compensateme wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I realized something, maybe this is the reason G4 doesn't do DTW, maybe the lack of travers going from Detroit to Punta Gorda and Sanford is the reason they don't fly to DTW. Most people in Detroit use MCO and RSW and it would make no sense to drive out of the way to SFB if you live in the corridor between Downtown Orlando and Tampa. FLL already has enough seats in correlation to PDEW, the only route that would probably work is PIE, but I wouldn't expect them to just add PIE with JAX and AUS, it would make no sense for G4 which in my opinion is why they don't fly to DTW. I'm conveniently located about 20 minutes south west of MCO also never would I go to SFB to catch a flight where I have both NK and F9 doing low cost at MCO direclty to DTW which is also located closer to family.

Haven't we been through this before? G4's niche is linking smaller (and select medium-sized), low-cost airports to "sun and fun" (Florida, LAS, LAX, etc.) destinations. DTW doesn't fit this model -- it's a very large, costly airport to operate from and it doesn't provide the "free" advertising that G4 thrives on. For example - when I'm home and at the gym during the noon hour, I see multiple commercials (across the channels) for FNT; these commercials very prominently feature G4 "...get to the Orlando and Tampa areas from here for as low as $39, the lowest fares in Michigan." G4 thrives off that free advertising*** -- in fact, it's the #1 way their passengers hear about the service.

Practically nobody flies G4 to go to Sanford, FL and few people fly into Punta Gorda to vacation there -- they merely serve as gateways into the Orlando and Fort Myers areas, respectively. It's just that the use of these secondary airports enables G4 to provide lower fares, which attracts budget-minder travelers. (Remember, during the Great Recession NK acknowledged it might move to SFB). Which is the problem -- DTW has sufficient low-cost service into MCO, TPA & RSW. Until G4's business model changes, they're not coming here.

***I know somebody's going to respond 'it's really not free advertising because G4's fees are paid into FNT's budget, which is used to pay for advertising.' Wrong. FNT has historically relied on marketing campaigns, even during the periods its service was primarily turboprops to DTW; thus, it would be paying for marketing, anyway. Not to mention that a large chunk of its budget comes from county taxpayers (not atypical of community airports).

We may have gone through it before but I probably wasn't proactive and didn't include it in my notes, trust me I have a huge Google Docs sheet that explains a.net theories and points I've collected, and this wasn't one of them.

OTOH, my point is MCO and RSW are much more convenient for the travel base that DTW is catering to.

I really think that if the city of Detroit got their act together and brought the facilities at DET up to snuff they could successfully sell it to Allegiant. Because lets face it DET is the epicenter of the traveling public that patronizes them. The marginal income family that would like to take a family vacation some where and Allegiant would allow those families to do that.

compensateme wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I realized something, maybe this is the reason G4 doesn't do DTW, maybe the lack of travers going from Detroit to Punta Gorda and Sanford is the reason they don't fly to DTW. Most people in Detroit use MCO and RSW and it would make no sense to drive out of the way to SFB if you live in the corridor between Downtown Orlando and Tampa. FLL already has enough seats in correlation to PDEW, the only route that would probably work is PIE, but I wouldn't expect them to just add PIE with JAX and AUS, it would make no sense for G4 which in my opinion is why they don't fly to DTW. I'm conveniently located about 20 minutes south west of MCO also never would I go to SFB to catch a flight where I have both NK and F9 doing low cost at MCO direclty to DTW which is also located closer to family.

Haven't we been through this before? G4's niche is linking smaller (and select medium-sized), low-cost airports to "sun and fun" (Florida, LAS, LAX, etc.) destinations. DTW doesn't fit this model -- it's a very large, costly airport to operate from and it doesn't provide the "free" advertising that G4 thrives on. For example - when I'm home and at the gym during the noon hour, I see multiple commercials (across the channels) for FNT; these commercials very prominently feature G4 "...get to the Orlando and Tampa areas from here for as low as $39, the lowest fares in Michigan." G4 thrives off that free advertising*** -- in fact, it's the #1 way their passengers hear about the service.

Practically nobody flies G4 to go to Sanford, FL and few people fly into Punta Gorda to vacation there -- they merely serve as gateways into the Orlando and Fort Myers areas, respectively. It's just that the use of these secondary airports enables G4 to provide lower fares, which attracts budget-minder travelers. (Remember, during the Great Recession NK acknowledged it might move to SFB). Which is the problem -- DTW has sufficient low-cost service into MCO, TPA & RSW. Until G4's business model changes, they're not coming here.

