Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46): SNN-ATL

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46): LGW-CVG

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46): LGW-ATL

All three of these were around longer than "recent" years. SNN-ATL was the first routing to Ireland in '86.....LGW-CVG since the 80s, I believe and LGW-ATL since '78.

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 30): (at about 55 flights/day, it's one of the largest non-hubs in the system),

Seems funny to hear that being said. Pre deregulation, we had about 90 flights a day.

Quoting TC957 (Reply 39): I'd take a guess and say it's Virgin's same slot from the summer season service they operate.

That theory doesn't really work in practice - VS don't have the ORD slot in winter at LHR and haven't had for over 10 years. This must be the slot from DL's second DTW which I'd guess isn't to go year-round.

[Edited 2014-02-17 13:09:55]

Quoting ZuluTime (Reply 51): This must be the slot from DL's second DTW which I'd guess isn't to go year-round.

Not sure that the second DTW will be seasonnal, DL19 and DL57 are bookable for next winter by the way.

VS may have kept the slot year round and just not used it over the winter, isn't it a rule I read somewhere that slots held can be unused for two years or something like that ?

Good to see SkyTeam using Delta at ORD to fill in the winter void. Makes complete sense to use a better fitting plane during the off season and fill the belly with cargo. I'm sure DL has some national/global contracts and VS has similar contracts to make this work with the JV. DL does have a significant operation at ORD and ORD-LHR is a premium heavy route (maybe someday AA will realize this and up-gauge to the 77W on this route soon) and DL/VS can probably coexist on this route.

This is not an attempt for DL/VS to go after UA/* or AA/1. This is just a business decision to better utilize aircraft. When DL launches ORD-LAX, that will be a shot at UA/AA (and VX). When DL launches ORD-SEA, that will cause a the seismologists to come out at both ends, like they do at Seahawks games, as this will get notice (AA, AS, UA).

Quoting TC957 (Reply 53):

Slots have to be used 80% of the time before being forfeited.

I'm not surprised ORD is going year round, but 9.30am is not an ideal departure time for one daily flight. From my experience the earlier transatlantic flights tend to be lighter with business passengers who for flights later in the day.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46): Delta is kind of fond of the patented airliners.net magic dartboard of route planning when it comes to London. They've had more combos than most of the rest put together. In recent years we've seen EDI-ATL, EDI-JFK, MAN-JFK, SNN-ATL, LGW-CVG, LGW-JFK, LGW-ATL and LHR-MIA all come and go. In London they hey have a core around : LHR-ATL/JFK/DTW/MSP/BOS/SEA as four hubs and two focus cities The rest also concentrate on their strengths with UNITED on LHR-EWR/IAH/IAD/ORD/LAX/SFO four hubs and two focus cities. AMERICAN on LHR-ORD/JFK/DFW/MIA/LAX/RDU four hubs, one focus city and an underwritten point to point. US AIRWAYS LHR-PHL/CLT both being hubs.

I'm sure you'd acknowledge that EDI, MAN and SNN aren't actually London airports. I'm not sure what point you are really trying to make. Some of those markets were served for years, but the world changed after 2008 and lots of airlines rationalized lots of marginal flying. Those cutbacks had nothing to do with a dartboard-mentatlity.

Delta was famously shut out of LHR by Bermuda II. It was a surprise to no one when it transferred LGW services as quickly as possible to LHR. Again...no "dartboard".

The CVG hub was dramatically downsized. Losing London nonstop service was completely rational. Again...no "dartboard".

And MIA-LHR was a rare opportunity to acquire slots at LHR for a carrier that had very few. They gained BOS and MIA at the same time. BOS worked, MIA didn't. I'm not sure how one could consider this a "dartboard" selection process either. The markets were pre-determined.

Delta had to build a London franchise organically. It didn't buy the whole package like AA or UA. As a result, you have to expect a little volatility. But it really is amazing when you think that five years ago Delta didn't even serve LHR and now it will have 12 daily flights to seven destinations and own 49% of Virgin Atlantic.

