To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

Plenty. In my experience it's cheaper to go to Newark and fly internationally saving hundreds. Yeah NY does hurts Philly air service. Also being a hub for AA. It's hard to complete here too

Nicknuzzii wrote:

2 main things effect PHL;

1.) AA’s fortress hub - For years AA has been adding to what US started with their TATL ops from PHL. AA has even moved several routes from JFK to PHL.

2.) Cost - It is significantly cheaper to fly from EWR and even cheaper to fly from JFK. Most of the O&D demand will just hit the road leaving PHL to fill it’s flights with connecting pax.

Now do I think in the future we will international carriers? Yes.

AF - Not too likely because they are more on the conservative end but always a possibility.
KL - KL has made some interesting choices in the past such as the planned AUS launch and cutting EWR. I would be surprised if they tried PHL but not the least likely one to enter the market.
LX - LH would add MUC and possibly the 748-I to FRA before adding a route on another LH group carrier.

Other possibilities;
TP - Heavily rumored. I could definitely see this coming once they work out the kinks in their schedule in a few years. An a321 to LIS would be awesome since AA is having a field day on the route.

EK - EK planned for launch to PHL in 2015 but never went through with it. A fifth freedom flight would fit in great. MXP would make sense.

JL - PHL to Asia has to come one day and I do think we will see it in this decade.

IB - Why aren't they here yet? EI and BA both do decent from PHL and IB would fit right in.

1 and 2 aren't different. Transatlantic flights from PHL are expensive because AA wants them that way. EWR has a much higher CPE caused by huge fees charged by the Port Authority. If UA is charging less there, it's not based on lower airport costs.

As to the airlines, AF used to fly to PHL and pulled out. Not sure why AF-KL would try AMS instead. And IB would do nothing about the fares as they're in an ATI JV with AA. They have zero incentive to fly their own metal there unless it's taking over a flight from AA, which doesn't really make sense now.

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

I do not recall KLM ever serving PHL, but Alitalia did in the 1970s.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

TP - Heavily rumored. I could definitely see this coming once they work out the kinks in their schedule in a few years. An a321 to LIS would be awesome since AA is having a field day on the route.

TP: "heavily rumored?" Where? What's the PDEW for PHLLIS that would compel them to jump in? I'll wait...

What about IAD? It’s only a little further from PHL as NYC is. There is some spillage to there, too.

Also, let’s not forget that there simply isn’t the same demand from the Philadelphia area as there is out of NYC and DC, or even Boston, which is why you see a lot fewer international carriers there. Let’s compare Boston to Philadelphia...prior to COVID, of course. Both cities are about the same size, yet BOS has a ton more international traffic and airlines than PHL. BOS is a richer city with more lucrative industries and a lot more tourism. PHL has a much different demographic than BOS. Quite frankly, I think it’s lucky to have the amount of international traffic that it has.

So yeah, maybe there is some spillage from Philadelphia to NYC and DC, but there is also a lot less demand out of there. If the city’s demographics were different and demand was greater, you’d probably see a lot more international airlines, regardless of its location or even AA’s hub status.

leader1 wrote:

What about IAD? It’s about the same distance to PHL as NYC is. There is some spillage to there, too.

Also, let’s not forget that there simply isn’t the same demand from the Philadelphia area as there is out of NYC and DC, or even Boston, which is why you see a lot fewer international carriers there. Let’s compare Boston to Philadelphia...prior to COVID, of course. Both cities are about the same size, yet BOS has a ton more international traffic and airlines than PHL. BOS is a richer city with more lucrative industries and a lot more tourism. PHL has a much different demographic than BOS. Quite frankly, I think it’s lucky to have the amount of international traffic that it has.

So yeah, maybe there is some spillage from Philadelphia to NYC and DC, but there is also a lot less demand out of there. If the city’s demographics were different and demand was greater, you’d probably see a lot more international airlines, regardless of its location or even AA’s hub status.