***I know somebody's going to respond 'it's really not free advertising because G4's fees are paid into FNT's budget, which is used to pay for advertising.' Wrong. FNT has historically relied on marketing campaigns, even during the periods its service was primarily turboprops to DTW; thus, it would be paying for marketing, anyway. Not to mention that a large chunk of its budget comes from county taxpayers (not atypical of community airports).

No but KDET fits their model perfectly.

Glad to see that the 359 is making its debut in DTW. However, that is a huge seat count downgrade to ICN and NRT from the 744. I suppose it will drive yields and KE might come in...

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Glad to see that the 359 is making its debut in DTW. However, that is a huge seat count downgrade to ICN and NRT from the 744. I suppose it will drive yields and KE might come in...

Sort of. DL has rotated between the 777 and 744 between DTW & NRT, ICN & PVG over the past few years (and even this year, ICN & PVG have flipped between the 777 and 744). While Pacific ASM to/from DTW will be down in 2018 compared to 2017, they won't be that far off their 5-year average. 2017 can be viewed as an outlier necessitated by DL's decision to wind down the 744 fleet and concentrate ops in a single market.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Glad to see that the 359 is making its debut in DTW. However, that is a huge seat count downgrade to ICN and NRT from the 744. I suppose it will drive yields and KE might come in...

With the draw-down of DL service at NRT, I think the 359 is the perfect aircraft size for this route. As for ICN, I called it that they could get KE in on a JV deal or a second DL flight, any way you approach it from a yield or profit standpoint the best second aircraft for ICN would be a 777-200ER. The 77L is remaining on PVG for now, if DL wanted they could always code share with MU on a second PVG flight.

So here is my question. I read on another post that MAN-SFO is doing poorly at 165 passengers a day in the summer only flights. Given that would VS have not have been much better off starting DTW-MAN at the same frequency with a shorter stage length with an abundance of connections that surely would have filled the flight on most days why would they not at least attempt DTW-MAN and mature the route these are the things I don't get. Is it more of an ego thing saying hey look Virgin flies nonstop to SFO 2 or three days a week would without fail be at least as much profitable if not more than the SFO link.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Glad to see that the 359 is making its debut in DTW. However, that is a huge seat count downgrade to ICN and NRT from the 744. I suppose it will drive yields and KE might come in...

It's going to be interesting to see how they make this up. So far ICN is covered with the extra ATL capacity

klm617 wrote:

So here is my question. I read on another post that MAN-SFO is doing poorly at 165 passengers a day in the summer only flights. Given that would VS have not have been much better off starting DTW-MAN at the same frequency with a shorter stage length with an abundance of connections that surely would have filled the flight on most days why would they not at least attempt DTW-MAN and mature the route these are the things I don't get. Is it more of an ego thing saying hey look Virgin flies nonstop to SFO 2 or three days a week would without fail be at least as much profitable if not more than the SFO link.

I don't think DTW would do any better even with feed because as of 2016, only 5,000 or so passengers from Detroit went to Manchester which isn't a lot, but that's better than prior years, so it would be better to wait a few more years to see what kind of growth is in the market before making any action.

flymco753 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

So here is my question. I read on another post that MAN-SFO is doing poorly at 165 passengers a day in the summer only flights. Given that would VS have not have been much better off starting DTW-MAN at the same frequency with a shorter stage length with an abundance of connections that surely would have filled the flight on most days why would they not at least attempt DTW-MAN and mature the route these are the things I don't get. Is it more of an ego thing saying hey look Virgin flies nonstop to SFO 2 or three days a week would without fail be at least as much profitable if not more than the SFO link.

I don't think DTW would do any better even with feed because as of 2016, only 5,000 or so passengers from Detroit went to Manchester which isn't a lot, but that's better than prior years, so it would be better to wait a few more years to see what kind of growth is in the market before making any action.

That's actually pretty good. If you run it three times a week in the months of June, July and August that's 138 passengers from the O/D passengers from Detroit alone. If it's daily in those 3 months that's 55 O/D passengers from Detroit hence the 757 is perfect and add to that the transfer passengers

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

AM is ending MTY service on Saturday July 15. Short lived, the route must have performed poorly. OTOH, MEX will remain. Maybe AM will go for BJX, QRO or GDL next? Only issue is, Y4 couldn't do GDL too if AM did it because the markets not big enough for 2.

flymco753 wrote:

AM is ending MTY service on Saturday July 15. Short lived, the route must have performed poorly. OTOH, MEX will remain. Maybe AM will go for BJX, QRO or GDL next? Only issue is, Y4 couldn't do GDL too if AM did it because the markets not big enough for 2.

