An extensive analysis of Delta
- Thread starter WorldTraveler
- Start date
Me think I touched a nerve that probably came from drinkin so much Delda KOOL-AID...poor thing!
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #18
After more than 7 years of participating in various airline discussion forums, I can classify the participants into 4 groups:
1. Employees or family members of the industry who largely participate because of the economic connections they have to aviation and the need to speak out, like most people, on things that matter to them at the most basic levels. Most of this group are able to meaningfully participate in the arenas of the industry that impact their lives and generally do not try to discuss larger scale, strategic issues about which they are not trained or experienced. Most online airline employees are rational but tend to be cynical, esp. in the airline industry where employees have incurred the brunt of cost cuts over the past 30 years.
2. Fans which does include some of the above. Often have strong loyalty to one carrier or another. Often get excited about lots of aspects of the industry but do not have the experience or knowledge to understand why things in the industry actually happen.
3. Big picture people sometimes management plants or those with former management experience but also very frequent flyers with business experience who understand the BUSINESS of aviation.
4. Naysayers and critics who rarely can find anything positive and who use internet chat forums as a mechanism for expressing their disdain for either specific people, the companies they support, or the companies themselves.
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that most of the responses to my discussion here have been from people who fall into group 4.
Despite repeated invitations to engage me and discuss specific topics, all they have been able to do is throw criticisms. The only reason why I am not surprised is because I know the posting style of each of the people after the first several and know they havent contributed anything of substance to this discussion forum and apparently dont have the ability or knowledge to coherently discuss the actual topic at hand.After 7 years of posting, I also know full well that I am going to say things that make some people uncomfortable. I have never hesitated to speak my mind often with emotion; many people in aviation dont want someone to tell them the truth, esp. if it does not bode well for their preferred airline.
It is worth noting that much of my criticism of other airlines is of those at the top tier of the US airline industry American and United. Both called themselves the worlds largest airline at one time and were. But both have made significant strategic missteps which have allowed more nimble competitors, including DL, to overtake them.
A look at the AA forum today will show that AMR is one of the most hated large companies in the United States ranked poorly by its customers, investors, AND employees. Of the 15 companies mentioned as the most hated in America, AA and UA are both on the list.
While AA continues to struggle with a lack of a ability to turn the company around and find a viable business plan including working cooperatively with labor, after the longest and most expensive bankruptcy in US airline history, UA was able to leapfrog DL as its more nimble network carrier by buying CO, the most successful US airline of the 90s. Yet DL is already on the verge of overtaking the new UA in both NYC and to Asia, markets where UA and or CO before had enormous advantages to DL. And if DL succeeds at a couple of strategic moves such as the LGA slot swap, AS acquisition, or development of a S. Florida Latin America gateway, UAs advantage gained through the merger is even more fleeting. And yet people are somehow surprised when I note that DL has a real possibility of overtaking its larger competitors in more dimensions than just size once again.
A discussion of DL and its fans and critics cannot exclude the deep reality that DL is probably one of the most disliked companies in the US among organized labor and its supporters. With the NW merger, DL set out to eliminate the labor-mgmt rancor that was part of the internal (and oftentimes external) NW experience for years and which continues to paralyze AA. Further, it is a miscalculation of UA/CO mgmts assessment of how easy it will be to merge UA and CO that will significantly limit the new UA. Whether you like what DL has done or not doesnt change the fact that they have succeeded pending essentially the final paperwork at what they intended to do with respect to maintaining DLs labor-mgmt relations and replacing those of NWs. It doesnt take a brain scientist to realize that DL will never be well-regarded by many specifically for what it has done to organized labor in the airline industry and given that this board is heavily frequently by pro-labor participants, I dont expect there will be any parties for DL anytime soon.
But there are plenty of pro-labor people on this forum who wont say anything positive about DL and I dont expect them to based on their own view of the industry - but who at least are smart enough to not criticize DL because they know there is validity to what I am saying.
