Alaska Airlines has announced plans to turn Seattle into a global gateway, by launching long haul flights from the airport, using jets that were acquired through the takeover of Hawaiian. This has major implications for the competitive landscape in the Pacific Northwest, given that Delta has a long haul hub in Seattle as well. How will this play out?
In this post:
Alaska & Delta have an interesting history
Before we talk about what’s going on right now, let’s take a trip down memory lane. Up until 2017, Alaska and Delta had a partnership. Going back a bit over a decade, it was a close and mutually beneficial partnership, with a codeshare agreement, reciprocal upgrades, and more.
However, things got interesting in 2012, when Delta announced it would greatly increase service in Seattle. At first, the growth still seemed mutually beneficial — Delta was primarily wanting to launch long haul flights from Seattle, and the idea was that Alaska would provide much of the feed for those flights. Okay, at that point it was still kind of mutually beneficial.
But then as time continued, Delta kind of just threw Alaska under the bus, as the airline added more and more domestic connectivity in Seattle, competing directly with Alaska. Between 2014 and 2017 we saw the two airlines greatly scale back their partnership, before ultimately discontinuing it.
Of course Delta had to do what was in its best interest, though the whole thing definitely felt like a bit of a backstabbing, since Alaska helped enable that growth, and once Delta was big enough in Seattle, it no longer acted in good faith.
In fairness, despite the direction Delta took, Alaska ultimately is still doing very well, and probably had the last laugh. The airline has great margins, despite the competition from Delta. For that matter, Alaska has more than double of Delta’s market share in Seattle (52.6% vs. 24.3%), and serves roughly double as many destinations.
Alaska CEO says airline is ready to take on Delta
Alaska Air Group CEO Ben Minicucci appeared on The Air Show Podcast (which is worth listening to, by the way), and was asked about whether he thinks the airline is going to be able to successfully compete against Delta in long haul markets in Seattle, and if there’s room for two global airlines there.
Here’s how Minicucci responded:
“Our view is that Seattle is our hometown. It’s our hub. This is the nexus of Seattle, and we will never give up Seattle to anybody, which is why we’ve grown Seattle market share as much as we did, and never gave an inch. We’re here to stay, and now with international flying, we believe that we can be extremely successful here, because we have the domestic strength, we have the loyalty, we have people who love the hometown airline, our executives live here, we’re part of the community, we invest in the community. Alaska is everywhere in this community. So I think people want to see us win.”
There was then a follow-up question about Alaska taking on the most profitable airline in the country, and winning on a global basis. In his response, Minicucci pointed out how Alaska had the best pre-tax margin of any US airline for 13 of the past 15 years. He also pointed out how Alaska isn’t scared of competition, and he believes Alaska has created a resilient business model with a great focus on costs.
Can Alaska make Delta retreat in Seattle?
Realistically speaking, there are three ways this could play out — Alaska and Delta could both succeed, Alaska could succeed and Delta could retreat, or Delta could succeed and Alaska could retreat.
How do I see this playing out? I think the truth will be somewhere between the first and second scenario, and definitely not the third scenario.
I would never, ever bet against Alaska, especially in Seattle:
- Alaska is an incredibly well run company; just look at how successful the company has been in recent years, unlike its domestic rivals outside of the “big three,” which have struggled with profitability
- Even as Delta has grown in Seattle, Alaska hasn’t given up any market share, and has continued to grow substantially, seemingly unfazed by Delta’s presence
- The Seattle community is loyal to Alaska, and that’s reflected in Alaska’s revenue from its loyalty program; people there want to fly Alaska, and have an Alaska credit card, which nowadays is how airlines earn a lot of their profits
- Alaska has a better cost structure than the “big three” carriers, so it has a considerably cost advantage
Of course let me also acknowledge that Delta is the most profitable airline in the US (in absolute terms), and has done a lot of things well. However, as it relates to Seattle:
- We know that Delta finds the most success in its fortress hubs, like Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City; the airline doesn’t do so well in markets where it has to compete directly against other major players, like Los Angeles
- A big part of Delta’s network strategy, and part of the reason Delta is so heavily focused on fortress hubs, is because that’s the easiest way to make a lot of money from credit cards, in markets like Atlanta and New York
- While Seattle is where Alaska makes a lot of its money, we know that Delta’s domestic yields in Seattle are poor, with a vast majority of the routes being in the bottom half of route performance in terms of revenue per available seat mile
What’s my prediction here? I think Alaska will succeed with its long haul expansion from Seattle. The airline succeeds with just about everything it tries out of Seattle, the airline has great margins and a good cost structure, and the airline has a loyal customer base. Even when not operating as part of a joint venture, the airline at least has lots of partnerships.
Furthermore, Alaska has the largest hub on the West Coast, so the amount of traffic that these flights can get will be massive, and the Seattle hub also has advantageous geography across the Pacific.
Meanwhile if I had to guess, I think Delta will maintain a decent presence in Seattle, but I don’t think we’re going to see considerable growth from the airline in Seattle anymore. For one, the airport is largely capacity constrained, so there’s not actually that much growth that can happen right now.
The reason I don’t think Delta is going to massively retreat is because most of its long haul service from Seattle is to joint venture hubs anyway, so it’s not like that’s terribly risky flying, even with competition. Delta feeds into KLM’s network in Amsterdam, Air France’s network in Paris, Korean Air’s network in Seoul Incheon, and Tokyo, Shanghai, and Taipei, are just huge markets independently (though Delta’s load factor on the Taipei route has been absolutely abysmal).
If Delta had some huge plans for Seattle, you’d think that would have been announced already, but clearly that hasn’t been a focus. That’s not surprising, given the extent to which Delta’s long haul routes are about serving joint venture hubs.
The reason I think Delta won’t retreat completely in Seattle is because it doesn’t have another strong West Coast hub. It’s not like United with San Francisco. The closest hub that Delta could shift capacity to would be Salt Lake City.
I just don’t see much upside for Delta in Seattle anymore. It’s not a hub that Delta can build a moat around, where the airline can charge whatever fares it wants. Delta isn’t going to get everyone in Seattle to pick up an Amex cards. Domestic yields are bad, so aside from some routes to joint venture hubs, where can Delta really go from there?
Bottom line
Alaska and Delta have long been competing in Seattle. Delta has been able to build up a long haul presence there without competition from Alaska, given Alaska’s historical fleet. However, with Alaska having taken over Hawaiian, the airline will now launch long haul flights out of Seattle with wide body aircraft.
This is going to make for some very interesting competition. I feel strongly that Alaska will succeed with this expansion. While I don’t think Delta will fully retreat from the airport, I do think we won’t see much more growth from the airline in the Pacific Northwest.
How do you see the latest battle between Alaska and Delta playing out?
We formally preferred Alaska, but switched our loyalty to Delta. Mainly because we have had much better customer service experiences with Delta. That wasn't an easy decision for multiple reasons.
Delta f*cking sucks. The service for Alaska is the best of all the American carriers. People actually do their jobs instead of doing the bare minimum or pointing the finger that it isn't their job. 100 times out of 100 I'm flying Alaska if forced to pick between the two.
