While NW certainly has the most recognized brand of any US airline in Japan, the world is a bigger place and other US airlines, including DL, carry many, many more passengers.
NW is the most recognized brand of any US airline in Asia, not just Japan.
It's ridiculous to toss out the NW name and legacy and assume all customers to/from Asia are going to see Delta but think NW. If they did NW/DL and kept NW west of the Mississippi and DL east of the Mississippi, then I think it would make a lot more sense given NW's strength to Asia/Pacific and DL's strength to Europe/Africa. South America would stay Delta, obviously, and since NW is the #1 US carrier to Canada, the Canada flights would stay NW.
Why throw out all that hard earned (and expensive) brand recognition and loyalty?
NW is the most recognized brand of any US airline in Asia, not just Japan.
It's ridiculous to toss out the NW name and legacy and assume all customers to/from Asia are going to see Delta but think NW. If they did NW/DL and kept NW west of the Mississippi and DL east of the Mississippi, then I think it would make a lot more sense given NW's strength to Asia/Pacific and DL's strength to Europe/Africa. South America would stay Delta, obviously, and since NW is the #1 US carrier to Canada, the Canada flights would stay NW.
Why throw out all that hard earned (and expensive) brand recognition and loyalty?
UA carries significantly more passenger from Asia (excluding Japan) to the US than NW. Whether that means its brand is more recognized or respected by native customers would be difficult to attain.
One thing is for certain; US carriers are poorly perceived in Asia in general. Neither UA nor NW (or any other US carries) does well with premium passengers originating in Asia. For NW especially, most Japanese traffic comes from blocks of seats sold to travel agencies.
Regardless of the name painted on the side of the plane, passengers (especially those originating in the US) will continue to fly NW based on the network and schedule offered. As long as there is a descent premium product, high-yield US originating traffic will follow.
While the two brand strategy is nice (and necessary at this point in Europe), it would wipe out any potential cost savings for DL and NW. This merger will be successful on the ability to seamlessly connect and streamline the network and operations of the two companies. This is best accomplished under a single brand.
Outside of the entirely emotional connection many have to the NW brand, there is no data or facts to support its survival or a more recognized and widely distributed brand.
Outside of the entirely emotional connection many have to the NW brand, there is no data or facts to support its survival or a more recognized and widely distributed brand.
I'm with you 100% to this point. I don't know if one can say 'there are no data'. One might say we haven't seen any objectively developed data in the public domain presented here on FT - yet.
One thing is for certain; US carriers are poorly perceived in Asia in general. Neither UA nor NW (or any other US carries) does well with premium passengers originating in Asia. For NW especially, most Japanese traffic comes from blocks of seats sold to travel agencies.
The block sales has nothing to do with NWs perception in the market. It's just how business is done there. People don't do self service booking there. You cannot book a flight on JALs website. ANA just started doing limited web booking this year.
Furthermore it's not like people end up on NW because the travel agency did a no questions asked fare sale. You go into a travel office in japan and there are three airlines with travel brochures. ANA, JAL, and NW. Unlike other US flagged carriers NW actually has many routes that are loaded with non-US travelers. They even have a nice chunk of the Japanese leisure market. There is a substantial marketing effort on the part of NW to sell seats outside the US market. The brand switch to Delta will be a large marketing effort.
While the two brand strategy is nice (and necessary at this point in Europe), it would wipe out any potential cost savings for DL and NW.
Frankly, this comment is absurd. So, by the same token, KL/AF merger had no cost saving at all ? What about savings in accounting/finance/IT/Flight Ops/HR/Sourcing....? I can see additional marketing expense by keeping two brands, but savings in signage, ticket counters, uniforms, etc...there are already there
The block sales has nothing to do with NWs perception in the market. It's just how business is done there. People don't do self service booking there. You cannot book a flight on JALs website. ANA just started doing limited web booking this year.
Furthermore it's not like people end up on NW because the travel agency did a no questions asked fare sale. You go into a travel office in japan and there are three airlines with travel brochures. ANA, JAL, and NW. Unlike other US flagged carriers NW actually has many routes that are loaded with non-US travelers. They even have a nice chunk of the Japanese leisure market. There is a substantial marketing effort on the part of NW to sell seats outside the US market. The brand switch to Delta will be a large marketing effort.
