JetBlue can ask DOT to review it and whatever else they want. To me, its laughable that the DOT will even seriously entertain JetBlue's request when after all, JetBlue has ties to the heavily government subsidized Emirates airlines. Not to worry boys and girls (and B6) tthis JVA will go through. There are more important things at play here than B6's ridiculous request.

jumbojet wrote:

JetBlue can ask DOT to review it and whatever else they want. To me, its laughable that the DOT will even seriously entertain JetBlue's request when after all, JetBlue has ties to the heavily government subsidized Emirates airlines. Not to worry boys and girls (and B6) tthis JVA will go through. There are more important things at play here than B6's ridiculous request.

Probably just JetBlue giving Delta a taste of their own medicine for the Atlanta gate fiasco. Can't believe JetBlue would stoop so low as to use the same tactics that Delta does when they don't get their way.

KarelXWB wrote:

Well, JetBlue wants to DOT to review this partnership:

JetBlue asks US DOT to review Delta-Korean Air ATI JV, authorised over a decade ago but in different competitive marketplace.
JetBlue notes Delta-Korean Air originally had ATI authorisation to combat Northwest - which Delta since merged with.
JetBlue: it would be "extraordinary, inherently anti-competitive" to permit Delta-Korean Air JV without US DOT review.

https://twitter.com/winglets747

Interesting... when push comes to shove, I wonder how JetBlue can show it would be anticompetitive to them? I haven't seen any plans afoot for them to start flying over the Pacific...

Transfer of DL/KE ati was considered and approved in the DL/NW route transfer proceeding, and subsequently affirmed in a later case (I believe UA/CO ATI).

DOT has wanted DL and KE to be closer. And, in light of what happened to DL's NRT hub as a result of the not-so-open skies deal, the rationale for a DL/KE deal is stronger than ever.

Alliance implementing agreements such as the JV are subject to a 30 day prior review condition by DOT, but it does not trigger a full blown de novo review. There is no doubt the JV is procompetitive and necessary to counter the AA/JL and UA/NH alliances now that Delta's NRT hub has been decimated.

johns624 wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Considering the point of sale in market favors Korea, and sale in the US is largely to ethnic Koreans who prefer to stick with KE/OZ, throwing DL metal, product and service into the mix likely will be a negative for these consumers. The JV would be better maximizing KE flying.

This has nothing to do with ethnic Koreans. DL and KE want to turn ICN into the Asian AMS-the hub for onward connections.

I for one love connecting through ICN. I've been getting amazing deals on J fares with KE A380's I need to try there 748. I think it has a better J seat then the A380

jumbojet wrote:

JetBlue can ask DOT to review it and whatever else they want. To me, its laughable that the DOT will even seriously entertain JetBlue's request when after all, JetBlue has ties to the heavily government subsidized Emirates airlines. Not to worry boys and girls (and B6) tthis JVA will go through. There are more important things at play here than B6's ridiculous request.

As opposed to Delta's PBGC subsidy, and the subsidy they got in Chapter 11?

Right...

klm617 wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

JetBlue can ask DOT to review it and whatever else they want. To me, its laughable that the DOT will even seriously entertain JetBlue's request when after all, JetBlue has ties to the heavily government subsidized Emirates airlines. Not to worry boys and girls (and B6) tthis JVA will go through. There are more important things at play here than B6's ridiculous request.

Probably just JetBlue giving Delta a taste of their own medicine for the Atlanta gate fiasco. Can't believe JetBlue would stoop so low as to use the same tactics that Delta does when they don't get their way.

To what tactics did they stoop? Delta used their bought and paid for Atlanta politicians to keep a competitor out, when the airport administration IN WRITING promised specific gates to that competitor.

But asking a regulatory agency to conduct a review that is statutorily available to them to conduct is stooping so low?

Probably said before, but I'll say it again.

