Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:55 am

FSDan wrote:
If you have P&L data, reliable margin estimates for the hub from industry analysts or an inside source, etc. that demonstrate DL was on the brink at SEA, I'm certainly willing to listen!

By these measures, your own claims are equally unproven.

The economics is very simple. Delta added far more domestic capacity to SEA than the growth in passengers, despite there being a boom in passengers. Delta has a higher operating cost than Alaska. Now we're in a bust, demand is falling, and customers focus more intensely on price, so the producer with the lower cost (Alaska) should win.
 
jordanh
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:56 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:10 am

n9801f wrote:
The economics is very simple. Delta added far more domestic capacity to SEA than the growth in passengers, despite there being a boom in passengers. .


Really? Show us the numbers.


n9801f wrote:
Delta has a higher operating cost than Alaska.


Here again, let us see numbers - facts - and we can draw our own conclusions.


n9801f wrote:
Now we're in a bust, demand is falling, and customers focus more intensely on price, so the producer with the lower cost (Alaska) should win.


"Should win"? By whose measure? You may claim you know who "should" win; do you have any evidence as to who is winning?


Lots of claims should be supported by lots of data... which we still haven't seen yet.
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:42 am

jordanh wrote:
n9801f wrote:
Delta has a higher operating cost than Alaska.

Here again, let us see numbers - facts - and we can draw our own conclusions.

It is well known that Delta is a legacy carrier and Alaska an LCC, but here goes:

From 2019 annual reports, Delta CASM is 14.7 cents and Alaska 13.2 cents.

You'd be well advised to make additional adjustments to control for differences in fleet and flying composition. If you do this, the difference becomes bigger in Alaska's favor.

jordanh wrote:
n9801f wrote:
Now we're in a bust, demand is falling, and customers focus more intensely on price, so the producer with the lower cost (Alaska) should win.

"Should win"? By whose measure? You may claim you know who "should" win; do you have any evidence as to who is winning?

This is freshman year college economics. The lower cost producer of a commodity good is inherently more profitable.

As for the point on traffic, feel free to examine the detailed traffic statistics published by the US DOT yourself. This data is available free online. Be sure to focus on Seattle domestic origin-destination passengers and compare this to the growth in domestic seats.
 
panamair
Posts: 4332
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:53 am

Just went through DL's international long-haul schedule for August; rather interesting to see what other destinations have popped up in August in addition to the usual AMS/CDG; also, hardly any 767s flying long-haul international, with the A333 as the main TATL workhorse:

Transatlantic (Europe/Israel/Africa):

ATL: 33x weekly flights
ATL-AMS: daily A359; 5x weekly A333
ATL-CDG: daily A359
ATL-LHR: 4x weekly A333
ATL-FRA: 4x weekly A333
ATL-MUC: 3x weekly A333 - new for August
ATL-DUB: 3x weekly A333 - new for August

JFK: 32x weekly flights
JFK-AMS: daily A333
JFK-CDG: daily A333
JFK-LHR: daily 764 - new for August
JFK-MXP: 3x weekly A333 - new for August
JFK-TLV: daily A333
JFK-DSS: 1x weekly 763ER

DTW: 14w weekly flights
DTW-AMS: daily A359
DTW-CDG: daily A359

BOS-AMS: 4x weekly A333

SEA-AMS: 4x weekly A333

Transpacific

DTW: 12x weekly flights:
DTW-ICN: daily A359
DTW-HND: 4x weekly A359
DTW-PVG (via ICN): 1x weekly A359

SEA: 10x weekly flights
SEA-ICN: 4x weekly A339
SEA-HND: 4x weekly A339
SEA-PVG (via ICN): 2x weekly A359

ATL: 8x weekly flights
ATL-ICN: 5x weekly A359
ATL-HND: 3x weekly A359 - new for August

LAX: 6x weekly flights
LAX-HND: 3x weekly 77E - new for August
LAX-SYD: 3x weekly 77L


"Deep" South America

ATL-GRU: 4x weekly A333 - new for August
 
tphuang
Posts: 5226
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:19 pm

Without knowing how much smaller DL will be, it's impossible to know which hubs/focus cities will shrink and by how much. if there is no CARES act 2.0, all the airlines will have to go ahead with their cuts on Oct 1 and maybe another round early next year if things still look bleak. once you cut the pilot size, it's not that simple to just bring them back. UA is threatening to furlough as much as 1/3 of their pilots. Which if we account for retirements and voluntary outs, means they could be down 40% by next year. Hard for me to see UA going to be more than 60% of their pre-COVID size by next summer. And bringing these pilots back will take time. Which means they will have to be permanently smaller.

DL's WARN notices went out to 15 to 20% of its pilots, but they also have a lot more takers for their early outs and voluntary packages. Again, if pilot group is down 30% by next summer, hard to see them going to be more than 70% of their pre-COVID size. Again, bringing the pilots back will take time. Which means they will be smaller than pre-COVID size for a long time.

AA has already made their decisions known. They are going to be massively smaller in LAX, LGA and JFK. And quite a bit smaller in MIA and PHX.

What is DL going to cut? From what we've seen so far when they originally scheduled in a 60% schedule for August.

SLC - I think had the most capacity back of any DL hubs. Makes sense, terminal expansion, 1 of 2 possible hubs in its area along with DEN. Great connection point for west coast markets. This should be restored to pre-COVID size pretty quickly.

ATL - A few Latin American markets got cut and some domestic routes saw reduced frequencies. But I would imagine most markets get restored to pre-COVID capacity pretty quickly. I think DL knows well how important it is to have ATL hub. It certainly doesn't want AA's DFW hub to become as powerful.

DTW/MSP - I'm a little more doubtful on how quickly these 2 core hubs restore to pre-COVID size. It's possible one of them will get brought back more quickly than other one. Still, I think DL knows the value here and will bring them back to at least 70 to 80% of pre-COVID size sometimes next year. Long term, they will both be back to close to pre-COVID size in 3 or 4 years.

SEA - They have been bringing flights back at SEA faster than any of the other coastal hubs. I think due to how SEA allocates gates. I would imagine SEA gets backs to at least 80% of pre-COVID size by next year. By summer of 2022, I think it will be back to pre-COVID size for sure.

LAX - They are in less of rush here because AA/UA/WN have all cut back. I think it will take a few years for LAX to be back to pre-COVID size. Eventually, they will be the largest legacy here. Maybe it will take until 2024 to 2025 for that to happen. Again, no rush to bring things back before the work in T2/3 is finished.

LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.

