Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Boston757
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:39 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 6:08 pm

Information from all sides is the best.
 
2175301
Posts: 1898
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 6:13 pm

TropicalSky wrote:
DAL requesting 15% pay cut from pilots to ensure 1 yr of no furloughs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... 4I2UR?il=0


I suspect that the Pilots will reject this proposal. The airline industry has a lot of history with companies asking for reductions in pay and benefits during tough times... and never giving them back after the tough times are over. There might be a few exceptions to that.

Have a great day,
 
cessna2
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:16 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 6:19 pm

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
klm617 wrote:
HNLSLCPDX wrote:
This thread is full of so many false narratives and wishful thinking. I think it’s to a point where many people here on a.net, and specifically on this Delta thread are in a rush to talk in an educated manner about things y’all know nothing about. If you want to get accurate news on the current state of Delta then watch the many interviews Ed Bastian and corporate have been giving on Fox Business, CNN, Sky Hub, etc.

It’s dangerous and simply foolish to speculate about things that have not happened yet especially when it comes to people’s livelihoods, employment, and the overall state or future of Delta. It reminds me of the predictions Fauci and all these medical “experts” have been given the public the last six months and yet not one of them has been correct. Same thing here on this thread. We simply do not know what’s going to happen. Stick to the facts and make sure the information you get is directly from Delta.


While you maybe right why would you just listen to Ed Bastian. He's not going to tell you the full truth he's only going to tell you what he want's you to know. That's a common misconception here that only people in the know tell the truth. Everyone has an agenda this days and half truth are the flavor of the day. Truth that only fits the narrative that suits the agenda. Great examples of this are the elimination of the MEM and CVG hub that Delta management swore were not going to close. We need to see the picture from all sides and perspective's not just the side that cooperate want's us to see. I welcome all the posts I read even the far fetched ones because if you don't like the content just scroll on by. It's not just about the airline and it's management and their perspective it's about all the other cascading events that are effected by the decisions a company makes and those effects need to be brought to light as well.


I respectfully disagree with you. From the beginning of this pandemic Ed Bastian and corporate said they would be honest and transparent with the information they give. I believe they have been.

Because they would tell you when they are lying right? Companies, DL in this case, tend to spin their information as best as possible while not putting themselves in a legally liable situation. Take the furlough talk for example. Ed said, "I am hopeful, not optimistic, but hopeful we will avoid furloughs or at least be minimal furloughs." What i've seen my DL friends posting all over social media is, "We aren't going to get furloughed like the other airlines. This is great!" Whereas no where has it been said they will avoid furloughs. It's just a pretty picture management is trying to paint publicly to avoid the bad press. When/if WARN notices get sent out some of them are going to be very shocked and unprepared. I promise you DL IFS is still overstaffed by 4-6,000. Where will all these people go to avoid furloughs? How creative can one company get?
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8310
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:04 pm

Boston757 wrote:
Information from all sides is the best.


That's a false-equivalence trap. Not everyone is equally informed about corporate finance, labor law, or the filings requirements of U.S. public companies. Not every post or source has equal value. The business reporting - not the opinion pieces - of sources like Reuters, the New York Times, WSJ, Washington Post, and USA Today and generally regarded as pretty reliable. They aspire to proper standards of journalism; they'll look for multiple sources, not a single, unidentified rumormonger. If you look at Forbes and Barron's you slide into a lot of opinion and commentary. These are much more subjective. Simple Flying, Fliegerfaust... of them what needs to be said, really?

Pick reliable sources. Parse company and executive statements very heavily. As noted above, there are penalties for misrepresentation of material matters but one needs to take care of what is, and is not, said. 'We hope to avoid layoffs' is NOT 'There will be no layoffs.'
 
jagraham
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:35 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
danipawa wrote:
so how was the fleet before the pandemic and how its going to be after this retirements ?



B763:
YE2019: 56
Current: 12 in-service, 44 in temp storage
Projection: 7 announced to be retired in 2020, per yesterdays announcement. This fleet is likely to continue to see accelerated retirements depending on trajectory of international demand


---
Current count of accelerated 2020 retirements:

47 MD88
30 MD90
10 A320
10 B73G

8 B77E
10 B77L
7 B763

94 narrowbodies, 25 widebodies = 119 aircraft.
Granted the MD88 were only pulled ahead a few months.


The 7 "retired" 763s are the youngest 763s. Probably opportunistic onward sale . . .
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5121
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:42 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
Boston757 wrote:
Information from all sides is the best.


That's a false-equivalence trap. Not everyone is equally informed about corporate finance, labor law, or the filings requirements of U.S. public companies. Not every post or source has equal value. The business reporting - not the opinion pieces - of sources like Reuters, the New York Times, WSJ, Washington Post, and USA Today and generally regarded as pretty reliable. They aspire to proper standards of journalism; they'll look for multiple sources, not a single, unidentified rumormonger. If you look at Forbes and Barron's you slide into a lot of opinion and commentary. These are much more subjective. Simple Flying, Fliegerfaust... of them what needs to be said, really?

Pick reliable sources. Parse company and executive statements very heavily. As noted above, there are penalties for misrepresentation of material matters but one needs to take care of what is, and is not, said. 'We hope to avoid layoffs' is NOT 'There will be no layoffs.'


