PlanesNTrains wrote:

enilria wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

Because you chose to omit the fact that they come right back in October, implying it was a permanent reduction when it's clearly not.



Not when the frequencies simply went somewhere else, no. The lift didn't disappear from DAL, it just originates elsewhere now.



That's like saying because I sell you my used car, you think you're now entitled to use my garage. AS is not interested in releasing any real estate at DAL.

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

FWIW, you’re side-stepping the primary claim.

I don't understand the "I omit the fact that the flights come back" comment actually. This thread reports changes. The change is that AS reduced service to SJC as posted. I said it must not have been going well. Airlines reduce flights when they are poor. In and of itself a reduction on DAL-SJC is nothing but coupled with dropping DAL-LGA/DCA, and no stated plan to backfill those flights coupled with the roller coaster ride of failed routes at VX in DAL over the years. I'm not clear why it is any kind of leap to say they will be giving up at least one gate in DAL. This is something I predicted two years ago.

Here's a history of AS/VX service at DAL:
Oct 2014 11.8 RTs; VX enters DAL
Jun 2015 17.4 RTs; VX Peak Service Level
Apr 2016 14.3 RTs; Merger Announced
Dec 2016 12.9 RTs, Merger Closes
July 2017 11.7 RTs, Low Point
Aug 2017 14.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 1
Feb 2018 17.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 2
Sep 2018 10.6 RTs, Assumes AS Does Not Backfill DCA/LGA Ops

Similarly, I predicted numerous times that B6 would close LGB as a focus city and stated that it was losing money numerous times. That also is turning out to be true, but for some reason AS people are much more defensive than B6 people. Another point is that while I think B6 made a lot more sense as a merger partner for VX, than AS, it is pretty clear that I don't have an ax to grind against AS since I also predicted B6 would close LGB. So, I don't really see the issue.

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Rdh3e wrote:

tphuang wrote:

That's about 7 additional daily adds for Sep/Oct quiet period. Maybe this is due to all the recent DL JFK adds?

With everything they cut on the West Coast they have to do something with those aircraft.

B6 is in a really tough spot. Delta is eating their lunch out east, AS/DL/WN are all over them out west, and their operational reliability is in taters.

I’m confused how is Dl eating JetBlue’s lunch out east?

enilria wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

enilria wrote:

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

FWIW, you’re side-stepping the primary claim.

I don't understand the "I omit the fact that the flights come back" comment actually. This thread reports changes. The change is that AS reduced service to SJC as posted. I said it must not have been going well. Airlines reduce flights when they are poor. In and of itself a reduction on DAL-SJC is nothing but coupled with dropping DAL-LGA/DCA, and no stated plan to backfill those flights coupled with the roller coaster ride of failed routes at VX in DAL over the years. I'm not clear why it is any kind of leap to say they will be giving up at least one gate in DAL. This is something I predicted two years ago.

Here's a history of AS/VX service at DAL:
Oct 2014 11.8 RTs; VX enters DAL
Jun 2015 17.4 RTs; VX Peak Service Level
Apr 2016 14.3 RTs; Merger Announced
Dec 2016 12.9 RTs, Merger Closes
July 2017 11.7 RTs, Low Point
Aug 2017 14.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 1
Feb 2018 17.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 2
Sep 2018 10.6 RTs, Assumes AS Does Not Backfill DCA/LGA Ops

Similarly, I predicted numerous times that B6 would close LGB as a focus city and stated that it was losing money numerous times. That also is turning out to be true, but for some reason AS people are much more defensive than B6 people. Another point is that while I think B6 made a lot more sense as a merger partner for VX, than AS, it is pretty clear that I don't have an ax to grind against AS since I also predicted B6 would close LGB. So, I don't really see the issue.

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Please keep your weekly thread going. It's a great service to this forum.

enilria wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

enilria wrote:

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

FWIW, you’re side-stepping the primary claim.

I don't understand the "I omit the fact that the flights come back" comment actually. This thread reports changes. The change is that AS reduced service to SJC as posted. I said it must not have been going well. Airlines reduce flights when they are poor. In and of itself a reduction on DAL-SJC is nothing but coupled with dropping DAL-LGA/DCA, and no stated plan to backfill those flights coupled with the roller coaster ride of failed routes at VX in DAL over the years. I'm not clear why it is any kind of leap to say they will be giving up at least one gate in DAL. This is something I predicted two years ago.

Here's a history of AS/VX service at DAL:
Oct 2014 11.8 RTs; VX enters DAL
Jun 2015 17.4 RTs; VX Peak Service Level
Apr 2016 14.3 RTs; Merger Announced
Dec 2016 12.9 RTs, Merger Closes
July 2017 11.7 RTs, Low Point
Aug 2017 14.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 1
Feb 2018 17.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 2
Sep 2018 10.6 RTs, Assumes AS Does Not Backfill DCA/LGA Ops

Similarly, I predicted numerous times that B6 would close LGB as a focus city and stated that it was losing money numerous times. That also is turning out to be true, but for some reason AS people are much more defensive than B6 people. Another point is that while I think B6 made a lot more sense as a merger partner for VX, than AS, it is pretty clear that I don't have an ax to grind against AS since I also predicted B6 would close LGB. So, I don't really see the issue.

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

My assumption is that you want to be taken seriously. You tout your record - nothing wrong with that. However, if you are going to say AS must have made a de facto deal with WN to give up some or all of a gate (or more) at DAL and base that on their schedule, it'd seem to make more sense to at least acknowledge the adds later in the year. But it's up to you. I never said you had anything against AS. I think you enjoy prognosticating (like many of us) - not everyone will agree with your thoughts though.

BTW, in that thread where you gave 85% on AS leaving DCA/LGA and 70% on them leaving DAL, you didn't seem clear on the conditions placed on those asset dispositions. Additionally, EA CO AS said in that 2016 thread to give AS 3-5 years to see how DAL shake's out. I point that out because if, in 2019, they drop DAL, your 70% seems a little less definite than his 3-5 years. You disagreed, but at least you hedged yourself.

RE: B6. They opened that focus city in, what, 2001? It's gate restricted, they've done little with it, and once they added LAX some years back and began focusing more on the primary airport in SoCal, LGB seemed like the red-headed step-child. But sure, you called it.

As you say, you can say whatever you want. I appreciate what you post and have learned a lot along the way. However, that doesn't mean that you can't make mistakes or misrepresent or whatever. Anyone can.

heretothere wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

enilria wrote:

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

That's not what's in question here, and labeling you "inaccurate" would imply you accidentally overlooked or omitted something. That's not what I've said; I'm pointing out that your posts of late have been intentionally misleading to create the false impression that AS is flailing and doesn't know what they're doing.

I'm just wondering why you're engaging in this, that's all. I've never seen this in your previous weekly OAG schedule updates.

In what way has enilria been intentionally misleading? He simply reports the filed schedule changes each weekend.

No, he reports the changes and provides commentary. It's that commentary that some will occasionally take issue with, like any other thread.

tphuang wrote:

Please keep your weekly thread going. It's a great service to this forum.

Why would you think he would stop? Nobody is saying it isn't appreciated. We're just discussing his take on it, like anyone else in the thread.

I’d have a hard time believing the DAL AS gates were apart of the LGA/DCA slot deal with WN. If they are truly AA gates on lease to AS, why wouldn’t AS just fly west with them? If they chose to leave and consolidate at DFW, wouldn’t AA get them back? Who says they won’t fly from them?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Please keep your weekly thread going. It's a great service to this forum.

Why would you think he would stop? Nobody is saying it isn't appreciated. We're just discussing his take on it, like anyone else in the thread.

I just think it's important that people that provide additional sources for an armchair noob like myself should be appreciated for their work. I've seen many times people in the past complaining that certain route changes didn't show up. I'm going to appreciate any additional info that I can get, even if it's not absolutely perfect.

