Delta's TPAC strategy is not going to work. Centered around LAX, where it has so much competition and yields are trash, is one reason. The other challenge for DL is the SEA gateway, which isn't working well for Delta, and is stagnant in its growth.
Delta assumes arrogantly that its growth plans will work because folks will pay a premium to fly it. That's absurd.
Delta's bread and butter long haul is to Europe, not to Asia. It's network across the Pacific isn't small, but it is never going to reach the size and scale of UA's and it cannot, because it has no viable gateway to make that work.
It's really odd how coy Delta is being about their intended Singapore flight, and where they plan to fly it from.
Most bloggers and enthusiasts are assuming Seattle, but Delta's never actually said that. All they've ever officially said is "not likely Los Angeles," in Esposito's interview.
Sure that makes Seattle likely (and yes, I saw JonNYC's tweet), but then when pressed twice for confirmation, Esposito refused to just say "Seattle." Weird, since they didn't do that with Hong Kong nor Manila, so why this?
I really wonder if that's a hint that they might try something wild like Singapore from New York (their 283 tonne A350-900s can do it with no problem)? Unlikely, since they don't even bother doing Tokyo or Seoul.
Detroit's also possible. But then again, they could just as easily do something lame, like fly it from Narita (again) now that they're back at that gateway.
This era of 'Celebrity CEO' is so freaking lame. Please stop the pettiness and fake brawling with rivals; just focus on leading reliable, comfortable, reasonably profitable airlines that deliver for passengers (not deceive them with micro-targeted algorithmic unbundled fares, or rely on cop-outs like blaming 'the weather' when you don't properly maintain or staff your aircraft). None of us should have to know or care who Scott, Ed, or any of these jokers even are.
This is tabloid drama.
Does Scott Kirby saying negative or positive things about Delta's Asia expansion even matter?
If the quality of growth is good or bad, it doesn't matter what people say about it. The objective metrics like yields and profits are what will tell the story.
As a Delta Platinum I’m supposed to be offended by this, but unfortunately Kirby has a point. United has spent years building a Pacific network around probably the best US hub for the job, while Delta is now trying to catch up from LAX and SEA. I’m all for Delta giving it a go (more competition is good for passengers, apparently), but announcing you want to beat United across the Pacific and actually building a network that can do it are two very different things. Kirby could perhaps enjoy being right a little more quietly, though.
Regardless of how right or wrong Kirby is, this is the same guy who was making noise about a likely-legally-impossible merger with AA not too long ago. I only hope Ed responds with "Well, Scott has been talking out of his [tush] a lot lately, hasn't he?"
Self admitted I don’t know a lot about how much airlines make on flights/routes but I just flew Delta to Hong Kong and back. From all the news about how poorly this route will do for them I was expecting the flights to be empty but was shocked when both there completely full… (they were selling cheap upgrades however 1k for delta one and $199 for premium select)