Yes every post is of equal value. Again people want this forum to be one sided what's good for the airlines. There are several other objectives that are relevant not just the well being of a particular airlines. You treed on very shaky ground when you say one persons idea has more value than another's just because it doesn't suit a particular narrative.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 8:39 pm

tphuang wrote:
However, if their ownership stakes get wiped out, those airlines could easily turn their backs on delta down the line

People keep saying this, but what exact incentive do these airlines have to leave DL? Particularly VS and AM who have active JVs with DL and have partnered together for years now? LA just signed the JV agreement with them. Neither AA nor UA has the finances right now to throw money at any of these airlines, so why exactly are they going to "turn their backs on DL?" Further, when in recent memory has this even happened. When DL tried to woo JL away from AA during JLs bankruptcy, JL decided to stick with AA.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
jordanh
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:56 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:05 pm

OA412 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
However, if their ownership stakes get wiped out, those airlines could easily turn their backs on delta down the line

People keep saying this, but what exact incentive do these airlines have to leave DL? Particularly VS and AM who have active JVs with DL and have partnered together for years now? LA just signed the JV agreement with them. Neither AA nor UA has the finances right now to throw money at any of these airlines, so why exactly are they going to "turn their backs on DL?" Further, when in recent memory has this even happened. When DL tried to woo JL away from AA during JLs bankruptcy, JL decided to stick with AA.


:checkmark: The LATAM bankruptcy financing package was predicated on the continuing partnership with Delta; that is what gave the investors confidence that we could be a successful airline going forward. Maybe some people are wishing partnerships will be disregarded, but the evidence is actually the opposite from their wishes.
 
Boston757
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:39 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:47 pm

I’ll take in the information from my union! They speak for me and have my best interest at hand.
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:13 pm

IMO, perhaps Ed Bastian's "creativity" remark means a domestic codeshare arrangement opportunity (?). (SW?) One of the key advantages, I mean AAdvantages, American now has is being able to deploy domestic aircraft in markets other than SEA, JFK and BOS (enter JetBlue) while retaining a loyalty base. American's move with JetBlue can be seen as American being ready, wiling and able to defend Miami. Perhaps Delta needs that short-to-medium-term resiliency during the recovery (and perhaps beyond).
 
alasizon
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:04 pm

Boston757 wrote:
I’ll take in the information from my union! They speak for me and have my best interest at hand.


I hope you are being facetious. Your union doesn't have your best interest in mind, they have the overall best interest for them in mind and ideally that will match up with a large number of their members, but in no way does it mean it is your best interest. Unions are rarely a good source of unbiased information.

TYWoolman wrote:
IMO, perhaps Ed Bastian's "creativity" remark means a domestic codeshare arrangement opportunity (?). (SW?) One of the key advantages, I mean AAdvantages, American now has is being able to deploy domestic aircraft in markets other than SEA, JFK and BOS (enter JetBlue) while retaining a loyalty base. American's move with JetBlue can be seen as American being ready, wiling and able to defend Miami. Perhaps Delta needs that short-to-medium-term resiliency during the recovery (and perhaps beyond).


I'm not sure what your obsession is with a DL and WN codeshare but it'll never happen.

A) WN's pilot contract forbids it
B) WN has no need - they are already looking to take advantage of situations where a competitor is disadvantaged. Why bother to assist a competitor?
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:11 pm

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Stick to the facts and make sure the information you get is directly from Delta.


You overlook the fact that Delta isn't incentivized to tell you the whole truth.

A good management has to balance the interest of many groups whose interests conflict.

Given that pilot negotiations are underway and other groups experience periodic unionization drives, Delta has motivation to make reassuring noises right now to non-union employees, whether those noises are realistic or not.

Always consider the motives of others or you someone might get the better of you!

Many events in the airline industry can easily be accurately predicted based on economics and past precedents. If you know the industry well, it's not hard to predict outcomes, including some which others might not want to tell employees about.
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:25 pm

OA412 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
However, if their ownership stakes get wiped out, those airlines could easily turn their backs on delta down the line

People keep saying this, but what exact incentive do these airlines have to leave DL?


Simple.

For a publicly traded company, the most important factor for choosing a partner is network.

Delta is the second-choice (or later) network fit for some of its partners. But the ownership stake drives partners to work with Delta despite the second-best network fit.

Now if Delta's ownership stake is removed, for instance by a bankruptcy court giving full ownership of a partner to its creditors (very common), then these partners won't have any more reason to settle for their second-best choice. They'll be free to partner with their first choice airline (maybe not Delta) instead, and their new owners may want them to do this.
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:28 pm

alasizon wrote:
Boston757 wrote:
I’ll take in the information from my union! They speak for me and have my best interest at hand.


I hope you are being facetious. Your union doesn't have your best interest in mind, they have the overall best interest for them in mind and ideally that will match up with a large number of their members, but in no way does it mean it is your best interest. Unions are rarely a good source of unbiased information.

TYWoolman wrote:
IMO, perhaps Ed Bastian's "creativity" remark means a domestic codeshare arrangement opportunity (?). (SW?) One of the key advantages, I mean AAdvantages, American now has is being able to deploy domestic aircraft in markets other than SEA, JFK and BOS (enter JetBlue) while retaining a loyalty base. American's move with JetBlue can be seen as American being ready, wiling and able to defend Miami. Perhaps Delta needs that short-to-medium-term resiliency during the recovery (and perhaps beyond).


I'm not sure what your obsession is with a DL and WN codeshare but it'll never happen.

A) WN's pilot contract forbids it
B) WN has no need - they are already looking to take advantage of situations where a competitor is disadvantaged. Why bother to assist a competitor?