He is entitled to his opinions just as much as anyone else is. His weekly updates present raw information for us to discuss each week, proportionately it probably makes him one of the most objective posters here. Sheesh.

The fanboyism gets a little weird in here sometimes.
I happen to dislike the merger between Alaska and Virgin due to the decrease in competition, and the destruction of a carrier with a unique product. Does this mean I despise AS and will never fly with them? No, that means I have a nuanced opinion of them.

[quote=“PlanesNTrains”]

heretothere wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

That's not what's in question here, and labeling you "inaccurate" would imply you accidentally overlooked or omitted something. That's not what I've said; I'm pointing out that your posts of late have been intentionally misleading to create the false impression that AS is flailing and doesn't know what they're doing.

I'm just wondering why you're engaging in this, that's all. I've never seen this in your previous weekly OAG schedule updates.

In what way has enilria been intentionally misleading? He simply reports the filed schedule changes each weekend.

No, he reports the changes and provides commentary. It's that commentary that some will occasionally take issue with, like any other thread.[/quote]

Maybe I misinterpreted EA’s post, but it read to me as an accusation that enilria is omitting or manipulating some of the data. Certainly enilria’s commentary didn’t begin recently lol.

enilria wrote:

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Thank you for posting this thread each week, I know many including myself appreciate it!

Enilria...opinions and snarkiness aside, I really do appreciate your posts.

EvanWSFO wrote:

us330 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

I live in Dallas and travel often. I talk to a lot of people, and no one seems to care if WN got all of DAL. If AS stays and flies to the left coast, WN will lower fares. We are looking at less than a dozen flights. Having them all in the same location makes more sense.

DOJ regulators would likely not have approved the slot transfer if de facto control of the Love gates were included. First, those gates don't actually belong to AS--they are American's and AS is sub-leasing them as the successor to VX. Given the fairly drawn out legal mess between DL, WN, and the City of Dallas over access to those gates, DL would likely be given the first opportunity to utilize them if all existing LCCs declined the option.

Basically, Love is a special situation, so what may be applicable to other airports doesn't necessarily apply to Love given the mess of settlements and regulations that took place prior to the ending of the Wright Amendment.

Reality is the W.A. is still in place, it's letting WN have a near monopoly by restricting the number of gates built. 12 to 24 more gates could have been build and open up DAL to everyone without severely hurting DFW. If AS pulls out, which I think they will, the gates may be given to DL for use since no one else appears interested.

On the specific subject of AS at DAL, isn’t AS primarily (or mostly focused) on being a West Coast carrier? Service from western cities to DAL might make sense for them whereas major operations outside of a western city focus doesn’t? If so, then operations from DAL-LGA/DCA would be outside of their focus. Unles they want to be a larger, nationwide airline.

enilria wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

enilria wrote:

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

FWIW, you’re side-stepping the primary claim.

I don't understand the "I omit the fact that the flights come back" comment actually. This thread reports changes. The change is that AS reduced service to SJC as posted. I said it must not have been going well. Airlines reduce flights when they are poor. In and of itself a reduction on DAL-SJC is nothing but coupled with dropping DAL-LGA/DCA, and no stated plan to backfill those flights coupled with the roller coaster ride of failed routes at VX in DAL over the years. I'm not clear why it is any kind of leap to say they will be giving up at least one gate in DAL. This is something I predicted two years ago.

Here's a history of AS/VX service at DAL:
Oct 2014 11.8 RTs; VX enters DAL
Jun 2015 17.4 RTs; VX Peak Service Level
Apr 2016 14.3 RTs; Merger Announced
Dec 2016 12.9 RTs, Merger Closes
July 2017 11.7 RTs, Low Point
Aug 2017 14.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 1
Feb 2018 17.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 2
Sep 2018 10.6 RTs, Assumes AS Does Not Backfill DCA/LGA Ops

Similarly, I predicted numerous times that B6 would close LGB as a focus city and stated that it was losing money numerous times. That also is turning out to be true, but for some reason AS people are much more defensive than B6 people. Another point is that while I think B6 made a lot more sense as a merger partner for VX, than AS, it is pretty clear that I don't have an ax to grind against AS since I also predicted B6 would close LGB. So, I don't really see the issue.

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Wasn’t there a discussion barely a week ago about SJC-DAL going to 2x, and SFO and/or SAN being cut to 1x or am I confusing this with some other route? If so, what do you think happened in less than a week?

Jouhou wrote:

He is entitled to his opinions just as much as anyone else is. His weekly updates present raw information for us to discuss each week, proportionately it probably makes him one of the most objective posters here. Sheesh.

The fanboyism gets a little weird in here sometimes.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Enilria...opinions and snarkiness aside, I really do appreciate your posts.

Midwestindy wrote:

enilria wrote:

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Thank you for posting this thread each week, I know many including myself appreciate it!

tphuang wrote:

Please keep your weekly thread going. It's a great service to this forum.

I appreciate that. The fanboy-ism drives me a little bonkers on here. I think if anybody searched my history, they would see I am pretty even-handed in my criticism of the U.S. carriers.

AirFiero wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

us330 wrote:

DOJ regulators would likely not have approved the slot transfer if de facto control of the Love gates were included. First, those gates don't actually belong to AS--they are American's and AS is sub-leasing them as the successor to VX. Given the fairly drawn out legal mess between DL, WN, and the City of Dallas over access to those gates, DL would likely be given the first opportunity to utilize them if all existing LCCs declined the option.

Basically, Love is a special situation, so what may be applicable to other airports doesn't necessarily apply to Love given the mess of settlements and regulations that took place prior to the ending of the Wright Amendment.

Reality is the W.A. is still in place, it's letting WN have a near monopoly by restricting the number of gates built. 12 to 24 more gates could have been build and open up DAL to everyone without severely hurting DFW. If AS pulls out, which I think they will, the gates may be given to DL for use since no one else appears interested.

On the specific subject of AS at DAL, isn’t AS primarily (or mostly focused) on being a West Coast carrier? Service from western cities to DAL might make sense for them whereas major operations outside of a western city focus doesn’t? If so, then operations from DAL-LGA/DCA would be outside of their focus. Unles they want to be a larger, nationwide airline.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

My assumption is that you want to be taken seriously. You tout your record - nothing wrong with that.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

you didn't seem clear on the conditions placed on those asset dispositions.

I only touted it because he said I have some kind of record of mis-information against AS which is patently false. I'm not Nostradamus, but AS has a handful of "slots" in DAL up against AA and WN. They were screwed from the git-go. At least DL has enormous market strength across the country and is more likely to make a go of it with inbound customers, although I do not belabor under the illusion that DL will be cheap or do anything other than provide some sort of check on WN which is really the bully here for attempting to control an airport lock, stock, and barrel. AS is a hero for trying to be Robin Hood in DAL, but the deck is stacked too heavily against them just as it was against B6 in LGB. This is what happens when 4 airlines control the whole national market.

AirFiero wrote:

Wasn’t there a discussion barely a week ago about SJC-DAL going to 2x, and SFO and/or SAN being cut to 1x or am I confusing this with some other route? If so, what do you think happened in less than a week?

Any time carriers make quick changes it is because they are surprised. If they add it's better than they thought. If they shrink it's worse than they thought. Bookings are the data that drives these things 90% of the time.

Jouhou wrote:

He is entitled to his opinions just as much as anyone else is. His weekly updates present raw information for us to discuss each week, proportionately it probably makes him one of the most objective posters here. Sheesh.

The fanboyism gets a little weird in here sometimes.
I happen to dislike the merger between Alaska and Virgin due to the decrease in competition, and the destruction of a carrier with a unique product. Does this mean I despise AS and will never fly with them? No, that means I have a nuanced opinion of them.