I wonder if PDX will benefit at all from any of this. AS and DL are busy fighting over SEA, while PDX sits 180 miles away up for the taking. Maybe one airline (more likely Delta) shifts some focus there and concedes ground in SEA. Obviously Seattle has the larger population, more business travelers, etc., but Portland isn't exactly small potatoes at $2.5M metro population and several large companies (Nike, Intel, Columbia, etc.) based there....
I wonder if PDX will benefit at all from any of this. AS and DL are busy fighting over SEA, while PDX sits 180 miles away up for the taking. Maybe one airline (more likely Delta) shifts some focus there and concedes ground in SEA. Obviously Seattle has the larger population, more business travelers, etc., but Portland isn't exactly small potatoes at $2.5M metro population and several large companies (Nike, Intel, Columbia, etc.) based there. I know Delta recently axed ICN and HND, but maybe this news will make them reconsider
I wonder if DL still has bad memories of Deportland from when they had an Asian flights from PDX?
That was 25 years ago and Delta has had successful flights from PDX-HND and PDX-AMS since.
Delta won’t retreat…. Once Delta gets its new A350-1000 in 2026 you’ll see Delta expand International flying out of SEA. I would expect SEA - SIN & SEA - MNL are coming
100 comments later… haven’t seen this level of engagement in a long while. Good job, Ben!
Forgot to add, but Delta at SEA also has a very uncompetitive TPAC schedule for connecting.
You're basically forced to take the earliest departure from the East Coast at 5am to 7am in order to catch the TPAC bank, most of which departs around 11am to noon time.
On top of this, you're also given very tight layover windows of under an hour, which deters many passengers.
Despite this, Delta has done decently with HND/ICN/PVG....
Forgot to add, but Delta at SEA also has a very uncompetitive TPAC schedule for connecting.
You're basically forced to take the earliest departure from the East Coast at 5am to 7am in order to catch the TPAC bank, most of which departs around 11am to noon time.
On top of this, you're also given very tight layover windows of under an hour, which deters many passengers.
Despite this, Delta has done decently with HND/ICN/PVG. However, Alaska's superior scheduling will make it preferred for connections as they enter the market
Delta currently has four other continental US gateways to Tokyo and Seoul which offer daylight flights on its own metal plus an overnight flight to Seoul on their own metal in addition to KE's own flights from multiple gateways, the most notable of which is JFK and BOS in the eastern US.
The timing of the DTW-PVG flight requires an early departure from the east coast but that is also true on UA via...
Delta currently has four other continental US gateways to Tokyo and Seoul which offer daylight flights on its own metal plus an overnight flight to Seoul on their own metal in addition to KE's own flights from multiple gateways, the most notable of which is JFK and BOS in the eastern US.
The timing of the DTW-PVG flight requires an early departure from the east coast but that is also true on UA via SFO and will be true with LAX for either DL or UA.
The best hub for not having to get up before sunrise in the eastern US to get to Asia is DL's DTW hub where they have early afternoon departures to both HND and ICN.
DL retimed the SEA-TPE flight and return in order to have an afternoon departure from SEA which will be one of the best westbound schedules to Asia. Many foreign carriers have overnight flights to the Pacific Rim even from the west coast so they can connect with their first banks of flights.
As a Diamond on Delta and 100K on Alaska, all I can say is Amen, Ben. Go Alaska! They have my loyalty in Seattle and as a 200K miles + per year frequent flyer, whenever I can choose Alaska/OW I will. Delta isnt bad or anything (especially compared to United or American) but lately they’ve stopped providing benefits to their most loyal flyers and Alaska has filled the gap! Viva Alaska!
I meant for this comment to go up here for all to see how you spell stupid:
I meant for this comment to go up here for all to see how you spell stupid:
Do you know who needs to be banned from commenting (for being too stupid)? That would be anyone that sees similarities between DCS's erudite commenting, which has shaped how many issues are written about or discussed in travel blogosphere (seen posts on the "values of points" on this site or VFTW lately? Or claims about which hotel point is more "valuable"?), and Dunn's incessant hyperventilating about DL's "superiority". DCS has never claimed Hilton Honors to be a "superior" program (provide evidence to the contrary). All he does is to use his superior knowledge of the program to set the record straight -- a real community service!
Now, please go back to your "flame wars", while I pack for the 12th annual and 2024 edition of my 4-week Year-end Asian Escapade(tm) that starts in a couple of days.
Looks like the exclusivity of connection Delta demanded of Alaska at the detriment of AS codeshare partners has come back to bite Delta in its tail.
Shame cause AS was quite happy making tons of money just connecting major cities to SEA with efficient 737s, leaving the complexities of long distance international journeys to others. Bigger take away is Alaska has acquired an immediate economies of scale wide-body operation when it acquired HA. With this,...
Looks like the exclusivity of connection Delta demanded of Alaska at the detriment of AS codeshare partners has come back to bite Delta in its tail.
Shame cause AS was quite happy making tons of money just connecting major cities to SEA with efficient 737s, leaving the complexities of long distance international journeys to others. Bigger take away is Alaska has acquired an immediate economies of scale wide-body operation when it acquired HA. With this, the complexities of long haul wide-body logistics and ops are negated, and Alaska gains an out of the box long haul fleet and experience instantaneously. Pretty smooth Alaska. Not sure if they truly realized this when they took the plunge, but its worthy to note.
Why do aviation enthusiasts and pundits ask if one airline or another will win in a given market - with the question couched in language that suggests that a loss will mean chapter 7 liquidation? I could be wrong. but it seems to me that both Alaska and Delta have strengths and weaknesses in the Pacific Northwest that will allow both of them to compete. And Alaska probably has a much better handle on the demographics of its customer base than we could ever have.
while your point about someone having to lose in order for someone else to lose, I rarely see someone rooting for the entire demise of an entire airline... it does happen for some airlines but it won't happen for either AS or DL and anyone other than the most rabid even suggest it.
as hard as it is for some to suggest, AS and DL will both succeed. Even just to Tokyo and Seoul,...
while your point about someone having to lose in order for someone else to lose, I rarely see someone rooting for the entire demise of an entire airline... it does happen for some airlines but it won't happen for either AS or DL and anyone other than the most rabid even suggest it.
as hard as it is for some to suggest, AS and DL will both succeed. Even just to Tokyo and Seoul, DL already has a significant headstart and network/schedule/JV benefits and that will be true for most if not all cities that AS adds.
and the biggest challenge for AS is that SEA is nearing capacity so has limited room for more growth.
And while AS loves to tout the size of its SEA hub relative to everything else on the west coast, DL and UA both have multiple hubs throughout the US so they do not need to connect everything through the west coast while AA's TPAC operation is largely centered at DFW.
and let's not forget that it will take AS years to build a schedule and have aircraft configured competitive with what DL has now - and DL will keep growing.
I expect we may hear more TPAC expansion from DL in the coming weeks now that the KE/OZ merger has been approved by the DOJ; whether it involves SEA or not, DL will keep growing to Asia.
I'm not sure if this is the right story for this (given all the Alaska/Hawaii posts today)... But what about the long hypothesized HNL to LHR route?
