DL expands SEA further with SEA-SFO flights
- Thread starter WorldTraveler
- Start date
- Status
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #572
DL pilots are being told that DL is looking at a combination of gate swaps and new construction that would give DL between 25-30 gates at SEA, comparable to what DL has at JFK.
By that definition, DL would have more than enough capacity to operate a true int'l hub with more than enough int'l feed to the top Asian markets.
Also, DL pilots are already being told that plans are underway to move narrowbody mainline aircraft onto routes that currently operate or will soon start with large RJs.
As I have noted, DL is now very careful about taking on strategically what it make sure it succeeds at... there is no reason to doubt the SEA buildup isn' the same thing.
By that definition, DL would have more than enough capacity to operate a true int'l hub with more than enough int'l feed to the top Asian markets.
Also, DL pilots are already being told that plans are underway to move narrowbody mainline aircraft onto routes that currently operate or will soon start with large RJs.
As I have noted, DL is now very careful about taking on strategically what it make sure it succeeds at... there is no reason to doubt the SEA buildup isn' the same thing.
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #574
and the real question is to compare DL's growth in SEA with AA's in NYC.
B6 and AA have severed their commercial relationship but other than the NYC-hub routes that US already flew, how is the combined airline any stronger at NYC than what they were before.
IN contrast, DL has significantly grown at SEA and will be a much larger part of the SEA market than they were before.
Lots of people have argued that AS should ditch the relationship with DL and yet fail to grasp that both had clear contractual obligations. IN the absence of DL obtaining what it was supposed to obtain from AS, it was free to do what it has now done.
dawg,
you are dead on about LAX-BOS but in terms of losses and the strategic necessity.... but there have been a lot of other routes that the big 3 or 5 or 6 (depending on how many legacy airlines there were) all called strategically necessary and have slowly been whittled down to a subset of the megacarriers.
B6 and AA have severed their commercial relationship but other than the NYC-hub routes that US already flew, how is the combined airline any stronger at NYC than what they were before.
IN contrast, DL has significantly grown at SEA and will be a much larger part of the SEA market than they were before.
Lots of people have argued that AS should ditch the relationship with DL and yet fail to grasp that both had clear contractual obligations. IN the absence of DL obtaining what it was supposed to obtain from AS, it was free to do what it has now done.
dawg,
you are dead on about LAX-BOS but in terms of losses and the strategic necessity.... but there have been a lot of other routes that the big 3 or 5 or 6 (depending on how many legacy airlines there were) all called strategically necessary and have slowly been whittled down to a subset of the megacarriers.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
You might want to wait a year to start your comparisons.
The combination of transcons, international service, and the Shuttle was one of the biggest incentives for a lot of corporate contracts to shift share over to DL over the past five years.
Nobody else could match that until now, so the corporate contracts stayed put.
Now that there's a competitor, and with DL's changes to both SkyPesos accrual and qualifying, I suspect you'll see some of DL's share eroding over the next 6-18 months.
It takes a while for that to show up because corporate contracts tend to fall on a renewal cycle, and the agencies doing the work are still under an obligation to meet their quotas under the existing contracts. Once those quotas are met and/or the agreements expire, you'll start to see shift.
The combination of transcons, international service, and the Shuttle was one of the biggest incentives for a lot of corporate contracts to shift share over to DL over the past five years.
Nobody else could match that until now, so the corporate contracts stayed put.
Now that there's a competitor, and with DL's changes to both SkyPesos accrual and qualifying, I suspect you'll see some of DL's share eroding over the next 6-18 months.
It takes a while for that to show up because corporate contracts tend to fall on a renewal cycle, and the agencies doing the work are still under an obligation to meet their quotas under the existing contracts. Once those quotas are met and/or the agreements expire, you'll start to see shift.
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #576
E.
of course the story is continually being written.... but you and the AA fan club have repeatedly tried to count the benefits of the merger before it actually has happened and by refusing to accept the legitimate strategic challenges that new AA faces which I and others have noted.