1. The NRT hub is about to die. DL will try to switch US-TYO ops to HND, and the TYO-Asia ops will die and be replaced by KE flights from ICN.
2. More US-ICN flights. The wide-bodies flying intra-Asia flights will be available to do that.
3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.
4. Less MU connections. DL will need them less, as the JV covers most stuff. Chances are some form of that relation will persist, as a bargaining chip.
5. More ULH flights. Some of those connections that flowed through NRT will more than likely move to nonstops from SEA, with some coming to other hubs (yes, even Detroit). That also explains the need for A359s.
6. Angry NW fanboys, for obvious reasons

ASQ400 wrote:

Probably said before, but I'll say it again.

1. The NRT hub is about to die. DL will try to switch US-TYO ops to HND, and the TYO-Asia ops will die and be replaced by KE flights from ICN.
2. More US-ICN flights. The wide-bodies flying intra-Asia flights will be available to do that.
3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.
4. Less MU connections. DL will need them less, as the JV covers most stuff. Chances are some form of that relation will persist, as a bargaining chip.
5. More ULH flights. Some of those connections that flowed through NRT will more than likely move to nonstops from SEA, with some coming to other hubs (yes, even Detroit). That also explains the need for A359s.
6. Angry NW fanboys, for obvious reasons

I think the KE/DL JV has killed any notion of any mainland USA to Asia. SEA is done now as far as anymore Asian routes along with DTW-HKG being DOA. The only long haul to Asia that is now viable is connecting China to the US that is the only chance of any long haul flights being added KE now has everything else covered from every other major US city.

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

Probably said before, but I'll say it again.

1. The NRT hub is about to die. DL will try to switch US-TYO ops to HND, and the TYO-Asia ops will die and be replaced by KE flights from ICN.
2. More US-ICN flights. The wide-bodies flying intra-Asia flights will be available to do that.
3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.
4. Less MU connections. DL will need them less, as the JV covers most stuff. Chances are some form of that relation will persist, as a bargaining chip.
5. More ULH flights. Some of those connections that flowed through NRT will more than likely move to nonstops from SEA, with some coming to other hubs (yes, even Detroit). That also explains the need for A359s.
6. Angry NW fanboys, for obvious reasons

I think the KE/DL JV has killed any notion of any mainland USA to Asia. SEA is done now as far as anymore Asian routes along with DTW-HKG being DOA. The only long haul to Asia that is now viable is connecting China to the US that is the only chance of any long haul flights being added KE now has everything else covered from every other major US city.

Do you really think Delta doesn't want to tap into connections of secondary US cities to depeer Asian cities?
Frankly, I don't think places like AUS, STL, MCO, CVG, PIT, and co will see nonstops to ICN, or anywhere in Asia. Places like BOI and RNO sure as hell won't.
You'd be asinine to think Delta will let UA sweep these places with 1-stop service to big Asian cities like SIN or BKK. Even dumber of you would be to think DL won't aim for offering nonstops to these places for SEA O&D pax, which clearly exist and which DL is by far best-positioned to serve.
The obvious way to do that, and the obvious reason for Delta trying to have a long-haul fleet, is to offer connections in SEA.

And while we're talking, thanks for proving point 6

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

Probably said before, but I'll say it again.

1. The NRT hub is about to die. DL will try to switch US-TYO ops to HND, and the TYO-Asia ops will die and be replaced by KE flights from ICN.
2. More US-ICN flights. The wide-bodies flying intra-Asia flights will be available to do that.
3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.
4. Less MU connections. DL will need them less, as the JV covers most stuff. Chances are some form of that relation will persist, as a bargaining chip.
5. More ULH flights. Some of those connections that flowed through NRT will more than likely move to nonstops from SEA, with some coming to other hubs (yes, even Detroit). That also explains the need for A359s.
6. Angry NW fanboys, for obvious reasons

I think the KE/DL JV has killed any notion of any mainland USA to Asia. SEA is done now as far as anymore Asian routes along with DTW-HKG being DOA. The only long haul to Asia that is now viable is connecting China to the US that is the only chance of any long haul flights being added KE now has everything else covered from every other major US city.