What reasonable person has hypothesized this? The obsession with LHR is so strange
Enilria is suggesting rumors that Alaska is aiming to add 7 more long-haul routes from Seattle in 2026 across Asia-Pacific and Europe. The rumor is SEA-FCO (unserved), SEA-LHR (looking for slots), and SEA-CDG. Also suggests that one of the concessions for the OZ-KE merger will be that Korean Air will have to continue code sharing w/ Alaska for SEA-ICN as DL and KE will have a monopoly on the route post-merger.
Will be interesting to watch.
the problem is that virtually all of the routes from SEA are part of JVs with other airlines.
Just as with JL to NRT, AA has a JV with BA to LHR so AS can either buy its own slot or join the JVs which will almost certainly require AA to not be a JV partner on that flight. Despite what some will argue, the US has never allowed two US carriers to be in...
the problem is that virtually all of the routes from SEA are part of JVs with other airlines.
Just as with JL to NRT, AA has a JV with BA to LHR so AS can either buy its own slot or join the JVs which will almost certainly require AA to not be a JV partner on that flight. Despite what some will argue, the US has never allowed two US carriers to be in a JV with each other or for two of them to be in a JV with the same foreign carrier on the same route.
Maybe something will change but I don't see any of the current big 3 including AA ceding any of their markets to AS as part of one of the 3 sets of JVs.
As for S. Korea, the DOT might have put conditions on the KE/OZ merger but they haven't been released anywhere and there are plenty of people that pick up legal filings and none have been published.
It has happened that the DOT has required codesharing with a smaller carrier to continue but I'm not sure that really accomplishes anything if AS starts its own service to ICN. Further, DL and KE are in a JV so it makes little sense for AS to put any passengers on a KE flight if it can put them on its own.
I am sure that AS wants to move quickly but let's remember that AS doesn't even have industry standard business class cabins on its 332s and does not have premium economy on either of its widebody types. If AS wants to develop a positive reputation in the international market comparable to what it has in the domestic market, adding a bunch of service on an inferior aircraft will be a fast way to tarnish that image.
I agree Europe will be difficult b/c of the JVs. SEA-LHR is tricky b/c LHR is clearly over-capacity from the West Coast, but no one wants to give up LHR slots. No US airline is performs well to LHR year-round from the West Coast (SFO, LAX, or SEA) outside May-Sept except British Airways which dominates POS & premium travel from the UK. Alaska entering that will likely further hurt capacity resulting in only British Airways...
I agree Europe will be difficult b/c of the JVs. SEA-LHR is tricky b/c LHR is clearly over-capacity from the West Coast, but no one wants to give up LHR slots. No US airline is performs well to LHR year-round from the West Coast (SFO, LAX, or SEA) outside May-Sept except British Airways which dominates POS & premium travel from the UK. Alaska entering that will likely further hurt capacity resulting in only British Airways serving SEA-LHR profitably?
SEA-CDG is also tough b/c the AF/Delta JV - Air Tahiti Nui just left that market and was getting ~60% LFs which were profitable in the summer, so there is a seasonal opportunity. With Alaska's feed maybe they can get 70% to Tahiti Nui's 60%, but it'll be tricky. Delta averages ~85-90% on SEA-CDG in LFs which is solid - hard to see that dropping below 80% or becoming unprofitable.
SEA-FCO can certainly work seasonally in the late spring - summer, but I'm not optimistic for the off-season when large markets like LAX, SFO, and JFK have to reduce capacity significantly. There's little business traffic to FCO and SEA is poorly located for transit.
What else is left? Maybe DUB? MAD? Europe is too seasonal - there's $$ in spring-summer definitely but year-round probably not.
Asia IMO is the opp. - when HND adds more slots in 2028, it's likely the US gets 1-2 more. If that happens, Alaska will very likely get SEA-HND where it can do very well. SEA-NRT probably is the placeholder until then. SEA-ICN there's a lot of local demand so it could work, but hard to see them beating Delta.
However, elsewhere is opportunity in markets like SEA-DEL, SEA-BLR, SEA-HKG, SEA-SIN, SEA-TPE (overserved right now), SEA-MNL, SEA-PVG, SEA-SYD, SYD-MEL, SYD-AKL, or SEA-PEK. Are all of those routes viable? No but 3-4 of those probably are (which may grow as China slowly recovers) and that's where the bigger domestic feed will help Alaska vs Delta.
Alaska would do well to ignore TATL right now. The West Coast is fundamentally not designed to do extensive TATL operations since it's purely O&D as it makes no practical sense to route passengers from the Midwest and East Coast. Longer distances and less feed.
Like Tim also said, the JVs are far bigger TATL than TPAC and it'll be hard to make a dent in that space.
SEA is a TPAC hub first and...
Alaska would do well to ignore TATL right now. The West Coast is fundamentally not designed to do extensive TATL operations since it's purely O&D as it makes no practical sense to route passengers from the Midwest and East Coast. Longer distances and less feed.
Like Tim also said, the JVs are far bigger TATL than TPAC and it'll be hard to make a dent in that space.
SEA is a TPAC hub first and foremost. Alaska's goal should be to make it something like AC's YVR and eventually as big as UA's SFO. India is the largest unserved market from SEA and offers a lucrative opportunity to lock up tons of corporate contracts with their local tech clientele.
Alaska is also uniquely positioned to launch South Pacific flights since they have partners in Qantas/Fiji/TN, but they'll need to do some negotiating to see how AA/QF feel.
this site is so much more fun when the kids go to bed.
I think you are both very right.
All this fighting over a hub like Seattle has me laughing. Alaska has way more experience with domestic flying and I think they are overhyping Seattle. I think ultimately people would select an airline like Singapore Airlines to go to Singapore vs an Airline like Alaska/Hawaiian or whatever they are calling it.I think they could make some international flying work like Japan possibly but I doubt it will be anything game changing. They seem all...
All this fighting over a hub like Seattle has me laughing. Alaska has way more experience with domestic flying and I think they are overhyping Seattle. I think ultimately people would select an airline like Singapore Airlines to go to Singapore vs an Airline like Alaska/Hawaiian or whatever they are calling it.I think they could make some international flying work like Japan possibly but I doubt it will be anything game changing. They seem all over the place with the Alaska/Hawaiian brand and I’m betting it will confuse people
US airline companies heavily rely on the lucrative corporate contracts to fill up their premium cabins. Adding long haul routes would help Alaska become more competitive to win the contract. The business travelers likely have to choose Alaska over Singapore Airlines in this case.
As a Seattleite, Alaska has been the most convenient choice for domestic travel whether it's for leisure or business. Domestic route network out of SEA/PAE, better customer service than most other US carriers, the most comfortable seats for domestic narrowbody config, and reliability.. I'm always happy to fly Alaska.
I fly other airlines only when Alaska's not available, and it's mostly been international flights. Alaska has contracts with many tech companies based in Seattle...
As a Seattleite, Alaska has been the most convenient choice for domestic travel whether it's for leisure or business. Domestic route network out of SEA/PAE, better customer service than most other US carriers, the most comfortable seats for domestic narrowbody config, and reliability.. I'm always happy to fly Alaska.
I fly other airlines only when Alaska's not available, and it's mostly been international flights. Alaska has contracts with many tech companies based in Seattle area, however, it was losing some of them to Delta only for international route network. If only Alaska starts long-haul international service combined with already extensive domestic route network, it'll be able to further strengthen its presence in the area.
