UA Plays Dirty and Kicks Delta Out of Dallas-Love
Oct 1, 2014, 4:06 pm
#106
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SJC
Programs: DL PM MM, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 3,276
I never got the obsession with VX. They charge for bags and snacks on board if you are in Y. Their elite program is a joke IMO, and their up charge for the bulkhead and reclining exit row (Main Cabin Select) is really high. Also, they seem to have trouble with lots of routes being profitable enough to stick around. They have abandoned several airports quickly due to lack of profitability, including my home airport.
Oct 1, 2014, 6:56 pm
#108
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
Oct 1, 2014, 10:37 pm
#109
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,384
Historically, the DOT has given the advantage to smaller carriers at slot-restricted airports over huge legacy carriers- for instance, AS won LAX-DCA over AA. They also give a lot of benefit to point-to-point travel rather than connecting.
Oct 1, 2014, 11:52 pm
#110
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: Delta skymiles DM + 1MM
Posts: 8,144
shouldn't a 90 minute UA turn be enough time for the UA plane to unload its 40 or so pax, get towed out of the gate, pull in the DL plane, load her up, push her back and let the UA regional back in? I mean, surely that should be enough time? If anyone is losing out, its DAL because now, thanks to UA's greed, they are losing out on DL's landing and gate expenses. Plus, UA loses out for keeping the regional jets grounded for so long. I guess DL is actually the winner in the long run.
UA pulls into gate, takes 5 minutes for pax to deplane then another 15 - 25 minutes to off load the luggage and clean the plane. Total time = 30 min tops.
DL plane gets towed in...crew boards and 10 minutes later, pax board. Total time so far, 40 to 45 minutes. Pax finish boarding in 20 minutes (can be done in a 717) and the flight is ready to push back. Total time = 60 to 65 minutes. Back with the UA plane, already cleaned and ready to accept her 40 or so passengers with just enough time for an on time departure.
UA pulls into gate, takes 5 minutes for pax to deplane then another 15 - 25 minutes to off load the luggage and clean the plane. Total time = 30 min tops.
DL plane gets towed in...crew boards and 10 minutes later, pax board. Total time so far, 40 to 45 minutes. Pax finish boarding in 20 minutes (can be done in a 717) and the flight is ready to push back. Total time = 60 to 65 minutes. Back with the UA plane, already cleaned and ready to accept her 40 or so passengers with just enough time for an on time departure.
Oct 2, 2014, 12:20 am
#111
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
shouldn't a 90 minute UA turn be enough time for the UA plane to unload its 40 or so pax, get towed out of the gate, pull in the DL plane, load her up, push her back and let the UA regional back in? I mean, surely that should be enough time? If anyone is losing out, its DAL because now, thanks to UA's greed, they are losing out on DL's landing and gate expenses. Plus, UA loses out for keeping the regional jets grounded for so long. I guess DL is actually the winner in the long run.
UA pulls into gate, takes 5 minutes for pax to deplane then another 15 - 25 minutes to off load the luggage and clean the plane. Total time = 30 min tops.
DL plane gets towed in...crew boards and 10 minutes later, pax board. Total time so far, 40 to 45 minutes. Pax finish boarding in 20 minutes (can be done in a 717) and the flight is ready to push back. Total time = 60 to 65 minutes. Back with the UA plane, already cleaned and ready to accept her 40 or so passengers with just enough time for an on time departure.
UA pulls into gate, takes 5 minutes for pax to deplane then another 15 - 25 minutes to off load the luggage and clean the plane. Total time = 30 min tops.
DL plane gets towed in...crew boards and 10 minutes later, pax board. Total time so far, 40 to 45 minutes. Pax finish boarding in 20 minutes (can be done in a 717) and the flight is ready to push back. Total time = 60 to 65 minutes. Back with the UA plane, already cleaned and ready to accept her 40 or so passengers with just enough time for an on time departure.
This is exactly what I said up-thread. UA is simply playing games. 90min turns on an RJ. Subleasing the second gate to WN. UA better keep their eye on ORD, as Frontier plans expansion and is now running as a ULCC.
Oct 2, 2014, 1:22 am
#112
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Paris, France
Programs: United, TAP Victoria, AVIOS
Posts: 480
Right now I think that UA is more concerned with WNs entrance into Mexico/Central America than it is with any of Frontier´s plans in ORD.
UA isn´t playing games with DL at all. DL lost the American gates which are going to Virgin.
Oct 2, 2014, 2:43 am
#113
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
The looser in this this is the DAL (airport) on take off / landing fees. As well as gate space. It matters little to me, as I visit this "gem" of an airport maybe twice a year.
Perhaps UA should use their 2 gates to fly real aircraft (full size jets) to real airports (perhaps out of the same State). And not pull a 90 min turns on a RJ garbage move.
Business is business, and that is what I do everyday. If I were UA (and could get away with it), I guess I would pull the same move. Leasing the second gate to WN is my question?
Perhaps UA should use their 2 gates to fly real aircraft (full size jets) to real airports (perhaps out of the same State). And not pull a 90 min turns on a RJ garbage move.
Business is business, and that is what I do everyday. If I were UA (and could get away with it), I guess I would pull the same move. Leasing the second gate to WN is my question?
Oct 2, 2014, 7:24 am
#114
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: Delta skymiles DM + 1MM
Posts: 8,144
The looser in this this is the DAL (airport) on take off / landing fees. As well as gate space. It matters little to me, as I visit this "gem" of an airport maybe twice a year.
Perhaps UA should use their 2 gates to fly real aircraft (full size jets) to real airports (perhaps out of the same State). And not pull a 90 min turns on a RJ garbage move.
