Delta loads new DAL flights

[WorldTraveler]

so you want to go there? 
 
WN not only lost 20% of its local market share at ATL, allowed DL to increase its average fares, AND AND AND pulled down connecting capacity that had no effect on the local market but it happened anyway.
 
WN paid $2B for FL and then has been in a hasty withdrawal ever since, even leaving DL the 717s that FL used as WN left the city.  Better yet, WN even refurbished the aircraft to DL's standards and did periodic maintenance.

 

[swamt]

Yes ATL has changed.  Yes SWA has reduced and or canceled flights.  But AT's current route structure was not the same as SWA's at all the other airports SWA serves.  ATL turned into a work in progress to make it a better fit for the way SWA operates at all airports in order to make it efficient like the others.  Yes SWA is reducing flights and revamping at ALT, but I assure you, SWA is in no way retreating from the comp at ATL with Delta.  Matter fact SWA is growing ATL but adding new routes to ALT, and when the W/A is gone SWA will add ATL to DAL in direct competition with AA and others.  I do not know if Delta does DFW to ATL, do they?  But if they don't will they pick up the route?  If they do, we will see their passenger numbers go down after SWA starts the DAL-ATL. 
 
You said it yourself above;  by SWA reducing flights 20% (this is your percentile number not mine) it has allowed DL to "increase" it's average fares.  Which is exactly why Delta will not be getting any of the divested gates that AA must give up.  It also proves the point of the DOJ, that they should go to LCC in order to help lower fares for competition, NOT "increase fares".
 
WT, when will you grasp the fact that we do not any 717's, they are to costly to run.  They cost the same to operate as the 737's and the 37's have a lot more seats which therefore decrease the cost per seat mile and are much more efficient to use.  SWA was more than happy to mod the 717's just to get rid of them.  besides that, all the 717's are getting replaced by 37's so there's really no lost in seat count at all, matter fact it will more than likely increase seat count as the 37's hold more...
 
Bottom line here is Delta pulled well over 200 flights out of DFW.  SWA is no where near that number at ATL, and if you want to use percentiles, and I will use your number for SWA (even though I have no clue if it is true) 20% reduction at ATL;   Delta is at 83.3% retreat out of DFW, and not adding any to the DFW market like SWA currently is and will in the future. Yes it will take awhile to get ATL back to the size it once was when served by AT because SWA has other more important cities and routes to address first, and Boeing still cannot produce enough planes for SWA's potential growth plans...

 

[WorldTraveler]

Are you serious?  You're the child of a DL employee and you don't know if DL flies DFW-ATL?  It's only one of the original routes DL flew... albeit with multiple stops.
 
Sorry, but your logic about reduced fares for DL at ATL doesn't work because it is precisely what has happened in N. Texas.  As much as you want to argue otherwise, WN HAS THE HIGHEST average fare in the markets it serves from DAL compared to AA's and other fares from DFW. 
 
AA is NOT a low fare leader.  Not from DAL.
 
I get you don't want the 717s.  I'm just grateful that DL got such a great deal on them and WN is willing to spend $100M of their money to get rid of them.... some of which will be used on direct-WN competitive routes like ATL-AUS-LAX. 
 
You're just a WN mechanic so I'm sure you can't grasp it, but the vast majority of passengers that DL carried from DFW were CONNECTING there and are connecting elsewhere on DL's network today.  You can't argue that WN pulled down ATL because it didn't need the connecting capacity at ATL - which I agree it didn't - and then hold DL responsible for doing the same thing at DFW a decade ago.
 
WN has cancelled service to 18 cities since the merger, many of which were served from ATL.  DL did the same thing at DFW.  The difference is that DL has more than made up in local market revenue for what it lost.  WN might do the same thing at ATL in time but for now it is no more accurate to argue that WN should be given a pass for what it has done in ATL but DL didn't do the same thing.
 
Also noted in the traffic reports that WN Is the smallest of the big 4 airlines in domestic RPMs. 

 

[LD3]

 
You're just a WN mechanic so I'm sure you can't grasp it, 

Wow, you never cease to amaze me.... You are the first one to complain about name calling, but with a twist of words, you do the same...

 

[WorldTraveler]

so he's not an WN mechanic?
 
I haven't repeated about 30 times that DL gave up the DFW market because of pulling down the hub.  DL lost the connecting capacity over DFW.  There are ample statistics to show that DL's share of the local market didn't change much and its revenue share has improved quite a bit in the past several years.
 