Delta still has its advantage with better widebody product and connectivity in Asia via ICN, however, Alaska will also invest in widebodies in the upcoming years. DL-KE JV is hard to beat, but Alaska has advantage in domestic network from SEA, and it can also connect in Asia through JAL and Starlux.
I'll just comment on the great pic at the top of the article. Glad I'm able to see my condo at OMAAT! ;-)
it is actually encouraging to see the number of people that believe that both AS and DL will succeed - in large part because both are well-run companies and, although have been direct competitors at SEA for almost a decade, have rarely done anything that harms one for the benefit of the other. In other words, as much as some want to believe otherwise, they have reached a point of stability where they both do...
it is actually encouraging to see the number of people that believe that both AS and DL will succeed - in large part because both are well-run companies and, although have been direct competitors at SEA for almost a decade, have rarely done anything that harms one for the benefit of the other. In other words, as much as some want to believe otherwise, they have reached a point of stability where they both do well.
AS laid out a pretty ambitious plan but it wasn't unexpected. There are enormous constraints that will make it a challenge for AS to achieve what it has - just as it will be for DL to continue to grow its presence at SEA which it has steadily done over the past decade. Both have significant advantages and significant challenges. To think that either one will cave is foolish.
As much as some want to believe that someone else has to lose for "you" to win, AS and DL have proven in real life that they both are capable of winning and that will very likely be the outcome in a lookback a decade from now.
The same cannot be said about all competitive matchups in the US airline industry but it will very likely be true a year and ten years from now with AS and DL in SEA.
Loser
Define "win". Is it an external measure established by somebody? Or, is it an internal measure established by the companies for themselves? If airline X sets an objective for itself in Seattle and achieves it, it has won. Who cares whether it meets or doesn't meet objectives set by someone else.
Given Delta has no upside running a second-tier operation out of SEA I wouldn’t be surprised to see them pull back a little further. DL loves to funnel everyone through ICN, so it seems that DL leadership’s ICN-brain might be inclined to move all TPAC flying to a double daily ICN (and feed into the expanded KE network post-merger) and then call it a day as Alaska charges ahead
Although Delta is a very well run airline they are saddled with a really inferior alliance that cannot create any synergies for them. Especially to Asia. Joining oneworld was a stroke of genius for Alaska. They instantly got a global reach and didn’t have to invest too much in it. Alaska will be smart with their own metal and let JAL, Cathay and Qantas do most of the work across the Pacific. Europe may be...
Although Delta is a very well run airline they are saddled with a really inferior alliance that cannot create any synergies for them. Especially to Asia. Joining oneworld was a stroke of genius for Alaska. They instantly got a global reach and didn’t have to invest too much in it. Alaska will be smart with their own metal and let JAL, Cathay and Qantas do most of the work across the Pacific. Europe may be a different story, but honestly Skyteam is so loosely put together and reciprocal benefits are arbitrary. I’d much rather fly BA or Finnair to Europe and benefit from the excellent services and lounges.
Your reply is so embarassing and the fact that you put in so much effort to try and format it.
The irony being that its message applies to what you just wrote too.........
It really doesn't, I spent two seconds to type that out, meanwhile you're trying to do some wack ass formatting to type more meaningless drivel.
You assume so much, while knowing so little. It's not particularly tough to do dude.
Wait... you'd much rather fly BA from SEA to LHR, partly because of 'excellent' lounges?
Umm... have fun with those plane swaps, and 'excellent' sure is an interesting way to describe the BA lounge.
You have obviously never been to the BA Arrivals lounge and BA First lounge in Terminal 5 at LHR. (First Lounge access by oneworld Emerald only including AS 75k and higher). The DO & CO catering on BA is much better than any other US airline, and it's especially good on intra European flights. The new club world suites are now a very good and competitive hard product. And frankly, I prefer the professionalism of...
You have obviously never been to the BA Arrivals lounge and BA First lounge in Terminal 5 at LHR. (First Lounge access by oneworld Emerald only including AS 75k and higher). The DO & CO catering on BA is much better than any other US airline, and it's especially good on intra European flights. The new club world suites are now a very good and competitive hard product. And frankly, I prefer the professionalism of the BA cabin crew over Premium Airline's. Finnair's business class seat is the best in the industry IMO, and their Platinum Wing lounge for oneworld Emerald in Helsinki is fantastic.
@TM Wow... the BA Arrivals lounge and first lounges are solid, I'll agree. But the catering on BA is definitely not much better than any other US airline. It may be better v certain US domestic routes, but some of the meals on say, Delta internationally are really good (and I say that disliking Delta generally because they've really cut what loyalty means even to Diamonds and, of course, Skypesos). Plus, you're advocating that BA...
@TM Wow... the BA Arrivals lounge and first lounges are solid, I'll agree. But the catering on BA is definitely not much better than any other US airline. It may be better v certain US domestic routes, but some of the meals on say, Delta internationally are really good (and I say that disliking Delta generally because they've really cut what loyalty means even to Diamonds and, of course, Skypesos). Plus, you're advocating that BA serving breakfast in first and biz class on flights at 12pm is better than a good lunch on another airline? As for the professionalism of BA cabin crews, it may have previously been the case. But BA moving to mixed crews makes the professionalism of cabin crew on a flight a complete crapshoot.
I'm not going to wade into the entire debate - but Lucky, I found this paragraph puzzling, and I think it results in a bit of a flaw in the thinking of the article:
"We know that Delta finds the most success in its fortress hubs, like Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City; the airline doesn’t do so well in markets where it has to compete directly against other major players, like Los Angeles."
...I'm not going to wade into the entire debate - but Lucky, I found this paragraph puzzling, and I think it results in a bit of a flaw in the thinking of the article:
"We know that Delta finds the most success in its fortress hubs, like Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City; the airline doesn’t do so well in markets where it has to compete directly against other major players, like Los Angeles."
Delta finds the most *profit* in its fortress hub, but it probably finds the most *relative success* in markets like LAX, BOS and NYC. Delta at LAX is a huge success story relative to American and United - to me, that is "doing well." I find it more notable that Delta has been able to build up NYC, get to basically #1 in seats at LAX, and take over Boston than its profits at ATL and DTW. Are these hubs money centers? Maybe not - but the fact that Delta is so competitive in these money center hubs has to have a positive knock-on effect for profitability elsewhere in the system, including the "core" hubs.
To that point - Alaska will probably maintain its number one market share in SEA, and new wide bodies will help it. But Delta still needs an airport to launch planes to Asia, and SEA is as good of a place as any. I would expect Delta to continue to compete at SEA indefinitely. And that is what we want - airlines competing, even when narrow measures (like hub by hub profitability) may be tough
I think it’s clear that DL is many things but huge success story at LAX is far from one of them. Compare the ex-LAX international networks of DL & UA for example. UA has charged ahead while DL runs terrible performances — just look at the @yoloswag420 comment down below detailing their inability to maintain CDG or decent SLF
Delta went from roughly 16% market share at LAX in 2014 to 18/19%, generally leading the carriers there by a percent or two (though you are right to imply United has higher market share). You can talk about a failure to maintain CDG, but you can also look at how Delta has consistently done very well at LAX-NYC, despite what some bloggers claim is inferior hardware :)
DAL has tried stuff and switched stuff around...
