I’m not surprised to see Delta making this change, I’m just not sure what the airline was thinking in the first place.
In this post:
Delta reduces Los Angeles to Auckland service
We’ve seen US airlines add a significant amount of capacity to New Zealand in the past year or so. For example, a year ago, no US airlines flew from Los Angeles (LAX) to Auckland (AKL). Then as of late October 2023, all of the “big three” US carriers launched seasonal flights in the market.
Delta was the first to announce seasonal service between Los Angeles and Auckland, followed by United, followed by American. When United and American matched Delta, Delta responded by making this route year-round. That always seemed like a questionable move, so I’m not surprised to see the latest update.
As spotted by Enilria, Delta’s Los Angeles to Auckland route will once again transition to seasonal. This will happen after the 2024-2025 northern winter schedule. That means Delta will suspend the route as of late March 2025. It remains to be seen if it returns seasonally again in late October 2025, though I imagine it will (the schedule isn’t open that far out).
I can’t help but wonder with what logic Delta decided to extend this service to year-round in the first place. The international market in which the “big three” US carriers are consistently raking in the dough is across the Atlantic in summer. So I was surprised that Delta executives thought an A350 could be better utilized to Auckland than to Europe (never mind that it’s a significantly longer flight).
With this cut, Delta’s year-round long haul international destinations out of Los Angeles include Paris, Sydney, and Tokyo (given that Delta is cutting its London service as of May 2024, and is handing it over to Virgin Atlantic). Then the airline has seasonal flights to Auckland, Brisbane, and Tahiti.
While some have suggested that Delta is trying to take the lead among US carriers with global services out of Los Angeles, that doesn’t seem to be materializing. That’s probably for good reason, since it’s a challenging market with a lot of foreign competition.
We’ve seen too much growth across the South Pacific
Recently we’ve seen an absolutely massive expansion across the South Pacific among US airlines. This has primarily come in three areas:
- American, Delta, and United, all adding service to Brisbane, as this is being subsidized by the government
- American, Delta, and United, all growing New Zealand service
- United hugely expanding to Australia, with the carrier having more capacity than Qantas across the South Pacific in the most recent peak season
I think we’ve probably peaked when it comes to South Pacific service for US carriers, and we’re going to see reductions, rather than more additions. Sure, there’s a fair bit of seasonal demand across the South Pacific, and US carriers need somewhere to send their wide bodies counter seasonally (since many Europe routes are only in summer).
However, as Cranky Flier recently analyzed, United has really struggled to fill seats across the South Pacific, and the numbers are pretty grim. United’s expansion is coming at the expense of yields.
US carriers have very high operating costs (and that doesn’t even account for upcoming flight attendant pay increases, which are inevitable), and these are very long routes.
I have to imagine we’ll see some peak season reductions to Auckland, the Brisbane flights will mostly only last as long as the subsidies do, and United will scale back its growth.
Bottom line
Delta no longer plans to fly between Los Angeles and Auckland year-round, as the airline is instead reducing this service to seasonal. That means American, Delta, and United, will all exclusively operate seasonal flights in the market.
I was surprised when Delta decided to make the Auckland route year-round in the first place, so I’m also not surprised to see this reversal.
What do you make of Delta backtracking on its Auckland plans?
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...
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.
"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
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)
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.
Some kind soul, please do a welfare check on Tim Dunce.
Oops somehow ended up at the wrong reply.
UUUGH with the seasonal BS....
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!
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...
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.
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.
This is what happens when you fly an inferior product and price it like it's the flagship Delta One suite.
This delta retreat might be the fastest pullback in the history of lax
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 ;)
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?"
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
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...
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
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 just heard soft crying in my basement. I hope my son is okay
Another day, another Delta network planning failure. Worst US carrier by far.
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
More evidence LAX is not profitable for DL.
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
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%.
Tim -that’s not a complete argument without taking into account cargo revenues.
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.
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.
@30West - I actually heard exactly the same thing about one of their Melbourne routes.
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.
Could this be related also to Virgin Australia and Air New Zealand about to start code share agreements ( awaiting government approval)?
@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.
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...
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.
Delta should sell the A350's and just concentrate on domestic routes and sports charters.
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 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.
ConcordeLadyBoy, you are the Queen of Daftness.
Reminds me of some of their new destinations out of Austin. Like why? Delta loves wasting money I guess.
I think I hear Tim Dunn crying in the toilets.