FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - RIP CVG
Thread: RIP CVG
View Single Post
Old May 29, 2020, 1:55 pm
  #722  
ATOBTTR
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Back in Reds Country (DAY/CVG). Previously: SEA & SAT.
Programs: DL PM 1MM, AA PLAT, UA Silver, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 10,333
Originally Posted by HDQDD
Suggest you re-read my (tongue and cheek) post you responded to. My response you quoted was about GE (and my response was to a post about GE). You tried to switch the convo to GE Av.
You actually misdirected the convo first by turning a point about GE Aviation into a discussion about GE as a whole, even if KDCAflyer's post just said "GE" it was clear that KDCAflyer's post about shipping GE engine parts was referring to the GE Aviation plant in Evendale and not GE as a whole.

Originally Posted by HDQDD
GE is the company, GE Av is a Division of GE. Investors don't buy GE Av, they buy GE (which is why I used it). Regardless, I seriously doubt either has a great outlook at the moment.
I realize you can't invest in just GE Aviation. But again, GE Aviation and how it's operating does not appear to be the major problem at GE as GE Aviation is operating in the black; the problem appears to be with other divisions that aren't operating in the black.

Originally Posted by HDQDD
I wasn't wrong. As stated, I've worked in both cargo, ramp, system operations, RM and as an analyst. If you don't believe me, just look at an airline's financials. You can keep trying to spew misinformation, but saying it over and over doesn't make it true. Pax airlines don't fly flights just because of cargo. It's ancillary revenue and a small piece of it at that.
I never said pax airlines fly routes solely because of cargo. What I said was cargo can play a key part in sustaining a route. Even if across the worldwide network as a whole, cargo is not a large part of an airline's overall revenue source, it's not misinformation to point out that cargo revenue can play a key role in helping profitably sustain and keep an individual route in the network, for which CVG-CDG is one such example. You even conceded ATL-LIM as another such example as a route where cargo plays an important role in sustaining a route, though you were wrong about it just being flowers; DL carries a wide range of produce on the route.
Here was the press release from DL when they upgauged ATL-LIM from a 767-400 to 777-200:
Delta Cargo’s operation in Peru, the largest in Latin America, will also benefit from the Boeing 777’s arrival to Lima. This new aircraft allows Delta to increase the average load factor of 17 tons to 25 tons per flight, supporting the expected increase in cargo volume of agro-industrial products from Peru to markets in Europe and Asia. Currently, Delta transports primarily perishable products such as asparagus, mangos, berries and avocados from Lima.

“Delta’s change in aircraft represents a significant stake in the positive economic momentum Peru is experiencing and a reaffirmation of our commitment to cargo customers who entrust us with their shipments throughout the year,” said Miguel LaTorre, Delta Cargo Manager – Peru. “Delta is a strong choice for Peru to reach not only the United States but also a greater number of markets in Europe where we can offer better transit times to Amsterdam, Paris and Madrid through our main logistics center in Atlanta.”

https://news.delta.com/delta-increas...ma-and-atlanta

The article does note the additional increase in seating capacity but also specifically notes the increase in cargo capacity and how cargo (mainly fresh produce) on this route is shipped across both oceans via DL cargo, highlighting the importance cargo plays one such route.

Now I do get that DL has since down-gauged the 777 off of Lima, but DL still runs a widebody on this route, as noted by DL, in large party due to cargo capacity and the cargo DL carries out of LIM. As a side note, I had non-rev privileges with DL at one point through a friend and received the warnings about flying out of LIM because non-revs would not be cleared even with empty seats in the pax cabin due to DL maxing out cargo on the route.

Now does that mean cargo will help sustain that route forever or is solely what sustains a route? No - multiple factors could cause things to change (and something did which caused DL to take the 777 off ATL-LIM). But I'll take DL's own statement in its article about cargo capacity and the warnings about non-reving out of LIM over your statements here on FT in this case in which DL emphasizes the importance cargo plays on its ATL-LIM route, thus demonstrating that there are routes where cargo revenue does play a significant role in the sustainability and the aircraft type dedicated to an individual route.

Going back to CVG-CDG specifically, a WSJ article from 2012 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000...50781305169460) notes that DL carried 4.2 million pounds of engine parts on CVG-CDG per year, averaging about 11,500 lbs a day just in cargo. I don't know if that figure is the same rough figure today but with ~11,500 lbs per day in engine parts worth of cargo on a given route, I would say that the revenue from that does play a key role in sustaining a route and contributing handsomely to the bottom line of that individual route's performance.
ATOBTTR is offline