Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
atcanobbio wrote:Any idea why AM was not included in this JV? Just curious
On the trans-atl side, you see UA and AC team up. Makes me wonder why DL would not include AM, an airline they have a stake in.
nickofatlanta wrote:It could also be to do with anti-trust concerns? I suspect AM and LA have a near monopoly on flights between MEX and Chile/Brazil.
nickofatlanta wrote:It could also be to do with anti-trust concerns? I suspect AM and LA have a near monopoly on flights between MEX and Chile/Brazil.
mercure1 wrote:Aeromexico partners with Gol in Brazil.
MIflyer12 wrote:
I will wonder out loud just how durable that relationship is going to be now that DL has dumped its Gol stake and acquired 49% of AM.
DTWLAX wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:
I will wonder out loud just how durable that relationship is going to be now that DL has dumped its Gol stake and acquired 49% of AM.
It is the same as VS. DL owns 49% of VS, but VS still partners with SQ, NZ, NH and Air China, all from Star Alliance.
Lootess wrote:DTWLAX wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:
I will wonder out loud just how durable that relationship is going to be now that DL has dumped its Gol stake and acquired 49% of AM.
It is the same as VS. DL owns 49% of VS, but VS still partners with SQ, NZ, NH and Air China, all from Star Alliance.
So? Alaska still partners with Korean Air and LATAM. Airlines are free to have relationships with whoever they want. Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
Lootess wrote:
So? Alaska still partners with Korean Air and LATAM. Airlines are free to have relationships with whoever they want. Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
EddieDude wrote:I am glad to learn that loyalty programs will be linked beginning June 2020.
With respect to AM, I think it is safe to assume that AM will probably drop its Gol codeshare and F.F. reciprocal agreements soon and enter into new ones with LATAM. Having said that, AM joining the J.V. looks like an uphill battle because, as someone said earlier, AM and LA are the only carriers serving MEX-SCL and MEX-GRU.
Overall, Delta anticipates that full implementation of the JV will ultimately result in a 33% increase in Delta’s seat capacity at Miami (associated with 57% more Delta flights at Miami) compared to pre-COVID-19 operations
Although relatively recent, the implementation of the Delta and Korean Airlines JV has also resulted in new and expanded service. Two of the four planned new routes (from Boston and Minneapolis to Seoul) have launched already, with a third planned for [Redacted]
Lootess wrote:
Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
OzarkD9S wrote:Lootess wrote:
Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
They probably mean more than ever, at least post-Covid. Full schedules/networks aren't coming back full strength anytime in the foreseeable future, so airlines will have to work with their partners for the coverage they used to have.
DTWLAX wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:
I will wonder out loud just how durable that relationship is going to be now that DL has dumped its Gol stake and acquired 49% of AM.
It is the same as VS. DL owns 49% of VS, but VS still partners with SQ, NZ, NH and Air China, all from Star Alliance.
MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
LawAndOrder wrote:Mia and BOS are a bit different from SEA. Those two cities have quite a bit of originating traffic. Especially Miami to the Latin/ South America.
LawAndOrder wrote:onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
Mia and BOS are a bit different from SEA. Those two cities have quite a bit of originating traffic. Especially Miami to the Latin/ South America. Fewer adds are needed to compliment the Miami South American network (like the top 20 business flow markets that they cited). B6 will be struggling to maintain BOS as well. SEA is the one that requires extensive feed.
onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
MIflyer12 wrote:You recognize that AS revenues were less than 1/5 of DL's in 2019, right? B6 had even less.
MIflyer12 wrote:Fleet simplicity has a benefit to AS & B6 but it also imposes expansion constraints: they are less likely to have the 'right' aircraft for any airport pair.
MIflyer12 wrote:onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
You recognize that AS revenues were less than 1/5 of DL's in 2019, right? B6 had even less. Fleet simplicity has a benefit to AS & B6 but it also imposes expansion constraints: they are less likely to have the 'right' aircraft for any airport pair.
onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
onwFan wrote:MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
Yes! Plus I don’t think LA’s entire MIA network is going to come back - EZE gone, secondary Brazil is doubtful. It is going to be interesting to watch DL fight AS at SEA, B6 at BOS and AA at MIA - all when demand is at an all time low.
tphuang wrote:At this point, DL will be quite a bit smaller in 2021. Let's wait to actually see what their "MIA expansion" look on paper. DL clearly is 100% commited at SEA at this point. If it continues with MIA expansion, that would just show how pissed of it is at AA/AS. A grudge match between DL and AA/AS benefits every other carrier, since that would mean less resources elsewhere.
lightsaber wrote:OzarkD9S wrote:Lootess wrote:
Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
They probably mean more than ever, at least post-Covid. Full schedules/networks aren't coming back full strength anytime in the foreseeable future, so airlines will have to work with their partners for the coverage they used to have.
