N830MH

Ineed, it is. DL is being considering the 77W aircraft. I think the 77W aircraft is the right choice by replace 744 aircraft. It will help.

How about picking up some 77W from EK? When they retire the 77W aircraft. DL will acquired the 77W from EK.

77W routes:

ATL-NRT
ATL-JNB
ATL-GIG
ATL-GRU
ATL-DXB
ATL-TLV
ATL-LHR
JFK-TLV
JFK-NRT
JFK-HKG
JFK-LHR
JFK-BOM
JFK-DEL
JFK-DXB
SEA-HKG
SEA-PVG
SEA-PEK
SEA-NRT
DTW-NRT
DTW-PVG
DTW-NGO-MNL
DTW-TLV
LAX-NRT
LAX-SYD
LAX-MEL
LAX-AKL
LAX-PVG
LAX-PEK
LAX-HKG
LAX-TLV


How about more than 50 77W aircraft? Can they do that?

motytrah

DL and NW filed for on the same day as it was right before the law changed that would have seriously curtailed executive compensation. Differences between the two:

1) DL has run up over $10bn in losses since 2001, NW had only run up about $3bn.
2) NW had one of the largest cash on hand reserves (over $2.5bn) of any of the legacies.
3) NW had the second highest labor costs of any legacy at the time. Union contracts were keeping them from timing costs. NW exited BK with labor costs similar to WN. Although NW ended up treating its retirees much better than DL.
4) NW didn't need a bail out from anyone, whereas DL needed AMEX to pre-buy nearly a $1bn in miles.

The general consensus was that NW primarily entered BK specifically to break union labor contracts as they are previously not been able to do more than nibble around the edges of labor costs. Company insiders had started dumping stock 18 months previous to the BK.

Given NW's high labor costs it should have been in worse shape than DL, but it wasn't. Not by a long shot. Most likely reason for that was strong hubs and routes.

DL was one of the few non-union airlines and I'm scratching my head how they ended up so much worse than NW. I would assume like they were seriously mismanaged.

pbarnette

1) Only people who know nothing about balance sheets fixate on marginal differences in cash between insolvent enterprises. I work for a company that went from several billion in cash to minimal cash overnight. It reflected not one bit on the solvency of the enterprise.

2) If NW was not insolvent, then the bankruptcy courts would have never let them extinguish debts.

3) If your comments about company insiders are some sort of insinuation that they were engaging in insider information, I think it incumbent upon you to relay any such evidence to the proper authorities. As I doubt that will happen, I'll assume that it is a throw-away line meant to distract rather than inform.

4) Nobody that I am aware of has ever denied DL's bankruptcy or financial mismanagement, so your comparison serves what purpose?

5) You fully acknowledge that NW was loss-making, even as you try to minimize those substantial and sustained losses. Given that, and given events post-bankruptcy that have been correlated to profits, on what evidence do you base your assertion that the hubs and routes of a heretofore loss-making enterprise were "strong"?

Beckles

I doubt they were that high.
Wow, that is a ridiculous interpretation of what happened in my opinion. Both airlines needed financing to exit bankruptcy. Delta was able to secure from AMEX by pre-selling miles. Northwest sold junk bonds for $1.225 billion to provide their financing. DL certainly could have sold junk bonds if they wished, but I have little doubt the terms provided by AMEX were better.
DL is not a 'non-union airline' ... they are relatively non-unionized compared to the airline industry in general, but their pilots are unionized and are a significant portion of their labor costs.

rylan

Anyway... back to the topic for the 744/767 replacements. Whichever way DL decided to go, I think there is one thing all (or most) of us can agree upon... its going to be configured like a sardine can in back, aka 739.

Beckles

You mean like 10 across seating on the 777? Oh wait, DL doesn't do that now ...

Mishap

Throw in 739 sized seats and you might get 11 across. Can't imagine a better marketing strategy for selling BE seats. I'm betting someone's already done the calculations to see if a 772 can get off the ground w/ 450 people crammed inside.

motytrah

Let's cut to the chase here. The fact that DL accrued $10bn in losses even though they had much lower labor costs compared to NWs $3bn. If those routes and hubs (probably not MEM) were as weak as you are infering then NW should have been in much worse shape than DL.

Specifically speaking to TPAC at the time they were the most valuable part of the company. They put them up for collateral for the DIP bonds. To quote Moodys:

Beckles

There's enough legitimate complaints about Delta I really don't see the benefit of concocting ridiculous hypothetical ones.

readywhenyouare

Now there's an idea. An 11 across arrangement in 3 - 5 - 3 would still meet the FAA regulation of being no more than two seats from an aisle. If you pitch the idea to Delta they might throw a few Skypesos your way.

Oh, and to keep the blood flowing, every 30 minutes an excercise video will automatically play on your IFE screen showing various stretches.

us2

I think it will be a decision made by bean counters for bean counters. For all we know, this is public posturing for negotiating purposes and has nothing at all to do with what they really have in mind.

jimrpa

Stop giving Delta ideas! Remember, it will be come "An enhancement our customers asked for!"

jimrpa

I'm sure if they "re-engine" it. Their might be some old SSMEs (Space Shuttle Main Engines) laying around. Then they could turn the 777 attic into even more passenger space!

jimrpa

A Ford TriMotor would be a vast improvement over an A330 (ok, well, maybe at least a VC10 or a 707)

readywhenyouare

I'm getting ready for Delta's new seating enhancement to be launched on these new aircraft. These guys look really comfortable.