rjbesikof wrote:

Noticed that there was a one off LAX-MSP on an A359 today (DL953; the 8 AM flight). It came from SYD and used TBIT gate 133. Why did they put this flight on an A350 as opposed to the usual B752?

If I'm not mistaken it's getting C+ and is repositioning.

OlympicATH wrote:

Detroit313 wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised to see ATL - ATH return seasonally now that JFK - ATH is year-round again.

I was also quite surprised to see this go year-round in the current context. I guess DL sees potential for leisure/VFR traffic, with some business routes taking longer to recover.

ATL-ATH would be a nice resumption (and is probably going to happen eventually) but I would also like to see a seasonal BOS-ATH, which is among the top unserved routes on both sides.

Pre-COVID, BOS-ATH was my guess as to one of the next future summer seasonal routes out of BOS. Depending on how DL's BOS operation rebounds, I would give it a long-shot chance of happening in summer 2022 or 2023.

HVNandrew wrote:

OlympicATH wrote:

Detroit313 wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised to see ATL - ATH return seasonally now that JFK - ATH is year-round again.

I was also quite surprised to see this go year-round in the current context. I guess DL sees potential for leisure/VFR traffic, with some business routes taking longer to recover.

ATL-ATH would be a nice resumption (and is probably going to happen eventually) but I would also like to see a seasonal BOS-ATH, which is among the top unserved routes on both sides.

Pre-COVID, BOS-ATH was my guess as to one of the next future summer seasonal routes out of BOS. Depending on how DL's BOS operation rebounds, I would give it a long-shot chance of happening in summer 2022 or 2023.

I used to think someone (DY, LEVEL, or DL) would launch this but after seeing that Geneva report on BOS 2018 Western Europe traffic there is no way DL does it.

ATH has an extremely poor yield per mile - well under 11 cents. Average one way fare to DUB is practically the same price.

If travel does strongly rebound, DL would be better off going for BOS-BCN - 1000 miles shorter, 50% larger market in 2018, 18.8 cents/mile yield, and who knows if LEVEL will be around in 2022 and 2023.

adamh8297 wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

OlympicATH wrote:

I was also quite surprised to see this go year-round in the current context. I guess DL sees potential for leisure/VFR traffic, with some business routes taking longer to recover.

ATL-ATH would be a nice resumption (and is probably going to happen eventually) but I would also like to see a seasonal BOS-ATH, which is among the top unserved routes on both sides.

Pre-COVID, BOS-ATH was my guess as to one of the next future summer seasonal routes out of BOS. Depending on how DL's BOS operation rebounds, I would give it a long-shot chance of happening in summer 2022 or 2023.

I used to think someone (DY, LEVEL, or DL) would launch this but after seeing that Geneva report on BOS 2018 Western Europe traffic there is no way DL does it.

ATH has an extremely poor yield per mile - well under 11 cents. Average one way fare to DUB is practically the same price.

If travel does strongly rebound, DL would be better off going for BOS-BCN - 1000 miles shorter, 50% larger market in 2018, 18.8 cents/mile yield, and who knows if LEVEL will be around in 2022 and 2023.

Is that a public source you can share?
If the yield is based on the available options from BOS in 2018, DUB and BCN had direct flights (two carriers for DUB I believe) and ATH did not. Direct flights drive yield and one would expect this to happen as well if a direct flight to ATH was launched.
Another nuance is that I suspect these yields are for the entire year. Yields to ATH are significantly higher in the summer vs. the winter and I don't think anyone is expecting a year-round service.

BOS - ATH would surprise many with its performance same way AA's ORD - ATH exceeded every expectation.

Detroit313 wrote:

BOS - ATH would surprise many with its performance same way AA's ORD - ATH exceeded every expectation.

Please stop posting your opinions as facts; what evidence do you have to support your post?

Jeremy

DL is going to still be short ~30 widebodies in Summer 2022 than they were in Summer 2019 so the bar for new service is going to be pretty high. Especially seasonal leisure routes versus restoring capacity into their JV hubs.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

DL is going to still be short ~30 widebodies in Summer 2022 than they were in Summer 2019 so the bar for new service is going to be pretty high. Especially seasonal leisure routes versus restoring capacity into their JV hubs.

The other wildcard will be what countries let you in. For example, Greece said "we're open" pretty early so those flights were loaded. Other destinations are not so willing even if there is a major hub there. It will be interesting to see how much TATL comes back. The TPAC side is abysmal.