BOS - This I think really depends on what kind of response they want to making to the AA/B6 partnership. As with LGA, the northeast business demand is non-existent. They were at 27 departures here yesterday. And they are not really in a rush to bring things back since they have all of Terminal A. I see this station permanently smaller. Not sure how much smaller.

RDU/CVG - There is not much rationale in keeping around routes outside of hub/focus city/Florida for these 2. I see both stations permanently downsized to be 40 to 50 flights a day stations.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5287
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:25 pm

n9801f wrote:
jordanh wrote:
n9801f wrote:
Delta has a higher operating cost than Alaska.

Here again, let us see numbers - facts - and we can draw our own conclusions.

It is well known that Delta is a legacy carrier and Alaska an LCC, but here goes:

From 2019 annual reports, Delta CASM is 14.7 cents and Alaska 13.2 cents.

You'd be well advised to make additional adjustments to control for differences in fleet and flying composition. If you do this, the difference becomes bigger in Alaska's favor.


Why are you using the CASM of the entire companies to estimate who is more profitable in a city? Delta doesn't even split CASM up between mainline & regional I believe, so your CASM number includes the CASM of a B777 and the CASM of a CR2.

Unless you have a break down by aircraft type, the company wide CASM number is useless for determining profitability by hub. In this case especially since DL has removed all the high cost aircraft from SEA
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 1:30 pm

WassbiKhalifa wrote:
I saw the new smaller Delta first hand today. I work in IT. We had 530 people put in for the package. We had a conference call for our group this morning to say goodbye to those who chose to leave. One of the harder things I've done in my 33 years at DL. We've had almost entire groups of departments put in for the package. I personally know probably 50-60 people who decided to go. Some young, many old enough that they deserve to get out of the industry after being in it for so long.

Some folks I know who aren't old enough to really retire took it and and don't have anything lined up. Just a really strange, emotional day. Sort of like 9/11.

I decided to stay because I have years left in the tank. I've gone through many things in my career at Delta and if I can help it this virus won't end it just yet. I'm fighting, hopefully, to end it on my terms.

I agree with you. It has been a strange week. TechOps is seeing the same type of movement you saw in IT. A lot of older AMT's taking it just because it is time for them to move to the next stage of their lives. This was the push they needed to do it. Others younger with nothing lined up. "I'll take a month or so off and then start looking for a job. Something will come up". I personally would never intentionally quit right now knowing I need to find a new job.

Some departments got hit very hard. We have a aircraft welding shop in the repair area. I think everyone took the package. Machinist positions were also hard hit. That was a tough fill already. Kids just are not going to school for that profession. I expect we will be hiring off the street for those two areas. Not many people in the company have those certs that are not already in those areas. Next comes the big shuffle to back fill spots. Some people are going to find themselves doing jobs they never thought they would do.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 3:18 pm

I really don't think profit and loss is the real issue for Delta in Seattle it's a strategic hub that Delta needs to maintain in the west to stay competitive to Asia in that region. You guys are over thinking this Delta situation in Seattle way to much. Delta is in Seattle for the long haul minus SEA-KIX that one is going away.
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...
 
HNLSLCPDX
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:40 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 4:11 pm

tphuang wrote:
Without knowing how much smaller DL will be, it's impossible to know which hubs/focus cities will shrink and by how much. if there is no CARES act 2.0, all the airlines will have to go ahead with their cuts on Oct 1 and maybe another round early next year if things still look bleak. once you cut the pilot size, it's not that simple to just bring them back. UA is threatening to furlough as much as 1/3 of their pilots. Which if we account for retirements and voluntary outs, means they could be down 40% by next year. Hard for me to see UA going to be more than 60% of their pre-COVID size by next summer. And bringing these pilots back will take time. Which means they will have to be permanently smaller.

DL's WARN notices went out to 15 to 20% of its pilots, but they also have a lot more takers for their early outs and voluntary packages. Again, if pilot group is down 30% by next summer, hard to see them going to be more than 70% of their pre-COVID size. Again, bringing the pilots back will take time. Which means they will be smaller than pre-COVID size for a long time.

AA has already made their decisions known. They are going to be massively smaller in LAX, LGA and JFK. And quite a bit smaller in MIA and PHX.

What is DL going to cut? From what we've seen so far when they originally scheduled in a 60% schedule for August.

SLC - I think had the most capacity back of any DL hubs. Makes sense, terminal expansion, 1 of 2 possible hubs in its area along with DEN. Great connection point for west coast markets. This should be restored to pre-COVID size pretty quickly.

ATL - A few Latin American markets got cut and some domestic routes saw reduced frequencies. But I would imagine most markets get restored to pre-COVID capacity pretty quickly. I think DL knows well how important it is to have ATL hub. It certainly doesn't want AA's DFW hub to become as powerful.

DTW/MSP - I'm a little more doubtful on how quickly these 2 core hubs restore to pre-COVID size. It's possible one of them will get brought back more quickly than other one. Still, I think DL knows the value here and will bring them back to at least 70 to 80% of pre-COVID size sometimes next year. Long term, they will both be back to close to pre-COVID size in 3 or 4 years.

SEA - They have been bringing flights back at SEA faster than any of the other coastal hubs. I think due to how SEA allocates gates. I would imagine SEA gets backs to at least 80% of pre-COVID size by next year. By summer of 2022, I think it will be back to pre-COVID size for sure.

LAX - They are in less of rush here because AA/UA/WN have all cut back. I think it will take a few years for LAX to be back to pre-COVID size. Eventually, they will be the largest legacy here. Maybe it will take until 2024 to 2025 for that to happen. Again, no rush to bring things back before the work in T2/3 is finished.

LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.

BOS - This I think really depends on what kind of response they want to making to the AA/B6 partnership. As with LGA, the northeast business demand is non-existent. They were at 27 departures here yesterday. And they are not really in a rush to bring things back since they have all of Terminal A. I see this station permanently smaller. Not sure how much smaller.

RDU/CVG - There is not much rationale in keeping around routes outside of hub/focus city/Florida for these 2. I see both stations permanently downsized to be 40 to 50 flights a day stations.


You have to remember that even though the number of flights could be at near pre pandemic numbers, DL has a cap on flight loads, also the current flights flying are still not near full even with the capacity cap. So number of flights does not tell the entire story of the hubs being back to their numbers of 2019. I am not going to put a guess on when similar levels will return because it could happen sooner than later or simply way down the road. No use of predicting something that no one knows what or when it will happen.
 
wernerga3
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:26 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 4:18 pm

Didn't they try this with song already?
 
panamair
Posts: 4332
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:02 pm

tphuang wrote:
LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.