It's very easy to think this is another "DL Dartboard" route if you ignore the JV. With the JV factored in, it essentially becomes VS switching the route to a 767, more or less. No guarantee it will work, but it worked for DL/AF/KL on several routes (and didn't work on others.)

With VS feed on the LHR side and DL being a major airline, I think flying a single 767 on such a busy route might work out with them assuming the yields aren't trashed.

Also, this is as much of an attack on UA or AA by DL as when LH or BA adds a route to a DL city... correct me if I'm wrong but that's how I understand JVs

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 56): it really is amazing when you think that five years ago Delta didn't even serve LHR and now it will have 12 daily flights to seven destinations and own 49% of Virgin Atlantic

  
Delta's management has done an outstanding job positioning the company for the ultimate showdown between the 3 mega US legacies with global reach

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46): exactly as MIA saw Delta as the spare wheel between BA and AA, ORD is likely to end up doing the same as that's a three way fight with UA/AA/BA

MIA likely would have stuck had the JV been in place, ORD has an even better chance, if DL/AF can make CDG work year round, DL/VA should be able to pull off 1 daily LHR, and who knows, Delta may just surprise us again and throw a few 'darts' at ORD  

what on earth are you talking about? "SkyTeam" doesn't have ANY role in telling its carriers which routes to fly. This is a decision that was made because DL and VS thought that it would support their JV agreement. "SkyTeam" and all the alliances are simply marketing organizations. They have NO role in route selection. Every member of an alliance has to make the business decision to serve or not serve a route on its own merits and whether it thinks it can make money and is a good use of its aircraft. period.

Quoting nomorerjs (Reply 54): Good to see SkyTeam using Delta at ORD to fill in the winter void. Makes complete sense to use a better fitting plane during the off season and fill the belly with cargo. I'm sure DL has some national/global contracts and VS has similar contracts to make this work with the JV. DL does have a significant operation at ORD and ORD-LHR is a premium heavy route (maybe someday AA will realize this and up-gauge to the 77W on this route soon) and DL/VS can probably coexist on this route.

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 40): AeroMexico also flies multiple flights daily to JFK and have a daily flight to ATL, so I doubt Delta is going to start competing with UA into their fortress hub to catch redundant connections that can be (and are) easily handled elsewhere. Also, why would somebody fly from ATL or DTW to LHR through Houston when are there multiple daily nonstops?

Aero Mexico is starting their own MEX-LHR flight in the next few months with the arrival of additional 788s. AM doesn't need to rely on transfers much via ATL/JFK since they have KL and AF with multiple flights on AMS/CDG-MEX.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 60): Aero Mexico is starting their own MEX-LHR flight in the next few months with the arrival of additional 788s. AM doesn't need to rely on transfers much via ATL/JFK since they have KL and AF with multiple flights on AMS/CDG-MEX.

Even more of an argument against LHR-IAH.

Quoting OOer (Reply 41): Will DL take over any other routes from VS?

DL isn't taking the route over - they are expanding it during the winter months and I'm pretty sure it will be abck to VS on larger aircraft in the summer (as per the last few years).

Quoting uberflieger (Reply 37):

Does Delta route passengers on VS through LHR to NRT, HKG, PVG, MUM, or DEL?

Not that shocking when placed in the context of a metal neutral JV with VS. Reminds me a bit of DL's CDGEWR service, right in UA's backyard but again, understandable in a metal neutral JV with AF/KL/AZ.

Aeromexico have been on MEX-LHR for some time with B767s.

Quoting seat1a (Reply 63): Does Delta route passengers on VS through LHR to NRT, HKG, PVG, MUM, or DEL?

Certainly not.
NRT, HKG, PVG are significantly shorter flying westbound from ORD.
BOM, DEL passengers are routed through AMS or CDG.

Quoting seat1a (Reply 63): Does Delta route passengers on VS through LHR to NRT, HKG, PVG, MUM, or DEL?

