Rumor has it DL PHL-LHR
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #47
since you brought it up, you do realize that AA has no JV partners to China (no US carrier does) and AA had to turn to its Japanese partner to get a JV to HKG?
If JVs come to China (they aren't permitted by the current US-China treaty) DL and UA will have a far greater chance of success in China with them since DL and UA both have much larger partners than AA does.
but, Asia JVs are simply a side show to the reality that the EU demanded that AA/US/BA divest slots to a competitor for PHL-LHR because US wasn't a part of the AA/BA JV but with the merger, the AA/BA would control the PHL-LHR market.
feel free to argue anything else you want but DL is starting PHL-LHR because AA chose to merge with a carrier that had a duopoly with AA's JV partner.
no such arrangement existed in the DL-NW merger.
and because of the AA/US merger, DL will have access to one more market - after BOS - using slots that AA/BA previously controlled.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #49
and what int'l service does ANY other US carrier offer from BOS on its own metal?
and specific to PHL-LHR, can you list the other transoceanic int'l markets that either AA or UA or serve from another carrier's hubs?
let me help you out:
there... that wasn't hard.
PHL-LHR will be a great asset to DL's network.
and specific to PHL-LHR, can you list the other transoceanic int'l markets that either AA or UA or serve from another carrier's hubs?
let me help you out:
there... that wasn't hard.
PHL-LHR will be a great asset to DL's network.
Wow you learned how to use the return or enter button
Your coming along way
Did you hurt your fingers with that - you might want to put ice on them so they don't swell
Yes for example - AA offers LHR and GRU from the DL LAX hub - being that we trash AA's work in LA and how poor of an operation and how large DL is in LA so this would count using all your logic
Your coming along way
Did you hurt your fingers with that - you might want to put ice on them so they don't swell
Yes for example - AA offers LHR and GRU from the DL LAX hub - being that we trash AA's work in LA and how poor of an operation and how large DL is in LA so this would count using all your logic
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #51
LAX is also an AA hub.
The only part of AA's LAX operation that I have "trashed" is their Asian operation.
I have also said that AA will never grow to a size to dominate the market above what other carriers offer.
it is nice for you to put your summary opinions about what I said so everyone can see how far off you are in understanding what has been said.
The only part of AA's LAX operation that I have "trashed" is their Asian operation.
I have also said that AA will never grow to a size to dominate the market above what other carriers offer.
it is nice for you to put your summary opinions about what I said so everyone can see how far off you are in understanding what has been said.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #53
are you keeping track of the number of posts for any reason? do you think that someone is going to care if I hit 100,000?
DL flies from other carrier hubs where other carriers are much larger - and where DL doesn't have a hub presence.
ORD, EWR, and now PHL come to mind.
tell me which DL hubs either AA or UA serve with their own metal longhaul aircraft.
there is no rationalization... it is a pretty obvious fact.
DL flies from other carrier hubs where other carriers are much larger - and where DL doesn't have a hub presence.
ORD, EWR, and now PHL come to mind.
tell me which DL hubs either AA or UA serve with their own metal longhaul aircraft.
there is no rationalization... it is a pretty obvious fact.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #55
are you looking to break 1000 posts today?
you are apparently feeling very rich with yourself, aren't you?
you are apparently feeling very rich with yourself, aren't you?
I wish Delta (and Delta UK, aka Virgin Atlantic) good luck - they're going to need it.
Of course this is Delta taking advantage of an opportunity to deprive AA/BA of another peak-time LHR slot pair, although I remain highly skeptical that Delta will be able to make this work - just as I was skeptical of Delta's ability to make double-daily 767s BOS-LHR, or even a single 767 MIA-LHR, work.
Just goes to show yet again how committed Delta is to "capacity discipline."
As for Delta (or Virgin) attempting, let alone actually succeeding in, LHR-DFW and/or LHR-IAH ... they're going to need more than just luck for those two. Considering that Delta couldn't make a nonstop work between MIA and LHR, even when that is one of the busiest transatlantic city pairs and Delta is quite strong in South Florida, it is beyond laughable to suggest that Delta could ever make Texas work from LHR. It appears the detachment from reality and misplaced sense of Delta's entitlement/invincibility continues. Another day, another laugh, I suppose.
Of course this is Delta taking advantage of an opportunity to deprive AA/BA of another peak-time LHR slot pair, although I remain highly skeptical that Delta will be able to make this work - just as I was skeptical of Delta's ability to make double-daily 767s BOS-LHR, or even a single 767 MIA-LHR, work.
Just goes to show yet again how committed Delta is to "capacity discipline."
As for Delta (or Virgin) attempting, let alone actually succeeding in, LHR-DFW and/or LHR-IAH ... they're going to need more than just luck for those two. Considering that Delta couldn't make a nonstop work between MIA and LHR, even when that is one of the busiest transatlantic city pairs and Delta is quite strong in South Florida, it is beyond laughable to suggest that Delta could ever make Texas work from LHR. It appears the detachment from reality and misplaced sense of Delta's entitlement/invincibility continues. Another day, another laugh, I suppose.