JFK - will be increased to about 75 departures starting August - 59 domestic and 16 international/Caribbean. September looks to be similar with maybe some marginal increase.

LGA - they actually went up to close to 90 departures starting August, but then pulled that back down to about 65. So LGA is actually now recovering at a slower pace than JFK as domestic demand is being walloped more than some of the international (Caribbean) flying due to the quarantines.

Slot waiver for JFK/LGA currently in effect until Oct 24. If demand is still not returning or increasing, I would not be surprised to see that being extended. At this point, no carrier is going to have a leg up on another in terms of trying to snatch slots away if the demand is simply not there.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5226
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:47 pm

panamair wrote:
tphuang wrote:
LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.



JFK - will be increased to about 75 departures starting August - 59 domestic and 16 international/Caribbean. September looks to be similar with maybe some marginal increase.

LGA - they actually went up to close to 90 departures starting August, but then pulled that back down to about 65. So LGA is actually now recovering at a slower pace than JFK as domestic demand is being walloped more than some of the international (Caribbean) flying due to the quarantines.

Slot waiver for JFK/LGA currently in effect until Oct 24. If demand is still not returning or increasing, I would not be surprised to see that being extended. At this point, no carrier is going to have a leg up on another in terms of trying to snatch slots away if the demand is simply not there.


Business demand in northeast hasn't come back. It will be weak all of next year even if we get vaccine early in 2021. Let's say LGA slots waiver get extended until March, which is probable. Do you think Delta is going to be able to run a 240 flight schedule in Q2 out of LGA?

By then, leisure demand will be back and all the LCCs will be looking to adding leisure flights out of LGA. You don't think WN, with all their cash, is looking to get additional slots at LGA?

JFK is a different story. That's more a long term play. Aside from UA, I don't think anyone is looking for JFK slots. I think slot constraints will go away like it did for EWR. Then, it's more a race between JetBlue and Delta to see who can add flights faster.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8074
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:00 pm

Big week for a lot of 752's (16) returning from storage and being put into service for August. Its apparent, particularly with the middle seat blocking, they want the extra seats on the larger narrowbody aircraft.
It will be interesting to see to what extent additional aircraft are removed from storage throughout August.

Actual for Mon 7/27: (4)
1 A320 SBD-MSY (N375NC)
1 B752 VCV-ATL (N660DL) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-JFK (N6704Z) (75D)
1 B738 MCI-ATL

Actual for Tue 7/28: (4)
1 B752 SBD-ATL (N6711M) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-SEA (N535US) (75H)
1 B752 MZJ-DTW (N690DL) (75D)
1 B738 MCI-ATL


Actual for Wed 7/29: (5)
1 B752 VCV-LAX (N672DL) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-MSP (N684DA) (75D)
1 A320 SAL-ATL
1 B739 MCI-SLC
1 B739 MCI-ATL


Actual for Thu 7/30: (5)
1 A320 SBD-BOS (N356NW)
1 B752 SBD-SEA (N674DL) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-MSP (N6702) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-LAX (N693DL) (75D)
1 B739 MCI-SLC


Actual for Fri 7/31: (10)
1 B752 VCV-SEA (N681DA) (75D)
1 B752 VCV-DTW (N6708D) (75D)
1 B752 MZJ-ATL (N536US) (75H)
1 B752 MZJ-BOS (N676DL) (75D)
1 B739 MZJ-ATL
1 B738 MWH-QRO (N382DA)
1 B752 VQQ-ATL (N698DL) (75D)
1 B752 BHM-MSP (N661DN) (75C)
1 B739 MCI-MSP
1 B739 MCI-JFK

Total aircraft returned from storage through Fri 7/31:
4 A359 (All A359s out of storage and returned to service)
4 A319
25 A320
38 A321
1 B73G
20 B738
76 B739
32 B752
10 B753
7 B763
3 A333
----
225 Total


*Does not include reactivation of aircraft that had been parked or stored at hub locations
 
HNLSLCPDX
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:40 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:01 pm

Will be interesting to see if CVG service resumes to just the hubs and a few Florida cities.

I think RDU would be a better focus city to have than CVG going forward.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3326
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:18 pm

n9801f wrote:
FSDan wrote:
If you have P&L data, reliable margin estimates for the hub from industry analysts or an inside source, etc. that demonstrate DL was on the brink at SEA, I'm certainly willing to listen!

By these measures, your own claims are equally unproven.

The economics is very simple. Delta added far more domestic capacity to SEA than the growth in passengers, despite there being a boom in passengers. Delta has a higher operating cost than Alaska. Now we're in a bust, demand is falling, and customers focus more intensely on price, so the producer with the lower cost (Alaska) should win.


My main claim is that your claim hasn't been backed up by any data. I then pointed out some factors that might indicate your claim is overblown (i.e. DL continuing to add capacity to the hub, flying extremely fuel-efficient aircraft in the market, etc.).

Regarding the economics, I'd add a few considerations:
1) Since both airlines operate connecting hubs, looking at purely SEA O&D traffic growth and comparing to DL's capacity growth isn't sufficient. As one example, DL was flying increasingly larger equipment to Asia, and filling a chunk of that added capacity by boosting seats in domestic connecting markets.
2) Yes, AS has lower operating costs than DL. But a direct profitability comparison based on operating cost alone doesn't make sense since the two carriers aren't flying the exact same equipment to the exact same places at the exact same frequencies.
3) Even assuming DL's margins at SEA are significantly lower than AS's, that says very little about the standalone profitability of the DL hub. We know that AS generally has very good margins overall, and SEA is an above-average hub for them, with SFO and LAX likely dragging down the overall margins/profitability of the airline. DL may be getting margins 5+% lower than AS at SEA, and still be making pretty respectable margins themselves. Certainly not guaranteed to be "barely keeping their head above water".

Again, I'm not claiming to have the P&L numbers either (hence why I'd be interested to see them if you had them). I'm merely questioning the statements you put out there as fact with nothing to back them up and with some evidence to the contrary.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5961
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:40 pm

panamair wrote:
tphuang wrote:
LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.



JFK - will be increased to about 75 departures starting August - 59 domestic and 16 international/Caribbean. September looks to be similar with maybe some marginal increase.

LGA - they actually went up to close to 90 departures starting August, but then pulled that back down to about 65. So LGA is actually now recovering at a slower pace than JFK as domestic demand is being walloped more than some of the international (Caribbean) flying due to the quarantines.

