Delta to cut Seattle-Hong Kong, announces Seattle-Osaka

enilria · Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:41 pm

jetlanta wrote:
The hyperbole in this thread is amazing. There is no real honor in serving one particular city or another with one's "own metal" when that flight is a huge money loser and a JV can basically fix the issue. Delta is not becoming a "minor league player" in the Asia market. DL/KE are a reasonably close #2 in market share, and that share is likely to increase as the JV gets into full swing. Just last week, DL announced the net growth of one new U.S.-Asia market.

I think it is clear that Delta flew SEA-HKG because it HAD to. Without a JV partner, it did indeed need to be able to offer it's corporate customers a link to HKG. But it is quite clear that it was not a successful route. ... UA has mostly failed on its China secondary strategy. I've had communications with people that would know that indicate that UA's SIN services are a disaster. This is simply not a region that U.S. carriers are well-equipped to succeed in.

Hmm...so you are saying that the geography that these are end points from the USA rather than gateways onward to more of the world is really the reason why these routes cannot be served profitably. Apparently so different from India which has the exact same geography, but the problem there was that Qatar Airways was not releasing audited financial reports. Amazing how geography can be so different going one way around the world vs. the other. :rotfl:

ldvaviation · Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:41 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
DL behind AA at LAX??? ... depends upon the metric. If the metric is investment in LAX, DL is way ahead of AA. DL is mirroring on the west coast the pair of international hubs it has on the east coast. Moreover, DL is rapidly closing the PDEW gap ex-LAX. Take a look. https://www.lawa.org/en/lawa-investor-r ... statistics

Other metrics: Alliance TPAC annually ex-LAX.

IMO, the DL/KE JV's impact will be greatest at LAX.

Keep up. AA has signed a LOI with LAWA to spend $1.6 B on terminals 4 and 5. The difference amounts to $200 M or the cost of the T4 connector, which was recently completed.

Delta won't be closing any gap soon because it would mean having to compete against AA, UA, and WN on many hub to hub routes (e.g., LAX-ORD) and some hub to partner hub routes like LAX-HKG. Heck, after all this time, Delta still doesn't fly LAX-LHR on its own metal despite having a JV partner.

Why will the impact be greatest at LAX? The two already codeshare. If there is significant connection traffic, it is already reflected in Delta's numbers.

spinotter · Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:56 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
Topic title should be corrected. The "replacement route" is Seattle/Kansai, not Seattle/Osaka. The Osaka airport is Itami, ITM (or city code, OSA), which has no international service. KIX is not "Osaka International" (which ITM was until 1994), it is Kansai International.

Give it a rest. That's like saying LAX is "Southern California International" because it's not technically in Los Angeles.

I beg to differ. IATA nomenclature should be observed, and I don't follow the analogy, since SoCal Intl has never been an airport, but Osaka was Osaka International until 1994. Correct nomenclature is probably a pedagogical trait from a stint teaching graduate courses ... a.net is a learning tool for many readers.

I agree with you that the name is important. Every airport has an official name and we should be using at least an abbreviated form of the official name in a.net. Thanks for making the difference between ITM and KIX clear to me.

jetlanta · Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:22 pm

FlyHappy wrote:
Look - I mostly agree with you, though DL's gateway locations and its legacy NW NRT result are all of their own doing, and wasn't just "fate". Regardless, that is water under the bridge.

But here's the problem - as DL goes to this JV everywhere model (AF, AM, KE) for int'l flying, its always easiest to abandon challenging routes to the JV partner - and while that may make for the best bottom line financial results, it gives substance to the notion that US3 cannot compete on the international stage with ME3, Asians, Chinese, even the EU3; not in service, amenities, price.

Running away from competition all the time because you have a cousin who can do it more cheaply, better, or both, is not a path (or return) to greatness. I have trouble accepting that DL has no possible means to compete with others internationally. It seems that UA and AA are still making more effort in this way.
I get that DL is super profitable and seems to be well run, but I am starting to agree with the anti-US cynics around here that having a US home market means you have to be incompetent to not make money at it.

Even as I am writing this, I'm realizing the axiom: airlines aren't in the business of flying, they're in the business of making money........

The opening if HND to international traffic and the development of a new generation of aircraft that can economically overfly NRT were not the result of Delta's own doing. If you don't recognize those facts, we won't have much to discuss.

And the idea that pulling out of one route means that Delta can't compete internationally is silly. Delta's competes with great carriers are around the world. It's primary international gateway is JFK, for goodness sake. It faces strong competition on nearly every route from there. It invested a fortune to build up a presence in the world's premier intercontinental market...JFK-LHR. It also has built strong franchises in LAX and SEA in spite of strong competition from a global cast of characters. It added LAX-PVG and did it's best to get LAX-PEK, in spite of heavy competition. They didn't even have nonstop competition in the SEA-HKG market which should tell you something about the market. Just this year, Delta is adding ATL-ICN and ATL-PVG, which I think we can all agree are far more important to the carrier that a token presence in HKG.

Your last statement is the truth, however. Cathay Pacific is in terrible financial condition. Think about it.