In fairness, EA CO AS isn't a fanboy, he's an employee. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a fan. If it makes you a "fanboy" by wanting to have an accurate dialogue, then I guess there's a lot of fanboys on here. I'm also a fan of JetBlue. It's just that AS has been my hometown carrier for decades so I am more interested in them and certainly want to see them succeed. Yet I fly other carriers more often than not and somehow have survived. I really wish JetBlue had been more successful out west - I even applied with them when they opened SEA but missed the deadline.

Enilria is absolutely a valued poster for what he brings each week. We all look forward to our Sunday morning route fix. However, we can still have disagreements about things. As he himself alluded to earlier, there have been years of discussions on many, many topics where a history has been created. He pulled his posting history from a non-OAG thread from two years ago where he shared his thoughts on AS+VX. Sometimes that dialogue will spill over into the OAG threads as a normal matter of discussion.

In that last thread he said that then - in 2016, on Day 1 of the merger - that AS had already decided that they were pulling out of DAL. It was done. They just were not announcing the bad news yet. The death knell had been sounded. Here we are two years later and AS still has it's two gates at DAL and, until that changes, his prediction has not come true. So, when in a thread like this he makes statements about how AS must have "de facto agreed" to pull out of at least some DAL gates (which of course would support his previous assertions that DAL had already been called dead by AS), yet AS has flights being re-added, there is going to be pushback.

Enilria has had a narrative that AS is pulling out of DAL and might want to interpret things through that prism. EA CO AS (perhaps with inside info, perhaps just in his gut) has had a different narrative, that AS will give it 3-5 years in DAL before pulling the plug, and might want to interpret (or present) things through that prism. All we can do is hold each other accountable for what we say. And lest you think I'm an EA CO AS "fanboy", the mountain he chose to die on for me personally was the AS/AA codeshare statements in the VX merger.

EvanWSFO wrote:

us330 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

I live in Dallas and travel often. I talk to a lot of people, and no one seems to care if WN got all of DAL. If AS stays and flies to the left coast, WN will lower fares. We are looking at less than a dozen flights. Having them all in the same location makes more sense.

DOJ regulators would likely not have approved the slot transfer if de facto control of the Love gates were included. First, those gates don't actually belong to AS--they are American's and AS is sub-leasing them as the successor to VX. Given the fairly drawn out legal mess between DL, WN, and the City of Dallas over access to those gates, DL would likely be given the first opportunity to utilize them if all existing LCCs declined the option.



Basically, Love is a special situation, so what may be applicable to other airports doesn't necessarily apply to Love given the mess of settlements and regulations that took place prior to the ending of the Wright Amendment.

y
Reality is the W.A. is still in place, it's letting WN have a near monopoly by restricting the number of gates built. 12 to 24 more gates could have been build and open up DAL to everyone without severely hurting DFW. If AS pulls out, which I think they will, the gates may be given to DL for use since no one else appears interested.

opy

Absolutely correct. Back in the day, DAL had 32 gates before the renovation; prior to the DFW opening in 1974, it had over 40, and handled numerous widebodies, including DC-10's, L-1011's, and 747's. Today's planes are quieter and have less environmental impact. The Wright Amendment has caused more problems than eliminating it would, and Southwest will still be the strongest carrier there. Anybody should be able to use either airport.

I live in the DFW area, and can use either airport, it is about hte same distance to eac. I prefer DFW and I think many people here choose airports for either location or airline preference. Some like Southwest, some the other guys. But anybody should be able to use eit
le

So is FI going year-round PDX-KEF?

flyoregon wrote:

So is FI going year-round PDX-KEF?

Currently the only month that the route isn't operating is in February. Ends in January. Resumes in March.

Jplatts, I’m not sure what the threshold is for AS to lose its sole use of the two gates at DAL, though I believe that there are proceedings taking place Feb 2019 that should provide some clarity. I’d imagine that in the interim AS will retain its exclusive use of the two gates. Again, depending on any pre-existing minimum use threshold.

EvanWSFO wrote:

AS needs to consolidate back at DFW. Sooner or later, and like it or notm WN is going to get those two gates.

The Feds are definitely going to have something to say about that. If DL surrenders the two gates at DAL, then it's highly doubtful that WN would automatically get them, though I wonder if that would open up an opportunity for G4 to hit some destinations from DAL which aren't served by WN.

AS DAL-SJC. Just flew it 4/28 on an OO operated E75. F6/12 Y24/Y64.

Also recently flew SJC-TUS on AS/OO and load was even worse. F1/12. Y18/64.

enilria wrote:

WN leased the DCA/LGA slots that take away a lot of the use of the DAL gates. I have to think a de facto part of the deal was release of DAL gates.

Having said that, DOT should not allow that DL should get the gates. It's somewhat distressing when DL is the best hope for competition, but that's the case in DAL.

The gates should go common-use. But the question is how do you make money off a gate that goes common-use? You don't. So there's no incentive to make it a common-use gate for AS, even if there's room/they leave.

enilria wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

He is entitled to his opinions just as much as anyone else is. His weekly updates present raw information for us to discuss each week, proportionately it probably makes him one of the most objective posters here. Sheesh.

The fanboyism gets a little weird in here sometimes.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Enilria...opinions and snarkiness aside, I really do appreciate your posts.

Midwestindy wrote:

enilria wrote:

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

Thank you for posting this thread each week, I know many including myself appreciate it!

tphuang wrote:

Please keep your weekly thread going. It's a great service to this forum.

I appreciate that. The fanboy-ism drives me a little bonkers on here. I think if anybody searched my history, they would see I am pretty even-handed in my criticism of the U.S. carriers.

AirFiero wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

Reality is the W.A. is still in place, it's letting WN have a near monopoly by restricting the number of gates built. 12 to 24 more gates could have been build and open up DAL to everyone without severely hurting DFW. If AS pulls out, which I think they will, the gates may be given to DL for use since no one else appears interested.

On the specific subject of AS at DAL, isn’t AS primarily (or mostly focused) on being a West Coast carrier? Service from western cities to DAL might make sense for them whereas major operations outside of a western city focus doesn’t? If so, then operations from DAL-LGA/DCA would be outside of their focus. Unles they want to be a larger, nationwide airline.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

My assumption is that you want to be taken seriously. You tout your record - nothing wrong with that.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

you didn't seem clear on the conditions placed on those asset dispositions.

I only touted it because he said I have some kind of record of mis-information against AS which is patently false. I'm not Nostradamus, but AS has a handful of "slots" in DAL up against AA and WN. They were screwed from the git-go. At least DL has enormous market strength across the country and is more likely to make a go of it with inbound customers, although I do not belabor under the illusion that DL will be cheap or do anything other than provide some sort of check on WN which is really the bully here for attempting to control an airport lock, stock, and barrel. AS is a hero for trying to be Robin Hood in DAL, but the deck is stacked too heavily against them just as it was against B6 in LGB. This is what happens when 4 airlines control the whole national market.

AirFiero wrote:

Wasn’t there a discussion barely a week ago about SJC-DAL going to 2x, and SFO and/or SAN being cut to 1x or am I confusing this with some other route? If so, what do you think happened in less than a week?

Any time carriers make quick changes it is because they are surprised. If they add it's better than they thought. If they shrink it's worse than they thought. Bookings are the data that drives these things 90% of the time.

They’d make that change after only on *week*?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

No, he reports the changes and provides commentary. It's that commentary that some will occasionally take issue with, like any other thread.

It's not so much the commentary, but rather, reporting only select parts of the changes to make the commentary seem credible. In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result. Or in the previous thread, that AS was dropping 1X LAXJFK and 1X SFOJFK with the comment "continuing to cut transcons" while omitting the fact that they'd used those to fund 2 new transcons, SJCJFK and a 3rd daily SEAJFK.

For the record, I'm a fan of enilria's weekly thread! I'm just wondering why the whole picture doesn't get shared when discussing AS of late.

