ikolkyo wrote:

I've noticed 35L aircraft operating ATL-AMS, was this planned? https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/dl74

Yes. The A35L will be flown to AMS, ATH, BCN, CDG (2 daily), and MXP this summer.

Anyone know why delta does not use the 339 out of dtw for any routes? Is it because the 359 is there? Dtw seems to be 330-200 heavy maybe it’s just load factors and location ?

DL is "re-returning" to BNA-RDU in June 2x daily, it ran pre-covid, was cut, then started again post-covid, then it was announced it was cut again late last year...and now it's back

ORDLHR787 wrote:

If colocation with one’s JV partners isn’t a competitive advantage, then why are UA and AA spending billions at ORD to create that very thing? DL got it for free. If they don’t exploit it, they’re stupid.

dtwpilot225 wrote:

Anyone know why delta does not use the 339 out of dtw for any routes? Is it because the 359 is there? Dtw seems to be 330-200 heavy maybe it’s just load factors and location ?

DL put the A339 on DTW-CDG for three months between August and October of last year. Otherwise, with DTW being quite a large A359 base, and the lack of need for the A339's capabilities on DTW TATLs, the A339's not there. DTW isn't terribly A332 heavy; they're only used on LHR, FRA, and from this June FCO.

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

How late do all of these operate?

I agree not surprising. This year may have been an anomaly with ATH and CPH operating into January. Are the other seasonals like ATH still seasonal?

ATL - STT is still twice daily next winter according to Galileo.

Ah...I think you meant STR - Stuttgart not STT - St Thomas VI.

Not sure China passenger levels will ever return to pre Covid levels. World has changed.

TC957 wrote:

Ah...I think you meant STR - Stuttgart not STT - St Thomas VI.

My bad...ATL-Stuttgart, not St. Thomas, VI. Sorry

jagraham wrote:

ORDLHR787 wrote:

If colocation with one’s JV partners isn’t a competitive advantage, then why are UA and AA spending billions at ORD to create that very thing? DL got it for free. If they don’t exploit it, they’re stupid.

If you're speaking of DL co-locating with partners at ORD, AA and UA have hubs at ORD, and DL doesn't. DL can't offer many connections from ORD to take int'l passengers they can't already fly non-stop from AMS, CDG, MEX, etc.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

Poor Sttutgart. It just came back online after COVID and now it is cut once again. A bit surprised as this route used to heavily patronized by Mercedes Benz staff before the pandemic.

I wonder how these cuts play into the newly signed pilot contract with regards to global scope. FWIU Delta stated that by this fall they would be in compliance.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

Thing is DUS and STR are not tourist destinations, they are business destinations. There shouldn't be that much flocculation between summer and winter. If they cant make it work year round, I wouldn't be that surprised if they don't come back.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

Thing is DUS and STR are not tourist destinations, they are business destinations. There shouldn't be that much flocculation between summer and winter. If they cant make it work year round, I wouldn't be that surprised if they don't come back.

It's a sign corporate traffic, which hasn't rebounded to pre-pandemic levels, and likely will not, and potentially a slowing economy.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

I have a feeling STR and DUS will meet the same fate as NGO. The BJS cuts should also free up a couple of A330s/A350s. What is the implementation timeline for the pilot contract that will require them to grow their intl flying?

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

JFK-PRG is still seasonal right? How come PRG wasn't cut but CPH was? I'm legitimately curious

Boeing757100 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

JFK-PRG is still seasonal right? How come PRG wasn't cut but CPH was? I'm legitimately curious

I believe CPH but also the other routes will become seasonal and are not fully suspended. Only a limited number of European destinations seems to be able to attract year-round services.

cokepopper wrote:

I wonder how these cuts play into the newly signed pilot contract with regards to global scope. FWIU Delta stated that by this fall they would be in compliance.

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

xorrygva wrote:

Boeing757100 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Cuts coming for Winter 2023/2024 on TATL and TPAC:

ATL-DUS
ATL-STT
JFK-BER
JFK-CPH
JFK-GVA
JFK-ARN

DTW and SEA to PEK also cut for the winter.

The JFK-BER and JFK-GVA suspensions aren't at all surprising. Neither are the DUS and STT routes.

JFK-PRG is still seasonal right? How come PRG wasn't cut but CPH was? I'm legitimately curious

I believe CPH but also the other routes will become seasonal and are not fully suspended. Only a limited number of European destinations seems to be able to attract year-round services.

No one said they were being fully suspended, but the year-round part of it, yes.

BER, ARN, and CPH were never year-round on DL, until DL's very recent announcement that they would be. GVA was originally announced as seasonal, then year round. These are routes that are already served year round for the most part from the NY area, with enough service as is. SK is re-entering JFK with A321LR service, and flies ARN and CPH from EWR which probably covers the market. Don't know if AY is going to return on JFK-ARN this summer or not, but with that, plus UA at EWR and DL's seasonal JFK service, the market is covered, and winter demand likely drops dramatically. BER seems to only work for UA on a year-round basis.

GVA, frankly, was an ambition to put a SkyTeam player in NY-GVA nonstop market owned by *A, which LX has to itself at JFK and UA at EWR. The reality is that the sticky traffic on this route flies LX. The rest is pure leisure and in order to succeed, needs to have a strong balance of POS from both ends. The GVA catchment area is quite large. DL's ability to draw traffic onto its flight, unclear.

As to China, the level of service that existed pre-COVID isn't coming back.

rjbesikof wrote:

cokepopper wrote:

I wonder how these cuts play into the newly signed pilot contract with regards to global scope. FWIU Delta stated that by this fall they would be in compliance.