I seldom agree with you, klm, but I think you may be right here. With the KE JV, we'll see little if any Asia expansion other than perhaps a couple of new ICN routes opening. (PDX-ICN, SLC-ICN?). I fully expect to see SIN and MNL dropped within the next year or so as everything south of ICN (save for PVG and perhaps HKG) will be flown on KE metal.

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

Probably said before, but I'll say it again.

1. The NRT hub is about to die. DL will try to switch US-TYO ops to HND, and the TYO-Asia ops will die and be replaced by KE flights from ICN.
2. More US-ICN flights. The wide-bodies flying intra-Asia flights will be available to do that.
3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.
4. Less MU connections. DL will need them less, as the JV covers most stuff. Chances are some form of that relation will persist, as a bargaining chip.
5. More ULH flights. Some of those connections that flowed through NRT will more than likely move to nonstops from SEA, with some coming to other hubs (yes, even Detroit). That also explains the need for A359s.
6. Angry NW fanboys, for obvious reasons

I think the KE/DL JV has killed any notion of any mainland USA to Asia. SEA is done now as far as anymore Asian routes along with DTW-HKG being DOA. The only long haul to Asia that is now viable is connecting China to the US that is the only chance of any long haul flights being added KE now has everything else covered from every other major US city.

Do you really think Delta doesn't want to tap into connections of secondary US cities to depeer Asian cities?
Frankly, I don't think places like AUS, STL, MCO, CVG, PIT, and co will see nonstops to ICN, or anywhere in Asia. Places like BOI and RNO sure as hell won't.
You'd be asinine to think Delta will let UA sweep these places with 1-stop service to big Asian cities like SIN or BKK. Even dumber of you would be to think DL won't aim for offering nonstops to these places for SEA O&D pax, which clearly exist and which DL is by far best-positioned to serve.
The obvious way to do that, and the obvious reason for Delta trying to have a long-haul fleet, is to offer connections in SEA.

And while we're talking, thanks for proving point 6

Delta doesn't even serve SIN or BKK don't you think that if they were a priority to Delta that they would already have Delta service.

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I think the KE/DL JV has killed any notion of any mainland USA to Asia. SEA is done now as far as anymore Asian routes along with DTW-HKG being DOA. The only long haul to Asia that is now viable is connecting China to the US that is the only chance of any long haul flights being added KE now has everything else covered from every other major US city.

Do you really think Delta doesn't want to tap into connections of secondary US cities to depeer Asian cities?
Frankly, I don't think places like AUS, STL, MCO, CVG, PIT, and co will see nonstops to ICN, or anywhere in Asia. Places like BOI and RNO sure as hell won't.
You'd be asinine to think Delta will let UA sweep these places with 1-stop service to big Asian cities like SIN or BKK. Even dumber of you would be to think DL won't aim for offering nonstops to these places for SEA O&D pax, which clearly exist and which DL is by far best-positioned to serve.
The obvious way to do that, and the obvious reason for Delta trying to have a long-haul fleet, is to offer connections in SEA.

And while we're talking, thanks for proving point 6

Delta doesn't even serve SIN or BKK don't you think that if they were a priority to Delta that they would already have Delta service.

They serve SIN and served BKK with their old TPAC hub, NRT

jbs2886 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

ASQ400 wrote:

Do you really think Delta doesn't want to tap into connections of secondary US cities to depeer Asian cities?
Frankly, I don't think places like AUS, STL, MCO, CVG, PIT, and co will see nonstops to ICN, or anywhere in Asia. Places like BOI and RNO sure as hell won't.
You'd be asinine to think Delta will let UA sweep these places with 1-stop service to big Asian cities like SIN or BKK. Even dumber of you would be to think DL won't aim for offering nonstops to these places for SEA O&D pax, which clearly exist and which DL is by far best-positioned to serve.
The obvious way to do that, and the obvious reason for Delta trying to have a long-haul fleet, is to offer connections in SEA.

And while we're talking, thanks for proving point 6

Delta doesn't even serve SIN or BKK don't you think that if they were a priority to Delta that they would already have Delta service.