Well especially in the context of recent developments with American, I wouldn't say it's an obsession but rather strategizing what awesome carrier option is left for Delta to team up with in key domestic markets in response (not that there really needs to be a like-wise response). I agree with your A and B but I wouldn't say that any of those things are set in-stone in light of a recovery, furloughs, changing competitive landscapes, and potential dismal traffic forecasts. Should the industry determine that domestic codeshares are the key to recovery outside of bankruptcy to bring value and remain competitive, Delta would bring international flow into the system, perhaps cooperation with trans-border partners Aeromexico and WestJet, maybe JFK/LGA slots, Boston and Dallas codeshares, and A220 know-how if Southwest plans on introducing it in the future. But I do admit, relinquishing LGA slots (even JFK slots) would be something not worthwhile short of a long-term partnership.
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:32 pm

n9801f wrote:
OA412 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
However, if their ownership stakes get wiped out, those airlines could easily turn their backs on delta down the line

People keep saying this, but what exact incentive do these airlines have to leave DL?


Simple.

For a publicly traded company, the most important factor for choosing a partner is network.

Delta is the second-choice (or later) network fit for some of its partners. But the ownership stake drives partners to work with Delta despite the second-best network fit.

Now if Delta's ownership stake is removed, for instance by a bankruptcy court giving full ownership of a partner to its creditors (very common), then these partners won't have any more reason to settle for their second-best choice. They'll be free to partner with their first choice airline (maybe not Delta) instead, and their new owners may want them to do this.


That view has some truth, but most of Delta's main alliance partners would overlap networks in other alliances. Delta's current alliance partners don't want to play second-fiddle in a new alliance.
 
kavok
Posts: 846
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:41 pm

Here is my own take on the whole “DL needs to respond to AA+ B6/AS”.:

DL doesn’t need to do anything significant.

For the last decade, Delta’s bread and butter has always been the four interior Fortress hubs that are great for providing connections, and who basically fund the rest of the Delta operation. The growth in SEA, BOS, RDU, etc. may all turn out to be great long term investments (or not) ... but at the end of the day investments are what they are at this point.

The point I am trying to make is that AA’s partnerships with AS and B6 have no significant impact on DLs four interior fortress hubs. And as such, the Delta money train will continue when the demand returns. Yes the coastal hubs are more sexy, and NYC does provide some necessary feed to secondary Europe. But let’s not forget where the Golden Goose resides (ATL, DTW, MSP & SLC). Until that paradigm changes, DL is still going to have more money to outspend its competitors, regardless of what moves AA makes with B6 or AS.
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:01 am

kavok wrote:
Here is my own take on the whole “DL needs to respond to AA+ B6/AS”.:

DL doesn’t need to do anything significant.

For the last decade, Delta’s bread and butter has always been the four interior Fortress hubs that are great for providing connections, and who basically fund the rest of the Delta operation. The growth in SEA, BOS, RDU, etc. may all turn out to be great long term investments (or not) ... but at the end of the day investments are what they are at this point.

The point I am trying to make is that AA’s partnerships with AS and B6 have no significant impact on DLs four interior fortress hubs. And as such, the Delta money train will continue when the demand returns. Yes the coastal hubs are more sexy, and NYC does provide some necessary feed to secondary Europe. But let’s not forget where the Golden Goose resides (ATL, DTW, MSP & SLC). Until that paradigm changes, DL is still going to have more money to outspend its competitors, regardless of what moves AA makes with B6 or AS.



I like the observation. Delta staying the course is probably prudent unless the value to partner is overwhelming. However, at a time when all airlines are fragile amid recovery, one airline's move at a corner of the network of another's could have recovery implications for that other airline. The industry at a stand-still and restarting again brings bold dynamics into the equation. Look at AS in LAX, JetBlue in LGA, EWR and LAX. Look at American having the opportunity to free up resources to put elsewhere since they now have the benefit of retaining passengers in key markets through JetBlue and Alaska. The competitive landscape is changing before our eyes because everyone's common denominator (scared traveling public) is pretty much the same, relatively. Airlines are shifting their networks like tectonic plates but the shimmers are not felt yet until after the recovery takes place and, over-time, can affect interior bread and butter. If Delta's response is to add capacity, that puts Delta at a cost-disadvantage when American can just put an increased demand for its services on Alaska and JetBlue. That's the brilliance of the proposed American codeshares: It is as significant, amid the recovery, as was (still is) the Delta-Latam deal announcement last year.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8170
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:44 am

Update for the past week. Nice to see a number of 752s returning to service.......

---
Actual returned from storage for Tue 7/14: (8)
1 A320 SBD-MSY (N353NW)
1 A320 SBD-MIA (N344NW)
1 A321 VCV-MSP (N346DX)
1 B739 MZJ-DTW
1 B752 MZJ-JFK (N717TW) (75S)
1 B73G MWH-ATL (N307DQ) return to service, to "burn cycles" before retirement?
1 A321 MCI-DTW
1 B763 ILN-ATL (N184DN)

Return to storage Wed 7/15: (1)
1 A320 MSP-SBD (N326US); this aircraft left MCI on 6/30, retirement based on today's annoucement?