Slot waiver for JFK/LGA currently in effect until Oct 24. If demand is still not returning or increasing, I would not be surprised to see that being extended. At this point, no carrier is going to have a leg up on another in terms of trying to snatch slots away if the demand is simply not there.



I could’ve told Delta this two months ago


This recovery is about leisure travel. Florida California islands. Sun belt, mountain west.

That screams JFK.Couldn’t be anything further from the high frequency short/ medium haul business service of LGA
 
deltairlines
Posts: 7084
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 4:47 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:10 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
panamair wrote:
tphuang wrote:
LGA - This is the interesting one. Northeast demand is way down. I mean way down. They are non-existent for these places close by. They were at 54 departures yesterday. And they are regularly at close to 270. They'd need probably at 240 to meet their slot usage requirements. When is slot waiver going away and are they will to operate 10+ flight a day to places like DCA/BOS/ORD when there is no business case for it? Will LGA slot system go away next year? There is a chance LGA will be permanently smaller if slot system goes away or slot waiver goes away next year.

JFK - They operated 38 departures yesterday. Given the international demand being down, I think this is going to be even slower recovering than LGA. Again, really depends on when the slot waiver is going away. I think either JFK is no longer slot constrained by next summer or DL is going to have to give up some slots here if other carriers complain. I don't see them getting back to anywhere close to the 230 departures they were making here in peak summer season anytime soon. Until TATL demand comes back to close to pre-COVID level, they will be smaller here. For same reason as LGA, there is pretty good chance JFK will be permanently smaller.



JFK - will be increased to about 75 departures starting August - 59 domestic and 16 international/Caribbean. September looks to be similar with maybe some marginal increase.

LGA - they actually went up to close to 90 departures starting August, but then pulled that back down to about 65. So LGA is actually now recovering at a slower pace than JFK as domestic demand is being walloped more than some of the international (Caribbean) flying due to the quarantines.

Slot waiver for JFK/LGA currently in effect until Oct 24. If demand is still not returning or increasing, I would not be surprised to see that being extended. At this point, no carrier is going to have a leg up on another in terms of trying to snatch slots away if the demand is simply not there.



I could’ve told Delta this two months ago


This recovery is about leisure travel. Florida California islands. Sun belt, mountain west.

That screams JFK.Couldn’t be anything further from the high frequency short/ medium haul business service of LGA


Florida is heavy at LGA as well but that's about it for leisure out of there.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8074
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:12 pm

Again.....as of early June, even as recently as beginning of July, many large companies were planning on getting back into offices and starting resume some travel in September.
Now here we are and thats not the case.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5226
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 12:58 am

JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.

I'm not sure why there is such a passionate argument over SEA/BOS, when the obvious headache facing DL is LGA. They spent a lot of money building that operation up. They are going to have to fly a lot of empty planes around if they don't want to lose slots next year.

Also, I think UA will end up selling/leasing its slots at LGA. No way it can maintain it's pre-COVID level of flying at LGA with a 40% smaller airline.

AA will have its problems at DCA.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:22 am

tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.

I'm not sure why there is such a passionate argument over SEA/BOS, when the obvious headache facing DL is LGA. They spent a lot of money building that operation up. They are going to have to fly a lot of empty planes around if they don't want to lose slots next year.

Also, I think UA will end up selling/leasing its slots at LGA. No way it can maintain it's pre-COVID level of flying at LGA with a 40% smaller airline.

AA will have its problems at DCA.

The only folks I ever see on the AirTrain are international tourists and people working at the airport, and the recent price increases were not well received. LGA definitely has no issue with leisure even with the rather poor bussing and taxi options. Pre-COVID I never saw the M60 or Q70 anything but jammed. The far greater presence of LCCs at LGA rather than JFK does indicate it too. RJs help to preserve slots if needed, but I expect waivers to continue for a while. Considering they are continuing to press ahead and even make use of the downtime to speed up renovations, they seem to want a solid LGA presence in the future.
 
alfa164
Posts: 3616
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:29 am

tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.


I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
n9801f
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:29 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:32 am

FSDan wrote:
My main claim is that your claim hasn't been backed up by any data.

Yet you readily admit that your own claims aren't either...

Also, your arguments would be more persuasive if you didn't make some fundamental, fatal flaws in logic. For instance:


FSDan wrote:
flying extremely fuel-efficient aircraft in the market

You say that SEA P&L should be evaluated including the benefit of scarce, efficient, high opportunity cost aircraft that could have been used elsewhere.

However second-year employees of the very professional, skilled, objective network departments of savvy competitors like American and United, good stock analysts, and competent airline economists will point out that looking at SEA P&L that is artificially subsidized by putting all the efficient planes there is not a good way to make the most profitable decision for stockholders and employees.

They will consider the full picture instead. So if SEA looks good because it is loaded it up with all the good A-220's but some other hub got larded up with comparatively inefficient B717's as a result, they'll look at the combination of consequences of these two things, not either one alone.

This is a very basic concept of network economics and its absence seriously undercuts your arguments.


FSDan wrote:
Regarding the economics, I'd add a few considerations:
1) Since both airlines operate connecting hubs, looking at purely SEA O&D traffic growth and comparing to DL's capacity growth isn't sufficient. As one example, DL was flying increasingly larger equipment to Asia, and filling a chunk of that added capacity by boosting seats in domestic connecting markets.

It's previously been pointed out that Delta's SEA-Asia boils down to 4 routes. Saturating the SEA domestic market with 100+ flights to feed these 4 routes is a questionable decision for maximizing short term profitability.

And in a crisis, the short term is all that matters. Because if you don't survive the crisis, there is no long term.

Here's the bottom line:


gaystudpilot wrote:
*If* AA+AS+oneworld are successful in SEA, I do not see a scenario where DL could successfully operate a hub in SEA.

Delta could cut bait and focus TPAC elsewhere. A strategy for DL could be not having a “primary TPAC gateway.”

The US airline industry will be lucky to return to 75% of pre-recession, pre-COVID levels by 2024.

The tail doesn't wag the dog.

The foundation of a SEA hub (the "dog") is the domestic local market. Alaska serves this better than Delta, has lower costs, and has better penetration with business travelers.

The international operation at SEA (the "tail") can only grow onto a successful domestic foundation.

Alaska is holding its own against Delta in SEA. Delta has struggled to make inroads in the SEA domestic local markets against Alaska.

It will be easier for Alaska's 300-flight "dog" to grow a 4-flight "tail" of AA/oneworld flights than it will for Delta's 4-flight "tail" to grow a 150+ flight dog.