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

rjbesikof wrote:

cokepopper wrote:

I wonder how these cuts play into the newly signed pilot contract with regards to global scope. FWIU Delta stated that by this fall they would be in compliance.

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

rjbesikof wrote:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

Agreed, and not to mention with AA, UA and B6 all jumping on that route in the last couple of years there’s no way DL will just throw in the towel on that and just let the rest of those guys have it.

AviationScorpio wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

Agreed, and not to mention with AA, UA and B6 all jumping on that route in the last couple of years there’s no way DL will just throw in the towel on that and just let the rest of those guys have it.

100%. LON is one of the largest business markets for BOS (commanding well over 1mm pax per year on direct fights between LHR and LGW- pre Covid) Only market larger is NYC (best guess, I don’t have the numbers handy). For 2020, BOS-LON was planned at: AA/BA 5x daily to LHR; DL/VS 3x daily to LHR; DL 1x daily to LGW; and Norwegian 6-7x weekly to LGW. With the rebound from Covid this year and UA, B6 and Norse on the routes now, I can see them hitting those pre Covid pax numbers, or even exceeding. Not to mention, when DL started their cabin reconfigs with Premium Economy (I believe the 764 was first to be reconfigured) they immediately threw them on BOS/JFK-LHR.

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

rjbesikof wrote:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

But what do they mean by performance? LF? I doubt they know revenue and yield, or cargo contribution, or corporate contracts?

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

I wouldn't doubt that it is the weakest link in their BOS-Europe routes considering that most other routes go out full in each cabin, however, this statement is a lot different than DL doing poorly on BOS-LHR. I imagine that statement was said based on load factor solely, not taking into account what others have mentioned (J cabin=full making it break even, plus corp. contracts, cargo, etc.) making it viable to continue operating the route.

Zero chance DL cuts BOS-LHR. It'll stay as is aircraft wise for the time being also. Maybe changes to a 763 or A330 but not much else.
IF DL does eventually order the A321XLR and gives it a good J product, that could eventually take over the route if loads haven't improved. Heck, I think the A321NEO would be able to operate BOS-LHR considering how short of a transatlantic flight that is. But obviously there would need to be an improved J product on the A321NEO for that to even be considered. They also have 752s that could fly it. However the DL-A321XLR has been discussed on this forums excessively and I'm not interesting going back down that rabbit hole again, not to mention DL is avoiding narrowbody transatlantic flights at the moment.

jbs2886 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

They are not/will not cut that flight. This flight has been spoken about extensively in the Boston thread. About 10 years ago, DL was running BOS-LHR at 60-70%, but selling out the J cabin. Since DL has ramped up their hub, this flight has improved pretty nicely, while still selling out the J cabin. Also, they have huge corporate contracts for that flight that sustain it. Prior to Covid, DL/VS went to 3x daily, where VS added a morning flight out of BOS; and DL had also announced BOS-LGW in addition to start in 2020 (we all obviously know what happened then). I’m sure it’s down due to Covid still, but I just don’t see them giving up that flight. The premium demand makes this flight for DL.

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

But what do they mean by performance? LF? I doubt they know revenue and yield, or cargo contribution, or corporate contracts?

Basically, there is way too much capacity on BOS-LHR across all airlines and they are having to undercut their own fares in order to fill up premium seats. Its to the point where they've slashed fares and cabins are being filled with sub $2000 base fares in J class on BOS-LHR many days. My company actually recommended they re-allocate a frequency to a daytime flight because right now BA is the only one with a daytime flight on BOS-LHR. Those flights typically have lower yields, but given how much capacity is on BOS-LHR right now, we personally thought it would be worth a try.

Now is DL gonna chop it? I cant imagine so because BOS-LHR is way too strategically important of a market. This is also far from a DL only issue. I don't even think DL is the one struggling the worst. Based on fares, Id say that likely goes to UA but that is more of a hypothesis on my end.

Its pretty similar across the board on BOS-LHR.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

But what do they mean by performance? LF? I doubt they know revenue and yield, or cargo contribution, or corporate contracts?

Basically, there is way too much capacity on BOS-LHR across all airlines and they are having to undercut their own fares in order to fill up premium seats. Its to the point where they've slashed fares and cabins are being filled with sub $2000 base fares in J class on BOS-LHR many days. My company actually recommended they re-allocate a frequency to a daytime flight because right now BA is the only one with a daytime flight on BOS-LHR. Those flights typically have lower yields, but given how much capacity is on BOS-LHR right now, we personally thought it would be worth a try.

Now is DL gonna chop it? I cant imagine so because BOS-LHR is way too strategically important of a market. This is also far from a DL only issue. I don't even think DL is the one struggling the worst. Based on fares, Id say that likely goes to UA but that is more of a hypothesis on my end.

Its pretty similar across the board on BOS-LHR.

If anyone cuts BOS-LHR, it will be UA. They will simply use the slot elsewhere.

I would have thought that New York-GVA could do quite well in the winter because of business traffic mixed with premium ski traffic. Yes Star Alliance may be stronger in Switzerland but doesn't Delta have a strong base in New York (and many other places in the US) by now ?

nbc7 wrote:

I would have thought that New York-GVA could do quite well in the winter because of business traffic mixed with premium ski traffic. Yes Star Alliance may be stronger in Switzerland but doesn't Delta have a strong base in New York (and many other places in the US) by now ?

The traffic that makes JFK-GVA profitable and sustains it generally flies Swiss. The UA flight supplements it. So, from a point of sale originating in NYC, the NGO/UN/Corporate traffic largely goes LX/UA. Delta has a strong base in New York, between JFK and LGA, but the yields it was seeing likely not good enough to keep the flight going, on a 767-400ER through the Winter and the ski traffic isn't that big. The other factor is point of sale on the GVA end, and again, LX and UA (*A) have that pretty much to themselves.

