Delta Reduces Los Angeles To Auckland Route To Seasonal

I think I hear Tim Dunn crying in the toilets.

Reminds me of some of their new destinations out of Austin. Like why? Delta loves wasting money I guess.

With this cut, Delta’s year-round long haul international destinations out of Los Angeles include Paris, Sydney, and Tokyo. Then the airline has seasonal flights to Auckland, Brisbane, and Tahiti.

Shanghai is scheduled to return as well, albeit pushed back twice.

@ ConcordeBoy -- The airline just axed those plans, which I'll be covering in a separate post.

Delta struggling at LAX. Somebody better check on Tim Dunn.

It’s clear that while DL wanted to grow international especially in LAX, it couldn’t do so profitably. You don’t take delivery of a bunch of wide bodies in 2024 and simultaneously cut international long haul out of LAX if that gateway makes money. DL’s solution to overcrowding in its lounges is to build a DL One lounge in LAX that caters to 3 long haul destinations year round.

DL’s decision to sub in the ex-LA config A350 in AKL means not only is the route going seasonal, Premium Economy is axed and business is downgraded to the worst long haul product of the US3. DL is the smallest carrier from LA to Europe and Asia and their international position in LA continues to be eroded. Trying to duplicate the dual hub DTW/MSP or BOS/JFK strategy in the west coast with SEA/LAX seems to be doing wonders for DL as its transpacific profits continue to decline. Outperforming B6 in BOS is not the same as competing with AA and UA in LAX.

AA and UA are fine. They both have JV partners in the South Pacific to support feed on both ends. Same for Japan which is why only DL has just one flight to all of Asia from LA, while AA and UA have multiple frequencies to East Asia from LAX not even considering the rest of Asia. Even a partnership with KE isn’t enough for DL to launch LAX-ICN since the inception of the JV which predated the filing of the KE/OZ merger. CrankyFlier also mentioned that DL is doing only marginally better than UA in load factors while having a fraction of the transpacific capacity which further indicates the softness of LAX for DL.

DL’s axing of LHR from LAX is probably the biggest indicator of LA’s underperformance for DL. Every hub for the US3 plus some non hubs have service to LHR because it’s a destination requirement for many corporate contracts. The only exception now is DL in LAX. It’s no surprise DL’s frustration of entertainment industry contracts in LAX being poached is cemented by DL’s pullback in AKL and LHR. Not to mention both PDX, MCO, and TPA have service to AMS without even being hubs or even “focus cities” for DL.

Could this be related also to Virgin Australia and Air New Zealand about to start code share agreements ( awaiting government approval)?

Makes sense. Many European destinations are only served during the northern hemisphere summer and now Auckland will only be served during the southern hemisphere summer.

More evidence LAX is not profitable for DL.

LAX isn't premium enough for Delta. DL doesn't need to waste their luxurious high-end premium jets out of small market backwaters like LAX. DL is going to put this frame to better use by adding another ATL-AMS, MSP-DUB, or DTW-NRT.

Delta is the #1 most premium airline in the world because they fly to Atlanta, Detroit, Salt Lake City, and Amsterdam. Nobody wants to go to Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, and Auckland

Another day, another Delta network planning failure. Worst US carrier by far.

I just heard soft crying in my basement. I hope my son is okay

You do realize that United’s load factor for all its AKL flights was below 50%? When an airline wants to self destruct, the wise step back and let them do it

This delta retreat might be the fastest pullback in the history of lax

Not according to T100 it wasnt. It was above 50% by a long shot. And Cranky's analysis, which you have cited, shows 68% full. Not great, but not below 50%.

that title is firmly held by American Airlines.
No contest

Yeah
It really isn’t… AA had their Asia flights much longer than delta
Delta’s retreat is historic 😉

tim/atl100M/worldtraveller

This is why you shouldn’t tie your self worth to an airline that fired you 😉

This is what happens when you fly an inferior product and price it like it's the flagship Delta One suite.

It's amazing how neither Delta nor anyone else talk about the once-lauded Delta deal with communist state-owned China Eastern. That deal was supposed to supplant and Delta's former intra-Asia network out of Tokyo. Obviously, it's never materialized. And toss in the pandemic and geopolitical tensions and China Eastern is never, ever mentioned.

Bottom line? United owns the US-Asia/Pacific market.

What is there to really talk about?

DL integrated to the best it could with MU (they legally cannot gain anti-trust immunity, they cannot revenue share, they cannot co-plan schedules, nor merge FFPs) and that integration is still in place.

What changed is that DL/KE finally agreed to a J/V, and DL legally can have those things with Korean. However, since the Chinese carved it out, DL cannot use KE for most mainland traffic, and still has to rely on MU accordingly.

Quite frankly, the amount of supply for flights from Auckland-North America has been insane and isn't sustainable. Even if you added the amount of flights from Sydney and Melbourne to North America (Both cities 4 times bigger in population), it would still be less than the amount of flights out of Auckland to North America.