Like it or not, Alaska has a good hand in this game. Delta is smart and will be well served by being objective about this in its decisions.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5226
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:59 am

alfa164 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.


I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.


Well you met the first here.

And I have taken subway + airtrain to JFK many times. Better than the rush hour 4 train experience of q70 or m60.
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:15 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
Big week for a lot of 752's (16) returning from storage and being put into service for August. Its apparent, particularly with the middle seat blocking, they want the extra seats on the larger narrowbody aircraft.
It will be interesting to see to what extent additional aircraft are removed from storage throughout August.

From the last company town hall it sounded like the current fleet size as of Aug 1 could be pretty stagnant through the end of the year. I would bet there will be some swap outs to manage time on airframes, but it sounded like this is the fleet size for the next few months. At this point who really knows.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8074
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:35 am

Yeah, it will be interesting and all dependent on how much flights/capacity getting added back in the months ahead.
I would imagine there will still be reactivation through August, and in particular getting aircraft out of some of the remote storage into rolling parking at the hubs.

More for Saturday:
Planned for Sat 8/1:
1 B738 MWH-ATL
1 B752 VCV-LAX
1 B752 VCV-LAX
1 B752 MZJ-BOS
1 B763 ILN-JFK
 
DMPHL
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:33 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:53 am

tphuang wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.


I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.


Well you met the first here.

And I have taken subway + airtrain to JFK many times. Better than the rush hour 4 train experience of q70 or m60.


Lol make it two. Living in Brooklyn, it is massively easier to hop on any one of the LIRR trains from Atlantic to Jamaica and taking the AirTrain. 30 minutes, ~$12. The alternative is a $60 Uber to LGA that takes 20 minutes to even get through Downtown Brooklyn and onto the BQE, and who knows what awaits you there.
 
nwadeicer
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:17 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:20 am

So, now that the dust is starting to settle on the employees taking the retirement packages. It looks like approximately 500 above/below wing employees in MSP have taken the package. Looking like a little over 1000 above/below wing employees have taken it in ATL, add to that over 30 OSM (front line managers) have opted to take the packages as well in ATL. There have been reports that some smaller B/C stations have lost over 90% of their staff. I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages. If you're a Delta employee and was thinking about transferring to a different station, give it a month or two, you just might get to pick whatever station you'd like to work at.
I miss the Red Tail
 
gaystudpilot
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 10:55 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:34 am

n9801f wrote:
gaystudpilot wrote:
*If* AA+AS+oneworld are successful in SEA, I do not see a scenario where DL could successfully operate a hub in SEA.

Delta could cut bait and focus TPAC elsewhere. A strategy for DL could be not having a “primary TPAC gateway.”

The US airline industry will be lucky to return to 75% of pre-recession, pre-COVID levels by 2024.


The tail doesn't wag the dog.

The foundation of a SEA hub (the "dog") is the domestic local market. Alaska serves this better than Delta, has lower costs, and has better penetration with business travelers.

The international operation at SEA (the "tail") can only grow onto a successful domestic foundation.

Alaska is holding its own against Delta in SEA. Delta has struggled to make inroads in the SEA domestic local markets against Alaska.

It will be easier for Alaska's 300-flight "dog" to grow a 4-flight "tail" of AA/oneworld flights than it will for Delta's 4-flight "tail" to grow a 150+ flight dog.

Like it or not, Alaska has a good hand in this game. Delta is smart and will be well served by being objective about this in its decisions.


Agree.
 
joeblow10
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:44 am

nwadeicer wrote:
So, now that the dust is starting to settle on the employees taking the retirement packages. It looks like approximately 500 above/below wing employees in MSP have taken the package. Looking like a little over 1000 above/below wing employees have taken it in ATL, add to that over 30 OSM (front line managers) have opted to take the packages as well in ATL. There have been reports that some smaller B/C stations have lost over 90% of their staff. I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages. If you're a Delta employee and was thinking about transferring to a different station, give it a month or two, you just might get to pick whatever station you'd like to work at.


The brain drain is real. I don’t know how management couldn’t have seen something like this happening when offering up such a generous retirement package. If you were eligible, it’s sounds like a no brainer. No wonder all the experienced folks took it
 
75driver
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:02 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 6:25 am

joeblow10 wrote:

The brain drain is real. I don’t know how management couldn’t have seen something like this happening when offering up such a generous retirement package. If you were eligible, it’s sounds like a no brainer. No wonder all the experienced folks took it


It was NOT a no brainer despite how it looks. I had a low enough number to keep bidding until retirement (9 more years) but I elected to move aside. There are plenty of others who are not. It’s an individual decision based on your individual circumstances. Many of us think the industry is going to be unstable for a long time. Many of us have had enough of the swaps, slips and ever increasing pressure that’s going to come from the Kompany. Delta was good to us and I wish my friends well in the future. It’s going to be heavy chop for sure.
 
0newair0
Posts: 417
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:21 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 7:00 am

nwadeicer wrote:
So, now that the dust is starting to settle on the employees taking the retirement packages. It looks like approximately 500 above/below wing employees in MSP have taken the package. Looking like a little over 1000 above/below wing employees have taken it in ATL, add to that over 30 OSM (front line managers) have opted to take the packages as well in ATL. There have been reports that some smaller B/C stations have lost over 90% of their staff. I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages. If you're a Delta employee and was thinking about transferring to a different station, give it a month or two, you just might get to pick whatever station you'd like to work at.
The truth is management was hoping more would sign up. The company is still over staffed and it is going to take a lot of effort to avoid involuntary layoffs and furloughs in a couple of months.
That's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:42 pm

0newair0 wrote:
nwadeicer wrote:
So, now that the dust is starting to settle on the employees taking the retirement packages. It looks like approximately 500 above/below wing employees in MSP have taken the package. Looking like a little over 1000 above/below wing employees have taken it in ATL, add to that over 30 OSM (front line managers) have opted to take the packages as well in ATL. There have been reports that some smaller B/C stations have lost over 90% of their staff. I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages. If you're a Delta employee and was thinking about transferring to a different station, give it a month or two, you just might get to pick whatever station you'd like to work at.
The truth is management was hoping more would sign up. The company is still over staffed and it is going to take a lot of effort to avoid involuntary layoffs and furloughs in a couple of months.

It kind of depends on which division you are talking about. I think for TechOps the losses will be small. The take rate for the division is said to be about 17% of all employees. There will be a lot of shuffling of the workforce to back fill into vacated positions that need to be filled. Say if ATL Line is still overstaffed, but some of the ATL shops are decimated (they are some with 90% retired). Those junior Line guys will be building hydraulic pumps for a while. They will still have AMT jobs though.
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:52 pm

nwadeicer wrote:
I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages.


