Delta loads new DAL flights
- Thread starter WorldTraveler
- Start date
- Status
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
that's awesome E 
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #348
if it takes locking competitors out of the market in order for them to be profitable, then it isn't in the best interests of consumers or ultimately the businesses themselves.
Can you imagine the outrage if ORD or ATL or DFW told the DOJ that they wouldn't allow a whole set of airlines in - whether it be foreign or the ME3 or LCCs? That is the same type of thing the DOJ wants us to believe is good for everyone despite the fact that WN's average fares are growing faster than anyone else and its costs are no longer significantly different from other carriers - which means they can't price their product all in at a significant discount.
Can you imagine the outrage if ORD or ATL or DFW told the DOJ that they wouldn't allow a whole set of airlines in - whether it be foreign or the ME3 or LCCs? That is the same type of thing the DOJ wants us to believe is good for everyone despite the fact that WN's average fares are growing faster than anyone else and its costs are no longer significantly different from other carriers - which means they can't price their product all in at a significant discount.
Kev3188
Veteran
Sure, as long as that consumer has money in hand...eolesen said:
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #350
and please let us know what airline in still a charity.
Note that DL's average fare growth was well below the growth rate of WN... clearly not as pro-consumer as DL.
Note that DL's average fare growth was well below the growth rate of WN... clearly not as pro-consumer as DL.
blue collar
Veteran
- Mar 17, 2008
- 1,241
- 901
So fare growth = bad, but growth rate = good? Or is it just DL = good, and everyone else = bad? If there was a WT for WN, they'd be saying how good it is that WN is tapping into new revenue. Apparently WN is the newest threat to DL, seeing the way you're on full attack mode- maybe it's because their 'brand' won't ever be as popular as WN's?
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #352
investors in airlines want fare growth but consumers don't. That is the reality in any business.
When your average fares are growing faster than any of your competitors, it will invite criticism from consumer groups and the government, regardless of the industry.
You have it the other way around regarding who is a threat to who. it is WN that is trying to keep from keeping DL from competing with WN, not the other way around. Given that WN has not grown its presence in any key DL hub, it isn't a surprise why WN wants to avoid confrontation with DL.... but let's be honest that WN has long avoided direct competition with the legacy carriers and pulled back from US at PHL as well.
The whole DAL discussion wouldn't be taking place if WN embraced competition at DAL by all carriers... but they don't want to do that, instead seeking a protected market where they can avoid competition, esp. from legacy carriers.
When your average fares are growing faster than any of your competitors, it will invite criticism from consumer groups and the government, regardless of the industry.
You have it the other way around regarding who is a threat to who. it is WN that is trying to keep from keeping DL from competing with WN, not the other way around. Given that WN has not grown its presence in any key DL hub, it isn't a surprise why WN wants to avoid confrontation with DL.... but let's be honest that WN has long avoided direct competition with the legacy carriers and pulled back from US at PHL as well.
The whole DAL discussion wouldn't be taking place if WN embraced competition at DAL by all carriers... but they don't want to do that, instead seeking a protected market where they can avoid competition, esp. from legacy carriers.
The 2 gates at LF are not the issue WT? Really? Did you really just state that? There you go again twisting shite up again. You are just classic man. I just laugh my a$$ off at your postings and rhetoric, please keep posting your idiotic postings. LMAO...
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #355
of course you are laughing because you can't see that the real issue is competitiveness and the fact that WN doesn't have the mojo it once had and doesn't want to compete against carriers who can.
I still stand by my statement that DL will be at DAL and that WN will have to compete against DL, a carrier that WN has been trying to avoid competing with.
The truth is very much that WN is less able to gain in the marketplace like it once did.... I've said it for years and the media is putting out one article after another that WN doesn't have the advantages it once had - average fare and cost increases that are higher than other carriers.
Meanwhile, DL is being lauded in the press for one thing after another. DL is a serious competitor and marks the advent of the resurgent legacy carrier segment which WN doesn't want to see.
This is good stuff - DL keeps upping the bar for the entire industry on its climb to the top.
BTW, DL's flights from DAL after the WA falls are STILL for sale.
Kev3188
Veteran
DL is for the people...
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #358
since DL's flights to/from DAL are still for sale, they haven't thrown in the towel yet... nor will they make any decision unless their efforts to fly to DAl are futile.
if it was really as open and shut case by DAL, WN, or the DOJ to get DL out of DAL, the schedules would have been pulled a long time ago.
Funny thing is that WN is the one that pushed its advocacy for the people but that is hard to claim now that they want to be the only show in town.... monopolies aren't good for consumers.
so, yeah, DL has figured out how to be for the people and still make money too.
Yes E. And now he is claiming that he all along was saying that Delta will still fly out of DAL. I have said all along that Delta is free to stay at DAL, it just won't be by the 2 gates being divested by AA. There are other gates Delta could use. He has twisted just enough again, from the guarantee Delta will get the gates to now just trying to stay at DAL. The usual twist and change from WT when he gets proven wrong.
And let's get one thing clear WT. Nobody is actively trying to remove Dl from DAL, not DAL, SWA, DOJ nobody you listed. It may come true when this is all said and done, but it is not due to someone trying to force Delta out. It will just be a mere result, if you will, of the divesture requirements brought forth by the DOJ for the merger of AA and US. But hey look at the bright side. There are 2 gates across the way over at the old Legend Airlines terminal. Maybe Delta could talk them into using them
And let's get one thing clear WT. Nobody is actively trying to remove Dl from DAL, not DAL, SWA, DOJ nobody you listed. It may come true when this is all said and done, but it is not due to someone trying to force Delta out. It will just be a mere result, if you will, of the divesture requirements brought forth by the DOJ for the merger of AA and US. But hey look at the bright side. There are 2 gates across the way over at the old Legend Airlines terminal. Maybe Delta could talk them into using them
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #360
I'm still saying DL will fly out of DAL. Given that DL hasn't pulled its flights despite you telling them they had no chance at those two gates, they apparently aren't giving up.
it is simply delusional to argue that the DOJ is not trying to push DL out when they currently serve the airport so that they can rearrange the deck and bring in either a carrier that has never served DAL or allow WN to grow further. Given that the DOJ made the ballsy statement that the legacy carriers collude among themselves and shouldn't be allowed to have a larger presence - something they failed to prove and will be brought up if the case goes to court - you can't argue that the DOJ is acting on anything other than that WN got to them first and filled their minds with marketing sewage which has no basis in reality.
What you and don't want to hear is that there is a strong, resurgent legacy carrier that is challenging WN at every turn and isn't about to let WN dominate an airport that DL served long before you or WN ever existed.
it is simply delusional to argue that the DOJ is not trying to push DL out when they currently serve the airport so that they can rearrange the deck and bring in either a carrier that has never served DAL or allow WN to grow further. Given that the DOJ made the ballsy statement that the legacy carriers collude among themselves and shouldn't be allowed to have a larger presence - something they failed to prove and will be brought up if the case goes to court - you can't argue that the DOJ is acting on anything other than that WN got to them first and filled their minds with marketing sewage which has no basis in reality.
What you and don't want to hear is that there is a strong, resurgent legacy carrier that is challenging WN at every turn and isn't about to let WN dominate an airport that DL served long before you or WN ever existed.
- Status