Actual returned from storage for Wed 7/15: (1)
1 B739 MZJ-SLC

Actual returned from storage for Thu 7/16: (2)
1 B739 MZJ-BOS
1 B738 VCV-LAX (N386DA)

Actual returned from storage for Fri 7/17: (3)
1 B752 SBD-LAX (N540US) (75H)
1 B738 VCV-LAX (N377DA)
1 B739 MZJ-ATL

Actual returned from stroage for Sat 7/18: (4)
1 B738 VCV-SLC (N3745B)
1 B738 VCV-SLC (N3746H)
1 B738 MCI-ATL
1 B752 BHM-ATL (N662DN) (75C), F72 sport charter config

Actual returned from storage for Sun 7/19: (3)
1 B752 SBD-DTW (N555NW) (75D)
1 B752 MZJ-MSP (N682DA) (75D)
1 B739 MCI-ATL

Actual returned from stroage for Mon 7/20: (2)
1 B739 MZJ-DTW
1 B738 MCI-ATL

Total aircraft returned from storage through Mon 7/20:
4 A359 (All A359s out of storage and returned to service)
2 A319
16 A320
38 A321
1 B73G
12 B738
58 B739
14 B752
10 B753
7 B763
3 A333
----
168 Total

Planned for Tue 7/21: (4)
1 A320 SBD-ATL (N309US); oldest age-wise A320 in the fleet
1 B738 VCV-BOS
1 B752 MZJ-ATL (N536US) (75H)
1 B739 MCI-JFK

Planned for Wed 7/22: (2)
1 A320 SBD-ATL
1 B738 VCV-SEA





*Does not include reactivation of aircraft that had been parked or stored at hub locations
 
DMPHL
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:33 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:42 am

TYWoolman wrote:
IMO, perhaps Ed Bastian's "creativity" remark means a domestic codeshare arrangement opportunity (?). (SW?) One of the key advantages, I mean AAdvantages, American now has is being able to deploy domestic aircraft in markets other than SEA, JFK and BOS (enter JetBlue) while retaining a loyalty base. American's move with JetBlue can be seen as American being ready, wiling and able to defend Miami. Perhaps Delta needs that short-to-medium-term resiliency during the recovery (and perhaps beyond).


Maybe AA is willing to shift some money and additional capacity to Miami to keep as much market share on South America routes as possible. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Delta operates out of 8 gates in Miami. American operates out of 65 gates in Miami. DL is making a play for a chunk of the South American market, They are not planning to, will not, and as it stands cannot, in any way control any comparatively sizable share of MIA passenger operations.
 
User avatar
NWAESC
Posts: 1606
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:27 am

cessna2 wrote:
Because they would tell you when they are lying right? Companies, DL in this case, tend to spin their information as best as possible while not putting themselves in a legally liable situation. Take the furlough talk for example. Ed said, "I am hopeful, not optimistic, but hopeful we will avoid furloughs or at least be minimal furloughs." What i've seen my DL friends posting all over social media is, "We aren't going to get furloughed like the other airlines. This is great!" Whereas no where has it been said they will avoid furloughs. It's just a pretty picture management is trying to paint publicly to avoid the bad press.


I've seen a lot of those comments as well, but I wonder if that's more about noise covering the signal than anything else. In person-at least in my experience- people are far more pragmatic.

When/if WARN notices get sent out some of them are going to be very shocked and unprepared. I promise you DL IFS is still overstaffed by 4-6,000. Where will all these people go to avoid furloughs? How creative can one company get?


We've all had months to prepare. I don't know what to say to anyone that hasn't at least given the worst-case scenario some thought.

I can't see other divisions absorbing 4-6k F/A's, but between that/leaves/split lines, I'll bet it makes a dent. That assumes an F/A is open to going to, say, Res for a year or two...
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
 
HVNandrew
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:05 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 1:00 pm

TYWoolman wrote:
kavok wrote:
Here is my own take on the whole “DL needs to respond to AA+ B6/AS”.:

DL doesn’t need to do anything significant.

For the last decade, Delta’s bread and butter has always been the four interior Fortress hubs that are great for providing connections, and who basically fund the rest of the Delta operation. The growth in SEA, BOS, RDU, etc. may all turn out to be great long term investments (or not) ... but at the end of the day investments are what they are at this point.

The point I am trying to make is that AA’s partnerships with AS and B6 have no significant impact on DLs four interior fortress hubs. And as such, the Delta money train will continue when the demand returns. Yes the coastal hubs are more sexy, and NYC does provide some necessary feed to secondary Europe. But let’s not forget where the Golden Goose resides (ATL, DTW, MSP & SLC). Until that paradigm changes, DL is still going to have more money to outspend its competitors, regardless of what moves AA makes with B6 or AS.



I like the observation. Delta staying the course is probably prudent unless the value to partner is overwhelming. However, at a time when all airlines are fragile amid recovery, one airline's move at a corner of the network of another's could have recovery implications for that other airline. The industry at a stand-still and restarting again brings bold dynamics into the equation. Look at AS in LAX, JetBlue in LGA, EWR and LAX. Look at American having the opportunity to free up resources to put elsewhere since they now have the benefit of retaining passengers in key markets through JetBlue and Alaska. The competitive landscape is changing before our eyes because everyone's common denominator (scared traveling public) is pretty much the same, relatively. Airlines are shifting their networks like tectonic plates but the shimmers are not felt yet until after the recovery takes place and, over-time, can affect interior bread and butter. If Delta's response is to add capacity, that puts Delta at a cost-disadvantage when American can just put an increased demand for its services on Alaska and JetBlue. That's the brilliance of the proposed American codeshares: It is as significant, amid the recovery, as was (still is) the Delta-Latam deal announcement last year.

