MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
Really? It seems you are writing history before history happens.WorldTraveler said:
AAG announces changes at DCA and LGA
- Thread starter lpbrian
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #197
which is why I used the word "if"
we know what has happened in the past in NYC and DL's increased performance at DFW where it has performance stronger than AA in the local market to DL's hubs which in multiple cases AA dominated at one time.
The fact that you want to pretend doesn't exist is that AA and US have more hubs that they dominate with higher market shares than either DL or UA and it is precisely because there is an opportunity to enter key markets that the strategic pressure is on new AA. That is what the Wright amendment changes are about and that is what DCA is about. DL and UA don't have that kind of protection in its markets and yet they manage to get as good as or better yields in the local markets.
The only carrier that has more concentrated focus cities is WN because they have convinced the world that they are a low cost carrier and yet there is ample evidence that they don't have lower fares in markets where they don't have to compete.
AA has a much worse track record of successfully competing in high profile markets against more nimble competitors. US' strategy post BK was to retreat to its core hubs which it dominates outside of PHX. AA did have a cost disadvantage before BK which has eased somewhat but costs are going up and the sheer growth in competition that AA faces in its key markets is unprecedented - no one has yet to suggest another example that disproves my point.
AA/US still control markets with good revenue. there is every incentive for every carrier that can to get as much of AA's key markets as they can when everyone else is trying to do the same thing.
We can see how it plays out but the principle is far bigger than DCA or DAL and it is precisely why DL who has a finished merger, strong earnings, and a history of well-executed strategic objectives will use whatever opportunities it can to advance its current strategic objectives.
I expect every carrier including new AA to do everything they can to advance their own strategic objectives and to limit everyone else's advances, including those of DL.
we know what has happened in the past in NYC and DL's increased performance at DFW where it has performance stronger than AA in the local market to DL's hubs which in multiple cases AA dominated at one time.
The fact that you want to pretend doesn't exist is that AA and US have more hubs that they dominate with higher market shares than either DL or UA and it is precisely because there is an opportunity to enter key markets that the strategic pressure is on new AA. That is what the Wright amendment changes are about and that is what DCA is about. DL and UA don't have that kind of protection in its markets and yet they manage to get as good as or better yields in the local markets.
The only carrier that has more concentrated focus cities is WN because they have convinced the world that they are a low cost carrier and yet there is ample evidence that they don't have lower fares in markets where they don't have to compete.
AA has a much worse track record of successfully competing in high profile markets against more nimble competitors. US' strategy post BK was to retreat to its core hubs which it dominates outside of PHX. AA did have a cost disadvantage before BK which has eased somewhat but costs are going up and the sheer growth in competition that AA faces in its key markets is unprecedented - no one has yet to suggest another example that disproves my point.
AA/US still control markets with good revenue. there is every incentive for every carrier that can to get as much of AA's key markets as they can when everyone else is trying to do the same thing.
We can see how it plays out but the principle is far bigger than DCA or DAL and it is precisely why DL who has a finished merger, strong earnings, and a history of well-executed strategic objectives will use whatever opportunities it can to advance its current strategic objectives.
I expect every carrier including new AA to do everything they can to advance their own strategic objectives and to limit everyone else's advances, including those of DL.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
What has happened in the past is not necessarily an indication of the future. You usually make predictions based on historical figures. The industry has changed and there are only 3 legacy carriers left. Please don't complain about AA and US having more hubs which they dominate compared to UA and DL... Consolidation was predicted and has come to pass. It shouldn't matter to you because you feel DL COULD, SHOULD, AND WILL dominate the industry.WorldTraveler said:
You cheer the fact that no one can compete with DL in certain markets, but cry foul when DL is not the dominate force in others. You have a prediction of everything airline. Yours are no more and no less valid than anyone else's.
Since DL is the greatest thing to happen to aviation since the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk...I ask you....WHAT ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT WHERE DL IS CONCERNED?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #199
the concept of forecasting the future based on the past is not new nor is it limited to the airline industry.
I'm not complaining about AA and US' dominance of their hubs - I'm pointing out as I have before that is precisely that level of dominance that invites competition, something that AA has repeatedly resisted doing - or hid behind limited access markets such as at LHR and Latin America as well as DFW.
No one is saying that AA or any other airline shouldn't compete vigorously - just that the evidence is overwhelming that AA has done a poor job of defending its network against competitors whether we are talking about its hubs or focus cities or continental Europe and Asia. US has become profitable precisely because they have retreated to their east coast hubs - including DCA - which they have dominated and which have little competition.