AC up gauging its YUL flight from an A330-300 to a 777-300ER with 400 seats is also likely a factor, as *A has more itineraries to sell with connections. Though the 77W is only there for the summer, it probably is a factor in depressing yields into the Fall/Winter and likely why DL pulled the year-round service.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

They might not cut the flight because it is very strategically important. But I trust the source I have that has mentioned that its the weakest link in their BOS-Europe network and is not preforming well currently. That could change at some point.

But what do they mean by performance? LF? I doubt they know revenue and yield, or cargo contribution, or corporate contracts?

Basically, there is way too much capacity on BOS-LHR across all airlines and they are having to undercut their own fares in order to fill up premium seats. Its to the point where they've slashed fares and cabins are being filled with sub $2000 base fares in J class on BOS-LHR many days. My company actually recommended they re-allocate a frequency to a daytime flight because right now BA is the only one with a daytime flight on BOS-LHR. Those flights typically have lower yields, but given how much capacity is on BOS-LHR right now, we personally thought it would be worth a try.

Now is DL gonna chop it? I cant imagine so because BOS-LHR is way too strategically important of a market. This is also far from a DL only issue. I don't even think DL is the one struggling the worst. Based on fares, Id say that likely goes to UA but that is more of a hypothesis on my end.

Its pretty similar across the board on BOS-LHR.

Where are you getting this information and yield based data? No airline nor entity publishes yield information for international flights. BOS does not have way too much capacity to LON- I don’t know where you’re getting these numbers. We keep track of the T-100 data and BOS-LON is very healthy; it’s a massive market. Even when Norwegian was on BOS-LGW they were consistently operating high 90s for loads. If you’re basing your conclusions off of load factors, you’re doing yourself a disservice. If the market is over saturated why would UA bother reallocating a slot away from their hubs for BOS-LHR? Highly profitable airlines don’t just throw darts at the board when it comes to transatlantic flights from non hubs. Makes no sense- they wouldn’t do that for an over saturated market; they’d be better off utilizing it at a hub.

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

But what do they mean by performance? LF? I doubt they know revenue and yield, or cargo contribution, or corporate contracts?

Basically, there is way too much capacity on BOS-LHR across all airlines and they are having to undercut their own fares in order to fill up premium seats. Its to the point where they've slashed fares and cabins are being filled with sub $2000 base fares in J class on BOS-LHR many days. My company actually recommended they re-allocate a frequency to a daytime flight because right now BA is the only one with a daytime flight on BOS-LHR. Those flights typically have lower yields, but given how much capacity is on BOS-LHR right now, we personally thought it would be worth a try.

Now is DL gonna chop it? I cant imagine so because BOS-LHR is way too strategically important of a market. This is also far from a DL only issue. I don't even think DL is the one struggling the worst. Based on fares, Id say that likely goes to UA but that is more of a hypothesis on my end.

Its pretty similar across the board on BOS-LHR.

Where are you getting this information and yield based data? No airline nor entity publishes yield information for international flights. BOS does not have way too much capacity to LON- I don’t know where you’re getting these numbers. We keep track of the T-100 data and BOS-LON is very healthy; it’s a massive market. Even when Norwegian was on BOS-LGW they were consistently operating high 90s for loads. If you’re basing your conclusions off of load factors, you’re doing yourself a disservice. If the market is over saturated why would UA bother reallocating a slot away from their hubs for BOS-LHR? Highly profitable airlines don’t just throw darts at the board when it comes to transatlantic flights from non hubs. Makes no sense- they wouldn’t do that for an over saturated market; they’d be better off utilizing it at a hub.

I've worked in the airline industry for 20 years. Im well aware how airlines plan routes and I also dont base my conclusions on loads.

Where did I get the info from? Someone who works for DL in a corporate capacity and Im not going to go into it further than that.

No one said BOS-LHR is a small market. Of course its huge. Pre pandemic it was about 900 PDEW. But oversaturation is a VERY real thing especially in the current market. BOS-LHR is currently oversaturated. The fares are very low compared to pre-pandemic fares currently. Its not even just Boston. All carriers are having to lower their fares on East Coast-LHR flights to fill premium seats.

As to why DL would fly BOS-LHR even though it is currently not a barn-burner, the same reason UA flies it. Its too strategically important of a market to not fly if you want a significant presence in Boston.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Basically, there is way too much capacity on BOS-LHR across all airlines and they are having to undercut their own fares in order to fill up premium seats. Its to the point where they've slashed fares and cabins are being filled with sub $2000 base fares in J class on BOS-LHR many days. My company actually recommended they re-allocate a frequency to a daytime flight because right now BA is the only one with a daytime flight on BOS-LHR. Those flights typically have lower yields, but given how much capacity is on BOS-LHR right now, we personally thought it would be worth a try.

Now is DL gonna chop it? I cant imagine so because BOS-LHR is way too strategically important of a market. This is also far from a DL only issue. I don't even think DL is the one struggling the worst. Based on fares, Id say that likely goes to UA but that is more of a hypothesis on my end.

Its pretty similar across the board on BOS-LHR.

Where are you getting this information and yield based data? No airline nor entity publishes yield information for international flights. BOS does not have way too much capacity to LON- I don’t know where you’re getting these numbers. We keep track of the T-100 data and BOS-LON is very healthy; it’s a massive market. Even when Norwegian was on BOS-LGW they were consistently operating high 90s for loads. If you’re basing your conclusions off of load factors, you’re doing yourself a disservice. If the market is over saturated why would UA bother reallocating a slot away from their hubs for BOS-LHR? Highly profitable airlines don’t just throw darts at the board when it comes to transatlantic flights from non hubs. Makes no sense- they wouldn’t do that for an over saturated market; they’d be better off utilizing it at a hub.

