MSP to lose NRT route???
 

Was talking to a friend of the family who's a FA and does a lot of MSP-NRT. They indicated that they have been advised to make plans to base out of ATL or DTW late 2010 - early 2011.

I'll believe it when I see it. MSP-NRT isn't the only route that is staffed by the MSP base. Sounds like something taken out of context or somebody being waaaaay melodramatic about the merger.

I didn't take it to say the base is closing or anything. MSP will still have hundreds of flights. I took it mean that if she wanted to keep flying to NRT she'd have to move or commute. I'm hoping it ends up not being correct.

If DL starts removing the domestic direct flights to cities I travel to I will be gone. This is a big loss for MSP. There are a number of major companies in the area to regularly fly that route such as 3M, Metronics and others. The flights are always packed.

This flight has always been quite full when I have been on it, in both WBC and coach. I have been told by a manager at NW that it has always been consistently one of the most profitable flights from MSP.

Another one of DL brilliant moves. :rolleyes:

Motyrah -

I guess I misinterpreted your post. Ok... perhaps what will happen some day is a re-gaging of the route. In other words... take the 744 off and replace it with a 777. Until SOC (single operating certificate) that would indeed involve using pre merger DL FAs on the route. However, with SOC expected by the end of the year and a resolution to the AFA issue, it is likely that nothing but a change of a/c will occur.

Let's not let one interpretation of a comment be the cause for threats to leave NWA/DL and to make broad assumptions with regard to the network! This is DL after all... what they do this hour is likely to change by the end of the day.:D

Thanks for the laugh. Oh so true. ^

True... but when you see them putting all their eggs in one basket (LGA/JFK) to be the biggest there, one does have to wonder...

redtailshark said it all in another thread, the beancounters care about the SE US (ATL).

I wouldn't read too much into the activities in NYC. The build-up of LGA doesn't mean they're going to ignore the rest of the network. There are plenty of planes and people to go around without killing a hub to make LGA happen.

You are correct, but this is DL. AA did the same thing to STL; there were certainly plenty of planes and people to go around when they acquired TW. AA, however, did indeed kill a hub, mostly to make consolidation at ORD and DFW happen.

The current set of behaviors and decisions by DL management is eerily similar.

MSPers, be prepared to be STL-ized over the next few years. Good luck, you will need it. Maybe you will get lucky and WN will expand greatly at MSP just as they have at STL over the years to fill the domestic void.

it'll be a sad day when the cities lose the only non-stop to asia. i'll no longer be a nw/dl elite. if i have to make a connection, why would i pay delta for their inferior product when the choices abound.


wait.. i'll still be a lifetime silver. darn.

Not to divert the thread but just look at the shift of Comair from CVG to NYC.

Back on point, if DL can not take advantage of the Asia routes in a consistent manner then long term survival is in question.

That's an overly simplistic characterization of the STL situation, IMO.

AA bought TWA's assets in early 2001 and maintained nearly all of TWA's network until November, 2003, when AA downsized the hub in the face of staggering losses. That was just months after AA avoided filing for bankruptcy. Nevertheless, AA remains a very large presence at STL compared to any other legacy airline.

Southwest's presence at STL is about exactly what it was in 2003 when AA pruned the STL hub. WN's expansion at STL occurred prior to 2001 when AA bought TWA.

I don't see MSP being "STLd" given the much larger metropolitan area of MSP. The hubs that have been de-hubbed have tended to be much smaller metros, like PIT, IND, BNA, RDU and DAY (as well as STL). SJC (de-hubbed by AA twice) is much larger but is essentially the Bay area's ONT - it will never rival SFO (like ONT will never rival LAX). MSP is the only big airport in the entire region - and it will remain an important hub and international gateway, IMO.

Certain aircraft types are based at certain locations.

Pilots are based in locations where "their" aircraft type is based.

Flight attendants are based all over without regard to any specific type of aircraft (witness BOS, LAX, etc. bases for FAs. -- no aircraft are "based" there).

I think this is just a nasty rumor without much factual basis. Aside from all that, does DL really know the economy more than 12 months out to have already decided to cancel this route? Could we see frequency or equipment shifts? Sure. But I think it's way too far out to start planning on this "rumor".

The title of this thread is extremely misleading. Moderator - can you put a ? at the end of the title?

Information from flight attendants regarding long-term company plans needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Occasionally, however, they are right. For example, in 2006 we were told by an FA on NRT-DTW that they would be getting rid of WorldPerks. :D

mod., thanks for correcting the misspell in the title. it was bugging the heck out of me for the first couple of days when it appeared.