Let's say Boston has much better business diversity this Philly. Also didn't help the city is poor itself.
I disagree on tourism. Philly's tourism was booming before this virus hit.

PHLspecial wrote:

Let's say Boston has much better business diversity this Philly. Also didn't help the city is poor itself.
I disagree on tourism. Philly's tourism was booming before this virus hit.

Yes, but overseas tourism is not even close to Boston’s level. The stats I found were that Boston attracted 1.7M overseas tourists in 2018, vs. about 700K for Philadelphia. Not sure about 2019 numbers.

https://www.bostonusa.com/media/statist ... isitation/

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphi ... -5-in.html

TAP was planning on launching half a dozen or so routes to North America this year, none of which were to PHL.

I lived in the Philly area for a few years and my parent's are still there. I know a lot of people there that don't even look at flights out of PHL and just book out of EWR/JFK/LGA automatically (stupid if you ask me-check PHL first at least). I'd pay a small premium to fly out of PHL if I lived in the area rather than make the trek (which if traffic is bad can be arduous imo) to the NYC 3 or even a place like TTN. My parent's go further and are willing to pay a large premium to avoid that hassle but a lot of people simply aren't. There are even quite a lot of people who live in the Philly area and work in NYC and commute daily on Amtrak (or, less commonly, drive) so it is almost second nature to many.

As others have said the fortress hub really does limit competition and drives up fares. The hub situation was in some ways even worse when it was US as a lot of people would rather go to NYC and fly anyone else than put up with (real or imagined) poor US service.

On a separate note, I could see IB showing up as a JV frequency addition with an A321XLR out of MAD, perhaps seasonally. Now, AA has 50 XLRs on the way and I imagine at least a few will be flying Euro routes ex-PHL so maybe that will be unnecessary. As for TP, an A321LR could make a lot of sense and I think would probably do quite well when the economy picks up again given the high fares and general lack of competition possibly favoring a little bit of low-risk disruption. That said, I don't see them trying it until the economy looks less feeble and demand for VFR traffic picks up again.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

leader1 wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Let's say Boston has much better business diversity this Philly. Also didn't help the city is poor itself.
I disagree on tourism. Philly's tourism was booming before this virus hit.

Yes, but overseas tourism is not even close to Boston’s level. The stats I found were that Boston attracted 1.7M overseas tourists in 2018, vs. about 700K for Philadelphia. Not sure about 2019 numbers.

https://www.bostonusa.com/media/statist ... isitation/

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphi ... -5-in.html

Thanks for sharing this! Just out of curiosity does this include tourist who add Philly onto their NYC trips or just tourists coming via the airport?

Yeah it's a lot cheaper to fly into NY and then stay a couple of days in Philly.

crownvic wrote:

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

I do not recall KLM ever serving PHL, but Alitalia did in the 1970s.

Maybe referring to NW and the split NW/KLM livery they had on a few DC10s

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

Lots. 'Back in the day' shouldn't include the period of regulated routes - nor the decade following the end of that while carriers got out of those restrictions and figured out their own networks. Regulators - not markets - determined where planes would fly.

Lots. Look at the international carrier count (67 at JFK per the 9/19 PANYNJ report), relevant to price competition; and non-stop international destination count (112 at JFK per same report), which makes the drive to JFK comparable/favorable to making a connection PHL-xxx-destination.

This is an effect seen all over the U.S.: big airports (at least those which have had capacity to grow in the last decade) inhibit the destination set and frequency of service of smaller nearby airports.

leader1 wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Let's say Boston has much better business diversity this Philly. Also didn't help the city is poor itself.
I disagree on tourism. Philly's tourism was booming before this virus hit.

Yes, but overseas tourism is not even close to Boston’s level. The stats I found were that Boston attracted 1.7M overseas tourists in 2018, vs. about 700K for Philadelphia. Not sure about 2019 numbers.

https://www.bostonusa.com/media/statist ... isitation/

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphi ... -5-in.html

Phillys tourism is school trips to see the Liberty Bell and side trips from other big cities. It is not a large destination unto itself.