Yes, the intent is for AA to be a stronger company as a result of the merger. But let's also be clear that AA/US is the last major merger to happen in the US, AA/US is paying the highest price to make the merger happen that any US airline has ever paid, AA/US has some inherent challenges as a result of having protected markets (N. Texas, LHR, and S. America) which are all becoming open at the same time that other carriers are growing rapidly in those regions, and most significantly because it is far from certain that the revenue benefits that other carriers gained as a result of their mergers will be AA's to enjoy.
Much of DL's benefits came because it reduced capacity. AA/US was created with the promise of being the largest airline but that size advantage came in the domestic US market, not in int'l markets. Thus, why would DL, UA, and WN be willing to maintain capacity discipline in order to allow AA to maintain a size advantage? They have no incentive to help AA win and that is precisely why you are seeing DL grow domestic capacity and move into key AA markets. UA and WN will do the same eventually.. WN just has no aircraft to grow domestically even with the all of the growth opportunities at DAL and DCA plus the beginnings of int'l growth. UA has unique structural problems such as their high use of small RJs that they have to address.
As for the Skypesos comment, the purpose of loyalty programs in any business is to drive premium revenue, not to reward passengers because they just pay average fares. DL is getting revenue premiums despite having what some call a poor loyalty program. that says that DL understands the reasons for incentive programs and are properly using them with the right customers.
I have long said that AA will likely end up better than it is now but will gain some of its benefits from UA.
of course the story is continually being written.... but you and the AA fan club have repeatedly tried to count the benefits of the merger before it actually has happened and by refusing to accept the legitimate strategic challenges that new AA faces which I and others have noted.
Yes, the intent is for AA to be a stronger company as a result of the merger. But let's also be clear that AA/US is the last major merger to happen in the US, AA/US is paying the highest price to make the merger happen that any US airline has ever paid, AA/US has some inherent challenges as a result of having protected markets (N. Texas, LHR, and S. America) which are all becoming open at the same time that other carriers are growing rapidly in those regions, and most significantly because it is far from certain that the revenue benefits that other carriers gained as a result of their mergers will be AA's to enjoy.
Much of DL's benefits came because it reduced capacity. AA/US was created with the promise of being the largest airline but that size advantage came in the domestic US market, not in int'l markets. Thus, why would DL, UA, and WN be willing to maintain capacity discipline in order to allow AA to maintain a size advantage? They have no incentive to help AA win and that is precisely why you are seeing DL grow domestic capacity and move into key AA markets. UA and WN will do the same eventually.. WN just has no aircraft to grow domestically even with the all of the growth opportunities at DAL and DCA plus the beginnings of int'l growth. UA has unique structural problems such as their high use of small RJs that they have to address.
As for the Skypesos comment, the purpose of loyalty programs in any business is to drive premium revenue, not to reward passengers because they just pay average fares. DL is getting revenue premiums despite having what some call a poor loyalty program. that says that DL understands the reasons for incentive programs and are properly using them with the right customers.
I have long said that AA will likely end up better than it is now but will gain some of its benefits from UA.
topDawg
Veteran
- Nov 23, 2010
- 2,957
- 2,298
Delta pilots also think DFW is coming back with MD90s. Delta is opening a GUM base and that the new 333s can fly ATL-SIN non-stop. (with paxs) In other words, they don't know jack crap.WorldTraveler said:
Having said that, Delta posted one of the latest pilot base visits on DeltaNet. I can promise you the number of gates being talked about isn't anywhere remotely close to 25.
And gate swaps? with who? before you post a rumor look at the airport WT. Unless WN or AS are giving up space, Or AA/HA/UA are going to quit flying to SEA, then Delta isn't going to be adding much space. It sounds like US will be moving to the current AA gates on D and Delta is going to take the 4 or 5 US gates on A. UA just moved to A(as did HA) to give AS more room in N.
and the only place that can really grow at SEA is N, which is why AS wanted complete control.
gah, crew rumors are the worst.
