80 wrote:
If anyone pulls back LAX of the US3 I see United more likely than Delta.


Interesting. Isnt UA committed to T9? How would they back out of that?


[quote="DeltaPSCFlyer"]As for T9, I don't have the specifics on it, or what the agreement states, but everything is negotiable...

LAWA and UA are still in negotiations.
"The greatest mistake you can make in life is to continually be afraid you will make one." - Elbert Hubbard
 
n7371f
Posts: 1852
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:55 am

Everything is going to be smaller follks. Yes, ATL, MSP, DTW, LAX, SEA et all....

Delta is preparing for a tepid rebound and then it'll go from there - across the network.
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:50 am

Thats too early
May be there is sharp rising on travel demand after the crisis and DL have to build nee hub (eg:MIA, AUS)
 
Deltran757
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:37 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 8:40 am

For people who don’t understand. No airline in the world will recover quickly. Delta is accepting the new reality. When it’s all said and done. Every airline in the world will be different. Business and leisure travel will be effected. For example. Here in the states, If people aren’t buying airlines tickets for the MLB, NFL, NBA games, and etc... that’s a 1/4 Of revenue. And we aren’t taking about the business travel just yet. Boeing and Airbus will have the biggest negative impact. Airlines are already renegotiating new aircraft coming into their fleets.
To see the world... One plane at a time
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:27 am

crj900lr wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
Delta has "Hubs at ATL, DTW, MSP, SLC. and now SEA. Other than ATL does anybody notice something wrong? Where ARE hubs along the southern tier or in the West? why not a Texas or Southwestern Hub? American Has PHX, in the Southwest Nobody really owns LAX as a hub So? Where would they spread their hubs TO?
Southwest went in big at Denver so they have a large hub in the gateway to the west. From there they hub OAK. So? Delta can diversify their hubs but to exactly where?


Didn't DL have DFW at one point along with AA? I believe they were 1 & 2 at DFW then DL up and left basically leaving DFW to AA. Can't remember why DL left though.


Before deregulation, Braniff was the dominant airline at DFW. AA was #2, and DL was #3. Continental, Frontier, and Texas International also had a strong presence there. Immediately after deregulation, Delta and AA added a few additional routes from DFW. By the fall of 1980, the economy was in a recession, and Braniff was in dire trouble. DL chose to wait until the economy recovered to build DFW further. AA, however, decided to aggressively expand at DFW, in hopes of becoming the dominant airline there if/when Braniff went out of business. By the summer of 1981, AA was #1 at DFW.

In August, 1981, the air traffic controllers went on strike, which severely limited airlines' ability to add new routes, so DL was not able to expand further in DFW, even as Braniff continued to move towards shutting down.

Braniff did shut down in May, 1982, and although the economy was still in recession, AA continued to build their hub at DFW as slots became available. Delta waited until 1984/85 to expand their hub at DFW further, and by then it was too late, because AA had become the dominant airline at DFW.

Delta remained a weak #2 to AA until they shut their DFW hub in the aftermath of 9/11. Published reports after the hub shut down said DL lost money in DFW all but one year the hub was in existence.
 
chonetsao
Posts: 721
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:55 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:29 am

Instead of cutting all the hubs and focus cities, another way to be a smaller carrier, is to reduce two to three rows of seats from aircraft, get rid of the customer unfriendly space saver toilet and give a little more legroom to the torture seat rows. By doing that DL and other US3 can reduce capacity by 10% without any need to lay off too many staff and cut routes.
 
WidebodyPTV
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:06 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:44 am

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
Sorry this is not correct . Delta did put out there own money for items they wanted to include. Delta agreed to the plans then later put out cash for certain things they wanted. Not insignificant money either.


Additionally for cost overruns you do realize they ended up building alot more than they started right? They chose to go that route to get more gates as they decided it was cheaper and given SLC growth rate would be too small too soon. The airport was sitting on a ton of cash their plans have been extremely conservative . It will still be a very low cost airport to operate from and even more on time (if that's even possible).

Plus delta just extended and is on a very long term lease at SLC. They are going nowhere, and the new terminals looks awesome and are super conservative financially


You're misinformed. NW oversaw the design and construction of DTW, but did not spend its own money on the project; instead, it was financed similarly to SLC -- largely debt that NW was mostly responsible for paying for through various user fees. Likewise, DL has influenced the design of SLC - as it should - but has not spent its own money on the project. SLC recently raised the estimate of the airport by $500M and claimed 'it's a good thing, because it's mostly upon requests DL made, such as the world's largest and best SkyClub and an increase in size in the FIS.' For half a billion dollars, it's going to be some SkyClub! In reality, construction trade publications blame the $500M increase largely on an unfavorable labor market (re: SLC is paying a lot more for labor and contractors than it had anticipated) and increased costs (specifically the Trump Tariffs) on raw materials. Similar dynamics considerably swelled the expected cost of the new MCI airport.