OlympicATH wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

Pre-COVID, BOS-ATH was my guess as to one of the next future summer seasonal routes out of BOS. Depending on how DL's BOS operation rebounds, I would give it a long-shot chance of happening in summer 2022 or 2023.

I used to think someone (DY, LEVEL, or DL) would launch this but after seeing that Geneva report on BOS 2018 Western Europe traffic there is no way DL does it.

ATH has an extremely poor yield per mile - well under 11 cents. Average one way fare to DUB is practically the same price.

If travel does strongly rebound, DL would be better off going for BOS-BCN - 1000 miles shorter, 50% larger market in 2018, 18.8 cents/mile yield, and who knows if LEVEL will be around in 2022 and 2023.

Is that a public source you can share?
If the yield is based on the available options from BOS in 2018, DUB and BCN had direct flights (two carriers for DUB I believe) and ATH did not. Direct flights drive yield and one would expect this to happen as well if a direct flight to ATH was launched.
Another nuance is that I suspect these yields are for the entire year. Yields to ATH are significantly higher in the summer vs. the winter and I don't think anyone is expecting a year-round service.

Here it is below. It also has Chicago data - 8.7 cents for CHI-ATH. You have to do your own math on yield using gcmap.com for the mileage.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/859c15_f ... 564d1b.pdf

adamh8297 wrote:

Here it is below. It also has Chicago data - 8.7 cents for CHI-ATH. You have to do your own math on yield using gcmap.com for the mileage.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/859c15_f ... 564d1b.pdf

Thanks, that's useful data.
I will agree with you that the yield per mile for BOS-ATH seams low. However a few observations (the first couple I already made above):
-Looking at the BOS table, I believe all the cities above ATH in number of pax have direct flights, which not only drive passenger numbers (vs. a city pair with no direct service) but also significantly drive yield. My gut feeling is that if ATH had a direct flight, yields would be better
-ATH is a very seasonal market, probably one of the most seasonal ones on the list. I suspect yields in the summer are actually much much better, which is what matters for a seasonal route
-I find the Chicago data (which is from the year before AA's ORD-ATH summer route was launched) quite encouraging. Sure, ORD is a major hub and attracts connecting traffic in a way that BOS won't, but CHI-ATH is barely bigger than BOS-ATH pax wise, it's a longer flight, yields also seem very low and yet AA is (allegedly) doing well on the route. Perhaps this is linked to my two points above
-Looking at Rome (which is not a lot closer than ATH), yields are not much better from either BOS or ORD. Yet both these markets sustain multiple carriers, especially in the summer (OK, pax numbers are higher)
-DL is making JFK-ATH year-round again from next winter. While that is a much bigger market than BOS-ATH, it's also very seasonal and they will be competing against EK. I believe this shows ATH is a market DL is looking at and believes in to some extent

In a nutshell, I wouldn't write that off just yet. We don't have very granular data unfortunately, but it seems to me like this could work on a seasonal basis.
Now that DL will be flying JFK-ATH year-round (with a second daily flight in the summer), an additional seasonal flight in the next couple of years isn't too far fetched in my view. To me the question is whether this will be from BOS or ATL (which they did fly for a few years in the early 2000s).

Delta June should be released tomorrow morning, currently visible on Delta cargo

Midwestindy wrote:

Delta June should be released tomorrow morning, currently visible on Delta cargo

How is it different from the May schedule?

rjbesikof wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Delta June should be released tomorrow morning, currently visible on Delta cargo

How is it different from the May schedule?

Looks like its only updated until June 17, lots of guage and frequency changes to the hubs

They rolled forward suspensions on a number of routes (not an exhaustive list):
SAT-JFK
CLE-SLC
MKE-SEA
MCI-SEA
IND-SEA
PHL-BOS

A few routes that appear to be resuming (not an exhaustive list):
PDX-JFK
IND-SLC
IND-BOS
MCI-BOS

Interesting they’re still not bringing back some of the mid-cons out of SEA. Would’ve figured June would be when they’d resume.

Maybe they will come back in July? If not... maybe not until 2022 if they don’t see the business demand returning. SEA demand falls dramatically come fall

Edit: scratch that, looks like they’ve been removed for most of July as well. I would assume these don’t come back this year

Midwestindy wrote:

rjbesikof wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Delta June should be released tomorrow morning, currently visible on Delta cargo

How is it different from the May schedule?

