Originally Posted by
The Situation
SEA is a wealthy, fast-growing metro area, it makes sense as a connection to Asia and Europe, and AS had some very high yield monopoly routes (also some highly competitive low yield routes not to be ignored, but often people are blinded by the shiny object). If DL was not in the picture today, and as an airline executive, would you not see the appeal of that market? If DL didn't move in, another airline would have. AA had the codeshare agreement with AS, so that would have made sense and perhaps UA would have sought to reduce the pressure on some of their chronically delayed SFO operations. Growth would have happen no matter what DL did and the port needs to start starting to think about some possible quick fixes to the relieve the pressure as it doesn't appear that the area is going to stop growing anytime soon.
Absolutely — Delta invested because it saw the potential of the market and saw the trend. If it wasn’t DL, it would have been someone else. If I’m AS, I’d definitely feel deceived by Delta to some extent because going from “international partner” to “we’re making your home base our new hub” is a big blow, but let’s not pretend any other competent airline (so that throws out AA) wouldn’t have done the same thing.
But all of this is reciprocal too. Part of the reason for Seattle’s continued growth is also fueled by the fact that it has a major player like DL making the investment in the airport for international travel and wider connections. Which is why POS has had to step up to support expansion plans.