Secondly, the project started at $1.8B and is now at $4.1B. When SLC announced it was going forward with additional construction, it claimed that cost overruns plus the additional construction costs added about $800M to the project. Ultimately, the final project will certainly cost more than $4.1B, so the added market costs (labor and raw materials) will be somewhere between $1.5B and $2B. SLC initially intended to fund the airport with just 20% debt but that number's now about two-thirds. The cost of the new airport will unquestionably increase and SLC was never going to meet the traffic levels it forecasted, let alone after what's happening now. If the project finishes on budget, it'll make SLC about $1B more in debt than DTW and MSP -- when it begins to service the full debt, its CPE will far surpass both.

Now, I don't think - nor did I imply - that DL will de-hub SLC. I merely pointed out facts -- you simply can't gauge the future of DL based upon improvement projects made to individual airports, e.g. SLC's new airport does not make it immune to cuts. DTW's a great example of that -- it houses a smaller hub for DL today than the old terminal did for NW. Instead, what I said was that DL agreed to a $1.8B project that was to be financed by $600M in debt, by an airport that had zero debt. Instead, it's getting a project that will likely balloon over $4.5B and financed by close to $3.5B in debt; had they known this, I doubt they would've agreed to that scope of rebuild. To save face with the public, airlines generally keep their mouths shut when it comes to whining about costs that improve the passenger experience. There's plenty of examples -- WN publicly supported the MCI project, but reportedly opposed the scope of it privately; NK publicly supported the DTW North Terminal Project, but we now know they privately opposed it, etc.

And no, a project that ballooned by $1.5B - $2B (simply labor and material cost, and not including project additions) isn't run by a "super conservative" airport. Some overage was unexpected (Trump Tariffs), but they missed the mark well.

- - -

As I posted two weeks ago, the low-hanging fruit in terms of flight cuts has histrionically been very early, very late and redeye departures, plus long, thin flights that overfly other hubs. The first flights DL cut were... very early, very late and redeye departures. Most of these will be gone indefinitely... as will the long, thin flights that overfly other hubs. And SLC's seen more growth in this arena in recent years, than any other hub. There's simply now way CLE-SLC, CMH-SLC, etc. will operate during a downturn.
 
0newair0
Posts: 436
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:21 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 11:33 am

I think a lot of you are over thinking this. All hubs are likely to remain. Focus cities are likely to have significantly reduced services because of limited business travel. All other stations are likely to see a service reduction of some sort (be it freq. or gauge or both) because of less overall travel.
That's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1363
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 11:55 am

DeltaPSCFlyer wrote:
All interesting replies, but it seems like they all look through the lens of how Delta was/is before all this started.

Once we're past the worst of this virus, it will be the overall domestic and global airline industry landscape that will ultimately have a profound impact on DL, and how they plot their recovery.

Questions:
- What will market demand for international travel look like, and where will it be strong and weak?
- How fast will the economy recover?
- What will be the longer-term ramifications on everyday air travel be like? (TSA after 9/11, social distancing, etc.)
- How will other domestic airline competitors like AS, UA, AA, WN, and B6 emerge and what changes will they make?
- What domestic competitors may merge or disappear?
- What international competitors may merge or disappear?
- How will DL's alliance partners emerge? KE? KL? VS?



Thank you very much.
As is obvious to most, all existing airlines will emerge smaller after this if they emerge at all.

DL is quite optimistic about emerging at all, which is great,.
But quite frankly, as a traded company, DL and other publicly traded airlines should IMHO inform their shareholding how much liquidity they have and how much time they have left on that liquidity so that shareholders can decide what to do with their positions.

Also, if there s a time to ask for money from their shareholders and staff, this is it. Hey remember those buybacks and profit sharings? Guess what, we could use some help back right now, we'll give it back double after the crisis, we promise.

As much as I applauded Delta for their record profits, I am deeply disappointed in them since I saw their balance sheet at the beginning of this crisis.
Even more so as they were one of the first to beg for a bailout.
They slapped their huge profits in other airlines' faces, bought stock in partner airlines like it was nothing, shamed the ME3 for their subsidies, splashed cash on their employees. Delta here, Delta there.
What goes around comes around... and it really does.

Personally I would like to see DL emerge from this on their own, even if they have to give up some of their shine. I would like to see them face the situation like men, not whimps, take responsibility, liquidate some of their assets if they need to.
I'm ok with government taking over payroll, but all the rest they can and should figure out on their own.

No revenues? Sell miles or vouchers for future travel at a discount. It's Delta Airlines, not Air Zimbabwe.
Last edited by Waterbomber2 on Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2360
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 11:58 am

chonetsao wrote:
Instead of cutting all the hubs and focus cities, another way to be a smaller carrier, is to reduce two to three rows of seats from aircraft, get rid of the customer unfriendly space saver toilet and give a little more legroom to the torture seat rows. By doing that DL and other US3 can reduce capacity by 10% without any need to lay off too many staff and cut routes.