The 2000 census tab for the MSA of Minneapolis-St. Paul is about 2,900,000 with an estimate of 3,200,000 for year 2008.

The 2000 census tab for the MSA of St. Louis is about 2,700,000 with an estimate of 2,800,000 for 2008.

Not much difference in size.

size of the population doesn't give you a snap shot of the regional economy which probably is a better indicator for the feasibility of businesses such as airlines.

St. Louis has 8 firms in the 2009 Fortune 500 list and the Twin Cities 18. Every annual list of Inc. 500/5000 fastest growing private companies contain, by about 3:2, more Twin Cities metro area firms than those in St. Louis metro area.

Comparison of the Cities and St. Louis metro region isn't apple to apple in a hub related debate.

Knowing Delta, they'll take all the Northwest planes and send them to Atlanta. :rolleyes:

Simpler is better...ask any ex-TW FFer and you will get the same characterization.

AA started cutting back quickly after the purchase; routes/network are one thing, service cutbacks and 'adjustments' are another.



That is incorrect. As cited on another thread...

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/s...29/story1.html

WN continues to expand and by the end of 2009 or early/mid 2010, should eclipse AA as the dominant carrier.


You have a right to your opinion. In my opinion, MSP is on the same path that STL was, nearly 10 years ago. The signs are all there.

That's just false. Unless, of course, you count AA's 20% systemwide schedule reduction implemented on September 14, 2001 that continued until the schedules were largely restored in 2002.

AA's purchase of TWA's assets closed in April, 2001 and AA made no substantial changes to TWA's STL operation until the days following September 11, 2001, when it chopped the schedules in every AA city. Once the AA systemwide schedules were restored in 2002, AA maintained the STL schedule at almost the same level as existed in early 2001. AA did retire the DC-9s following September 11, 2001 and during the depths of its financial crisis in 2002 unloaded the replacement 717s. Nevertheless, the entire AA system shared in the reductions that those fleet reductions caused.

No, it's not incorrect. WN's STL operation was built up during the period prior to AA's purchase in 2001. Following the 2003 schedule reductions, WN added a few flights, including an additional nonstop to LAX (which was subsequently removed). WN is about the same size at STL as it was in April, 2001 and the article does not contradict that fact:

AA didn't announce the TWA purchase until early January, 2001, so 1999 size comparisons are irrelevant. Additionally, with AA's cutbacks in late 2003 (and those that have followed that pullback), STL's passenger counts have fallen, so of course WN's market share has increased.

No doubt WN will eventually become the dominant carrier at STL, much like at BWI, MDW, LAS, BUR, OAK and SJC.

You may very well be right that MSP will suffer the same fate as STL. After all, TWA wasn't making any money with its massive hub operation at STL for several reasons. Likewise, the fortress hub at MSP didn't create enough profits to keep NW out of bankruptcy in 2005 (nor did it prevent the prior financial problems suffered by NW in the early 1990s). So perhaps MSP will be downsized so traffic more closely matches O&D. STLd? I doubt it.

FWAAA is right on STL. I know that many ex-TWA and STLers are very upset, but the cutbacks were primarily due to the effects of 9/11 and the economic downturn unrelated to 9/11. Remember that the stock market started downward well before 9/11.

If 9/11 and the economic downturn had not happened, I believe that STL would still be an AA hub (albeit slightly smaller than TW's operation) and most of the TW employees would still be employed. AA correctly envisioned STL as a relief valve between ORD and DFW. AA just didn't envision 9/11 and the economic downturn (otherwise they would NEVER have purchased TW).

I would also note that if this rumor is true, that it is not inconsistent with NW's vision for MSP before the merger. MSP was never a major international hub. At the end of 2007, it was only the 18th busiest gateway in the US and it has never served even 3m international pax. Now, I recognize losing NRT would be visible, given that it is one of only 3-1/2 long-haul destinations that pre-merger NW served from MSP, but that they served so few destinations should tell you something about NW's assessment of its viability as a true international hub.

We're still just a little bent out of shape over losing nonstop 747 service to NYC! :D What, you can't make money with a 1/4 full 747 on a 900 mile route? Those were the days though!

so MSP loses NRT (ok..a big if).. it's gaining STL on WN in 2010! Somewhat ironic that there's this big MSP-STL debate going on here. :D

What signs?