While block sales are how airlines have traditionally done business, NW's network from Japan is targeted to low-yield vacation packages rather than originating business traffic. I know very few Japanese who view NW as their carrier of choice for travel to Asian or American business centers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PVGMSP
Frankly, this comment is absurd. So, by the same token, KL/AF merger had no cost saving at all ? What about savings in accounting/finance/IT/Flight Ops/HR/Sourcing....? I can see additional marketing expense by keeping two brands, but savings in signage, ticket counters, uniforms, etc...there are already there
Yeah, there's limited savings there. But the cost of merging DL and NW, but maintaining two brands for no reason other than sentimentality would severely reduce the benefits of a merger.
Last edited by thezipper; May 1, 08 at 3:17 pm.
Reason: consecutive posts by OP
Programs: DL Plat, SK Silver, BA Silver - Gift, CO Plat - Match
Posts: 3,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
While block sales are how airlines have traditionally done business, NW's network from Japan is targeted to low-yield vacation packages rather than originating business traffic. I know very few Japanese who view NW as their carrier of choice for travel to Asian or American business centers.
I've said the same thing regarding CO and European travelers. My feeling is that the foreign brand perception is either negative or non-existent for all of the US airlines, and that they should choose strictly on the basis of domestic brand recognition and perception.
While block sales are how airlines have traditionally done business, NW's network from Japan is targeted to low-yield vacation packages rather than originating business traffic. I know very few Japanese who view NW as their carrier of choice for travel to Asian or American business centers.
You have to temper "low-yield" with who the competition is. ANA and JAL aren't exactly putting the squeeze on NW like an LCC would. The market is considerably different, and everything I've heard from my Japanese associates is that they use travel agents and they accept that they pay more than people in the US pay for flights.
I would also say my impression of Japanese business travelers is US flagged carriers are often used by smaller/newer businesses that don't have a 50+ year relationship with JAL or ANA.
While NW certainly has the most recognized brand of any US airline in Japan, the world is a bigger place and other US airlines, including DL, carry many, many more passengers.
Most brand surveys place AA and UA as the most recognized airline brands in the US. While sheer recognition ultimately has nothing to do with quality, consumer awards do. With that measure, CO would be the 'best' legacy carrier brand, hands down.
Forgive me, but isn't your second paragraph in contradiction with your first?
On the one hand, you claim (correctly) that DL and others carry more passengers than NW and so are better known. On the other you argue that sheer recognition does not correlate with quality or carrier brand.
Furthermore, when you say that "[m]ost of my NW flying is to Asia, where I find the [NW] product, on the Airbus to be superior to UA or other US carriers", aren't you, in fact, advancing a non-emotional argument in favor of the survival of NW as a brand, at least on the TATL and TPac markets?
Forgive me, but isn't your second paragraph in contradiction with your first?
On the one hand, you claim (correctly) that DL and others carry more passengers than NW and so are better known. On the other you argue that sheer recognition does not correlate with quality or carrier brand.
Furthermore, when you say that "[m]ost of my NW flying is to Asia, where I find the [NW] product, on the Airbus to be superior to UA or other US carriers", aren't you, in fact, advancing a non-emotional argument in favor of the survival of NW as a brand, at least on the TATL and TPac markets?
There is absolutely no contradiction.
While NW has a descent international product, it is available in very few markets and receives almost no advertising. Clearly the affinity towards NW will be strong in markets like DTW/MEM/MSP/SEA, but non-existent in ATL or NYC (DL would be the opposite). At the end of the day, a half-way intelligent manager would ask which brand has the greatest reach and most favorable perception.
Location: Alexandria, VA, USA NW Platinum Elite Since 1999, United 1K, CO Roach, Hyatt Diamond, SPG Gold, Hilton Gold, Hertz #1 Gold, IC Royal Ambassador, Avis Chairman's
Posts: 6,780
But the options in an ATL market are almost "non-existant" as well... unless your counting non-DL entrants, then your point is moot. NW also pulls from many midwest / central US markets as well for their asian service.