Look, I get that there are some "prestige" markets that people think carriers need to be in. HKG has traditionally been one of those. But the nature of the DL/KE JV means that Delta serves HKG in a little different fashion, but still to the benefit of it's customers. And in the end, that is what matters.

jetlanta · Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:27 pm

enilria wrote:
jetlanta wrote:
The hyperbole in this thread is amazing. There is no real honor in serving one particular city or another with one's "own metal" when that flight is a huge money loser and a JV can basically fix the issue. Delta is not becoming a "minor league player" in the Asia market. DL/KE are a reasonably close #2 in market share, and that share is likely to increase as the JV gets into full swing. Just last week, DL announced the net growth of one new U.S.-Asia market.

I think it is clear that Delta flew SEA-HKG because it HAD to. Without a JV partner, it did indeed need to be able to offer it's corporate customers a link to HKG. But it is quite clear that it was not a successful route. ... UA has mostly failed on its China secondary strategy. I've had communications with people that would know that indicate that UA's SIN services are a disaster. This is simply not a region that U.S. carriers are well-equipped to succeed in.

Hmm...so you are saying that the geography that these are end points from the USA rather than gateways onward to more of the world is really the reason why these routes cannot be served profitably. Apparently so different from India which has the exact same geography, but the problem there was that Qatar Airways was not releasing audited financial reports. Amazing how geography can be so different going one way around the world vs. the other.

I didn't say anything about India and you know it. You also know that there are many factors that make these market similar and different. Don't try to draw me into you little pet obsession.

spinotter · Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:30 pm

FlyHappy wrote:
jetlanta wrote:
The hyperbole in this thread is amazing. There is no real honor in serving one particular city or another with one's "own metal" when that flight is a huge money loser and a JV can basically fix the issue. Delta is not becoming a "minor league player" in the Asia market. DL/KE are a reasonably close #2 in market share, and that share is likely to increase as the JV gets into full swing. Just last week, DL announced the net growth of one new U.S.-Asia market.

I think it is clear that Delta flew SEA-HKG because it HAD to. Without a JV partner, it did indeed need to be able to offer it's corporate customers a link to HKG. But it is quite clear that it was not a successful route. Neither was DTW-HKG. The economics of nonstop service to HKG, as well as pretty much any point south of PVG, are simply very tough from the U.S. HKG is not geographically well-situated for U.S. carriers, especially without a HKG-based partner to provide onward connections. AA has been pretty clear that it's HKG service is more strategic than successful at this point. UA has mostly failed on its China secondary strategy. I've had communications with people that would know that indicate that UA's SIN services are a disaster. This is simply not a region that U.S. carriers are well-equipped to succeed in. And Delta's particular hub structure is less well-suited for it than United's is. That's just the way it is. There is no shame in admitting that, especially when you have a better alternative via a world-class ICN hub.

This doesn't mean Delta can't compete in Asia. It means that Delta's network, especially with the KE JV, needs to serve the region differently than in the past. It is a big mistake to look at the old network and think that Delta can't compete in Asia because it cannot serve all the same markets the way NW did via NRT. That network was already doomed a decade ago. What is important now is how the new network develops. The ATL/DTW/LAX/SEA gateways + ICN , give Delta excellent coverage across its core geographies. Which is more than enough to make Delta a major player, particularly in North Asia, where most of the demand is.

Look - I mostly agree with you, though DL's gateway locations and its legacy NW NRT result are all of their own doing, and wasn't just "fate". Regardless, that is water under the bridge.

But here's the problem - as DL goes to this JV everywhere model (AF, AM, KE) for int'l flying, its always easiest to abandon challenging routes to the JV partner - and while that may make for the best bottom line financial results, it gives substance to the notion that US3 cannot compete on the international stage with ME3, Asians, Chinese, even the EU3; not in service, amenities, price.

Running away from competition all the time because you have a cousin who can do it more cheaply, better, or both, is not a path (or return) to greatness. I have trouble accepting that DL has no possible means to compete with others internationally. It seems that UA and AA are still making more effort in this way.
I get that DL is super profitable and seems to be well run, but I am starting to agree with the anti-US cynics around here that having a US home market means you have to be incompetent to not make money at it.

Even as I am writing this, I'm realizing the axiom: airlines aren't in the business of flying, they're in the business of making money........

If I remember correctly, NW/DL have flown DTW-HKG, MSP-HKG, SEA-HKG, NRT-HKG, GMP-HKG, TPE-HKG, OKA-HKG, HND-HKG - any others? All were yanked. DL cannot be present in every airport in the world. They have the means to compete, but not in every market. DL pulled HKG. UA pulled JFK. What did AA pull? Every airline slashes unprofitable or less profitable routes. And DL is even now in HKG with its JV partner KE. Why should they come back? They used to fly to AMM, CAI, IST, IEV, LED, etc. AF/KL do those places better. Same over the Pacific.

By the way, looking over those ancient NW route maps was a trip down memory lane. HKG (Kaitak) to TPE (Songshan) on NW? Who ever knew? Not sure they had interport traffic rights, but why not?

BoeingGuy · Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:08 pm

mercure1 wrote:
While we agree Hong Kong was likely a terrible performer for Delta, I am not sure routing via ICN is the best outcome for customers, especially those in non-US gateways looking to get to Hong Kong.

