Delta Sends Four 767-300's to Hawaiian

[Snecma]

At least they're finding spots for the rejected aircraft. Maybe the used aircraft market will pick back up.

http://www.airlineempires.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=79

 

[Mugs]

I have a question for the DAL guys. Why is it that I frequently see a DAL 767-300s or -400s is LAS of all places? Who else flies widebodies into such a low yield market? Everytime I see them there, I can't help wondering why they aren't in the kind of markets they should be in.

 

[General Lee]

I have a question for the DAL guys. Why is it that I frequently see a DAL 767-300s or -400s is LAS of all places? Who else flies widebodies into such a low yield market? Everytime I see them there, I can't help wondering why they aren't in the kind of markets they should be in.

They are moving them to the INTL side, but not all of the 764 loads are low yields. We have an unbelievable amount of connection traffic from places like Lynchberg, VA and Wilmington, NC. The fares from those types of places to LAS via ATL aren't that cheap. The fares from ATL as the origin are probably cheap, but not the connection cities Airtran doesn't go to. We also have a lot of European connections that connect in ATL onto Vegas. Many pay in Euros, which we like.

Interesting about the 4 763s going to Hawaiian. I knew we had a disagreement with the lessors about three of them, but not 4. Maybe that will be bring back some Hawaiian furloughed pilots.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[SlapShot]

I wonder why they are getting rid of the airplanes they should be flying across the pond (higher yield markets). Wouldn't it make sense to keep those airplanes flying across the pond and send some of the domestic stuff to DCI? Now, I know I am not an accountant, or a marketing expert but that seems to be what most of the other carriers are doing so there might be a reason.

 

[General Lee]

I wonder why they are getting rid of the airplanes they should be flying across the pond (higher yield markets). Wouldn't it make sense to keep those airplanes flying across the pond and send some of the domestic stuff to DCI? Now, I know I am not an accountant, or a marketing expert but that seems to be what most of the other carriers are doing so there might be a reason.

Send RJs to LAS from ATL? Did you notice what happened to our DFW base that had mostly CR7s? AA killed us. Airtran would love it if we sent more RJs up against them. No, RJs are mainly for routes LCCs don't go to, to increase the yields on those routes. Airtran is expanding.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Stifler's Mom]

RJs from ATL to LAS? Please no, I cringe when I see PWM on my schedule.

 

[FDJ2]

I have a question for the DAL guys. Why is it that I frequently see a DAL 767-300s or -400s is LAS of all places? Who else flies widebodies into such a low yield market? Everytime I see them there, I can't help wondering why they aren't in the kind of markets they should be in.

Just a hunch, but I believe the CASM is lower on the 767 than on the narrow bodied fleet. With a low yield market, you'd want to serve it with a lower CASM aircraft.

 

[Mugs]

Not when you can get much higher RASM out of the airplane when placed into the correct markets for it. DAL for whatever reason is the only carrier that finds such aircraft appropriate for the LAS market. Everyone else gave up on that idea a long time ago.

 

[puddlejumper101]

Send RJs to LAS from ATL? Did you notice what happened to our DFW base that had mostly CR7s? AA killed us. Airtran would love it if we sent more RJs up against them. No, RJs are mainly for routes LCCs don't go to, to increase the yields on those routes. Airtran is expanding.

Bye Bye--General Lee

General...I was under the impression that Delta gave up DFW well before they made it mostly DCI. I don't think you can blame the 70 seater or DCI for that one. Delta had practically shut down the hub when they pulled out most of their mainline flights and suplemented their service with RJs. The only reason Delta didn't completely close the base was market share. The RJ stunt was a last ditch effort to have a presence in DFW...AA had already killed Delta long before that. DFW closing and the CR7 have nothing to do with eachother...it was an afterthought to an already dead hub.

 

[XRMEFLYER]

FWIW, the DFW DCI operation was about 85% fifty seaters at the end. 700s comprised a fairly small percentage of the flights.

 

[aa73]

RJs in LAS, oh yeah, we've got a few. Eagle just replaced AA MD80s from LAS-LAX. That's gonna go over great with our customers.... oh and by the way, that soda'll be $1.

DL has always been a little bit of a throwback to the regulated times of the 70s, flying widebodies to smaller cities. I see 767-300s/400s in JAX, PBI, FLL, LGA, RSW, etc... places that AA only sends MD80s and a few 757s into. Hey, if they've got the yields, why not?

 

[General Lee]

General...I was under the impression that Delta gave up DFW well before they made it mostly DCI. I don't think you can blame the 70 seater or DCI for that one. Delta had practically shut down the hub when they pulled out most of their mainline flights and suplemented their service with RJs. The only reason Delta didn't completely close the base was market share. The RJ stunt was a last ditch effort to have a presence in DFW...AA had already killed Delta long before that. DFW closing and the CR7 have nothing to do with eachother...it was an afterthought to an already dead hub.