You're really comparing apples to oranges when you look at what AA/B6/AS are doing domestically to international JVs. When you're analyzing the AA/B6/AS arrangements, you almost seem to be equating service on B6 or AS to AA actually flying the routes, and that is not the case. These are codeshare arrangements - something that hasn't been revolutionary either in the domestic or international market in decades. This doesn't allow for anti-trust immunity, schedule/pricing coordination, etc. It's fundamentally different from the arrangements that DL (and AA for that matter) have with their international JV partners, where one carrier flying a route really is tantamount to the other carrier flying the route as well. Yes, AA's arrangements with B6 and AS are interesting and allow them to build/maintain a presence in some markets through a codeshare on routes they don't want to or cannot economically fly (i.e. certain domestic markets) while expanding in other ways in those markets (internationally), but it is not the same as flying the routes themselves or growing organically in those markets. As has been discussed in other threads, I'd actually argue that the arrangement with B6 may actually signal AA's further retreat in NYC, at least domestically, and further ceding the NYC domestic market to B6. IMO it's a further shift in AA's strategy away from maintaining a hub in NYC and further narrowing their focus on international and certain high value domestic O/D out of the area.
 
Boston757
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:39 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:03 pm

alasizon wrote:
Boston757 wrote:
I’ll take in the information from my union! They speak for me and have my best interest at hand.


I hope you are being facetious. Your union doesn't have your best interest in mind, they have the overall best interest for them in mind and ideally that will match up with a large number of their members, but in no way does it mean it is your best interest. Unions are rarely a good source of unbiased information.

TYWoolman wrote:
IMO, perhaps Ed Bastian's "creativity" remark means a domestic codeshare arrangement opportunity (?). (SW?) One of the key advantages, I mean AAdvantages, American now has is being able to deploy domestic aircraft in markets other than SEA, JFK and BOS (enter JetBlue) while retaining a loyalty base. American's move with JetBlue can be seen as American being ready, wiling and able to defend Miami. Perhaps Delta needs that short-to-medium-term resiliency during the recovery (and perhaps beyond).


I'm not sure what your obsession is with a DL and WN codeshare but it'll never happen.

A) WN's pilot contract forbids it
B) WN has no need - they are already looking to take advantage of situations where a competitor is disadvantaged. Why bother to assist a competitor?



I’m going to take information from multiple sources..not just from my company. I’d never ever just listen to my ceo like he is or she is be all end all.
 
Boston757
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:39 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:05 pm

A friend of mine has already as of last month been moved out of reservations to payroll, they had no say in the move, nor happy about it.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18216
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:32 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
danipawa wrote:
so how was the fleet before the pandemic and how its going to be after this retirements ?

B752:
YE2019: 111
Current: 37 in-service, 74 in temp storage
Projection: No official announcement of any pending decisions. Its possible there could be some early retirements or rationalization of subfleets. This could happen of an accelerated timeframe. The domestic non-ETOPS are probably most at-risk. Any retirements are more likely to be based on frames approaching heavy maintenance checks

How have the 752s managed to survive this so far?
I don't take responsibility at all
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:49 pm

HVNandrew wrote:
TYWoolman wrote:
kavok wrote:
Here is my own take on the whole “DL needs to respond to AA+ B6/AS”.:

DL doesn’t need to do anything significant.

For the last decade, Delta’s bread and butter has always been the four interior Fortress hubs that are great for providing connections, and who basically fund the rest of the Delta operation. The growth in SEA, BOS, RDU, etc. may all turn out to be great long term investments (or not) ... but at the end of the day investments are what they are at this point.

The point I am trying to make is that AA’s partnerships with AS and B6 have no significant impact on DLs four interior fortress hubs. And as such, the Delta money train will continue when the demand returns. Yes the coastal hubs are more sexy, and NYC does provide some necessary feed to secondary Europe. But let’s not forget where the Golden Goose resides (ATL, DTW, MSP & SLC). Until that paradigm changes, DL is still going to have more money to outspend its competitors, regardless of what moves AA makes with B6 or AS.



I like the observation. Delta staying the course is probably prudent unless the value to partner is overwhelming. However, at a time when all airlines are fragile amid recovery, one airline's move at a corner of the network of another's could have recovery implications for that other airline. The industry at a stand-still and restarting again brings bold dynamics into the equation. Look at AS in LAX, JetBlue in LGA, EWR and LAX. Look at American having the opportunity to free up resources to put elsewhere since they now have the benefit of retaining passengers in key markets through JetBlue and Alaska. The competitive landscape is changing before our eyes because everyone's common denominator (scared traveling public) is pretty much the same, relatively. Airlines are shifting their networks like tectonic plates but the shimmers are not felt yet until after the recovery takes place and, over-time, can affect interior bread and butter. If Delta's response is to add capacity, that puts Delta at a cost-disadvantage when American can just put an increased demand for its services on Alaska and JetBlue. That's the brilliance of the proposed American codeshares: It is as significant, amid the recovery, as was (still is) the Delta-Latam deal announcement last year.

You're really comparing apples to oranges when you look at what AA/B6/AS are doing domestically to international JVs. When you're analyzing the AA/B6/AS arrangements, you almost seem to be equating service on B6 or AS to AA actually flying the routes, and that is not the case. These are codeshare arrangements - something that hasn't been revolutionary either in the domestic or international market in decades. This doesn't allow for anti-trust immunity, schedule/pricing coordination, etc. It's fundamentally different from the arrangements that DL (and AA for that matter) have with their international JV partners, where one carrier flying a route really is tantamount to the other carrier flying the route as well. Yes, AA's arrangements with B6 and AS are interesting and allow them to build/maintain a presence in some markets through a codeshare on routes they don't want to or cannot economically fly (i.e. certain domestic markets) while expanding in other ways in those markets (internationally), but it is not the same as flying the routes themselves or growing organically in those markets. As has been discussed in other threads, I'd actually argue that the arrangement with B6 may actually signal AA's further retreat in NYC, at least domestically, and further ceding the NYC domestic market to B6. IMO it's a further shift in AA's strategy away from maintaining a hub in NYC and further narrowing their focus on international and certain high value domestic O/D out of the area.