Stay tuned watch for Delta to kick AM out of the Detroit market while they allow them to grow in Atlanta. Just more of the same.

WN also returns with Saturday MCO service.

WN will fly in the MAX 8 next winter from BWI,

WN's dropping a flight to DEN next winter, which is surprising. Plenty of sub-$100 fares available right now -- grab them will they last...

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

AM is ending MTY service on Saturday July 15. Short lived, the route must have performed poorly. OTOH, MEX will remain. Maybe AM will go for BJX, QRO or GDL next? Only issue is, Y4 couldn't do GDL too if AM did it because the markets not big enough for 2.

Stay tuned watch for Delta to kick AM out of the Detroit market while they allow them to grow in Atlanta. Just more of the same.

DL is working for profit. They'll keep the JV routes from DTW to Mexico if they're profitable enough to warrant it.

klm617 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I realized something, maybe this is the reason G4 doesn't do DTW, maybe the lack of travers going from Detroit to Punta Gorda and Sanford is the reason they don't fly to DTW. Most people in Detroit use MCO and RSW and it would make no sense to drive out of the way to SFB if you live in the corridor between Downtown Orlando and Tampa. FLL already has enough seats in correlation to PDEW, the only route that would probably work is PIE, but I wouldn't expect them to just add PIE with JAX and AUS, it would make no sense for G4 which in my opinion is why they don't fly to DTW. I'm conveniently located about 20 minutes south west of MCO also never would I go to SFB to catch a flight where I have both NK and F9 doing low cost at MCO direclty to DTW which is also located closer to family.

Haven't we been through this before? G4's niche is linking smaller (and select medium-sized), low-cost airports to "sun and fun" (Florida, LAS, LAX, etc.) destinations. DTW doesn't fit this model -- it's a very large, costly airport to operate from and it doesn't provide the "free" advertising that G4 thrives on. For example - when I'm home and at the gym during the noon hour, I see multiple commercials (across the channels) for FNT; these commercials very prominently feature G4 "...get to the Orlando and Tampa areas from here for as low as $39, the lowest fares in Michigan." G4 thrives off that free advertising*** -- in fact, it's the #1 way their passengers hear about the service.

Practically nobody flies G4 to go to Sanford, FL and few people fly into Punta Gorda to vacation there -- they merely serve as gateways into the Orlando and Fort Myers areas, respectively. It's just that the use of these secondary airports enables G4 to provide lower fares, which attracts budget-minder travelers. (Remember, during the Great Recession NK acknowledged it might move to SFB). Which is the problem -- DTW has sufficient low-cost service into MCO, TPA & RSW. Until G4's business model changes, they're not coming here.

***I know somebody's going to respond 'it's really not free advertising because G4's fees are paid into FNT's budget, which is used to pay for advertising.' Wrong. FNT has historically relied on marketing campaigns, even during the periods its service was primarily turboprops to DTW; thus, it would be paying for marketing, anyway. Not to mention that a large chunk of its budget comes from county taxpayers (not atypical of community airports).

No but KDET fits their model perfectly.

It costs money to bring KDET up to shape for commercial service. That means fees.
Still, FNT is only an hour's ​drive from Detroit, so G4 would only move for an incentive

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

AM is ending MTY service on Saturday July 15. Short lived, the route must have performed poorly. OTOH, MEX will remain. Maybe AM will go for BJX, QRO or GDL next? Only issue is, Y4 couldn't do GDL too if AM did it because the markets not big enough for 2.

Stay tuned watch for Delta to kick AM out of the Detroit market while they allow them to grow in Atlanta. Just more of the same.

DL is working for profit. They'll keep the JV routes from DTW to Mexico if they're profitable enough to warrant it.

I did dummy bookings and MTY was wide open, too much capacity for a daily A319 and E190, OTOH the codeshare never happened on this flight.

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

Incentives: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... iption.pdf

A3A and A3B of that policy: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... 1_2015.pdf

These deals are ultimately better than what airports around the area are offering.

flymco753 wrote:

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

Incentives: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... iption.pdf

A3A and A3B of that policy: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... 1_2015.pdf

These deals are ultimately better than what airports around the area are offering.

So then in reading all this I wonder if KEF would get the incentives as it was served by scheduled service before and perhaps that's why we keep getting over looked. I also think if that's the case the rule should be waved as it has been over 30 years since DTW had scheduled service to KEF

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

Incentives: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... iption.pdf

A3A and A3B of that policy: http://www.wcaa.us/Portals/WCAACorp/WCA ... 1_2015.pdf

These deals are ultimately better than what airports around the area are offering.