There are no shortage of people on this forum who, like me, fit into group 3 above. Most like me have a preferred carrier as well; few have the resources to the do analysis I have done here.
I have been called a DL loyalist (to put it nicely) for years but that doesnt change the fact of what I have discussed.
The simple fact is that I expect to be judged on what I have written; I have posted excerpts from several posts that are 5 or more years old to show that I was just as bullish on my outlook about DL then as I am now. But it should also be noted that my estimation of where DL was going was pretty accurate. Thats not surprising when you actually understand the nature of the business and what drives it more than being focused on day to day events.
So let me share a few excerpts from my posts, particularly around the 2004-2005 period when the industry was headed into a downturn which ended up with NW and DL in BK, filing on the same day in the same bankruptcy court.
Since the time I wrote, CO has been acquired by UA which continues to shrink the UA side of the operation in favor of CO because of COs lower costs; while AA struggles to find its own future, while also losing money and market position along with employee and customer loyalty. UA could be the best competition DL has but it is a long way from where UA/CO are right now to being a full fledged airline able to fully focus on being competitive with DL. US surprisingly is in the best position; at least their mgmt. has been honest about their strategic limitations and has built a company that works around what they have. WNs heyday expansion driven by fuel edging has ended, their costs are creeping up almost to levels comparable with DL, and they are now experiencing the same operational problems network carriers, and are once again banking on a merger to provide the strategic kickstart that they need despite failing at their only other major mergers (Muse Air).
Can DL lose its momentum and fall from leadership of the industry in the same way AA and UA did before? You better believe it. And when DL makes missteps that threaten its ability to continue its strategic leadership, then by all means lets discuss it. What is clear in this industry is that there a few strategic blunders that effect the outcome of the industry for a very long time; but as in life, more often than not opportunities open up and close because of long term patterns and choices, which repeatedly fail to address strategic needs.
But once again the invitation is to discuss topics of substance and not resort to character assassination. But I also have to recognize that in the absence of being able to engage in a meaningful discussion, that is all some people can do.
21 July 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/20796-2nd-qrtr-numbers/page__st__8
One thing I've learned since following this industry nearly 30 years ago is that Delta has always been the underdog - never had the sexy route structure, large markets, or political connections but somehow has outlived some of the big names of the industry including its far-better healed competitor Eastern and become the third largest airline in the US. There's something about Delta's DNA that many of you simply do not understand.
HG,
let me address each of your issues.
1. CVG and SLC have small LOCAL markets but they are very efficient and carry extraordinary amounts of connecting traffic - far beyond the size any comparably sized city has for service by any other airline anywhere in the world. Name a city comparable to CVG that has daily service to five Europe destinations during the peak summer travel season? Delta knows how to build hubs very well; they just scale them to the size of the local markets. ATL is a much bigger city and has far more air service by one carrier and its affiliates than any other city on the planet.
2. I'd like to see DL have a stronger west coast presence but that doesn't doom it. CO has even less presence in the western US but no one thinks they are on the verge of failure. There is a principle that good people and businesses make the best of the cards they are dealt. Delta has done an extraordinary job with the smaller business markets/larger leisure markets and increased low cost competition it faces.
3. To most of us, 400 RJs seem a bit excessive but that is how DL has developed its smaller secondary cities with so much connecting traffic. More recently, DL has deployed dozens of RJs in point to point flying overflying not only DL's hubs but also other airline's hubs. In the airline business, the carrier that has nonstop service usually dominates the market. DL's RJs allow it to serve dozens of markets nonstop that no one now or in the future will serve. Those are markets DL owns. There are never too many assets for something that profitably allows DL to own those markets. Based on the loads DL carries in and out of Florida and the statistics DL provides the DOT, they do in fact take ownership of the markets they begin unique RJ service in. If you doubt that, just look at the shrinkage going on by US Airways in the SE. DL not only has a stronger hub structure serving those cities but also has point to point RJ service to the top markets. Point your cursor over to the US board and read what US employees have to say about what DL has done to Greensboro, a former US stronghold. It's just one of many.