WN has done the very same thing - they don't have a great track record of succeeding in direct competition against large operations of legacy airlines, including DL AND US.
The whole asset divestiture is built around AA and US' attempts to limit competition, not promote it.
that is the issue here... AA might be able to succeed against its competitors but they have to prove things are different today than what they were in the past.
I'm not complaining about AA and US' dominance of their hubs - I'm pointing out as I have before that is precisely that level of dominance that invites competition, something that AA has repeatedly resisted doing - or hid behind limited access markets such as at LHR and Latin America as well as DFW.
No one is saying that AA or any other airline shouldn't compete vigorously - just that the evidence is overwhelming that AA has done a poor job of defending its network against competitors whether we are talking about its hubs or focus cities or continental Europe and Asia. US has become profitable precisely because they have retreated to their east coast hubs - including DCA - which they have dominated and which have little competition.
WN has done the very same thing - they don't have a great track record of succeeding in direct competition against large operations of legacy airlines, including DL AND US.
The whole asset divestiture is built around AA and US' attempts to limit competition, not promote it.
that is the issue here... AA might be able to succeed against its competitors but they have to prove things are different today than what they were in the past.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
Oh here we go with the hiding behind limited access markets sob story. Would you like some cheese with that whine?WorldTraveler said:
I guess NRT and China are wide-open (open skies) non-slot controlled airports ... .. ...
I wonder how much more poor DL could dominate the world if only Asia wasn't wide open to competition ... ... ..
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #201
yes, there are more than enough slots available for any US carrier to add flights in those markets. and there are also joint ventures in Japan which AA has which was intended to overcome DL's historical advantage gained from NW.
There is no such thing as a joint venture in a domestic market and there are still very much gate and slot restrictions at US airports.
As much as you want to call it whining, it is the same market access that was the issue at LHR and in Latin America... AA has gained access to Asia but hasn't generated average fares comparable to DL or UA while DL has done exactly that at LHR and is able to remain profitable despite its smaller size relative to AA, esp. in deep S. America.
the difference is market access and the ability to successfully compete regardless of the market involved. For years, AA has had its most profitable operations in markets where competitors have had limited access while DL and UA have faced much more competition. The changes that will take place in the industry over the next few years will target AA (including US') dominant market position. It is what the DOJ wanted and it is what a free enterprise system should move towards.
My beef with the DOJ is that they have tried to pick winners based on their desire to shape the US airline market based on pricing -something that the US government lost the ability to do with the airline deregulation act of 1978.
There is no such thing as a joint venture in a domestic market and there are still very much gate and slot restrictions at US airports.
As much as you want to call it whining, it is the same market access that was the issue at LHR and in Latin America... AA has gained access to Asia but hasn't generated average fares comparable to DL or UA while DL has done exactly that at LHR and is able to remain profitable despite its smaller size relative to AA, esp. in deep S. America.
the difference is market access and the ability to successfully compete regardless of the market involved. For years, AA has had its most profitable operations in markets where competitors have had limited access while DL and UA have faced much more competition. The changes that will take place in the industry over the next few years will target AA (including US') dominant market position. It is what the DOJ wanted and it is what a free enterprise system should move towards.
My beef with the DOJ is that they have tried to pick winners based on their desire to shape the US airline market based on pricing -something that the US government lost the ability to do with the airline deregulation act of 1978.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
well the doj appears to have won against your beef by allowing WN B6 and VX the slots and the High Almighty DL did not get any slots.. but from the start the govt told delta and ual they need not apply but you did say delta would file legal challenge we all are still waiting for that though I have serious doubts about it coming to life.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #203
Almighty DL? probably not, except perhaps in your mind.
DL is just a tough competitor.
And as has been noted, DL's focus is on the gates at DAL.
You did see that DL is accelerating delivery of the 717s - which is good for WN who otherwise faced the prospect of parking a good chunk of the fleet at the end of the year.
Also good for DL who can add more capacity this year.
You might want to sit and see where it ends up before you declare victory.
And it still doesn't change that I simply have to roll my eyes at how giddy you get at the prospect of keeping DL away from DCA slots that they intended to use to fly to small and medium sized cities that were going to lose service - DL never said anything about using the slots to fly in markets competitive with US - while clueless about the impact that all of that increased competition will have on AA.
AA has more competitors coming at it than any carrier has ever had. If you or someone else wants to argue otherwise, I'd love to hear it.
