Delta Air Lines will be pulling out of one of the few international long haul markets where all of the “big three” US carriers directly compete, as flagged by @IshrionA.
In this post:
Delta ends Los Angeles to London flights in May 2024
As of May 6, 2024, Delta will discontinue its route between Los Angeles (LAX) and London (LHR). For context, the route is currently operated daily by an Airbus A330-900neo with the following schedule:
DL186 Los Angeles to London departing 8:00PM arriving 2:50PM (+1 day)
DL187 London to Los Angeles departing 4:50PM arriving 8:30PM
Los Angeles to London is a route that’s served by quite a few airlines, including American, British Airways, United, and Virgin Atlantic. While American and United have consistently served this route for a long time, Delta hasn’t.
Delta first started operating this route in 2014, and then canceled the route in 2015. After a nearly eight year suspension, the airline only brought it back in the summer of 2023, only to cancel it again a year later.
Delta has repeatedly tried to position itself as Los Angeles’ leading airline, and the airline does offer more capacity to the airport than American and United. But when the airline can’t even connect Los Angeles to one of the biggest aviation markets in the world, the optics of Delta being a global airline at LAX aren’t great.
Why is Delta canceling its Los Angeles to London route?
There are a couple of things at play here. First of all, Delta and Virgin Atlantic have a joint venture, and Delta even owns a 49% stake in Virgin Atlantic. The UK-based SkyTeam carrier operates up to three daily flights between Los Angeles and London.
Airlines generally view joint ventures as part of their overall operation, so I’m sure Delta only views cutting the Los Angeles to London route as a technicality with limited implications, since passengers in the market can fly with Virgin Atlantic.
Furthermore, since London Heathrow is slot restricted, Delta of course isn’t just canceling a service without having another plan in mind. As of May 7, 2024, Delta instead intends to add a third daily flight to London from Atlanta (ATL).
So clearly what’s happening here is that Delta just decided that it’s better off using its own metal for a third flight to London from Atlanta, rather than one flight a day from Los Angeles.
Why, though? Well, that’s a great question, and I’m not sure I have a great answer. Obviously Delta has a very loyal customer base and amazing name recognition in Atlanta, so perhaps the carrier finds that it performs better relative to Virgin Atlantic in markets where it has a fortress hub.
It still doesn’t look great for Delta to launch the same route twice, and have it only last for a year. And as much as internally an airline may consider a joint venture part of its operation, I don’t think all consumers necessarily view it that way.
Bottom line
Delta will be cutting its Los Angeles to London route as of May 2024. The airline only launched this route roughly a year ago, after an eight year hiatus, so this is the second time the route is only lasting for around a year. Delta will be using this London Heathrow slot to instead launch a third daily flight out of Atlanta.
What do you make of Delta cutting its Los Angeles to London route, and what do you think the logic is?
I flew this route with Delta back in May 2018 when it was seasonal. The seats were very old but appreciated getting a last minute award redemption at a reasonable amount.
I’m flying this route in J (lax-lhr) in a few days vs my normal jfk-lhr route because I will be in LA for a wedding this weekend. The flight ended up cheaper than my average JFK-LHR route(I fly it 7/8 times a year) even though it’s like 60% longer. They are just maximizing profit as one would expect
Well, that's why we chose to build miles on Delta, so having achieved Diamond, and this is the route we fly four times a year, very disappointing. We've been trying to book for the summer and getting nowhere, including any explanation when we call the dedicated line.
Hubby and I (Diamond and Platinum Delta members) booked flights in Delta One with miles from LAX to London six months ago, for a big event (over a million miles to book). Got a random email notice yesterday congratulating us on booking our Award tickets -- from LAX to Heathrow through Detroit. We were confused! We received no communication about or acknowledgment of the cancellation of our direct flights -- and we were charged the...
Hubby and I (Diamond and Platinum Delta members) booked flights in Delta One with miles from LAX to London six months ago, for a big event (over a million miles to book). Got a random email notice yesterday congratulating us on booking our Award tickets -- from LAX to Heathrow through Detroit. We were confused! We received no communication about or acknowledgment of the cancellation of our direct flights -- and we were charged the same amount of miles for the new route. We called Delta to try to get seats on the direct flights operated by their partner but Virgin Atlantic doesn't allow bookings using miles in any other cabin than coach. We wished we'd booked with American.
part of the answer as to why DL dropped LAX-LHR might be because they have retimed their new SEA-TPE flight for the winter so that the flight will have a late evening arrival in TPE, the plane will overnight in TPE, and the return will be in the morning in SEA which allows for more connections throughout the US.
While DL didn't have to cancel LAX-LHR during the summer, they clearly see more value...
part of the answer as to why DL dropped LAX-LHR might be because they have retimed their new SEA-TPE flight for the winter so that the flight will have a late evening arrival in TPE, the plane will overnight in TPE, and the return will be in the morning in SEA which allows for more connections throughout the US.