Rather nice historic area and waterfront nonetheless.

There is no comparison to Boston on the world stage in terms of tourism.

In regards to the debate about TAP thinking about starting a route to PHL here are two articles I've read from the past that they at least have or had interest in it

https://www.flightglobal.com/strategy/t ... 78.article

https://airlinegeeks.com/2019/04/07/tap ... st-a321lr/

Nicknuzzii wrote:

IADCA wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

2 main things effect PHL;

1.) AA’s fortress hub - For years AA has been adding to what US started with their TATL ops from PHL. AA has even moved several routes from JFK to PHL.

2.) Cost - It is significantly cheaper to fly from EWR and even cheaper to fly from JFK. Most of the O&D demand will just hit the road leaving PHL to fill it’s flights with connecting pax.

Now do I think in the future we will international carriers? Yes.

AF - Not too likely because they are more on the conservative end but always a possibility.
KL - KL has made some interesting choices in the past such as the planned AUS launch and cutting EWR. I would be surprised if they tried PHL but not the least likely one to enter the market.
LX - LH would add MUC and possibly the 748-I to FRA before adding a route on another LH group carrier.

Other possibilities;
TP - Heavily rumored. I could definitely see this coming once they work out the kinks in their schedule in a few years. An a321 to LIS would be awesome since AA is having a field day on the route.

EK - EK planned for launch to PHL in 2015 but never went through with it. A fifth freedom flight would fit in great. MXP would make sense.

JL - PHL to Asia has to come one day and I do think we will see it in this decade.

IB - Why aren't they here yet? EI and BA both do decent from PHL and IB would fit right in.

1 and 2 aren't different. Transatlantic flights from PHL are expensive because AA wants them that way. EWR has a much higher CPE caused by huge fees charged by the Port Authority. If UA is charging less there, it's not based on lower airport costs.

As to the airlines, AF used to fly to PHL and pulled out. Not sure why AF-KL would try AMS instead. And IB would do nothing about the fares as they're in an ATI JV with AA. They have zero incentive to fly their own metal there unless it's taking over a flight from AA, which doesn't really make sense now.

1.) I never once mentioned airport costs but only the prices of tickets.

2.) AF-KL hasn’t made interesting decisions in the past? TPA - AMS on DL? AUS - AMS on KL?

3.) There is a reason both AA fly routes such as JFK - BCN and ORD/JFK/MIA/LAX - MAD.

1) Trying to discuss ticket prices without considering costs is a silly exercise. Here a look at airport costs makes clear that the problem is AA, which is important to any commercial analysis of the realities at PHL. If AA is happy to leak traffic to the NY-area airports, that has strong knock-on effects, particularly on any potential increase in service from JV partners - see your point 3.

2) And yet, they pulled out of PHL. That itself is a pretty interesting decision, having zero service to one of the 10 largest MSAs in the US and one that's not a particularly long flight from CDG or AMS.

3) Is a particularly strange rejoinder in a discussion about how and why PHL is treated differently than JFK. In addition to the above, all of those route pairings you mentioned have much greater demand on the European-origin side than PHL does, and hence the commercial sensibility of the EU-branded flights.

It’s an unfair question, because PHL would not be as good as it is, if the JFK and EWR regions did not exist. PHL still is a good hub with a different usage and configuration than JFK or EWR. As a hub, EWR is better and PHL is second best. Difficult to make money at JFK due to competition depressing yields.