:checkmark:

Agreed. I suspected that this would be the case. Based on what I'm hearing, you are not alone in this belief. It will take more than a few weeks for the dust to settle. There is about to be a very significant internal reshuffling as folks relocate. That will lead to backfilling and more reshuffling until nearly everyone is where they want to be for awhile as they try to ride out what lies ahead. I don't expect the movement to fully subside until end of 4Q '20 or even early 1Q '21.

75driver wrote:
Many of us think the industry is going to be unstable for a long time. Many of us have had enough of the swaps, slips and ever increasing pressure that’s going to come from the Kompany. Delta was good to us and I wish my friends well in the future. It’s going to be heavy chop for sure.


Yes sadly, that really does seem to be the common feeling, doesn't it? Many of them have been through 9/11, multiple economic downturns, in some cases (multiple) mergers, so they all know what to expect in the future if they choose to stay onboard. It's going to be unprecedented (not unlike COVID itself) and it's not going to be easy or pretty. It may well prove to be the most challenging and difficult part of many peoples' careers. The old bar will never be high enough, so it's going to be continuously raised over and over again. New job duties, expectations and requirements. And then there's the inevitable pay and benefit reductions which most are convinced are just around the corner. Against this backdrop, many of them just didn't feel feel like there was enough "fight" left in them to go through it all again. You certainly can't fault them for feeling that way.
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
User avatar
NWAESC
Posts: 1586
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:17 pm

New job duties, expectations and requirements. And then there's the inevitable pay and benefit reductions which most are convinced are just around the corner.


Maybe, but remember most of us are already under 25% pay cuts. There have some nominal benefit cuts as well.

As for additional (or new) job duties, I don’t think many people would much mind if it means keeping people on the property.
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:51 pm

NWAESC wrote:

Maybe, but remember most of us are already under 25% pay cuts. There have some nominal benefit cuts as well.


But wasn't that 25% pay reduction introduced as a temporary measure intended to help weather the worst of the pandemic? Wasn't it driven by moving from a 5-day/40-hour work week to a 4-day/30-hour work week? I would not be at all surprised if the 5-day/40-hour work week is reinstated, but the 25% pay cut is retained. With revenues still down 80-90% and no relief in sight, it seems inevitable.
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
Lootess
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:15 pm

Distractors been saying Delta was doomed in Seattle since 2013. When Mike Medeiros was tapped to new VP of the new hub. Every month we heard it, and yet the company was raking money. Still going to hear it for years to come, that it's going to be comical. The same was said about the JFK build-up. If anything, it's Alaska that had to retreat from entrenching Delta's hub in SLC.

alfa164 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.


I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.


I roll my eyes at the thought of JFK for anything domestic. LGA whenever possible.
 
tjerome
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:23 pm

nwadeicer wrote:
So, now that the dust is starting to settle on the employees taking the retirement packages. It looks like approximately 500 above/below wing employees in MSP have taken the package. Looking like a little over 1000 above/below wing employees have taken it in ATL, add to that over 30 OSM (front line managers) have opted to take the packages as well in ATL. There have been reports that some smaller B/C stations have lost over 90% of their staff. I'm thinking Delta grossly underestimated how many people would actually take the retirement packages. If you're a Delta employee and was thinking about transferring to a different station, give it a month or two, you just might get to pick whatever station you'd like to work at.


I wonder how much they will backfill especially at ATL
 
CRJ200flyer
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:33 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:40 pm

In DTW at the B and C concourses and in MSP at the A and B concourses, DGS continues to be understaffed. I’ve had to wait almost every flight for ground crew, and so far 4 flights I’ve operated have been late due to a lack of available ground crew (my record is waiting almost 30 minutes!).
 
evank516
Posts: 2139
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:37 pm

alfa164 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JFK is actually more convenient for leisure travelers than LGA. You can get there a lot easier with mass transit. It offers more destinations to travel to. Without business traffic, LGA will be in a lot of trouble. Let's say we get to Q2 and slot waiver goes away, what is short haul business traffic looking like for rest of the year? Is it going to be 20% of regular, 30%, 50%? It seems like even 50% would be hard to achieve given that we are at around 0 right now.


I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.


Ever come to Long Island? Ya know, a heavy source of commuter traffic for New York City (which is home to tons of transplants that call themselves New Yorkers while they live in a shoebox for $4,000 a month with 5 roommates). We prefer JFK. After NYC are the next most densely populated region in the state. We prefer JFK.

DMPHL wrote:
tphuang wrote:
alfa164 wrote:

I have never - ever - known a New Yorker who prefers JFK over LGA.

And I know a lot of New Yorkers.


Well you met the first here.

And I have taken subway + airtrain to JFK many times. Better than the rush hour 4 train experience of q70 or m60.


Lol make it two. Living in Brooklyn, it is massively easier to hop on any one of the LIRR trains from Atlantic to Jamaica and taking the AirTrain. 30 minutes, ~$12. The alternative is a $60 Uber to LGA that takes 20 minutes to even get through Downtown Brooklyn and onto the BQE, and who knows what awaits you there.


Long Island Railroad is literally out my window and I live on the Huntington/Port Jeff line. Quick change in Jamaica and I'm there and back for less than what it would cost to park there for two nights.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 6:10 pm

CRJ200flyer wrote:
In DTW at the B and C concourses and in MSP at the A and B concourses, DGS continues to be understaffed. I’ve had to wait almost every flight for ground crew, and so far 4 flights I’ve operated have been late due to a lack of available ground crew (my record is waiting almost 30 minutes!).


To me that's unacceptable. Your operating an airline at about 50% of what it was and you don't have the planning ability to keep what you are operating staffed.
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...
 
JAMBOJET
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:23 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 7:10 pm

klm617 wrote:
CRJ200flyer wrote:
In DTW at the B and C concourses and in MSP at the A and B concourses, DGS continues to be understaffed. I’ve had to wait almost every flight for ground crew, and so far 4 flights I’ve operated have been late due to a lack of available ground crew (my record is waiting almost 30 minutes!).


To me that's unacceptable. Your operating an airline at about 50% of what it was and you don't have the planning ability to keep what you are operating staffed.