WorldTraveler said:
Let's see you are 17 to 1 ahead of me - so I don't have to worry about catching up - I know math is hard for you - no way for me to catch up - it's like DL there is no way for anyone to compete with DL and there is no way for anyone to catch up to WT on posts
It takes very special thinking to bloviate like the high poster
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #59
I wish Delta (and Delta UK, aka Virgin Atlantic) good luck - they're going to need it.
Of course this is Delta taking advantage of an opportunity to deprive AA/BA of another peak-time LHR slot pair, although I remain highly skeptical that Delta will be able to make this work - just as I was skeptical of Delta's ability to make double-daily 767s BOS-LHR, or even a single 767 MIA-LHR, work.
Just goes to show yet again how committed Delta is to "capacity discipline."
As for Delta (or Virgin) attempting, let alone actually succeeding in, LHR-DFW and/or LHR-IAH ... they're going to need more than just luck for those two. Considering that Delta couldn't make a nonstop work between MIA and LHR, even when that is one of the busiest transatlantic city pairs and Delta is quite strong in South Florida, it is beyond laughable to suggest that Delta could ever make Texas work from LHR. It appears the detachment from reality and misplaced sense of Delta's entitlement/invincibility continues. Another day, another laugh, I suppose.
it's all a laugh to you, isn't it?
for DL it is about growing its presence in key markets.
The EU ordered a divestiture for the AA/BA JV to be extended to include US.
it is NO surprise that DL applied for this route. No surprise to anyone.
PHL is NOT a huge market and US has done a good job of developing the int'l potential the market has.
Still, a 757 is not a large aircraft and US uses it on multiple flights from PHL to Europe. To argue the 757 is subpar when AA/US use less equipped versions of the same airframe for other TATL flying is simply hypocritical.
DL doesn't have huge expectations of success or they would have scheduled a larger aircraft. a single 757 in a TATL market isn't going to make or break anything for anyone.
As for DFW or IAH to LHR, DL may or may not go after it but DL has proven that they have the wherewithal to see opportunity even in key industry markets and use its JV partners to get what it needs in revenue to make those routes work.
LAX-LHR is an example where AA/BA clearly have an enormous advantage but DL decided it is worth making it work, again with a fairly small aircraft.
the bigger question is why AA or BA hasn't been willing to take on DL in some of their hubs - or launch more than one flight/day from ATL
and DL does serve MIA to LHR thru its JV and unlike any of AA's JVs, DL owns equity in VS which means DL has twice the ability to work with VS. DL knows not only what VS does on its LHR routes because that is part of the JV but on all of VS' network because of DL's equity and board position.
again, why are you so preoccupied with what someone else does?
perhaps but since this also involves a divestiture order, it probably is a route DL intends to keep.
further, ORD-LHR didn't happen but LAX did.
Again - it's not a question for any but those who don't want to accept reality: the reason why AA (and United) have been far less aggressive about "tak[ing] on DL in some of [its] hubs" is that, in general, Delta's hubs are smaller and less lucrative markets that are just not as worth fighting for. Delta has had no choice but to try and invade AA and United strongholds because that's where the money is and Delta has pushed the practical limits of organic, non-secular growth (i.e., essentially rate of broader, long-term economic growth) in its hubs.
But let's not lose sight of the original, ridiculous, point - which was the completely laughable suggestion that Delta would be able to make a nonstop from LHR to Texas work. Delta couldn't make a nonstop work in one of the busiest O&D markets not just between the U.S. and U.K., but indeed between the U.S. and all of Europe, and that was even though Delta actually does have a relatively strong presence (although, needless to say, nowhere near as large as AA) in South Florida. And now we're to entertain - seriously, with a straight face - that Delta is somehow going to make a nonstop work between LHR and Texas, even though Delta is #3 or #4 player in DFW and HOU metro, respectively, and will continue to receive minimal (if any) feed on the LHR end? Detachment. From. Reality.
P.S. - "nlike any of AA's JVs, DL owns equity in VS which means DL has twice the ability to work with VS" (emphasis mine). Seriously? Talk about ridiculous. I swear - this stuff just gets more hysterical with each passing day, but now it's just getting so sloppy as to be embarrassing, even by what were already incredibly low "best in commercial aviation" standards.
But let's not lose sight of the original, ridiculous, point - which was the completely laughable suggestion that Delta would be able to make a nonstop from LHR to Texas work. Delta couldn't make a nonstop work in one of the busiest O&D markets not just between the U.S. and U.K., but indeed between the U.S. and all of Europe, and that was even though Delta actually does have a relatively strong presence (although, needless to say, nowhere near as large as AA) in South Florida. And now we're to entertain - seriously, with a straight face - that Delta is somehow going to make a nonstop work between LHR and Texas, even though Delta is #3 or #4 player in DFW and HOU metro, respectively, and will continue to receive minimal (if any) feed on the LHR end? Detachment. From. Reality.
P.S. - "nlike any of AA's JVs, DL owns equity in VS which means DL has twice the ability to work with VS" (emphasis mine). Seriously? Talk about ridiculous. I swear - this stuff just gets more hysterical with each passing day, but now it's just getting so sloppy as to be embarrassing, even by what were already incredibly low "best in commercial aviation" standards.
- Status