PHL is an entirely different operation than the NY Area airports. AA inherited the US legacy hub at PHL and until COVID19, was (is) AA's primary TATL gateway. AA has a lot less competition at PHL than it does in the NY market, and specifically on TATL routes. The only other airlines flying long haul into PHL are LH, BA, and QR. BA is a partner, so really it is two. AA could not make Germany work ex-PHL and ceded the market to LH last year entirely, moving FRA/MUC services. PHL is what, the fourth or fifth largest US metro area after NY, LA, CHI so it is a destination in its own right, and a significant transit point. I'm not sure it pulls that much traffic from the NY Area airports, unless we're talking southern NJ, maybe Staten Island. The NY market is so much bigger, it dwarfs PHL. The PHL hub is both a positive and a negative for AA. The positives are less competition, strong O&D demand. It also is a factor in what complicates AA's presence in the NY market which until COVID19 had been optimized to essentially serving key business markets and partner hubs but was not supposed to be a connecting hub or some sort of mega footprint. PHL and JFK/LGA overlap destination wise with PHL but the higher yields technically would be NY, but probably high in PHL given less competition. UA had a similar but also very different overlap problem with EWR/IAD but opted to focus EWR more on O&D and flow connections through IAD. The footprint of UA at EWR of course is much, much bigger than AA for all of NY. PHL is in the end a good hub and serves a different usage. It is cheaper to operate from than the NY airports but it is also a hogdepodge of terminals and lacks a master rebuild design which if carried forward post COVID, will raise the cost of operations there.

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

PHL has it's own market, a bit different - but still has it's own. I know people who go from northenr NJ to PHL because of a cheaper flight. Not many, but a few do.
You can't forget that the NY/NJ/PA/BOS regions is the most densely populated - there is room and demand for all. Especially as businesses grow in PHL.

PHL has a market from southern NJ, and couple others areas on the south end - not to mentioan much of PA. They have the option of EWR as well, but can choose PHL. Just as many from NJ will pay a premium just so they don't have to fly out of JFK and deal with the headache of getting there, tolls, etc - many in the areas mentioned will pay a premium not to have to drive further to EWR or JFK.

Part of the problem I see is International carriers have failed to understand the geographical & market importance for each airport - All they see is NY.
I can't tell you how many years I've had to explain to personnel in carriers overseas that EWR is not just a 10 min hop to JFK & they are not the same, yes it is across the river - but they are drastcially different in many ways.

Some carriers just need to do their research & take the leap, such as QR did, BA, LH, Iceland.

But you can't forget that NY has a huge business market and have many overseas company HQ there - NJ has very large industry with Pharmaceuticals & the like.

Cedar

IADCA wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

IADCA wrote:

1 and 2 aren't different. Transatlantic flights from PHL are expensive because AA wants them that way. EWR has a much higher CPE caused by huge fees charged by the Port Authority. If UA is charging less there, it's not based on lower airport costs.

1.) I never once mentioned airport costs but only the prices of tickets.

1) Trying to discuss ticket prices without considering costs is a silly exercise. Here a look at airport costs makes clear that the problem is AA, which is important to any commercial analysis of the realities at PHL. If AA is happy to leak traffic to the NY-area airports, that has strong knock-on effects, particularly on any potential increase in service from JV partners - see your point 3.

One big difference between PHL and NYC is that NYC to Europe has nonstop competition on DL, UA, SU, UX, AF, AZ, OS, SN, AY, KL, DY, LO, SK, LX, TP, and VS whereas EI, BA, and LH are the only European airlines that serve PHL.

One of the main reasons why fares on NYC-Europe is less expensive than PHL-Europe is that NYC-Europe has significantly more competition than PHL-Europe does.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

catiii wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

TP - Heavily rumored. I could definitely see this coming once they work out the kinks in their schedule in a few years. An a321 to LIS would be awesome since AA is having a field day on the route.

TP: "heavily rumored?" Where? What's the PDEW for PHLLIS that would compel them to jump in? I'll wait...

Just about every PHL thread mentions TAP. Do you live under a rock?

Besides that the number is 94 pax one way. Do you think cities such as SFO and ATL are higher than this?

SFO is a Star hub with significant connectivity. ATL is the largest metro in the southeast, and they're paying a subsidy as I recall for the service. And when Frasquilho laid out the 9 North American cities that TAP was opening or going to open with the 339 or the LR, PHL wasn't on the list, and that's probably because the market that does exist is amply served by AA who can flow through hub traffic and fill O/D.