The via ICN routing creates an second additional connection stop, when there are so many US-HKG nonstops already. To many the ICN connection will result in double connections if they want to stay on the DL network (xxx-JV gateway-ICN-HKG) versus lets says on AA xxx-DFW-HKG or UA xxx-ORD-HKG or via any CX city in the US.

So while it might look best for DL financially to drop its own metal serving HKG, not sure its the best answer for customers at all.

Very few people from SEA go through a CX.gateway in the US. They go through YVR. Remember that AS and CX code-share. It’s pretty easy to take a quick Q400 connection to YVR. I’ve connected to CI and CZ up there too.

FSflyer899 · Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:35 pm

With Chinese airlines Hainan Airliens and Xiamen Air entering the market, flying to Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen while probably offering more/better connections, with lower fares, I would expect more people would choose those rather than flying into/connecting via Hong Kong.

FlyHappy · Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:53 pm

jetlanta wrote:
The opening if HND to international traffic and the development of a new generation of aircraft that can economically overfly NRT were not the result of Delta's own doing. If you don't recognize those facts, we won't have much to discuss.

I don't wish to be drawn into a NW/NRT/HND discussion. Its big and complex, but the fact is that DL failed to find a Japanese partner, and they weren't able to find profit in those 5th freedom flights. Even the idea that new gen planes made NRT obsolete isn't relevant since overflying NRT (or HND or ICN) to HKG, as you say isn't economical (for DL); and not just HKG, but everywhere virtually everywhere else; yes, I'm aware of of DL's China routes. DL's TPAC strategy today IS of their own doing; they own it.

jetlanta wrote:
And the idea that pulling out of one route means that Delta can't compete internationally is silly.

I didn't say this was about one route. Its about the long term metamorphosis from "global carrier" to US + a few select profitable trunks.

jetlanta wrote:
Delta's competes with great carriers are around the world. It's primary international gateway is JFK, for goodness sake. It faces strong competition on nearly every route from there. It invested a fortune to build up a presence in the world's premier intercontinental market...JFK-LHR.

I really don't think DL competes "around the world". JFK-LHR (or really NYC to LON, broadly) is not the sign of any greatness at all, that is easy. The two premier financial AND tourist meccas, of mid-haul length.... big deal. Competing with great carriers means going beyond safe trunk routes to partner hubs. DL has a few of those, UA/AA have a bit more, but all are shrinking away from it; yes - I get it, "not profitable", "yields are bad", "more money elsewhere", "leave it to a partner".

jetlanta wrote:
Your last statement is the truth, however. Cathay Pacific is in terrible financial condition. Think about it.

Mostly due to fuel hedging losses.

jetlanta wrote:
Look, I get that there are some "prestige" markets that people think carriers need to be in. HKG has traditionally been one of those. But the nature of the DL/KE JV means that Delta serves HKG in a little different fashion, but still to the benefit of it's customers. And in the end, that is what matters.

I never said anything about prestige, that has nothing to do with it. DL won't "serve" HKG - KE will. Its KE's brand and reputation. Sure the US DL consumer gets booked thru, and yes, its DL's JV, but the very nature of not flying your own metal into so many major destinations in the world, means that you never really try point of sale outside your home country; it means your brand is meaningless in those markets - THAT's why Delta is walking away from being a "global carrier", that's why DL doesn't really compete with ME3/EU3 and others.

LAXintl · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:09 pm

I think to me it comes down to fact that I view HKG as essentially a "must serve" market for a global airline that Delta bills itself as, especially one with big Pacific presence.

Yes I certainly understand HKG was quite clearly a very poor performer at DL, and I also often applaud airlines cutting their losses, but I just see the fact of Delta wanting to project a global player image and walking away from a market like HKG with its own metal as being at odds with each other.

WPvsMW · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:15 pm

spinotter wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Give it a rest. That's like saying LAX is "Southern California International" because it's not technically in Los Angeles.

I beg to differ. IATA nomenclature should be observed, and I don't follow the analogy, since SoCal Intl has never been an airport, but Osaka was Osaka International until 1994. Correct nomenclature is probably a pedagogical trait from a stint teaching graduate courses ... a.net is a learning tool for many readers.

I agree with you that the name is important. Every airport has an official name and we should be using at least an abbreviated form of the official name in a.net. Thanks for making the difference between ITM and KIX clear to me.

Thanks. Since the days of Pericles, Geeks have been held to higher standards than non-Geeks. [/humour]

LAXintl wrote:
... I just see the fact of Delta wanting to project a global player image and walking away from a market like HKG with its own metal as being at odds with each other.

Ed and Glen think that "own metal" is irrelevant is a JV.

WPvsMW · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:23 pm

ldvaviation wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
DL behind AA at LAX??? ... depends upon the metric. If the metric is investment in LAX, DL is way ahead of AA. DL is mirroring on the west coast the pair of international hubs it has on the east coast. Moreover, DL is rapidly closing the PDEW gap ex-LAX. Take a look. https://www.lawa.org/en/lawa-investor-r ... statistics

Other metrics: Alliance TPAC annually ex-LAX.