I get what you are saying...makes sense long-term. I just think that amid the backdrop of demand resurgence uncertainty, domestic codesharing is a distinct competitve advantage short to medium term.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 8:22 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
danipawa wrote:
so how was the fleet before the pandemic and how its going to be after this retirements ?

B752:
YE2019: 111
Current: 37 in-service, 74 in temp storage
Projection: No official announcement of any pending decisions. Its possible there could be some early retirements or rationalization of subfleets. This could happen of an accelerated timeframe. The domestic non-ETOPS are probably most at-risk. Any retirements are more likely to be based on frames approaching heavy maintenance checks

How have the 752s managed to survive this so far?


They're paid for, the cost of fuel is super low, and DL continues to enforce their self-imposed 60% capacity cap. I'd imagine that combination of factors makes the 199-seat 752 fairly attractive to operate on routes that warrant the capacity.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 3150
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 8:34 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
danipawa wrote:
so how was the fleet before the pandemic and how its going to be after this retirements ?

B752:
YE2019: 111
Current: 37 in-service, 74 in temp storage
Projection: No official announcement of any pending decisions. Its possible there could be some early retirements or rationalization of subfleets. This could happen of an accelerated timeframe. The domestic non-ETOPS are probably most at-risk. Any retirements are more likely to be based on frames approaching heavy maintenance checks

How have the 752s managed to survive this so far?

Paid for. Shared pilot category with the 767, so even if they are all retired there is no eliminated pilot group. The interior refresh is still pretty new. Most just finished a heavy check cycle I think. Could be a couple of years before any are due.
 
winginit
Posts: 2974
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:27 pm

n9801f wrote:
OA412 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
However, if their ownership stakes get wiped out, those airlines could easily turn their backs on delta down the line

People keep saying this, but what exact incentive do these airlines have to leave DL?


Simple.

For a publicly traded company, the most important factor for choosing a partner is network.

Delta is the second-choice (or later) network fit for some of its partners. But the ownership stake drives partners to work with Delta despite the second-best network fit.


Not quite.

For publicly traded companies wanting to engage in profit-sharing, anti-trust immunized joint ventures, profitability is the most important factor. You'll find Delta has historically been quite good at cranking out profits.
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:14 am

winginit wrote:
For publicly traded companies wanting to engage in profit-sharing, anti-trust immunized joint ventures, profitability is the most important factor. You'll find Delta has historically been quite good at cranking out profits.


This is a flawed argument for the following reasons.

First, if a partner has extremely profitable markets to begin with, why wouldn't that partner just keep all those profits to itself? Why would it deal Delta in and give away half of its own profits?

Second, the only way the profit picture starts looking different than the revenue picture is if there's a big difference in cost structure between Delta and its partners. For instance, if Delta can replace partner flying and reduce costs. However Delta does not have a lower cost structure than most of its partners. And Delta pilots will wisely resist attempts to push a lot of Delta flying to partners. So there are limited cost opportunities.

The argument then comes back to revenue, and finally network.

Who has the best network fit with Delta?

If the partner company seeks to maximize profits (like a stock company does) and has free choice of partners (which bankruptcy potentially opens through loss of Delta's ownership) then current Delta partners should seek partners with best network fit.

In many cases, that isn't Delta.
 
winginit
Posts: 2974
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:34 pm

n9801f wrote:
winginit wrote:
For publicly traded companies wanting to engage in profit-sharing, anti-trust immunized joint ventures, profitability is the most important factor. You'll find Delta has historically been quite good at cranking out profits.


This is a flawed argument for the following reasons.

First, if a partner has extremely profitable markets to begin with, why wouldn't that partner just keep all those profits to itself? Why would it deal Delta in and give away half of its own profits?


To make even extremely profitable markets even more extremely profitable through both revenue upside and both fixed and variable cost sharing. I had thought that would be obvious but apparently not.

n9801f wrote:
Second, the only way the profit picture starts looking different than the revenue picture is if there's a big difference in cost structure between Delta and its partners. For instance, if Delta can replace partner flying and reduce costs. However Delta does not have a lower cost structure than most of its partners. And Delta pilots will wisely resist attempts to push a lot of Delta flying to partners. So there are limited cost opportunities.


There are notable cost structure differences between Delta and their partners. This is well documented.
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:52 pm

winginit wrote:
fixed and variable cost sharing

Without an ownership stake to distort decision making, why would the lower-cost airline agree to bear some of the higher cost airline's cost, variable or fixed?

If you're the lower-cost airline, it's better just to have a revenue-based JV. That way you get the revenue upside without bearing any of the higher airline's costs.

winginit wrote:
There are notable cost structure differences between Delta and their partners. This is well documented.


Good luck getting the Delta (or other airline's) pilots to agree to outsource flying! I'd like to be a fly on the wall when you try to sell that one.

Pilots unions hire good economic advisers for negotiations and wouldn't fall for this.
 
FlyingHonu001
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:35 am

Interesting statement by Ed Bastian
https://www.today.com/today/amp-video/mmvo88113733837

Another blacklist to watch out for....DL is kinda stepping up its zero tolerance attitude towards pax it seems
 
Flflyer83
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 4:40 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sun Jul 26, 2020 2:17 pm

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
This thread is full of so many false narratives and wishful thinking. I think it’s to a point where many people here on a.net, and specifically on this Delta thread are in a rush to talk in an educated manner about things y’all know nothing about. If you want to get accurate news on the current state of Delta then watch the many interviews Ed Bastian and corporate have been giving on Fox Business, CNN, Sky Hub, etc.