But yeah, I'm the one living under a rock.

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR (81 miles away) and JFK (105 miles away)?

Probably quite a bit, at least in terms of service from international airlines. NYC is a higher priority to serve for pretty much every international carrier.
While Philly has some pretty big ethnic communities, they are likely dwarfed by the populations of those same groups that live in the NYC area. A similar comparison can be made with the business communities of each city. That means that any international airline thinking about serving PHL has to justify the cost of opening up a new station just ~100 miles from an existing one in the NYC area. Not too many airlines have decided that's worth it.

The great thing PHL has going for it is the AA hub. AA is at a structural disadvantage in the NYC area (3rd place slot portfolio across the 3 major airports), so PHL is likely to remain their best location for a TATL hub for the foreseeable future. The lower cost of operation helps as well, and was cited by AA Network Planning as one reason AA has been able to try out destinations such as BUD and DBV from PHL while UA and DL don't fly to those places from their NYC area hubs. Of course, the size of the PHL hub is small compared to the population of the CSA, which I think is partly demographic and partly bleed to EWR/IAD, etc. Nonetheless, there's plenty of wealth in the Philadelphia area (e.g. the Main Line) and plenty of business (Comcast, Vanguard, Big Pharma, etc.) to support a good-sized hub and international gateway for the home carrier.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

2 main things effect PHL;

1.) AA’s fortress hub - For years AA has been adding to what US started with their TATL ops from PHL. AA has even moved several routes from JFK to PHL.

2.) Cost - It is significantly cheaper to fly from EWR and even cheaper to fly from JFK. Most of the O&D demand will just hit the road leaving PHL to fill it’s flights with connecting pax.

Now do I think in the future we will international carriers? Yes.

AF - Not too likely because they are more on the conservative end but always a possibility.
KL - KL has made some interesting choices in the past such as the planned AUS launch and cutting EWR. I would be surprised if they tried PHL but not the least likely one to enter the market.
LX - LH would add MUC and possibly the 748-I to FRA before adding a route on another LH group carrier.

Other possibilities;
TP - Heavily rumored. I could definitely see this coming once they work out the kinks in their schedule in a few years. An a321 to LIS would be awesome since AA is having a field day on the route.

EK - EK planned for launch to PHL in 2015 but never went through with it. A fifth freedom flight would fit in great. MXP would make sense.

JL - PHL to Asia has to come one day and I do think we will see it in this decade.

IB - Why aren't they here yet? EI and BA both do decent from PHL and IB would fit right in.

IB doesn't need to fly to PHL because AA has PHL-MAD (outside of Pandemic times). A double daily PHL-MAD would not work. PHL-NRT has been rumored on Airliners.net since the USAirways days. Not likely now and probably not for at least 3 years. EK? No way. QR is in the market to DOH and that's likely enough for the ME3. An EK flight from DXB to PHL via MXP? Well, AA does not fly PHL-MXP yet but I just don't see them adding it. TP? It would cannibalize yields from EWR and AA has seasonal PHL-LIS on normal times.

LX? Well, SR flew PHL-BOS-ZRH in the 1980s and 1990s, at times with a 747, but no, AA flies PHL-ZRH and that's likely enough.

AF, no. They had it for years, then DL flew it but AA has strong POS in the US and on the CDG end. Again, 1 x daily is enough. KL? Unlikely. Not a Skyteam hub.

catiii wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

catiii wrote:

TP: "heavily rumored?" Where? What's the PDEW for PHLLIS that would compel them to jump in? I'll wait...

Just about every PHL thread mentions TAP. Do you live under a rock?

Besides that the number is 94 pax one way. Do you think cities such as SFO and ATL are higher than this?