IMO, the DL/KE JV's impact will be greatest at LAX.

Keep up. AA has signed a LOI with LAWA to spend $1.6 B on terminals 4 and 5. The difference amounts to $200 M or the cost of the T4 connector, which was recently completed.

Delta won't be closing any gap soon because it would mean having to compete against AA, UA, and WN on many hub to hub routes (e.g., LAX-ORD) and some hub to partner hub routes like LAX-HKG. Heck, after all this time, Delta still doesn't fly LAX-LHR on its own metal despite having a JV partner.

Why will the impact be greatest at LAX? The two already codeshare. If there is significant connection traffic, it is already reflected in Delta's numbers.

As to the gap closing, the numbers speak for themselves. Take a look. https://www.lawa.org/en/lawa-investor-r ... statistics

FSDan · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:33 pm

If DL wants to get back into HKG on their own metal, I think the best option might actually be from JFK using the 777-200LR. That's on the wrong side of the country for most connections, but the O&D is very large and lucrative, and once the 77Ls are refurbished DL would have a very competitive product. Speaking of competition, there's a lot of it in that market; however, I think given DL's overall network strength in NYC they could win a decent amount of corporate traffic away from other airlines and could potentially make this route work. For the record, I don't really expect this to happen, but if DL hears enough about HKG from their NYC corporate client base, I wouldn't be surprised either...

The only other long-term-viable option I see for DL is LAX-HKG (probably on the 359), but that market has just as much competition as NYC-HKG, and DL has a weaker position in L.A. than they do in NYC. All of DL's other hubs don't seem to have enough O&D demand to HKG (I'd guess SEA has more than MSP, DTW, or ATL, not to mention better geography for connections, and even that didn't pan out).

TransWorldOne · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:38 pm

What is so troubling about this announcement is that it speaks volumes to Delta's international strategy going forward which seems to be to outsource any flying that overflies JV partner hubs whether "important" markets or not. I'm sure SIN and MNL will see the same fate as HKG. All you have to do is look at DL's aircraft orders to see that trunk routes to JV partner hubs will make up for the majority of their international network in the not so distant future. This is a smart business choice, I get it. Shareholders will rejoice. But I don't think it's a win for customers and certainly not for DL employees who will continue to see their jobs outsourced to partners.

enilria · Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:42 pm

jetlanta wrote:
I didn't say anything about India and you know it. You also know that there are many factors that make these market similar and different. Don't try to draw me into you little pet obsession.

Sure, but the point that it is difficult to make money flying from your hub to the further reaches of the earth is a truth regardless of who you are competing with. If for no other reason than the limited connections as the "funnel" shrinks. That was your overarching point. I agree with it and it is just as true for India as it is for SE Asia. The only difference is the population of India is greater, but the yield is probably worse due to the composition of the traffic that gigantic population creates. So, bottom line, same problem both ways around the earth from the USA.

jetlanta · Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:59 pm

enilria wrote:
jetlanta wrote:
I didn't say anything about India and you know it. You also know that there are many factors that make these market similar and different. Don't try to draw me into you little pet obsession.

Sure, but the point that it is difficult to make money flying from your hub to the further reaches of the earth is a truth regardless of who you are competing with. If for no other reason than the limited connections as the "funnel" shrinks. That was your overarching point. I agree with it and it is just as true for India as it is for SE Asia. The only difference is the population of India is greater, but the yield is probably worse due to the composition of the traffic that gigantic population creates. So, bottom line, same problem both ways around the earth from the USA.

I think you and I understand that economics of these kind of markets in a way that some others here do not. I wonder what differentiates our backgrounds from theirs? :scratchchin:

Back to my rant... (not directed at you)

It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Delta somehow isn't a truly competitive global carrier because it won't serve HKG with it's own metal. It has the 2nd largest fleet in the world, has the 2nd most annual revenue, and in fact, has the largest net profit of any airline worldwide. But even it can't win in every market. Cathay Pacific is a one-hub airline that can't even make money it's one-hub. Let's review that, even CX doesn't make money at HKG! Delta, on the other hand, has far more strategic opportunities where it can profitably engage it's fleet.

In August, Delta is going to serve PVG with daily flights from four U.S. gateways, NRT from five, HND from two, PEK from two and ICN from three (plus MSP next year). Each of those is a far more critical trading partner with the U.S. than HKG is. In contrast, BA is going to serve each of them with ONE daily flight, except PVG which is 10x a week. In fact, BA serves those key airports only 38 times per week TOTAL. Delta serves them 120 times a week from U.S. airports. So forgive me if I don't buy the argument that Delta is somehow not in the same "global" category if it doesn't fly to HKG 5x per week anymore.

I don't want Delta to leave HKG and I wish they weren't. But the emotional argument that HKG is a city they need to be in to be a truly global player is ludicrous. Every airline on Earth misses some "must serve" markets. The difference in this case is that the U.S. has more than one national flag carrier, and one in particular is better suited for HKG. That would be the major U.S. carrier that doesn't even serve JFK, a market it's own President says is a "must serve".