While DL didn't have to cancel LAX-LHR during the summer, they clearly see more value in using the additional aircraft time on their SEA-TPE flight than flying LAX-LHR on their own metal
Delta has expanded more into other airline competitive strongholds over the past 20 years than any airline in US history.
Delta's strategic track record of growth is pretty strong.
Let's not forget they entered deregulation as the 6th largest airline in the US and is now the largest in revenue not just in the US but in the world. Delta does ensure that its forays into other airline strongholds are successful and continues to...
Delta has expanded more into other airline competitive strongholds over the past 20 years than any airline in US history.
Delta's strategic track record of growth is pretty strong.
Let's not forget they entered deregulation as the 6th largest airline in the US and is now the largest in revenue not just in the US but in the world. Delta does ensure that its forays into other airline strongholds are successful and continues to fine tune its network but the momentum is clearly more growth and expansion oriented than any other airline.
Delta also delivers one of the highest returns on assets among US airlines which means it is not just evaluating the performance of a specific route but it is making sure that it evaluates all of the potential uses for an asset.
In the case of route served by a joint venture partner, they can hand the route to them if the JV partner can operate it at higher total profits for both.
Since Delta's pilot agreement requires that Delta balance its flying with its partners - but not at the country or region (such as TATL level), DL can and does deploy airplanes elsewhere on its global system and satisfy the requirements of its pilot agreement and generate industry - leading profit sharing in the process.
Lucky should post more on Delta - seems to consistently generate the most engagement these days!
I do agree with many that this isn't a huge deal given Virgin has a lot of flights from this airport. Delta can probably get higher yields connecting passengers throughout the east coast through ATL on another flight.
Delta still has a very competitive offering (between it and its JVs) from all of its hubs to Europe. I think...
Lucky should post more on Delta - seems to consistently generate the most engagement these days!
I do agree with many that this isn't a huge deal given Virgin has a lot of flights from this airport. Delta can probably get higher yields connecting passengers throughout the east coast through ATL on another flight.
Delta still has a very competitive offering (between it and its JVs) from all of its hubs to Europe. I think in terms of LAX in general, I would love to see Delta restart attempts at locations like Singapore, Hong Kong (if and when business travel returns there), and even unique stuff like Thailand.
So Delta is cancelling LAX-LHR as Virgin operate 3 flights a day. So Delta is adding another ATL-LHR on top of what Delta & Virgin already operate ATL-LHR? That would be the 8th or 9th flight a day between them?
For yesterday and today, DL operated 2 flights/day on ATL-LHR and VS operated 1.
Looking into August, DL is operating 3 flights/day and VS is still operating 1.
DL, like most US airlines, updates its schedules on Saturday and LAX-LHR on DL is gone with 3 flights/day showing on VS.
VS may or may not have fully updated its summer schedule but LHR slots have to be used or lost. DL and VS have...
For yesterday and today, DL operated 2 flights/day on ATL-LHR and VS operated 1.
Looking into August, DL is operating 3 flights/day and VS is still operating 1.
DL, like most US airlines, updates its schedules on Saturday and LAX-LHR on DL is gone with 3 flights/day showing on VS.
VS may or may not have fully updated its summer schedule but LHR slots have to be used or lost. DL and VS have swapped slots outside of the US-LHR market - ie for VS markets beyond LHR.
You do have to wonder if the same breathless attention will be paid to every joint venture flight swap in the future just so some people can try to find fault with Delta and its supporters that accurately note how well run it is compared to its peers.
If the goal is pageviews, then highlighting routine business moves is a good strategy. If intelligent conversation and figuring out real trends in the industry is the goal, then a comprehensive "plusses and minuses" of the industry is warranted and should be driven by facts.
With this series of recent developments, it's important to remind ourselves that Delta still does have some potential within the aviation industry even if not quite as much as we had hoped.
LOL. Wut??
i don't think it's fair to draw any conclusions just because DL cxld a route. It happens for airlines. While the overall trend with DL has been pretty tough, they still have a solid asset base and could conceivably still play an important role in shaping the US aviation landscape, recent events notwithstanding. I'm just saying, sure, dunk on DL for how haphazard their strategic decisionmaking (especially route-planning) has been in recent years, but don't...
i don't think it's fair to draw any conclusions just because DL cxld a route. It happens for airlines. While the overall trend with DL has been pretty tough, they still have a solid asset base and could conceivably still play an important role in shaping the US aviation landscape, recent events notwithstanding. I'm just saying, sure, dunk on DL for how haphazard their strategic decisionmaking (especially route-planning) has been in recent years, but don't write them off entirely, as hard as that may be.
I just flew this route it was 80% empty. The food was so bad I was sick for the 5 days I was in the UK
LHR does not feed into a European global alliance peer for Delta like CDG or AMS. LHR is a massive route for JFK, but not LAX. DL is smart to let it go, especially during the busy summer season when a wibebody should be producing maxium revenue.
Ben - would it be possible for you to write an article featuring Delta while leaving the snark out? It is really distracting.