So then in reading all this I wonder if KEF would get the incentives as it was served by scheduled service before and perhaps that's why we keep getting over looked. I also think if that's the case the rule should be waved as it has been over 30 years since DTW had scheduled service to KEF

IMHO, if any Euro LCC should go to DTW, it needs to be WW. While FI would be nice, WW is still cheaper and the flyers in Detroit would appreciate the lower fare, just look at how successful NK is, WW uses that same model and that's what DTW travelers could benefit off of the most. Sure you have DY, but that's more of a p2p sale where WW would connect to various markets and stimulate markets. DY will come eventually, but you have to watch out because if WW or DY goes to YQG, that's a major issue.

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

I find it very interesting that anyone who claims to be in the know and is always defending the WCAA and they way they go about attracting new service at DTW has yet to comment on this question with facts that the WCAA is out there beating the pavement to bring more competition into the Detroit market and I believe that is because they can't defend the WCAA as far as marketing this airport effectively to bring new service and airlines into Detroit but that is just my two cents worth which really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

klm617 wrote:

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

I find it very interesting that anyone who claims to be in the know and is always defending the WCAA and they way they go about attracting new service at DTW has yet to comment on this question with facts that the WCAA is out there beating the pavement to bring more competition into the Detroit market and I believe that is because they can't defend the WCAA as far as marketing this airport effectively to bring new service and airlines into Detroit but that is just my two cents worth which really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

PDX and SFO both broke monopoly, that alone takes months over months to work out. International flights can take up to years.

klm617 wrote:

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

I find it very interesting that anyone who claims to be in the know and is always defending the WCAA and they way they go about attracting new service at DTW has yet to comment on this question with facts that the WCAA is out there beating the pavement to bring more competition into the Detroit market and I believe that is because they can't defend the WCAA as far as marketing this airport effectively to bring new service and airlines into Detroit but that is just my two cents worth which really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Nk's recent adds to OAK and SEA weren't pleasing enough? Or the fact NK is going year round with MSP, adding a 4th daily MCO and RSW flight, as well as aircraft upsizing on RSW, ATL, and IAH.

iFlyDTW wrote:

klm617 wrote:

kavok wrote:

Serious Question:
Does WCAA (or any other public entity) provide $ incentives for airlines to provide commercial service to/from DTW from new destinations?

There have been a lot of posts on this thread and others about how DTW doesn't receive the full amount of service the free market would naturally provide due to anti-Midwest bias.

We have seen other nearby airports that suffer from the same bias offer $ incentives to get airlines to start routes. Specifically, In talking about incentives that nudge a risk adverse airline into starting a service that could likely be very profitable. Many times those routes continue after the incentive ends because (as a surprise to some non-Midwesterners) they are actually profitable.

My question is whether DTW does (or has done) this, and if so, on which routes was it done? For an airport like DTW that suffers from a perception bias, it would seem like some incentive program would make sense.

I find it very interesting that anyone who claims to be in the know and is always defending the WCAA and they way they go about attracting new service at DTW has yet to comment on this question with facts that the WCAA is out there beating the pavement to bring more competition into the Detroit market and I believe that is because they can't defend the WCAA as far as marketing this airport effectively to bring new service and airlines into Detroit but that is just my two cents worth which really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Nk's recent adds to OAK and SEA weren't pleasing enough? Or the fact NK is going year round with MSP, adding a 4th daily MCO and RSW flight, as well as aircraft upsizing on RSW, ATL, and IAH.

Those are just capacity shifts not real adds in the sense of the word. They are dropping one LAX flight and making PHL seasonal. They have been operating 28 or so flights for a while now. Upgaguging is really not a big deal unless you're going from a narrow body to a wide body in my eyes. I am more international centric the last international carrier that added DTW was AF and since then we have lost 2 bonified international carriers KL and BA. Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

I've done some math, more or less statistical math.

I won't post all of the numbers I used to calculate this because that will include airline and airport fees, fuel burn, revenue, price per seat mile, etc.

If average fares for DTW-LHR nonstop are averaging ~$1,500 in October on one carrier, and BA entered the market, that average would decrease by 15% and it would bring average fares down to $1,125.

Now if WW entered the market and provided connections to LON via KEF, average fares to LON would decrease by 45% and the average fare would be around $900.