4. see #2. same logic. DL is the dominant airline to continental Europe and serves a number of markets which no other airline serves. Right now, Asia is not what DL does. NW doesn't do South America but Delta does. CO and UA don't do the SE but DL does.
5. I'd like to see London (actually any airport would do) from the NE on the DL network. New terminals won't make or break DL or any airline. Actually, AA will be paying more than $20 per passenger for their terminal at JFK; there is no way AA can be competitive with B6 in many markets when 10% or more of the average fare ends up in terminal expenses. Also, JFK is one of the few terminals in DL's network that are significantly below par. Given the terminal building boom that is going on and the growth of LCCs, DL's antiquated facilities at JFK might look pretty attractive when it comes to competing. As DL stabilizes financially and their presence at JFK grows, I'm sure they'll commit to even more improvements at JFK ABOVE and BEYOND the ones that are in the pipeline now.
6. False. Most of DL's cash is NOT restricted. read the financial statements before you make assertions like that. Your credibility goes to pieces when you spout inaccuracies. Let me point you in the right direction:
http://biz.yahoo.com...h013a.html?.v=1
Like all legacy airlines, DL has a significant amount of debt. Unlike others, DL has considerable flexibility by being largely non-union that allow DL to do things like change pensions without getting into the battles such as have happened at UA and now NW. DL will be spending alot of money on debt service but will be able to do that because of the productivity of their employees and their more efficient operation.
In fact, just six months into DL's restructuring, it has achieved a CASM BELOW AA and CO's mainline operation. Did you catch that? DL is a lower cost producer than either AA or CO, the two airlines everyone thinks will be most likely to win.
In this business, the lowest cost producer wins and it also gets rewarded with being able to manage more assets.
DL also has considerable tax assets (mentioned in a previous posting) that will allow DL to avoid paying income taxes for years to come. Bet you didn't bothe to notice that JetBlue will send a check to Uncle Sam and his friends that amounts to a whopping 45% of their income before taxes. Doesn't that just suck working so hard and giving almost half of it to the government.
No, life is no bed of roses for DL but to think that any of the six reasons you mention will send them off the edge is itself not in touch with reality.
--
Finally, if Delta has been able to cut costs this dramatically OUTSIDE of bankruptcy, you don't want to know what it can do with the benefits of bankruptcy on its side. If the lowest cost producer chooses to go into bankruptcy and further cut costs and shore up its balance sheet, everyone else is in serious trouble.
18 July 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/20563-anybody-heard-the-dl-merger-rumor/
NW is at a crossroads in its existence for sure. They have major issues confronting them - perhaps more than any other airline so far: labor strife (nothing terribly new for NW but the fragile economy could turn any hiccup into pneumonia), high fuel prices with a fleet that is 1/3 composed of inefficient aircraft, alliance jockeying, plus being the last of the legacies to restructure.
There are many positive things that could be said about a DL-NW merger but one thing can be said: it will require alot of outside help to pull off. It doesn't appear that CO is real interested in playing the merger game as acquiree which leaves NW's future even more cloudy if consolidation occurs but CO could easily do something with either NW or UA with outside help. Realistically, DL and NW need someone more than CO does. Lots of AA people think AA would go after NW but I'm not sure they would be willing to pay the price of absorbing all of NW just to get the beyond Japan rights since AA already has a fairly significant presence to/from NRT. Further, the gov't might have problems with the size of AA's midwest presence if they combined w/ NW and it isn't realistic to think they would buy NW and tell the gov't they are selling off the midwest hubs in order to get the deal passed. In contrast, neither CO or DL have a significant enough midwest presence to really pose a threat when combined with NW. CVG, while a good sized hub, is largely connecting traffic.
