Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Delta Air Lines | SkyMiles
Reload this Page >

DL Notifies EAS, May Drop up to 24 (PMNW) markets

DL Notifies EAS, May Drop up to 24 (PMNW) markets

Old Jul 25, 11, 10:47 am
  #226  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: AA, HH, MR elite. Fly mostly AA/WN/B6.
Posts: 19,006
Originally Posted by sxf24 View Post
It is my inference based on comments from a contingent of posters who regularly infer these types of decision are made by a Atlanta-centric groups of cronies who hate everything that has the remotest connection to legacy NW.
Well, that's silly, especially given the ex-NW figures in high places at DL.

Originally Posted by sxf24 View Post
Actually, from an auditory perspective, MSP will be quieter since DC-9s and turboprops are being replaced with quieter/newer jets. The 777 is also quieter than the 747.
You got me there. I was thinking in terms of stations served, total departures, frequencies, aircraft movements, etc. When all this goes through I would think they could close either the A or B finger and consolidate in one.
BearX220 is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 11:07 am
  #227  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
Well, that's silly, especially given the ex-NW figures in high places at DL.
I agree. However, it's frustratingly unconstructive that some posters feel the need to continue singing the DL-hates-NW tune...

Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
You got me there. I was thinking in terms of stations served, total departures, frequencies, aircraft movements, etc. When all this goes through I would think they could close either the A or B finger and consolidate in one.
MSP is still better off than CVG, JFK, MEM and SLC and only slightly worse then ATL.

I would imagine some consolidation is being considered, especially since it could benefit connecting times.
sxf24 is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 11:20 am
  #228  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somehere in the Midwest
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,892
What is the truth

I thought it would be interesting to go back and look at the actual press relase from Delta with respect to this service cutback and a couple of observations:

http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=43&item=1408

"Delta to Adjust Service to Smaller, Underperforming Markets"

Nowhere in the press release does Delta use the word "unprofitable". It uses "under-performing" and it cites "$14 million annual loss". Is this loss due to one route, a few, many but not all? We don't know , and it is the mainstream media and some that have jumped on the announcement and has used the word "unprofitable"

Further, the release states and I quote- "While Delta would prefer to continue serving these communities, the new reality of mounting cost pressures faced by our industry means we can no longer afford to provide this service. As we continue to strengthen our business, Delta is retiring the Saab turboprops and some 50-seat jet aircraft, which will hinder the financial viability of serving these smaller markets," Delta said.

So it's not as simple as saying, these routes are not profitable, but also on the corporate decision to terminate turboprops. IMO this decsion was made several years ago.
hazelrah is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 11:24 am
  #229  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
Originally Posted by hazelrah View Post
I thought it would be interesting to go back and look at the actual press relase from Delta with respect to this service cutback and a couple of observations:

http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=43&item=1408

"Delta to Adjust Service to Smaller, Underperforming Markets"

Nowhere in the press release does Delta use the word "unprofitable". It uses "under-performing" and it cites "$14 million annual loss". Is this loss due to one route, a few, many but not all? We don't know , and it is the mainstream media and some that have jumped on the announcement and has used the word "unprofitable"
Oh, so you can be profitable but still report an annual loss?

Originally Posted by hazelrah View Post
So it's not as simple as saying, these routes are not profitable, but also on the corporate decision to terminate turboprops. IMO this decsion was made several years ago.
How is it not simple? If unprofitable with small turboprop, a route would be even more unprofitable with a larger jet.
sxf24 is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 11:36 am
  #230  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: AA, HH, MR elite. Fly mostly AA/WN/B6.
Posts: 19,006
Originally Posted by hazelrah View Post
"Delta to Adjust Service to Smaller, Underperforming Markets"
We have a new euphemism for "kill." in a moment I'm going to go over and adjust a mosquito's lifespan.

Originally Posted by sxf24 View Post
How is it not simple? If unprofitable with small turboprop, a route would be even more unprofitable with a larger jet.
Trading the Saabs for RJs makes a marginal, on-the-bubble route into a clear loser. It's not that these markets cannot be served. It's that DL can't do it within the envelope of its master fleet plan.

Also, the real way to assess these routes is not on a stand-alone basis, as I doubt many pax are getting off at Minneapolis for the Twins game, but on the value of the total influx of small-market pax into MSP for onward trips. Does a pax going TVF-MSP-MIA bring less value to the company than one going PDX-MSP-MIA? Probably.
BearX220 is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 11:41 am
  #231  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
Also, the real way to assess these routes is not on a stand-alone basis, as I doubt many pax are getting off at Minneapolis for the Twins game, but on the value of the total influx of small-market pax into MSP for onward trips. Does a pax going TVF-MSP-MIA bring less value to the company than one going PDX-MSP-MIA? Probably.
On the occasions network carriers discuss route profitability, they're not talking about the absolutely profitability of the hub-spoke route. The contribution to the network is absolutely considered.

Of course, since the pax going TVF-MSP-MIA is the only one on the plane between TVF and MSP, its less valuable than 1 of 160 passengers on a PDX-MSP flight.
sxf24 is offline  
Old Jul 25, 11, 2:38 pm
  #232  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
Originally Posted by hazelrah View Post
Nowhere in the press release does Delta use the word "unprofitable". It uses "under-performing" and it cites "$14 million annual loss". Is this loss due to one route, a few, many but not all? We don't know , and it is the mainstream media and some that have jumped on the announcement and has used the word "unprofitable"
You aren't serious, right? The mainstream media and "some" use the term "unprofitable" because something is "unprofitable" when expenses exceed revenues. Another word for this would be "loss".
pbarnette is offline  
Old Oct 5, 11, 6:24 am
  #233  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,559
Q & A piece from the NY Times with the Mayor of Hibbing MN and a City Councilor regarding Delta's planned service reductions:

From Hibbing, Minn., a Plea for Planes to Keep Flying
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/us...ep-flying.html

The city's arguments aren't particularly compelling but thought it would be of interest.
FLLDL is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: