Forbes Article on Trainer

again, you can't understand that companies can gain benefit from projects even that ended.

Was AA's presence at DAL a strategic failure when it used 56 passenger configured Fokkers or whatever they used?

no. it helped them accomplish what they needed to at the time.

too many here think only in short-term results and without considering the longer term outcome of decisions.

and I will admit the same thing about AA and LAX and Asia if they actually turn the corner and establish a viable, profitable presence that increases their local market share and revenue. so far, AA's growth in the LAX market is attributable to the merger, not the increase in its flight activity.
 
WorldTraveler said:
again, you can't understand that companies can gain benefit from projects even that ended.

Was AA's presence at DAL a strategic failure when it used 56 passenger configured Fokkers or whatever they used?
 
I'd love to read your spin on the benefit(s) of Song and DL Express.  Specifically, please use facts (i.e. numbers, etc.) about how Song and DL Expresses harmed jetBlue and/or AirTran.  Also, please don't forget to explain why, if these projects were such a raging success, why they were scrapped. 
With respect to AA's decision to use 56-seat F100 out of DAL:  given that Legend ceased operations in less than a year, then I would argue that the 56-seat F100 along with the lawsuits accomplished their purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I didn't say they were raging successes.

I said that even though they were likely not profitable, they allowed DL to hold onto market share in a highly competitive market.

Both strategies were pre-BK strategies that DL used until it and the US industry overall decided that airline within airline strategies don't work. Interestingly, AC is now trying it even on int'l routes. we'll see how well it works out for them but they are using Rouge to serve markets they could not sustain by AC alone.

Ted did the same thing for UA in DEN.

and you need only look at DL's share of the NYC to Florida market relative to B6 to know that DL is better off today than if DL had simply folded up and left those markets.

and overall Song gave DL to refocus its entire NYC strategy and focus not just on leisure markets but on the entire market... and DL carries the most local NYC passengers of any US airline. (and I don't want to hear about UA's largest total numbers - they carry far more connecting passengers THRU NYC which could just as easily transfer in PHL or DCA or ATL or any other east coast hub.)

and given that AA did not operate from DAL but leased out its gates to DL, I'm not sure that AA's "win" against Legend is as meaningful as you want. If AA had served DAL with its own aircraft (or even large RJs configured in 56 seats) until it had to leave because of the DOJ settlement, then you might have a point.

nonetheless, I can see the benefit that AA got from fighting for DAL. It's a shame that you can't recognize the same thing for Song or DL Express or Ted.

Neither Song or DL Express was targeted at AirTran. DL used mainline and DCI to compete with FL from ATL which is where DL's competitive focus with FL was centered.
 
WorldTraveler said:
I said that even though they were likely not profitable, they allowed DL to hold onto market share in a highly competitive market.


Both strategies were pre-BK strategies that DL used until it and the US industry overall decided that airline within airline strategies don't work. Interestingly, AC is now trying it even on int'l routes. we'll see how well it works out for them but they are using Rouge to serve markets they could not sustain by AC alone.

and you need only look at DL's share of the NYC to Florida market relative to B6 to know that DL is better off today than if DL had simply folded up and left those markets.

and overall Song gave DL to refocus its entire NYC strategy and focus not just on leisure markets but on the entire market...
 
1.  Actually, it looks like AC is copying the (failed?) strategy of DL:  just as Song replaced DL Express, it appears that AC is trying to accomplish with Rouge what it failed to accomplish with Zip and Tango a decade earlier. To be fair, LH is trying the same strategy in Europe with Germanwings as is AF/KL with Transavia. 
 
I guess there is always somebody that thinks it can work, despite evidence to the contrary (NY Air, CO Lite, Shuttle by UA, Metrojet, DL Express/Song, Ted),
 
2.  I knew you could do it - spin out a positive from the DL Express/Song failure!
 
Since AA is the only legacy that didn't try an airline within an airline strategy but instead just gave up market share, the alternative is clear... and not one that other carriers are willing to accept.

I don't generally think airline within airline strategies will be successful on a long-term basis but I am willing to give AC the benefit of the doubt about whether they can make it work and do the same with LH and AF etc.

You do realize that BA and IB have airline within strategies as well, don't you?

the difference between me and you is that I can pull back to see the big picture and even if it doesn't deliver 100%, I can see what it does deliver. you only see life in black and white/success and failure.

btw, you do realize that crude oil continues to increase in trading today and the airlines as a whole are down?

further, are you also aware that the United Steelworkers are on strike against a number of refineries which will force up the cost of refined products even if crude oil remains down. Feel free to confirm for me but I don't believe Trainer is one of the refineries that the USW is striking.
 