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 66): Certainly not. NRT, HKG, PVG are significantly shorter flying westbound from ORD. BOM, DEL passengers are routed through AMS or CDG.

DL flies nonstop ORD-NRT/HKG/PVG??

With the JV why wouldn't DL rout passengers through LHR to MUM and DEL as well as AMS and CDG??

Quoting questions (Reply 67): DL flies nonstop ORD-NRT/HKG/PVG??

I did not say they fly nonstop. I said it is shorter flying westbound from ORD.
ORD-XXX(SEA)-NRT/HKG/PVG is shorter than ORD-LHR-NRT/HKG/PVG.

Quoting questions (Reply 67): With the JV why wouldn't DL rout passengers through LHR to MUM and DEL as well as AMS and CDG??

They'd be mad not to. Now they own 49% of VS, assuming the new management returns Virgin Atlantic to decent profitability, Delta will get some income stream for the LHR-BOM/DEL legs on VS. This isn't the case with CDG/AMS-BOM/DEL on AF-KLM. They've also a strong incentive to ensure that VS is profitable by routing any available traffic via LHR onto VS flights as long as this doesn't actually increase Delta's own costs/reduce revenue, or damage competitiveness.

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 66): BOM, DEL passengers are routed through AMS or CDG.

Quoting questions (Reply 67): With the JV why wouldn't DL rout passengers through LHR to MUM and DEL as well as AMS and CDG??

DL already fly AMS-BOM with their own metal, but I can see them putting some pax going to DEL through LHR versus AMS. NOT because of the JV, but because they now own 49% of VS and DL would be gettign more revenue from that, than funneling them on KL through AMS.

Quoting andy33 (Reply 69): They'd be mad not to. Now they own 49% of VS, assuming the new management returns Virgin Atlantic to decent profitability, Delta will get some income stream for the LHR-BOM/DEL legs on VS. This isn't the case with CDG/AMS-BOM/DEL on AF-KLM. They've also a strong incentive to ensure that VS is profitable by routing any available traffic via LHR onto VS flights as long as this doesn't actually increase Delta's own costs/reduce revenue, or damage competitiveness.

Quoting anstar (Reply 70): DL already fly AMS-BOM with their own metal, but I can see them putting some pax going to DEL through LHR versus AMS. NOT because of the JV, but because they now own 49% of VS and DL would be gettign more revenue from that, than funneling them on KL through AMS.

Both of these points are incorrect. Actually, India is included in the DL/AF/KL/AZ JV. So Delta gets revenue from India flying via the JV. In addition, the VS JV is only for Trans-Atlantic flying at this point. The VS deal would have to be incorporated into the AF/KL/AZ deal in order for DL to route traffic via LHR. To do that is a MUCH bigger issue as it would require an alliance between the VS and the others. As has been documented elsewhere, there are significant downsides to VS doing that, including the fact that they would lose a very favorable interline arrangement with BA that was a condition of the AA/BA JV.

Fundamentally, Delta's partnership with AF/KL/AZ is VERY deep and highly integrated. VS' primary value to DL is over the Atlantic. The rest of the network isn't of value to DL versus what AF/KL/AZ offers. The long-term goal, I'm sure, is to somehow integrate VS into the larger JV, but there are significant complications that need to be addressed by all parties in order to make that happen.

Also, and someone else can check this, I believe that very little of VS east-bound network actually connects efficiently with North American flying,

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 71): Also, and someone else can check this, I believe that very little of VS east-bound network actually connects efficiently with North American flying,

Correct. The beyond-LHR connectivity VS provides is of relatively little value to Delta, since not only is the number of markets with convenient, well-timed 2-way connectivity over LHR is not only small, but every single one of said markets is already available with 2-way connectivity over AMS and/or CDG. As you rightly said, the only real strategic network value VS brings to DL - at least now - is added heft between the U.S. and LHR.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 71): In addition, the VS JV is only for Trans-Atlantic flying at this point.