It’s dangerous and simply foolish to speculate about things that have not happened yet especially when it comes to people’s livelihoods, employment, and the overall state or future of Delta. It reminds me of the predictions Fauci and all these medical “experts” have been given the public the last six months and yet not one of them has been correct. Same thing here on this thread. We simply do not know what’s going to happen. Stick to the facts and make sure the information you get is directly from Delta.


Wait... in your first paragraph you say listen to Ed Bastian in the many tv interviews that he’s given to get accurate news and then in the second paragraph you’re trying to call out the experts as being wrong in their TV interviews. The cognitive dissonance is strong.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8170
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:22 am

Actual for Tue 7/21: (4)
1 A320 SBD-ATL (N309US); oldest age-wise A320 in the fleet
1 B738 VCV-BOS (N392DA)
1 B739 MCI-DTW
1 A320 MCI-MSP

----
Actual for Wed 7/22: (4)
1 A320 SBD-JFK (N358NW)
1 B739 VCV-SEA (N891DN)
1 B738 MCI-ATL
1 B739 MCI-ATL

Actual for Thu 7/23: (6)
1 B739 VCV-DTW (N895DN)
1 B739 MZJ-CLT
1 A319 SAL-ATL
1 B738 MWH-QRO
1 B752 SBD-MCO (N658DL) (75D)
1 B739 MCI-ATL

Actual for Fri 7/24:(7)
1 A320 SBD-MIA
1 B739 VCV-LAX (N890DN)
1 B739 VCV-ATL (N842DN)
1 A319 SAL-ATL
1 B739 MCI-JFK
1 B739 MCI-ATL
1 A320 MCI-ATL

Actual for Sat 7/25 (2)
1 A320 BHM-ATL
1 B738 MCI-CVG

Actual for Sun 7/26: (2)
1 B752 VCV-JFK (N6709) (75D)
1 B739 MCI-ATL

Total aircraft returned from storage through Tue 7/21:
4 A359 (All A359s out of storage and returned to service)
4 A319
22 A320
38 A321
1 B73G
17 B738
70 B739
16 B752
10 B753
7 B763
3 A333
----
197 Total

Planned for Mon 7/27:
1 A320 SBD-MSY (N375NC)
1 B752 VCV-ATL (N660DL) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-JFK (N6704Z) (75D)
1 B738 MCI-ATL


*Does not include reactivation of aircraft that had been parked or stored at hub locations
 
Delta350
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:37 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:24 am

I think a 757 from BHM is going to be leaving within this week to ATL. I saw some people out there today in it. Probably just checking it, who knows. We’ll find out.
Plane Spotter from the Magic City and Hartsfield-Jackson...(ATL)
 
gdavis003
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:59 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:35 am

Delta350 wrote:
I think a 757 from BHM is going to be leaving within this week to ATL. I saw some people out there today in it. Probably just checking it, who knows. We’ll find out.


Was it one of the F72 VIP configuration ones? Hopefully, it does leave this week. Last time I was down there, they were doing some work on a 767-300 which looked to be removing it from storage, and in fact, three days later, it took off to leave storage. Would love to catch a 752 takeoff from BHM, don't see those too often here as we are usually stuck with the MadDogs and 717s and the occasional U Alabama wide body charter
 
Delta350
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:37 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:07 am

gdavis003 wrote:
Delta350 wrote:
I think a 757 from BHM is going to be leaving within this week to ATL. I saw some people out there today in it. Probably just checking it, who knows. We’ll find out.


Was it one of the F72 VIP configuration ones? Hopefully, it does leave this week. Last time I was down there, they were doing some work on a 767-300 which looked to be removing it from storage, and in fact, three days later, it took off to leave storage. Would love to catch a 752 takeoff from BHM, don't see those too often here as we are usually stuck with the MadDogs and 717s and the occasional U Alabama wide body charter

I’ll have to check my pictures for the reg, but most likely.
Plane Spotter from the Magic City and Hartsfield-Jackson...(ATL)
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8170
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:23 am

The only 752s at BHM per Planespotters are the F72 VIP versions.
Nothing has a flight plan filed yet out of BHM, so at the very least it won't be tomorrow.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:42 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
The only 752s at BHM per Planespotters are the F72 VIP versions.
Nothing has a flight plan filed yet out of BHM, so at the very least it won't be tomorrow.


Delta ran a few B757 charters for the NHL to get teams to Toronto and Edmonton the two bubble cities for the NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8170
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:23 am

Yes, some of the 75Cs are active, some are still in storage.
They were used initially in early-July to start getting the NBA teams to MCO for their tournament.

5 of 11 are active

N649DL - active, currently at DTW since 7/26 (YYZ-DTW)
N650DL - stored, BHM
N651DL - stored, MCI
N652DL - active, flying HOU-LAX 7/27
N654DL - stored, MSP
N655DL - active, DTW since 7/26 (YYZ-DTW)
N661DL - stored, BHM
N662DN - active, ferried BHM-ATL 7/18
N663DN - stored, BHM
N664DN - stored, ATL, ferried MCI-ATL 6/13
N666DN - active, flying SAN-DFW 7/27
 
gdavis003
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:59 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:40 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
The only 752s at BHM per Planespotters are the F72 VIP versions.
Nothing has a flight plan filed yet out of BHM, so at the very least it won't be tomorrow.