FrugalFlyerv2.0 said:
 
butt-wink-squat.gif

 
 
 
But these are facts:
DL paid $180 million to purchase the refinery in 2012 and the operation suffered a $63 million loss.  Then DL tossed in $52 million in 2014 to result in a $116 million loss.  Finally, in 2014 the refinery was marginally profitable, but only after DL sunk in another $40 million.
 
 
And let's not forget the millions upon millions Delta spent on fighting the EPA in a huge law suit case that guess what?  Delta loss.  I bet 2014's minimal profit is now a break even or even still a loss when all monies are calculated in direct reference of the oil refinery.  Even the pres of Delta said it was a mistake and they were experiencing "teething problems"  
Any negative postings about Delta are of course wrong and not factual according to him.  But he is the first one to chime in "every freakin time" when someone post a positive about their own airline (other than Delta) and try to make that airline look bad.  Even analyst posted that the finery purchase was a disaster purchase from the get go.  Typical WT/Delta propaganda...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
how about a quote with the Pres. of DL saying it was a mistake, por favor.

I expect people who argue points to do so with all the facts. Whether DL is losing money on the refinery or not, the author didn't begin to present a credible argument to show it, including by mixing hedge gains/losses with an assessment of how the refinery is doing.

the fact that you and others aren't capable of understanding the fallacy of the author's argument speaks more about your ability to converse on the subject than mine
 
WorldTraveler said:
Since AA is the only legacy that didn't try an airline within an airline strategy but instead just gave up market share, the alternative is clear... and not one that other carriers are willing to accept.

I don't generally think airline within airline strategies will be successful on a long-term basis but I am willing to give AC the benefit of the doubt about whether they can make it work and do the same with LH and AF etc.

You do realize that BA and IB have airline within strategies as well, don't you?

the difference between me and you is that I can pull back to see the big picture and even if it doesn't deliver 100%, I can see what it does deliver. you only see life in black and white/success and failure.

btw, you do realize that crude oil continues to increase in trading today and the airlines as a whole are down?

further, are you also aware that the United Steelworkers are on strike against a number of refineries which will force up the cost of refined products even if crude oil remains down. Feel free to confirm for me but I don't believe Trainer is one of the refineries that the USW is striking.
 
Sorry I forgot about Vueling.
 
A comparison between AC Rouge, Ted, Song, vs Vueling, Transavia, German is not entirely straightforward. 
 
Rouge, Ted, Song are entities carved out from the parent carrier (AC, UA, DL planes + crews operating at lower wages).
Vueling, Transavia, Germanwings were companies that had their own aircraft and crews that were acquired by IAG, KL/AF, LH that were kept operating as separate entities and never integrated into the parent. 
In the case of Transavia, it was mostly a charter operator that was acquired by KLM.  Now AF is trying to offload its European short haul flights Transavia because its crews are paid so much less.  Eurowings was a low-cost regional airline acquired by LH, renamed Germanwings, and it will soon operate LH's short haul European flights. 
 
As usual, you have done a great job deflecting from the mistake that DL made in acquiring a refinery to talking about how airline within an airline is a failure - except for DL.
 
Ofcourse you will never admit DL management may have made a mistake, it could never be so in your world - despite the overwhelming evidence stating it may be a mistake.
 
And as usual, you throw in a useless factoid such as a steelworkers strike or the general inverse correlation between the price of crude oil and airline stocks.  But this is your shades of grey world where now you're going to blather about how smart you are. 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
no, you are going back a decade to try to find a strategy that didn't work despite the obvious reality that DL managed to grow into the largest airline in the NYC local market - and they could not have done it if they ran from markets and left them to B6. You won't understand it so don't try to argue otherwise.

Besides, your point is to try to argue a point about DL's network strategies - which have been far more successful than any US legacy carriers' - in hopes of trying to argue that the refinery doesn't make sense.

I wouldn't expect you to grasp the fact that unionized refineries face labor issues which DL's owned refinery may not. Nor would I expect you to understand that increases in the price of crude will hurt carriers that don't hedge while helping those who do hedge as well as diminishing the value of bad hedges that those carriers have.

those facts aren't really shades of gray at all... they are black and white. The fact that you don't understand the effect of strikes on supplies and movements in crude oil on airline stocks says a whole lot more about you than me.
 
WorldTraveler said:
how about a quote with the Pres. of DL saying it was a mistake, por favor.
 
I think swamt is referring to this quote from the article: 
 
"It did moderate jet fuel prices for Delta–but also for every other airline flying out of New York and Philly. For that altruistic move, maybe Delta ought to pass the hat: In 2012 Delta invested $180 million to modernize the plant–which generated a $63 million loss. In 2013 it added $52 million in fresh cap ex–with a $116 million loss. Late that year company president Ed Bastian said the refinery had experienced some “teething pains.”"
 