I've worked in the airline industry for 20 years. Im well aware how airlines plan routes and I also dont base my conclusions on loads.

Where did I get the info from? Someone who works for DL in a corporate capacity and Im not going to go into it further than that.

No one said BOS-LHR is a small market. Of course its huge. Pre pandemic it was about 900 PDEW. But oversaturation is a VERY real thing especially in the current market. BOS-LHR is currently oversaturated. The fares are very low compared to pre-pandemic fares currently. Its not even just Boston. All carriers are having to lower their fares on East Coast-LHR flights to fill premium seats.

As to why DL would fly BOS-LHR even though it is currently not a barn-burner, the same reason UA flies it. Its too strategically important of a market to not fly if you want a significant presence in Boston.

Ok good for you, unless you publish data backing up what you’re asserting, it’s not substantive in any capacity. it’s not really relevant, given what you’re saying runs counter to published, verifiable T-100 data. Okay, fine; BOS as well as all East Coast markets are down, that is to be expected- there hasn’t even been a full year since all Covid restrictions were lifted on international flights. Not to mention, things will still be depressed on the international stage for some time and the dynamic has likely shifted more towards leisure travelers vs. business travelers.

The DL BOS-LHR flight is an incumbent flight; which you alluded to them possibly cutting in your earlier post:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.[/quote]

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.[/quote]

Bottom line; they aren’t and will not cut it. And your “contact” at Delta must be seriously misinformed- the BOS-LHR flight is extremely corporate contract rich and pulls down serious premium revenue- in my opinion they don’t have enough premium seats on their flight.

BOS-LHR is consistently priced at 3-7k in D1… granted that’s a lot cheaper than they used to be, but would argue that is because B6 entered the market and pulled down J fares, not due to over-saturation. Your basis for why UA entered the market makes no sense- sure, a Star Alliance carrier not being on BOS-LHR was a whole, but again, UA wouldn’t have utilized that slot on BOS-LHR and pulled it away from a hub if they could make more money on it on IAH-LHR… makes zero sense. And based on the most recent T-100 data, UA is actually performing (LF factor) towards the top of the list on BOS-LHR.

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

Where are you getting this information and yield based data? No airline nor entity publishes yield information for international flights. BOS does not have way too much capacity to LON- I don’t know where you’re getting these numbers. We keep track of the T-100 data and BOS-LON is very healthy; it’s a massive market. Even when Norwegian was on BOS-LGW they were consistently operating high 90s for loads. If you’re basing your conclusions off of load factors, you’re doing yourself a disservice. If the market is over saturated why would UA bother reallocating a slot away from their hubs for BOS-LHR? Highly profitable airlines don’t just throw darts at the board when it comes to transatlantic flights from non hubs. Makes no sense- they wouldn’t do that for an over saturated market; they’d be better off utilizing it at a hub.

I've worked in the airline industry for 20 years. Im well aware how airlines plan routes and I also dont base my conclusions on loads.

Where did I get the info from? Someone who works for DL in a corporate capacity and Im not going to go into it further than that.

No one said BOS-LHR is a small market. Of course its huge. Pre pandemic it was about 900 PDEW. But oversaturation is a VERY real thing especially in the current market. BOS-LHR is currently oversaturated. The fares are very low compared to pre-pandemic fares currently. Its not even just Boston. All carriers are having to lower their fares on East Coast-LHR flights to fill premium seats.

As to why DL would fly BOS-LHR even though it is currently not a barn-burner, the same reason UA flies it. Its too strategically important of a market to not fly if you want a significant presence in Boston.

Ok good for you, unless you publish data backing up what you’re asserting, it’s not substantive in any capacity. it’s not really relevant, given what you’re saying runs counter to published, verifiable T-100 data. Okay, fine; BOS as well as all East Coast markets are down, that is to be expected- there hasn’t even been a full year since all Covid restrictions were lifted on international flights. Not to mention, things will still be depressed on the international stage for some time and the dynamic has likely shifted more towards leisure travelers vs. business travelers.

The DL BOS-LHR flight is an incumbent flight; which you alluded to them possibly cutting in your earlier post:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.[/quote]

Bottom line; they aren’t and will not cut it. And your “contact” at Delta must be seriously misinformed- the BOS-LHR flight is extremely corporate contract rich and pulls down serious premium revenue- in my opinion they don’t have enough premium seats on their flight.

BOS-LHR is consistently priced at 3-7k in D1… granted that’s a lot cheaper than they used to be, but would argue that is because B6 entered the market and pulled down J fares, not due to over-saturation. Your basis for why UA entered the market makes no sense- sure, a Star Alliance carrier not being on BOS-LHR was a whole, but again, UA wouldn’t have utilized that slot on BOS-LHR and pulled it away from a hub if they could make more money on it on IAH-LHR… makes zero sense. And based on the most recent T-100 data, UA is actually performing (LF factor) towards the top of the list on BOS-LHR.[/quote]

You do you man. I know what I’ve been told and I’m not misinformed. I’ve worked out in this industry for close to 20 years and I’ve seen routes ebb and flow and I know what constitutes strategic importance for corporate contracts. There is too much capacity on east coast-LHR markets period. This isn’t 2019.

PS corporate contracts are not a good indicator of route profitability alone.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

You do you man. I know what I’ve been told and I’m not misinformed. I’ve worked out in this industry for close to 20 years and I’ve seen routes ebb and flow and I know what constitutes strategic importance for corporate contracts. There is too much capacity on east coast-LHR markets period. This isn’t 2019.