UA and NW are the "Significant" US based airlines flying to Asia. They have a combined RPM for the Pacific in March of almost 4 Billion miles, compare to that of DL of 130 Million.
To say who has the greatest reach, well I give that to NW/UA currently. I ask if you've ever been on a widebody to asia on either UA or NW or DL for that matter and asked where people are going... WBC has always been full on my recent asia flights... and they do include asian businessmen as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
There is absolutely no contradiction.
While NW has a descent international product, it is available in very few markets and receives almost no advertising. Clearly the affinity towards NW will be strong in markets like DTW/MEM/MSP/SEA, but non-existent in ATL or NYC (DL would be the opposite). At the end of the day, a half-way intelligent manager would ask which brand has the greatest reach and most favorable perception.
__________________
Delta SkyMiles Forum Moderator - FlyerTalk Member #1,038
Yeah, there's limited savings there. But the cost of merging DL and NW, but maintaining two brands for no reason other than sentimentality would severely reduce the benefits of a merger.
I'd say the majority of cost savings are in the areas I mentioned - accounting/flight ops/IT, etc. Many many companies operate very successfully by using multiple brands.
In the end, it remains a personal choice to prefer IFE on domestic flights and a connection via JFK or CDG over no IFE but connections via DTW or AMS. Or an old DC9 with what one could perceive as so-so service, over an RJ with what one could perceive as great service - I insist on using the word "perceive" because service is a matter of perceptions.
What really is service, at least on the smaller planes? On a flight of less than two hours, there is very little I want that I feel is worth paying extra for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxf24
While block sales are how airlines have traditionally done business, NW's network from Japan is targeted to low-yield vacation packages rather than originating business traffic. I know very few Japanese who view NW as their carrier of choice for travel to Asian or American business centers.
Is part of that due to scheduling issues? With one flight per day ex-NRT to all destinations in Asia and most in the US, I just have to wonder.
Last edited by thezipper; May 1, 08 at 3:18 pm.
Reason: consecutive posts by OP
While NW has a descent international product, it is available in very few markets and receives almost no advertising. Clearly the affinity towards NW will be strong in markets like DTW/MEM/MSP/SEA, but non-existent in ATL or NYC (DL would be the opposite). At the end of the day, a half-way intelligent manager would ask which brand has the greatest reach and most favorable perception.
Maybe I'm just repeating thezipper's point, but DL's international product is only available ex-ATL or JFK with isolated exceptions like CVG or SLC, so how is the situation to the disadvantage of NW?
Alternatively, why is strong affinity towards DL in selected large markets like ATL and NYC better than strong affinity towards NW in a larger number of smaller markets like DTW/MEM/MSP/SEA (I would also add PDX and BOS)?
It seems to me, at the end of the day, that a half-way intelligent manager would ask which airline offers the product best positioned to attract or retain high yield customers. And, by your own admission, on high-yield international routes NW more than holds its own (I would personally say is in fact superior to DL).
Are you per-chance getting emotional about the DL brand?
Programs: DL Plat, SK Silver, BA Silver - Gift, CO Plat - Match
Posts: 3,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by respectable_man
It seems to me, at the end of the day, that a half-way intelligent manager would ask which airline offers the product best positioned to attract or retain high yield customers.
But you are confusing product with brand, and I think that is a mistake. You assume that NW's excellent international product can overcome their poor domestic reputation. It is funny, I recommend the NW TATL product to friends, co-workers, and complete strangers. In most cases, they have either never heard of NW, or they have "sworn to never fly them again" because they flew them domestically and thought it stunk. Folks that have never flown them call them NorthWorst! Where, exactly, is this "brand"? I can't find it. And what I can find doesn't reflect the quality of the product.
Personally, I think neither brand is very valuable, so they might as well flip a coin. Heck, since I think the product is better than the brand, I suggest they just give it some new name and let the product speak for itself.
So, by the same token, KL/AF merger had no cost saving at all ?
What about savings in accounting/finance/IT/Flight Ops/HR/Sourcing....? I can see additional marketing expense by keeping two brands, but savings in signage, ticket counters, uniforms, etc...there are already there 