SFO is a Star hub with significant connectivity. ATL is the largest metro in the southeast, and they're paying a subsidy as I recall for the service. And when Frasquilho laid out the 9 North American cities that TAP was opening or going to open with the 339 or the LR, PHL wasn't on the list, and that's probably because the market that does exist is amply served by AA who can flow through hub traffic and fill O/D.

But yeah, I'm the one living under a rock.

I had post earlier in this thread two articles in regards to TAP thinking about PHL route. One article was from 2018 and the other from last year. With what you mentioned About the NA 9 routes I remember hearing about that As well with PHL not being mention. So they could have had a change of heart but who knows

It’s not likely that BOS gets everything back after this. Hainan’s double-daily to Beijing and Shanghai show no signs of returning. Crickets from JAL; Qatar, too. EK says they’ll come back with the A380 July 1 but no one is holding their breath on that. Education is a big market driver for BOS and if that doesn’t bounce back, the flights won’t, either.

It's also worth considering that Philadelphia isn't the same kind of international tourism destination as New York, Boston or DC. Each of those cities attract lots of international leisure travelers. Philadelphia isn't nearly as big of a destination for international visitors. It's more of a domestic leisure destination

I remember when AA announced the start of the Dubrovnik route in same articles and posts I saw some people, especially from Croatia, questioned why philadelphia and not New York. As many have stated In this thread and in the past Philly is nowhere compared to NYC, BOS, LAX, DC for tourism and business travel. As a philly native I’m fine with that as I know this will always be the case. PHL has its own little niche that’s working especially for AA. In a perfect world the only international carriers at the moment I could see add service would be JL (philly to Asia service is another topic of its own) and maybe Porter IMO. I did believe TAP and Norwegian could add service using 321LRs as both stated in past about the potential service but my current thoughts for that happening are long gone.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

IB - Why aren't they here yet? EI and BA both do decent from PHL and IB would fit right in.

IB doesn't need to fly to PHL because AA has PHL-MAD (outside of Pandemic times). A double daily PHL-MAD would not work.

That’s it. We have to take into account what purpose PHL serves and where it comes from. When is was the main East Coast hub for US Airways it was marketed heavily as a thru-point. Direct flight (with a change of gauge) stopping at PHL linking airports in Europe and beyond airports in the US. That way some “unserved non-stop” city pairs were shown up front on search engines. US nn MAD-(PHL-)LAX, US mm CDG-(PHL-)PHX or US kk FCO-(PHL-)SFO were shown higher on the results search pages vs. one-stop options on other carriers.
They were chasing that connecting market. Now being part of AA, and being JFK soooo congested, both on the ground and up in the air, PHL serves as a relief cheap airport to get connecting people though, while focusing NYC on O/D traffic.

IB didn’t fly there, because it’s not a top destination from Spain’s point of sale or it’s european connecting catchment area. MAD-PHL as always existed flown by US... Now AA, and more specifically with a IB-AA joint venture. IB would only fly To PHL if AA had to use the frame for some other purpose. Adding a second daily would solve unexistent connectivity problems and would add A LOT of capacity to be filled at trash yields.... That explains why IB is NOT on the route (just via a JV codeshare...)

BA flies there because it’s an important destination from LHR and the route was in competition with US. When the route joined the BA-AA JBA I’m sure both tweaked schedules to improve the appeal of the service. That explains why BA is on the route

EI flies there on the same basis. PHL-DUB on US was flown in competition. Even now AA PHL-DUB is flow in competition as AerLingus is not part of the AA-IB-BA-AY JBA... That explains why EI is on the route.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

catiii wrote:

TP: "heavily rumored?" Where? What's the PDEW for PHLLIS that would compel them to jump in? I'll wait...

Just about every PHL thread mentions TAP. Do you live under a rock?
Besides that the number is 94 pax one way. Do you think cities such as SFO and ATL are higher than this?

What do SFO and ATL have to do with whether PHL attracts TAP?

catiii wrote:

ATL is the largest metro in the southeast, and they're paying a subsidy as I recall for the service.