I think the logic most airlines have is that most people wouldn't mind transiting via Auckland to Australia, but you still need to get a NZ Esta to transit AKL and only Air NZ flights have late departures which is great for connecting flights from Australia that arrive in the evening. Most of the time it's more convenient to transit SFO,YVR,DFW,HNL or LAX and fly directly to Syd/Mel from there.

Personally would like it to stay that way where Auckland has lots of competition to North America, but I just don't think it's sustainable long term.

that title is firmly held by American Airlines.

How?

Yes, Delta's had more (cumulative) time in the LAX-Japan market.

But American began LAX-PVG 4yrs before DL did.
Launched LAX-PEK when DL never did.
And AA's time in LAX-HKG was far longer than either of DL's two previous attempts.

So how is it "no contest?"

Hawaiian Airlines also cut their route between HNL and AKL to seasonal. I was originally supposed to go this July, but they axed the summer months. Found a good use of my HA miles for Christmas, though!

Tim -that’s not a complete argument without taking into account cargo revenues.

Both Melbourne and Sydney are more populous than the whole of New Zealand, so you're absolutely correct about the vast over-supply of seats between Auckland and North America.

And AA has what now? AA pulled down more than DL ever flew TPAC from LAX

Tim
We get it
You try to change the subject when shown you’re wrong
But Try to stay on focus and topic when you spout lies
It’s funny for those of us that know how much you lie but some people may not realize you just lie for no reason to defend delta

Sarthak
Can’t believe I’m defending tim
But no airline
Even United, gives an F about cargo nor would they fly a route for that.

UUUGH with the seasonal BS....

@Creditcrunch most unlikely. The agreement applies only on trans-Tasman routes and then only on those where VA doesn't fly its own metal (so not to Queenstown). It could theoretically allow VA to market US-NZ flights via Australia on UA and NZ metal, but UA could already have done that. Net effect? Yeah, nah.

The only one that wants to change the subject is you when you make false statements. AA owned LAX for years, pulled back domestic and international routes and Delta has handedly taken the top spot domestically. United is trying to block Delta from international expansion but is likely losing money at LAX and SFO in the process. UA dumped 60% more capacity on the Pacific and it continues to backfire. Delta will let United implode while Delta fried the eastern US to Asia

Delta should sell the A350's and just concentrate on domestic routes and sports charters.

Some kind soul, please do a welfare check on Tim Dunce.

Haha I hear you.

I don't know if that implies United flies a route for cargo alone, but a lot of these Australia routes make a lot more sense for United to operate (using that example because of the disproportionate capacity they deploy there) with the cargo premium they generate.

That would be incorrect, I know of one UA route that the cargo pays 100% of the cost every day, everything else is profit, also requires a certain airplane type.

once again, Cranky Flier showed that DL's Load factor to AKL was 5 points higher than UA even though DL used the largest capacity plane - the ex-Latam A350 - among US airlines on its single daily flight during the winter.

UA shot itself in the foot by dumping capacity into the AKL market by trying to keep DL out.

DL might be temporarily reducing capacity during the offpeak season but it is keeping the capacity up during the peak period by, once again, using the ex-Latam A350s for the US winter 2024-25 season.
The message is clear.
If UA or anyone else just wants to throw capacity into the market to try to push DL out, DL will just use its largest, least premium international airplane.

UA will learn. They failed miserably dumping capacity onto its TPAC system for winter 2023-24.

AA and DL will be in AKL for the long-term. UA can do stupid things and pay the price or it can accept that it really doesn't own any part of the globe and if it tries, it cannot possibly achieve financial results comparable to DL that wants.

@30West - I actually heard exactly the same thing about one of their Melbourne routes.

"by, once again, using the ex-Latam A350s for the US winter 2024-25 season.
The message is clear."

Message is clear indeed.
Delta doesn't care about it's customer. It's riding on Tim Dunn's "premium" and using inferior product because none of their DeltaOne customers will be going to AKL twice.
People who do, switch to AA or UA on their next trip.

That’s laughable considering that Polaris and AA is inferior to Delta One Suites on 50 Delta 339s and 359s

Absolutely not. DL’s cuts are routes that were flown not even a year or not even launched. AA’s flew much longer than that. Try again.

I agree with Eskimo. Every talking point Tim has about Delta's excellence centers around shareholder value. That's mostly not the right audience here.

Oops somehow ended up at the wrong reply.

Hey Tim listen, we all know you're full of fluff. But fluffing your own fluff is like beyond what the fluff.

I would never imagine to expect Tim Dunn to pull a Tim Dunn on a Tim Dunn quote by Tim Dunn against Tim Dunn. This is beyond meme material.

I quote you talking and about "ex-Latam A350s". So you argue against yourself with "Delta One Suites on 50 Delta 339s and 359s"

WTF.
Tim Dunn multiverse?

*(Repost to the correct person)