DL CEO hints at PVG hub

[WorldTraveler]

when you use the same arguments that people on a.net use, it is pretty obvious where you have been

I absolutely get the nature of the Chinese gov't.

DL and Aeroflot have had a relationship with the Russians for years.

and, no, just because you are state owned doesn't mean that they are subsidized.

DL HAS PARTNERS that it is working with in China - right now involving codesharing.

btw, what DL is doing with its Chinese partners is no different from what AA does with Lan/Tam and AA only has a JV with a small part of that group.

and once again the difference is that the ME3 have a primary focus to steal business from other carriers; the Chinese airlines do not have that goal or if they do, they certainly not achieving it.

the Chinese airlines largely serve the Chinese market. It is with strong global carriers that they stand a chance of changing that.

 

[topDawg]

good.

we'll put you down in the naysayer column that will be shocked when DL actually succeeds at developing deeper relationships with Chinese carriers that many like yourself and E think aren't possible.

I don't think I said that, 
 
However you are on coke (or know nothing about China) if you think a bilateral that allows a DL/KL type relationship between DL/CZ or DL/CZ or DL/CZ/MU is anywhere close to being remotely possible in the near to mid term. It might happen 50 years from now, but it wont happen while Anderson is at Delta. 
 
China isn't signing up for open skies. The last time the US and China went to bilateral negos the US wanted open skies, the best they got was a promise to talk about it in 2012......which those talks lasted minutes with China quickly ruling it out. 

 

[topDawg]

when you use the same arguments that people on a.net use, it is pretty obvious where you have been

I absolutely get the nature of the Chinese gov't.

DL and Aeroflot have had a relationship with the Russians for years.

and, no, just because you are state owned doesn't mean that they are subsidized.

DL HAS PARTNERS that it is working with in China - right now involving codesharing.

btw, what DL is doing with its Chinese partners is no different from what AA does with Lan/Tam and AA only has a JV with a small part of that group.

and once again the difference is that the ME3 have a primary focus to steal business from other carriers; the Chinese airlines do not have that goal or if they do, they certainly not achieving it.

the Chinese airlines largely serve the Chinese market. It is with strong global carriers that they stand a chance of changing that.

Again, not anything even remotely close to the relationship Delta has with AF/KL or AZ..... 
 
I don't think anyone is saying DL/MU wont codeshare and even co-locate when they can. A JV and/or ATI are completely out of the question. May want to read what Anderson said again

 

[jcw]

when you use the same arguments that people on a.net use, it is pretty obvious where you have been

I absolutely get the nature of the Chinese gov't.

DL and Aeroflot have had a relationship with the Russians for years.

and, no, just because you are state owned doesn't mean that they are subsidized.

DL HAS PARTNERS that it is working with in China - right now involving codesharing.

btw, what DL is doing with its Chinese partners is no different from what AA does with Lan/Tam and AA only has a JV with a small part of that group.

and once again the difference is that the ME3 have a primary focus to steal business from other carriers; the Chinese airlines do not have that goal or if they do, they certainly not achieving it.

the Chinese airlines largely serve the Chinese market. It is with strong global carriers that they stand a chance of changing that.

 
Sorry dude if you are now the thought police please do not post links to stories from yahoo finance, etc do not start topics etc
 
I'm not posting a.net thoughts - just because you came to that conclusion does not make it fact
 
Once again - I"m glad DL is trying to find a partner in Asia like AA and UA have (oh that's right they both have multiple partners that want to work with them) DL really doesn't have any real Asia partners - while Korean is in skyteam - that relationship is ice cold

 

[Kev3188]

What, you don't want to have your own reality explained to you?

 

[WorldTraveler]

well looky here.

Kev just like E is jumping on every subject he can to lash out at those who are calling out his own stupid labor beliefs.

If you can't win on the subject you are playing, then go create havoc everywhere else. E has "skuled" you well.

The very reason why the Chinese carriers and government have had no interest in Open Skies is the very same reason why the Latins have been reluctant - because they would be destroyed by US carriers who offer a far better product and have far better networks.

The Chinese carriers are very much aware of their poor product relative to US and other Asian carriers - but they also know that their market is where the action is.

They have had no reason to do anything that would allow US carriers to grow if they can't get something at least as big or bigger out of the deal.

if a US carrier or two decides to do JVs and help PVG and PEK become true transit hubs that compete alongside TYO, ICN, and HKG, you can bet the Chinese would be interested.

just like E, you fail to understand the real issues and dynamics and therefore continue to argue that status quo can't change.