Yet another stupidly anti-Delta post.
Who cares? As TD and others have said, if this allows Virgin to replace one of their 787 flights with another 350, then that’s a net positive for the consumer.
Ben, with respect I don’t think you appreciate the Delta-Virgin partnership. It’s not your average airline alliance.
Well hello, Dim Tunn. How d’you do?
I care. I’m very interested in reading about changes to major routes by major carriers. Carry on, Ben.
then it should be done objectively and consistently and within the context of what those routes mean.
Switching carriers within a JV that doesn't impact position in a local market is an item for Cranky Flier's Friday news roundup and not much more.
The answer is Virgin Atlantic. Delta might just see this route as redundant.
Delta knows exactly what it is worth for them to remain in the market and what it is worth to leave the route to VS. There is a point for any business where it stops making sense to try to serve the market. With a joint venture, it is a question of "me, them, us, or none of us." DL simply moved from us to them.
AA and UA never understood the point to...
Delta knows exactly what it is worth for them to remain in the market and what it is worth to leave the route to VS. There is a point for any business where it stops making sense to try to serve the market. With a joint venture, it is a question of "me, them, us, or none of us." DL simply moved from us to them.
AA and UA never understood the point to walk away from poor performing markets in serving China pre-covid when both lost money flying their entire Pacific networks. It has only been since the pandemic and restrictions by the Chinese government on capacity that airfares across the Pacific have soared and UA is making money flying the Pacific while DL made money before covid and has in 2023. AA walked away from most of its Chinese routes and it will be years before they get them back.
You gotta know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em.
This shows great success from Delta management, and how Delta is dominant out of LAX and everyone else has a bad strategy. Well done Delta. Skypesos forever.
and you just prove that you are incapable of having an intelligent conversation so shrink around mocking others who actually present facts and data that you don't like.
None of which changes that Delta is still the largest at LAX, this or any cancellation is far from changing that, Delta manages to earn substantially more revenue and profits than any other airline etc.
I know you and others aren't the sharpest knives in the...
and you just prove that you are incapable of having an intelligent conversation so shrink around mocking others who actually present facts and data that you don't like.
None of which changes that Delta is still the largest at LAX, this or any cancellation is far from changing that, Delta manages to earn substantially more revenue and profits than any other airline etc.
I know you and others aren't the sharpest knives in the kitchen but you do realize that your mocking only incentivizes me to write more esp. about the failings of Delta's competitors, don't you?
Not enough passengers to fill all those seats.
Haha The mighty consumer and business travelers found out that Delta Devalued their frequent flyer program. For example I am going to London and Paris this summer and I am using points. Anerican is 45,000 points round trip and Delta is 139,000 points! I switched out of Delta when I realized my 500,000 points are worth half of what they were two years ago! Ed really stuck it to the frequent travelers! Delta is now my last choice airline.
Yup - truly uncompetitive program
Let's not paint Delta as a lone offender. How many times has AA pulled an on-again/off-again with respect to a particular route?
I suspect your answer to the question is found in the Pilot Work Agreement. Outsourcing flying to foreign carriers is every airline's dream, then all they are is a travel agency
Some LHR-LAX history.
LHR - LAX is high yield and "high expectations". The route is more ex-UK than ex-US originating pax in the past, and I suspect this hasn't changed much.
Most Brits will ALWAYS favor VS and BA over American carriers, but many do like AA and UA alot. AA is BA, and UA has always had a good reputation out of LHR (also grandfathered in many PA pax). History and longevity play a...
Some LHR-LAX history.
LHR - LAX is high yield and "high expectations". The route is more ex-UK than ex-US originating pax in the past, and I suspect this hasn't changed much.
Most Brits will ALWAYS favor VS and BA over American carriers, but many do like AA and UA alot. AA is BA, and UA has always had a good reputation out of LHR (also grandfathered in many PA pax). History and longevity play a part in Heathrow's aviation.
Those TW and PA passengers and their kids went somewhere, and it was to AA and UA ...not DL. DL picked FRA. AA and UA are the celebrity carriers of the past in the US and that was seen.
Los Angeles is also Hollywood glitz, sunshine - puuure cache. Its the "dream" for many, and so they want to arrive on the right carrier. BA, VS, AA or UA. NZ was a big favorite back in the day. Lots of Hollywood biz too.
Laugh if you may, but Delta is pulling out. Obviously they can make a lot more money into ATL, and they own half of VS anyway. DL was late to LHR, and built up a good presence from nothing...but it cant have everything. Look at its ops out of AMS. Yes AMS is NO LHR and not even remotely close yield wise, hence their situation. DL was very smart buying half of VS. They need to be happy with that.
Delta rules supreme to its important hubs, and it should. AGAIN, leave LAX to VS, its going to never work for DL. I said this last time and here we are again.
BA routes tons of pax over London on to BA/AA from Europe, Africa, M.E and South Asia. Many Indians looove BA.