Looks like its only updated until June 17, lots of guage and frequency changes to the hubs

They rolled forward suspensions on a number of routes (not an exhaustive list):
SAT-JFK
CLE-SLC
MKE-SEA
MCI-SEA
IND-SEA
PHL-BOS

A few routes that appear to be resuming (not an exhaustive list):
PDX-JFK
IND-SLC
IND-BOS
MCI-BOS

Do you have a link? I keep getting April's off the website.

DeltaRules wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

rjbesikof wrote:

How is it different from the May schedule?

Looks like its only updated until June 17, lots of guage and frequency changes to the hubs

They rolled forward suspensions on a number of routes (not an exhaustive list):
SAT-JFK
CLE-SLC
MKE-SEA
MCI-SEA
IND-SEA
PHL-BOS

A few routes that appear to be resuming (not an exhaustive list):
PDX-JFK
IND-SLC
IND-BOS
MCI-BOS

Do you have a link? I keep getting April's off the website.

It's up on Delta.com

joeblow10 wrote:

Interesting they’re still not bringing back some of the mid-cons out of SEA. Would’ve figured June would be when they’d resume.

Maybe they will come back in July? If not... maybe not until 2022 if they don’t see the business demand returning. SEA demand falls dramatically come fall

Edit: scratch that, looks like they’ve been removed for most of July as well. I would assume these don’t come back this year

The AS competition doesn't help at all on these routes, they probably opted for more capacity through MSP/SLC as opposed to overflying both;

I agree, SEA is summer heavy, so these probably won't return until April 2022 or later.

Wisconsin airports are getting some love with this latest schedule load.

MSN is going from 9 flights a day (all CR9 or CR7) to 14 per day, with an A321 and a few 717s thrown into the mix.

And GRB is getting a daily 717 to ATL in June, the first time that station has seen scheduled mainline since well before the pandemic began.

KGRB wrote:

Wisconsin airports are getting some love with this latest schedule load.

MSN is going from 9 flights a day (all CR9 or CR7) to 14 per day, with an A321 and a few 717s thrown into the mix.

And GRB is getting a daily 717 to ATL in June, the first time that station has seen scheduled mainline since well before the pandemic began.

It’s good to see! In MSN, UA has brought back some mainline flying and AA is getting ready to as well.

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

maps4ltd wrote:

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

Never believe Wikipedia. People post fake info on there for airports all the time.

Jshank83 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

Never believe Wikipedia. People post fake info on there for airports all the time.

Specifically, there has been an anonymous user doing nonsense posts there for the last week - IP 157.131.123.208 - including this one.

V/F

It's noteworthy that SLC hasn't come back as much as UA and WN at DEN where they are pouring capacity back in. Any thoughts? DL building up MSP instead?

fun2fly wrote:

It's noteworthy that SLC hasn't come back as much as UA and WN at DEN where they are pouring capacity back in. Any thoughts? DL building up MSP instead?

Definitely not building up MSP. My thought is Delta’s being more conservative in general. Also the new SLC is pretty gate constrained.

Also in this weekend’s update: JFK-ATH restart pulled forward to May 28 instead of June 5; JFK-NCE restart pushed from June 5 to July 2.

joeblow10 wrote:

Interesting they’re still not bringing back some of the mid-cons out of SEA. Would’ve figured June would be when they’d resume.

Maybe they will come back in July? If not... maybe not until 2022 if they don’t see the business demand returning. SEA demand falls dramatically come fall

Edit: scratch that, looks like they’ve been removed for most of July as well. I would assume these don’t come back this year

I agree these won't come back until 2022. Business travel from big corporate accounts is what makes these routes viable, and my sense is that summer 2021 is pretty much scrapped for the return of widespread business travel, especially given how Seattle's tech-heavy economy adapts pretty well to continued remote work. Despite what I think will be robust leisure demand for the Pacific Northwest this summer, it is simply not lucrative enough to justify some of these mid-cons, as they can route passengers through SLC to get them there.

VirginFlyer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

Never believe Wikipedia. People post fake info on there for airports all the time.

Specifically, there has been an anonymous user doing nonsense posts there for the last week - IP 157.131.123.208 - including this one.