That would mean keeping nearly 100% of the costs while still losing most of the revenue. Hard to see how that’s a winning formula.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 7273
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:10 pm

chunhimlai wrote:
Thats too early
May be there is sharp rising on travel demand after the crisis and DL have to build nee hub (eg:MIA, AUS)

Airlines are not going to be opening new hubs for a while. Remember the aftermath of 9/11 were US carriers shrank, similar will happen now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
micstatic
Posts: 772
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:07 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:36 pm

There are so many negatives to this situation. So many. I have respected delta management for the last 10 years. If there was every a complaint I had it was arrogance. That's likely gone now.
S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
 
chonetsao
Posts: 721
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:55 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:37 pm

hOMSaR wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
Instead of cutting all the hubs and focus cities, another way to be a smaller carrier, is to reduce two to three rows of seats from aircraft, get rid of the customer unfriendly space saver toilet and give a little more legroom to the torture seat rows. By doing that DL and other US3 can reduce capacity by 10% without any need to lay off too many staff and cut routes.


That would mean keeping nearly 100% of the costs while still losing most of the revenue. Hard to see how that’s a winning formula.


It might cause short term pain. But it will minimise the number of laying off staff, minimise the risk of loosing market share, and be ready for the market bounce back any time. The aircraft would be kept flying, customer would be happier. Win win situation.

And I am sure this outcome would also please other stakeholders like airport, local governments and unions.
Last edited by chonetsao on Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6086
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:46 pm

For people who are saying that the companies don’t deserve a bail out, There’s no way to plan for something like this...For the reaction to something like this

You could have all the smoke detectors and fire extinguishers in the world but when a wall of fire approaches your house, they are worthless

There are a few companies poised to do well because they have what people need at this moment… Everybody else is in very bad shape across all industries
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 948
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:48 pm

Cut all the focus cities and focus on core hubs. This would be a good time for DL to finish off closing up CVG.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20613
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:07 pm

chonetsao wrote:
hOMSaR wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
Instead of cutting all the hubs and focus cities, another way to be a smaller carrier, is to reduce two to three rows of seats from aircraft, get rid of the customer unfriendly space saver toilet and give a little more legroom to the torture seat rows. By doing that DL and other US3 can reduce capacity by 10% without any need to lay off too many staff and cut routes.


That would mean keeping nearly 100% of the costs while still losing most of the revenue. Hard to see how that’s a winning formula.


It might cause short term pain. But it will minimise the number of laying off staff, minimise the risk of loosing market share, and be ready for the market bounce back any time. The aircraft would be kept flying, customer would be happier. Win win situation.

And I am sure this outcome would also please other stakeholders like airport, local governments and unions.

AA's MRTC (More Room Throughout Coach) repeated!

It failed spectacularly. Exactly why would it work in reducing costs to match revenue?

DL isn't reducing flights by half for fun. There needs to be a brutal cost reduction. Your strategy would bankrupt Delta. Unfortunately, more must be done.

Delta is cutting capacity 70%. Not at little that can be trimmed easy. That isn't enough. :cry2:

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/nationa ... 33548/?amp

This is far worse than 9/11 for the airlines.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9766
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:17 pm

That is a scenario no airline can survive without government help.
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 2046
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:28 pm

I think DL will just use this situation to off load it's expensive older aircraft only and take advantage of industry opportunities when the time is right.
Out of the Big 3 AA and UA are in far worse financial shape in this economic situation from the pandemic. This going to cause more industry consolidation.
I wouldn't be surprised if DL took advantage of buying and eliminating B6 or AA.
Especially under a Trump administration if he is successful winning another term.
Flyguy
My Wings are clipped just another Retired Airline person. The Ultimate Armchair out of the loop airline industry geek. Aloha Mr Hand!
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 738
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:45 pm

I’m not a fan of an industry-wide bailout. It punishes airlines like DL who have paid down debt to be better positioned for an event like this, by propping up competition that should have gone away. It rewards poor behavior like AA’s outsized debt for shiny planes and stock buy-backs. Rewarding a bad behavior usually gets you more of it and punishing good corporate behavior usually gets you less of it over the long term. Both are very bad for the industry as a whole.

We have been through this before. Visiting electronically was supposed to have eliminated most business travel at the last downturn. Technology to do that has improved, but you still can’t shake hands, check the pulse of business, or kick the tires via the internet. Some, most?, but not all business travel will resume, sooner or later.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
alasizon
Posts: 2630
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:45 pm

aaway wrote:
Byrdluvs747 wrote:
flyboy80 wrote:
If anyone pulls back LAX of the US3 I see United more likely than Delta.


Interesting. Isnt UA committed to T9? How would they back out of that?


DeltaPSCFlyer wrote:
As for T9, I don't have the specifics on it, or what the agreement states, but everything is negotiable...

LAWA and UA are still in negotiations.


Meetings with the corporate real estate folks are common in times like these, it is all about negotiating deferrals of rent, return of unused space, etc. to save cash.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8536
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:48 pm

wnflyguy wrote:
I think DL will just use this situation to off load it's expensive older aircraft ...


There's no situation to take advantage of here with older aircraft, unless those aircraft have debt against them and DL files bankruptcy. DL can park older, owned aircraft at any time. Today, just like 3 months ago or 3 years ago, if the aircraft and parts have remaining book value it needs to be written off. Retire a big number of any subfleet and you set of a cascade of pilot displacements and retraining where you're spending money to retrain and relocate pilots (money paid and they're not flying).