VS is beloved and has a ton of loyalty as an O&D carrier, and BA's O&D - but as a user of BA/AA to/from LHR/LAX I know there are many connections.
VS/DL have to rely on heavy O&D, which is fine...and that O&D prefers VS. Didn't DL try MIA-LHR, same thing.
DL can shove everyone through its mega hubs, but try LAX and MIA. No!
AF - tried LAX-LHR. They are a huge name in the UK, what could go wrong?. Everything! It does not work. The same people who wouldn't get on AF to LHR, will happily show up at LAX for CDG. Pendulums
I could go on and on about Delta being associated with the South, and grabbing the NW pendulum for MSP, DTW and BOS. There are unseen things at play. Pendulums.
Pendulums swing hard, and mantain that grip.
I flew DL to Amsterdam frequently around 2000 .... DL had one daily from ATL, one from JFK. JFK arrived first, it was turned around, flew the ATL route home. DL has built the current routes from that humble start.
Northwest had a massive presence at AMS, and NW and KL had a JV across the Atlantic that was massively successful.
DL merged with NW inheriting their hub operation and JV, so a lot was already in place for DL to work with.
Yes Delta just isn't the premium cachet carrier
UNITED rising
the only thing that is rising is UA's debt.
$12 billion in capex in 2024 on top of billions in debt payments is far beyond the amount of cash UA can generate.
Let's not forget that massive fleet spending and flying routes for "strategic purposes" is exactly what AA did with Kirby and friends in multiple positions of leadership.
AA is still trying to cast out the demons that those folks left...
the only thing that is rising is UA's debt.
$12 billion in capex in 2024 on top of billions in debt payments is far beyond the amount of cash UA can generate.
Let's not forget that massive fleet spending and flying routes for "strategic purposes" is exactly what AA did with Kirby and friends in multiple positions of leadership.
AA is still trying to cast out the demons that those folks left behind.
To somehow think that UA will not end up as the most indebted US airline with no improvement in profits to show for it is just plain naive.
Interestingly, Air France tried an LAX - LHR route about 15 years ago. They couldn't get it to work either.
Does that leave HND as the only remaining A330 international destination for DL out of LAX? The A350 is used for SYD, AKL, CDG. They use a 767 for PPT.
Delta flies the A330-900 LAX - CDG
going to the A350.
LAX is one of 3 A350 pilot bases for DL along w/ ATL and DTW.
LAX is not an A330 pilot base - SEA, MSP, DTW, ATL, and NYC are.
As the converted ex-Latam A350s come online, the chances are high that LAX-HND will become an A350
“Of course it’s a smart move. It’s simple math. You have the lowest seat cost when you don’t operate the route at all. How dare they breathe the same air as Delta. AA operates 3 times a day, and UA has 2 flights to LHR because they have inferior management. In 2030 when all of the A350’s have joined the fleet, they’ll be sorry!” - Tim Dunn
as usual, we have the same childish subjects that love to throw dirt at someone else but go absolutely nuts if you dare bring up all of the routes that AA has cancelled from ORD, SEA, LAX, BOS and on and on or the fact that UA maintains its size by making far less money than its direct competitors and then justifying spending $12 billion per year on new aircraft! (yes, that is what UA...
as usual, we have the same childish subjects that love to throw dirt at someone else but go absolutely nuts if you dare bring up all of the routes that AA has cancelled from ORD, SEA, LAX, BOS and on and on or the fact that UA maintains its size by making far less money than its direct competitors and then justifying spending $12 billion per year on new aircraft! (yes, that is what UA will spend on new aircraft this year) just so it can keep growing - which it can't do because Airbus and Boeing can't deliver the planes that UA THINKS it needs.
Go ahead, child, and have your hypocritical temper tantrums. There are clearly enough people that have contributed to the discussion that understand not only what is happening here but don't find the need to selectively throw mud.
Well Delta has just done this to Portland (PDX) on the Portland-Tokyo route. A route flown for years by Northwest and kept ip by Delta. Years ago Delta made PDX a hub for flights to the Orient. Only to pull out in a short time. A habit it seems.
Meh, I guess if we're to describe 1987-2001 as "a short time."
Sadly, there were huge problems with racist behavior at immigration at PDX. Word got around and Asia originating passengers started avoiding PDX in favor of LAX, SFO an SEA. I was living in PDX at the time and it sucked not only to lose our Asia flights, but DL closed their PDX hub, leaving on a handful of daily flights to ATL, SLC and LAX. And I had to give up flying Delta and start...
Sadly, there were huge problems with racist behavior at immigration at PDX. Word got around and Asia originating passengers started avoiding PDX in favor of LAX, SFO an SEA. I was living in PDX at the time and it sucked not only to lose our Asia flights, but DL closed their PDX hub, leaving on a handful of daily flights to ATL, SLC and LAX. And I had to give up flying Delta and start flying Alaska... which, now that I'm east coast based leaves me 3/4 of the way to million miler on Alaska...