Except BOS-LHR hasn’t “ebbed and flowed”. It’s been a consistent route for over 10 years. Now with VS finally inking their JV with DL, the last thing they’re going to do is cut it; again, that’s a complete aside from the corporate contracts that exist on that flight- which you haven’t even acknowledged- I never said it’s the 100% driving force behind a flight, but it is significant. That’s a material thing that highly impacts the sustainability of flights between markets, especially high business routes.

If the East Coast is so over-saturated, we should just route all the flights over IAH, right? Where are you getting your data that the East Coast is “highly” saturated? So highly profitable air carriers just keep launching flights on “over-saturated” routes?

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

You do you man. I know what I’ve been told and I’m not misinformed. I’ve worked out in this industry for close to 20 years and I’ve seen routes ebb and flow and I know what constitutes strategic importance for corporate contracts. There is too much capacity on east coast-LHR markets period. This isn’t 2019.

Except BOS-LHR hasn’t “ebbed and flowed”. It’s been a consistent route for over 10 years. Now with VS finally inking their JV with DL, the last thing they’re going to do is cut it; again, that’s a complete aside from the corporate contracts that exist on that flight- which you haven’t even acknowledged- I never said it’s the 100% driving force behind a flight, but it is significant. That’s a material thing that highly impacts the sustainability of flights between markets, especially high business routes.

If the East Coast is so over-saturated, we should just route all the flights over IAH, right? Where are you getting your data that the East Coast is “highly” saturated? So highly profitable air carriers just keep launching flights on “over-saturated” routes?

What on earth are you talking about? IAH isn’t a DL hub nor is it a primary gateway to Europe and IAH-LHR is about 1/2 the size of BOS-LHR. You’re throwing shade to attempt to paint this as me saying this because IAH is my home airport in an attempt to discredit me which is ludicrous.

BOS-LHR is oversaturated in the current market. You’re talking about market size which I never disputed. BOS-LHR is a huge market. Right now the J class fares are a lot lower than they should be on East Coast-LHR flights and Boston is no exception due to over saturation. That is my point.

I know well about airline corporate contracts. I analyze them. Blanketing all airline corporate contracts and saying “this flight has a lot of contracts” isn’t correct. Routes are kept and planned even if they face headwinds because the network demands it to win said business. But corporate contracts do NOT equal profitability. It depends on how utilized they are and the discount level. If we’re talking contracts that require use of a UATP card, then they probably will have Lots of profit because those are prepaid and the airline gets the money anyway. If we’re talking MSA contracts, they are hardly worth considering.

ContinentalEWR is correct. If one carrier is going to cut BOS-LHR it is UA. Why? Strategic importance. They are in the market because it’s such a huge corporate market. They are playing the long game. That doesn’t mean fares are great right now. DL on the other hand has more invested in Boston than UA. Even if UA is outperforming DL, UA has the luxury of being able to leave if they so choose without it affecting their overall network much. DL doesn’t because of what their endgame in Boston is.

I am not misinformed. I know what I heard. I know what we recommended (a day flight on VS/DL to capture more of that market). I will acknowledge that my comment about potentially cutting BOS-LHR was tongue in cheek and poorly worded but I will not concede my overall point which 100% standby. It’s currently a laggard.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

You do you man. I know what I’ve been told and I’m not misinformed. I’ve worked out in this industry for close to 20 years and I’ve seen routes ebb and flow and I know what constitutes strategic importance for corporate contracts. There is too much capacity on east coast-LHR markets period. This isn’t 2019.

Except BOS-LHR hasn’t “ebbed and flowed”. It’s been a consistent route for over 10 years. Now with VS finally inking their JV with DL, the last thing they’re going to do is cut it; again, that’s a complete aside from the corporate contracts that exist on that flight- which you haven’t even acknowledged- I never said it’s the 100% driving force behind a flight, but it is significant. That’s a material thing that highly impacts the sustainability of flights between markets, especially high business routes.

If the East Coast is so over-saturated, we should just route all the flights over IAH, right? Where are you getting your data that the East Coast is “highly” saturated? So highly profitable air carriers just keep launching flights on “over-saturated” routes?

What on earth are you talking about? IAH isn’t a DL hub nor is it a primary gateway to Europe and IAH-LHR is about 1/2 the size of BOS-LHR. You’re throwing shade to attempt to paint this as me saying this because IAH is my home airport in an attempt to discredit me which is ludicrous.

BOS-LHR is oversaturated in the current market. You’re talking about market size which I never disputed. BOS-LHR is a huge market. Right now the J class fares are a lot lower than they should be on East Coast-LHR flights and Boston is no exception due to over saturation. That is my point.

I know well about airline corporate contracts. I analyze them. Blanketing all airline corporate contracts and saying “this flight has a lot of contracts” isn’t correct. Routes are kept and planned even if they face headwinds because the network demands it to win said business. But corporate contracts do NOT equal profitability. It depends on how utilized they are and the discount level. If we’re talking contracts that require use of a UATP card, then they probably will have Lots of profit because those are prepaid and the airline gets the money anyway. If we’re talking MSA contracts, they are hardly worth considering.

ContinentalEWR is correct. If one carrier is going to cut BOS-LHR it is UA. Why? Strategic importance. They are in the market because it’s such a huge corporate market. They are playing the long game. That doesn’t mean fares are great right now. DL on the other hand has more invested in Boston than UA. Even if UA is outperforming DL, UA has the luxury of being able to leave if they so choose without it affecting their overall network much. DL doesn’t because of what their endgame in Boston is.

I am not misinformed. I know what I heard. I know what we recommended (a day flight on VS/DL to capture more of that market). I will acknowledge that my comment about potentially cutting BOS-LHR was tongue in cheek and poorly worded but I will not concede my overall point which 100% standby. It’s currently a laggard.