DL is just a tough competitor.
And as has been noted, DL's focus is on the gates at DAL.
You did see that DL is accelerating delivery of the 717s - which is good for WN who otherwise faced the prospect of parking a good chunk of the fleet at the end of the year.
Also good for DL who can add more capacity this year.
You might want to sit and see where it ends up before you declare victory.
And it still doesn't change that I simply have to roll my eyes at how giddy you get at the prospect of keeping DL away from DCA slots that they intended to use to fly to small and medium sized cities that were going to lose service - DL never said anything about using the slots to fly in markets competitive with US - while clueless about the impact that all of that increased competition will have on AA.
AA has more competitors coming at it than any carrier has ever had. If you or someone else wants to argue otherwise, I'd love to hear it.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
im not the one who glorifies delta in every single thread you are im not declaring victory bec there is no victory just merely pointing out to you that you claimed back in nov that delta would file legal challenge to date in the 4 months since there has been no legal challenge filed and its doubtful there will be
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #205
I don't call them "almighty" or says they can do no wrong... you are.
and no you still have the notion in your head despite the fact that I have said otherwise about six dozen times that I NEVER said that they definitely would file a lawsuit.
When you start listening to what is actually being said instead of hearing what you want to hear, we can have a valid discussion.
You are free to be doubtful.... I also made it clear that DL's focus was on the DAL gates - and that so far as we know has not been resolved. I NEVER said that DL was expecting to acquire DCA slots in order to fly routes that are already served by other airlines - which is exactly what the low fare carriers are going to do.
You can't grasp that the issue is far bigger than DL. It is about the federal government sticking its nose in the airline industry and deciding who is going to win and who is going to lose.
Have you been following the stories about the FCC and their interest in monitoring the media? They might have backed down on this issue but the principle of sticking their nose into everyone's business is still there.
If you are unable to connect that the government in Washington we have now wants to pick winners and losers and dictate the outcome of live for millions of Americans and businesses - and the AA/US divestiture process is just part of it - then you deserve the America that you will get.
I want nothing to do with it. Unfortunately, unless I renounce my US citizenship, I have no choice but to pay.
and no you still have the notion in your head despite the fact that I have said otherwise about six dozen times that I NEVER said that they definitely would file a lawsuit.
When you start listening to what is actually being said instead of hearing what you want to hear, we can have a valid discussion.
You are free to be doubtful.... I also made it clear that DL's focus was on the DAL gates - and that so far as we know has not been resolved. I NEVER said that DL was expecting to acquire DCA slots in order to fly routes that are already served by other airlines - which is exactly what the low fare carriers are going to do.
You can't grasp that the issue is far bigger than DL. It is about the federal government sticking its nose in the airline industry and deciding who is going to win and who is going to lose.
Have you been following the stories about the FCC and their interest in monitoring the media? They might have backed down on this issue but the principle of sticking their nose into everyone's business is still there.
If you are unable to connect that the government in Washington we have now wants to pick winners and losers and dictate the outcome of live for millions of Americans and businesses - and the AA/US divestiture process is just part of it - then you deserve the America that you will get.
I want nothing to do with it. Unfortunately, unless I renounce my US citizenship, I have no choice but to pay.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
bottom line is that back in nov when the merger btwn aa and us was cleared for take off the bidding slots by the doj/dot made clear that dl and ua could bid if they wanted to but they would not win you don't have to say that delta is the high and the almighty your posts pretty well spells it out as you spread the delta cheers in every darn thread. plain n simple. face it delta cannot win every single time and the dca slots happen to be one loss they were handed there is not a whole lot more they can do about that yes you did say that delta would file a legal challenge but the govt does not regulate the pricing thus the 1978 airline deregulation but the dca and lga and few others are slot controlled and therefore the govt did what they wish and that's to have carriers like swa and b6 and vx fly in for lower fares
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Feel free to renounce your citizenship... There's a chance you won't be missed.
You don't like the fact that the DOJ are standing in DL's way of abusing their market position, but that's their job. They most certainly do have the right to prevent oligopolies, and what they've done in managing the DCA and LGA slot divestitures clearly supports that.
You're hopelessly hung up on the low fare aspect that these airlines have in common, and ignoring the fact that the carriers selected are the most likely to continue to offer some form of competitive pressure on the larger three airlines, although I do question if VX is going to remain in business long enough to really matter...
You are the only person I've seen who is thumping on the table and questioning DOJ's authority on this.