Slow news day.
This is not unusual in the Amsterdam, Paris and London markets, letting their 49% owned Virgin or 30% owned AF/KLM fly the routes with cheaper crew and splitting the additional profits.
Seems like this was an OK place to park a pair of LHR slots until they found a better use for them.
“Slow news day”? Really? One of the biggest US airlines pulling out of the London route from purportedly one of its major focus cities?
They're not really pulling out. The framing of this story is odd. VS is taking over the LAX-LHR route with a third flight. DL is moving this aircraft over to ATL. There's no net loss in terms of their TATL JV.
True, but its a loss in DL not being in a top UK-US market, to a major hub/focus city. It speaks volumes. The JV can work on VS metal only LHR-LAX. DL, no.
DL/VS TATL JV operated 4 daily flights last summer. 3 VS, 1 DL.
"This is not unusual in the Amsterdam, Paris and London markets, letting their 49% owned Virgin or 30% owned AF/KLM fly the routes"
No issue with the overall point but I think you meant 3% owned AF/KLM, not 30%.
I’m not sure that Delta’s premium pricing for its business class works in every market. I fly the LAX - LHR route a lot and Delta’s business class is always the most expensive. And while it is a better product than the competition on this route, it wasn’t always full. Which is strange, because with upgrades, long haul business class always seems to be pretty much full. I don’t know why you would price your...
I’m not sure that Delta’s premium pricing for its business class works in every market. I fly the LAX - LHR route a lot and Delta’s business class is always the most expensive. And while it is a better product than the competition on this route, it wasn’t always full. Which is strange, because with upgrades, long haul business class always seems to be pretty much full. I don’t know why you would price your product higher than your competition when they are selling more seats. Maybe they just don’t want to degrade the pricing of their product for the rest of their network. (In terms of delta at LAX, they need more long-haul flights, particularly to Asia).
anyone that has objectively looked at the airline industry for any length of time knows that there is alot of truth to your statement.
Delta does price its product higher than many carriers and then sells business class seats as part of corporate negotiations, not filling them with gate upgrades due to status or loyalty program awards.
And yet data show that DL gets as high or higher average fares than its competitors even...
anyone that has objectively looked at the airline industry for any length of time knows that there is alot of truth to your statement.
Delta does price its product higher than many carriers and then sells business class seats as part of corporate negotiations, not filling them with gate upgrades due to status or loyalty program awards.
And yet data show that DL gets as high or higher average fares than its competitors even with generally smaller business class cabins - the 339 only has 29 seats IIRC - so they are clearly getting a better mix of fares throughout the aircraft.
And VS' crew costs per hour are cheaper than DL's for a number of reasons so it makes sense to let VS fly a financially challenging route from a revenue standpoint.
VS is not cumulatively profitable while DL is more so than any other airline. DL holds an equity stake - which currently has no value because of VS' reorganization - but DL does not control all of their actions just as is true w/ every other DL equity partner.
and just about DL's entire TATL operation is part of its JV with AF/KL and VS; those airlines only fly from the US to their home countries while DL can fly anything and the revenue is shared at the best cost base.
and DL will be adding more TPAC routes. They are simply at the beginning of a large buildup that they sat on the sidelines for. There are good opportunities to Asia and the S. Pacific and DL has the planes - and the right planes - to regrow its TPAC presence which was the largest only 15 years ago.
.
.
"And while it is a better product than the competition on this route"
Isn't BA an overall better product on this route on the 777?
DL is only "bigger" at LAX right now due to AA having a construction and limited gate access. Once the remodel is done AA will regain the LAX crown. AA and SWA pretty much own LA market, AA is strong at Orange County and Onterio verses the other Big 3.
As for DL, UA and AA have a much more consistant hard product and a more modern (DL should have kept the 787 order)....
DL is only "bigger" at LAX right now due to AA having a construction and limited gate access. Once the remodel is done AA will regain the LAX crown. AA and SWA pretty much own LA market, AA is strong at Orange County and Onterio verses the other Big 3.
As for DL, UA and AA have a much more consistant hard product and a more modern (DL should have kept the 787 order). The A330-300/900 as AA found out are cost effective as the 787 or 350 so, better run them where these is no compitition. Funny AA offers 3 flights to LHR and DL cant run 1. You may mock AA's LHR / Europe strategy but they are locked in and making it work.
you do make up your own reality.
First, the 330 D1 is a suite w/ a door something neither AA and UA do not offer. You or anyone can subjectively say what you think is of higher value but a business class suite either has a door or it doesn't. DL has one on the 339.
Second, see ALL of the discussion about JVs here. Funny how the AA fankids love to tout...
you do make up your own reality.
First, the 330 D1 is a suite w/ a door something neither AA and UA do not offer. You or anyone can subjectively say what you think is of higher value but a business class suite either has a door or it doesn't. DL has one on the 339.
Second, see ALL of the discussion about JVs here. Funny how the AA fankids love to tout the size of their JV partners but can't accept the same principle for DL.