Question: does the JV with DL also cover VS' non-US North American markets (e.g. LHR-YVR, LGW-BGI, etc?) as well as DL's non-LHR UK flights (e.g. ATL-MAN)?

Would also be nice to double check on the JV coverage between North America and the UK on Star (UA-AC) and OneWorld (AA-BA) if anyone has that market data.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 71):

You will actually be surprised that VS is actually using ALL DL flights EX LHR to connect onto BOM , DEL , DXB , JNB , CPT ( in the Winter ) and LOS .

DL does not sell these flights on their website but VS do . Of all these destinations India is a HUGE market .

DL own 49 % of VS so feeding VS via LHR earns them more revenue than feeding flights via CDG/AMS .

Yes they are part of a JV with AF/KLM and hence they on their own website do not sell connections to India via LHR on VS but the catch is VS does . You can log onto the VS website and do a search yourself .

UK charges massive APD on departures EX LHR . However there is no APD on connecting traffic so when VS connects a passenger from BOM to JFK on part VS part DL metal , VS pocket the whole fare .

DL own 49 % of VS so its a win win .

The VS BOM flight connects beautifully onto DL 's JFK flights , SEA , BOS , etc . VS have retimed their BOS flight to a later departure so connections from BOM will use the DL flight .

Also DL move most flights into Terminal 3 so connecting will be a breeze .

More so VS is giving full mileage and tier points to all DL frequent fliers . DL frequent fliers have a choice now between AF , KLM , DL or VS to travel to India for example .

In my experience VS beat all of them hands down so more and more DL folk will choose VS over others which is good for both VS and DL . VS has an amazing in flight product on all aircraft and great crews .

DL is in a precarious position . They married AF/KLM and now are in bed with VS . They will have to get this part of the equation sorted as AF/ KLM will not be liking the loss on connecting traffic .

You will be surprised the number of DL folk flying VS not just to the UK but to both DEL and BOM .

I have always believed this marriage is going to help both DL and VS and it seems to be working .

Quoting laca773 (Reply 60): Aero Mexico is starting their own MEX-LHR flight in the next few months with the arrival of additional 788s. AM doesn't need to rely on transfers much via ATL/JFK since they have KL and AF with multiple flights on AMS/CDG-MEX.

AM is already flying 3x weekly to LHR using 767ERs. The switch to 788 will happen in the coming months. AM continues to rely on DL for flights to LHR and elsewhere in Europe where they don't have nonstop service via ATL and JFK, and it also relies on AF ex-CDG.

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): You will actually be surprised that VS is actually using ALL DL flights EX LHR to connect onto BOM , DEL , DXB , JNB , CPT ( in the Winter ) and LOS .

Do you mean that DL actually uses VS flights ex-LHR to connect to those destinations? Otherwise it makes no sense.

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): DL does not sell these flights on their website but VS do

DL should sell them, no?

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): DL is in a precarious position . They married AF/KLM and now are in bed with VS . They will have to get this part of the equation sorted as AF/ KLM will not be liking the loss on connecting traffic .

AF/KL and AZ will end up welcoming VS into their trans-Atlantic JV with DL in my opinion.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 75):

VS uses DL flights and sells mixed itineraries with have both VS and DL flights from lets say JFK to BOM via LHR .

DL cant sell them on their website and wont because AF/KLM wont be too happy about it .

If i remember correcting VS has applied to join the AF/KLM / DL JV too but that hasn't been approved yet .

Quoting irishayes (Reply 73): Question: does the JV with DL also cover VS' non-US North American markets (e.g. LHR-YVR, LGW-BGI, etc?) as well as DL's non-LHR UK flights (e.g. ATL-MAN)?

Yes to Canada. Not sure about the Caribbean stuff.

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): You will actually be surprised that VS is actually using ALL DL flights EX LHR to connect onto BOM , DEL , DXB , JNB , CPT ( in the Winter ) and LOS .