At some point, you might want to consider why that's the case. Perhaps all those well paid lawyers on staff at DL realise there's no basis for trying to do so, and even less chance of actually overturning those decisions.
You don't like the fact that the DOJ are standing in DL's way of abusing their market position, but that's their job. They most certainly do have the right to prevent oligopolies, and what they've done in managing the DCA and LGA slot divestitures clearly supports that.
You're hopelessly hung up on the low fare aspect that these airlines have in common, and ignoring the fact that the carriers selected are the most likely to continue to offer some form of competitive pressure on the larger three airlines, although I do question if VX is going to remain in business long enough to really matter...
You are the only person I've seen who is thumping on the table and questioning DOJ's authority on this.
At some point, you might want to consider why that's the case. Perhaps all those well paid lawyers on staff at DL realise there's no basis for trying to do so, and even less chance of actually overturning those decisions.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #208
since you're writing in British English and carry a US passport, the question should be who has defected.
I'm going nowhere. Democracy is a messy process and Ukraine and Venezuela shows why people have to fight for it and I absolutely support them... but the US is still the best hope for democracy in the world. Doesn't mean that I or others can't complain.
Actually, DL noted on the very day of the DOJ's divestiture announcement that they strongly encouraged the DOJ to allow any carrier to participate in the bidding process for AA/US assets. It's not just my idea.
DL abusing its power? DL is competing fairly in the marketplace and winning.... DL wasn't one of the chosen 4 domestically like AA or UA or PA internationally and yet DL has grown to be one of the largest and most profitable airlines in the world.
Let's look at the JFK transcons which have been the backbone of AA and UA's network and in which both are now only willing to serve a fraction of the market while DL is now able to serve all segments of the market and has become the largest carrier.
Would you like to tell us how DL abused its power to achieve that position?
How do you think the low fare carriers offer competitive pressure if it isn't via fares? In fact, they do offer competitive pressure via lower fares - they do it in market after market. The difference is that WN limits the amount of markets that they have to compete directly against other carriers so they can minimize having to undercut competitors.
It is precisely because VX' strategy from the beginning has been to challenge AA and UA in the biggest markets in the US and yet have quickly attained fare parity. VX' losses have come from its aggressive growth and the necessity to develop new markets. For markets that VX has remained in for multiple years, they are likely profitable.
The core of the argument for you to answer is why AA and US are so willing to hand over key markets to low fare carriers but doesn't want to compete against DL.
I'm going nowhere. Democracy is a messy process and Ukraine and Venezuela shows why people have to fight for it and I absolutely support them... but the US is still the best hope for democracy in the world. Doesn't mean that I or others can't complain.
Actually, DL noted on the very day of the DOJ's divestiture announcement that they strongly encouraged the DOJ to allow any carrier to participate in the bidding process for AA/US assets. It's not just my idea.
DL abusing its power? DL is competing fairly in the marketplace and winning.... DL wasn't one of the chosen 4 domestically like AA or UA or PA internationally and yet DL has grown to be one of the largest and most profitable airlines in the world.
Let's look at the JFK transcons which have been the backbone of AA and UA's network and in which both are now only willing to serve a fraction of the market while DL is now able to serve all segments of the market and has become the largest carrier.
Would you like to tell us how DL abused its power to achieve that position?
How do you think the low fare carriers offer competitive pressure if it isn't via fares? In fact, they do offer competitive pressure via lower fares - they do it in market after market. The difference is that WN limits the amount of markets that they have to compete directly against other carriers so they can minimize having to undercut competitors.
It is precisely because VX' strategy from the beginning has been to challenge AA and UA in the biggest markets in the US and yet have quickly attained fare parity. VX' losses have come from its aggressive growth and the necessity to develop new markets. For markets that VX has remained in for multiple years, they are likely profitable.
The core of the argument for you to answer is why AA and US are so willing to hand over key markets to low fare carriers but doesn't want to compete against DL.
Virgin America has announced that they are pursuing the 2 DAL gates with plants to move their service from DFW, and add additional service to Chicago, LGA and DCA. Large Q & A on http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com
Gotta love the arrogant bastards at Southwest: although we already control 80% of the gates at DAL, we'll be prevented from spreading our low fares to more people if we aren't permitted to hold 90% of the gates at this move convenient airport. Wow.AirLUVer said:
I'm a long-time shareholder of Southwest Airlines, but the chutzpah displayed by Gary Kelly boggles the mind. Southwest isn't as low-fare as it used to be - Virgin America is in fact low-fare competition.
Similar threads