Carry on.

enilria wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

enilria wrote:

You say how inaccurate I've been. I actually nailed this prediction in 2016.

"I give it 85% likely the move the DCA/LGA slots since that seems likely to happen whether the stay in DAL or not"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1350079

FWIW, you’re side-stepping the primary claim.

I don't understand the "I omit the fact that the flights come back" comment actually. This thread reports changes. The change is that AS reduced service to SJC as posted. I said it must not have been going well. Airlines reduce flights when they are poor. In and of itself a reduction on DAL-SJC is nothing but coupled with dropping DAL-LGA/DCA, and no stated plan to backfill those flights coupled with the roller coaster ride of failed routes at VX in DAL over the years. I'm not clear why it is any kind of leap to say they will be giving up at least one gate in DAL. This is something I predicted two years ago.

Here's a history of AS/VX service at DAL:
Oct 2014 11.8 RTs; VX enters DAL
Jun 2015 17.4 RTs; VX Peak Service Level
Apr 2016 14.3 RTs; Merger Announced
Dec 2016 12.9 RTs, Merger Closes
July 2017 11.7 RTs, Low Point
Aug 2017 14.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 1
Feb 2018 17.1 RTs, AS Refocuses DAL West Phase 2
Sep 2018 10.6 RTs, Assumes AS Does Not Backfill DCA/LGA Ops

Similarly, I predicted numerous times that B6 would close LGB as a focus city and stated that it was losing money numerous times. That also is turning out to be true, but for some reason AS people are much more defensive than B6 people. Another point is that while I think B6 made a lot more sense as a merger partner for VX, than AS, it is pretty clear that I don't have an ax to grind against AS since I also predicted B6 would close LGB. So, I don't really see the issue.

As a final point, I am not obligated to post schedule changes without my opinions. Further, I am not obligated to do anything, particularly when nobody is paying me...and nobody here is. I have, however, seen numerous threads deleted by mods because of this stated reason "news links must be accompanied by a commentary or opinion". So, a.net policy is that an opinion is supposed to be presented, as that is the seed of discussion, which I do.

I love your posts every week and all your comments. You are always very objective in your replies as your opinion always is never biased. Most on this forum don't like any comments that don't align with their agenda be it their fanboyism or their loyalty to the carrier they work for. Thank you for being you and always being respectful. Your data speaks for itself for anyone who reads ity correctly.

jplatts wrote:

enilria wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

On the specific subject of AS at DAL, isn’t AS primarily (or mostly focused) on being a West Coast carrier? Service from western cities to DAL might make sense for them whereas major operations outside of a western city focus doesn’t? If so, then operations from DAL-LGA/DCA would be outside of their focus. Unles they want to be a larger, nationwide airline.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

My assumption is that you want to be taken seriously. You tout your record - nothing wrong with that.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

you didn't seem clear on the conditions placed on those asset dispositions.

I only touted it because he said I have some kind of record of mis-information against AS which is patently false. I'm not Nostradamus, but AS has a handful of "slots" in DAL up against AA and WN. They were screwed from the git-go. At least DL has enormous market strength across the country and is more likely to make a go of it with inbound customers, although I do not belabor under the illusion that DL will be cheap or do anything other than provide some sort of check on WN which is really the bully here for attempting to control an airport lock, stock, and barrel. AS is a hero for trying to be Robin Hood in DAL, but the deck is stacked too heavily against them just as it was against B6 in LGB. This is what happens when 4 airlines control the whole national market.

AirFiero wrote:

Wasn’t there a discussion barely a week ago about SJC-DAL going to 2x, and SFO and/or SAN being cut to 1x or am I confusing this with some other route? If so, what do you think happened in less than a week?

Any time carriers make quick changes it is because they are surprised. If they add it's better than they thought. If they shrink it's worse than they thought. Bookings are the data that drives these things 90% of the time.

DAL actually has more non-WN flights than HOU does, with 23 non-WN departures a day out of DAL vs. 15 non-WN departures a day out of HOU. WN also has more market share at HOU than it does at DAL, with WN having 92.96% market share at HOU vs 91.96% market share at DAL. DL does have more flights out of HOU and MDW than it does out of DAL, with DL doing 6 daily departures out of HOU and 16 departures a day out of MDW.

There is enough room to accommodate G4 at DAL once AS discontinues DAL-LGA and DAL-DCA nonstop service. The City of Dallas should make an offer to Allegiant Air to sublease at least one of the gates currently used by AS at DAL, and G4 also has opportunities to add nonstop service out of DAL to destinations not currently served by WN.

The key difference between HOU and DAL is that HOU doesn't have a cap on the number of gates, but DAL is capped at 20. There are also no hardstand limitations at HOU unlike DAL. Any airline that wants to add service to HOU can do so and is not limited by an artificial gate cap. DAL is. Given these factors, WN may have greater market share at HOU, but they are doing so in a free market. DAL is artificially constrained by the gate cap. Again, this is why it is tough to make a true apples to apples comparison of airline competition at DAL to operations at other airports.

And why would G4 bother coming to DAL? It goes completely against their business model. They focus on connecting smaller, underserved destinations with more tourist focused cities or snowbirds seeking the sun. For all of the many things the DFW area has to offer, I wouldn't exactly call it a great place for tourism.

DL747400 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

AS needs to consolidate back at DFW. Sooner or later, and like it or notm WN is going to get those two gates.

No airline should be legally permitted to control 100% of the gates at ANY airport. You underestimate the extent to which DL is determined to fight WN on this one. Even airlines like AA, UA, etc. who do not serve Love Field are likely to protest, especially if it keeps an arch rival from gaining access to the last 2 gates at a restricted-capacity airport.

Why would UA protest? They are the ones who gave up their gates to sublease to WN in the first place.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

He is entitled to his opinions just as much as anyone else is. His weekly updates present raw information for us to discuss each week, proportionately it probably makes him one of the most objective posters here. Sheesh.

The fanboyism gets a little weird in here sometimes.
I happen to dislike the merger between Alaska and Virgin due to the decrease in competition, and the destruction of a carrier with a unique product. Does this mean I despise AS and will never fly with them? No, that means I have a nuanced opinion of them.

In fairness, EA CO AS isn't a fanboy, he's an employee. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a fan. If it makes you a "fanboy" by wanting to have an accurate dialogue, then I guess there's a lot of fanboys on here. I'm also a fan of JetBlue. It's just that AS has been my hometown carrier for decades so I am more interested in them and certainly want to see them succeed. Yet I fly other carriers more often than not and somehow have survived. I really wish JetBlue had been more successful out west - I even applied with them when they opened SEA but missed the deadline.

Enilria is absolutely a valued poster for what he brings each week. We all look forward to our Sunday morning route fix. However, we can still have disagreements about things. As he himself alluded to earlier, there have been years of discussions on many, many topics where a history has been created. He pulled his posting history from a non-OAG thread from two years ago where he shared his thoughts on AS+VX. Sometimes that dialogue will spill over into the OAG threads as a normal matter of discussion.

In that last thread he said that then - in 2016, on Day 1 of the merger - that AS had already decided that they were pulling out of DAL. It was done. They just were not announcing the bad news yet. The death knell had been sounded. Here we are two years later and AS still has it's two gates at DAL and, until that changes, his prediction has not come true. So, when in a thread like this he makes statements about how AS must have "de facto agreed" to pull out of at least some DAL gates (which of course would support his previous assertions that DAL had already been called dead by AS), yet AS has flights being re-added, there is going to be pushback.

Enilria has had a narrative that AS is pulling out of DAL and might want to interpret things through that prism. EA CO AS (perhaps with inside info, perhaps just in his gut) has had a different narrative, that AS will give it 3-5 years in DAL before pulling the plug, and might want to interpret (or present) things through that prism. All we can do is hold each other accountable for what we say. And lest you think I'm an EA CO AS "fanboy", the mountain he chose to die on for me personally was the AS/AA codeshare statements in the VX merger.

