It seems like every month Delta has more RON's. This morning I counted 11 aircraft at the gates and hardstand. Six of them were mainline, is Delta slowly beefing up CLT and catching US off guard?
Charlotte?
- Thread starter LD3
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
yes, DL has aggressively increased capacity in CLT along with a number of other east coast cities, in part driven by the slot swap. DL's seats and flights are both up around 20% in CLT.
CLT is in the top 5 cities in seats added from LGA by DL - and has mainline flights on some flights.
Other cities where DL has increased overall capacity around 20% include DFW, PHL, and BUF. MIA was one of the top markets for added seats by DL from LGA but total capacity in MIA was reduced because of other reductions including the LHR flight and intra-Florida flying.
DL got most of the aircraft for the slot swap from pulldowns at MEM and CVG but cities in the Carolinas, Virginia (US strength regions) saw larger capacity additions overall - despite the pulldown at MEM and CVG.
CLT also has a DL flight to SLC that has been added this summer. Several months ago, US loaded schedules for a CLT-SLC flight, DL added one as well, US backed off while DL did not. The SLC flight is one of the overnighters at CLT.
For its part, US has added capacity in DL hubs at SLC - largely to PHX - and MSP - largely to DCA.
DL's seats at LGA grew by 45% as a result of the slot swap while US' grew by 15%.
CLT is in the top 5 cities in seats added from LGA by DL - and has mainline flights on some flights.
Other cities where DL has increased overall capacity around 20% include DFW, PHL, and BUF. MIA was one of the top markets for added seats by DL from LGA but total capacity in MIA was reduced because of other reductions including the LHR flight and intra-Florida flying.
DL got most of the aircraft for the slot swap from pulldowns at MEM and CVG but cities in the Carolinas, Virginia (US strength regions) saw larger capacity additions overall - despite the pulldown at MEM and CVG.
CLT also has a DL flight to SLC that has been added this summer. Several months ago, US loaded schedules for a CLT-SLC flight, DL added one as well, US backed off while DL did not. The SLC flight is one of the overnighters at CLT.
For its part, US has added capacity in DL hubs at SLC - largely to PHX - and MSP - largely to DCA.
DL's seats at LGA grew by 45% as a result of the slot swap while US' grew by 15%.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Now that DL is the largest airline at LGA, it is probably the highest cost carrier there. Those larger jets deployed to cities in the Carolina's will be ruinous to DL's bottom line in NY. There simply isn't that much high yield business traffic in these markets to support the capital expenditures associated with running the larger equipment and higher labor costs in and out of places such as Columbia and Greenville to name a couple. DL is betting the farm in these markets by driving up operating costs due to short flight segments filled with more leisure traffic than premium. There is simply too much competition in NY for DL to garner any kind of lasting stronghold and at best will be maintaining a high profile presence in order to attract a smaller pool of high yield business traveler that will be diluted by low yield leisure as well as budget conscious corporate travelers that won't mind a connection in PHL, CLT or BWI to the cities in the Carolinas. Not to mention the cost of maintaining the equipment that will be overused while trying to chase a small profit.
There is a very good reason why US wanted to dump LGA.
There is a very good reason why US wanted to dump LGA.
In addition DL may very well end up having to connect customers through ATL in order to compete by price with all the other carriers connecting their customers through other hubs to cities in the Carolina's. Much like US did through PIT and PHL before the bankruptcies and restructuring and realignment of hubs.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Sorry, Johnny, but the reason why US wanted to dump its slots at LGA was because there were a handful of markets from NYC where it still had the size on the "other end" of the route to command sufficient amounts of traffic on the flight. Cities in the Carolinas and Virginia were the few places outside of US hubs where US had strength in NYC.
US pulled out of many of the largest LGA markets in the early 2000s including the Florida market. Florida markets can be low yielding but remember that there are huge numbers of commuters that work in NYC but live elsewhere including in FLA. They don't all pay trash fares.
In fact, DOT data shows that DL's average fares at LGA were slightly higher than US' at DCA, even given the longer distances from NYC to most of the top destinations.