After everything you went on about, you never once referenced any data substantiating your point; as to BOS/EastCoast-LON is “over-saturated”. You hearing something from a friend has no bearing whatsoever on the market dynamics and is absolutely ludicrous and asinine to suggest. Highly profitable airlines are not just throwing excess capacity (if the market is truly “over-saturated”) at markets, especially non hub markets (in the case of UA), just to run a flight for the sake of doing it, especially transatlantic flights. Again, what data are you referencing that shows this market is over saturated? Do you look at T-100 data?

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

Except BOS-LHR hasn’t “ebbed and flowed”. It’s been a consistent route for over 10 years. Now with VS finally inking their JV with DL, the last thing they’re going to do is cut it; again, that’s a complete aside from the corporate contracts that exist on that flight- which you haven’t even acknowledged- I never said it’s the 100% driving force behind a flight, but it is significant. That’s a material thing that highly impacts the sustainability of flights between markets, especially high business routes.

If the East Coast is so over-saturated, we should just route all the flights over IAH, right? Where are you getting your data that the East Coast is “highly” saturated? So highly profitable air carriers just keep launching flights on “over-saturated” routes?

What on earth are you talking about? IAH isn’t a DL hub nor is it a primary gateway to Europe and IAH-LHR is about 1/2 the size of BOS-LHR. You’re throwing shade to attempt to paint this as me saying this because IAH is my home airport in an attempt to discredit me which is ludicrous.

BOS-LHR is oversaturated in the current market. You’re talking about market size which I never disputed. BOS-LHR is a huge market. Right now the J class fares are a lot lower than they should be on East Coast-LHR flights and Boston is no exception due to over saturation. That is my point.

I know well about airline corporate contracts. I analyze them. Blanketing all airline corporate contracts and saying “this flight has a lot of contracts” isn’t correct. Routes are kept and planned even if they face headwinds because the network demands it to win said business. But corporate contracts do NOT equal profitability. It depends on how utilized they are and the discount level. If we’re talking contracts that require use of a UATP card, then they probably will have Lots of profit because those are prepaid and the airline gets the money anyway. If we’re talking MSA contracts, they are hardly worth considering.

ContinentalEWR is correct. If one carrier is going to cut BOS-LHR it is UA. Why? Strategic importance. They are in the market because it’s such a huge corporate market. They are playing the long game. That doesn’t mean fares are great right now. DL on the other hand has more invested in Boston than UA. Even if UA is outperforming DL, UA has the luxury of being able to leave if they so choose without it affecting their overall network much. DL doesn’t because of what their endgame in Boston is.

I am not misinformed. I know what I heard. I know what we recommended (a day flight on VS/DL to capture more of that market). I will acknowledge that my comment about potentially cutting BOS-LHR was tongue in cheek and poorly worded but I will not concede my overall point which 100% standby. It’s currently a laggard.

After everything you went on about, you never once referenced any data substantiating your point; as to BOS/EastCoast-LON is “over-saturated”. You hearing something from a friend has no bearing whatsoever on the market dynamics and is absolutely ludicrous and asinine to suggest. Highly profitable airlines are not just throwing excess capacity (if the market is truly “over-saturated”) at markets, especially non hub markets (in the case of UA), just to run a flight for the sake of doing it, especially transatlantic flights. Again, what data are you referencing that shows this market is over saturated? Do you look at T-100 data?

Tone it down some man, neither of you have provided the data (you keep referencing T-100 data but haven't provided it). It is perfectly reasonable to state what he heard, he also provided the caveat that its from a source, so he can't provide the data.

Further, highly profitable airlines certainly throw excess capacity on routes when it fulfills another business need (did UA need to put a 777 on IAD-SAN?).

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

I've worked in the airline industry for 20 years. Im well aware how airlines plan routes and I also dont base my conclusions on loads.

Where did I get the info from? Someone who works for DL in a corporate capacity and Im not going to go into it further than that.

No one said BOS-LHR is a small market. Of course its huge. Pre pandemic it was about 900 PDEW. But oversaturation is a VERY real thing especially in the current market. BOS-LHR is currently oversaturated. The fares are very low compared to pre-pandemic fares currently. Its not even just Boston. All carriers are having to lower their fares on East Coast-LHR flights to fill premium seats.

As to why DL would fly BOS-LHR even though it is currently not a barn-burner, the same reason UA flies it. Its too strategically important of a market to not fly if you want a significant presence in Boston.

Ok good for you, unless you publish data backing up what you’re asserting, it’s not substantive in any capacity. it’s not really relevant, given what you’re saying runs counter to published, verifiable T-100 data. Okay, fine; BOS as well as all East Coast markets are down, that is to be expected- there hasn’t even been a full year since all Covid restrictions were lifted on international flights. Not to mention, things will still be depressed on the international stage for some time and the dynamic has likely shifted more towards leisure travelers vs. business travelers.

The DL BOS-LHR flight is an incumbent flight; which you alluded to them possibly cutting in your earlier post:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

A few things:

1. Both DL and UA are using accommodation slots leased from BA due to the BA/AA JV and must be used on BOS
2. LON (and really LHR) is key for holding many corporate sales contracts from BOS (especially in finance)
3. UA added LHR as part of their LHR growth plan; to build out a strong LH/LX network from BOS but also to lock in a Raytheon K
4. If either DL/UA leave, B6 will take either or both of those slots and don't think DL doesn't know that and wants to prevent B6 having upto 3X flights
5. DL/VS have had an immunized JV for nearly 10 years now; VS just joined SkyTeam, which honestly doesn't mean much to people from BOS
6. DL/VS can easily run the morning LHR flight and would love it personally as I really liked VS' late LHR departure
6a. VS still holds the slot and I'm pretty sure that exact slot is now running the TLV run but reserve the right to be 100% wrong
7. LHR has, for sure, under performed other TATL from BOS and the J cabin has been kept it profitable and B6 is putting pressure on the J fares
8. Just because it under performs doesn't mean DL would even think about dropping it...b/c #1, 2 and #4 supra

N717TW wrote:

6. DL/VS can easily run the morning LHR flight and would love it personally as I really liked VS' late LHR departure
6a. VS still holds the slot and I'm pretty sure that exact slot is now running the TLV run but reserve the right to be 100% wrong

Would those slots be eas(ier) to acquire versus needing to move the TLV flight? Certainly adding more at peak TATL times would be expensive, but would the daytime flight slots be something reasonably acquired?

