77D/2-cabin 772 enters service today

[jcw]

Let me translate:
 
DL has no aircraft capable of competing with AA, AZ or BA so they will go with the sub par 763 product
 
And since DL is so inefficient they will need to generate more revenue than AA due to them driving their operating margin down and throwing capacity on routes that are already saturated and scaling back routes without that heavy of competition like TLV
 
And since DL basically owns VS - it's illogical for them to use VS metal in LAX - because the double standard is at work - it's perfect sense for ATL but not LAX
 
Hope that helps everyone understand the garbage posted

 

[737823]

WT VS has not even been able to make ORD work on a year round basis. Neither Virgin affiliates serve ATL or DTW and the VS 333 is a bit premium heavy for those markets with many Upper Class and Premium Economy seats. BOS is transitioning from 333 to 789 anyday now for VS and my understanding is it has historically been one of their stronger performers. LAX-LHR is a crowded route will be interesting to see what happens.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

Let me translate:
 
DL has no aircraft capable of competing with AA, AZ or BA so they will go with the sub par 763 product
 
And since DL is so inefficient they will need to generate more revenue than AA due to them driving their operating margin down and throwing capacity on routes that are already saturated and scaling back routes without that heavy of competition like TLV
 
And since DL basically owns VS - it's illogical for them to use VS metal in LAX - because the double standard is at work - it's perfect sense for ATL but not LAX
 
Hope that helps everyone understand the garbage posted

take a breather... you are having a hard time coping with reality.

DL has 777s and 330s which have business class products that are comparable to or superior to what AA has on its 777s, many of which do not even have lie flat business class seats.

DL has plenty of aircraft it could use.

DL is using a 767.

We can check back in about 6 months and see how well DL is doing on LAX-LHR. that is the way the industry works.

DL owns a 49% stake in VS. that is a minority stake.

Josh,
DL's 764s and the majority of the 763s both have more business class seats than VS'333s.

DL does not offer a separate economy premium cabin and neither does any other US carrier.

DL specifically noted that its LHR revenues and margins are some of the fastest growing on its int'l network and they intend to redeploy more capacity into LHR, something that Doug Parker and other AA execs have said is troubling (not surprising given AA's position in the US-LHR market)

Given that DL has its own slots plus the JV which is increasing DL's revenues, DL is doing what is in the best interest of DL's stockholders. I would expect AA to do nothing less in the markets that matter to AA.

the best part of the airline industry is that DOT data will eventually be available to show whether AA and DL's strategies are working.

 

[jcw]

not really - the word meter is way up tonight by you - your the one that has to go on and on and one and on
 
bless your heart
 
How is your list coming

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

on LAX-HND, DL gets higher total revenue than AA gets on LAX-NRT even though AA uses a larger aircraft.

 
 
Oh gee, it couldn't possibly be because the AA flight is flying into a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TOKYO AIRPORT, could it?

 

[WorldTraveler]

sure it could be.... one in which AA has better timings than DL does.

it could also be the same reason why AA wants to ditch NRT and start LAX-HND because it recognizes what DL is doing at BOTH airports and AA sees more hope of generating some connecting traffic at HND than in competing against a host of carriers at NRT.

as much as you want to avoid admitting it, the same principle of market size and strength applies to AA in Asia, including from LAX as it does for why AA has higher average fares to Latin America and LHR as a whole.

the difference is that DL's average fares are percentage wise much closer to AA's at LHR and in Latin America than AA's is to DL and UA's to Asia.

in time, I fully expect all 3 carriers to narrow the differences between each other's route systems but for now, AA has a much bigger hill to climb to develop a profitable and comparably sized route system in Asia than DL has in doing the same at LHR or Latin America.

 

[topDawg]

WT why is DL sending the 763 LAX-LHR? I mean it makes no sense to send VS metal to ATL/DTW where no Virgin affiliates have a presence or following, while in LAX they have a very loyal following and have been there for many years. I get it's a JV and capacity decisions are made jointly but this just seems like a bonehead move. Sure it's a nice trip for the LAX base and DL nonrevs can fly in BE but why take that frequency from VS?