US used the majority of its slots at LGA to fly dozens of times per day to PHL and on turboprop aircraft to cities around NYC, but LGA was not a hub for US as DL has made it. DCA was a hub for US before the slot deal and they have used
NYC is the number one destination for almost every city in the eastern US... despite US' attempts to say that NYC doesn't matter, it is the largest market.
But more specific to this conversation, DL used the much larger number of slots it gained from US compared to what US gained from DL in order to add new flights in markets up and down the east coast, including into key US markets.
AA/Eagle also has flown LGA to a number of key US markets including CLT.
The simple fact is that DL also used its slots to add service into virtually every market from LGA that every other carrier serves from LGA as well in an attempt to provide little room for any carrier to have an advantage over DL in NYC; most of those same markets are served nonstop by UA from EWR as well.
DOT data also shows that US obtained decent average fares in many of the point to point markets it flew with RJs from LGA... the problem was that there were way more slots than US could use.
It is well known that hubs allow carriers to gain greater power to compete in the local market because of the connecting passengers that flow thru the hub.
It is also well established that LGA is the first choice among the NYC airports for every market that can be served from LGA.
While CO/UA has had a dominant position at EWR for years, LGA and JFK have been split among multiple carriers for years.
DL's strategy at NYC was to add a domestic hub at LGA just as B6 has at JFK and UA has at EWR but to use the preferred airport status of LGA to gain a revenue advantage over other carriers and in so doing free up some of its slots at JFK to add flights that could only be flown from JFK.
US' strategy at DCA is similar to DL's at LGA.... the simple difference is that LGA average fares are higher to comparable markets, NYC is a larger market overall, and DL has both longhaul and shorthaul service from two airports while US has only the shorthaul service from DCA.
To argue that DL's service will fail at LGA while US' will succeed at DCA is not only a poor rendering of every fact that both companies presented in arguing for the slot deal but also the realities of each market.
DL is simply a larger airline and better able to compete in a larger market like NYC while US had an established position at DCA on which it could build.
US traded away what it could not use to DL who will gain far more in terms of its ability to advance in a market that was more fragmented than DCA where US already had a decent position but was able to use what DL decided could best be swapped away for more LGA slots.
Since there aren't a whole lot of cities that have nonstop int'l service, I'm not sure what the point is about carrying int'l traffic... it is going to connect on some airline somewhere.
Industry data shows that the carrier that has the largest domestic presence from a city usually gets a higher percentage of the int'l traffic - as long as it is to a region of the world where that carrier competes.
DL is simply a larger airline than US and is heavily concentrated in the eastern US via its hubs at LGA/JFK, DTW, and ATL each of which have international service to multiple continents.
US pulled out of many of the largest LGA markets in the early 2000s including the Florida market. Florida markets can be low yielding but remember that there are huge numbers of commuters that work in NYC but live elsewhere including in FLA. They don't all pay trash fares.
In fact, DOT data shows that DL's average fares at LGA were slightly higher than US' at DCA, even given the longer distances from NYC to most of the top destinations.
US used the majority of its slots at LGA to fly dozens of times per day to PHL and on turboprop aircraft to cities around NYC, but LGA was not a hub for US as DL has made it. DCA was a hub for US before the slot deal and they have used
NYC is the number one destination for almost every city in the eastern US... despite US' attempts to say that NYC doesn't matter, it is the largest market.
But more specific to this conversation, DL used the much larger number of slots it gained from US compared to what US gained from DL in order to add new flights in markets up and down the east coast, including into key US markets.
AA/Eagle also has flown LGA to a number of key US markets including CLT.
The simple fact is that DL also used its slots to add service into virtually every market from LGA that every other carrier serves from LGA as well in an attempt to provide little room for any carrier to have an advantage over DL in NYC; most of those same markets are served nonstop by UA from EWR as well.
DOT data also shows that US obtained decent average fares in many of the point to point markets it flew with RJs from LGA... the problem was that there were way more slots than US could use.
It is well known that hubs allow carriers to gain greater power to compete in the local market because of the connecting passengers that flow thru the hub.
It is also well established that LGA is the first choice among the NYC airports for every market that can be served from LGA.