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): You will be surprised the number of DL folk flying VS not just to the UK but to both DEL and BOM .

Neither of those things surprise me.

They just weren't the question that I was answering. VS can route its passengers via all the Delta flights it wants. DL, however, has to respect the AF/KL/AZ JV requirements for now.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 71): Fundamentally, Delta's partnership with AF/KL/AZ is VERY deep and highly integrated. VS' primary value to DL is over the Atlantic. The rest of the network isn't of value to DL versus what AF/KL/AZ offers.

I'd say it has some value - especially as DL own 49% of VS so it is in their interests for VS to succeed in those markets.

Quoting irishayes (Reply 73): Question: does the JV with DL also cover VS' non-US North American markets (e.g. LHR-YVR, LGW-BGI, etc?) as well as DL's non-LHR UK flights (e.g. ATL-MAN)?

It covers all UK - USA, Canada & Mexico flying.

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 76): If i remember correcting VS has applied to join the AF/KLM / DL JV too but that hasn't been approved yet .

The JV application with DL also included co-operation KL/AF/AZ - it was in the paperwork submitted to the DOT.
I believe this was more for legalities - ie DL need to be open to all parties when discussing say JFK-ABZ (aberdeen UK) traffic and pricing as it would include VS and or KL so all parties needed to be included.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 71): Fundamentally, Delta's partnership with AF/KL/AZ is VERY deep and highly integrated. VS' primary value to DL is over the Atlantic. The rest of the network isn't of value to DL versus what AF/KL/AZ offers. The long-term goal, I'm sure, is to somehow integrate VS into the larger JV, but there are significant complications that need to be addressed by all parties in order to make that happen.

And I am sure the VS JV and ownership will be alot deeper than their relationship with AF/KL as DL will own half of their JV partner. As for the BA interline connections, surely this is something they can work on with AF/KL?

Whilst I can see why KL are hostile towards a VS/DL relationship (ie KL is strong in regional UK) and more to lose in that respect) there are also alot of benefits they could enjoy... ie taking VS pax to the points in Africa and Asia that Vs don't serve themselves.

Quoting anstar (Reply 78): I'd say it has some value - especially as DL own 49% of VS so it is in their interests for VS to succeed in those markets.

Obviously it has SOME value. But DL is not going to trash the AF/KL/AZ JV for some crappy beyond LHR connections. They'll work it all out eventually.

Quoting anstar (Reply 78): And I am sure the VS JV and ownership will be alot deeper than their relationship with AF/KL as DL will own half of their JV partner. As for the BA interline connections, surely this is something they can work on with AF/KL? Whilst I can see why KL are hostile towards a VS/DL relationship (ie KL is strong in regional UK) and more to lose in that respect) there are also alot of benefits they could enjoy... ie taking VS pax to the points in Africa and Asia that Vs don't serve themselves.

Look, all the parties involved WANT to include VS in the overall JV. The details are difficult. The concept of connections for VS beyond AMS and CDG has to be weighed against the huge amount of revenue at risk if VS has to disavow the BA special pro-rate.

Here is a more comprehensive look at issues at stake for VS:

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...help-but-what-about-skyteam-129965

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): More so VS is giving full mileage and tier points to all DL frequent fliers . DL frequent fliers have a choice now between AF , KLM , DL or VS to travel to India for example .

You are forgetting that DL has a Medallion Qualification Dollars (MQD) requirement starting this year to achieve status. You can get that on other airlines only if it is booked on a DL ticket and not on partner tickets.
DL does not sell tickets to India via LHR on VS. A ticket booked through a VS channel is not eligible for MQDs.
So even though one may get full mileage on a VS issued ticket, it will not help attaining the MQD requirement.
So flying through LHR to India on a VS ticket is no good for DL frequent flyers who want to get to Medallion status.

Quoting Vsa330300 (Reply 74): You will be surprised the number of DL folk flying VS not just to the UK but to both DEL and BOM .