V/F

A Wikipedia admin has since temporarily blocked that IP address from editing: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 31.123.208

It's a fairly short block so I'm assuming they'll be back at it once their block expires.

You may have some luck reporting that IP address to their vandalism noticeboard if they continue being disruptive after their current block expires: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _vandalism

There's a Korean news source suggesting that DL plans to launch PDX-ICN in September. 3x weekly A330-200.
Source (in Korean only): http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art ... ode=620104

VirginFlyer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

Never believe Wikipedia. People post fake info on there for airports all the time.

Specifically, there has been an anonymous user doing nonsense posts there for the last week - IP 157.131.123.208 - including this one.

V/F

Yeah this user had also been doing similar posts for supposed UA routes.

VirginFlyer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

The SLC Wikipedia page is showing MRY service beginning July 7. The MRY page isn't saying anything, and I didn't see any announcements from the airport. Who to believe?

If true, it's weird that they'd fly to Monterey before returning to SBA.

Never believe Wikipedia. People post fake info on there for airports all the time.

Specifically, there has been an anonymous user doing nonsense posts there for the last week - IP 157.131.123.208 - including this one.

V/F

Yeah this user had also been doing similar posts for supposed UA routes.

DAY-MSP appears to resume in early June, once daily on a CRJ.

hoons90 wrote:

There's a Korean news source suggesting that DL plans to launch PDX-ICN in September. 3x weekly A330-200.
Source (in Korean only): http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art ... ode=620104

Thanks for finding this! Great add for DL if true. I started a new thread (and credited you) here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1459985

[twoid][/twoid]

AC4500 wrote:

hoons90 wrote:

There's a Korean news source suggesting that DL plans to launch PDX-ICN in September. 3x weekly A330-200.
Source (in Korean only): http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art ... ode=620104

Thanks for finding this! Great add for DL if true. I started a new thread (and credited you) here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1459985

I think it actually says A300-200 aircraft lol

AA going for a land grab, we'll see if DL does anything:

AA+B6 now starting/announced in just the past year: BOS-AUS/CVG/RDU/MKE/MCI/IND/STL/YYZ/AVL/SAT/YVR/JAC/TVC/CMH/LHR/ILM & converting BOS-LAX to all A321T
Unclear what is the mix between new/replacement service from LGA/JFK: But lots new service there as well

Outside of the northeast AA is also targeting traditional DL target/focus cities:
"Customers in rapidly growing cities and key business markets such as Austin; Nashville; Raleigh, North Carolina; Columbus, Ohio; Cleveland; Cincinnati; Memphis, Tennessee; and Indianapolis now have more ways to connect to the world through American’s flights and its partnerships with JetBlue Airways and Alaska Airlines"

"More is coming"
https://crankyflier.com/2021/04/21/amer ... w-flights/

It makes me wonder if AA is 'growing' or if DL know what they need to be and are trimming the fat...I'm not so certain these are good investments for AA. Of course, from a network analysis, a lot depends on where you live and where you need to go most often- both AA and DL have a good web of hubs but with the B6 AS partnership, AA customers simply have (gained) more options in the very places that Delta was more relevant before- still now, perhaps to a decreasing extent. I think it will be a bit more difficult to be as aggressive with their (DL) current restraints, but perhaps as many others have said, they don't need to be- their network needed minimal tweaking versus some of these almost excessive adds we're seeing from AA. DL is still an option everywhere they need to be despite these competitive pressures. In markets like SEA and BOS, I still admire the seamlessness of the Delta network versus connecting over partner brands. Looking at LAX specifically, I think this is going to be a real gem in their network going forward even if they have to trade some of their pre pandemic market position in places like JFK, LGA, BOS to AA and B6. In the end, I see DL being the more reliable and consistent option versus how AA appears to be building out its strategy.

flyboy80 wrote:

It makes me wonder if AA is 'growing' or if DL know what they need to be and are trimming the fat...I'm not so certain these are good investments for AA. Of course, from a network analysis, a lot depends on where you live and where you need to go most often- both AA and DL have a good web of hubs but with the B6 AS partnership, AA customers simply have (gained) more options in the very places that Delta was more relevant before- still now, perhaps to a decreasing extent. I think it will be a bit more difficult to be as aggressive with their (DL) current restraints, but perhaps as many others have said, they don't need to be- their network needed minimal tweaking versus some of these almost excessive adds we're seeing from AA. DL is still an option everywhere they need to be despite these competitive pressures. In markets like SEA and BOS, I still admire the seamlessness of the Delta network versus connecting over partner brands. Looking at LAX specifically, I think this is going to be a real gem in their network going forward even if they have to trade some of their pre pandemic market position in places like JFK, LGA, BOS to AA and B6. In the end, I see DL being the more reliable and consistent option versus how AA appears to be building out its strategy.