While CO/UA has had a dominant position at EWR for years, LGA and JFK have been split among multiple carriers for years.
DL's strategy at NYC was to add a domestic hub at LGA just as B6 has at JFK and UA has at EWR but to use the preferred airport status of LGA to gain a revenue advantage over other carriers and in so doing free up some of its slots at JFK to add flights that could only be flown from JFK.
US' strategy at DCA is similar to DL's at LGA.... the simple difference is that LGA average fares are higher to comparable markets, NYC is a larger market overall, and DL has both longhaul and shorthaul service from two airports while US has only the shorthaul service from DCA.
To argue that DL's service will fail at LGA while US' will succeed at DCA is not only a poor rendering of every fact that both companies presented in arguing for the slot deal but also the realities of each market.
DL is simply a larger airline and better able to compete in a larger market like NYC while US had an established position at DCA on which it could build.
US traded away what it could not use to DL who will gain far more in terms of its ability to advance in a market that was more fragmented than DCA where US already had a decent position but was able to use what DL decided could best be swapped away for more LGA slots.
Since there aren't a whole lot of cities that have nonstop int'l service, I'm not sure what the point is about carrying int'l traffic... it is going to connect on some airline somewhere.
Industry data shows that the carrier that has the largest domestic presence from a city usually gets a higher percentage of the int'l traffic - as long as it is to a region of the world where that carrier competes.
DL is simply a larger airline than US and is heavily concentrated in the eastern US via its hubs at LGA/JFK, DTW, and ATL each of which have international service to multiple continents.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
WN just announced that it will no longer serve CLT from ATL, along with ROC and FNT, cities that have all been served by FL from ATL.
WN will serve those cities along w/ PWM from WN's major focus cities including MDW and BWI in the eastern US, HOU in the south, as well as MCO and TPA.
Validates what I have said that DL and WN manage to do their own thing, stay out of each other's way, and focus their competitive energies on other carriers.
WN will serve those cities along w/ PWM from WN's major focus cities including MDW and BWI in the eastern US, HOU in the south, as well as MCO and TPA.
Validates what I have said that DL and WN manage to do their own thing, stay out of each other's way, and focus their competitive energies on other carriers.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
ok...but DL does call LGA and JFK both hubs which I presume means that DL was able to create a hub at LGA after the slot swap using an average of 250 flights/day while US didn't do the same at DCA with an average of 230 flts/day.
Please remember that the topic is CLT where WN is reducing its footprint competitive w/ DL while adding additional service in a key UA/US market.
Please remember that the topic is CLT where WN is reducing its footprint competitive w/ DL while adding additional service in a key UA/US market.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
I corrected WRONG information YOU posted.
And you brought up WN, B6 and everything else under the sun, take your own advice.
Its about CLT, you brought up LGA, International flying and lots of things that have nothing to do with the OP's original post.
And you brought up WN, B6 and everything else under the sun, take your own advice.
Its about CLT, you brought up LGA, International flying and lots of things that have nothing to do with the OP's original post.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
correction accepted... DCA is not a hub for US.
Note that other people responded to the information I replied even if it wasn't related to the original topic. That is exactly the same trend we have seen elsewhere where you seem to want to limit the conversation to the original topic.
Problem is, not many other people seem to care AND if you were really serious about thread drift you would push the issue in MULTIPLE forums and with multiple members of the forum.
But since you don't do that, your bias is obvious.
And, once again, WN is reducing its competitive footprint w/ DL but increasing it in US competitive markets. It would seem that fact should be of least some concern to you given that WN now is the dominant carrier in multiple former US hubs.
Note that other people responded to the information I replied even if it wasn't related to the original topic. That is exactly the same trend we have seen elsewhere where you seem to want to limit the conversation to the original topic.
Problem is, not many other people seem to care AND if you were really serious about thread drift you would push the issue in MULTIPLE forums and with multiple members of the forum.
But since you don't do that, your bias is obvious.
And, once again, WN is reducing its competitive footprint w/ DL but increasing it in US competitive markets. It would seem that fact should be of least some concern to you given that WN now is the dominant carrier in multiple former US hubs.