Third, there is NO example in US airline history of an airline giving up a leadership position to another legacy carrier and regaining it. AA has access to all of the gates it needs; it simply chose to give away large portions of its west coast flying to AS which is NOT part of any JV w/ AA
Fourth, the 330 in coach is by far more comfortable than the 9 abreast 787 or 10 abreast 777s which AA and UA operate. Not all the world measures "best" by fractions of inches in the business class footwell to the exclusion of every other factor.
What’s funny, tim
Is how you talk about delta metal size at lax all the time when it suits your normal delta nonsense. But now all of a sudden you care about JVs when delta can’t keep one of the biggest markets out of lax on its own metal.
Of course JVs matter but you have a funny habit of only talking about delta metal at lax because that’s the only thing that...
What’s funny, tim
Is how you talk about delta metal size at lax all the time when it suits your normal delta nonsense. But now all of a sudden you care about JVs when delta can’t keep one of the biggest markets out of lax on its own metal.
Of course JVs matter but you have a funny habit of only talking about delta metal at lax because that’s the only thing that makes delta look big in LA
Not JVs, not other relevant SoCal airports that MANY locals prefer vs LAx when they can, alliance size at the airport (aka. AS and AA are relevant together at lax because from a loyalty perspective, they’re completely in sync from a pax perspective.), or loyalty in the area.
Don’t go calling aa folks fanboys when your spiel for months has been entirely about delta metal at lax and nothing else to be relevant in a stupid comments chat.
Grow up and be consistent
Come on now Tim:
1) You know airlines pick the cabin configuration layout... 787s with 2-4-2 fly daily
2) Delta cancelling their inherited 787 order might have been the biggest blunder they've made in a very long time.
Even you, who is super biased, can admit these 2 things.
No one does, nor has ever, "owned [the] LA market."
The homeless seems to own LA.
Delta has 20% of LAX, whilst Southwest commands 10%. American has 15% of LAX and has no plans to expand now or when their remodel has finished, that I have seen.
Shifting the slot to ATL might also have to do with taking advantage of demand. The Olympics will be in Paris this summer and people might look to fly into LHR and then take the train from St Pancras into Paris.
I'll add another reason for this route being cancelled was the consistentley low load factor. Most of the time this flight would leave with less than 35% of the seats occupied.
OH WOW! Yes VS is always full.
You’re doing auto-playing ads with sound now? For shame, OMAAT.
Just use adblock?
Exactly.
Next Tuesday’s LHR-LAX shows only 37 passengers on the seat map right now. On an aircraft that seats over 280. Flights routinely operating with over 200 empty seats. No wonder they’re cutting it.
Virgin will operate it instead of delta. It is a joint venture. So it’s really not being cut as revenue is shared.
And you know the load factor of all the flights ?
?? VS is not just operating it instead of DL. They were combined offering 4x daily flights, which will drop to 3. They are dropping a daily frequency.
I can see the load factors on DL vs VS through T100 and DL's load factors on this route were consistently lower than those on the other US carriers as well as the British carriers.
When it operated, there were 3 VS departures and 1 DL departure, for a total of 4. Virgin is not replacing this flight. There will be only 3. It is being cut
The a lot is going to the ATL route. That came from the reduction of SLC-LHR and cancellation of the second DTW-LHR. So they now have an extra slot to re-deploy somewhere else. I guess we’ll find out soon what their plans are.
Delta and Virgin Atlantic have moved LHR slots around outside of US-LHR service so the picture might not be complete without knowing everything VS is doing.
Boring. American did the same years ago with Boston, ceding all traffic to its JBA British Airways and reusing it's slot.
and AA entered and then exited SEA-LHR, once flew SEA-Tokyo but doesn't any more, has LHR as its only daily, year round widebody longhaul destination from ORD....
and UA exited BOS and JFK to Europe.
Some people are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees...
I think it also has to do with aircraft utilization. The LAX schedule needs two aircraft to make it daily. ATL needs just one. With ATL being such a mega hub, Delta probably captures a fair bit of hub traffic leaving VS to the LAX route. DL does this with Korean too. Some routes to ICN are exclusively KE like JFK, SFO and LAX while DL flies from less obvious origins like DTW and MSP.
While this is a pretty short lead time to cancel a route and esp. going into summer travel season, London has been challenging since the pandemic for multiple airlines. Let's not forget that United jumped into Boston-LHR and then pulled it back even as its execs have repeatedly said that LHR is weak.
Virgin Atlantic does serve the route 3 times/day and DL and VS have a very strong relationship. VS is using the...
While this is a pretty short lead time to cancel a route and esp. going into summer travel season, London has been challenging since the pandemic for multiple airlines. Let's not forget that United jumped into Boston-LHR and then pulled it back even as its execs have repeatedly said that LHR is weak.
Virgin Atlantic does serve the route 3 times/day and DL and VS have a very strong relationship. VS is using the 787-9 on 2 of the 3 and the A350-1000 on only one of the flights so they aren't pouring the capacity into the market. The A35K has by far the best product in all cabins.