Um.... DL is sleeping at the wheel here.

Things are starting to pick up again and DL is still sitting on their hands. Time to get a move on things. Maybe there

I had recently mentioned DL re-adding BOS-DFW nonstop service as a possibility in the Boston Aviation Thread with the significant cuts that both AA and B6 have made on the BOS-DFW route during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the return of DL BOS-DFW nonstop service would allow DL to better compete against B6/AA in the BOS market.

Runway765 wrote:

It makes me wonder if AA is 'growing' or if DL know what they need to be and are trimming the fat...I'm not so certain these are good investments for AA. Of course, from a network analysis, a lot depends on where you live and where you need to go most often- both AA and DL have a good web of hubs but with the B6 AS partnership, AA customers simply have (gained) more options in the very places that Delta was more relevant before- still now, perhaps to a decreasing extent. I think it will be a bit more difficult to be as aggressive with their (DL) current restraints, but perhaps as many others have said, they don't need to be- their network needed minimal tweaking versus some of these almost excessive adds we're seeing from AA. DL is still an option everywhere they need to be despite these competitive pressures. In markets like SEA and BOS, I still admire the seamlessness of the Delta network versus connecting over partner brands. Looking at LAX specifically, I think this is going to be a real gem in their network going forward even if they have to trade some of their pre pandemic market position in places like JFK, LGA, BOS to AA and B6. In the end, I see DL being the more reliable and consistent option versus how AA appears to be building out its strategy.

The DL hub strategy works, in part, due to customer loyalty in out-stations.

Yes, DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC draw great local yields, but pre-covid they also got great yields from outstations. Customers/companies in outstations were willing to pay a premium to fly & connect on DL because of its breadth of service to compared to AA or UA (amongst other things). It wasn't just that DL could fly you to DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC, but you could fly to BOS/SEA/RDU/e.t.c nonstop.

Well now, corporate contracts are starting from scratch....

I think in places like RDU, BNA, AUS, e.t.c the proposition of AA(& partners) is much stronger, and more relevant to this thread, the pricing power of DL is diminished in these markets which has a trickle down impact on its core hubs.

Just my

Is DL resuming JFK-BOM a possibility with AA now jumping on the JFK India market?

rjbesikof wrote:

Is DL resuming JFK-BOM a possibility with AA now jumping on the JFK India market?

I suspect it was a possibility regardless of AA's move. I don't think we fully know what the U.S.-India market will end up looking like post-COVID (e.g. less ME3 capacity?), but I'm sure this one is still on DL's radar.

Midwestindy wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

It makes me wonder if AA is 'growing' or if DL know what they need to be and are trimming the fat...I'm not so certain these are good investments for AA. Of course, from a network analysis, a lot depends on where you live and where you need to go most often- both AA and DL have a good web of hubs but with the B6 AS partnership, AA customers simply have (gained) more options in the very places that Delta was more relevant before- still now, perhaps to a decreasing extent. I think it will be a bit more difficult to be as aggressive with their (DL) current restraints, but perhaps as many others have said, they don't need to be- their network needed minimal tweaking versus some of these almost excessive adds we're seeing from AA. DL is still an option everywhere they need to be despite these competitive pressures. In markets like SEA and BOS, I still admire the seamlessness of the Delta network versus connecting over partner brands. Looking at LAX specifically, I think this is going to be a real gem in their network going forward even if they have to trade some of their pre pandemic market position in places like JFK, LGA, BOS to AA and B6. In the end, I see DL being the more reliable and consistent option versus how AA appears to be building out its strategy.

The DL hub strategy works, in part, due to customer loyalty in out-stations.

Yes, DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC draw great local yields, but pre-covid they also got great yields from outstations. Customers/companies in outstations were willing to pay a premium to fly & connect on DL because of its breadth of service to compared to AA or UA (amongst other things). It wasn't just that DL could fly you to DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC, but you could fly to BOS/SEA/RDU/e.t.c nonstop.

Well now, corporate contracts are starting from scratch....