N717TW wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

Ok good for you, unless you publish data backing up what you’re asserting, it’s not substantive in any capacity. it’s not really relevant, given what you’re saying runs counter to published, verifiable T-100 data. Okay, fine; BOS as well as all East Coast markets are down, that is to be expected- there hasn’t even been a full year since all Covid restrictions were lifted on international flights. Not to mention, things will still be depressed on the international stage for some time and the dynamic has likely shifted more towards leisure travelers vs. business travelers.

The DL BOS-LHR flight is an incumbent flight; which you alluded to them possibly cutting in your earlier post:

My hunch is that there will probably be one or two more intl route adds/expansions.

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

A few things:

1. Both DL and UA are using accommodation slots leased from BA due to the BA/AA JV and must be used on BOS
2. LON (and really LHR) is key for holding many corporate sales contracts from BOS (especially in finance)
3. UA added LHR as part of their LHR growth plan; to build out a strong LH/LX network from BOS but also to lock in a Raytheon K
4. If either DL/UA leave, B6 will take either or both of those slots and don't think DL doesn't know that and wants to prevent B6 having upto 3X flights
5. DL/VS have had an immunized JV for nearly 10 years now; VS just joined SkyTeam, which honestly doesn't mean much to people from BOS
6. DL/VS can easily run the morning LHR flight and would love it personally as I really liked VS' late LHR departure
6a. VS still holds the slot and I'm pretty sure that exact slot is now running the TLV run but reserve the right to be 100% wrong
7. LHR has, for sure, under performed other TATL from BOS and the J cabin has been kept it profitable and B6 is putting pressure on the J fares
8. Just because it under performs doesn't mean DL would even think about dropping it...b/c #1, 2 and #4 supra

Thank you for this. Much appreciated. Has that Raytheon contract been in place a while?

jbs2886 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

What on earth are you talking about? IAH isn’t a DL hub nor is it a primary gateway to Europe and IAH-LHR is about 1/2 the size of BOS-LHR. You’re throwing shade to attempt to paint this as me saying this because IAH is my home airport in an attempt to discredit me which is ludicrous.

BOS-LHR is oversaturated in the current market. You’re talking about market size which I never disputed. BOS-LHR is a huge market. Right now the J class fares are a lot lower than they should be on East Coast-LHR flights and Boston is no exception due to over saturation. That is my point.

I know well about airline corporate contracts. I analyze them. Blanketing all airline corporate contracts and saying “this flight has a lot of contracts” isn’t correct. Routes are kept and planned even if they face headwinds because the network demands it to win said business. But corporate contracts do NOT equal profitability. It depends on how utilized they are and the discount level. If we’re talking contracts that require use of a UATP card, then they probably will have Lots of profit because those are prepaid and the airline gets the money anyway. If we’re talking MSA contracts, they are hardly worth considering.

ContinentalEWR is correct. If one carrier is going to cut BOS-LHR it is UA. Why? Strategic importance. They are in the market because it’s such a huge corporate market. They are playing the long game. That doesn’t mean fares are great right now. DL on the other hand has more invested in Boston than UA. Even if UA is outperforming DL, UA has the luxury of being able to leave if they so choose without it affecting their overall network much. DL doesn’t because of what their endgame in Boston is.

I am not misinformed. I know what I heard. I know what we recommended (a day flight on VS/DL to capture more of that market). I will acknowledge that my comment about potentially cutting BOS-LHR was tongue in cheek and poorly worded but I will not concede my overall point which 100% standby. It’s currently a laggard.

After everything you went on about, you never once referenced any data substantiating your point; as to BOS/EastCoast-LON is “over-saturated”. You hearing something from a friend has no bearing whatsoever on the market dynamics and is absolutely ludicrous and asinine to suggest. Highly profitable airlines are not just throwing excess capacity (if the market is truly “over-saturated”) at markets, especially non hub markets (in the case of UA), just to run a flight for the sake of doing it, especially transatlantic flights. Again, what data are you referencing that shows this market is over saturated? Do you look at T-100 data?

Tone it down some man, neither of you have provided the data (you keep referencing T-100 data but haven't provided it). It is perfectly reasonable to state what he heard, he also provided the caveat that its from a source, so he can't provide the data.

Further, highly profitable airlines certainly throw excess capacity on routes when it fulfills another business need (did UA need to put a 777 on IAD-SAN?).

I don’t have the T-100 data on hand, but it’s been published in the Boston Thread, which I stated if you read upthread.

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

N717TW wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

We’ll see. I wonder what they could do. I have it from a very reliable source that DL is doing poorly on BOS-LHR so that may add another frame.