Josh

Virgin has lower cost to the east coast than Delta does. Less pilots. 
 
and because Delta has to fly LAX-LHR if it wants to be part of the business market in LAX. JV or not. Same reason Delta quickly dumped the (stupid) idea to allow AF to only fly JFK-CDG. 
 
LAX-LHR and NRT are two have to have international routes if you want to be taken seriously in LA. Also because Delta is using the smaller plane it will allow the 2nd flight to be daily all winter where with virgin it was less than daily. (also how Virgin is able to start the 3rd daily in the summer, much easier to do with 1x 346 1x 763 than 2x 346.) 

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL never wanted AF to fly LAX-LHR. It was AF"s choice because the original set of LHR slots that DL and NW gained were from AF/KL as part of including LHR in the TATL JV.

DL is now in the largest LAX markets and will continue to start others.

The 763 is not likely the aircraft DL will use long-term but it is the right aircraft for starting a TATL route right before winter.

 

[jcw]

Let me translate

DL has been so successful building up LAX into a hub it had to start an SEA

With that it's elected to start flying to LHR with an inferior product to hurt the daily a380 service on the route

And I can't believe I forgot this did you know DL is going to start challenging FEDEX in cargo as we now carry the most cargo between la and ny - I have to get that into every thread

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL's revenue growth in LAX has been faster than AA/US or UA's.

that is verifiable data

as for your assertion of inferior product, there are plenty of markets where DL uses 767s against AA's 777s and end up with as good as or better average fares... such as JFK-LHR.

DL's product is all 767s while AA uses all 777s. DL has an IDENTICAL average fare.

So much for the theory of "inferior" product.

 

[jcw]

Hail to DL

It's like DL faster revenue growth in SEA easier to grow from a position of weaknesses when you are the smallest carrier

I know math runs past you

Just like when someone enters ATL their revenue would be growing faster

To bad it does not show up in margin at DL - their margin is down 46% unlike AA who is hitting out of the park in margin

 

[WorldTraveler]

if someone's revenue grows faster than DL's, it will be obvious to all to see.

in this case, your assertion that DL's product is inferior to AA's certainly doesn't hold water in the JFK-LHR market where DL is pulling down the same average fares as AA.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

DL's revenue growth in LAX has been faster than AA/US or UA's.

as for your assertion of inferior product, there are plenty of markets where DL uses 767s against AA's 777s and end up with as good as or better average fares...
 

 
While it is laudable that DL's revenue at LAX is growing fast, I will only be impressed once it reaches or surpasses that of AA and/or UA.  Until then, the rate of revenue growth might not have too much significance.  If UA and AA revenue at LAX is already higher than DL's then it'll remain higher for quite some time even if DL manages to increase revenue at a higher rate than UA and/or AA.
 
Your claim that there are markets where a DL B767 ends up with "as good as or better" average fares than AA B777 is interesting as well as very vague. 
Could you first define "as good as or better" - that is within X% or some other parameter.  Also, could you provide some numbers?
If you can provide some data it could lead to an interesting discussions.  
Otherwise you might as well just write "once upon a time ... ... ..."

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

in this case, your assertion that DL's product is inferior to AA's certainly doesn't hold water in the JFK-LHR market where DL is pulling down the same average fares as AA.

 
But one could argue that DL, especially in that particular market, that DL is pulling the fares they are only because AA/BA set the fares and DL is simply following the leaders and can't price any higher.

 

[WorldTraveler]

sorry but it doesn't work that way.

there are clear examples in which there are vast differences in fares between carriers.

by your logic, AA should have been pulling fares on par with DL in ATL-LGA but they didn't.

likewise, DL, not AA and not UA, has the highest average fares in the ORD-LGA market.