Who is the "they" who's giving this alleged subsidy? Because if it were a public entity of any sort, DL would be screaming bloody murder.

LCDFlight wrote:

As a hub, EWR is better and PHL is second best.

better/best at what exactly?

LCDFlight wrote:

Difficult to make money at JFK due to competition depressing yields.

Except that you have no idea what level of money any given carrier is making there, since they don't make that information public on a per-route basis, and are just assuming this conclusion based on number of competitors, while ignoring that competition is high because demand (and in some cases-- yield) is too.

LAX772LR wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

catiii wrote:

TP: "heavily rumored?" Where? What's the PDEW for PHLLIS that would compel them to jump in? I'll wait...

Just about every PHL thread mentions TAP. Do you live under a rock?
Besides that the number is 94 pax one way. Do you think cities such as SFO and ATL are higher than this?

What do SFO and ATL have to do with whether PHL attracts TAP?

catiii wrote:

ATL is the largest metro in the southeast, and they're paying a subsidy as I recall for the service.

Who is the "they" who's giving this alleged subsidy? Because if it were a public entity of any sort, DL would be screaming bloody murder.

LCDFlight wrote:

As a hub, EWR is better and PHL is second best.

better/best at what exactly?

LCDFlight wrote:

Difficult to make money at JFK due to competition depressing yields.

Except that you have no idea what level of money any given carrier is making there, since they don't make that information public on a per-route basis, and are just assuming this conclusion based on number of competitors, while ignoring that competition is high because demand (and in some cases-- yield) is too.

There is more to this than guesswork. There are solid methods to attribute profits. Some of it makes it to a.net. For example, ATL is very profitable. DTW is or was quite profitable. JFK is much less so, for a US domestic. You learn to read circumstantial information (the pressure behind capacity adds / deletes) after a while. This is the outcome of planning meetings where they use a certain method to make decisions, which you can deduce later. Occasionally, the various executives divulge this info in binding, material statements about their airline. In my case, I looked at the data directly at my desk at the carriers I worked for in the 2000s. The fundamentals haven't really changed since then. The good yields are not in highly competitive markets. What the US DOJ calls a Herfindahl Index explains this pretty well. With many competitors, prices inevitably fall to cost and the product becomes a commodity at zero profit. JFK and LAX tend to be examples.

LCDFlight wrote:

There is more to this than guesswork. There are solid methods to attribute profits. Some of it makes it to a.net.

That was awesome!
Got any others??

LCDFlight wrote:

For example, ATL is very profitable. DTW is or was quite profitable. JFK is much less so, for a US domestic. You learn to read circumstantial information (the pressure behind capacity adds / deletes) after a while. This is the outcome of planning blah blah blah blah

You're dealing in guesswork and ridiculously-broad generalizations.

And even when executives do divulge information on overall performance, they never make route-specific calculations public beyond whether or not a route meets their "expectations": thus how would you know if the deficit (or even benefit) is more geared toward the cost, per route revenue, network revenue, flow, etc.

LAX772LR wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

There is more to this than guesswork. There are solid methods to attribute profits. Some of it makes it to a.net.

That was awesome!
Got any others??

LCDFlight wrote:

For example, ATL is very profitable. DTW is or was quite profitable. JFK is much less so, for a US domestic. You learn to read circumstantial information (the pressure behind capacity adds / deletes) after a while. This is the outcome of planning blah blah blah blah

You're dealing in guesswork and ridiculously-broad generalizations.

And even when executives do divulge information on overall performance, they never make route-specific calculations public beyond whether or not a route meets their "expectations": thus how would you know if the deficit (or even benefit) is more geared toward the cost, per route revenue, network revenue, flow, etc.

I guess you feel like you are doing an epic take-down of what I said, but what I said was totally standard. The major airlines all have route strategy teams and finance / fleet analysis that combine internal actual financials with vendor/model estimates to make a good guess at competitor costs and profits. The US environment is quite transparent. Employees also circulate who know for 100% fact what the profitability is. The airlines all know what is what.