And, as I have noted before, AA/BA have a strong advantage at LHR but that is more than offset in continental Europe where DL and UA are much stronger - and DL and SkyTeam are growing while Star is watching SAS move to SkyTeam and a JV - which is a far bigger strategic threat to Star than the gain of ITA.
DL will remain the largest airline at LAX and will continue to grow including in longhaul markets. The internet will go crazy when DL starts deploying the 45 A350s that DL has coming in the next 5 years including for TPAC flying.
and, finally, the DOT has released profitability by global region for the big 3 through the 3rd quarter of 2023 using the data the AIRLINES THEMSELVES PROVIDE. Some will argue about the actual numbers but the trends are very clear.
AA still loses money flying both the Atlantic and Pacific; it lost over one-quarter of a billion dollars in the first 3 quarters flying the Atlantic. Delta made almost a half billion dollars which was 15% more than United which flew more capacity.
Cancelling a route here or there is what companies that want to ensure their future have to do.
Oh Timmy…
One day you’ll learn how useless dot reporting by region is. It’s not calculated the same by any airline and it’s purely an exercise in revenue accounting.
All it does is tell you delta is more profitable than ua and aa.
well, yes. there are accounting standards as to how costs and revenues are allocated. While there is some flexibility esp. w/ costs, there is far more standardization that you want to believe.
And the sole reason why you don't like it is because it, once again, shows that Delta runs its international operation - just like it does with the entire airline - to maximize profitability which is the same goal that AA, UA...
well, yes. there are accounting standards as to how costs and revenues are allocated. While there is some flexibility esp. w/ costs, there is far more standardization that you want to believe.
And the sole reason why you don't like it is because it, once again, shows that Delta runs its international operation - just like it does with the entire airline - to maximize profitability which is the same goal that AA, UA and every other company is supposed to have. Delta just does it better.
And you still can't tell us where you would like us to deduct profits if you think that AA or UA's profits in one region are not what you think they should be. The pie is the same size - and the size of that pie is clearly stated in its financial reports. UA earned $2 billion less than DL in 2023 and AA almost $4 billion less. In order to make AA and UA's international networks as profitable as DL's on a seat mile basis, AA and UA would be MUCH less profitable domestically.
So, please quit your childish arguing, accept reality, and then tell us how YOU want to restate the numbers. Whether AA, UA or the DOT agrees or concurs with you doesn't matter. At least you'll have taken the time to actually think through the data and quit rejecting it out of hand because you don't like what it says.
Yeah…
Dot reporting has no accounting standards for the reporting lol
Nice try though.
Revenue accounting standards as it applies to geographic profitability are not under any kind of accounting standard for the purpose of DOT reporting
Hey he has Delta stock, so he knows what he is talking about.
I much prefer the VS 787 PE seat with 21 inch width to the A350 18.5 inch seat width.
Going to be really fun when a certain fan boy gas lights us all how DL is superior than all other airlines with their order book and the kraken they’ll release.
His astonishment was amusing last night and he called me “hallucinating” about this drop on another website.
Delta also is dropping lax-dal… lax apparently is a little rough for delta being the smallest alliance group in SoCal
and you are fixated on size and finding fault with Delta despite the fact that there are abundant examples of other airlines dropping multiple routes - and yet you didn't come unglued about them.
You do realize that AA cancelled dozens of routes from LAX which is precisely why DL has grown as much as they have and are now and will still be the largest airline at LAX? There is easily a 15%...
and you are fixated on size and finding fault with Delta despite the fact that there are abundant examples of other airlines dropping multiple routes - and yet you didn't come unglued about them.
You do realize that AA cancelled dozens of routes from LAX which is precisely why DL has grown as much as they have and are now and will still be the largest airline at LAX? There is easily a 15% gap in size between AA and UA at LAX which is stunning considering that AA was that percentage larger than DL not that long ago.
UA has also cancelled at least one route to LHR in the past year. and UA's growth plans are nowhere going to be what they previously stated including that they will receive not more than a couple new 787s before the summer - and that is on top of their massive disappointment in delays from Boeing's messes.
Reality is tough to face for everyone but, as much as you want to singularly pin the blame on Delta, evidence is that they are doing what other airlines have done and will continue to do.
lol. I could care less who drops routes at lax and where they drop them. I’m not the guy on every blog comment telling everyone delta the Death Star is taking over lax and nothing will stop them. lol
Aa lost gates temporarily and also has AS helping keep their size in LAX above delta for the domestic market to say nothing of AA’s JV partners at lax.
But you can’t do your normal stupid...
lol. I could care less who drops routes at lax and where they drop them. I’m not the guy on every blog comment telling everyone delta the Death Star is taking over lax and nothing will stop them. lol
Aa lost gates temporarily and also has AS helping keep their size in LAX above delta for the domestic market to say nothing of AA’s JV partners at lax.