Delta is obviously a major global airline. In fact, it ist one of the biggest, best and truly MOST global carriers in the world. Not serving HKG does not change that.

enilria · Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:24 pm

jetlanta wrote:
It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Delta somehow isn't a truly competitive global carrier because it won't serve HKG with it's own metal.

It's some what embarrassing that they can't make that market work somehow, but I agree it means little in terms of Delta's overall position in the global marketplace. It's not unlike DL leaving Dubai when DXB has the second most airlines of any airport in the world. On the one hand, it's a giant market that something like 90 airlines think it is important to serve, but on the other hand they were surely losing money. You can't serve a large number of loss-leaders, particularly long-haul ones without it making a noticeable dent in earnings. This is why the U.S. airlines are the world's most profitable a this point. Tough decisions... Having said all that I think I reported DL was sucking in SEA-HKG before and you took the opposite position! LOL

FlyHappy · Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:32 pm

jetlanta wrote:
It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Delta somehow isn't a truly competitive global carrier because it won't serve HKG with it's own metal. It has the 2nd largest fleet in the world, has the 2nd most annual revenue, and in fact, has the largest net profit of any airline worldwide.

You are passionate.
Take away that massive US domestic market, and the DL fleet, revenue and profit looks quite a bit smaller. Good for DL for being so strong in the home market, but the crux of the thread is global presence.

jetlanta wrote:
In contrast, BA is going to serve each of them with ONE daily flight, except PVG which is 10x a week. In fact, BA serves those key airports only 38 times per week TOTAL. Delta serves them 120 times a week from U.S. airports. So forgive me if I don't buy the argument that Delta is somehow not in the same "global" category if it doesn't fly to HKG 5x per week anymore.

honestly, would you not agree that BA serves a wider ranging global route map, and does so with far greater competitive pressure, without the revenue benefit of a large, protected home market?

I'm not bashing DL. I'm a customer. I think they are most commonly the best of the US3.
Just as I am unhappy that Ford, GM and Chrysler are entirely ceding the sedan market to the Japanese/Korean/German makes, I am also unhappy that DL seems to be ceding "challenging" routes. I'd like to see them find a way to be more aggressive.

SESGDL · Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:00 pm

FlyHappy wrote:
jetlanta wrote:
It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Delta somehow isn't a truly competitive global carrier because it won't serve HKG with it's own metal. It has the 2nd largest fleet in the world, has the 2nd most annual revenue, and in fact, has the largest net profit of any airline worldwide.

You are passionate.
Take away that massive US domestic market, and the DL fleet, revenue and profit looks quite a bit smaller. Good for DL for being so strong in the home market, but the crux of the thread is global presence.

jetlanta wrote:
In contrast, BA is going to serve each of them with ONE daily flight, except PVG which is 10x a week. In fact, BA serves those key airports only 38 times per week TOTAL. Delta serves them 120 times a week from U.S. airports. So forgive me if I don't buy the argument that Delta is somehow not in the same "global" category if it doesn't fly to HKG 5x per week anymore.

If DL’s only as large as they are due to the home market, please explain to me where their 150+ aircraft widebody fleet (one of the largest widebody fleets in the world) is flying every day? It must not be places like LHR, JNB, NRT, SYD and GRU cause that certainly doesn’t represent “global,” does it...?

Jeremy

jetlanta · Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:06 pm

FlyHappy wrote:
honestly, would you not agree that BA serves a wider ranging global route map, and does so with far greater competitive pressure, without the revenue benefit of a large, protected home market?

I'm not bashing DL. I'm a customer. I think they are most commonly the best of the US3.
Just as I am unhappy that Ford, GM and Chrysler are entirely ceding the sedan market to the Japanese/Korean/German makes, I am also unhappy that DL seems to be ceding "challenging" routes. I'd like to see them find a way to be more aggressive.

BA operates from a privileged, slot-controlled position from the world's largest international air market (city). Of course they are going to serve a broader array of markets, if London is on one end of your itinerary. If Delta held a position in NYC similar to BA's in London, it would also serve many of the same markets. But it shouldn't be discounted that BA serves all of these cities often with just one daily flight. Delta serves PVG with four daily flights from four cities. Breadth vs. depth. Which is more important?

I guess my point is that your definition of "global" is very narrowly seems to be focused on the number of "prestigious" dots on the map. But Delta can take 4x the number of passengers to PVG in a day than BA can. Are four Delta tails lined up a Pudong more "prestigious" than one BA tail? What is a bigger deal? I'd argue "who cares?" They are both two of the most global airlines in the world. Delta is so global it own 49% of BA's largest UK competitor.

I'd also say that GM isn't abandoning sedans anymore than United is abandoning HKG. Global markets aren't one size fits all. I think we can agree that Delta's network isn't well-suited to HKG in the first place.

I get what you are saying. I just think you are barking up the wrong tree. Losing money for years on a route is not a way to prove your status. It is a way to fail your stakeholders. Delta isn't shrinking in Asia, quite the opposite. But HKG clearly isn't something that works for them.