The DFW hub was hurting before we gave it to the RJs. But, we realized quickly that they did not help at all when we put them up against much more roomy aircraft with first class seats. The CR7s we currently have do not have first class, and businessmen prefer larger planes with more room. We also had our 50 seaters competing with AA MD80s on regional routes around DFW (MCI, IAH, etc), and they really lost that fight. The CR7s would fly one stop transcons--OAK/ONT/SNA to DFW and onto DCA/JFK/PBI, and the lack of businessmen who wanted to fly on them forced us to lower fares and lose even more money to fill the planes.

RJs do great when they fly to cities not served by LCCs. It is harder to compete when businessmen flock towards more room and space. Now, we could just give away everything under 100 seats to DCI, and then lose more jobs, but we will not do that, even though the RJDC memebers pray for that. We say the big NO on that, and we will continue to. It is that or liquidate.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

FWIW, the DFW DCI operation was about 85% fifty seaters at the end. 700s comprised a fairly small percentage of the flights.

That made it even worse. Those 50 seaters can't compete against MD80s or LCC planes. Look at Indy Air.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[puddlejumper101]

The DFW hub was hurting before we gave it to the RJs. But, we realized quickly that they did not help at all when we put them up against much more roomy aircraft with first class seats. The CR7s we currently have do not have first class, and businessmen prefer larger planes with more room. We also had our 50 seaters competing with AA MD80s on regional routes around DFW (MCI, IAH, etc), and they really lost that fight. The CR7s would fly one stop transcons--OAK/ONT/SNA to DFW and onto DCA/JFK/PBI, and the lack of businessmen who wanted to fly on them forced us to lower fares and lose even more money to fill the planes.

RJs do great when they fly to cities not served by LCCs. It is harder to compete when businessmen flock towards more room and space. Now, we could just give away everything under 100 seats to DCI, and then lose more jobs, but we will not do that, even though the RJDC memebers pray for that. We say the big NO on that, and we will continue to. It is that or liquidate.


Bye Bye--General Lee

I agree in part to what you say about RJs...I think Delta in the Mullin days made a gargantuous mistake in buying soo many CRJs (especially 50s). I do think that Delta gave up on DFW and just handed it over to the DCI...closing the hub without pulling out. Once CH11 loomed overhead...thats when they completely pulled the plug on DFW. I don't think DCI caused it...I think the writing was on the wall long before that. I think Delta has pretty much settled with the Atlanta or bust mentality. RJs were made to replace the turboprops and enhance service to some cities...not to compete with mainline carriers...or even LCC...we all know that...if thats the case then what was, or is, Delta thinking?

 

[General Lee]

I agree in part to what you say about RJs...I think Delta in the Mullin days made a gargantuous mistake in buying soo many CRJs (especially 50s). I do think that Delta gave up on DFW and just handed it over to the DCI...closing the hub without pulling out. Once CH11 loomed overhead...thats when they completely pulled the plug on DFW. I don't think DCI caused it...I think the writing was on the wall long before that. I think Delta has pretty much settled with the Atlanta or bust mentality. RJs were made to replace the turboprops and enhance service to some cities...not to compete with mainline carriers...or even LCC...we all know that...if thats the case then what was, or is, Delta thinking?

You're right, DFW was almost dead. I think after we made Song and had to divert 45 757s from the rest of the system to fly East Coast stuff, and then moved other planes to fill in for those 757s, DFW was doomed. Moving the MD90s out and replacing them with CR7s was not good, and it showed with the frequent flyers.

I think DL now is still focused on ATL--the Mega Hub, plus INTL expansion, North/South East Coast, and a small hub out West. After Airtran moves to their new terminal on the South side of the field, I see DL trying to capture some more of those D gates, mainly because they don't want someone else moving in to Airtran's old gates. Even though Song will go away, the planes won't, and they will still fight Jetblue up and down the East Coast, probably will 100 seat aircraft and MD88s on some of the lighter routes or off peak times. NYC will still have the Shuttle, and JFK will have more INTL flights. CVG may get smaller and may go away if we actually merge with NW, since it is too close to DTW. SLC seems to be doing well, and we have expanded some flights out there, including Kona and Puerto Vallarta. The E170s have added new cities that we have never flown to and probably would not with even 737-300 aircraft--like CLE, IND, CHM, and BNA. Our LAX base is mainly there because we don't want to buy 100s of hotel rooms a night, and there are a few flights to Hawaii (HNL and OGG) that probably do well. A merger with NW would be interesting as I said before, with a possible CVG closing, but other than that most would stay intact, IMO. They would have ASIA, MSP/DTW/ANC cargo, and we would have Europe/South America, ATL/NY/SLC. That is my guess.


Bye Bye--General Lee