He reason LON doesn't carry a lot of passengers is because the market is obviously killed from high fares, so if you had WW begin service to DTW, than BA in the next 3 years, DTW could probably carry at least 75,000 per year from the DTW end only as opposed to the 50,000 right now.

London, is a strange market from Detroit. Perhaps, a Low Cost Carrier is probably the best direction to turn, reason being is; the connection opportunities to destinations that are not likely to be served nonstop can grow, or be stimulated. For example, DTW to BCN may not be able to have a nonstop flight at this time, but in the future, airlines like LEVEL, even Delta could consider it. The same obviously goes for other high originating markets in Europe that do not necessarily have what it takes to have a nonstop flight, besides, markets like MAN can grow to prove a nonstop flight is worthy, I just hope Warsaw sees the same effect.

LH begins 747 flights to FRA this Sunday, 2 JUL. What does this upgrade tell you about the FRA market?

Also, UA upgrades to a 739 in a few weeks too, what does that say about UA breaking a monopoly from DL? What have you noticed about yields?

The May passenger report for DTW shows YTD numbers flat compared to 2016. I predicted this earlier this year based on the January and February figures.

klm617 wrote:

Those are just capacity shifts not real adds in the sense of the word. Upgaguging is really not a big deal unless you're going from a narrow body to a wide body in my eyes. I am more international centric the last international carrier that added DTW was AF and since then we have lost 2 bonified international carriers KL and BA. Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

So upgauging and downgauging aren't important unless it's Delta exchanging old 744s for slightly smaller, but brand new 359s. Then it's the end of the world, in your eyes.
How would DTW passengers be loyal to airlines that don't even fly here?
PS --It's bona fide, not bonified.

johns624 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Those are just capacity shifts not real adds in the sense of the word. Upgaguging is really not a big deal unless you're going from a narrow body to a wide body in my eyes. I am more international centric the last international carrier that added DTW was AF and since then we have lost 2 bonified international carriers KL and BA. Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

So upgauging and downgauging aren't important unless it's Delta exchanging old 744s for slightly smaller, but brand new 359s. Then it's the end of the world, in your eyes.
How would DTW passengers be loyal to airlines that don't even fly here?
PS --It's bona fide, not bonified.

By not using the JetBlue code shares through BOS and not driving to ORD or YYZ to get a cheaper fare if they want Detroit business then let them fly here.

klm617 wrote:

Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

I don't get it. What on earth are you talking about? Are you saying we should boycott an airline simply because they don't serve DTW?

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

I don't get it. What on earth are you talking about? Are you saying we should boycott an airline simply because they don't serve DTW?

I just never get it, either...does anyone really think the poster-who-should not-be-named has any idea what he/she/it is talking about?

Until now, I thought "loonies" were a uniquely Canadian thing... I think at least one has migrated south...

11725Flyer wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

I don't get it. What on earth are you talking about? Are you saying we should boycott an airline simply because they don't serve DTW?

Absolutely not I don't patronize any airline that doesn't serve the Detroit market. First of all do you think there would be 3 FI flights from BOS to KEF if not for the B6 feed why prop up numbers at BOS, ORD and YYZ at the expense of DTW that's part of the problem why Detroit can't get any new flights. Detroit with out a doubt is a viable market for FI, LO and EK but because everybody choses to accept these double connections over Boston or driving to ORD or YYZ they don't serve this market.

johns624 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Those are just capacity shifts not real adds in the sense of the word. Upgaguging is really not a big deal unless you're going from a narrow body to a wide body in my eyes. I am more international centric the last international carrier that added DTW was AF and since then we have lost 2 bonified international carriers KL and BA. Again I think the approached that needs to be tan with the ME3 or FI should be what do we need to do to bring you into this market rather than he is what we are offering take it or leave it and these carriers that are unwilling or uninterested in the DTW market should be known so the people of Detroit know where they stand with these carriers and don't continue to be loyal to them.

So upgauging and downgauging aren't important unless it's Delta exchanging old 744s for slightly smaller, but brand new 359s. Then it's the end of the world, in your eyes.
How would DTW passengers be loyal to airlines that don't even fly here?
PS --It's bona fide, not bonified.

Not when they are shifting capacity from DTW to ATL by down sizing ICN and doubling up on that route and when they are shifting capacity from DTW to MSP on the AMS route when is the last time capacity has been shifted to Detroit at the expense of another hub I don't think ever. I even understand the reduction of GRU from 7 days to 3 because Detroit is not geographically located foe South American connections but there is no better connecting point for Europe and Asia in the Delta network than Detroit and it should not lose market share to other less convenient airports.