DL operated in the shadow of AA for years and never was able to obtain premium revenues relative to AA in most of the markets DL served.  DL's local market presence is much stronger today despite not having dozens of planes parked at the terminal at the same time.
 
I'm not sure how anyone who even remotely understands the airline industry can't grasp the concept, esp. since swamt uses the same argument to defend what WN has done in ATL - which I accepted.
 
He wanted to go for another round, so I did. 

 

[swamt]

WT, You are so off base.  Where have I ever said I was a child of a DL employee?  NEVER. 
DL dropped over 220 flights from DFW.  This is in no way JUST the connecting flights at DFW that DL dropped.
How many flights does DL operate from DFW now WT?
The DFW and Delta reduction, and the SWA at ATL reduction are two very different reductions, as far as reasons.  You, sir, are the one that does not comprehend (GRASP in your language) that they differ in reality. 
The reason I don't know if Delta has routes from DFW to ATL is because I don't care, don't give two shits about it. 
Delta is out of the full loop at LF as far as the gates are concerned and you, sir, are completely pissed off that this is fact and that I was right from the very beginning.  Get over it. move on, and except the facts, Delta WILL NOT get the gates and soon will be gone from LF---PERIOD!!!

 

[eolesen]

You're just a WN mechanic so I'm sure you can't grasp it, but the vast majority of passengers that DL carried from DFW were CONNECTING there and are connecting elsewhere on DL's network today.

Dunno, seems like swaamt has grasped quite a few of the facts, as opposed to being a cheerleader...

Trying to argue that DL's 83% downsizing is the same as FL/WN's 20% downsizing?...

Absurd.

In raw theory, yes, they both abandoned connecting traffic, but you can't even start to compare the scale of the two actions, nor can you ignore the post-decision scale of the two operations.

There were over 2000 layoffs when DL cut DFW, and I'm not sure that includes the 200 or so when they closed down the maintenance hangar. ASA took the brunt of the ground employee cuts, since they were operating significantly more departures than DL.

The impact on employees at FL hasn't come anywhere near that, mainly because WN also increased frequency in its hub-hub markets. Once the full integration of WN and FL is complete, I'd expect more incremental growth.

 

[700UW]

Dont forget they ran from MCO also.

 

[FWAAA]

You're just a WN mechanic so I'm sure you can't grasp it, but the vast majority of passengers that DL carried from DFW were CONNECTING there and are connecting elsewhere on DL's network today.  You can't argue that WN pulled down ATL because it didn't need the connecting capacity at ATL - which I agree it didn't - and then hold DL responsible for doing the same thing at DFW a decade ago.

Just another example.   Very classy, WT, very classy.    
 
You continue to insist in your delusional fantasy world that it's the facts you post that cause so many people to dislike you.   It's not the facts;   it's BS like that above behind your lack of online friends,  except of course for those you create, like Spectator and others who will vote this post down.   

 

[WorldTraveler]

It doesn't matter who it involves... we have had the discussion about flow vs. local capacity and market share dozens of times.  It doesn't matter who it is addressed to - if they can't get the concept but continue to argue it, then it is not me who demonstrates a lack of ability of discuss pertinent topics.
 
There is a point at which every needs to step out of any conversation based on their ability to understand the subject.
 
As much as I have ragged on AA for closing hubs, not once have I ever said that AA should have kept BNA, RDU, or STL open because they were losing valuable flow share.
 
I get the rationale that has been stated that AA closed RDU and BNA in order to build up MIA.
 
STL was excess capacity to AA's network.
 
My beef with AA in each of those cases is that they lost their market share EVEN IN THE LOCAL MARKETS.
 
DL was #2 at DFW in local traffic and #3 in the Metroplex both during the days of the hub there and now.
 
DL had fully intended to grow its Metroplex presence via DAL and if they don't do that and fall permanently to #4 or below to other carriers, then there will be full justification for saying that DL has failed.
 
I am certain that DL will move forward with a plan to grow its N. Texas operations regardless of the outcome of the two gates.  That was the intention before and there is no reason to think that won't still happen.
 
my apologies, swamt, for thinking you were the son of a DL employee.  there is another WN forum participant, perhaps it is WNmech, who has written that their parent was/is a DL employee and that they couldn't be hired by DL because of DL's nepotism rules.

 

[swamt]

Thx WT, and yes it must be someone else.  As far as the latest details I am going refrain from any more postings unless more info come to light about the LF gates.

 

[WorldTraveler]

thx...that seems prudent. 
 