None of the US3 serve BKK anymore. They do still serve SIN.

DL used to serve BKK through NRT. Now that they are closing the NRT hub, they stopped the BKK-NRT flight.

JV formally signed today here in Los Angeles.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDBg2u8VYAEpk1o.jpg:large

Delta press release:
http://news.delta.com/delta-and-korean- ... nt-venture


Delta and Korean Air will lay the groundwork for implementing all aspects of the joint venture, subject to regulatory approvals, including:
● Expanded codesharing in the trans-Pacific market
● Joint sales and marketing initiatives in Asia and the United States
● Colocation at key hubs with seamless passenger and baggage transit experience
● Enhanced frequent flyer benefits, providing customers of both airlines the ability to earn and redeem miles on Delta's SkyMiles and Korean Air's SKYPASS programs
● Increased cargo cooperation across the trans-Pacific

=

I notice MNL missing from the flights. I wonder if the A380 returns back too Atlanta and if Delta introduces the A350 on the Atl to Seoul route? I still find it strange that no one has a JV with Asia's top airline and airport Singapore.

Does this increase or lessen the chances that SOMEONE will do BOS nonstop (since Korean used to be there and DL is flexing its muscles at Logan).

chrisnh wrote:

Does this increase or lessen the chances that SOMEONE will do BOS nonstop (since Korean used to be there and DL is flexing its muscles at Logan).

I imagine increase, since whoever operates the route will now be able to leverage the partner's operations on the other end.

chrisnh wrote:

Does this increase or lessen the chances that SOMEONE will do BOS nonstop (since Korean used to be there and DL is flexing its muscles at Logan).

It should increase it.

Why do they keep merging threads that have ACTUAL breaking/corroborated news, into threads with 200+ posts of speculation??

Someone please explain what purpose that serves, other than increasing the chance that we'll miss something.

ASQ400 wrote:

3. More TATL+Transcon flying or faster 757 retirement. There are 757s flying intra-Asia, if I recall correctly. Where do they go? Either TATL, like most of their kind, a premium Transcon like UA p.s., or pasture.

"Most of" DL's 757's are in a domestic configuration that aren't premium heavy and are not flying TATL. There are currently only 2 757s that are dedicated for the intra-Asia flights, and both were recently acquired, so if the intra-Asian routes are cancelled, I think it's pretty easy to see them coming over to domestic/US-lower 48 routes.

Atlwarrior wrote:

I notice MNL missing from the flights. I wonder if the A380 returns back too Atlanta and if Delta introduces the A350 on the Atl to Seoul route? I still find it strange that no one has a JV with Asia's top airline and airport Singapore.

I meant MSP.

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail. Delta definitely needs a flight from MSP to ICN to make this fully work.

I guess we'll see if it's successful in a few years.

ElroyJetson wrote:

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail. Delta definitely needs a flight from MSP to ICN to make this fully work.

I guess we'll see if it's successful in a few years.

Why do they need a MSP-ICN link for this to work. Every major city is pretty well connected right now with the system as it stands and as Delta has shown us they are more interested in connecting the dots between major metropolitan area in the USA which mean that probably the first add will be BOS-ICN. The only hub that benefits from this is Atlanta as we've seen already Delta is not going to just dump seats into the market and trash it's yields. Expect the amount of capacity to stay pretty status quo this is nothing but a money saving tactic to maximize exposure and minimize cost and MSP play no role in that. I have said it before and I will say it again other than China this pretty much will end point to point Asia expansion from the Delta hubs except for Atlanta which Delta will continue to grow no matter what.

chrisnh wrote:

Does this increase or lessen the chances that SOMEONE will do BOS nonstop (since Korean used to be there and DL is flexing its muscles at Logan).

yes, reasonably likely to be announced in the next 12 to 18 months but probably on KE. Ed himself told BOS employees this spring that it'll happen (take that for what its worth) but that DL doesn't have the right aircraft for the route (translation: 350s will be focused on other markets plus might be too much airplane; 330s don't have range and not enough 777s to waste two frames on this route).