Instead, DL is going into cash conservation mode, deferring delivery of new aircraft being one of those measures. They announced suspension of the dividend. That means they've taken six of the seven actions I outlined ~10 days ago - the remaining one being furloughs. Like UA's begging/threatening, IMHO DL is hoping for federal gifts (not loans) before it comes to that.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/united- ... s-aid.html
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 7273
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:49 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
I’m not a fan of an industry-wide bailout. It punishes airlines like DL who have paid down debt to be better positioned for an event like this, by propping up competition that should have gone away. It rewards poor behavior like AA’s outsized debt for shiny planes and stock buy-backs. Rewarding a bad behavior usually gets you more of it and punishing good corporate behavior usually gets you less of it over the long term. Both are very bad for the industry as a whole.

We have been through this before. Visiting electronically was supposed to have eliminated most business travel at the last downturn. Technology to do that has improved, but you still can’t shake hands, check the pulse of business, or kick the tires via the internet. Some, most?, but not all business travel will resume, sooner or later.

And yet DL was one of the first ones publicly stating a bailout was needed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:58 pm

ATLWarrior might have it right - the airlines are not happy that only loans are being offered not cash grants. The threat - no buyout - big layoffs. I imagine there is a struggle in the Whitehouse for those who want to bail out and the others who say it's not fair to the other industries in deep trouble. Think abut it - Should $150,000 Office Managers ,$250,000 pilots, and $70,000 administrative assistants not be laid off while Joe Six-Pack who works for a mom and pop diesel shop is. This is going to last months. The airlines would be better served to go to the Unions and non-Union employees for temporary pay cuts. Early retirement packages are too expensive for an industry with no cash coming in. At least they'd keep their Health insurance and benefits , some of their wage and unemployment. It appears several European airlines are using this approach.

Are the airlines allowing employees who take a voluntary leave apply for unemployment? If they are, then the airlines just need to rapidly expand those to cover the 75% of staff that may be redundant for the next 3 months.
    300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
     
    EarlyLateORD
    Posts: 127
    Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:34 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:24 pm

    This subject of the DL Hubs has been beaten to death, but here is a quick synopsis:

    Delta has two strategies that have been long-standing, their "Not-Chicago" strategy and their "Atlanta to the World" strategy.

    DL believes it's better to own MSP/DTW (which have better cold weather ops) than to duke it out with another carrier for Chicago area traffic.

    The Chicago area is roughly a 12m MSA, DTW is 5.2m and MSP is 3.6m. Its better to own 8.6m travellers than to split up 12m as UA/AA/WN do in Chicago.

    MSP supports this strategy by basically having the highest wages in the US in relation to the cost of living. Combined with a need to travel in the winter for warm weather. MSP will survive, albeit with perhaps some natural loss of traffic. I think you all sometimes dont realize how big the DTW/MSP metros are compared to SLC, DEN PDX or SEA. MSP is bigger than all three except SEA, let alone DTW. DTW is bigger than all four plus PHX....

    DTW survives off the auto industry and other important service sectors. I dont see its roll diminishing unless the automobile industry takes a giant dive due to COVID-19.

    Atlanta is strategically important and allows a 2hr flight time to 60% of the US population, DL believes that ATL can basically support a flight to everywhere. Atlanta has always been an important Southern city, long before anyone had ever heard of Charlotte/Cary/Raleigh.

    Adam
    Last edited by EarlyLateORD on Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
     
    SESGDL
    Posts: 2904
    Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:38 pm

    EarlyLateORD wrote:
    This subject of the DL Hubs has been beaten to death, but here is a quick synopsis:

    Delta has two strategies that have been long-standing, their "Non-Chicago" strategy and their "Atlanta to the World" strategy.

    DL believes it's better to own MSP/DTW (which have better cold weather ops) than to duke it out with another carrier for Chicago area traffic.

    The Chicago area is roughly a 12m MSA, DTW is 5.2m and MSP is 3.6m. Its better to own 8.6m travellers than to split up 12m as UA/AA/WN do in Chicago.

    MSP supports this strategy by basically having the highest wages in the US in relation to the cost of living. Combined with a need to travel in the winter for warm weather. MSP will survive, albeit with perhaps some natural loss of traffic. I think you all sometimes dont realize how big the DTW/MSP metros are compared to SLC, DEN PDX or SEA. MSP is bigger than all four, let alone DTW. DTW is bigger than all four plus PHX....

    DTW survives off the auto industry and other important service sectors. I dont see its roll diminishing unless the automobile industry takes a giant dive due to COVID-19.

    Atlanta is strategically important and allows a 2hr flight time to 60% of the US population, DL believes that ATL can basically support a flight to everywhere. Atlanta has always been an important Southern city, long before anyone had ever heard of Charlotte/Cary/Raleigh.

    Adam


    I agree with you on all of this except for the size of the metros. MSP is not a larger metropolitan area than SEA. Everything else you said, however, is spot on.

    Jeremy
     
    EarlyLateORD
    Posts: 127
    Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:34 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:40 pm

    You are right, SEA is currently showing as 3.9m MSA, my error.
     