Delta went from roughly 16% market share at LAX in 2014 to 18/19%, generally leading the carriers there by a percent or two (though you are right to imply United has higher market share). You can talk about a failure to maintain CDG, but you can also look at how Delta has consistently done very well at LAX-NYC, despite what some bloggers claim is inferior hardware :)
DAL has tried stuff and switched stuff around internationally, but they do that in all of their coastal hubs. United and AA also benefit from a wider variety of partners in Asia, which is a structural issue
thank you. And as much as some people fixate on UA's international network, DL generates far more total revenue from LAX than UA does because DL's domestic size is so much larger.
People do not choose a carrier based on a handful of destinations that one carrier serves and the larger does not.
UA undoubtedly gets decent revenue on its international revenue - but it is not enough to offset a larger domestic network. It...
thank you. And as much as some people fixate on UA's international network, DL generates far more total revenue from LAX than UA does because DL's domestic size is so much larger.
People do not choose a carrier based on a handful of destinations that one carrier serves and the larger does not.
UA undoubtedly gets decent revenue on its international revenue - but it is not enough to offset a larger domestic network. It is precisely the domestic size that UA is now trying to chase because they realize that a big part of the reason DL earns so much more total revenue is because it has such an extensive and large domestic network - Delta carries more domestic ASMs on its own metal than any other airline. UA is a big international airline, AA flies a bunch of regional jets alongside a large domestic fleet, Southwest operates a massive domestic network that involves more shorthaul domestic travel but DL dominates domestic travel all across the US and they have a good credit card contract as a result.
And AS realizes the strength of the domestic market. Lots of people talk about the strength or weakness of the SEA market but it is the overall domestic market that will make or break AS' international markets. There is an enormous amount of international capacity from SEA. AS has to push a lot of traffic from across the US onto its flights. AS' challenge is that AA DL and UA all have multiple hubs to just about every destination so they can carry a passenger from, say, CMH to Tokyo or Seoul via multiple hubs. AS will still be competing with one domestic flight connecting to one international flight for the same O&D.
Both AK and DAL lead the industry in profit margins. There is no loser in this fight. Both know how to continue to make money.
Both know how to make money, but DL’s
strategy to do so is a) fortress hubs and b) being unchallenged allowing them to funnel everyone through their weaker network at high fares. Neither of these work with AK expanding at SEA
and yet DL is the largest airline at BOS, LGA, JFK and LAX.
It is ludicrous to think DL can lose money at four major competitive airports even if they are the largest, having no more than 50% share and still be the most profitable US airline.
the sooner you and others that spew this non-sense start talking about why AA and UA have not figured out how to do what DL has done...
and yet DL is the largest airline at BOS, LGA, JFK and LAX.
It is ludicrous to think DL can lose money at four major competitive airports even if they are the largest, having no more than 50% share and still be the most profitable US airline.
the sooner you and others that spew this non-sense start talking about why AA and UA have not figured out how to do what DL has done with its US hubs as well as where AA and UA's hubs clearly underperform DL's hubs, then there might be some intelligent conversation on aviation social media.
No, the answer is Delta cannot retreat from SEA.
They have an equally struggling West Coast hub in LAX, with maybe one or two year-round daily flights and the rest are low LF routes that perform poorly like SYD, PPT, AKL, etc. They can't even run a daily CDG flight to their partner hub year-round. BNE will fail due to the massive flood of capacity and no one actually wants to go to BNE either.
...No, the answer is Delta cannot retreat from SEA.
They have an equally struggling West Coast hub in LAX, with maybe one or two year-round daily flights and the rest are low LF routes that perform poorly like SYD, PPT, AKL, etc. They can't even run a daily CDG flight to their partner hub year-round. BNE will fail due to the massive flood of capacity and no one actually wants to go to BNE either.
If they lose SEA, all they have left for the West Coast is a 19% marketshare in LAX. And politics aside, SEA is a growing airport and area still, LAX and its surrounding MSA are declining.
If anything Delta needs to double down on SEA and invest in real growth there, however possible. It's simply not enough to have 4 TPAC flights, when their Northern neighbor in YVR fuels a dozen unique destinations to both East Asia and South Pacific.
Delta is here to stay anyways, otherwise they wouldn't be investing in a Delta One lounge, new SkyClub, etc.
Know that very little of this is empirically factual.
Know that all of this is very factual, but I suppose you're too busy with your crazy, useless blockquotes like your comment above, to read the basic numbers.
Try to point out one thing that is wrong here.
Basic numbers? You mean, the data you don't have, and couldn't possibly know?
You have no idea what their "performance" is on any one of those particular routes, both individually and (more importantly) as an aspect of network.
You also do not know what a route commenced less than a week ago will do in the future, regardless as to what you assume about subsidies or competition.
And while I don't know how you...
Basic numbers? You mean, the data you don't have, and couldn't possibly know?
You have no idea what their "performance" is on any one of those particular routes, both individually and (more importantly) as an aspect of network.
You also do not know what a route commenced less than a week ago will do in the future, regardless as to what you assume about subsidies or competition.
And while I don't know how you define "declining," the Greater Los Angeles MSA grew its GDP 7% y.o.y, which puts it ahead of NYC and Chicagoland for MSAs over 10MM, and behind only DFW, IAH, and ATL for MSAs over 5MM.
...............but of course, all I had to do was point out just one thing, right? ;)
You really provide more useless commentary than Tim Dunn. I would recommend you spending more time learning how to fix your blockquotes since that seems much more to your speed, given you can't get basic facts down.
The population of the LA MSA has been decreasing YoY since 2020 with no signs of upwards correction, that's what declining means.
It's pretty obvious that if Delta has mid 50% on the PPT route, then it's doing...
You really provide more useless commentary than Tim Dunn. I would recommend you spending more time learning how to fix your blockquotes since that seems much more to your speed, given you can't get basic facts down.
The population of the LA MSA has been decreasing YoY since 2020 with no signs of upwards correction, that's what declining means.
It's pretty obvious that if Delta has mid 50% on the PPT route, then it's doing bad. If Delta is at the bottom of the 4 competitors for LAX-SYD, they are doing worse. There's a reason why their 40% LF LHR flight got cut this year.
All you had to do was point out that you were still wildly and completely incorrect on everything. ;)
You sure do have a weird obsession with something that takes a single word and less than 2 seconds to construct, lol.
But as to the rest of your babble: fine, I'll oblige....
And who has reason to give a damn, when the MONEY the area generates has done the exact opposite, more so than almost...
You sure do have a weird obsession with something that takes a single word and less than 2 seconds to construct, lol.
But as to the rest of your babble: fine, I'll oblige....
And who has reason to give a damn, when the MONEY the area generates has done the exact opposite, more so than almost any similarly sized US metro... as directly explained to you above. Ask Berlin if airlines care more about a metro's population size or the money it generates.
The only thing "pretty obvious" here, is that (1) you take a single data point like load factor, then attempt to extrapolate far more out of it, than it alone is accurately able to tell you, while (2) comparing two things that may not share similarity.
Even a concept as simple as "common sense" should tell you that if they keep bringing the route, a single point, flown with their own metal) back... despite having an immunized partner running the same operation... then it holds a particular value to them, at least at this time, that's greater than the Opportunity Cost of running it?