Staffing shortages seem to be a common theme for delta this summer. Others on here have noted the 25% reduction in hours for all. Any idea why they just didn’t extend hours to solve this?

https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-air ... ughs-july/

https://thepointsguy.com/news/how-to-reach-delta/

https://slate.com/business/2020/06/delt ... rvice.html

Perhaps other carriers experienced something similar, but there seem to be an outsized number of articles about Delta’s cancellations and wait times.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 7:58 pm

JAMBOJET wrote:
klm617 wrote:
CRJ200flyer wrote:
In DTW at the B and C concourses and in MSP at the A and B concourses, DGS continues to be understaffed. I’ve had to wait almost every flight for ground crew, and so far 4 flights I’ve operated have been late due to a lack of available ground crew (my record is waiting almost 30 minutes!).


To me that's unacceptable. Your operating an airline at about 50% of what it was and you don't have the planning ability to keep what you are operating staffed.

Staffing shortages seem to be a common theme for delta this summer. Others on here have noted the 25% reduction in hours for all. Any idea why they just didn’t extend hours to solve this?

https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-air ... ughs-july/

https://thepointsguy.com/news/how-to-reach-delta/

https://slate.com/business/2020/06/delt ... rvice.html

Perhaps other carriers experienced something similar, but there seem to be an outsized number of articles about Delta’s cancellations and wait times.


Exactly why not just add hours. In these hard times who's going to refuse extra shifts. It would be hard for me to believe that airlines are not overstaffed at the moment. With the cares package going until the end of September there shouldn't be any issue with keeping the airports staffed.
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...
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:03 pm

klm617 wrote:
JAMBOJET wrote:
klm617 wrote:

To me that's unacceptable. Your operating an airline at about 50% of what it was and you don't have the planning ability to keep what you are operating staffed.

Staffing shortages seem to be a common theme for delta this summer. Others on here have noted the 25% reduction in hours for all. Any idea why they just didn’t extend hours to solve this?

https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-air ... ughs-july/

https://thepointsguy.com/news/how-to-reach-delta/

https://slate.com/business/2020/06/delt ... rvice.html

Perhaps other carriers experienced something similar, but there seem to be an outsized number of articles about Delta’s cancellations and wait times.


Exactly why not just add hours. In these hard times who's going to refuse extra shifts. It would be hard for me to believe that airlines are not overstaffed at the moment. With the cares package going until the end of September there shouldn't be any issue with keeping the airports staffed.


A lot of people were refusing extra hours right now, not everybody wants to work extra. Likewise speaking personally, it has been a pain in the neck getting people back to work because they were making more on unemployment.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
User avatar
NWAESC
Posts: 1586
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:02 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:46 pm

DL747400 wrote:
NWAESC wrote:

Maybe, but remember most of us are already under 25% pay cuts. There have some nominal benefit cuts as well.


But wasn't that 25% pay reduction introduced as a temporary measure intended to help weather the worst of the pandemic? Wasn't it driven by moving from a 5-day/40-hour work week to a 4-day/30-hour work week? I would not be at all surprised if the 5-day/40-hour work week is reinstated, but the 25% pay cut is retained. With revenues still down 80-90% and no relief in sight, it seems inevitable.


Time’ll tell. I think cutting hours is an easier sell than cutting base rates.
"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
 
nwadeicer
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:17 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:10 pm

alasizon wrote:
klm617 wrote:
JAMBOJET wrote:
Staffing shortages seem to be a common theme for delta this summer. Others on here have noted the 25% reduction in hours for all. Any idea why they just didn’t extend hours to solve this?

https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-air ... ughs-july/

https://thepointsguy.com/news/how-to-reach-delta/

https://slate.com/business/2020/06/delt ... rvice.html

Perhaps other carriers experienced something similar, but there seem to be an outsized number of articles about Delta’s cancellations and wait times.


Exactly why not just add hours. In these hard times who's going to refuse extra shifts. It would be hard for me to believe that airlines are not overstaffed at the moment. With the cares package going until the end of September there shouldn't be any issue with keeping the airports staffed.


A lot of people were refusing extra hours right now, not everybody wants to work extra. Likewise speaking personally, it has been a pain in the neck getting people back to work because they were making more on unemployment.


We were explicitly told by our manager that there will be no OT.
I miss the Red Tail
 
Flflyer83
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 4:40 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:38 pm

alasizon wrote:
A lot of people were refusing extra hours right now, not everybody wants to work extra. Likewise speaking personally, it has been a pain in the neck getting people back to work because they were making more on unemployment.


Then DL or whomever they’re employed by should deny the UE claim.
 
adtall
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:53 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:39 pm

NWAESC wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
NWAESC wrote:

Maybe, but remember most of us are already under 25% pay cuts. There have some nominal benefit cuts as well.


But wasn't that 25% pay reduction introduced as a temporary measure intended to help weather the worst of the pandemic? Wasn't it driven by moving from a 5-day/40-hour work week to a 4-day/30-hour work week? I would not be at all surprised if the 5-day/40-hour work week is reinstated, but the 25% pay cut is retained. With revenues still down 80-90% and no relief in sight, it seems inevitable.


Time’ll tell. I think cutting hours is an easier sell than cutting base rates.


I agree, it's an easier pill to swallow having an extra day off vs working the same 40 hrs but now with a pay cut. The other part is by reducing everyone to 30 hrs you create more 30 hr work, example 3 40 hr workers is equivalent to 4 30 hr workers, which helps with furloughs while payroll stays the same.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:09 pm

Flflyer83 wrote:
alasizon wrote:
A lot of people were refusing extra hours right now, not everybody wants to work extra. Likewise speaking personally, it has been a pain in the neck getting people back to work because they were making more on unemployment.


Then DL or whomever they’re employed by should deny the UE claim.


It isn't a matter of denying the claim (although most of the airlines agreed to not contest any of them). It is that when they are recalled they don't show up and then you have to go back through the recall process again with another employee - it just rolls the target down the calendar.

Recall should be easier now since the extra $600/week is gone (for now at least).
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
toltommy
Posts: 2790
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 9:04 am

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:13 pm

CRJ200flyer wrote:
In DTW at the B and C concourses and in MSP at the A and B concourses, DGS continues to be understaffed. I’ve had to wait almost every flight for ground crew, and so far 4 flights I’ve operated have been late due to a lack of available ground crew (my record is waiting almost 30 minutes!).