Now I know you're going to jump all over this and say but but but but he didn't say it was a mistake. 
The easy retort would be that if Song = brilliant strategy to win NY then teething pains = mistake.
Afterall, it is proper to see things not in black and white but in shades of grey, right?
 
jcw said:
eh. Everyone keeps telling Delta how stupid it is
 
 
and it keeps posting profits. 
 
 
it is amazing to me that this is what people want to focus on. Not years of losses due to piss poor choices on the airline side but a refinery that is cents on the dollar to Delta. Not hard to figure out why the airline industry is such a s**t show. 
 
WorldTraveler said:
no, you are going back a decade to try to find a strategy that didn't work despite the obvious reality that DL managed to grow into the largest airline in the NYC local market - and they could not have done it if they ran from markets and left them to B6. You won't understand it so don't try to argue otherwise.

Besides, your point is to try to argue a point about DL's network strategies - which have been far more successful than any US legacy carriers' - in hopes of trying to argue that the refinery doesn't make sense.

I wouldn't expect you to grasp the fact that unionized refineries face labor issues which DL's owned refinery may not. Nor would I expect you to understand that increases in the price of crude will hurt carriers that don't hedge while helping those who do hedge as well as diminishing the value of bad hedges that those carriers have.

those facts aren't really shades of gray at all... they are black and white. The fact that you don't understand the effect of strikes on supplies and movements in crude oil on airline stocks says a whole lot more about you than me.
 
DL grew into its strong position in NY due to the slot deal with US.  Not due to DL Express/Song.  To try to spin otherwise is outright lying.  Ofcourse somebody who had a career that spanned 2 decades in aviation should grasp that.
 
grasping-at-straws1.jpg

 
Since now you're an expert in both labor relations and crude oil/refineries/petrochemicals, why don't you tell us:
1.  how long strike(s) have to go on for jet fuel prices to jump
2.  what price does crude oil have to be at so that carriers that don't own a refinery start to lose money
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
and that is NOT an admission that the refinery investment was a mistake.

since you can't see the value in DL's use of Song and DL Express to maintain share, then I would ask you where the success is in AA and US' strategies in NYC which has watched their shares individually before and even since the merger shrink?

The slot deal absolutely helped DL in NYC but DL had already passed AA before the slot deal went thru. You won't understand it but DL could not have built its presence in NYC before or after the slot swap if it had walked away from the Florida markets or sustained even larger losses operating them with mainline which was a higher cost operation than DL Express or Song.

I don't know when ANY prices will jump and the refinery owners are saying they will keep the refineries operating - including with mgmt. labor... but if labor turmoil hits the refinery sector or even a segment of it, costs for users will go up. see the Wall Street Journal today if you don't understand the concept.
 
WorldTraveler said:
no, you are going back a decade to try to find a strategy that didn't work despite the obvious reality that DL managed to grow into the largest airline in the NYC local market - and they could not have done it if they ran from markets and left them to B6. You won't understand it so don't try to argue otherwise.Besides, your point is to try to argue a point about DL's network strategies - which have been far more successful than any US legacy carriers' - in hopes of trying to argue that the refinery doesn't make sense.I wouldn't expect you to grasp the fact that unionized refineries face labor issues which DL's owned refinery may not. Nor would I expect you to understand that increases in the price of crude will hurt carriers that don't hedge while helping those who do hedge as well as diminishing the value of bad hedges that those carriers have.those facts aren't really shades of gray at all... they are black and white. The fact that you don't understand the effect of strikes on supplies and movements in crude oil on airline stocks says a whole lot more about you than me.
And how many years did DL lose money in the nyc market ?? When other airlines are developing their strategys or new markets its a failure ?? Even Stevie Wonder can see you are a complete contradiction, a fraud, and a troll !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
WorldTraveler said:
since you can't see the value in DL's use of Song and DL Express to maintain share, then I would ask you where the success is in AA and US' strategies in NYC which has watched their shares individually before and even since the merger shrink?

The slot deal absolutely helped DL in NYC but DL had already passed AA before the slot deal went thru. You won't understand it but DL could not have built its presence in NYC before or after the slot swap if it had walked away from the Florida markets or sustained even larger losses operating them with mainline which was a higher cost operation than DL Express or Song.
 
We'll have to disagree on Song and the US-DL slot swap.
 
All you have to look at is how jetBlue grew despite of Song.
The way I see it:  DL Express + DL Song = major contributor to DL chapter 11 filing
To say anything positive about the Song concept/experience is just flat out wrong.
 
With respect to the DL-US slot swap, IMHO it was for DL probably a better deal, a better value than what DL got via their stake in VS. 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people