That's all fair, but that still doesn't add up to me having an ax to grind and spreading mis-information. Again, I did not triumphantly exclaim I was right when AS dropped DAL-DCA/LGA (until told I spread mis-information), but I did predict that exact thing 2 years earlier.

Again, where are all the B6 Fanboys claiming they won't fully close LGB as I keep saying? It's just that some posters (employees in many cases) take company decisions a lot more personally than others.

Since I'm espousing opinions, I'm going to repeat another one. AS is locked in a very difficult battle with DL in SEA. AS had a lot of advantages in SEA. DL has a lot of advantages everywhere else. AS is still winning that battle, but by a lot slimmer margin than early on. Another old prediction was that this merger would be a huge distraction when AS needed to concentrate on fighting DL. I think that has also come to pass in spades, although the QX operational meltdown certainly aggravated everything. Strategically, the merger looks like a worse choice with each passing day. Other than acquiring pilots I'm not sure what will be left in another 5-7 years. That's a lot of lost equity when you are under such serious attack. That's not hating on AS, it's the cold hard facts, at least as I see them. It does not make me happy it is heading that way. I don't want to see DL control every major Coastal airport. If anything, I'm irked with AS for backhandedly helping DL by putting themselves in this position.

jplatts wrote:

enilria wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

On the specific subject of AS at DAL, isn’t AS primarily (or mostly focused) on being a West Coast carrier? Service from western cities to DAL might make sense for them whereas major operations outside of a western city focus doesn’t? If so, then operations from DAL-LGA/DCA would be outside of their focus. Unles they want to be a larger, nationwide airline.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

My assumption is that you want to be taken seriously. You tout your record - nothing wrong with that.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

you didn't seem clear on the conditions placed on those asset dispositions.

I only touted it because he said I have some kind of record of mis-information against AS which is patently false. I'm not Nostradamus, but AS has a handful of "slots" in DAL up against AA and WN. They were screwed from the git-go. At least DL has enormous market strength across the country and is more likely to make a go of it with inbound customers, although I do not belabor under the illusion that DL will be cheap or do anything other than provide some sort of check on WN which is really the bully here for attempting to control an airport lock, stock, and barrel. AS is a hero for trying to be Robin Hood in DAL, but the deck is stacked too heavily against them just as it was against B6 in LGB. This is what happens when 4 airlines control the whole national market.

AirFiero wrote:

Wasn’t there a discussion barely a week ago about SJC-DAL going to 2x, and SFO and/or SAN being cut to 1x or am I confusing this with some other route? If so, what do you think happened in less than a week?

Any time carriers make quick changes it is because they are surprised. If they add it's better than they thought. If they shrink it's worse than they thought. Bookings are the data that drives these things 90% of the time.

DAL actually has more non-WN flights than HOU does, with 23 non-WN departures a day out of DAL vs. 15 non-WN departures a day out of HOU. WN also has more market share at HOU than it does at DAL, with WN having 92.96% market share at HOU vs 91.96% market share at DAL. DL does have more flights out of HOU and MDW than it does out of DAL, with DL doing 6 daily departures out of HOU and 16 departures a day out of MDW.

There is enough room to accommodate G4 at DAL once AS discontinues DAL-LGA and DAL-DCA nonstop service. The City of Dallas should make an offer to Allegiant Air to sublease at least one of the gates currently used by AS at DAL, and G4 also has opportunities to add nonstop service out of DAL to destinations not currently served by WN.

That's an excellent point, but *I THINK* that's the free market. I don't think there is any artificial barrier to another carrier coming into HOU or even building gates. DAL is legally set up to protect WN's monopoly through gate limits which is a travesty.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Jplatts, I’m not sure what the threshold is for AS to lose its sole use of the two gates at DAL, though I believe that there are proceedings taking place Feb 2019 that should provide some clarity. I’d imagine that in the interim AS will retain its exclusive use of the two gates. Again, depending on any pre-existing minimum use threshold.

I thought that the rules are that any gate with a gap can have other carriers flights placed on it, which would mean that's already happening with the VX/AS gates.

airliner371 wrote:

The gates should go common-use. But the question is how do you make money off a gate that goes common-use? You don't. So there's no incentive to make it a common-use gate for AS, even if there's room/they leave.

The problem with that is that WN will dominate them. There are a lot of tricks to hogging common use gates that a dominant airline can use that a smaller carrier just can't do. For example, often there are grandfathering rules that say that a flight loses its grandfathering when the times change even a minute. An airline with 150+ flights can work with that limitation much more easily than a carrier with 8 flights.
That's just one trick. WN could also put flights to places with routine ATC delays on those gates to make them very hard for other airlines to operate reliably from.

EA CO AS wrote:

It's not so much the commentary, but rather, reporting only select parts of the changes to make the commentary seem credible. In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result. Or in the previous thread, that AS was dropping 1X LAXJFK and 1X SFOJFK with the comment "continuing to cut transcons" while omitting the fact that they'd used those to fund 2 new transcons, SJCJFK and a 3rd daily SEAJFK.

For the record, I'm a fan of enilria's weekly thread! I'm just wondering why the whole picture doesn't get shared when discussing AS of late.

Carry on.

I appreciate the comments about keeping the thread, but I DO NOT FILTER THE CHANGES SHOWN ON HERE to make some sort of point. The changes you are talking about were posted when they happened. They didn't happen this week so they don't get reposted. That's how he thread works. If I reposted every change that had ever happened every week this thread would be 4,000 pages long.

In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result.
viewtopic.php?t=1391033
Interesting swap
AS DAL-SAN JUN 1.9>1.0 JUL 2>1.0 AUG 2>1.0 SEP 2>1.0 OCT 2>1.0 NOV 1.1>0.1 DEC 1.0>0
AS DAL-SJC JUL 1.0>1.8 AUG 1.0>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.0>2 NOV 1.0>2 DEC 1.0>2
AS PDX-DAL JUN 1.9>1.0
viewtopic.php?t=1392243
AS PDX-DAL NOV 1.1>2 DEC 1.0>2

enilria wrote:

FAQ

WHAT IS THIS REPORT?
This compares departures for sale THIS WEEK for the stated period versus what was for sale LAST WEEK...It does NOT compare to last year or now (UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED).

THE SCHEDULES SHOWN HERE CHANGE AFTER YOU POST???
-To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often---Winston Churchill. This is data the carriers filed at the point in time it was captured. It's changed since then. You are just going to have to live with it.

enilria wrote:

I appreciate the comments about keeping the thread, but I DO NOT FILTER THE CHANGES SHOWN ON HERE to make some sort of point. The changes you are talking about were posted when they happened. They didn't happen this week so they don't get reposted. That's how he thread works. If I reposted every change that had ever happened every week this thread would be 4,000 pages long.

In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result.
viewtopic.php?t=1391033
Interesting swap
AS DAL-SAN JUN 1.9>1.0 JUL 2>1.0 AUG 2>1.0 SEP 2>1.0 OCT 2>1.0 NOV 1.1>0.1 DEC 1.0>0
AS DAL-SJC JUL 1.0>1.8 AUG 1.0>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.0>2 NOV 1.0>2 DEC 1.0>2
AS PDX-DAL JUN 1.9>1.0
viewtopic.php?t=1392243
AS PDX-DAL NOV 1.1>2 DEC 1.0>2

enilria wrote:

FAQ

WHAT IS THIS REPORT?
This compares departures for sale THIS WEEK for the stated period versus what was for sale LAST WEEK...It does NOT compare to last year or now (UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED).

THE SCHEDULES SHOWN HERE CHANGE AFTER YOU POST???
-To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often---Winston Churchill. This is data the carriers filed at the point in time it was captured. It's changed since then. You are just going to have to live with it.