JVs are critical to manage/share costs.
I'm sad at the step back we will see. It will be interesting to see what routes are viable. While passengers will still dislike bridge hubbing (double hubbing), I think that will be far more common during the recovery. A well structured partnership has value.
Lightsaber
MAH4546 wrote:Wow. Fascinating. So Delta is all hands on deck for its Miami expansion even post-COVID.
tphuang wrote:If it continues with MIA expansion, that would just show how pissed of it is at AA/AS. A grudge match between DL and AA/AS benefits every other carrier, since that would mean less resources elsewhere.
DTWLAX wrote:Lootess wrote:
So? Alaska still partners with Korean Air and LATAM. Airlines are free to have relationships with whoever they want. Alliances don't mean anything nowadays.
My post was in response to the person who was wondering how the relationship would be between AM and Gol since DL owns 49% of AM. I just compared it to the VS relationship with other airlines inspite of DL's 49% stake in VS.
I never said airlines cannot have relationships with non-alliance members.
FSDan wrote:tphuang wrote:If it continues with MIA expansion, that would just show how pissed of it is at AA/AS. A grudge match between DL and AA/AS benefits every other carrier, since that would mean less resources elsewhere.
I don't think the MIA expansion is due to any sort of grudge DL has against AA (in fact, didn't they announce the LATAM partnership before AA and AS announced their partnership?). DL's modest build-out of MIA on the domestic side is a natural product of the DL-LA tie up, and was almost certainly considered, or even planned, by DL during their talks with LATAM before the public had any inclination about what was in the works.
While AA is obviously king at MIA and will remain so, DL has long had some strength of their own in the South Florida market (probably going back at least to when they operated a focus city at FLL, and maybe longer due to the power of the nearby ATL hub for connections from MIA/FLL/PBI). Kind of similar to the market position they had in SEA and BOS before deciding to turn them into gateway hubs, IMO. A difference between SEA/BOS and MIA, as was pointed out upthread, is that there's already an established hub-and-spoke international carrier at MIA. But another difference with MIA is that the international network DL is seeking to establish largely already exists with LA, and only needs to be selectively expanded rather than needing to be built from scratch. In short, I don't think DL expanding MIA is illogical or a knee-jerk reaction to AA+AS.
tphuang wrote:FSDan wrote:tphuang wrote:If it continues with MIA expansion, that would just show how pissed of it is at AA/AS. A grudge match between DL and AA/AS benefits every other carrier, since that would mean less resources elsewhere.
I don't think the MIA expansion is due to any sort of grudge DL has against AA (in fact, didn't they announce the LATAM partnership before AA and AS announced their partnership?). DL's modest build-out of MIA on the domestic side is a natural product of the DL-LA tie up, and was almost certainly considered, or even planned, by DL during their talks with LATAM before the public had any inclination about what was in the works.
While AA is obviously king at MIA and will remain so, DL has long had some strength of their own in the South Florida market (probably going back at least to when they operated a focus city at FLL, and maybe longer due to the power of the nearby ATL hub for connections from MIA/FLL/PBI). Kind of similar to the market position they had in SEA and BOS before deciding to turn them into gateway hubs, IMO. A difference between SEA/BOS and MIA, as was pointed out upthread, is that there's already an established hub-and-spoke international carrier at MIA. But another difference with MIA is that the international network DL is seeking to establish largely already exists with LA, and only needs to be selectively expanded rather than needing to be built from scratch. In short, I don't think DL expanding MIA is illogical or a knee-jerk reaction to AA+AS.
All that back and forth network add out of MIA and SEA right before COVID struck is a pretty indication at the bad blood between DL and AA. And you can bet that if DL continues with its plans to expand at MIA, it will face retaliations from AA elsewhere (even with AA in economic difficulties).
Also, it's quite telling that DL is bringing back SEA faster than all their other coastal hubs. It looks to be 100% committed to a long term war at SEA with AS and AA.