A few things:

1. Both DL and UA are using accommodation slots leased from BA due to the BA/AA JV and must be used on BOS
2. LON (and really LHR) is key for holding many corporate sales contracts from BOS (especially in finance)
3. UA added LHR as part of their LHR growth plan; to build out a strong LH/LX network from BOS but also to lock in a Raytheon K
4. If either DL/UA leave, B6 will take either or both of those slots and don't think DL doesn't know that and wants to prevent B6 having upto 3X flights
5. DL/VS have had an immunized JV for nearly 10 years now; VS just joined SkyTeam, which honestly doesn't mean much to people from BOS
6. DL/VS can easily run the morning LHR flight and would love it personally as I really liked VS' late LHR departure
6a. VS still holds the slot and I'm pretty sure that exact slot is now running the TLV run but reserve the right to be 100% wrong
7. LHR has, for sure, under performed other TATL from BOS and the J cabin has been kept it profitable and B6 is putting pressure on the J fares
8. Just because it under performs doesn't mean DL would even think about dropping it...b/c #1, 2 and #4 supra

Thank you for this. Much appreciated. Has that Raytheon contract been in place a while?

UA has long held a Raytheon contract (pre UTC merger) and its one of the reasons why BOS-LAX never left.

jbs2886 wrote:

N717TW wrote:

6. DL/VS can easily run the morning LHR flight and would love it personally as I really liked VS' late LHR departure
6a. VS still holds the slot and I'm pretty sure that exact slot is now running the TLV run but reserve the right to be 100% wrong

Would those slots be eas(ier) to acquire versus needing to move the TLV flight? Certainly adding more at peak TATL times would be expensive, but would the daytime flight slots be something reasonably acquired?

LHR is fully allocated (i.e. no new slots are available) and unlike just about every other slot controlled airport in the world, slots are privately owned assets that can be (with some limited exceptions) freely sold, traded and have real value that can be mortgaged, etc. The LHR slots all have different values as they are based on the their timing, with morning arrivals being the most valuable. So, short answer: Yes in theory slots are available since everyone "has their price" but at the expense of buying LHR slots from an airline willing to give up its slot, the route value has to be really high.

Note 1: the slot for morning flight from BOS (and late departure from LHR) had been previously used on VS' Dubai flight. VS/DL decided to try BOS thinking it would be more profitable than Dubai. Then Covid happened; now its used elsewhere.

Note 2: VS doesn't have spare aircraft (and surely doesn't have the capital) to be freely adding new routes. It has just agreed to start up ICN within the next 12 months and that will take up 2 frames.

N717TW wrote:

1. Both DL and UA are using accommodation slots leased from BA due to the BA/AA JV and must be used on BOS

I remember reading in the press and on this forum when the UA BOS-LHR flight was announced- they had transferred out an EWR slot and moved it to BOS. Is this not correct? Are there stipulations that the UA flight must be run to BOS? This I was not aware of.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

You do you man. I know what I’ve been told and I’m not misinformed. I’ve worked out in this industry for close to 20 years and I’ve seen routes ebb and flow and I know what constitutes strategic importance for corporate contracts. There is too much capacity on east coast-LHR markets period. This isn’t 2019.

Except BOS-LHR hasn’t “ebbed and flowed”. It’s been a consistent route for over 10 years. Now with VS finally inking their JV with DL, the last thing they’re going to do is cut it; again, that’s a complete aside from the corporate contracts that exist on that flight- which you haven’t even acknowledged- I never said it’s the 100% driving force behind a flight, but it is significant. That’s a material thing that highly impacts the sustainability of flights between markets, especially high business routes.

If the East Coast is so over-saturated, we should just route all the flights over IAH, right? Where are you getting your data that the East Coast is “highly” saturated? So highly profitable air carriers just keep launching flights on “over-saturated” routes?

What on earth are you talking about? IAH isn’t a DL hub nor is it a primary gateway to Europe and IAH-LHR is about 1/2 the size of BOS-LHR. You’re throwing shade to attempt to paint this as me saying this because IAH is my home airport in an attempt to discredit me which is ludicrous.

BOS-LHR is oversaturated in the current market. You’re talking about market size which I never disputed. BOS-LHR is a huge market. Right now the J class fares are a lot lower than they should be on East Coast-LHR flights and Boston is no exception due to over saturation. That is my point.

I know well about airline corporate contracts. I analyze them. Blanketing all airline corporate contracts and saying “this flight has a lot of contracts” isn’t correct. Routes are kept and planned even if they face headwinds because the network demands it to win said business. But corporate contracts do NOT equal profitability. It depends on how utilized they are and the discount level. If we’re talking contracts that require use of a UATP card, then they probably will have Lots of profit because those are prepaid and the airline gets the money anyway. If we’re talking MSA contracts, they are hardly worth considering.

ContinentalEWR is correct. If one carrier is going to cut BOS-LHR it is UA. Why? Strategic importance. They are in the market because it’s such a huge corporate market. They are playing the long game. That doesn’t mean fares are great right now. DL on the other hand has more invested in Boston than UA. Even if UA is outperforming DL, UA has the luxury of being able to leave if they so choose without it affecting their overall network much. DL doesn’t because of what their endgame in Boston is.

I am not misinformed. I know what I heard. I know what we recommended (a day flight on VS/DL to capture more of that market). I will acknowledge that my comment about potentially cutting BOS-LHR was tongue in cheek and poorly worded but I will not concede my overall point which 100% standby. It’s currently a laggard.

My apologies brother, I’m sorry I came at you hard on this. I’m sure there is substance to what your inside source relayed to you; again I’m sorry for going heavy. I have an inside source at DL as well, so I get it. Did your source mention specifics around other East coast markets that have over capacity? I’d be interested to know. I do think though a big factor as to why fares (at least in BOS- can’t speak for other markets) are lower is due to B6 entrance. I think that has pulled down J fares significantly. Also, time of year plays a part, as demand (even from business travelers) is a lot lower this time of year. I didn’t mean to throw shade at your home airport, wanted to make amends; let’s all play nice in the sandbox.