    HVNandrew
    Posts: 552
    Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:05 am

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm

    hpff wrote:
    AirFiero wrote:
    Wow. I se it as the exact opposite. A short term scare/panic over a virus that isn’t Ebola or the thing that turns people into zombies like the Walking Dead. Air travel demand was strong and growing until a few weeks ago. Now the world is coming to an end? Jesus, people, has humanity become that cynical?


    Less than three weeks ago, most of my friends were employed.

    This isn't going away tomorrow. Will it be short term? Yes, but it depends on how you define short term. It could be up to a year, and the economic impacts of this will last longer, especially since western governments can't quite seem to be able to figure any of this out.

    Agreed. The amount of posts on this forum over the last several days that are the equivalent of "this is just another cold I don't get it" and predicting that this will be over in three weeks is quite shocking. The *heath* crisis may not peak in the US until May or June. The economic effects are bound to last far beyond that.

    Anyway, on the topic of DL, as others have pointed out their position is not unique - all airlines are going to have to make significant cuts and will emerge out of this smaller. Claims that other airlines will swoop in where DL makes cuts misses that point. Even if DL cuts, say, SEA, AA isn't going to suddenly open up a hub and replace most of that service, nor will AS embark on a mass expansion. SEA was over-served with both the AS/DL hubs; if anything the reductions would return service to a more appropriate level for the market size and improve the profitability of the flights that remain. AS isn't going to backfill to reduce their own margins, and AA just like everyone else will need to make their own cuts and will not be in much of a position to add anywhere.

    Because they have so much focus city and P2P flying, DL can make cuts on a relatively large scale without significantly affecting their "core". Cuts to markets like RDU, LAS, CVG and even BOS can shrink the airline, while reinforcing core hubs like ATL, DTW, SLC and NYC as more of that traffic is directed their way. If I had to guess, I think that's where a lot of the shrink will come from. I used SEA in the above example because I do think of the hubs it is most vulnerable to cuts. I agree with others that it is important as a TPAC gateway, and TPAC will likely be more important in a reinvented DL as Asia will likely rebound much more quickly than Europe. However a gateway can operate successfully with select feeder flights from domestic markets; it doesn't need seven flights a day from BOI. The same argument can be made for BOS, though I think DL is in a stronger position there with the local market and could maintain a fuller (though reduced) network. I do question the viability of the Shuttle for DL (and similar operations for anyone) moving forward.

    I think cuts will also come generally across the board and at even the largest of hubs - 12x service to 9x service from hubs to key markets can cut a lot of capacity very quickly.
     
    SESGDL
    Posts: 2904
    Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 3:51 pm

    LAXdude1023 wrote:
    SESGDL wrote:
    WidebodyPTV wrote:

    Sure, but DTW is DL's third largest station behind ATL & NYC (the combined JFK/LGA) in terms of generating local passengers and local revenues...


    DTW is actually a smaller O&D airport and revenue generator for DL. There was a publication a few years ago that showed this. ATL was 1 (obviously), followed by MSP. DTW is a larger connecting hub than MSP, however.

    Jeremy


    Domestically, yes. Internationally, no. The O&D charts released are domestic only.

    DTW-Asia is much larger than MSP-Asia in O&D. DTW-Europe is larger too but its very concentrated in a few countries like Germany.

    Neither hub is going anywhere though.


    I'm aware that the data only referenced domestic. However, being that domestic demand from DTW and MSP dwarfs international demand, what I said still stands in that overall, MSP is a larger O&D market than DTW. I agree completely with your last statement that neither hub is going anywhere. I'd bet any amount of money that ATL, MSP, DTW and SLC will continue to be hubs for DL (and JFK/LGA).

    Jeremy
     
    AirFiero
    Posts: 1548
    Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:07 pm

    I really don’t get why people (including the DL CEO) say this will cause a permanent 30% decline in air travel. Supposedly, DL was making money just a few weeks ago with that level of service. If the demand was there, why wouldn’t it rebound when the virus problems are over?
     
    aaway
    Posts: 1452
    Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:07 am

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:38 pm

    alasizon wrote:
    aaway wrote:
    Byrdluvs747 wrote:

    Interesting. Isnt UA committed to T9? How would they back out of that?


    DeltaPSCFlyer wrote:
    As for T9, I don't have the specifics on it, or what the agreement states, but everything is negotiable...

    LAWA and UA are still in negotiations.


    Meetings with the corporate real estate folks are common in times like these, it is all about negotiating deferrals of rent, return of unused space, etc. to save cash.


    I can agree with that assessment.
    "The greatest mistake you can make in life is to continually be afraid you will make one." - Elbert Hubbard
     
    AZORMP
    Posts: 109
    Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:08 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:44 pm

    TTailedTiger wrote:
    WidebodyPTV wrote:
    Midwestindy wrote:
    LAX is not at risk, they won't drawdown SEA & LAX, that would leave them with nothing on the west coast & no-TPAC gateway(Excluding DTW)

    With DL retiring some 767s RDU/CVG/IND-CDG & TPA/MCO-AMS are probably at risk, not to mention p2p routes from RDU/CVG


    DL's in a flight for its life, strategy is largely irrelevant; cuts will be made based upon repairing the bleeding. While I think DL will try to salvage its investments, I'd be surprised if SEA didn't experience significant cuts, or SLC wasn't cut back to its early 2010s form. Longish flights to second- and third- tier communities simply won't be sustainable for ahwile.