And that's just remaining in supposition, I could just more directly state (again) that you have no idea what its revenues (both directly and in terms of network, or contractual obligations) is.
AA may bring back SEA-LHR if this works out...
This is more great news for SEA flyers due to the competition. As long as these two keep it up, fares stay low & so do point redemptions. SEA is one of the few US gateways that SkyMiles have value (in economy) as they typically match AS.
Well said!
"In fairness, despite the direction Delta took, Alaska ultimately is still doing very well, and probably had the last laugh. The airline has great margins, despite the competition from Delta."
In other words, capitalism and competition are great things. Just imagine if there was a true free market for airlines without subsidies and without favorable government laws and regulations that prevent new entrants, like Air Canada or Aeromexico adding flights within the USA.
"In fairness, despite the direction Delta took, Alaska ultimately is still doing very well, and probably had the last laugh. The airline has great margins, despite the competition from Delta."
In other words, capitalism and competition are great things. Just imagine if there was a true free market for airlines without subsidies and without favorable government laws and regulations that prevent new entrants, like Air Canada or Aeromexico adding flights within the USA.
Shifting hub operations to SLC might make sense? Elevation means A350 is likely needed, but that’s already happening with SLC-ICN route. A more centrally located hub may open up opportunities for feeder traffic that just can’t get to SEA in time for late morning international departures. Spitballing a bit… but maybe?
Delta currently has six gateways to Asia including HNL and that will grow to 7 with SLC-ICN.
Delta simply does not have to flow all traffic over SEA any more than UA needs to flow all traffic to Europe over EWR.
The same scheduling challenges will be true for AS as is true for DL or any other airline. Trying to fly Miami to SEA to Asia and then on to another city...
Delta currently has six gateways to Asia including HNL and that will grow to 7 with SLC-ICN.
Delta simply does not have to flow all traffic over SEA any more than UA needs to flow all traffic to Europe over EWR.
The same scheduling challenges will be true for AS as is true for DL or any other airline. Trying to fly Miami to SEA to Asia and then on to another city in Asia isn't really as viable as some people think.
But some people will be convinced that AS will be able to do what DL/NW and UA/PA have never been able to do in decades of serving Asia
SLC is part of Delta's 3 interior hubs that are known as fly-over country. The reality is that you need large sustained, high premium O&D, which SLC does not have.
SLC is primarily a connecting hub. That's why it didn't even have a single TPAC flight until recently. Unless SLC can suddenly become a top 10 MSA in the US, there's no chance.
Connecting traffic is far less profitable than nonstop O&D, which yields much higher fares.
"Trying to fly Miami to SEA to Asia and then on to another city in Asia isn't really as viable as some people think."
Probably because that's not the market Alaska is going for with Asia flying. DFW can handle a lot of the US to Asia. SEA will be an amazing OneWorld TPAC hub for the rest of the country and completely removes the backtracking issue for much of OneWorld flyers.
the reality is that **I** win.
I CONSISTENTLY am the most talked about person on aviation social media.
And Ben wins the most active aviation site -in large part because of what I have helped him create here.
This isn't about AS or DL.
It is about me and Ben. and Ben and me.
You're just another creepy weirdo on the Internet & nothing more Bud.
Seriously, he created the scenario for people to talk about him, and how weird he is, and acts like people began talking about him spontaneously for no reason.
And him thinking Lucky's is the most active site because of him is a clear sign of some type of mental problem.
He clearly is j*cking off quite a bit whenever he visits this site.
And yet you keep talking about him...
That’s why I’ve been suggesting over and over again that everyone should just ignore him. This would benefit both OMAAT and Tim himself (maybe he’ll have some time to seek the help he clearly needs).
no, but I do smile....
and I will get this subthread will become one of the longest in this, yet another article
You all are your own worst enemies.... I do have fun winding you all up.
What a peculiar little person you are, Tim. I think a lot of readers of this site are here despite your constant blather, not because of it.
Peculiar is being too generous.
Tim,
The funny thing is that, while calling others Trolls, you actively use the definition of troll and trolling to describe your own actions in the comment sections.
No surprise there. You’re nothing more than a loser troll using a fake name and you always will be.
My understanding vis-a-vis the disintegration of DL/AS cooperation is that DL wanted to be exclusive (whereas AS, to that point, cooperated with many majors) and AS was not willing to give up the open relationship. So DL, like any jilted ex, decided they were better by themselves.
Ironically, AS eventually came around, but not with DL. "It's not you, it's me..."
who is AS "faithful" to? they have multiple partners including AA which dissolved much of its west coast north-south network which only helped DL and UA grow even more on the west coast.
AS thinks they will overcome DL and UA's two west coast and 1 mountain hub each dominance of the west with one hub in the corner of the country?
first, the internet or any comments here won't determine the outcome of the battle of SEA.
second, DL asked for codeshare exclusivity with AS when DL wanted to build a global hub at SEA. AS refused, DL built its hub, and the airport is now very close to capacity not just on the ground but in the air. All of the dreams about alot of growth have to factor in that reality. All of those...
first, the internet or any comments here won't determine the outcome of the battle of SEA.
second, DL asked for codeshare exclusivity with AS when DL wanted to build a global hub at SEA. AS refused, DL built its hub, and the airport is now very close to capacity not just on the ground but in the air. All of the dreams about alot of growth have to factor in that reality. All of those codeshare partners that AS has now because they provide feed are not going to be interested in codesharing with a competitor that also serves the same international routes.
third, DL carries about 70% of the local market revenue including international that AS carries from or to SEA. DLserves all of the major Asian feed markets. AS is larger because they serve alot of secondary and tertiary markets that DL serves from other hubs and AS flows alot more CONNECTING revenue over SEA.
AS says it will send some of that connecting traffic over PDX as a reliever hub (whether they call it that or not) but that doesn't change that SEA is airspace constrained more than anything else.
fourth, AS laid out a grand plan that will take years to implement. DL has aircraft available now and has market experience around the world. AS just laid out a plan that DL expected would be the case.
and fifth, if Ben or anyone else really knew the story of SEA market share, it is actually AA, UA and WN that have lost the most share as DL has grown. If push comes to shove in SEA international, it will be all of the foreign carriers, esp. those that AS keeps in SEA via codesharing and domestic feed that will fail.
As usual, all of the grandstanding that will take place here will look very foolish in ten years when AS and DL are both stronger in SEA -and the airport regularly has delays that make EWR like tame.
How is Delta supposed to get stronger in SEA? Pray do tell where it would expand given the terrible LFs in its newest route (TPE) and poor LFs in routes like LHR (sub 80% in 8/12 months)? The domestic routes are underperformers overall which is why domestic growth for Delta from Seattle has lagged - your claims simply are not backed by reality.
By far the more realistic and likely situation is Delta will stagnate...
How is Delta supposed to get stronger in SEA? Pray do tell where it would expand given the terrible LFs in its newest route (TPE) and poor LFs in routes like LHR (sub 80% in 8/12 months)? The domestic routes are underperformers overall which is why domestic growth for Delta from Seattle has lagged - your claims simply are not backed by reality.