I think in places like RDU, BNA, AUS, e.t.c the proposition of AA(& partners) is much stronger, and more relevant to this thread, the pricing power of DL is diminished in these markets which has a trickle down impact on its core hubs.

Just my

I agree with most of this, what I am curious about is what happens if the demand doesn't match AA's growth? I get the feeling that AA is doing what Delta did for awhile back in the 2000s, adding routes one year and quietly ending them the next. I remember everyone saying Delta couldn't stay in LAX because of AA and UA, I wonder if we don't hear that about AA in a few years.

I also wonder how loyal a following AA is building. We on A.net focus a lot on the first mover on a route, but will Delta's premiumness that some talk about allow them to enter markets later and steal passengers?

As someone from PHX, a very anecdotal view of things: It seems like AA is a popular choice for routes that they are the only carrier, but if WN, UA, AS, or DL operate the route, they become far less popular. Like I get the feeling that while it wouldn't makes sense, DL could fly PHX-MSN and do better than AA. Another example is when DL started SEA-PHX, I feel like AS and WN hardly noticed, but AA lost some. Again, nothing to back that up, just a hunch.

mpdpilot wrote:

As someone from PHX, a very anecdotal view of things: It seems like AA is a popular choice for routes that they are the only carrier, but if WN, UA, AS, or DL operate the route, they become far less popular. Like I get the feeling that while it wouldn't makes sense, DL could fly PHX-MSN and do better than AA. Another example is when DL started SEA-PHX, I feel like AS and WN hardly noticed, but AA lost some. Again, nothing to back that up, just a hunch.

While there are fewer markets that have nonstop service out of PHX on WN but not AA with the recent adds that AA has made out of PHX, BUF and SDF have nonstop service out of PHX on WN but not AA.

One challenge that DL would face with point-to-point nonstop routes out of PHX is that there are some AA and WN FF's in Greater Phoenix who would avoid other airlines such as DL, UA, F9, NK, or G4 whenever possible, even though some of the WN FF's in Greater Phoenix would be willing to travel on DL or its codeshare partners if they needed to travel to a destination not served by WN. There are also some AA FF's in Greater Phoenix who would be willing to connect onto AS flights out of SEA and ANC to destinations in Washington State and Alaska that have no nonstop service out of PHX with the AA-AS codeshare partnership.

DL only currently serves its ATL, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, SLC, and SEA hubs nonstop from PHX and UA only currently serves its ORD, DEN, IAH, LAX, EWR, SFO, and IAD hubs nonstop from PHX.

mpdpilot wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

It makes me wonder if AA is 'growing' or if DL know what they need to be and are trimming the fat...I'm not so certain these are good investments for AA. Of course, from a network analysis, a lot depends on where you live and where you need to go most often- both AA and DL have a good web of hubs but with the B6 AS partnership, AA customers simply have (gained) more options in the very places that Delta was more relevant before- still now, perhaps to a decreasing extent. I think it will be a bit more difficult to be as aggressive with their (DL) current restraints, but perhaps as many others have said, they don't need to be- their network needed minimal tweaking versus some of these almost excessive adds we're seeing from AA. DL is still an option everywhere they need to be despite these competitive pressures. In markets like SEA and BOS, I still admire the seamlessness of the Delta network versus connecting over partner brands. Looking at LAX specifically, I think this is going to be a real gem in their network going forward even if they have to trade some of their pre pandemic market position in places like JFK, LGA, BOS to AA and B6. In the end, I see DL being the more reliable and consistent option versus how AA appears to be building out its strategy.

The DL hub strategy works, in part, due to customer loyalty in out-stations.

Yes, DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC draw great local yields, but pre-covid they also got great yields from outstations. Customers/companies in outstations were willing to pay a premium to fly & connect on DL because of its breadth of service to compared to AA or UA (amongst other things). It wasn't just that DL could fly you to DTW/MSP/ATL/SLC, but you could fly to BOS/SEA/RDU/e.t.c nonstop.

Well now, corporate contracts are starting from scratch....

I think in places like RDU, BNA, AUS, e.t.c the proposition of AA(& partners) is much stronger, and more relevant to this thread, the pricing power of DL is diminished in these markets which has a trickle down impact on its core hubs.