WPvsMW · Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:13 pm

HKG yields are a problem that DL hasn't solved yet, after many attempts. There may be no more attempts at HKG by DL, but don't rule our an expanded SZX, where DL has two partners. Just a hunch... but I think something is brewing at SZX, a Tier 1 city without the Tier 1 airport rules.

winginit · Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:32 pm

mercure1 wrote:
While we agree Hong Kong was likely a terrible performer for Delta, I am not sure routing via ICN is the best outcome for customers, especially those in non-US gateways looking to get to Hong Kong.

The via ICN routing creates an second additional connection stop, when there are so many US-HKG nonstops already. To many the ICN connection will result in double connections if they want to stay on the DL network (xxx-JV gateway-ICN-HKG) versus lets says on AA xxx-DFW-HKG or UA xxx-ORD-HKG or via any CX city in the US.

So while it might look best for DL financially to drop its own metal serving HKG, not sure its the best answer for customers at all.

Of course it's not the best outcome for customers, but the biggest lie in business is that the customer is always right. What would be best for the customer would be a $100 fare for a nonstop lie-flat between SEA and HKG, but it's not profitable so it doesn't matter what's best for the customer - what matters is what they're willing to pay for and whether or not it aligns with a profitable operation for the service provider.

ldvaviation · Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:46 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
As to the gap closing, the numbers speak for themselves. Take a look. https://www.lawa.org/en/lawa-investor-r ... statistics

Did you look at the numbers? Over a year (through April), Delta increased its market share by an unimpressive 0.12 % and closed the gap on American by .11%. Actually, I expected a lot more with all the hype from the Delta move. American even gave Delta a tiny boost by reducing some domestic frequencies due to gate-constraints of its own. In fact, to get a better read of which one needs more gates, look at the revenue-related ops on the same page. There the gap between the two widens.

As to the gap ever closing, what is next for the unstoppable Delta? LAX-LHR? LAX-ORD? Another LAX-DCA flight? LAX-PHL? LAX-CLT? All the low-hanging fruit are gone. Will Delta replace SEA-HKG with LAX-HKG?

Osubuckeyes · Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:16 pm

jetlanta wrote:

I get what you are saying. I just think you are barking up the wrong tree. Losing money for years on a route is not a way to prove your status. It is a way to fail your stakeholders. Delta isn't shrinking in Asia, quite the opposite. But HKG clearly isn't something that works for them.

While I am generally disappointed that HKG will no longer be served 1-stop for me on DL's metal I do generally agree with you that HKG DL sees best fit to hand it off to a JV partner, and it doesn't make them any less "global". It surely is a dent in prestige, but consistently DL has shown the bottom line is more important of course. I also dispute that DL isn't losing money in the Shanghai (and possibly PEK) market. I find it hard to believe that they are more successful there (even successful enough to add US-PVG freqs) when fares are consistently ~$400-600 RT in Y, sub $3000 in J, and with equally vigorous competition from other carriers. The only difference is that they don't have a JV partner to pawn PVG off to.

MSPNWA · Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:20 am

jetlanta wrote:
Delta isn't shrinking in Asia, quite the opposite. But HKG clearly isn't something that works for them.

DL's Pacific ASMs are down 2.1% year-to-date. "Quite the opposite"? And of course the long-term shrinkage in the Pacific has risen to about 20% in the last five years.

Would be nice for once to not brag about a "industry-leading global network" on every press release when you don't fly to one of the top destinations in the world and are quite literally the only large global airline not to.

jetlanta · Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:47 am

MSPNWA wrote:
jetlanta wrote:
Delta isn't shrinking in Asia, quite the opposite. But HKG clearly isn't something that works for them.

DL's Pacific ASMs are down 2.1% year-to-date. "Quite the opposite"? And of course the long-term shrinkage in the Pacific has risen to about 20% in the last five years.

Would be nice for once to not brag about a "industry-leading global network" on every press release when you don't fly to one of the top destinations in the world and are quite literally the only large global airline not to.

ATL-PVG starts next month.

MSP-ICN is coming next year, along with SEA-KIX With only SEA-HKG going away.

Max Q · Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:54 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Seems like history repeating itself with Delta using the wrong aircraft across the Pacific to HKG
I remember when they used the MD11 from LAX and often had to stop for fuel

What aircraft would you have suggested they use?

There were only three at the time that could do the route nonstop, and DL only had the M11 in its fleet.... doubt they were going to take on a whole new model just for a single route.

RWA380 wrote:
less their own LAX departures that are few by comparison to say AA & O/W partners.

Huh?? DL is barely behind AA at LAX (mostly because of being previously gate limited), and it's also the gateway where they offer the most partner connections... which they themselves have taken on as a marketing point.

Not unprecedented to acquire a unique type for one demanding route

AA acquired two 747SP’s just for the DFW
-NRT route

MSPNWA · Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:24 am

jetlanta wrote:
ATL-PVG starts next month.

MSP-ICN is coming next year, along with SEA-KIX With only SEA-HKG going away.

The loss of SEA-HKG will nearly cancel out ATL-PVG for the time being. And let's not count chickens, as we've seen many times before and now with the SEA-HKG cut. I doubt you meant "quite the opposite" only in the limited context of a new route launch turning a decline into a gain before an existing route temrination. It's like Sears saying they're making money because of the short-term gain from another brand sale. Gotta prove it for more than 3+ months.