By far the more realistic and likely situation is Delta will stagnate in SEA while Alaska grows. Delta won't retreat, but it won't grow. You already were wrong on Alaska and their long-haul plans and numerous other comments such as growth trends in LAX so you should be the last of all people to mock other posters on here.
feel free to provide the data - and not domestic only data that has international data stripped out because SOME posters don't have access to it.
You and other people don't grasp that when a fare is prorated over a short domestic and a long international flight and only the domestic part is seen, the fare will be low. AS data will look the same way when it starts operating its own international service.
Feel...
feel free to provide the data - and not domestic only data that has international data stripped out because SOME posters don't have access to it.
You and other people don't grasp that when a fare is prorated over a short domestic and a long international flight and only the domestic part is seen, the fare will be low. AS data will look the same way when it starts operating its own international service.
Feel free to post where I said that AS would never grow w/ longhaul. I'll wait for the link.
You said: 1) Alaska would not do any long-haul service from Seattle in the next few years and 2) the AA-Alaska partnership was giving the DOT issues. Look at your comments in here: https://onemileatatime.com/news/doj-not-challenging-alaska-hawaiian-merger/
Here is a direct quote from you:
"I get that you and everyone thinks there is some great goldmine for AS in the international market but their first priority is going to be to 1. eliminate HA's losses 2. integrate the...
You said: 1) Alaska would not do any long-haul service from Seattle in the next few years and 2) the AA-Alaska partnership was giving the DOT issues. Look at your comments in here: https://onemileatatime.com/news/doj-not-challenging-alaska-hawaiian-merger/
Here is a direct quote from you:
"I get that you and everyone thinks there is some great goldmine for AS in the international market but their first priority is going to be to 1. eliminate HA's losses 2. integrate the two companies and then focus on logical - not over the top growth prospects - that make sense based on the gap between what the two companies are presently doing.
Let me remind you that AS just decided that it was going to focus on reducing the seasonal swing in its earnings and announced a bunch of 2-3 times/week routes (at best).
The notion that AS is going to develop a large scale international network anytime in the next 5 years is beyond fanciful.
AS has no intention of watching its finances tank w/ this merger as they did with Virgin America. Getting out over their skis is the fastest way to repeat what they want to keep in the rearview mirror."
Any more delusion / backtracking you want to do b/c you were dead wrong.
Something hard to prove but I feel is true is that Alaska just "feels" a lot more Seattle than Delta does. I don't think Delta can ever cultivate that feeling
Add in Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska itself. Alaska's weakness is in the Rockies and Great Plains. If only they had more regional traffic feeding into Seattle or a second hub east of the Rockies.
I know so many people east of the Rockies and east of the Mississippi who would love to fly Alaska.
And 2/3 of the US population lives East of the Rockies.
No, you're totally on to something there. AS' brand loyalty in the NW--particulalry in SEA & PDX-- is unrivaled. For a lot of travelers, they're still a reflexive 1st choice when looking for flights.
Since the commenters are more looking forward to comments circlejerking, I would instead ask:
In SEA, what would you rather fly on, an A339/A359? Or a Hawaiian A332? If fares are equal?
@ wooootles -- As of now I'd definitely rather fly a Delta plane. However, I imagine Hawaiian 787-9s will eventually make their way to Seattle, and Alaska also has plans to reconfigure the A330-200s. Also, I think for most travelers, the decision goes beyond just what the aircraft type is.
For example, look how many people in Seattle choose to be loyal to Alaska over Delta, even though there are aspects of the Delta experience that are superior.
It's not actually that deep, it's a very obvious and tangible factor. Alaska has one of the better loyalty programs in the US.
No one wants to leave one of the best programs for the single worst program in the US.
Delta doesn't offer premium transcon out of SEA, no premium business class lounges (yet). The only thing Delta wins on is the superior widebody experience on longhaul service, which isn't enough to win over customers.
Lucky, I'm surprised you didn't mention wifi in your criteria between Delta and HA 330s out of SEA? Delta's viasat doesn't work to Asia yet. HA 330s have the worst business product, sure, but all of their 330s have starlink internet for free.
The blind loyalty to Alaska by those in Seattle is pretty amazing. I think Delta could charge half as much and still get fewer passengers than Alaska.
I like Alaska and Delta. The biggest issue with Alaska for me is they primarily fly 737s, which I absolutely hate. Delta has a the A220 which I like a lot. I also like the A320 more than the 737. I find it more comfortable.
Before or after AS retrofits the 330?
Right now, I wouldn't fly Hawaiian without major improvements to the catering and drinks. They don't even have champagne.
champagne is essential to your aviation experience? I can't imagine choosing an airline on this criterion.
I agree with your overall takeaway - there's just nowhere else for Delta to expand as a TPAC gateway, but outside of its JV hubs unlikely Delta can successfully open new destinations in Asia. But it's also unlikely Alaska can beat Delta at ICN, AMS, or CDG (LHR may be possible).
HND will have new slots / reallocations in 2028 - the US will likely get 1-2 more in which I'd expect Alaska will get...
I agree with your overall takeaway - there's just nowhere else for Delta to expand as a TPAC gateway, but outside of its JV hubs unlikely Delta can successfully open new destinations in Asia. But it's also unlikely Alaska can beat Delta at ICN, AMS, or CDG (LHR may be possible).
HND will have new slots / reallocations in 2028 - the US will likely get 1-2 more in which I'd expect Alaska will get SEA-HND.
With AA getting more gates at LAX (resulting in more competition from them there), it's going to be very hard for any of the US3 to displace United in Asia - AA and Delta simply are not going to have viable large-scale hubs to Asia. It looks like UA will dominate the region until market dynamics shift which are unlikely for the next 5 years at least.
Delta could start flying Hong Kong, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Delhi, and Ho Chi Minh City from Seattle.
Kuala Lumpur has very low O&D demand from the US so doubt it - there are literally no nonstops from the US to there. Delta already tried Hong Kong from Seattle which didn't work in 2018 pre-protests and COVID - why would it work now?
Ho Chi Minh City? King County in Washington has 35k total Vietnamese Americans (out of ~2.3M) in the US - Dallas, LA, and Bay Area have 10x+ more demand and...
Kuala Lumpur has very low O&D demand from the US so doubt it - there are literally no nonstops from the US to there. Delta already tried Hong Kong from Seattle which didn't work in 2018 pre-protests and COVID - why would it work now?
Ho Chi Minh City? King County in Washington has 35k total Vietnamese Americans (out of ~2.3M) in the US - Dallas, LA, and Bay Area have 10x+ more demand and more nonstops - why would people connect from Seattle?
Manila perhaps but that's a low yielding route and also way less O&D than SF and LA with Philippine Airlines already competing.
Singapore and Delhi are realistic, but Delta has avoided those destinations, and there will be competition there with Air India and Singapore Airlines. Alaska could also add those routes - why would Delta have any advantage over them if they did? They have no feed / partners on any end in both countries.
Didn't Delta just announce their Indigo partnership? I'm pretty sure an India flight is in the works.
SEA-DEL is the biggest unserved India market or at least to DEL by PDEW. Market is there.
However, India as a whole is pretty low yielding.
Indigo partners w/ everyone - they also partner w/ AA. SEA-DEL is definitely a viable market, but Delta seems to prefer Mumbai (BOM). Based on Bastian's comments about Delta expanding to India, it seems that they're eying JFK-BOM in 2025 or 2026.
