Delta exits LAX-LHR

[jcw]

It's so funny now UA gets higher average fares than AA

 

[WorldTraveler]

It's so funny now UA gets higher average fares than AA

it's actually fact and it is verifiable.


I am sure there are markets where AA gets a higher average fare but ORD and NYC are markets where AA has long had difficulty in maintaining average fares in the face of competition.

since this topic is about LAX, data clearly shows that the big 3 have very similar average fares with DL having an average fare advantage to Asia and AA having it to LHR. and yet, DL came into the LAX-LHR market and obtained average fares close to what UA was getting which are far closer to what AA gets on LAX-LHR than what AA was getting from LAX to Asia.

averages are made up of ALL of the data points in the set. AA has been able to offset its lower average fares to Asia because of its higher average fares on the transcons. As AA's total revenue on LAX-JFK has shrunk even as average fares have gone down, AA has sought other markets to help boost its total revenues, including across the Pacific and has the ability to take lower average fares on Asia markets while not pulling down its overall LAX fares.

those are verifiable mathematical facts.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

All those words in an attempt to deflect + spin and yet still can't grasp enough mental horsepower to come up with an answer to a simple question.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

You do realize that UA gets a higher average fare than AA even in the ORD-LHR market on an annual basis? AA/BA carry more passengers but UA gets a higher average fare.

as to the DOJ investigation, there is a separate thread on it, which is appropriate since, like the DAL discussion, it involves multiple airlines.

as to the assertion of nobody wanting to fly DL from LAX to LHR, that is patently false. DOT statistics show that in the first quarter that DL operated the route, it got half of the local market share that AA and UA had -

 
The text above is an amazing example of the best in commercial aviation.
 
For starters, it fascinating that on ORDLHR, the winner is the carrier that has a higher fare and less capacity.  The theory sounds awesome, except that in a market like the transcons, the winner is apparently not the carrier with the highest fares, but the carrier with the largest capacity but lower average fare than its competitor.  If one follows the logic that is applied to JFK transcon market then how is it possible that UA, and not AA is considered a winner?  The answer is so obvious:  a certain poster has a narrative and a hAAte for a certain company.
 
If one slithers to the DOJ investigation line/text, it is a great example of how somebody that celebrates the best in commercial aviation is trying to slither away form the comment, fraudulent I might add, that they made previously regarding DL and DOJ scrutiny.  So sad.
 
And the most fascinating example of the best in commercial aviation, is yet one more newly created theory of what defines a winner in a market:  if DL does not have the highest average fare or if DL does not have the most capacity, well then one must reach/grasp for straws and create a new metric:  the winning metric in % share of local market.  Pathetic.
 
But lets play along and pretend that DL is doing such a bang-up job of capturing the LAXLHR local market.  The question that remains unanswered, despite numerous post and thousand upon thousands of words is why would DL pull its metal from the market. Afterall, the local market is so profitable.  Some will say that mighty DL is realigning capacity - taking a plane where it was doing so amazingly awesome in the local market and shift it to another one where it won't get the high fares or the high local OD %.  The answer is simple:  somebody is not telling the Whole Truth!

 

[WorldTraveler]

STOP. FULL STOP.

Nowhere did I say that UA is the winner in the ORD-LHR market.

I simply said they have a higher fare as they do in most ORD int'l markets in which AA and UA directly compete.

when you take factual statements and either intentionally manipulate them or you do so because you don't understand the principles involved, you not only ensure that a dialogue that should end remains alive but you show how defensive you are.

The only thing that is pathetic is that you manipulate what is said in order to either try to avoid facing the reality that AA has real competition that holds its own in key competitive markets OR you simply don't understand the business of aviation.

Rational people who understand the principles of the industry don't drag conversations on endlessly. I don't agree with commavia or MAH or FWAAA but they clearly understand the industry and know how to walk away from a conversation better than you do.

and whether you like the answer or not, DL is moving capacity from the int'l market to the domestic market and particularly to a market which UA exited.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Can we say unhinged

 

 

[WorldTraveler]

you can say what you want but the fact is that DL redeployed capacity from its int'l to domestic system because it has an aircraft that serves both missions.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

UA and AA have the same aircraft as DL (capable of serving both missions), but last I checked they're not retreating from their international network.
 
Spin away!

 

[WorldTraveler]

How about you come up with the guidance each carrier has made for its int'l capacity and then get back with us?

facts are our friends... as least those who aren't afraid of it.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

The Whole Truth is that  i) I'm not the one playing the know-it-all on here, and ii) because of that don't fabricate facts once I'm proven to be wrong.

You on the other hand ... ... ...

 

[WorldTraveler]

let me finish it for you.

I, OTOH, said there was more to the story than when someone started this thread trying to argue that DL was failing at LAX-LHR.

and the other part of the story which has come to light is that DL is reallocating its 767 capacity from LAX and EWR to LHR to the US transcons and at the same time adding winter season 757 service on DL metal from BOS to CDG.

so, there really is nothing here other than DL reallocating capacity and allowing its JV partner to fly a route.

that is the whole truth.

 

[700UW]

If they werent failing, they would not be giving up the route.

 

[FWAAA]

LAX-LHR, MIA-LHR, ORD-LHR and EWR-LHR. Good thing DL has the joint venture with VS, so that DL can serve LHR from those major markets.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and yet DL provides more seats to LHR on its own metal than AA does from NRT.

LHR is one of DL's largest int'l cities and a city that DL didn't even serve 10 years ago.

DL has done extraordinarily well at LHR on its own metal, far larger than AA has done in NRT which it has served for far longer.

and again, some people just can't accept that DL is simply reallocating capacity from its int'l to domestic network because it has an identical product in both markets and because the JV with VS allows DL to maintain its presence.

and no one has yet to demonstrate this is anything but a temporary measure.

 

[700UW]

What does NRT have to do with anything?
 
Another topic heading to be locked because of you.
 
Yep its done so well thats why they are outsourcing the flights to VS.
 
You are living in your own Delta world.