I don't know how long you've been doing this thread, but I marvel that many people still struggle with the concept that you are posting things that changed from last week. I don't know why that is so hard to grasp, but hardly a week goes by that somebody isn't baffled despite the lengthy FAQ. Plus, there really is no other way to do it concisely.

To do it any other way would be like a newspaper saying, we are no longer going to tell you about things that are "new", we are now just going to list everything happening and you can figure out what is different than the last time you looked. LOL

TerminalD wrote:

enilria wrote:

I appreciate the comments about keeping the thread, but I DO NOT FILTER THE CHANGES SHOWN ON HERE to make some sort of point. The changes you are talking about were posted when they happened. They didn't happen this week so they don't get reposted. That's how he thread works. If I reposted every change that had ever happened every week this thread would be 4,000 pages long.

In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result.
viewtopic.php?t=1391033
Interesting swap
AS DAL-SAN JUN 1.9>1.0 JUL 2>1.0 AUG 2>1.0 SEP 2>1.0 OCT 2>1.0 NOV 1.1>0.1 DEC 1.0>0
AS DAL-SJC JUL 1.0>1.8 AUG 1.0>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.0>2 NOV 1.0>2 DEC 1.0>2
AS PDX-DAL JUN 1.9>1.0
viewtopic.php?t=1392243
AS PDX-DAL NOV 1.1>2 DEC 1.0>2

enilria wrote:

FAQ

WHAT IS THIS REPORT?
This compares departures for sale THIS WEEK for the stated period versus what was for sale LAST WEEK...It does NOT compare to last year or now (UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED).

THE SCHEDULES SHOWN HERE CHANGE AFTER YOU POST???
-To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often---Winston Churchill. This is data the carriers filed at the point in time it was captured. It's changed since then. You are just going to have to live with it.

I don't know how long you've been doing this thread, but I marvel that many people still struggle with the concept that you are posting things that changed from last week. I don't know why that is so hard to grasp, but hardly a week goes by that somebody isn't baffled despite the lengthy FAQ. Plus, there really is no other way to do it concisely.

To do it any other way would be like a newspaper saying, we are no longer going to tell you about things that are "new", we are now just going to list everything happening and you can figure out what is different than the last time you looked. LOL

When I started the thread there were numerous battles where people would say "just post every flight in the world and we will focus on what we want" or "show the aircraft type of every flight" or "you didn't note that the flight times changed" or "you ignored that went from an RJ70 to an RJ50" or "TranStates is no longer UA Express in MLI, where is that noted?" or "where is Kabul to Tehran service shown?" Eventually, I just said this is it, make your own if you want something else. The only thing I have really changed since the beginning is to lower the minimum flights/month cutoff as F9 operates flights so infrequently a lot of their stuff even now gets cut off, but you have to draw a line or you get repositioning and many more one-off charters.

DL747400 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

AS needs to consolidate back at DFW. Sooner or later, and like it or notm WN is going to get those two gates.

No airline should be legally permitted to control 100% of the gates at ANY airport. You underestimate the extent to which DL is determined to fight WN on this one. Even airlines like AA, UA, etc. who do not serve Love Field are likely to protest, especially if it keeps an arch rival from gaining access to the last 2 gates at a restricted-capacity airport.

UA won't protest as long as it's making money from the process. It's actually contributing to it, by leasing it's two DAL gates to WN.

I come for the snark and fanboy brinksmanship. Very entertaining!

n7371f wrote:

AS DAL-SJC. Just flew it 4/28 on an OO operated E75. F6/12 Y24/Y64.

Also recently flew SJC-TUS on AS/OO and load was even worse. F1/12. Y18/64.

You know...one thing that some airlines really suck at is advertising. There are probably many potential customers that don't know anything about these routes.

enilria wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

enilria wrote:

I appreciate the comments about keeping the thread, but I DO NOT FILTER THE CHANGES SHOWN ON HERE to make some sort of point. The changes you are talking about were posted when they happened. They didn't happen this week so they don't get reposted. That's how he thread works. If I reposted every change that had ever happened every week this thread would be 4,000 pages long.

In this thread, it was highlighting the LGADAL and DCADAL cuts without providing the counterpoint, that both SJCDAL and PDXDAL are increasing to 2X daily as a result.
viewtopic.php?t=1391033
Interesting swap
AS DAL-SAN JUN 1.9>1.0 JUL 2>1.0 AUG 2>1.0 SEP 2>1.0 OCT 2>1.0 NOV 1.1>0.1 DEC 1.0>0
AS DAL-SJC JUL 1.0>1.8 AUG 1.0>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.0>2 NOV 1.0>2 DEC 1.0>2
AS PDX-DAL JUN 1.9>1.0
viewtopic.php?t=1392243
AS PDX-DAL NOV 1.1>2 DEC 1.0>2

I don't know how long you've been doing this thread, but I marvel that many people still struggle with the concept that you are posting things that changed from last week. I don't know why that is so hard to grasp, but hardly a week goes by that somebody isn't baffled despite the lengthy FAQ. Plus, there really is no other way to do it concisely.

To do it any other way would be like a newspaper saying, we are no longer going to tell you about things that are "new", we are now just going to list everything happening and you can figure out what is different than the last time you looked. LOL

When I started the thread there were numerous battles where people would say "just post every flight in the world and we will focus on what we want" or "show the aircraft type of every flight" or "you didn't note that the flight times changed" or "you ignored that went from an RJ70 to an RJ50" or "TranStates is no longer UA Express in MLI, where is that noted?" or "where is Kabul to Tehran service shown?" Eventually, I just said this is it, make your own if you want something else. The only thing I have really changed since the beginning is to lower the minimum flights/month cutoff as F9 operates flights so infrequently a lot of their stuff even now gets cut off, but you have to draw a line or you get repositioning and many more one-off charters.

I appreciate the effort you put into these, and they are always my first read on Sundays. Any comments I would make are opinions to others and not you directly.

enilria wrote:

Since I'm espousing opinions, I'm going to repeat another one. AS is locked in a very difficult battle with DL in SEA. AS had a lot of advantages in SEA. DL has a lot of advantages everywhere else. AS is still winning that battle, but by a lot slimmer margin than early on. Another old prediction was that this merger would be a huge distraction when AS needed to concentrate on fighting DL. I think that has also come to pass in spades, although the QX operational meltdown certainly aggravated everything. Strategically, the merger looks like a worse choice with each passing day. Other than acquiring pilots I'm not sure what will be left in another 5-7 years. That's a lot of lost equity when you are under such serious attack. That's not hating on AS, it's the cold hard facts, at least as I see them. It does not make me happy it is heading that way. I don't want to see DL control every major Coastal airport. If anything, I'm irked with AS for backhandedly helping DL by putting themselves in this position.

AS is in a tough position being as a lot smaller carrier than DL and WN. Adding VX's network helps it in California and diversifies it from being cornered in SEA/PDX, where DL would put pressure on them anyways. What it does now in DAL is somewhat irrelevant in the big picture. I think it will keep DAL-west coast, though, or at least one of the two DAL gates.

While VX's decision to start DAL-LGA/DCA is often derided, people forget that VX was struggling in transcons outside of the core east markets, so the DAL-DCA/LGA strategy was somewhat of a diversification. It struggled in PHL and dropped PHL to fund the DAL-LGA/DCA expansion. In the end, VX's set up of the DAL focus city and acquiring the LGA/DCA slots from the AA merger was the right move, as these were valuable assets - and it attracted a higher bidding (between AS and B6) from having those DCA/LGA slots. Ironically, and fortunately for PHL travelers, AS is back serving PHL-SFO/LAX, albeit in a limited way, while deleting DAL-LGA/DCA.

enilria wrote:

FAQ
AA ORD-SJU AUG 1.0>0.8

I know the SJU hub is long gone, but it is hard to believe that this service is down to less than once daily. I guess there are tons of one-stop options through CLT, MIA, or PHL.

wedgetail737 wrote:

n7371f wrote:

AS DAL-SJC. Just flew it 4/28 on an OO operated E75. F6/12 Y24/Y64.