I expect a metal neutral move at DTW, either a 2nd DL flight or a 2nd flight on a KE 777. Probably a morning KE departure and afternoon DL departure.

klm617 wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail. Delta definitely needs a flight from MSP to ICN to make this fully work.

I guess we'll see if it's successful in a few years.

Why do they need a MSP-ICN link for this to work. Every major city is pretty well connected right now with the system as it stands and as Delta has shown us they are more interested in connecting the dots between major metropolitan area in the USA which mean that probably the first add will be BOS-ICN. The only hub that benefits from this is Atlanta as we've seen already Delta is not going to just dump seats into the market and trash it's yields. Expect the amount of capacity to stay pretty status quo this is nothing but a money saving tactic to maximize exposure and minimize cost and MSP play no role in that. I have said it before and I will say it again other than China this pretty much will end point to point Asia expansion from the Delta hubs except for Atlanta which Delta will continue to grow no matter what.

I do not see DL making a long term decision to end point to point Asian traffic. That would be idiotic. There is potentially way to much money to be made. The fact they have expanded LAX and SEA indicates exactly the reverse of what you are claiming.

NW had a very successful JV with KLM and over the years NW expanded its European service as did KLM to North America as the JV matured. JV's should and are an adjunct to the service you provide....nothing more.

Outside of Hawaii and Micronesia, DL will not operate point to point service between the US and Asia. MSP-ICN would become a hub to hub route under the JV and those types of routes are not hard to make work. LAX, SEA, and potentially even BOS become hub to hub routes depending on how much feed DL can generate on the US side.

The DL-KE JV will cover all of Asia except for China. DL has plenty of incentive to add flights on its own metal to other points in Asia and that will happen. It does include Japan.

We also have not seen the final result of this JV but it is a possibility that DL could operate its own aircraft beyond ICN. The chances are higher than DL and KE would prefer for DL to add new routes nonstop from the US to other points in Asia but you can't rule out that KE might want to use its own metal on some routes beyond the US and DL might want to do the same thing beyond ICN.

atl100million wrote:

Outside of Hawaii and Micronesia, DL will not operate point to point service between the US and Asia. MSP-ICN would become a hub to hub route under the JV and those types of routes are not hard to make work. LAX, SEA, and potentially even BOS become hub to hub routes depending on how much feed DL can generate on the US side.

The DL-KE JV will cover all of Asia except for China. DL has plenty of incentive to add flights on its own metal to other points in Asia and that will happen. It does include Japan.

We also have not seen the final result of this JV but it is a possibility that DL could operate its own aircraft beyond ICN. The chances are higher than DL and KE would prefer for DL to add new routes nonstop from the US to other points in Asia but you can't rule out that KE might want to use its own metal on some routes beyond the US and DL might want to do the same thing beyond ICN.

So with that being said there is no reason in your mind that we will se KE operating a Detroit- Seoul flight because since it's the largest gateway to Asia from the East then it should be able to generate enough connections being that DTW-ICN was on a 744 as a stand alone route and that route is getting a capacity reduction when it switches to an A350 later this year and that is a hub to hub route.

I understand the DL-AF/KL and nearly all other US carrier JVs regarding beyond hub flights, it is as possible that DL might want to operate to some country in SE Asia via ICN as it is that KE might want to operate to some cities in S. America on its own metal, both supplementing the "home carrier" in that market.
It is also possible that DL-KE could each operate in a major market like DTW as they will do in ATL and SEA or they could both decide they gain more by each adding a new market or two on their own.

Anything is possible and no one should rule anything in or out.

atl100million wrote:

Anything is possible and no one should rule anything in or out.

Agreed. I would just counter that there is a difference between "possible" and "likely." The prospect of DL or KE operating any 5th Freedom routes as part of this JV is possible, but not likely.

It 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

If 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

klm617 wrote:

Why do they need a MSP-ICN link for this to work. Every major city is pretty well connected right now......