Externally, the numbers all tie to public DOT and SEC data in the end. We can see how they configure their hubs (that’s why I visit a.net), so we can make some reasonable guesses at what they did in their route planning meeting, and why they did that. The real mysteries are the grand strategic projects like China and Delta Seattle, or AA Chicago. Cases where it is about more than quarterly P&L - they aren’t balancing the fleet using pure P&L which makes it harder to read from outside. But you can still look at yield data versus cost.

LAX772LR wrote:

catiii wrote:

ATL is the largest metro in the southeast, and they're paying a subsidy as I recall for the service.

Who is the "they" who's giving this alleged subsidy? Because if it were a public entity of any sort, DL would be screaming bloody murder.

First off Delta can scream all they want.

There are a number of Portuguese companies, especially on the tech side, that have their North American hqs in Atlanta. As I recall a few of them did the guarantee.

LCDFlight wrote:

I guess you feel like you are doing an epic take-down of what I said

Nah, just stating the obvious really.

LCDFlight wrote:

The major airlines all have route strategy teams and finance / fleet analysis that combine internal actual financials with vendor/model estimates to make a good guess at competitor costs and profits.

Not that you'd be currently privy to any of such, especially if you were foolish enough to blab about it on a public site.

LCDFlight wrote:

The US environment is quite transparent.

Domestically, sure. Systemwide, not so much...

LCDFlight wrote:

Employees also circulate who know for 100% fact what the profitability is.

Sufficiently to calculate for an entire gateway, across multiple carriers huh?
Weren't you just admonished for ridiculous generalizations?

LCDFlight wrote:

Externally, the numbers all tie to public DOT and SEC data in the end.

No they don't. Especially since those numbers so often exclude equivalent data on foreign routings.

LCDFlight wrote:

we can make some reasonable guesses

Which is all you were ever doing, guessing. Nothing more.

Though we're clearly at odds with what constitutes "reasonable" in this case.

catiii wrote:

First off Delta can scream all they want.

...and if their scream was for the reason stated, then they'd have legal justification and potential remedy, behind it.

catiii wrote:

There are a number of Portuguese companies, especially on the tech side, that have their North American hqs in Atlanta. As I recall a few of them did the guarantee.

"As you recall" based on what? That's the question at hand.

crownvic wrote:

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

To what extent will PHL’s international growth and relevance always be restricted by the massive number of international flights at EWR(81 miles away) and JFK(105 miles away)? I remember back in the day, PHL had a respectable evening lineup of Air France, British Airways, KLM, Swissair(Now Swiss International), and Lufthansa.

I do not recall KLM ever serving PHL, but Alitalia did in the 1970s.

I believe the route on AZ's service was DTW-PHL-FCO. It was dropped in the spring of 1974, after the first energy crisis.

I think it works both ways, I live in New Jersey closer to EWR but I use PHL often for domestic trips because it's almost always cheaper. I've flown US Airways, WN, CO etc.. from PHL because it was cheaper than EWR.

Also how much of PHL's economic activity is somewhat dependent on its proximity to the NYC region? If the city were 200 miles further from NY would that help or hurt its fortunes?

Boston does well being the furthest of the Northeast corridor cities. But in some ways New York is to Philadelphia as Washington DC is to Baltimore. They're somewhat reliant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

LAX772LR wrote:

catiii wrote:

First off Delta can scream all they want.

...and if their scream was for the reason stated, then they'd have legal justification and potential remedy, behind it.

catiii wrote:

There are a number of Portuguese companies, especially on the tech side, that have their North American hqs in Atlanta. As I recall a few of them did the guarantee.

"As you recall" based on what? That's the question at hand.

Conversations that I am privy to that I wouldn't be dumb enough to disclose the details of on a site like this.

In your view, what "legal justification and potential remedy" does Delta have to oppose market support or a private guarantee? Curious given that they're the beneficiaries of the exact same things.