Do you have a source to your claim regarding connections to India?

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 80): You are forgetting that DL has a Medallion Qualification Dollars (MQD) requirement starting this year to achieve status. You can get that on other airlines only if it is booked on a DL ticket and not on partner tickets. DL does not sell tickets to India via LHR on VS. A ticket booked through a VS channel is not eligible for MQDs. So even though one may get full mileage on a VS issued ticket, it will not help attaining the MQD requirement. So flying through LHR to India on a VS ticket is no good for DL frequent flyers who want to get to Medallion status.

How many people flying to India from the US are 'frequent flyers'? Most are probably expats flying to India for their yearly trip to visit family and couldn't care less about status. Most probably know that they will get miles for their trip and couldn't care less about MQDs.

We make IAH-LHR work pretty good here at UA.

Not sure we need to go into another carriers hub or ATL to Make LHR work.

We serve LHR from some of the countries biggest cities and global business centers.

SFO, LAX, ORD, EWR. Not sure we need to add ATL to the LHR porfolio. We're good.

[Edited 2014-02-19 22:33:41]

I think that a lot of folks are misunderstanding what DL's 49% stake in VS ultimately means vis a vis joint venture revenue. I have never seen the relevant agreements but just by the nature of the difference between an equity stake and joint venture operated flights it seems to me that DL's interest is to keep passengers on joint venture-operated flights only.

It is true that DL indirectly benefits from any benefit obtained by VS due to the equity stake in VS. This, of course, is because the healthier VS becomes the greater the value of DL's 49% position. However, DL is not necessarily generating revenue from any increase in the value of the VS stake. (It's possible that they get dividended some amount if VS does better, but likely not. And while the value of the 49% stake may increase, DL's investment in VS is for strategic not investment purposes so they aren't simply looking to increase the value of that stake and cash it out). On the other hand, when a DL passenger connects in AMS or CDG onto a JV onward flight, DL is collecting actual revenue from that ticket at that time. So from DL's perspective, there is a significant incentive to keep a passenger who books through DL on only DL-operated flights or DL-joint venture flights.

Another way to think about it is that when a DL passenger flies JFK-AMS-DEL, with the AMS-DEL leg on KLM, DL is collecting revenue for both the JFK-AMS and AMS-DEL legs. However, if the same passenger flies JFK-LHR-DEL, with the LHR-DEL leg on VS, then DL is only collecting revenue on the JFK-LHR leg. Conversely, when a VS passenger flies DEL-LHR-JFK, with the LHR-JFK leg on DL, VS is collecting revenue on DEL-LHR PLUS joint venture revenue on the LHR-JFK leg, so obviously VS has a different revenue incentive than DL to sell connecting tickets through LHR.

Someone also mentioned the Medallion Qualification Dollar requirement. That is a BIG deal for DL frequent fliers and will definitely keep them on DL ticketed flights in the future (which is the entire point so that DL ensures that they get revenue from every flight that counts toward status).

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 82): We make IAH-LHR work pretty good here at UA. Not sure we need to go into another carriers hub or ATL to Make LHR work. We serve LHR from some of the countries biggest cities and global business centers. SFO, LAX, ORD, EWR. Not sure we need to add ATL to the LHR porfolio. We're good.

ATL is not Chicago. Chicago is the third largest city in the US. Obviously, DL/VS want a year round presence in this important market

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 84):

p


I agree. I'm commenting on some posters saying UA should start ATL-LHR. Why chase passengers
you know are probably going to stick with another sirline.

Bethune said it best....WHY were we trying to compete for those few passengers ? Why
waste a lot of resources trying to pry passengers off some elses's plane and onto ours ?

sCO believed using their hubs to centralize traffic. I think the new UA has the same philosophy
in which they do alot of hub flying and very little P2P.