I suppose this is true if you feel there are only 8 "major" cities in the US. From my point of view, there is not nearly enough DL connectivity to ICN from the rest of the US. As far as I'm concerned, every hub that previously or currently goes to the defunct NRT hub needs to go to ICN.

ElroyJetson wrote:

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail.

Out of curiosity, which such "failed" J/Vs can you name?

WPvsMW wrote:

It 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

If you're talking about DL, then that isn't true at all.

Though they eventually transitioned away from them, DL flew several 5th freedom segments under its various TATL J/Vs:
AMS-BOM, CDG-BOM, CDG-MAA, FRA-BOM

LAX772LR wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail.

Out of curiosity, which such "failed" J/Vs can you name?

WPvsMW wrote:

It 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

If you're talking about DL, then that isn't true at all.

Though they eventually transitioned away from them, DL flew several 5th freedom segments under its various TATL J/Vs:
AMS-BOM, CDG-BOM, CDG-MAA, FRA-BOM

There have been many failed JV's. SQ and Virgin Atlantic comes immediately to mind. SQ made a significant financial investment in the JV and admitted after the fact they lost money on the deal and said the JV did not generate the traffic that was expected. Numerous U.S. carriers have attempted JV's with Japanese carriers and many of them have failed.

Frankly, with only 8 U.S. cities with direct flights to ICN I do not see this JV having much of an impact. For example....you need to travel from IND to HKG. Do drive to ORD and take a nonstop flight? Or maybe fly to LAX and then connect nonstop?

Or, do you take DL to back track from IND to DTW.....then to ICN.....then to HKG?

What do you think most pax would prefer?

ElroyJetson wrote:

There have been many failed JV's.

Yet you've thus far failed to (accurately) name even one, hence the question.

ElroyJetson wrote:

SQ and Virgin Atlantic comes immediately to mind.

SQ/VS was never a J/V, just an equity purchase... heck, they didn't even codeshare for the first two years after their purchase, and then to only about 6-7 destinations after that.

The two are not interchangeable concepts.

ElroyJetson wrote:

Numerous U.S. carriers have attempted JV's with Japanese carriers and many of them have failed.

Incorrect, as the US doesn't allow J/Vs in the absence of an open skies bilateral, which it didn't agree to with Japan until 2009.
The only USA-Japanese JVs are the two still in existence.

LAX772LR wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

If 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

If you're talking about DL, then that isn't true at all.

Though they eventually transitioned away from them, DL flew several 5th freedom segments under its various TATL J/Vs:
AMS-BOM, CDG-BOM, CDG-MAA, FRA-BOM

You're right... I forgot about the beyond routes of yore that DL dropped. So... better stated as, "If DL 5th Freedom isn't happening in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

I think DL may take over LAX/GRU from KE as part of the JV changes. KE downgauged that stage from a B773 to an A332 in 2015, and LF has been iffy (seats are easy to book w/ short lead times). WRT S.Am. routes, I think DL will try to make LAX its version of AA in MIA. IOW, I think DL's expansion of LAX is as much about S.Am. as it is about TPAC, as in playing the DXB Great Circle card S.Am/NE Asia. This expansion wouldn't require 5th Freedom rights for DL but could provide huge feed for the TPAC JV. Poetic justice in the ME3 context.

One other minor thing...the Wilshire Grand, LA's new tallest tower and the tallest west of the Mississippi, opened the other night. It was mostly funded by KE (or perhaps KE's parent company? Not sure) so it had the KE logo on top, and the rest of the building was lit in the same robin's egg blue of KE's livery. I saw it when I was driving by downtown and thought it looked cool, especially knowing it was the same day the KE/DL JV closed.

atl100million wrote:

Outside of Hawaii and Micronesia, DL will not operate point to point service between the US and Asia.

I remain skeptical that Delta will even maintain "point to point service" between Asia and Hawaii/Micronesia. I still, personally, expect virtually all of that flying - if not all of it - to be gone within five years of the JV going into effect, if not sooner.

Sightseer wrote:

The prospect of DL or KE operating any 5th Freedom routes as part of this JV is possible, but not likely.