Business is business, and that is what I do everyday. If I were UA (and could get away with it), I guess I would pull the same move. Leasing the second gate to WN is my question?
Perhaps UA should use their 2 gates to fly real aircraft (full size jets) to real airports (perhaps out of the same State). And not pull a 90 min turns on a RJ garbage move.
Business is business, and that is what I do everyday. If I were UA (and could get away with it), I guess I would pull the same move. Leasing the second gate to WN is my question?
Oct 2, 2014, 8:06 am
#115
Join Date: Oct 2007
Programs: Now just a lowly DL PM/1MM. This industry needs some competition. It's just not enjoyable anymore.
Posts: 3,543
UA has the leases on these gates. They are meeting their contractual obligations to DAL. Why should UA do anything to help a competitor? I would bet heavily that DL would do the same thing if the roles were reversed.
Oct 2, 2014, 8:20 am
#116
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,384
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/a...-expanding.ece
Dallas City Council member Philip Kingston is not happy with Delta’s forced departure from Love Field.
“United has done a historically poor job of utilizing its gates,” Kingston said. “United has provided the city with assurances the city has accepted that it will fully utilize the gates. We need to make sure we’re holding United to its assurances.”
The city plans to monitor gate usage at Love Field every month, Duebner said.
“If this was a thinly veiled tactic just to keep Delta from using the gates, that will become apparent,” he said. “At some point, we knew demand would outstrip supply with only 20 gates. Its a hard situation for us to be in. We like competition.”
“United has done a historically poor job of utilizing its gates,” Kingston said. “United has provided the city with assurances the city has accepted that it will fully utilize the gates. We need to make sure we’re holding United to its assurances.”
The city plans to monitor gate usage at Love Field every month, Duebner said.
“If this was a thinly veiled tactic just to keep Delta from using the gates, that will become apparent,” he said. “At some point, we knew demand would outstrip supply with only 20 gates. Its a hard situation for us to be in. We like competition.”
Oct 2, 2014, 9:27 am
#117
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
That's a distinction without a difference. As the tenant, occupying those gates under a long-term lease, UA can do whatever it wants with its two gates. If UA fails to use the gates, then other airlines (including DL) can potentially use them. Problem for DL is that UA plans to use them. Perhaps not as efficiently as possible or as efficiently as Delta would prefer.
Airlines squat on scarce resources like gates and slots all. the. time.
A few years ago, US flew some two dozen daily props between LGA and PHL, for no reason other than to "utilize" the slots sufficiently to avoid losing them. As a by-product, US connected a lot of low-fare seekers at PHL. US still flies more LGA-PHL flights than necessary.
Airlines squat on scarce resources like gates and slots all. the. time.
A few years ago, US flew some two dozen daily props between LGA and PHL, for no reason other than to "utilize" the slots sufficiently to avoid losing them. As a by-product, US connected a lot of low-fare seekers at PHL. US still flies more LGA-PHL flights than necessary.
Oct 2, 2014, 9:45 am
#118
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,384
The squatting idea got me thinking.
What if Delta employees "occupied" those DAL UA gates? Bring media attention to bear on UA forcing change?
Is there any evidence of change driven by a corporate "occupy" style movement? Are DL's hands clean at other airports? Or do they play this squatting game elsewhere themselves?
What if Delta employees "occupied" those DAL UA gates? Bring media attention to bear on UA forcing change?
Is there any evidence of change driven by a corporate "occupy" style movement? Are DL's hands clean at other airports? Or do they play this squatting game elsewhere themselves?
Oct 2, 2014, 9:52 am
#119
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: National Capitol Region
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,912
I recall that when USairways was driven out of its Baltimore hub by Southwest that USairways squatted on its empty gates on the D pier for years. It was a spooky ghost pier.
The Maryland Aviation Authority paid them to vacate the gates.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/200...airlines-gates
The Maryland Aviation Authority paid them to vacate the gates.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/200...airlines-gates
Oct 2, 2014, 9:58 am
#120
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Programs: DL DM 1.929MM, Hilton Lifetime Diamond, IHG Platinum, Avis CHM, Marriott Titanium (lifetime gold)
Posts: 7,857
Whether export credit financing is a subsidy or provides recipients a cost advantage is a valid discussion, though not germane to this discussion.
What is relevant is that Delta continues to sue foreign competitors because it wants to reduce or eliminate their head-to-head and indirect competition. Read the briefs to see their true intent.
Look at Delta's behavior with Norwegian as well.
What is relevant is that Delta continues to sue foreign competitors because it wants to reduce or eliminate their head-to-head and indirect competition. Read the briefs to see their true intent.
Look at Delta's behavior with Norwegian as well.
As far as Norwegian, again Delta has plenty of company in that complaint. Including much of the EU.
Anyway, I am still waiting to see some actual proof of your assertion:
As I said, it stinks. It may be legal, but it still stinks.
Oh, and we are discussing an airline (DL) that backed out of the Dallas market with their tails between their legs within recent history, right? No reason they can't reverse that at the other airport now that they swung and missed at DAL. It doesn't seem to me that if DL was really interested a buildup in the Dallas metro market that DFW is all that much worse a choice than DAL. A lot of the growth in that metro area is up north and better served by DFW. They could add LAX-DFW and be in pretty good shape, with LGA, JFK, ATL, MSP, DTW and SLC already served...
DAL is more convenient for a lot of travelers and DL wanted a chance to serve them, or at least to operate DAL-ATL with full size jets.
If it were no big deal, the city of Dallas wouldn't care, but it seems that they actually do. As evidenced by your quote just a few posts above.
David