Spirit upgraded IAH back to an A321 for the winter, that's not spectacular news but it shows growth specifically for NK to IAH which is mostly regional jets for DL and UA. I think NK will be up to 35 flights by 2020.

iFlyDTW wrote:

Spirit upgraded IAH back to an A321 for the winter, that's not spectacular news but it shows growth specifically for NK to IAH which is mostly regional jets for DL and UA. I think NK will be up to 35 flights by 2020.

Spirit needs to hook up with WOW Air and feed them through Detroit

It is quite evident that DTW is an airport in decline. Every quarter it continues to lose market share it is now second last as far as hubs go only SLC having less traffic than Detroit. As more and more second tier cities get added with international flight expect to see Detroit's position as a world class hub continue to decline. We have a hub airline that has to make sure not to piss of the government officials in Minnesota which hampers Detroit's growth and the fact that Atlanta need to maintain it's status as the worlds busiest airport hence traffic will always be routed away from other hubs to hold onto that status. My question is what happens when Atlanta is surpassed by some other airport as having more enplanements than Atlanta and my guess would be they will then spin Atlanta of as the largest hub in the USA. The airport council here at Detroit has allowed our position to erode away as a world class airport to protect Delta's status here. One must keep in mind that just because the airport is called Detroit Metro Airport doesn't exactly mean it serves the city of Detroit. DTW is more an airport of the region now than it is the city of Detroit itself. I think very few people understand that fact and assume because the airport has the city of Detroit's name in it that that is the market it serves which couldn't be further from the truth. Perhaps it's time for a name change at the airport to remove the negative stigma that it has for being connected to a city in decline. Perhaps it should be renamed the Southeast Michigan International Airport to more identify with the market it actually serves. Either way it's time for the WCAA to stop putting all it's eggs in the Delta basket because the time has also long since passed that Delta is going to hatch any of these eggs. Out of all the hubs in the USA except for Charlotte which is always getting upgrades and additions from American Airlines showing their commitment to growing that market The Southeast Michigan International Airport has the least amount of customer choice because of the lack of out of the box thinking and the lack of ability to effectively market this airport to prospective suitors. Time and time again airlines are choosing lessor cities to add to their network than Detroit. This market again will be posting flat numbers as far as enplanements for 2017 when more and more people are flying than ever and we are losing out on that revenue every day by not bringing in more options and by Delta constantly cutting capacity at DTW while adding it every where else in their network just to keep ticket prices as high as they can in this market to subsidize all the cheap fares the have to offer in the big markets because of the still competition they face in places like BOS,NYC and LAX.

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

reasonable wrote:

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

Actually, the lounge (in the central area) at DTW was my favorite lounge in the Delta system. Too many of their "upgrades" at other airports went to making sleek, bland, and plastic-y spaces.. more like glorified Student Union Buildings than clubs.

The DTW lounge actually felt "clubby".... has it deteriorated? That would be a shame... and might give DL an excuse to come in and slather it in white plastic, like all the other "upgrades"...

klm617 wrote:

It is quite evident that DTW is an airport in decline. Every quarter it continues to lose market share it is now second last as far as hubs go only SLC having less traffic than Detroit. As more and more second tier cities get added with international flight expect to see Detroit's position as a world class hub continue to decline. We have a hub airline that has to make sure not to piss of the government officials in Minnesota which hampers Detroit's growth and the fact that Atlanta need to maintain it's status as the worlds busiest airport hence traffic will always be routed away from other hubs to hold onto that status. My question is what happens when Atlanta is surpassed by some other airport as having more enplanements than Atlanta and my guess would be they will then spin Atlanta of as the largest hub in the USA. The airport council here at Detroit has allowed our position to erode away as a world class airport to protect Delta's status here. One must keep in mind that just because the airport is called Detroit Metro Airport doesn't exactly mean it serves the city of Detroit. DTW is more an airport of the region now than it is the city of Detroit itself. I think very few people understand that fact and assume because the airport has the city of Detroit's name in it that that is the market it serves which couldn't be further from the truth. Perhaps it's time for a name change at the airport to remove the negative stigma that it has for being connected to a city in decline. Perhaps it should be renamed the Southeast Michigan International Airport to more identify with the market it actually serves. Either way it's time for the WCAA to stop putting all it's eggs in the Delta basket because the time has also long since passed that Delta is going to hatch any of these eggs. Out of all the hubs in the USA except for Charlotte which is always getting upgrades and additions from American Airlines showing their commitment to growing that market The Southeast Michigan International Airport has the least amount of customer choice because of the lack of out of the box thinking and the lack of ability to effectively market this airport to prospective suitors. Time and time again airlines are choosing lessor cities to add to their network than Detroit. This market again will be posting flat numbers as far as enplanements for 2017 when more and more people are flying than ever and we are losing out on that revenue every day by not bringing in more options and by Delta constantly cutting capacity at DTW while adding it every where else in their network just to keep ticket prices as high as they can in this market to subsidize all the cheap fares the have to offer in the big markets because of the still competition they face in places like BOS,NYC and LAX.