MSP was a fortress hub and according to DOT data it was Northwest's most profitable hub. MSP dose not have the facilities to be a major hub for international flights. Two caracoules in international arrivals? It makes a better domestic hub.

I think if MSP were to EVER loose NRT and LHR, you would see the state offering some subsides to other airlines to start the routes.

MSP will contiunue to be a viable hub for Delta. Most of the cuts we have seen in the new system have been at CVG. There are also a lot of Fourtune 500 companies there and small businesses.

Not to mention, MSP was never seen as the major international gateway. That title was bestowed upon DTW. MSP was a prime domestic fortress hub with key links to international destinations.

It's been flowing around everywhere in the system saying that MSP will soon become a domestic domicile .. Those wanting to fly international trips should plan to transfer to all the 4 corners of the US (JFK, ATL, SEA, LAX) with supporting bases in DTW and SLC...

And that LHR-SEA is coming back with 767, of course! :)

Again, as one has mentioned, we'll believe it when we see it, right?

Eh, we all know WN is only going to fly MSP-STL because they know MikeMpls and WifeMpls will buy enough tickets to make the route profitable. :D

While I have no doubt that DL management is not in love with MSP and that DL management isn't going to hesitate to try to make MSP a second-tier kind of place for operations relative to ATL, JFK/LGA and even DTW, I have no doubt that MSP is a different -- and much more economically vibrant -- kind of market than STL. DL management will have a hard time pulling off a STL as quickly or as extensively as AA did to STL.

According to this article, MSP has been trying to lure other international service since at least 2006, apparently without success:

http://aviationweek.typepad.com/airp..._minneapo.html

My guess is that if NW were to drop LHR, that there might be some interest from another European carrier to add service (perhaps BA or LH). If NW were to drop NRT, however, I would doubt that any Asian carrier would be that quick to add service. Without access to the NW feed, I just don't see there being enough market at MSP.

It would be absurd to drop MSP-NRT and MSP-AMS, as that's a gateway to Europe and SE Asia for passengers around the region. I can understand the business case for non-stops to cities other than NRT or AMS, due to the low demand for the individual cities. Of course, I'm assuming that the companies located in the area are flying their employees in business class.

But then again, those 19 Fortune 500 companies are asking for NW to cut service if they let their employees fly in coach.

I didn't know MSP has only two carousels for international arrivals! :eek:

But I think we can all agree that CVG ("World Gateway 948543598432") has to go. :D

- Pat

Ok, let's replace MSP/NW with ATL/DL in the above underlined:
"Likewise, the fortress (feel free to use massive, world's busiest, etc. here ;)) hub at ATL didn't create enough profits to keep DL out of bankruptcy in 2005 (nor did it prevent the prior financial problems suffered by DL in the early 1990s). So perhaps ATL will be downsized so traffic more closely matches O&D."

So why DL is EXPANDING at ATL, while shrinking at MSP/CVG, etc? :confused: :confused: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I would think KE to ICN would be a good substitute, and will be in a position to benefit from feed.

Atlantacentrism. RTS had a good post on it not too long ago.

But still -- this is info from FA's, and FA's are notoriously inaccurate sources of corporate planning info. Meanwhile, one post said "MSP to lost NRT" while another post says "CDG back". Roll your dice .... I really think everyone just has to wait and see. The end game won't really be apparently until after the economic recovery, by which time the airline landscape (esp. with regards to UA/US/AA) might be dramatically changed.

Not likely when every ticket is accompanied by a companion fare & the net average RT cost is $62.10. :D

I'm surprised at how quickly WN has expanded service here. I'm really not expecting more additions near term, but they can surprise me again if they wish. I was quite happy just to get the initial connections to MDW. :)

The only notable airline that MSP officials have tried to lure were Aeromexico a few years back, but AM pulled back after initially deciding to go ahead with expansion into MSP.

There had been rumors about LH off and on for years, but nothing materialized. Reasoning? Most likely it was the fierce protectionism that NW employed at its hubs, especially its prime profit center of MSP.

And the reason why NW has never had that many international flights out of MSP (even though in the past they did have the MSP-HKG run) is that DTW has better facilities since NW's last international growth spurt, and NW has always relied on the connections via NRT and AMS (and to a lesser extent the West Coast ops in SEA, SFO, LAX, etc.)

Read up more on the history of NW's operations and growth actions before assuming that MSP simply can't "support" more international service. NW was not MSP/DTW-centric in the same manner that DL is ATL-centric. This gave NW many clear advantages, IMO.