Why? is it impossible for you not to drag another carrier into the topic? Delta at SEA has nothing to do with what AA is doing in NYC. Only you would find some way to connect the two.WorldTraveler said:
till now? I'm confused as who we are talking about? In terms of flights and network AA is about 200+ flights short of Delta at LGA/JFK.eolesen said:
and are cutting even more (Just loaded the end of JFK-TPA). AA will be a player, but they are looking down the road at PHL. Good luck when corp. contracts and asking people to connect over a hub when they have non-stop options.
Just ask Delta how well it has been working on the west coast.
and the changes to the SkyMiles program, do you honestly think Delta would make a major change like that without getting an idea of how it would effect the real HVCs? This new program will effect the people who are on the low end, not so much on the high end.
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #578
sorry... but I'm not supposed to believe crew rumors but maintenance rumors are ok?
to be honest, DL does a pretty good job of keeping big strategic issues under wraps until they reveal it.
Airlines always want total control at their home airport - that is nothing new. But SEA is smart enough to know that a dual AS and DL hub has the potential to do far more than leaving their eggs in one basket, esp. since DL will bring longhaul int'l flights on widebody equipment which AS cannot do -at least for years to come.
The advantage that DL could build at SEA is no different from what DL has managed to do at JFK. DL has added service to many of the same airports that B6 also serves... and yet you specifically note that corporate passengers want a full service airline which is why network carriers have an advantage over domestic only airlines like WN. This is exactly the same principle in action. DL has focused on serving as much as B6's network from JFK. DL has space limitations but they will do all they can to do the same at SEA, esp. targeting the biggest and most significant markets for AS.
read back in the thread... the reason why DL at SEA and AA at JFK got connected is because someone posted an article by Cranky saying that perhaps what happened to AA at JFK with B6 will also carry over to DL at SEA.... failing to recognize there are significant DISsimilarities between the two relationships involved (DL-AS, AA-B6)
again, loyalty programs are supposed to provide enough incentive to move business. DL either knows it doesn't have to provide the level of incentive that some people think they should provide and other carriers are providing or DL has other means of gaining business without using the loyalty program as the primary tool.
Given that corporate travel contracts can move fairly easily, I'm betting that DL figures it has the structural ingredients necessary to retain and grow business long term.
to be honest, DL does a pretty good job of keeping big strategic issues under wraps until they reveal it.
Airlines always want total control at their home airport - that is nothing new. But SEA is smart enough to know that a dual AS and DL hub has the potential to do far more than leaving their eggs in one basket, esp. since DL will bring longhaul int'l flights on widebody equipment which AS cannot do -at least for years to come.
The advantage that DL could build at SEA is no different from what DL has managed to do at JFK. DL has added service to many of the same airports that B6 also serves... and yet you specifically note that corporate passengers want a full service airline which is why network carriers have an advantage over domestic only airlines like WN. This is exactly the same principle in action. DL has focused on serving as much as B6's network from JFK. DL has space limitations but they will do all they can to do the same at SEA, esp. targeting the biggest and most significant markets for AS.
read back in the thread... the reason why DL at SEA and AA at JFK got connected is because someone posted an article by Cranky saying that perhaps what happened to AA at JFK with B6 will also carry over to DL at SEA.... failing to recognize there are significant DISsimilarities between the two relationships involved (DL-AS, AA-B6)
again, loyalty programs are supposed to provide enough incentive to move business. DL either knows it doesn't have to provide the level of incentive that some people think they should provide and other carriers are providing or DL has other means of gaining business without using the loyalty program as the primary tool.
Given that corporate travel contracts can move fairly easily, I'm betting that DL figures it has the structural ingredients necessary to retain and grow business long term.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
DL offering 200 more flights doesn't matter if they're not going where the business traffic is. Give it time. AA had to tweak the LGA schedule quickly to deal with the slot divestitures. The mix of markets served is going to change once they've tweaked the whole system, and know what they've got to work with as far as available hours.topDawg said:
The changes to SkyPesos will definitely cull the lower end, but it will also impact the middle. The changes have been out for a month, and nobody else has hinted at matching. If anything, Alaska has dug their feet in the opposite direction, and as the Battle for Seattle continues, they might win a few more converts along the way, and I suspect more than a few current DL loyalists may figure out they're better off flying AS and earning on AA.... especially those who have to book thru corporate agencies and can't use a SkyPesos Amex for the extra points...
