When will cancelled flights return?
 

Does anybody out there have any idea when Delta might reschedule the flights that were cancelled subsequent to 9/11. . In my experience, (I'm a PM and fly quite a bit throughout the year), traffic and fares are usually down this time of year. But fares have remained relativelly high and it is getting more and more difficult to book seats. I would think the airlines would be anxious to get the planes back in the air and the employees back on the payroll. (by the way, wasn't the huge subsidy Congress gave the airlines supposed to negate the needs for so many drastic cuts in service that the airlines have been dumping on us?) Does anybody have any answers?

Travel48

Supposedly the end of March.

Cancelled flights will return when there is the passenger loads and revenue to support them.

Read this again carefully and think! The effects of 9/11 have been horrible. However, if you really think about it something tells me this is just an excuse to trim the fat. You are right. I don't see any GREAT DEALS on airfares and I have NOT been on any empty planes lately. Less overhead, higher fares, decent passenger load (at least on the flights I have been on), plus money from the government. Sounds interesting to me.

Can you say "When Hell freezes over?"

I knew you could http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

The points that CALeeeIII brought out are right to the point. The question that I was trying to get feedback on is, "If the government was offering subsidies to the airlines to help them through the rough time brought on by the 9/11 tragedy, why the severe cutbacks and layoffs." If the subsidies were actually paid to the airlines, I don't see what the load factors and revenue have to do with it. Or were the subsidies contingent upon the airlines taking the actions they took? From a passenger point of view and from reading many of the posts on this forum, it seems to me that load factors are close to or above normal, especially for this time of year. Bottom line, my question is, "Are the airlines getting the subsidy along with the cutbacks, or did the government renege on the subsidy, thereby forcing the cutbacks?

Note that even including the bailout the airlines received from the government they still lost hundreds of millions of dollars. Ie: Delta lost $295 million in the 3rd quarter. I'm certainly not trying to justify them living off the government teat, but it didnt cover all of their loses pre or post 9/11.

The airlines have high costs. Except for Southwest, they are generally inefficient. Their corporate structures and labor contracts are so entrenched that it will be difficult to streamline costs.

Consider the revenue side. When the airlines lose their most profitable customers - the business travelers - they enter survival mode. It appears that the typical business traveler will not return soon at pre 9/11 full fare rates. That's a killer for the cents-per-passenger-mile calculation.

The new issue of Money Magazine has an article profiling the major carriers. It’s not pretty reading. The magazine recommends taking a chance on investing in UA as a "bottom feeder". That's what this industry has come to.

It's clear that times are so tough for the airlines that not all of them will survive. Except for Southwest, none of them are making money, nor have they been. Southwest has a market cap that is greater than the combined market caps of its six larger competitors! DL has a strong balance sheet, but the income statement doesn’t match. Does all of that that foretell danger in this industry? How long can US last without a merger?

Some fares - where the airlines want to create action - have been or continue to be as low as ever. Last week's one-day PIT sale. The continuing SIN fares. The usual Turkey Day sale fares. Current Europe sales (even though they may well be lower in January, based on past experience). Etc.

Think about another aspect of this whole situation. Airlines generally have their best results when the economy is doing well. Even though there were signs of a coming recession before 9/11, the economy continued to chug along this year until 9/11. Yet the airlines were losing money. Something’s wrong with the airline industry….

My guess is that it's likely that mostly full flights will be the general rule before very many cancelled flights will be resurrected. Yes, there are many full flights now. Try flying on a Sunday afternoon or a Monday morning or a Thursday or Friday evening. But many, many flights during the rest of the week are still running more than half-empty. That's not a healthy sign for an industry that is hemorrhaging.

I flew into MHT last evening and noticed a big UA banner advertising new service between MHT and IAD, a UA hub, starting in early December. That's evidence that some flights will resume or start anew. But I'm guessing that some of the more unprofitable mostly empty-plane routes of the past will not come back.

DL and the other carriers have an almost unsolvable puzzle. Virtually all of the things that we want, as frequent flyers, cost money. More flights. Better (or more) meals. Personalized service. More liberal upgrades. Easier routes to PM. Etc. Extra money is not something the airlines have to throw around these days. So either the airlines spend money that they don’t have, or they risk losing more of our business.

Sounds like a Hobson’s choice to me.

Here's a current article that indicates that many frequent flyers are not back in the skies and won't be for a while - or they may fly at a reduced level.

Not good news for those of us looking for more choices in flights.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/011119/nem038_1.html

I think you do have to look at the specific markets.
Delta is hurting most in the N/E market; especially if you look at the Shuttle load factor. A service pretty much tailored to business needs running at roughly 30%... I think Delta is missing a big money-maker here.

Actually, the real reasons are more likely intolerable security "enhancements" and service/ammentiy cuts. I'm not afraid to fly. I'm afraid of a crappy flying experience.

Maybe it's an attempt to build up a "home-defense" system. Make the travelers so miserable that they will attack a hijacker/terrorist with lethal force at the slightest provocation???



------------------
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

I agree 100% rcs85551. I'm sure DL looks at all of these issues from a different viewpoint than I do. There are some flight decisions I don't begin to understand, even though I know there are connection, competitive, and other issues that abound!

Sometimes I think the answers are so simple I don't see why DL and the other carriers don't get it. Some of those times I can step back and I still think I'm right. Other times it may be wishful (biased) thinking on my part!