Just my

I agree with most of this, what I am curious about is what happens if the demand doesn't match AA's growth? I get the feeling that AA is doing what Delta did for awhile back in the 2000s, adding routes one year and quietly ending them the next. I remember everyone saying Delta couldn't stay in LAX because of AA and UA, I wonder if we don't hear that about AA in a few years.

I also wonder how loyal a following AA is building. We on A.net focus a lot on the first mover on a route, but will Delta's premiumness that some talk about allow them to enter markets later and steal passengers?

As someone from PHX, a very anecdotal view of things: It seems like AA is a popular choice for routes that they are the only carrier, but if WN, UA, AS, or DL operate the route, they become far less popular. Like I get the feeling that while it wouldn't makes sense, DL could fly PHX-MSN and do better than AA. Another example is when DL started SEA-PHX, I feel like AS and WN hardly noticed, but AA lost some. Again, nothing to back that up, just a hunch.

There is a decent chance that for at least some of the routes, demand won't match growth. AA CVG-BOS is one example, where DL is already scheduled at 5x B717 a day and AA is going in at 3x E175. That is nearly 800 seats in a market that pre-covid was less than 300 PDEW (albeit demand was suppressed due to high fares).

Assuming 2020 didn't happen and AA tried this organically I'd say it wouldn't work, but given the circumstances, the Coronavirus has provided AA with a much easier path to implementation now.

Thanks to 2020 AA is almost taking a blueprint of DL's pre-covid strategies & implementing them, like what AA is implementing to maintain the loyalty of business pax while they aren't traveling for work. Pre-covid DL ran p2p routes to CUN, MCO, RSW, and even some LAS from non-hub stations, which served as a key way to keep business travelers earning and burning with DL away from work. Well, since covid hit DL cut almost every single one of these routes, even as leisure travel has returned. AA on the contrary now serves p2p routes from SJD, TPA, MCO, EYW, CUN, FLL, VPS, NAS, and many other cities & additionally some of their hubs are already in leisure spots like PHX/MIA.

So I think your point about "how loyal customers will be to these AA moves" is valid. DL does have the better reputation, product, and a strong FF base in many markets. However, I don't think that is something that DL can sit back and rely on post-covid if they want to continue to outperform the industry. With the network enhancements AA has made during covid, and the "reset" of corporate travel agreements, AA stands to win additional corporate travel share in many traditional DL markets.

This equation does change if DL does decide to respond.....

I still think most the growth will be from the core hubs of ATL/SLC/MSP/DTW. I just do not see DL adding similar type routes that AA and UA have been doing lately. I cannot see them doing routes such as PIT-CHS, BDL-MYR, STL-SAT, etc.

I'm still very curious about 2022 and a higher degree of transformational change and strategy inside the major airlines. For example, United has been very affected by the lack of demand to Asia, affecting DL to a similar extent although with lower exposure- although access to Asia will remain key in the developing SEA market for Delta's hub future there to work. I truly thought at the start of this that at least one legacy "true hub" would be severely impacted or eliminated. I definitely, for the most obvious reasons, see and know SFO will return for United- it may be a long painful recovery for those network assets to fully recover to their former profitability of course. When you line up the three legacy carriers top four hubs each (DL: ATL, DTW, MSP, SLC; UA: SFO, EWR, ORD, IAH; AA: DFW, CLT, ORD, PHX) I really can only see two hubs in that list that could be eliminated and ~75% replaced by the network. So, it brings the questions, could Delta do without DTW? Could the network be robust and profitable in a post-covid 2021 without the DTW hub? I'm sure many think this idea is crazy, it leaves a massive hole in the interior midwest and secondary east-coast connection point, but it would certainly fund and strengthen peripherally MSP, ATL, JFK/LGA, and BOS. Does Delta really need DTW as an Asian gateway with their KE alliance? Could they not easily reinvent a lot of their TPAC network around KE ICN to a higher degree, adding JFK and BOS to ICN, SLC-ICN. Between LAX, SEA, ATL, MSP- Asia will be covered in a perhaps smaller trans pacific market, certainly expanding the ICN connection into the Northeast would give Delta a viable replacement of DTW?

flyboy80 wrote:

I'm still very curious about 2022 and a higher degree of transformational change and strategy inside the major airlines. For example, United has been very affected by the lack of demand to Asia, affecting DL to a similar extent although with lower exposure- although access to Asia will remain key in the developing SEA market for Delta's hub future there to work. I truly thought at the start of this that at least one legacy "true hub" would be severely impacted or eliminated. I definitely, for the most obvious reasons, see and know SFO will return for United- it may be a long painful recovery for those network assets to fully recover to their former profitability of course. When you line up the three legacy carriers top four hubs each (DL: ATL, DTW, MSP, SLC; UA: SFO, EWR, ORD, IAH; AA: DFW, CLT, ORD, PHX) I really can only see two hubs in that list that could be eliminated and ~75% replaced by the network. So, it brings the questions, could Delta do without DTW? Could the network be robust and profitable in a post-covid 2021 without the DTW hub? I'm sure many think this idea is crazy, it leaves a massive hole in the interior midwest and secondary east-coast connection point, but it would certainly fund and strengthen peripherally MSP, ATL, JFK/LGA, and BOS. Does Delta really need DTW as an Asian gateway with their KE alliance? Could they not easily reinvent a lot of their TPAC network around KE ICN to a higher degree, adding JFK and BOS to ICN, SLC-ICN. Between LAX, SEA, ATL, MSP- Asia will be covered in a perhaps smaller trans pacific market, certainly expanding the ICN connection into the Northeast would give Delta a viable replacement of DTW?

So, one often overlooked fact about the DL network is that in 2019, DL flew more pax to Asia via DTW than SEA. Even now, when forced to choose, DL is flying their weekly PVG flight (via ICN) through DTW over SEA. For a number of reasons (geographical and industrial), DTW is still DL’s strongest TPAC hub. And despite trying to grow presence in MSP/LAX/SEA-Asia pre2020, DL was not able to achieve the success they have at DTW. So the long answer is no.

DL has downgraded all their BOS-LAX service to 738s, but the cost of a FC ticket is just about the same as B6 is asking for a Mint seat and service. As a Diamond medallion flyer, I suppose I could always buy coach, get an automatic upgrade to Comfort +, and hope for an upgrade to FC. But who would pay for a FC seat on a 738 when the same price could buy a Mint seat?

RobertS975 wrote:

DL has downgraded all their BOS-LAX service to 738s, but the cost of a FC ticket is just about the same as B6 is asking for a Mint seat and service. As a Diamond medallion flyer, I suppose I could always buy coach, get an automatic upgrade to Comfort +, and hope for an upgrade to FC. But who would pay for a FC seat on a 738 when the same price could buy a Mint seat?

Someone who values medallion-qualification and points accumulation enough to spend the same money for an inferior product. That's literally the only thing I can think of. Which that only makes sense if one regularly utilizes Delta's network for destinations B6 can't offer.

trueblew wrote:

RobertS975 wrote:

DL has downgraded all their BOS-LAX service to 738s, but the cost of a FC ticket is just about the same as B6 is asking for a Mint seat and service. As a Diamond medallion flyer, I suppose I could always buy coach, get an automatic upgrade to Comfort +, and hope for an upgrade to FC. But who would pay for a FC seat on a 738 when the same price could buy a Mint seat?

Someone who values medallion-qualification and points accumulation enough to spend the same money for an inferior product. That's literally the only thing I can think of. Which that only makes sense if one regularly utilizes Delta's network for destinations B6 can't offer.

Which is extremely common.

Jeremy

SESGDL wrote:

trueblew wrote:

RobertS975 wrote:

DL has downgraded all their BOS-LAX service to 738s, but the cost of a FC ticket is just about the same as B6 is asking for a Mint seat and service. As a Diamond medallion flyer, I suppose I could always buy coach, get an automatic upgrade to Comfort +, and hope for an upgrade to FC. But who would pay for a FC seat on a 738 when the same price could buy a Mint seat?

Someone who values medallion-qualification and points accumulation enough to spend the same money for an inferior product. That's literally the only thing I can think of. Which that only makes sense if one regularly utilizes Delta's network for destinations B6 can't offer.

Which is extremely common.

Jeremy

There's no doubt it's very common, but it's also common for frequent fliers to travel to the same handful of medium-to-large sized markets repeatedly, with a once-or-twice-a-year visit on an overseas trip or vacation. B6 has that sort of travel profile covered fairly decently between their organic network and diverse codeshare partners. This doesn't help BOS-based biz travelers who are visiting a plant in Rapid City or Medford obviously, but those likely aren't the ones looking to spend the same price for Mint to LAX versus Delta's inferior domestic first.