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #580
DL offers service to virtually every top market from LGA that is also served by other airlines.
We had great expectations that AA would use the new slots to add service similar to what DL added but they added a bunch of smaller cities using RJs and left major markets like IAH and other hubs unserved.
Again, your view of loyalty programs is tainted as someone who stands to lose by the degradation from your standpoint of the loyalty.
If DL's revenue premium deteriorates, then their program has failed.
given that you and others have called it skypesos for years, I'm not sure how the changes are going to be anywhere near as dramatic as you think.
The bottom line is revenue growth, not stuffing more rewards into the hands of people who may or may not generate more revenue.
DL is profit driven first and foremost.
DL's history over the past years shows they have done a very good job of moving revenue to DL. The fact that they are already upgauging routes from SEA that already were upgraded in frequency shows that DL is either profitable enough that they can dig their heels in to do even deeper damage or really are well on the way to being a viable competitor and AS can't really do anything.
We had great expectations that AA would use the new slots to add service similar to what DL added but they added a bunch of smaller cities using RJs and left major markets like IAH and other hubs unserved.
Again, your view of loyalty programs is tainted as someone who stands to lose by the degradation from your standpoint of the loyalty.
If DL's revenue premium deteriorates, then their program has failed.
given that you and others have called it skypesos for years, I'm not sure how the changes are going to be anywhere near as dramatic as you think.
The bottom line is revenue growth, not stuffing more rewards into the hands of people who may or may not generate more revenue.
DL is profit driven first and foremost.
DL's history over the past years shows they have done a very good job of moving revenue to DL. The fact that they are already upgauging routes from SEA that already were upgraded in frequency shows that DL is either profitable enough that they can dig their heels in to do even deeper damage or really are well on the way to being a viable competitor and AS can't really do anything.
- Banned
- #581
AS CFO talks about DL and SEA
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2014/03/19/alaska-airlines-costs-and-size-will-help.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2014/03/19/alaska-airlines-costs-and-size-will-help.html
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #582
of course he is going to say that AS has what it needs in order to defend its market from DL...
but DL hasn't tried to be a full, direct competitor to AS in every key market. It has taken the highest profile markets that matter the most to DL's network and added capacity in those.
Costs absolutely matter but costs matter a whole lot less because of the different types of networks. DL's is much more int'l focused, including in SEA where DL will connect a high percentage of its capacity to Asia.
As for quality, DL has been ranked as the highest quality US network carrier for a couple of years and has beat AS on some DOT statistics.
Regardless, DL is well on its way to becoming a serious competitor to AS in key markets like LAX-SEA with multiple mainline plus multiple large RJ flights per day at 60-75% of the total number of frequencies that AS offers.
AS' response in DL markets comes nowhere close to what DL offers and the loss of DL codeshares will cause AS to reduce its presence in DL overlap markets while DL will continue with its int'l feed-based hub at SEA.
After this summer, there will be no fight left. It will be apparent that DL has achieved what it needs to do at SEA, the codeshare and relationship will be irrelevant, and SEA will become a two hub city. The few flights that AS can add in other markets will be insignificant in comparison
but DL hasn't tried to be a full, direct competitor to AS in every key market. It has taken the highest profile markets that matter the most to DL's network and added capacity in those.
Costs absolutely matter but costs matter a whole lot less because of the different types of networks. DL's is much more int'l focused, including in SEA where DL will connect a high percentage of its capacity to Asia.
As for quality, DL has been ranked as the highest quality US network carrier for a couple of years and has beat AS on some DOT statistics.
Regardless, DL is well on its way to becoming a serious competitor to AS in key markets like LAX-SEA with multiple mainline plus multiple large RJ flights per day at 60-75% of the total number of frequencies that AS offers.
AS' response in DL markets comes nowhere close to what DL offers and the loss of DL codeshares will cause AS to reduce its presence in DL overlap markets while DL will continue with its int'l feed-based hub at SEA.