    TTailedTiger wrote:
    Why do they need to keep both MSP and DTW. They overlap quite a bit. Shrink one to just O/D demand.


    All hub overlap, but if you think there's a large degree of overlap between DTW & MSP, you need to take a good look at their schedules.

    iadadd wrote:
    Long shot, but I think Seattle will be relatively safe. Asia is likely going to fare much better in a post COVID-19 world than Europe will. Europe's inability to contain this disease is going to have a medium-long term economic impact, and I don't think the continent will return back to where it was before for a while. Therefore, with Seattle serving as a hub to Asia, I believe it'll be able to weather the storm

    JFK and LAX will be able to retain their glorified focus city status. ATL will remain the crown jewel

    Between DTW, MSP, and SCL a reduction will need to occur ...


    ATL, DTW, MSP and SLC are DL's profit engines. NYC, LAX, BOS and SEA are long-term investments; NYC and LAX are likely marginally profitable, whereas BOS & SEA are unquestionably money losers. I realize the a.net community is going to fantasize about DL moving forward with its sexiest hubs, but at the end of the day, DL's goal is to make money...


    But Delta will no longer need dozens of flights from MSP and DTW to places like GRB and LSE. Both Europe and Asia travel will be hit hard for many years and that puts DTW in a bad position with all of its Asia flights and shuttle to AMS. MSP can take all of the Midwest traffic.



    DL canceled the flights from AZO to MSP and is routing everything via DTW, effective next week. DTW was and will be the primary hub for the Midwest and the primary Asian Gateway. It’s also DL’s #2 hub for operations, according to DTW’s Wikipedia site.
    Kalamazoo’s Radio Man

    The RJ2 sucks.
     
    flyboy80
    Posts: 2070
    Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:10 am

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:57 pm

    Is LAX really a hub as it is a necessity for local traffic and flowing a HUGE amount of customers throughout the DL network?

    I keep seeing comments that Delta is in a better position re UA/AA for a downturn, but we don't even know what the downturn will be yet, and principally I'm not sure I understand why- because Delta has a better balance sheet? How does that matter when all of Delta's revenue streams are off-the-rails for this unknown period? How quickly should we expect to see specific announcements from Delta on medium term plans to wether the storm?
     
    User avatar
    NWAESC
    Posts: 1612
    Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:05 pm

    The TPG article is definitely click-baity, but Jacobsen's statement of DL coming out a smaller carrier is likely true. I mean even if you take it literally, the MD88/90's are gone. That represents X amount of flying and capacity (not to mention charter work). Add in the previously mentioned '57's and '67's and it adds up.

    I'm not a network planner, but I think you'll see an across-the-board reduction in frequencies and/or gauge.

    I don't think DL's effort to make inroads in places like AUS or even BNA will stop. They didn't necessarily move in there for today's market; they did it looking towards the future. Lots of young people, tech, etc.

    BOS, SEA, and even LAX still represent huge O & D markets and Int'l gateways.

    I can say that DL's internal communications to us have been brutally honest- especially compared to how they normally are. I just think they aren't wasting anytime getting ready for the new normal, whatever that may be.
    "Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
     
    kavok
    Posts: 848
    Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:13 pm

    I really think the most vulnerable operation in DL’s system is BOS. Reason being: 1, DL is relatively new there and not very entrenched. 2, DL’s BOS connections consisted of USA to Europe, with BOS offering a bunch of flights to secondary European markets. If TATL volumes go down, then DL can consolidate at JFK. DL can consolidate whats left of secondary Europe to JFK, and BOS is no longer necessary. 3, Obviously DL hub flying to BOS remains, but everything else can be routed though NYC (or CDG/AMS).

    What happens at SEA will be more interesting. DL’s problem there was gate space, which: 1, theoretically would be less of an issue if all carriers decrease flying there, as there are more gates to go around and 2, if DL drops flights/seats there too much, all of the battle with AS will be for not as AS will gain more gates by having a bigger market share. DL may have invested too much in SEA to let it all fall apart, but time will tell.
     
    User avatar
    NWAESC
    Posts: 1612
    Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:18 pm

    MohawkWeekend wrote:
    Are the airlines allowing employees who take a voluntary leave apply for unemployment? If they are, then the airlines just need to rapidly expand those to cover the 75% of staff that may be redundant for the next 3 months.


    Delta has stated that they won't contest any claims made by employees taking voluntary leave.
    "Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
     
    MohawkWeekend
    Posts: 283
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

    Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

    Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:12 pm

    Good job Delta. I was in HR at the end of my career in another industry. . Many people don't know that companies are billed when an employee claims unemployment, hence UEC actually comes out of your employers bank account (unless your employer is out of business then the State picks it up). Delta will be billed for this in a quarter or 2. That's why companies contest UEC if the claim is not valid in normal times (i.e. you got fired).
      300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
       
      hpff
      Posts: 101
      Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:20 am

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:45 pm

      AirFiero wrote:
      I really don’t get why people (including the DL CEO) say this will cause a permanent 30% decline in air travel. Supposedly, DL was making money just a few weeks ago with that level of service. If the demand was there, why wouldn’t it rebound when the virus problems are over?