LAX772LR · Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:39 am

Max Q wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Seems like history repeating itself with Delta using the wrong aircraft across the Pacific to HKG
I remember when they used the MD11 from LAX and often had to stop for fuel

What aircraft would you have suggested they use?

Not unprecedented to acquire a unique type for one demanding route

AA acquired two 747SP’s just for the DFW-NRT route

And that lasted a grand total of five seconds, thus not exactly sure what your point in using that as an example of anything is, as they got rid of those aircraft as soon as they found something else that could replace them (which they also ironically got rid of in a short time once the 77E was available).

United Airline · Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:09 am

Delta will soon suspend its HKG-SEA-HKG flight which is very sad. The service, food, drinks etc were excellent. The flights were very full too.

Will they return to HKG? From ATL? JFK? LAX? Detroit? Minneapolis?

jfklganyc · Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:53 pm

Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

Cointrin330 · Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:30 pm

It seems strange that Delta can't make DTW-HKG work. The A350 should be the perfect aircraft for this route.

Newbiepilot · Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:38 pm

If Chinese Airlines keep growing as fast as they are and offer connecting fares as cheap as they do now, I doubt it. Fares in economy between the US and HKG are as low as $500-600. That is the same price as a peak season US transcon flight. Flights to China, HKG, BKK, HAN, KUL, etc are dirt cheap and not profitable

bkflyguy · Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:56 pm

I wonder if the A339 will allow it to come back on the SEA-HKG route, esp. if they get the higher weight version that has about the same legs as the A332 now. More seats and lower operating costs might, and I emphasize might, allow it to work.

wedgetail737 · Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:56 pm

I'm sure DL will find out fairly soon whether or not their JV with KE will be effective or not. That'll probably determine any future plans for reinstating HKG from anywhere.

TW870 · Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:58 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
I'm sure DL will find out fairly soon whether or not their JV with KE will be effective or not. That'll probably determine any future plans for reinstating HKG from anywhere.

Absolutely. Delta's Asia strategy is a work in progress. While the ICN hub will do a great job of providing 1-stop service to almost all of Asia for the largest Delta markets, there are notable gaps in that strategy. Namely, three of the biggest business markets in Asia, HKG, TPE, and SIN (presuming the drop NRT-SIN) will require 2-stop service from many of the cities where Delta is very strong and has large corporate accounts (RDU, MCO, IND, SAN among many others). Right now DL is hoping that the strength of their overall network will keep corporate customers in mid-size cities on board even though Star Alliance and OneWorld will have more convenient connections to some large Asian business centers. Right now I think DL wants to stay out of HKG, but I am not sure that they will be able to maintain that absence.

usssla · Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:13 pm

Hong Kong airport has serious shortage of slots and delta realizes this. Therefore, delta cease Hong Kong operation means the management will not plan to return to Hong Kong for at least 5 years.

jumbojet · Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:16 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

Swadian · Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:24 pm

jumbojet wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

They resurrected SEA-KIX presumably because ICN is poorly positioned for connections to Japan. They added MSP-ICN to feed KE. It has yet to be seen whether SEA-KIX will work as it failed last time.

N717TW · Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:34 pm

jumbojet wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

What are the two new int'l destinations?

notdownnlocked · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:02 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

No, it is a new SAD day for Delta in Asia.

They will take you to Korea, Japan and China. That will be all folks. The management see other codeshare/JV partners as flying their own flag/DL colors/metal onboard a JV partner. How many DL cities lost now in Asia? Let us see, BKK, HKG, Pusan, TPE, Palau, Guam, Saipan, Guangzhou and others I have forgotten not to mention inter Asia. Hoop de do up next is PDX-ICN to replace PDX-NRT. DL has no flying rights from ICN to other cities. Let the KE Cho sisters cry about that.

jumbojet · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:18 pm

N717TW wrote:
jumbojet wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

What are the two new int'l destinations?

MSP-ICN and SEA-KIX

jumbojet · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:23 pm

notdownnlocked wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

No, it is a new SAD day for Delta in Asia.

They will take you to Korea, Japan and China. That will be all folks. The management see other codeshare/JV partners as flying their own flag/DL colors/metal onboard a JV partner. How many DL cities lost now in Asia? Let us see, BKK, HKG, Pusan, TPE, Palau, Guam, Saipan, Guangzhou and others I have forgotten not to mention inter Asia. Hoop de do up next is PDX-ICN to replace PDX-NRT. DL has no flying rights from ICN to other cities. Let the KE Cho sisters cry about that.

so its better to fly to destinations on there own metal that they will lose millions on then to hand them off to JV partners?

And until they get rid of SIN and MNL, those are still verifiable cities that DL serves via Narita.

I just flew 3 segments on Korean Air. Great airline, great airport, especially the new terminal 2 at ICN, great flight attendants.... Just need those business seats on the 380's to get replaced ASAP.

MIflyer12 · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:30 pm

TW870 wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
I'm sure DL will find out fairly soon whether or not their JV with KE will be effective or not. That'll probably determine any future plans for reinstating HKG from anywhere.

