|Quoting Halls120 (Reply 34):|
I think the proper statement is that Delta isn't Southwest's peer, quite frankly. Southwest is a well managed airline that is making money and growing. Delta is trying to grow, but isn't well managed nor is it making money.
I will remind you that Delta was a very profitable airline long before Southwest ever flew its 1st flight. DL
hasn't done nearly as well during deregulation but I firmly believe DL
has finally figured out what it takes to make it in the deregulated environment and will return to industry leadership. Those Delta employees that stick it out will be nicely rewarded for holding on through this difficult chapter. Most of the rest of the industry will be blown away with what DL
will do. Long time DL
employees knew DL
when they were the most respect airline and they are more than willing to help return their employer to that position.
Take a look at the latest issue of Air Transport World. There is a good article about Air Canada. They are the classic example of an airline that used bankruptcy right and is now running on all eight cylinders. You can bet DL
has studied AC
's restructuring just as it did UA
and US' and others before and will copy and improve on everything that makes sense.
|Quoting Grbld (Reply 53):|
Fundamentally, it's management that has to step up with a clear-cut goal for the future, a vision for the company. Simply cutting costs while keeping revenue the same is not a vision. That's just poor management. Launching Song and then killing it a short while later, that just shows lack of backbone and vision.
Delta has articulated a more coherent turnaround strategy than that of any airline in the world. Delta has maintained its domestic network but is redeploying nearly 30 767s from domestic to international service, opening cities that have never been served by US carriers most of which will be profitable longterm additions to its network although there will certainly be some that do not work. Given the size and wealth of the USA, it is an indictment of the rest of the industry that they have beat each other over the head trying to all serve a dozen cities in Asia and western Europe and a couple in S. America while leaving huge chunks of the world unserved. In the meantime, DL
is taking Eastern Europe by storm and is poised to add significant new routes to Africa and perhaps even the S. Pacific. Look at the route systems of BA
, and LH
. There is no reason a US airline should not serve many of the very same cities while maintaining a strong profitable network at home. DL
absolutely has a vision and they are executing against it very well.
Pulling the plug on Song may seem shortlived but I believe it shows how willing current DL
management is to admit what was done wrong in the past and correct it. Current management did not create Song and they will not continue to support it if can't make money. CO
, the two best run airlines for at least a decade, have both said airlines within airlines don't make money. I tend to think they are right. It would be more of a mistake to be unwilling to admit Song's failure.
|Quoting Surfdog75 (Reply 61):|
This goes to the heart of the argument for me. Why not replace an inefficient Delta 100 seat aircraft with....of all things...a new efficient Delta 100 seat aircraft? I'll go even further and say a family of mainline aircraft from 70-110 seats? These airplanes would be crewed, supported, and maintained by loyal, motivated Delta employees who have a stake in a successful company as opposed to a bunch of contract carrier employees who probably don't care much about Delta.
Management has insisted on moving mainline flying to the lowest bidder because they say we can't afford to fly them on mainline. I say we can't afford not to. Our costs have come down dramatically and a deal can be worked to save this flying and the many jobs that depend on it. If Delta wants to build a consistent, outstanding product for our customers this flying needs to be done in house. Delta has very little quality control over the contract companies and many cancel flights at the drop of a hat, lead the world in mishandled bags etc.
I agree that I would certainly like to see DL
add new generation aircraft at the bottom end of its fleet. However, the EMB 170/190 is the only real alternative and I'm not sure that it is the best thing for a company to take the first product in a new product cycle. I personally do not buy the 1st release of technology but wait for it to be proven and revised as it often is. I am sure that other manufacturers will come up w/ new 100 seat airplanes that will be as good if not better than EMB's. And even if DL
goes w/ EMBs they will know that is the best product available and they are getting it for the best price. Since they are the only product in their class now, there is no basis for comparison.
has said they will order airplanes shortly after getting out of BK; they intend to structure their plan of reorg around those acquisitions. DL
surely knows they cannot support their international operation almost entirely on 767s so you will see them order ultralonghaul aircraft, as well as the potential 100 seater mentioned above. In the meantime, there are still routes that will be below the size of a DL
100 seater and it only makes sense to continue to develop the product line even with contract carriers. DL
is not proposing raising the size of a/c connection carriers can operate above 79 seats - enough to allow probably the CRJ 705 which will provide more onboard space but is not substantially larger or longer range than the aircraft DL
connection carriers presently operate.
I have watched DL
for years and know that the Spirit you encountered is what will keep DL
alive. Even some of the toughest pilots know what they have and will think long and hard before throwing it all away. And, as I have pointed out, national ALPA is working w/ DALPA to make sure they realize that the deal DL
is proposing is really pretty good compared with what UA
, US, and NW
pilots will make.