FSDan wrote:tphuang wrote:FSDan wrote:
I don't think the MIA expansion is due to any sort of grudge DL has against AA (in fact, didn't they announce the LATAM partnership before AA and AS announced their partnership?). DL's modest build-out of MIA on the domestic side is a natural product of the DL-LA tie up, and was almost certainly considered, or even planned, by DL during their talks with LATAM before the public had any inclination about what was in the works.
While AA is obviously king at MIA and will remain so, DL has long had some strength of their own in the South Florida market (probably going back at least to when they operated a focus city at FLL, and maybe longer due to the power of the nearby ATL hub for connections from MIA/FLL/PBI). Kind of similar to the market position they had in SEA and BOS before deciding to turn them into gateway hubs, IMO. A difference between SEA/BOS and MIA, as was pointed out upthread, is that there's already an established hub-and-spoke international carrier at MIA. But another difference with MIA is that the international network DL is seeking to establish largely already exists with LA, and only needs to be selectively expanded rather than needing to be built from scratch. In short, I don't think DL expanding MIA is illogical or a knee-jerk reaction to AA+AS.
All that back and forth network add out of MIA and SEA right before COVID struck is a pretty indication at the bad blood between DL and AA. And you can bet that if DL continues with its plans to expand at MIA, it will face retaliations from AA elsewhere (even with AA in economic difficulties).
Also, it's quite telling that DL is bringing back SEA faster than all their other coastal hubs. It looks to be 100% committed to a long term war at SEA with AS and AA.
I'm not saying DL and AA are on friendly terms. They're not. I'm just saying DL isn't making major network planning decisions (like opening a new focus city/gateway) based primarily on a rivalry. With the Latam partnership they see an opportunity in MIA to built their brand. That's what's driving this.
FSDan wrote:tphuang wrote:FSDan wrote:
I don't think the MIA expansion is due to any sort of grudge DL has against AA (in fact, didn't they announce the LATAM partnership before AA and AS announced their partnership?). DL's modest build-out of MIA on the domestic side is a natural product of the DL-LA tie up, and was almost certainly considered, or even planned, by DL during their talks with LATAM before the public had any inclination about what was in the works.
While AA is obviously king at MIA and will remain so, DL has long had some strength of their own in the South Florida market (probably going back at least to when they operated a focus city at FLL, and maybe longer due to the power of the nearby ATL hub for connections from MIA/FLL/PBI). Kind of similar to the market position they had in SEA and BOS before deciding to turn them into gateway hubs, IMO. A difference between SEA/BOS and MIA, as was pointed out upthread, is that there's already an established hub-and-spoke international carrier at MIA. But another difference with MIA is that the international network DL is seeking to establish largely already exists with LA, and only needs to be selectively expanded rather than needing to be built from scratch. In short, I don't think DL expanding MIA is illogical or a knee-jerk reaction to AA+AS.
All that back and forth network add out of MIA and SEA right before COVID struck is a pretty indication at the bad blood between DL and AA. And you can bet that if DL continues with its plans to expand at MIA, it will face retaliations from AA elsewhere (even with AA in economic difficulties).
Also, it's quite telling that DL is bringing back SEA faster than all their other coastal hubs. It looks to be 100% committed to a long term war at SEA with AS and AA.
I'm not saying DL and AA are on friendly terms. They're not. I'm just saying DL isn't making major network planning decisions (like opening a new focus city/gateway) based primarily on a rivalry. With the Latam partnership they see an opportunity in MIA to build their brand. That's what's driving this.
Jo8338 wrote:Where is DL going to add domestically from MIA?
ORD, RDU, and BOS are my guess.
Jo8338 wrote:Where is DL going to add domestically from MIA?
ORD, RDU, and BOS are my guess.
FSDan wrote:Jo8338 wrote:Where is DL going to add domestically from MIA?
ORD, RDU, and BOS are my guess.
Well, they already announced SLC (daily), TPA (5x daily), MCO (5x daily), and RDU (2x daily, up from weekend-only). I believe they also planned to add some incremental frequencies from hubs like MSP/DTW/LGA/BOS.
I'd say SEA and LAX service would be reasonable expectations. I'm not convinced they'll want to jump into MIA-ORD, although you never know (I didn't expect SEA-ORD, and they added that one). Either way, I don't think ORD would be added before DL moves into Terminal 5 there and gets access to some more gates.
Jo8338 wrote:I think those are less than daily and LAX has been on and off