They pulled a fast one the other week and filed a flight plan day of when they removed a 763 from storage if I recall. I’ve been vigilantly checking in the mornings haha. Missed Sun Country the other day at BHM doing a charter out to Laughlin because they didn’t file till day of. Was not happy
 
Detroit313
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:56 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:28 pm

Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.

Karma for being a bully and invading the hubs of other airlines.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8310
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:11 pm

Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.

Karma for being a bully and invading the hubs of other airlines.


It's called competing. If you're a consumer buying tickets it's a good thing. If you're an airline employee yearning for the days of government-allocated routes and government-set prices and 7% earnings on 55% load factors -- U.S. domestic airline deregulation happened in 1978.
Last edited by MIflyer12 on Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6193
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:14 pm

Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.

Karma for being a bully and invading the hubs of other airlines.


A bully? Regulation died years ago and thats a good thing.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8170
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:17 pm

Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.

Karma for being a bully and invading the hubs of other airlines.

No one right now is "growing". Every airlines is in survival mode during this industry apocalypse. We haven't even gotten to the rebuild phase yet.
Thus its natural that everyone is going to pull-back to their core hubs.
With no business travel, no mass-tourism/leisure travel, no international traffic everyone is retreating to the core.

Time will tell what happens, and how exactly each rebuilds their network in the years going forward.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6193
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:00 pm

Looks like HAV and TGU are gone from ATL.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
JAMBOJET
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:23 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:51 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Looks like HAV and TGU are gone from ATL.

HAV is also gone from MIA. It's a somewhat significant market exit for a company that wants to build loyalty in Miami from scratch.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:47 pm

Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.


Could you post the P&L data you're looking at for the SEA hub? What sort of margin was DL getting there pre-COVID? You seem very certain of your facts, so I'm looking forward to the data! Joking aside, all we really know at this point is that DL has brought SEA ops back at least as fast as their other coastal hubs, so I guess that's our answer until DL signals otherwise.

I don't doubt that BOS wasn't profitable yet as it was in its infancy as a hub, and DL had recently jumped into some competitive markets. But regardless, it's not as gate-constrained as SEA, as far as I know, and DL has a whole terminal more or less to themselves. B6 has room to grow some more, independent of what DL does, but IMHO they're unlikely to end up using any gates in DL's Terminal A, even if DL were to pull back on their plans for BOS. Keep in mind that you can get from any gate at SEA to any other gate without leaving security. That's not the case at BOS, so it isn't set up like SEA to be able to reallocate space between airlines easily.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
onwFan
Topic Author
Posts: 474
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:16 pm

FSDan wrote:
Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.


Could you post the P&L data you're looking at for the SEA hub? What sort of margin was DL getting there pre-COVID? You seem very certain of your facts, so I'm looking forward to the data! Joking aside, all we really know at this point is that DL has brought SEA ops back at least as fast as their other coastal hubs, so I guess that's our answer until DL signals otherwise.

I don't doubt that BOS wasn't profitable yet as it was in its infancy as a hub, and DL had recently jumped into some competitive markets. But regardless, it's not as gate-constrained as SEA, as far as I know, and DL has a whole terminal more or less to themselves. B6 has room to grow some more, independent of what DL does, but IMHO they're unlikely to end up using any gates in DL's Terminal A, even if DL were to pull back on their plans for BOS. Keep in mind that you can get from any gate at SEA to any other gate without leaving security. That's not the case at BOS, so it isn't set up like SEA to be able to reallocate space between airlines easily.

For the exact reasons you state above, DL cannot pull down SEA to the same extent it can at BOS. They need to maintain reasonably proportionate capacity levels at SEA if they don't want to cede their market share to AS through the gate allocations. Their moves at SEA are primarily motivated by this, rather than profitability or anything else. It is simply a matter of how long they can afford to bleed...
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:42 pm

onwFan wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Detroit313 wrote:
Boston and Seattle were losing money even before the virus. What is Delta going to do now?

You pull back a bit in Seattle, Alaska grows.
You pull back in Boston, JetBlue grows.


Could you post the P&L data you're looking at for the SEA hub? What sort of margin was DL getting there pre-COVID? You seem very certain of your facts, so I'm looking forward to the data! Joking aside, all we really know at this point is that DL has brought SEA ops back at least as fast as their other coastal hubs, so I guess that's our answer until DL signals otherwise.

I don't doubt that BOS wasn't profitable yet as it was in its infancy as a hub, and DL had recently jumped into some competitive markets. But regardless, it's not as gate-constrained as SEA, as far as I know, and DL has a whole terminal more or less to themselves. B6 has room to grow some more, independent of what DL does, but IMHO they're unlikely to end up using any gates in DL's Terminal A, even if DL were to pull back on their plans for BOS. Keep in mind that you can get from any gate at SEA to any other gate without leaving security. That's not the case at BOS, so it isn't set up like SEA to be able to reallocate space between airlines easily.

For the exact reasons you state above, DL cannot pull down SEA to the same extent it can at BOS. They need to maintain reasonably proportionate capacity levels at SEA if they don't want to cede their market share to AS through the gate allocations. Their moves at SEA are primarily motivated by this, rather than profitability or anything else. It is simply a matter of how long they can afford to bleed...


I'd argue that means they still see some long term benefit (read profitability) from the SEA hub, and maybe it wasn't doing as badly as a.net lore likes to claim it was before COVID-19... If DL saw no future chance of profitability at SEA, why would they need to try to defend their gate share there?
This is my signature until I think of a better one.

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