Absolutely. Delta's Asia strategy is a work in progress. While the ICN hub will do a great job of providing 1-stop service to almost all of Asia for the largest Delta markets, there are notable gaps in that strategy. Namely, three of the biggest business markets in Asia, HKG, TPE, and SIN (presuming the drop NRT-SIN) will require 2-stop service from many of the cities where Delta is very strong and has large corporate accounts (RDU, MCO, IND, SAN among many others). Right now DL is hoping that the strength of their overall network will keep corporate customers in mid-size cities on board even though Star Alliance and OneWorld will have more convenient connections to some large Asian business centers. Right now I think DL wants to stay out of HKG, but I am not sure that they will be able to maintain that absence.

Can you cite the PDEWs for RDU/MCO/IND-HKG/TPE/SIN? I doubt they are meaningful.

With the KE joint venture DL gets one-stop service from ATL/ORD/DFW/HNL/LAS/LAX/NYC/SEA/SFO/WAS/DTW/MSP- to 80 destinations beyond Seoul (see 12/17 Investor Day Presentation). That's ten of the 16 largest U.S. MSAs. Watch for BOS. You might see DTW-HKG come back. I can't imagine DTW-TPE, nor LAX-SIN on Delta metal.

jfklganyc · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:33 pm

I believe NRT will fully close.

I predict it.

Follow the trajectory

hoons90 · Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:34 pm

notdownnlocked wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
. DL has no flying rights from ICN to other cities.

My understanding is that the Korean government would allow DL to operate fifth freedom flights to other countries from ICN, under the open skies agreement. I have flown ICN-NRT-ICN on DL back in 2010, without continuing onwards to the US.

Travelmanager · Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:10 pm

jumbojet wrote:
notdownnlocked wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

No, it is a new SAD day for Delta in Asia.

They will take you to Korea, Japan and China. That will be all folks. The management see other codeshare/JV partners as flying their own flag/DL colors/metal onboard a JV partner. How many DL cities lost now in Asia? Let us see, BKK, HKG, Pusan, TPE, Palau, Guam, Saipan, Guangzhou and others I have forgotten not to mention inter Asia. Hoop de do up next is PDX-ICN to replace PDX-NRT. DL has no flying rights from ICN to other cities. Let the KE Cho sisters cry about that.

so its better to fly to destinations on there own metal that they will lose millions on then to hand them off to JV partners?

And until they get rid of SIN and MNL, those are still verifiable cities that DL serves via Narita.

I just flew 3 segments on Korean Air. Great airline, great airport, especially the new terminal 2 at ICN, great flight attendants.... Just need those business seats on the 380's to get replaced ASAP.

Isn't the very nature of a JV partner such that they won't be handing them off, but rather spitting the revenue? I understand the downsides as far as connectivity from Delta cities that don't have non-stop service to ICN, but I don't think revenue is a downside to this.

Cubsrule · Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:26 pm

Swadian wrote:
jumbojet wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Not anytime soon. Delta will likely shrink their own metal further in Asia as the JV with KE ramps up.

It is a new day for Delta in Asia.

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

They resurrected SEA-KIX presumably because ICN is poorly positioned for connections to Japan. They added MSP-ICN to feed KE. It has yet to be seen whether SEA-KIX will work as it failed last time.

ICN is poorly positioned but it's competitive because the international-domestic connecting experience at NRT and (especially) HND isn't much fun. If the connection was short in ICN, I'd fly US-ICN-interior Japan rather than US-TYO-interior Japan every day of the week. The problem has historically been long connecting times at ICN on many itineraries.

FCOTSTW · Thu Jul 05, 2018 6:04 pm

TW870 wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
I'm sure DL will find out fairly soon whether or not their JV with KE will be effective or not. That'll probably determine any future plans for reinstating HKG from anywhere.

Absolutely. Delta's Asia strategy is a work in progress. While the ICN hub will do a great job of providing 1-stop service to almost all of Asia for the largest Delta markets, there are notable gaps in that strategy. Namely, three of the biggest business markets in Asia, HKG, TPE, and SIN (presuming the drop NRT-SIN) will require 2-stop service from many of the cities where Delta is very strong and has large corporate accounts (RDU, MCO, IND, SAN among many others). Right now DL is hoping that the strength of their overall network will keep corporate customers in mid-size cities on board even though Star Alliance and OneWorld will have more convenient connections to some large Asian business centers. Right now I think DL wants to stay out of HKG, but I am not sure that they will be able to maintain that absence.

So, are you suggesting that DL will tone down NRT/HND in favor of SEL? Thanks

N717TW · Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:32 am

jumbojet wrote:
N717TW wrote:
jumbojet wrote:

pray tell, which routes will this happen on? They are already adding two international destinations on their own metal so if anything, they are doing the opposite and growing.

What are the two new int'l destinations?

MSP-ICN and SEA-KIX

Oh. Well, that's two new routes to existing destinations (granted KIX wasn't really connected to the mainland as it was super hard to get there via HNL). This is really different than opening a new station.

I still think DL ending service to HKG would be similar to dropping service to FRA. Sure people can connect via AMS/CDG on AF-KLM but it would really change the way we all look at DL's seriousness towards central Europe or towards major European financial centers.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net