DL plans MCO-GRU service

[WorldTraveler]

BSB is a major hub for Gol so it isn't just the BSB local market. But no other US airline serves MCO to Latin America and G3 doesn't have its share of the international market and DL can make that happen
The risk is for AA the most and Azul and TAM who will have stronger carriers on both ends

 

[WorldTraveler]

Correction. No legacy serves MCO to S America and no US airline serves MCO to Brazil

 

[700UW]

Delta filed notice with the DOT that is will be returning total of 6 weekly Brazil frequencies to the DOT.

Specifically 2 ATL-GIG frequencies, 2 frequencies used for unspecified city-pair plus 2 currently unused frequencies

 

[Kev3188]

Given that the U.S. and Brazil will have an Open Skies agreement later this year (correct?), Is this just a formality?

 

[commavia]

Delta filed notice with the DOT that is will be returning total of 6 weekly Brazil frequencies to the DOT.

Specifically 2 ATL-GIG frequencies, 2 frequencies used for unspecified city-pair plus 2 currently unused frequencies

 
Seems like Delta is taking the smart approach with Brazil.  Delta recognizes its network is simply not optimal to compete head-on in Brazil with the likes of AA, TAM, etc., and in a down market, Delta is naturally going to be able to support far less capacity to Brazil than those rivals.  Nonetheless, focusing on markets where Delta is strong (e.g., ATL) and markets with natural O&D that leverage GOL connectivity (e.g., MCO) seems like the best option Delta has.

 

[700UW]

DL cut ATL to Brazil capacity.
 
They cut one flight a day from ATL to GRU and cut all flights from ATL-BSB

 

[WorldTraveler]

Seems like Delta is taking the smart approach with Brazil.  Delta recognizes its network is simply not optimal to compete head-on in Brazil with the likes of AA, TAM, etc., and in a down market, Delta is naturally going to be able to support far less capacity to Brazil than those rivals.  Nonetheless, focusing on markets where Delta is strong (e.g., ATL) and markets with natural O&D that leverage GOL connectivity (e.g., MCO) seems like the best option Delta has.

you might want to look at actual capacity for each carrier before making that statement.

DL has operated a single ATL-GRU flight for years and is doing the very same thing while shifting 4 of its 7 frequencies for ATL-GRU to MCO. ATL-GRU and ATL-GIG are both scheduled with increased capacity on the 333.

The other US carrier that operates US-BSB has not operated it on a daily basis for quite some time.


DL is adding another gateway to Brazil - its fourth - and competing better for the Florida market than it has ever done. DL's Latin America RASM was virtually flat for the 2nd quarter. Let's see how other carriers do when they announce later this week.

again, check how the capacity numbers actually work based on real schedules.

 

[commavia]

No need to check anything.  I'm already well acquainted with reality.  And the reality I already alluded to was that carriers are smartly reducing capacity to Brazil given the softening economy, but Delta's structural weakness vis-a-vis Brazil - particularly compared to AA - and is adjusting its Brazil network accordingly (again, focusing on markets of strength and/or markets where GOL connectivity is particularly relevant).  Not sure what there is to dispute about the above - again, reality.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

DL has operated a single ATL-GRU flight for years and is doing the very same thing while shifting 4 of its 7 frequencies for ATL-GRU to MCO. ATL-GRU and ATL-GIG are both scheduled with increased capacity on the 333.

 
Just curious:  I believe you were saying that it is impossible for DL to use the A330 (operationally) to GRU.  What happened?

 

[WorldTraveler]

If DL starts 330 service to GRU, it likely will be on the new 333s which have higher thrust engines and a higher take off weight. To my knowledge, DL has never brought any of the PMNW 330s (332 or 333) to GRU.

As to the notion that DL has a structural disadvantage, feel free to define it however you would like.

The evidence shows that DL is doing better in maintaining its position in Latin America and generating revenues than other carriers are.

If size is the definition of a structural advantage, then AA has it over EVERY other carrier to Brazil.

But by that token, there are scores of markets where other carriers have a structural advantage over others.

If the issue is serving a particularly gateway over others, then there are equally as many cases where one carrier has it over another.

Plz define "structural advantage" and "structural disadvantage" and don't be surprised if your own definitions are used elsewhere exactly the way you want to use them regarding Brazil service.

meanwhile, DL is adding a 4th gateway and coming closer to competing with MIA and offering better US coverage than not only DL ever has but also better than UA.

 

[commavia]

I'll go ahead and define "structural disadvantage" as Delta having essentially 1/3 the seats to Brazil as AA - and yes, AA does, indeed have this structural advantage relative to just about every other carrier in the U.S.-Brazil market, just as Delta and United have their structural advantage in other places as well.  Meanwhile, congratulations to Delta in "maintaining its position" of being dramatically smaller than AA, and congratulations on opening a "4th gateway" in a hyper-competitive, leisure-dominated market that offers a fraction of the connectivity - either internationally or domestically - as MIA.
 
Reality.

 

[topDawg]

Delta filed notice with the DOT that is will be returning total of 6 weekly Brazil frequencies to the DOT.

Specifically 2 ATL-GIG frequencies, 2 frequencies used for unspecified city-pair plus 2 currently unused frequencies

means next to nothing. Open Skies is coming and the Brazil economy is crap. 
 

If DL starts 330 service to GRU, it likely will be on the new 333s which have higher thrust engines and a higher take off weight. To my knowledge, DL has never brought any of the PMNW 330s (332 or 333) to GRU.

As to the notion that DL has a structural disadvantage, feel free to define it however you would like.

The evidence shows that DL is doing better in maintaining its position in Latin America and generating revenues than other carriers are.

If size is the definition of a structural advantage, then AA has it over EVERY other carrier to Brazil.

But by that token, there are scores of markets where other carriers have a structural advantage over others.

If the issue is serving a particularly gateway over others, then there are equally as many cases where one carrier has it over another.

Plz define "structural advantage" and "structural disadvantage" and don't be surprised if your own definitions are used elsewhere exactly the way you want to use them regarding Brazil service.

meanwhile, DL is adding a 4th gateway and coming closer to competing with MIA and offering better US coverage than not only DL ever has but also better than UA.

 
as of now the plan is to fly any of the 333s Delta has into Brazil. (and FWIW Delta wont have enough 242T 333s to run the Brazil routes only on those aircraft.) 
 
FWIW as i have told you before ATL-GRU is will with-in the range of a 238T or 242T 333. Plenty of other reasons why Delta hasn't flown the 330 into GRU (or Brazil in general) but range/thrust is not the issue. GRUs runways are long enough (same for ATL) that 68K should be able to get the airplane off the ground at full MTOW. 
 
 

 
Just curious:  I believe you were saying that it is impossible for DL to use the A330 (operationally) to GRU.  What happened?

It was wrong then and its wrong now. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

GRU is at 2500 feet of elevation and that is why the current 330s don't work
GIG is at sea level, has a longer runway and doesn't need the new 330s

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

eanwhile, DL is adding a 4th gateway and coming closer to competing with MIA and offering better US coverage than not only DL ever has but also better than UA.

 
MCO vs MIA to South America:  about as close as a lingerie shop without a front window.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

It was wrong then and its wrong now. 

 
 
OMG!