1. It's still Delta's 2nd-biggest hub
2. Southeast Michigan is in decline as well. Look at Flint

reasonable wrote:

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

No plans, IMHO the A Concourse is starting to show some age, outdated bathrooms, no nursing areas for mothers, areas of the terminal smell horrid, IMHO that terminal looks like it belongs in 2005. ATL's F Concourse is far much better.

flymco753 wrote:

reasonable wrote:

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

No plans, IMHO the A Concourse is starting to show some age, outdated bathrooms, no nursing areas for mothers, areas of the terminal smell horrid, IMHO that terminal looks like it belongs in 2005. ATL's F Concourse is far much better.

About the smell in the terminal, I was waiting for my flight to ATL on Tuesday morning and it smelled like someone took soda and smeared it all over the place, it had that sticky soda smell. Other parts of the terminal have a strange odor, and the bathrooms smell horrible even after someone cleans it.

flymco753 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

reasonable wrote:

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

No plans, IMHO the A Concourse is starting to show some age, outdated bathrooms, no nursing areas for mothers, areas of the terminal smell horrid, IMHO that terminal looks like it belongs in 2005. ATL's F Concourse is far much better.

About the smell in the terminal, I was waiting for my flight to ATL on Tuesday morning and it smelled like someone took soda and smeared it all over the place, it had that sticky soda smell. Other parts of the terminal have a strange odor, and the bathrooms smell horrible even after someone cleans it.

If you honestly think it's that bad, than tell the WCAA because I have no problems with the McNamara Terminal, I think it's one of the most if not the most modern airport facility in the US.

iFlyDTW wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

No plans, IMHO the A Concourse is starting to show some age, outdated bathrooms, no nursing areas for mothers, areas of the terminal smell horrid, IMHO that terminal looks like it belongs in 2005. ATL's F Concourse is far much better.

About the smell in the terminal, I was waiting for my flight to ATL on Tuesday morning and it smelled like someone took soda and smeared it all over the place, it had that sticky soda smell. Other parts of the terminal have a strange odor, and the bathrooms smell horrible even after someone cleans it.

If you honestly think it's that bad, than tell the WCAA because I have no problems with the McNamara Terminal, I think it's one of the most if not the most modern airport facility in the US.

I assume you've never been to the F Concourse in ATL, IND, SAN, TPA, MCO, or DEN which all have far better facilities.

flymco753 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

reasonable wrote:

Does DL plan to upgrade the shitty club lounges in McNamara?

No plans, IMHO the A Concourse is starting to show some age, outdated bathrooms, no nursing areas for mothers, areas of the terminal smell horrid, IMHO that terminal looks like it belongs in 2005. ATL's F Concourse is far much better.

About the smell in the terminal, I was waiting for my flight to ATL on Tuesday morning and it smelled like someone took soda and smeared it all over the place, it had that sticky soda smell. Other parts of the terminal have a strange odor, and the bathrooms smell horrible even after someone cleans it.

I agree the last time I was there the bathrooms were horrible.