(1) Multiple aircraft options, that are both more capable than A332s + more fuel efficient than 772ERs, neither of which were available pre-2018.
(2) Interline agreement between DL and CX, now to include 5 gateways (though CX interlines with UA at all operated gateways and codeshares with AA), allowing DL to schedule connections through...
(1) Multiple aircraft options, that are both more capable than A332s + more fuel efficient than 772ERs, neither of which were available pre-2018.
(2) Interline agreement between DL and CX, now to include 5 gateways (though CX interlines with UA at all operated gateways and codeshares with AA), allowing DL to schedule connections through HKG including checked baggage to final destination.
DL's CEO has publicly announced a partnership with India's largest domestic carrier (IndiGo) aimed to begin 2026.
Yet Hong Kong's traffic today is ~55% of 2018 levels, the largest O&D cities (SF + LA) are served with multiple (3+) daily frequencies, and Cathay serves the other top markets (Dallas, Chicago, and New York) nonstop. So again, how would a more fuel-efficient plane help Delta when their problems were driven by low LFs in 2018 (along w/ the less efficient planes) when there's further decreased demand today? You think Delta is going to...
Yet Hong Kong's traffic today is ~55% of 2018 levels, the largest O&D cities (SF + LA) are served with multiple (3+) daily frequencies, and Cathay serves the other top markets (Dallas, Chicago, and New York) nonstop. So again, how would a more fuel-efficient plane help Delta when their problems were driven by low LFs in 2018 (along w/ the less efficient planes) when there's further decreased demand today? You think Delta is going to further siphon connections from its SEA-TPE, SEA-PVG, and SEA-ICN routes? There's a reason why Cathay hasn't prioritized adding Seattle yet.
Delta will commence a partnership with Indigo, but Indigo partners w/ everyone (Qatar, AA, Delta, BA, Virgin, Air France, Qantas, etc.) w/ Air India launching a new SEA-DEL route. There's room for more carriers, but Alaska can do everything Delta can on this route (and probably plans to add this regardless) including partner w/ Indigo if it chooses. We'll see where they add in 2026.
68.2% actually, based on the latest (Oct'24) 12mo rolling average. But take care to not confuse traffic with demand, as the two aren't interchangeable. By the admission of both the airport authority and CX itself, demand is actually outstripping capacity, and CX's relative command of that demand is way lower now against competitors than it was-- all indicating that HKG, while still haven't...
68.2% actually, based on the latest (Oct'24) 12mo rolling average. But take care to not confuse traffic with demand, as the two aren't interchangeable. By the admission of both the airport authority and CX itself, demand is actually outstripping capacity, and CX's relative command of that demand is way lower now against competitors than it was-- all indicating that HKG, while still haven't a long way to go, is still primed for continuous near term growth.
Getting back to the original point, I don't know the full puzzle of DL's (historic, as they've attempted it from 4 different gateways) struggles in HKG, but if they do intend to return, they may do well to hop2it while CX is still labor limited.
Dallas is by no means a "top market" from Hong Kong. I don't have recent numbers, but pre-Covid, it barely had half of what Seattle has and 1/6th of SFO. HKG-DFW is about one thing: unique connections.
Having other partners does not change the fact that it will provide ample connections to essentially every corner of India.
Tim Dunn: looks forward to a Tuesday away from grinding away in the comments sections across the travel/ points internet.
Ben: Not if I have anything to say about it.
Well, this ought'a be rich.
I'll grab the popcorn. Anyone else need anything?
Flying out of DEN to SEA and being an Alaska MVP Gold, I think across 20 flights I never once cleared into F, and often found their Premium Class booked up. Meanwhile, on Delta Silver Medallion I'd reliably get F upgrades almost 100% of the time and the planes would have a light load.
there is DOT data available on LFs by airline and your experience doesn't match data.
Actually it does. Next time you should actually read said data before challenging me, as I clearly know more than you.
That's because you mid tier elite. I am 75k & have only been upgraded twice across AS & AA. When I was DL plat. I was only upgraded 3 or 4 times on DL or AM. Why? Airlines sell the upgrades cheap enough that they sell out.
I call B.S. The upgrade lists on Delta out of Denver are absurdly long. There's no way a silver is regularly getting an upgrade out of Denver. I've seen 55 names on Denver-Detroit on a Tuesday two weeks after Labor Day.
I mean yes, you're taking one person's anecdotal evidence, who at best is on a few dozen flights across the year vs the actual statistical data aggregated across the full year.
This is why you don't pay attention to people saying "my one flight I took was empty". The data will tell if the load factors are high or not.
I might secretly root for Alaska but DL will be getting most of my business simply because...
Delta One Lounge (if anything close to the one at LAX) + Virgin Atlantic or Air France flight = Win
@ Redacted -- I hear you, it's hard to compete with the joint ventures. But it sounds like Alaska is also planning a premium lounge in Seattle, though it'll take some patience.
I gave up on Delta lounges long ago - just way too packed with quality that is passable and nothing more. Same for the majority of US airline lounges. Credit card lounges are way better in terms of quality, though many suffer similar crowding issues.
Oh the comments coming up!
Chupacabra is probably chewing off his last fingernails ready for a fight on the keyboard.
Thoughts and prayers to that keyboard or screen.
Alaska will win. Partner Condor is already planning on increasing flights to 11 per week next summer.
Anything could happen, but I'd sure rather be Alaska here.
Can you please consider more proactive comment moderation, if not banning Tim Dunn entirely? His views aside, the ensuing flame wars derail so many other discussions it really detracts from the site, in my opinion.
Or DCS for that matter, the self anointed "Hilton guru" who doesn't like it when people say Hilton Honors and Hilton in general is just fine. Will go on paragraph long diatribes about how everyone is wrong and he's right all the time.
‘ORD is my second home’ etc.
This is how you spell stupid:
This is how you spell stupid:
Do you know who needs to be banned from commenting (for being too stupid)? That would be anyone that sees similarities between DCS's erudite commenting, which has shaped how many issues are written about or discussed in travel blogosphere (seen posts on the "values of points" on this site or VFTW lately? Or claims about which hotel point is more "valuable"?), and Dunn's incessant hyperventilating about DL's "superiority". DCS has never claimed Hilton Honors to be a "superior" program (provide evidence to the contrary). All he does is to use his superior knowledge of the program to set the record straight -- a real community service!
Now, please go back to your "flame wars", while I pack for the 12th annual and 2024 edition of my 4-week Year-end Asian Escapade(tm) that starts in a couple of days.
Agree with this! I like to join the discussion in the comment section, however it is long over due to ban Dunn and DCS for that matter
oh no! please keep it this way!
I love the Dunn's Family (Tim Dunn, Momma Dunn, Timothy Dunn Jr.) - such a good soap opera to watch. Momma Dunn crack me up!
hahahahhaha The Dunn Family!!!! I think we need a Tim Dunn's spouse. That said, I think Lucky should do something about the Dunn Family. I also agree with DCS but he is more tolerable than Tim Dunn
Having read all the Tim Dunn comments on this article, is it just me or are the comments toned down significantly? Way less trumpeting of Delta than is usual. Tim - you ok?
Awaiting the comments...