|Quoting diverdave (Reply 53):|
Given that SLC has one of the larger if not the largest WN infestation of any Delta hub, I would expect you are correct on the yields.
It's not just yields. So, you can overlay the DB1B data with routing over the DL
route network and then correct for loads (DB1B is a 10% sample) with T100 and be pretty much dead on with hub RASM. I've done it. Stage adjusted, SLC
is by far the worst domestic hub. Not saying it doesn't make a profit, but if it does it means that the other domestic DL
hubs have margins of at least 15% fully allocated. Again, if you adjust for stage length it is essentially unchanged.
also has a history of cannibalizing capacity from the lowest performing hub to expand and with the overlapping geography of SEA
that is the logical choice. In fact, I'll say this. If they don't do that they are purposefully worsening their overall profitability because SLC
is the lowest hanging fruit left for funding new routes.
Again, I was comparing SLC
to the other DL
hubs in terms of profitability and UA
against other UA
hubs. Since both hubs are poor performers and hub consolidation rolls on, it is a logical step to say that one is endangered. I also left out PHX
which overlaps them to some extent and is definitely AA
's poorest performing domestic hub. So, bottom line, there are too many hubs in the West and it gets worse when DL
has a 30 gate hub in SEA
|Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 54):|
Both UA and DL are reluctant to walk away from hubs with rapidly expanding populations.
I don't know how you base that statement on any sort of fact. Profitability is much more likely to be the decision maker than population. IAD
area has great population growth and is shrinking rapidly as a hub and may close completely.