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

It is quite evident that DTW is an airport in decline. Every quarter it continues to lose market share it is now second last as far as hubs go only SLC having less traffic than Detroit. As more and more second tier cities get added with international flight expect to see Detroit's position as a world class hub continue to decline. We have a hub airline that has to make sure not to piss of the government officials in Minnesota which hampers Detroit's growth and the fact that Atlanta need to maintain it's status as the worlds busiest airport hence traffic will always be routed away from other hubs to hold onto that status. My question is what happens when Atlanta is surpassed by some other airport as having more enplanements than Atlanta and my guess would be they will then spin Atlanta of as the largest hub in the USA. The airport council here at Detroit has allowed our position to erode away as a world class airport to protect Delta's status here. One must keep in mind that just because the airport is called Detroit Metro Airport doesn't exactly mean it serves the city of Detroit. DTW is more an airport of the region now than it is the city of Detroit itself. I think very few people understand that fact and assume because the airport has the city of Detroit's name in it that that is the market it serves which couldn't be further from the truth. Perhaps it's time for a name change at the airport to remove the negative stigma that it has for being connected to a city in decline. Perhaps it should be renamed the Southeast Michigan International Airport to more identify with the market it actually serves. Either way it's time for the WCAA to stop putting all it's eggs in the Delta basket because the time has also long since passed that Delta is going to hatch any of these eggs. Out of all the hubs in the USA except for Charlotte which is always getting upgrades and additions from American Airlines showing their commitment to growing that market The Southeast Michigan International Airport has the least amount of customer choice because of the lack of out of the box thinking and the lack of ability to effectively market this airport to prospective suitors. Time and time again airlines are choosing lessor cities to add to their network than Detroit. This market again will be posting flat numbers as far as enplanements for 2017 when more and more people are flying than ever and we are losing out on that revenue every day by not bringing in more options and by Delta constantly cutting capacity at DTW while adding it every where else in their network just to keep ticket prices as high as they can in this market to subsidize all the cheap fares the have to offer in the big markets because of the still competition they face in places like BOS,NYC and LAX.

1. It's still Delta's 2nd-biggest hub
2. Southeast Michigan is in decline as well. Look at Flint

It's not it's Delta's third largest hub and in decline and Flint isn't part of southeast Michigan. Just because DTW is a Delta hub doesn't mean they can't look else where as far as service enhancements.

alfa164 wrote:

Actually, the lounge (in the central area) at DTW was my favorite lounge in the Delta system. Too many of their "upgrades" at other airports went to making sleek, bland, and plastic-y spaces.. more like glorified Student Union Buildings than clubs.

The DTW lounge actually felt "clubby".... has it deteriorated? That would be a shame... and might give DL an excuse to come in and slather it in white plastic, like all the other "upgrades"...

NW dumped a ton of money into renovating the DTW & MSP WorldClubs shortly before the merger so DL let them be (for the most part). IMO, the clubs at DTW & MSP are a step above the DL clubs, although their design is now a decade old so I can understand why some would like to see it change. MSP was renovated earlier this year but I haven't been to it -- I hear it wasn't a dratic change, but rather a minor update.

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

It is quite evident that DTW is an airport in decline. Every quarter it continues to lose market share it is now second last as far as hubs go only SLC having less traffic than Detroit. As more and more second tier cities get added with international flight expect to see Detroit's position as a world class hub continue to decline. We have a hub airline that has to make sure not to piss of the government officials in Minnesota which hampers Detroit's growth and the fact that Atlanta need to maintain it's status as the worlds busiest airport hence traffic will always be routed away from other hubs to hold onto that status. My question is what happens when Atlanta is surpassed by some other airport as having more enplanements than Atlanta and my guess would be they will then spin Atlanta of as the largest hub in the USA. The airport council here at Detroit has allowed our position to erode away as a world class airport to protect Delta's status here. One must keep in mind that just because the airport is called Detroit Metro Airport doesn't exactly mean it serves the city of Detroit. DTW is more an airport of the region now than it is the city of Detroit itself. I think very few people understand that fact and assume because the airport has the city of Detroit's name in it that that is the market it serves which couldn't be further from the truth. Perhaps it's time for a name change at the airport to remove the negative stigma that it has for being connected to a city in decline. Perhaps it should be renamed the Southeast Michigan International Airport to more identify with the market it actually serves. Either way it's time for the WCAA to stop putting all it's eggs in the Delta basket because the time has also long since passed that Delta is going to hatch any of these eggs. Out of all the hubs in the USA except for Charlotte which is always getting upgrades and additions from American Airlines showing their commitment to growing that market The Southeast Michigan International Airport has the least amount of customer choice because of the lack of out of the box thinking and the lack of ability to effectively market this airport to prospective suitors. Time and time again airlines are choosing lessor cities to add to their network than Detroit. This market again will be posting flat numbers as far as enplanements for 2017 when more and more people are flying than ever and we are losing out on that revenue every day by not bringing in more options and by Delta constantly cutting capacity at DTW while adding it every where else in their network just to keep ticket prices as high as they can in this market to subsidize all the cheap fares the have to offer in the big markets because of the still competition they face in places like BOS,NYC and LAX.

1. It's still Delta's 2nd-biggest hub
2. Southeast Michigan is in decline as well. Look at Flint

It's not it's Delta's third largest hub and in decline and Flint isn't part of southeast Michigan. Just because DTW is a Delta hub doesn't mean they can't look else where as far as service enhancements.

And so they got NK to hub DTW.