Also recently flew SJC-TUS on AS/OO and load was even worse. F1/12. Y18/64.

You know...one thing that some airlines really suck at is advertising. There are probably many potential customers that don't know anything about these routes.

AS is flooding the Bay Area with advertising. They just have a lot of patience for flying half full E175s at SJC (while leaving Q400s on PDX-OAK, PDX-SMF, SEA-STS, etc). TUS is a marginal market from the Bay Area; WN is only seasonal to OAK and not on TUS-SJC at all.

kbmiflyer wrote:

enilria wrote:

FAQ
AA ORD-SJU AUG 1.0>0.8

I know the SJU hub is long gone, but it is hard to believe that this service is down to less than once daily. I guess there are tons of one-stop options through CLT, MIA, or PHL.

Puerto Rico is not even close to being recovered from last year's hurricane, and the news season is starting up. I can see why this is being cutdown. B6 owns SJU now anyway.

phluser wrote:

enilria wrote:

Since I'm espousing opinions, I'm going to repeat another one. AS is locked in a very difficult battle with DL in SEA. AS had a lot of advantages in SEA. DL has a lot of advantages everywhere else. AS is still winning that battle, but by a lot slimmer margin than early on. Another old prediction was that this merger would be a huge distraction when AS needed to concentrate on fighting DL. I think that has also come to pass in spades, although the QX operational meltdown certainly aggravated everything. Strategically, the merger looks like a worse choice with each passing day. Other than acquiring pilots I'm not sure what will be left in another 5-7 years. That's a lot of lost equity when you are under such serious attack. That's not hating on AS, it's the cold hard facts, at least as I see them. It does not make me happy it is heading that way. I don't want to see DL control every major Coastal airport. If anything, I'm irked with AS for backhandedly helping DL by putting themselves in this position.

AS is in a tough position being as a lot smaller carrier than DL and WN. Adding VX's network helps it in California and diversifies it from being cornered in SEA/PDX, where DL would put pressure on them anyways. What it does now in DAL is somewhat irrelevant in the big picture. I think it will keep DAL-west coast, though, or at least one of the two DAL gates.

While VX's decision to start DAL-LGA/DCA is often derided, people forget that VX was struggling in transcons outside of the core east markets, so the DAL-DCA/LGA strategy was somewhat of a diversification. It struggled in PHL and dropped PHL to fund the DAL-LGA/DCA expansion. In the end, VX's set up of the DAL focus city and acquiring the LGA/DCA slots from the AA merger was the right move, as these were valuable assets - and it attracted a higher bidding (between AS and B6) from having those DCA/LGA slots. Ironically, and fortunately for PHL travelers, AS is back serving PHL-SFO/LAX, albeit in a limited way, while deleting DAL-LGA/DCA.

I'm going to have to disagree with this a little bit. DL/SEA is a problem for AS, but not a huge one. They have much lower costs, which allow them to generate good profits despite getting comparable yields with DL. DL is the one that's seeing RASM underperformance due to capacity increases. The problem AS faces are at SFO, where UA is killing them on all those new routes added last year(both yield/LF are terrible), and at intra-west coast + DAL market where they are engaged in a war of attrition with WN. I would say WN is their biggest problem right now. If you looked at their Q4 earning, the regional operation saw a -6% RASM from last year. Much of that is due to their turf war with WN. And it's only going to get worse for both AS/WN since some of the announced capacity additions are only just going in for Q2 + WN's much anticipated entry into HI.

One thing to watch out for is their performance on the higher performing legacy-VX routes, now that free/cheap upgrades are available for them. I've heard so far the upgrades are easy to come by.

AS is flooding the Bay Area with advertising. They just have a lot of patience for flying half full E175s at SJC (while leaving Q400s on PDX-OAK, PDX-SMF, SEA-STS, etc). TUS is a marginal market from the Bay Area; WN is only seasonal to OAK and not on TUS-SJC at all.

not even an exaggeration for a route like BUR-SJC

phluser wrote:

AS is in a tough position being as a lot smaller carrier than DL and WN. Adding VX's network helps it in California and diversifies it from being cornered in SEA/PDX, where DL would put pressure on them anyways. What it does now in DAL is somewhat irrelevant in the big picture. I think it will keep DAL-west coast, though, or at least one of the two DAL gates.

While VX's decision to start DAL-LGA/DCA is often derided, people forget that VX was struggling in transcons outside of the core east markets, so the DAL-DCA/LGA strategy was somewhat of a diversification. It struggled in PHL and dropped PHL to fund the DAL-LGA/DCA expansion. In the end, VX's set up of the DAL focus city and acquiring the LGA/DCA slots from the AA merger was the right move, as these were valuable assets - and it attracted a higher bidding (between AS and B6) from having those DCA/LGA slots. Ironically, and fortunately for PHL travelers, AS is back serving PHL-SFO/LAX, albeit in a limited way, while deleting DAL-LGA/DCA.

I think VX had to try it. They couldn't just fly to LAX/SFO and really make much of a dent at DAL. That's the same problem AS now faces. Without connecting traffic they are at a huge advantage in such a dominated market.

Tell you what, here's the ultimate point. The fact that AS and VX can't make DAL work when DFW works reasonably well is EXACTLY why DOT's consideration of DAL and DFW as a single market is fatally flawed. If the markets were really ONE, then VX/AS performance would be identical at both airports.

EvanWSFO wrote:

enilria wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

I don't know how long you've been doing this thread, but I marvel that many people still struggle with the concept that you are posting things that changed from last week. I don't know why that is so hard to grasp, but hardly a week goes by that somebody isn't baffled despite the lengthy FAQ. Plus, there really is no other way to do it concisely.

To do it any other way would be like a newspaper saying, we are no longer going to tell you about things that are "new", we are now just going to list everything happening and you can figure out what is different than the last time you looked. LOL

When I started the thread there were numerous battles where people would say "just post every flight in the world and we will focus on what we want" or "show the aircraft type of every flight" or "you didn't note that the flight times changed" or "you ignored that went from an RJ70 to an RJ50" or "TranStates is no longer UA Express in MLI, where is that noted?" or "where is Kabul to Tehran service shown?" Eventually, I just said this is it, make your own if you want something else. The only thing I have really changed since the beginning is to lower the minimum flights/month cutoff as F9 operates flights so infrequently a lot of their stuff even now gets cut off, but you have to draw a line or you get repositioning and many more one-off charters.

I appreciate the effort you put into these, and they are always my first read on Sundays. Any comments I would make are opinions to others and not you directly.

Thanks

tphuang wrote:

I'm going to have to disagree with this a little bit. DL/SEA is a problem for AS, but not a huge one. They have much lower costs, which allow them to generate good profits despite getting comparable yields with DL. DL is the one that's seeing RASM underperformance due to capacity increases. The problem AS faces are at SFO, where UA is killing them on all those new routes added last year(both yield/LF are terrible), and at intra-west coast + DAL market where they are engaged in a war of attrition with WN. I would say WN is their biggest problem right now. If you looked at their Q4 earning, the regional operation saw a -6% RASM from last year. Much of that is due to their turf war with WN. And it's only going to get worse for both AS/WN since some of the announced capacity additions are only just going in for Q2 + WN's much anticipated entry into HI.

So, have you looked at the DOT data on this? Is AS doing much worse from SFO than LAX? I must say that's surprising. I wouldn't think it would be much different.