But you can’t do your normal stupid “delta metal is biggest at lax and you can’t accept it” then simultaneously tell us alliances matter.
Metal doesn’t matter in a place like lax because aa, as an example as a very strong domestic partner at lax (and other local airports that customers may prefer for domestic flying) and very strong JV partners too that keep AA far more relevant than delta temporarily having more gates
Seriously, your delta double speak is amusing today
And I’ll accept your apology because you’re too slow getting news about delta routes drops ;)
DAL is forever limited to 20 Gates. SW owns 18. A wonderful lawsuit, DL, AA, Alaska, City of Dallas, Love Field, maybe a couple others, all suing each other 'cause DL wanted use of a Gate. (negotiated temporary settlement, I think a trial is still set for '25). DL got use of 1, DL has 10 or so departures daily, SW already flies DAL-LAX, DL wanted to use that slot elsewhere. I fly DAL-ATL to avoid having to use AA at DFW, planes are always packed.
Simple. It wasn’t profitable and delta decided it could make more money on the lhr slot with a third Atlanta flight. That LAX market is saturated and ATL isn’t. Profit maximization
It’s untrue, as VS will operate the third flight. You’ll find that when there’s a joint venture the flight may be operated by one of the participating carriers. So there will still be three LHR LAX flights daily.
VS have operated 3x daily since pre-pandemic for the summer demand. It has nothing to do with DL’s exit.
I do a lot of work for alliances and know how the accounting works. Virgin already had three flight ls last summer. They are t taking over this delta flight.
They were flying 4x daily, not 3x.
Didn’t United somewhat recently add their second LAX LHR flight in the last year or two? It seems like to be successful if they’ve gotten Delta to retreat out of the market with their own metal in a highly competitive hub.
Yes indeed
UNITED rising with great LAX based crew on flagship routes
It’s a joint venture so they are cutting capacity. The route still operates by Virgin.
I'm gonna guess this has to do with aircraft rotation. LAX-LHR schedule requires 1+ airframes while ATL-LHR requires just a single. Makes more sense for Virgin to operate in such a situation given the additional degree of operational flexibility in their operation.
This tells me two things:
1) Delta’s product in the business class can’t compete with Virgin Atlantic and even British Airways with the new seats is better than Delta, especially food and drinks.
2) Corporate travel between Los Angeles and London is down, which makes sense with the media industry and entertainment industry cutbacks.
@ FNT Delta Diamond -- I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong. Delta has one of the best business class products in the world, and the most corporate customers, as the world's most profitable airline. Allow me to quote someone who consistently has exceptional, unbiased insights:
"The notion that Delta wasn’t interested in international growth was flawed and wrong and there will be more long haul announcements from Delta including from LAX."
"And DL does have...
@ FNT Delta Diamond -- I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong. Delta has one of the best business class products in the world, and the most corporate customers, as the world's most profitable airline. Allow me to quote someone who consistently has exceptional, unbiased insights:
"The notion that Delta wasn’t interested in international growth was flawed and wrong and there will be more long haul announcements from Delta including from LAX."
"And DL does have a track record of getting more corporate contract revenue than AA or UA - and that is the stuff that moves the needle when you are competing w/ foreign carriers. A dedicated high premium check-in for the most elite corporate accounts and for celebrities will translate into a real revenue difference. It is very possible that DL at LAX could be close to what UA has at SFO = and DL also has SEA."
"I am not sure I would compare DL's service to SQ's but I have flown enough carriers to know that DL does compare favorably in some characteristics to even some of the best Asian (including Middle East) airlines."
I see Ben is getting out ahead of Tim on this one.
May I add that Virgin is replacing the Delta operated flight. That’s one of the raison d’etres of a joint venture . Therefore there’s no capacity reduction at all.
Delta has one of the best business class products in MSP and SLC possibly. There's no way Delta has one of the best business class products in the world, I guarantee you that. And I've flown dozens of int'l airlines in Business Class. You never know if you'll get a 25 years old plane with stains or a 3 year old plane with Delta.
It's weird when people attribute that to DL as though it was a concept unique to them; when airlines from UA to BA to AF to AA are all flying 25-yr-old+ aircraft, both widebody and narrowbody, on key routes.
It's almost like a tic, when they see the word "Delta."
"... I have flown enough carriers to know that DL does compare favorably in some characteristics to even some of the best Asian (including Middle East) airlines."
I can't believe someone wrote this nonsense. No US carrier can compare. I had to make sure it wasn't 1st April.
This is absolutely false. The VS 787 Upper Class (currently the 9:20ish departure from LAX>LHR) is an awful product and by no means competitive. DL is among the best global products (other than the old 767s).
Don’t forget that there are also up to 5 daily flights from Paris during summer , one of which is Delta metal plus 2 from Amsterdam.
And Delta management lying through its teeth saying corporate demand will be back to 100% by the end of the year.
No way that happens if LHR remains 'soft' - too big of a market