And I will stay away from the WN cut ATL routine as long as you are willing to leave what DL has done at DFW off the table.  sound fair?
 
a woman is either pregnant or not. you don't cut a hub as a hub just a little bit. It is either still a hub and there is clear evidence of significant amounts of connecting traffic or the city now serves the local market only for an airline.
 
All four of the big 4 have cut hubs/large focus cities to reduce connecting capacity.  It comes down to the size of the carrier in the local market.  Some carriers have done a better job of retaining their share in the local market after the hub cuts than others.  Given the continued movement in the industry, including AA's merger with US, it is hard to say at this time how each carrier's share will end up in each of the markets that were once hubs.

 

[eolesen]

And I will stay away from the WN cut ATL routine as long as you are willing to leave what DL has done at DFW off the table.  sound fair?
 
a woman is either pregnant or not. you don't cut a hub as a hub just a little bit. It is either still a hub and there is clear evidence of significant amounts of connecting traffic or the city now serves the local market only for an airline.
 
All four of the big 4 have cut hubs/large focus cities to reduce connecting capacity.  It comes down to the size of the carrier in the local market.  Some carriers have done a better job of retaining their share in the local market after the hub cuts than others.  Given the continued movement in the industry, including AA's merger with US, it is hard to say at this time how each carrier's share will end up in each of the markets that were once hubs.

Yeah, that's not going to happen....

Here are what the DOT's stats show for market share at ATL in 2009 vs. 2013.

Granted, it's not divided out by local vs. connecting, but a paying passenger is a paying passenger.

Essentially, WN+FL's boardings at ATL are only down about 75% from where they were in 2009, and they're still holding onto a 14% share of the total traffic at ATL, which is a respectable share.

To put the scale of WN's ATL operation into perspective, WN carried 477,000 more customers @ ATL than DL did @ JFK & LGA combined during in 2013. And that's down about 25% from what they were carrying pre-merger...


The math doesn't lie, and it's why trying to argue that what WN has done in ATL is akin to what DL did in DFW is absurd.

Likewise, trying to intimate that it's even remotely similar to what DL did in MEM or CVG. No comparison to what AA did in STL, BNA, or RDU, or what UA's planning to do in CLE.


Them's facts, guys. Try to argue that downsizing ATL was de-hubbing, but WN's operation at ATL is a very rare example of de-hubbing without sacrificing a lot of share in the process.

Now WT, you're free to argue that O&D shares are all that matter, but since FL was running a connecting hub, and WN isn't relying on connecting flow, their local share could really only have gone up.

 

[WorldTraveler]

First of all, the WN/FL merger closed on May 2, 2011, not 2009.  
 
 
Of course you don't have data looking specifically at the local market but the DOT does provide it.
 
In fairness to WN/FL, WN's share is measured for just the United States.... FL's few Caribbean routes have little effect on their total share and it isn't fair to compare them to DL's network in other cities.
 
On that basis, DL and DCI carried 62% of the ATL local US market while FL carried 23% in the summer of 2011.  In the most recent reported quarter, 2 years later, WN/FL carried just under 17% while DL grew to 66 points of market share.  
 
WN/FL lost 6 points of market share while DL gained 4  Most of the rest of what FL lost went to US. 
 
Despite cutting far more flights from DFW, DL's market share only dropped by 8 points, very little more than FL/WN who have cut far fewer flights.
 
Further, in the same period of time, AA's share has dropped by 6 points, due largely to low fare carriers such as VX, B6, and NK.
 
So, it is NOT at all accurate to argue that WN's pulldown at ATL is exempt from being lumped into the same category as DL's pulldown of DFW as a hub and in fact, DL has done a better job of growing its revenue despite the downsizing than FL has done in ATL.  DL's revenue share on the DFW local market only fell by 4% while FL/WN's retained the same proportions to passenger share.   
 
DL's pulldown at DFW lopped off lots of connecting traffic and yet DL is a stronger carrier from a revenue standpoint relative to AA in the local DFW market - while AA has itself also lost share - than WN has done in ATL.  
 
WN's local market share WENT DOWN, E, by 6 points.  
 
WN's average fares have increased, but so has the overall ATL market.  And every market that WN pulls out of from ATL has resulted in DL's average fares in the market going up faster.  That is precisely why DL has consistently said that DL's profit margins at ATL have improved since the FL/WN merger took place.   

 

[swamt]

Just curious if Delta has refunded all the tickets they were selling?   This will certainly be a big burden on a lot of folks who were counting on making those flights.  But look at it this way.  They will move over to one of the 2, SWA or VX, and end up saving more money anyway.  Our CEO has put out that they will have an award soon...