You bring up another strategic point, though, that I would add to AS mis-steps. At the risk of inflaming the Alaska fans more. They declared public war on WN. WHY?????
Alaska Airlines wants to replace Southwest Airlines as California's go-to airline
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-a ... story.html
This was a dumb move. Who does that? It's a perfectly acceptable internal strategy, but where is the benefit of announcing something like that except to poke your much larger and more powerful competitor in the eye when they were already in a blood feud with DL. This speaks to why this merger was a distraction. You could even argue the QX pilot problem slipped further through the cracks because of the distraction. AS was doing very well before the merger was announced and I would like to see them claw back to that point, but low costs also come from low interest expense and blowing a lot of money on a merger adds a lot of cost.

n7371f wrote:

AS DAL-SJC. Just flew it 4/28 on an OO operated E75. F6/12 Y24/Y64.

Also recently flew SJC-TUS on AS/OO and load was even worse. F1/12. Y18/64.

Neither being a leisure route, I'm not sure it's fair to pick a Saturday flight to be making assumptions about load factors on a relatively new route.

enilria wrote:

Tell you what, here's the ultimate point. The fact that AS and VX can't make DAL work when DFW works reasonably well is EXACTLY why DOT's consideration of DAL and DFW as a single market is fatally flawed. If the markets were really ONE, then VX/AS performance would be identical at both airports.

DFW seems to work reasonably well for AA. It was a small spoke for VX and it's still a small spoke for AS. As far as some other smaller carriers, we don't see B6 covering DFW-FLL/MCO/JFK, F9 with much of a presence, G4 with any presence, despite DFW's impressive population growth. NK has a decent presence, and the competition (and low fares) it offers to the market is ignored.

Some imply VX should not have been awarded the DAL gates in the first place, because of all the competition that was lost in DFW when it moved, and the loss of potential additional service from DL or WN at DAL, because VX got the gates. When VX now AS offers competition, pax are absent in supporting it. To top it off, AS is chastised for anything it does in DAL from a number of posters, even though it rightfully purchased VX and everything that came with it.

phluser wrote:

Some imply VX should not have been awarded the DAL gates in the first place, because of all the competition that was lost in DFW when it moved, and the loss of potential additional service from DL or WN at DAL, because VX got the gates. When VX now AS offers competition, pax are absent in supporting it. To top it off, AS is chastised for anything it does in DAL from a number of posters, even though it rightfully purchased VX and everything that came with it.

I don't think chastised is the right word. I think most people appreciate the competitiveness it brings to the Dallas area, but at the same time DAL does nothing for AS. It's not a large money maker, and it doesn't fit into AS's larger network (among other things).

enilria wrote:

AA BGR-LGA SEP 0.1>1.3

Large increase, will DL switch a flight back to DTW, or double down in response?

B6 JFK-DEN SEP 1.1>2.0 OCT 1.0>1.9

1x was pretty low...2x is better, but I sometimes wonder where B6 is even flying, compared to WN, even with only 30% of the planes, B6 seems.... somewhat absent...from lots of midsize markets.

*B6 LGB-SLC OCT 4>3 NOV 4>3 DEC 4>3 JAN 0.9>0.5

Cutting in January/February or schedule load?

BA IAD-LHR NOV 2>3 DEC 2.0>3 JAN 2>3

Going to 17x weekly with additional 3x weekly 788 frequency.

DI JFK-LGW OCT 1.9>2 NOV 1.9>3 DEC 1.8>3 JAN 1.9>3

Doubt it will make more money than 2x frequencies, but 3x is a pretty major presence/high capacity in the market. Are they "banking" on LGW connections with U2?

DL SEA-CVG OCT 0.9>0.5
DL SEA-MCO SEP 1.0>0.7

Is the CVG bubble bursting?

*DL SEA-TUS NOV 0>0.9

I thought it was weekend (Saturday) only, now almost daily?

*FI SFO-KEF OCT 0.3>0.6 NOV 0>0.6 DEC 0>0.5 JAN 0>0.5

Did this just start? Thought WOW was alone on the route.

**UA EWR-FWA JUL 0.9>0 AUG 1.0>0 SEP 1.0>0 OCT 1.0>0 NOV 1.0>0 DEC 1.0>0 JAN 1.0>0

Predictable, especially with PHL coming back at 2x daily. Hope UA goes 4x daily to ORD or adds E175s to compensate.

phluser wrote:

enilria wrote:

Tell you what, here's the ultimate point. The fact that AS and VX can't make DAL work when DFW works reasonably well is EXACTLY why DOT's consideration of DAL and DFW as a single market is fatally flawed. If the markets were really ONE, then VX/AS performance would be identical at both airports.

DFW seems to work reasonably well for AA. It was a small spoke for VX and it's still a small spoke for AS. As far as some other smaller carriers, we don't see B6 covering DFW-FLL/MCO/JFK, F9 with much of a presence, G4 with any presence, despite DFW's impressive population growth. NK has a decent presence, and the competition (and low fares) it offers to the market is ignored.

Some imply VX should not have been awarded the DAL gates in the first place, because of all the competition that was lost in DFW when it moved, and the loss of potential additional service from DL or WN at DAL, because VX got the gates. When VX now AS offers competition, pax are absent in supporting it. To top it off, AS is chastised for anything it does in DAL from a number of posters, even though it rightfully purchased VX and everything that came with it.

I think that VX getting the gates wasn’t a bad thing but I definitely think DL should have also gotten permanent space to at least operate their ATL flights. Now that AS controls the gates and will have no connection to the east coast, DL should have the gates. Back in 2014, DL proposed mainline 8x daily ATL flight, and RJ DTW/MSP/LAX/LGA flights with many more markets available with connections if they got the 2 gates from AA which they were actually subleasing them before until the DOT forced AA to sublease them to VX instead because they are a LCC. DL would make much better use of the gates while not giving WN a near monopoly anything to the east of DAL. Simply put it this way, AS is a West Coast airline and shouldn’t be taking up valuable assets at DAL.

...even the OAG schedule filings by AS couldn't deter the AS/EA dude from going all progressive Seattle on Enirilia - who just reports weekly filings - and has for years - with some comments about opinions. I used to think the Frontier person from New Zealand used to get worked up about Enrilia before AS came into play & this individual married to Angle Lake. The sensitivity to anything AS would seem to indicate a concern about the AS game plan - or just lack of confidence.

Yes, we're all waiting for Dallas Love to be this panacea for As

phluser wrote:

enilria wrote:

Some imply VX should not have been awarded the DAL gates in the first place, because of all the competition that was lost in DFW when it moved, and the loss of potential additional service from DL or WN at DAL, because VX got the gates. When VX now AS offers competition, pax are absent in supporting it. To top it off, AS is chastised for anything it does in DAL from a number of posters, even though it rightfully purchased VX and everything that came with it.

I applaud the DOT for giving a small carrier a chance with assets like those, but the DOT's own merger policy makes it very hard for anybody but the Big 4 to succeed on one of the Big 4's turf.

KMCOFlyer wrote:

I think that VX getting the gates wasn’t a bad thing but I definitely think DL should have also gotten permanent space to at least operate their ATL flights. Now that AS controls the gates and will have no connection to the east coast, DL should have the gates. Back in 2014, DL proposed mainline 8x daily ATL flight, and RJ DTW/MSP/LAX/LGA flights with many more markets available with connections if they got the 2 gates from AA which they were actually subleasing them before until the DOT forced AA to sublease them to VX instead because they are a LCC. DL would make much better use of the gates while not giving WN a near monopoly anything to the east of DAL. Simply put it this way, AS is a West Coast airline and shouldn’t be taking up valuable assets at DAL.

DL should get at least one permanent gate at this point.

B6 JFK-AUA SEP 1.9>3 OCT 1.8>1.9 NOV 1.9>3
B6 JFK-BGI NOV 1.9>3
Can someone confirm that these two routes will operate 3x daily in November?