Mr. Anderson and Mr. Hauenstein are both far smarter than that. and you.

 

[Kev3188]

I haven't "argued" either way on the status quo.

My comment was directed towards JCW's "thought police" comment.

 

[WorldTraveler]

yeah we get that.

you wade into arguments that you otherwise won't because you want to join the pile-on against those that pile-on against you.

problem for you is that I can see where the Chinese market is going and just like, the famous "WN will kick DL's butt in ATL" argument, most of the people who argue here have no understanding of the issues or strategies at play in those markets and that is why they look like fools as the situation plays out and they are proven wrong.

DL is well aware of the issues involved in being a part of change in the Chinese market. Do you not think that NW was just as innovative and willing to break the status quo when it build its hub at HND post WWII?

and no one is being a thought police to anyone. I am telling jcw to be at least creative in his arguments. Copying the very same arguments that have been made on another website makes it pretty clear that no original thought is involved. and that WILL BE DULY NOTED - to use your own words.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

DL has antitrust immunity with KE; it is unknown if they use it but it is doubtful they do. DL has not chosen to develop a joint venture. I'm not sure what other airlines have ATI with a carrier that they don't use in a JV.

the notion that "the Chinese are the Chinese and can't be trusted to engage in open and fair business" while the US can sign Open Skies agreements with countries that subsidize their carriers far beyond anything the US has ever seen (words of the DOT) is nothing but racism.

 
Seems kind of illogical to me for DL not to work out their differences with KE and go for a JV/ATI deal ( given that an open skies agreement is in place between USA-S. Korea).
 
There is nothing racist about not trusting the Chinese.  If you think the Chinese aren't as shrewd or afraid to violate international agreements as long as it benefits them, well I'm sorry but I'm going to have to question your expertise in the field of Sino foreign policy.

 

[WorldTraveler]

You clearly don't understand that DL has worked with KE for years. they don't want a JV because it would shrink the size of their market.

They are in exactly the same position as AS... they don't want to cooperate so DL will compete with them. Much of the Korean carriers' market from the US to Asia is filled with Chinese carriers. If KE doesn't want to cooperate with DL then DL will serve the market from within China and it will cost KE dearly.

since we are having a discussion about the US playing a bait and switch game with Mexico, it is clear that the US can and does the very same thing.

 

[topDawg]

well looky here.

Kev just like E is jumping on every subject he can to lash out at those who are calling out his own stupid labor beliefs.

If you can't win on the subject you are playing, then go create havoc everywhere else. E has "skuled" you well.

The very reason why the Chinese carriers and government have had no interest in Open Skies is the very same reason why the Latins have been reluctant - because they would be destroyed by US carriers who offer a far better product and have far better networks.

The Chinese carriers are very much aware of their poor product relative to US and other Asian carriers - but they also know that their market is where the action is.

They have had no reason to do anything that would allow US carriers to grow if they can't get something at least as big or bigger out of the deal.

if a US carrier or two decides to do JVs and help PVG and PEK become true transit hubs that compete alongside TYO, ICN, and HKG, you can bet the Chinese would be interested.

just like E, you fail to understand the real issues and dynamics and therefore continue to argue that status quo can't change.

Mr. Anderson and Mr. Hauenstein are both far smarter than that. and you.

Ahem, you do know you are famous for doing the exact same thing right? (minus the pro-labor part) 

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'll stand by my track record of what I have spoken about.

I don't care if anyone can speak about multiple subjects and do it accurately.

In this case, the very same mindset is being demonstrated by many of the same people who can't think outside of the box and said that DL couldn't defend itself in ATL, couldn't make a refinery work, couldn't build SEA.....

 

[topDawg]

I'll stand by my track record of what I have spoken about.

I don't care if anyone can speak about multiple subjects and do it accurately.

In this case, the very same mindset is being demonstrated by many of the same people who can't think outside of the box and said that DL couldn't defend itself in ATL, couldn't make a refinery work, couldn't build SEA.....

So it is okay for you to do it, but the rest of us can't? 

 

[jcw]

It's called double standard

 

[WorldTraveler]

anyone can and does build their own track record.

I still will argue and the future will become proof that China is willing to move into a new role in global aviation - not just as a destination but as a true transit hub - IF they can get (a) large enough partner(s) who will ensure that the Chinese win and not just give away more access to foreign carriers.

It is precisely that kind of solution that US carriers have to present to foreign carriers in order to build their networks in high growth areas of the world using ATI, JV, and advanced aviation relationships that are currently used almost exclusively by US carriers working with the most developed carriers in Europe and Asia