DL/VS may start ORD-LHR, but UA responding with ATL-LHR would be silly. Waste of money and resources. Offer a good product and countinue to improve your product on your current LHR flights from your hubs is the best response IMO.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 56): But it really is amazing when you think that five years ago Delta didn't even serve LHR and now it will have 12 daily flights to seven destinations and own 49% of Virgin Atlantic.

And that 49% translates into:

17 daily flight to 11 destinations on VS metal (with DL codeshare)

- LHR-BOS
- LHR-IAD
- LHR-ORD
- LHR-JFK
- LHR-EWR
- LHR-MIA
- LHR-LAX
- LHR-SFO
- LHR-YVC
- LGW-LAS
- LGW-MCO

plus....DL's own operations

- 12 daily flights and 7 destinations on DL metal,

Results into DL offering 29x daily flights from LON across the Atlantic to 14 destinations in N. America.

How well does Virgin do on LHR-ORD during the summer? If you think about it, Virgin doesn't have a hub at either end to feed traffic. AA/BA has the BA hub at LHR and the AA hub at ORD. UA has its ORD hub, and I suspect that it does get feed at LHR from other Star carriers.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 86): - LHR-YVC

I didn't know that VS flies nonstop to La Ronge, Saskatewan. Or did you mean LHR-YVR?

watch DL get slaughtered because their is no loyalty in the ORD area for DL. We are all AA/UA ff's, and both of them have it covered.

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 89): watch DL get slaughtered because their is no loyalty in the ORD area for DL. We are all AA/UA ff's, and both of them have it covered.

This is entirely false. If that were the case then only UA/AA would serve ORD. Instead, many airlines do, including airlines that provide service to places that neither UA nor AA does.

Jeremy

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 89): watch DL get slaughtered because their is no loyalty in the ORD area for DL. We are all AA/UA ff's, and both of them have it covered.

Why should they? If all they're doing is covering the flight for VS for the winter, they may pickup VS' pax. Not only that, I'd be willing to bet that there's much more loyalty at ORD for DL than you realize. If it was all just AA/UA, then it would be a pretty lonely place with just the two of them, there. They might not even be 4th busiest in the world if it was like that.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 90): watch DL get slaughtered because their is no loyalty in the ORD area for DL. We are all AA/UA ff's, and both of them have it covered.

I doubt you're right. There are enough FF's at LHR to help fill up the plane and the cargo will also help. I think DL/VS got it right on this one.

Quoting mayor (Reply 91): Why should they? If all they're doing is covering the flight for VS for the winter, they may pickup VS' pax. Not only that, I'd be willing to bet that there's much more loyalty at ORD for DL than you realize.

  

We will be reading very soon on how this route was dropped. Makes no sense from a planning perspective. I make the comparison to AA at Love. Why?

Quoting aajfksjubklyn (Reply 93): We will be reading very soon on how this route was dropped. Makes no sense from a planning perspective. I make the comparison to AA at Love. Why?

Obviously because their JV partner asked them to. Perhaps VS is going to use that plane for another route this winter? It's not a big mystery, or all that difficult to come up with possible scenarios where this makes sense, especially since the posts above yours discuss them at length.

Quoting aajfksjubklyn (Reply 93): We will be reading very soon on how this route was dropped. Makes no sense from a planning perspective. I make the comparison to AA at Love. Why?

I remember reading comments just like that one and the DL 'dart board' and it'll never work and AF has a much better product and so on when ORD-CDG was announced seasonally. Three years later, I pushed out DL 592 ORD-CDG from M9 today. So much for the 'experts' on here.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 87): How well does Virgin do on LHR-ORD during the summer?

It does quite well, which is why we see it back year after year. They have also been extending it either side fo the season by about a week for the past couple of years... ie it used to end in the first week of OCT and now the VS service goes right till the end of OCT... DL using a smaller aircraft in the winter to ensure a year round operation can only helo attaract more corporates who shy away from the summer only service.

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 89): watch DL get slaughtered because their is no loyalty in the ORD area for DL

Jump onto the DL Flyertalk forum and I think you will find there are quite a few who say they will use this service.