      1) There are a large group of people who are now unemployed or underemployed who would have spent money on discretionary travel but now need to retrench and spend their savings on rent, not just in the US - Canada's unemployment applications were the highest they've ever been this week;
      2) Every company and friend of mine, at least in my orbit, is now working from home, some of which has only happened in the past week, and the longer the virus stays an issue, the more used to teleconferencing and working from home each company will get, which may reduce corporate travel in the future;
      3) Some vulnerable businesses/corporations will end up shuttering completely depending on how long the virus lasts, further reducing both the overall economy and potential business travel;
      4) We don't know what the lasting political, legal, and business impacts of the virus will be at this point;
      5) If the virus is a hurricane, we're not even into the eyewall yet.

      Even if this ended tomorrow, there's a big chunk of the economy that has been impacted. It's not a matter of just turning the lights back on.
       
      WN732
      Posts: 827
      Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:13 pm

      lightsaber wrote:
      Good question. 600+ Aircraft to be parked:

      https://news.delta.com/ed-bastian-memo- ... our-future

      I personally think SLC and MSP are a bit close for hubs. One or the other will be downsized, but I fully admit, I do not know which.

      Complete aircraft deferals tells me DL negotiated well.

      I expect many long/thin routes to be cut. The era of yours truly having a selection of TCON direct flights is probably over.

      Lightsaber


      Personally I'd pick SLC to stay as DTW can fill in the slack of MSP and SLC is better for the mountain West and everything West.
       
      HVNandrew
      Posts: 552
      Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:05 am

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:16 pm

      kavok wrote:
      I really think the most vulnerable operation in DL’s system is BOS. Reason being: 1, DL is relatively new there and not very entrenched. 2, DL’s BOS connections consisted of USA to Europe, with BOS offering a bunch of flights to secondary European markets. If TATL volumes go down, then DL can consolidate at JFK. DL can consolidate whats left of secondary Europe to JFK, and BOS is no longer necessary. 3, Obviously DL hub flying to BOS remains, but everything else can be routed though NYC (or CDG/AMS).

      What happens at SEA will be more interesting. DL’s problem there was gate space, which: 1, theoretically would be less of an issue if all carriers decrease flying there, as there are more gates to go around and 2, if DL drops flights/seats there too much, all of the battle with AS will be for not as AS will gain more gates by having a bigger market share. DL may have invested too much in SEA to let it all fall apart, but time will tell.

      DL is anything but new in BOS. While their operations there have grown and shrunk several times over the years, they have had significant operations at BOS since the Northeast Airlines acquisition in the 70s. The only thing that's new-ish is another uptick in service.
       
      cokepopper
      Posts: 518
      Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 9:44 pm

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:29 pm

      Some are very shortsighted when it comes to their thinking on government bailouts to the airlines. It’s not just the airlines. Think of all the vendors, hotels, ground transportation workers this list goes on and on. Just recently a crew van driver to the hotel is thanking US because as he stated, it’s the airlines keeping him in business.
       
      LCDFlight
      Posts: 698
      Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:34 pm

      They will draw everything down, most certainly including ATL. Even at, say, 600 flights, ATL can function quite well. It would be wasteful to fly a full schedule there is demand is less than half of previous levels.

      Something that interests me is they must still utilize their slots. Notice HND, LHR, DCA, LGA activity seems to keep their slots in use.
      Last edited by LCDFlight on Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
       
      2175301
      Posts: 1915
      Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:38 pm

      I agree that Delta will emerge smaller after the travel and other restrictions are lifted. I also believe that all other carriers will also emerge smaller, and some will vanish long term.

      In my opinion, Delta has the fundamentals in place to be able to emerge smaller and poised to expand to capture market share. As an example, I do not think AA with all of its debt is going to fair well. They may survive; but, is likely to not be able to regain their previous size... and Delta (and Southwest) are likely to be two of the majors that pick up routes and traffic from the other airlines.

      I believe that in 5 years Delta will be larger than it is now... at the expense of other airlines.

      Have a great day,
       
      SkyVoice
      Posts: 422
      Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:34 pm

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:40 pm

      BNAMealer wrote:
      Cut all the focus cities and focus on core hubs. This would be a good time for DL to finish off closing up CVG.


      Nah, baby, nah! Until the coronavirus crisis began, Delta was actually making money at CVG, something they didn't always do when CVG was a Delta / Comair hub. They were at 400 flights a day, but up to 80% of their passenger traffic was connecting. In 2019, most of their CVG traffic was O&D with very good loads, and there were still some connections being made. On top of that, there are a huge number of SkyMiles members that live in the Greater Cincinnati Tri-State metro area. So, I don't expect Delta to abandon all of that when it was working so well for them.
      "Tough times never last. Tough people do." - Dr. Robert H. Schuller
       
      MKIAZ
      Posts: 279
      Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 5:24 am

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:48 pm

      IWMBH wrote:
      But, why wouldn't air traffic return to normal after the virus outbreak is over? In Europe most governments are pouring money into their economies to keep businesses 'alive' till they can reopen again after the crises. I'm sure the US economy will also get incentivises.