Don't forget that DL spun DGS off a couple years back. DL never considered DGS to be part of the family. I don't think DGS (or Unifi now) got CARES money. All they could do was cut hours and/or lay off. DL may have tried to push some of the regional work they were handling on A back over to th cheaper ground handler on B/C in DTW. But DGS had no CARES money, didn't offer hourly employees health care unless they paid 100% of the premium, and took away most of the travel benefits after the sale. Then add no work in. File for unemployment, take what you can, plus $600/week. Why would anyone at DGS/Unifi stay. Quick look at their website shows recent openings for customer service manager, general manager, and director in DTW. DL likely made their ground handler so cheap that everyone had no problem leaving when the world imploded.
A300/A310/A319/A320/A321/A332/A333 / 707/712/727/732/733/734/735/738/739/752/753
/762/763/764/772/788/789/DC8/DC9-10/30/40/50/MD81/83/87/88/90/L1011-/250/500/CRJ200/440 /700/900/EMB135/140/145/170/175/190/328Jet/F70/SF3/BE1/J31
 
FSDan
Posts: 3326
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta plans to emerge a "smaller" carrier

Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:39 pm

n9801f wrote:
FSDan wrote:
My main claim is that your claim hasn't been backed up by any data.

Yet you readily admit that your own claims aren't either...


I took a look back through my posts, and the only statement I found where I feel I overstepped my supporting evidence is where I said not even half of DL's domestic network lost money pre-COVID. I don't have data to back that up, so apologies for making a statement of fact on that as opposed to qualifying it as an educated guess.

Everything else I "claimed" (DL was planning to be bigger than ever at SEA this summer, had been upgauging and adding routes, has been bringing the SEA hub back faster than other coastal hubs post-COVID; A220s and A330-900s are fuel efficient, etc.) is easily verified by looking at DL's historical schedules, OAG data, aircraft spec sheets, etc. In other cases I carefully worded my "claims" to indicate that they are opinion statements using phrasing such as "I expect that...", "I'd be surprised if...", etc. I wish more posters here would use that type of wording when talking about things that are educated guesses, or are otherwise not provable with public data.

So my bad for one statement I made that was indeed too bold, but I stand by the rest of my statements. I'd still love to see some data that proves DL was floundering in SEA, given the frequency with which that's proclaimed here as known fact.

n9801f wrote:
FSDan wrote:
flying extremely fuel-efficient aircraft in the market

You say that SEA P&L should be evaluated including the benefit of scarce, efficient, high opportunity cost aircraft that could have been used elsewhere.

However second-year employees of the very professional, skilled, objective network departments of savvy competitors like American and United, good stock analysts, and competent airline economists will point out that looking at SEA P&L that is artificially subsidized by putting all the efficient planes there is not a good way to make the most profitable decision for stockholders and employees.

They will consider the full picture instead. So if SEA looks good because it is loaded it up with all the good A-220's but some other hub got larded up with comparatively inefficient B717's as a result, they'll look at the combination of consequences of these two things, not either one alone.

This is a very basic concept of network economics and its absence seriously undercuts your arguments.


I'm betting DL's network planners are also professional, skilled, and objective, and thus far they've demonstrated continued commitment to SEA. Maybe I'm wrong and DL could have been making way more money these past years with better network planners... but that seems relatively unlikely.

Yes, any route that is assigned a 717 likely won't make as much profit as if an A220 had been assigned to the same route, but DL still has 717s that they need to deploy somewhere in their network. We've seen DL opt to deploy the 717s largely in their fortress hubs while deploying the A220s on competitive routes out of competitor hubs like SEA and DFW. That makes a lot of sense as a way to maximize overall profits across the network.

n9801f wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Regarding the economics, I'd add a few considerations:
1) Since both airlines operate connecting hubs, looking at purely SEA O&D traffic growth and comparing to DL's capacity growth isn't sufficient. As one example, DL was flying increasingly larger equipment to Asia, and filling a chunk of that added capacity by boosting seats in domestic connecting markets.

It's previously been pointed out that Delta's SEA-Asia boils down to 4 routes. Saturating the SEA domestic market with 100+ flights to feed these 4 routes is a questionable decision for maximizing short term profitability.

And in a crisis, the short term is all that matters. Because if you don't survive the crisis, there is no long term.


Wait a minute... I never said all increases in domestic capacity were to feed the Asia flights... I used that as one example of why looking at solely O&D traffic numbers when evaluating the amount of capacity added to a market would give an incomplete picture.

I understand that the short term has become immensely more important because of the crisis, but I still doubt that airlines have stopped considering the long term entirely in their planning decisions. That's affirmed by statements from both UA and AA executives about being ready to scale back up and be well-positioned when traffic returns. In constrained, strategic hubs like SEA, LAX, NYC, and BOS, I have to think DL is mindful of the long term effects of ceding gates/slots/etc. to competitors when deciding how best to minimize short term pain. If you don't survive the crisis, there's no long term. But if you survive and haven't planned for the long term, you're still in trouble.

n9801f wrote:
gaystudpilot wrote:
*If* AA+AS+oneworld are successful in SEA, I do not see a scenario where DL could successfully operate a hub in SEA.

Delta could cut bait and focus TPAC elsewhere. A strategy for DL could be not having a “primary TPAC gateway.”

The US airline industry will be lucky to return to 75% of pre-recession, pre-COVID levels by 2024.

The tail doesn't wag the dog.

The foundation of a SEA hub (the "dog") is the domestic local market. Alaska serves this better than Delta, has lower costs, and has better penetration with business travelers.

The international operation at SEA (the "tail") can only grow onto a successful domestic foundation.

Alaska is holding its own against Delta in SEA. Delta has struggled to make inroads in the SEA domestic local markets against Alaska.

It will be easier for Alaska's 300-flight "dog" to grow a 4-flight "tail" of AA/oneworld flights than it will for Delta's 4-flight "tail" to grow a 150+ flight dog.

Like it or not, Alaska has a good hand in this game. Delta is smart and will be well served by being objective about this in its decisions.
[/quote]

Agreed that AS isn't under pressure from DL at SEA - I've never been one to claim that. I just think AS+AA doing well at SEA doesn't preclude DL from doing well at the same time.

If we apply the logic that the smaller, higher cost operation always fails, we should have seen AA pull out of ORD a long time ago. Of course Chicago is a much larger overall market than Seattle, but the UA and AA hubs there are also more than double the size of what AS and DL have at SEA (and there's no major second airport in the SEA area to compete for traffic like there is in Chicago). There's sometimes an assumption that travelers will always choose the airline that has the biggest network out of their home airport, when that's far from the only factor. Reliability, service quality, hard product, etc. all matter in addition to network breadth and price. Even since the pandemic/recession started, I've paid extra and traveled out of my way to fly DL due to their cleaning and social distancing policies.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.

Who is online

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