WPvsMW wrote:

If 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

At this point, the only Asian city that I think could even be a plausible candidate for a beyond-ICN 5th freedom flight operated by Delta itself would be SIN, owing to its prominent global economic significance. But I agree that even that seems like a stretch when Korean operates three daily flights from ICN. As for Delta's few other remaining 5th Freedom flights between NRT and Asia, it's very hard to imagine MNL getting a Delta flight to/from ICN, due to both a similarly-strong existing Korean offering in the market, and just the broader economic dynamics of the market. And as for PVG, I continue to expect those seven China frequencies to be shifted off this route and onto either LAX-PEK or ATL-PVG.

FlyHappy wrote:

From my point of view, there is not nearly enough DL connectivity to ICN from the rest of the US.

With respect to Delta, specifically, I agree that the dynamics of the JV, governed by the proprietary agreement between the two carriers, may necessitate additional Delta flying between the U.S. and ICN. But in general, there is certainly plenty of existing capacity among these two airlines between the U.S. and ICN. In fact, I believe - someone correct me if I'm wrong - that Korean from ICN is actually the largest single-carrier U.S. gateway in Asia in terms of both nonstop markets and seats. Korean's U.S. network is pretty impressive, and the combined transpacific network of these two airlines - specifically to/from Korea and in general - is also quite impressive.

FlyHappy wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, every hub that previously or currently goes to the defunct NRT hub needs to go to ICN.

And all of them already do, except MSP. Every one of Delta's other U.S. gateway hubs has one or multiple daily flights to ICN on Delta (ATL, DTW, SEA) and/or Korean (ATL, JFK, LAX, SEA). The only challenge with MSP, specifically, is that Delta has the immovable HND flight there and I question whether or not, in 2017, MSP can viably support two daily nonstop flights to Asia.

FlyHappy wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Why do they need a MSP-ICN link for this to work. Every major city is pretty well connected right now......

I suppose this is true if you feel there are only 8 "major" cities in the US. From my point of view, there is not nearly enough DL connectivity to ICN from the rest of the US. As far as I'm concerned, every hub that previously or currently goes to the defunct NRT hub needs to go to ICN.

They already do except for MSP and it is a well known fact that Delta was ending NRT if it didn't get access to HND from MSP Ed Bastian said so.

ElroyJetson wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I am always dubious about the benefits of these JV. At least as many that succeed, fail.

Out of curiosity, which such "failed" J/Vs can you name?

WPvsMW wrote:

It 5th Freedom hasn't happened in the TATL JV, IMO it won't happen in the TPAC JV.

If you're talking about DL, then that isn't true at all.

Though they eventually transitioned away from them, DL flew several 5th freedom segments under its various TATL J/Vs:
AMS-BOM, CDG-BOM, CDG-MAA, FRA-BOM

There have been many failed JV's. SQ and Virgin Atlantic comes immediately to mind. SQ made a significant financial investment in the JV and admitted after the fact they lost money on the deal and said the JV did not generate the traffic that was expected. Numerous U.S. carriers have attempted JV's with Japanese carriers and many of them have failed.

Frankly, with only 8 U.S. cities with direct flights to ICN I do not see this JV having much of an impact. For example....you need to travel from IND to HKG. Do drive to ORD and take a nonstop flight? Or maybe fly to LAX and then connect nonstop?

Or, do you take DL to back track from IND to DTW.....then to ICN.....then to HKG?

What do you think most pax would prefer?

I'm flying IND-ORD-HKG you are so right and this is where Delta misses the boat even when it comes to Europe causing most of their markets to double connect or back track to ATL because they refuse to add more international flights from any other hub but ATL

I'm interested in insights on what this JV does to the competitive landscape of the three major alliances for TPAC. In recent years, SkyTeam seemed to be at a disadvantage (to me anyway) because the other alliances have major anchors on both sides of the ocean - OneWOrld has AA/JAL and Star has UA/ANA. Now with DL/KE, what are some changes that we could see in the next 3-5 years?