      Two factors.

      It depends on how bad this virus actually turns out to be, which we do not know yet. If this lasts 6 months + and kills millions of people, you can bet people will be VERY reluctant to resume leisure travel to crowded areas. Kind of how after the great depression people who lived through it were weird about having enough food. If this is bad enough people who live through it they will probably have a lifelong (or at least few yearlong) aversion to crowded spaces.

      Many businesses are now 100% work from home due to necessity. The consequence of this is they are getting used to using video conferencing, getting the kinks worked out ect. If they remain productive some not-insignificant number of them may decide to continue with it at least to an extent to save on costs. Meaning less expensive corporate travel.

      9/11 was the same type of thing. Logical or not people were afraid to travel for quite awhile..
       
      BravoOne
      Posts: 4094
      Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:56 pm

      Waterbomber2 wrote:
      DeltaPSCFlyer wrote:
      All interesting replies, but it seems like they all look through the lens of how Delta was/is before all this started.

      Once we're past the worst of this virus, it will be the overall domestic and global airline industry landscape that will ultimately have a profound impact on DL, and how they plot their recovery.

      Questions:
      - What will market demand for international travel look like, and where will it be strong and weak?
      - How fast will the economy recover?
      - What will be the longer-term ramifications on everyday air travel be like? (TSA after 9/11, social distancing, etc.)
      - How will other domestic airline competitors like AS, UA, AA, WN, and B6 emerge and what changes will they make?
      - What domestic competitors may merge or disappear?
      - What international competitors may merge or disappear?
      - How will DL's alliance partners emerge? KE? KL? VS?



      Thank you very much.
      As is obvious to most, all existing airlines will emerge smaller after this if they emerge at all.

      DL is quite optimistic about emerging at all, which is great,.
      But quite frankly, as a traded company, DL and other publicly traded airlines should IMHO inform their shareholding how much liquidity they have and how much time they have left on that liquidity so that shareholders can decide what to do with their positions.

      Also, if there s a time to ask for money from their shareholders and staff, this is it. Hey remember those buybacks and profit sharings? Guess what, we could use some help back right now, we'll give it back double after the crisis, we promise.

      As much as I applauded Delta for their record profits, I am deeply disappointed in them since I saw their balance sheet at the beginning of this crisis.
      Even more so as they were one of the first to beg for a bailout.
      They slapped their huge profits in other airlines' faces, bought stock in partner airlines like it was nothing, shamed the ME3 for their subsidies, splashed cash on their employees. Delta here, Delta there.
      What goes around comes around... and it really does.

      Personally I would like to see DL emerge from this on their own, even if they have to give up some of their shine. I would like to see them face the situation like men, not whimps, take responsibility, liquidate some of their assets if they need to.
      I'm ok with government taking over payroll, but all the rest they can and should figure out on their own.

      No revenues? Sell miles or vouchers for future travel at a discount. It's Delta Airlines, not Air Zimbabwe.


      Actually its Delta Air Lines, but who cares at a time like this?
       
      MohawkWeekend
      Posts: 283
      Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

      Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

      Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:10 pm

      1) No one knows how bad or how long this will go on. So discussions on which hubs will survive is really premature.
      2) Cargo flights by airlines and air cargo operators firms will continue and might grow.
      3) A small percentage of passenger flights will still exist to all major cities. You might see subsidies to maintain an expanded EAS but now to places that had 3 to 15 flights a day - say Flint for example. The Govt might want to maintain 2 or 3 flights to any mid-size city.
      4 IDT the govt will not be able to bail out any single industry(airlines or Boeing) because that horse has left the barn. Numerous industries are starting mass layoffs. They better be planning for bailing out essential services - local governments, utilities, food, medical, sanitation, fire and safety, and expanded Medicaid/Obama Care insurance, Unemployment Claims, and direct govt cash grants to individuals
      5) All starts to go away as soon as a treatment is found. Hopefully soon. Otherwise we are going to see if Modern Monetary Policy works or not.
        300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
         
        hsuthe19
        Posts: 24
        Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:22 pm

        Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

        Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:16 pm

        I don’t think they’ll dehub BOS. Unless AA trims back JFK to hub flying +LHR MAD and other one world hubs, which would enable DL to grow more in JFK, BOS will stay (though service will be reduced). If anything, I think AA’s BOS ambitions will be diminished.
         
        stlgph
        Posts: 11229
        Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

        Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

        Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:26 pm

        AirFiero wrote:
        I really don’t get why people (including the DL CEO) say this will cause a permanent 30% decline in air travel. Supposedly, DL was making money just a few weeks ago with that level of service. If the demand was there, why wouldn’t it rebound when the virus problems are over?


        Apparently you think things are going to be exactly the same after all this.

        They won't be.
        if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
        • 1
        • 2
        • 3
        • 4
        • 5
        • 44

        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