After this summer, there will be no fight left. It will be apparent that DL has achieved what it needs to do at SEA, the codeshare and relationship will be irrelevant, and SEA will become a two hub city. The few flights that AS can add in other markets will be insignificant in comparison
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
If the codesharing and relationship are irrelevant, then I guess DL would have no qualms about the agreement being terminated, eh?...
My view remains that the way they've conducted things in SEA is really shortsighted.
WT no doubt sees a win, and will spike the football repeatedly, but it may still come down to winning a play early on, yet still losing the game.
Specifically, going forward, DL's ability to feed its international flights will be increasingly tied to the ability of their regional partners to provide service. That's a serious gamble.
It's a fact that regionals are currently burning the candle from both sides right now: you've got serious attrition (young pilots with sufficient hours leaving for the majors, plus senior pilots approaching Age 65 forced retirement), and a shortage of qualified candidates to backfill that attrition.
The higher tier regionals say they're not seeing the impact, but conventional wisdom says it will eventually catch up to them. Skywest and the others can increase pay, but they can't increase the number of pilots now in the training pipeline. The best they can hope for is someone like Mesa going out of business (they just pulled the plug on what was left of Go!), but that doesn't help in the longer run.
There's little question they've alienated AS, and now have little to fall back on should Skywest be unable to continue to maintain their existing levels of service.
That means DL could be faced with providing the service themselves, or paring it back, and I don't think they'll be in a position to be providing the service themselves.
To be fair, when DL started the Battle for Seattle, the hiring issue wasn't as clear. But, ever since it has firmed up, it seems they've kicked things into a higher gear. Now, they're beyond the point of notching back the throttle, and that stands to hurt them in the long run.
As with all things in this industry, there is risk and reward. I'm still not convinced this was a risk worth taking, and only time will tell if DL gets rewarded.
My view remains that the way they've conducted things in SEA is really shortsighted.
WT no doubt sees a win, and will spike the football repeatedly, but it may still come down to winning a play early on, yet still losing the game.
Specifically, going forward, DL's ability to feed its international flights will be increasingly tied to the ability of their regional partners to provide service. That's a serious gamble.
It's a fact that regionals are currently burning the candle from both sides right now: you've got serious attrition (young pilots with sufficient hours leaving for the majors, plus senior pilots approaching Age 65 forced retirement), and a shortage of qualified candidates to backfill that attrition.
The higher tier regionals say they're not seeing the impact, but conventional wisdom says it will eventually catch up to them. Skywest and the others can increase pay, but they can't increase the number of pilots now in the training pipeline. The best they can hope for is someone like Mesa going out of business (they just pulled the plug on what was left of Go!), but that doesn't help in the longer run.
There's little question they've alienated AS, and now have little to fall back on should Skywest be unable to continue to maintain their existing levels of service.
That means DL could be faced with providing the service themselves, or paring it back, and I don't think they'll be in a position to be providing the service themselves.
To be fair, when DL started the Battle for Seattle, the hiring issue wasn't as clear. But, ever since it has firmed up, it seems they've kicked things into a higher gear. Now, they're beyond the point of notching back the throttle, and that stands to hurt them in the long run.
As with all things in this industry, there is risk and reward. I'm still not convinced this was a risk worth taking, and only time will tell if DL gets rewarded.
topDawg
Veteran
- Nov 23, 2010
- 2,957
- 2,298
I haven't posted any rumors.WorldTraveler said:
not really.
unless they spend a bunch of capital on gates that end up being unused.....
AS isn't B6. honestly they aren't even comparable.
uh....I honestly don't have anything for this one.eolesen said:
Its AA who is dumping business markets.....
I would say LGA-ATL is a much more important route to have, I don't think they are going to be gaining a large share of the corp. market by flying to BTV and TYS.
Delta's network out of NYC is much larger and has much better scope.I am a little amazed that you even made that comment, I can't think of a single business market Delta doesn't fly to from NYC.......
- Status
Similar threads