It is very possible that part of NW's strategy if anything goes wrong in the restructuring game is to head to bankruptcy court, torch all kinds of contracts, and put themselves up for sale.
28 August 2005 and following
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21382-katrina-assures-that-delta-wont-be-alone/
Katrina has already been called one of the most powerful hurricanes ever. 1/3 of Gulf of Mexico oil production has already been taken down and it is very likely that some of that capacity will be damaged and cannot be quickly returned to service after the storm passes. Oil will certainly be the first flight for takeoff on Monday morning. Oil in the mid-$70s is almost certain and $80 is not at all out of the realm of possibililty.
Those kind of oil prices will ensure that Delta will not be the only airline filing chapter 11 in the near future; in fact, AA and CO might not want to get too comforable on the sidelines.
You can bet that the petroleum infrastructure (and shipping from the Port of New Orleans although that is less of an issue to the airlines) will return to service as quickly as possible. Oil companies will make money by returning capacity to service, although prices could continue to go up. We still haven't heard any reports on damage to oil production facilities offshore so that is still a big wildcard.
All of this only confirms that DL will be in bankruptcy soon but so will alot of other airlines. The events of this summer and esp. this last week will have a lasting impact on the economy; it may well be that airlines that go into service now will fare better than those that wait.
5 Sept 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21561-a-new-business-plan-must-be-forthcoming/
We have passed another weekend and Delta has not filed for chapter 11 which leads me to believe it won't have for two more weekends since I doubt if they will file on the weekend of 9/11. Regardless of whether a bankruptcy filing is coming, there is no doubt that a large scale business plan change is needed and will be coming. I also believe DL realizes bankruptcy doesn't alter the need for change.
I believe changes will be announced soon, perhaps this week, along these lines:
Network - DL has hinted at additional service from JFK and to Latin America. Some of these are with new aircraft but some are with existing aircraft which probably means some reallocation is coming. I think it is likely that DL will thin its presence in Florida and possibly CVG and SLC.
Although crude oil is settling back a bit, I have not heard anything to say that jet fuel is coming off of its elevated heights. $2 plus jet fuel was unimaginable just a couple months ago and will require major and lasting changes at every airline.
Personnel - layoffs are quite likely but I think it is also likely that DL will change personnel policies so as to make employee careers more short-lived for many employee groups. I believe Song has personnel policies like JetBlue's which requires employees to leave after a few years. Someone correct/ enlighten me on both carriers' policies.
Fleet and financing - both of these are probably more closely tied to a chapter 11 filing but I think it is possible but probably a stretch that DL could succeed at an out of court restructuring. Either way, the fleet will change and debt will be restructured inside or outside of bankruptcy.
Because this business is so competitive, whatever changes DL makes will almost certainly require a response by other carriers. Being largely non-union, DL does have an advantage that they can make some HR related changes that other carriers cannot. The next few weeks will be interesting
The reality is that DL has done far more network restructuring outside of BK than any other airline has in BK. Given that network is the largest determinant of an airline's success, they are doing what needs to be done. While costs have to come down, DL has largely shown that it can get that under control as good as if not better than competitors. These moves will go a long ways toward fixing DL's revenue underperformance relative to the industry.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21767-how-will-southwest-respond/
16 Sept 2005
My response to rumors that WN would move into ATL:
There aren't enough gates in ATL right now. Airtran wants more gates but can't obtain them. WN would not try to step into a market as big as ATL without being able to significantly grow it. Further, there are LCCs in every major WN market from ATL already.
DL and NW aren't cutting capacity in their local markets; they are cutting connecting capacity. DL had a very low percentage of local traffic in DFW and a very high percentage of flow traffic in CVG relative to the size of the local market which DL dominated. The legacies have O&D revenue management systems and O&D controls that allow them to determine how much local vs. flow traffic they take. DL could reduce capacity in ATL by 20% (not saying nor is there any indication that they are) but still be fully competitive w/ every carrier on nonstop flights out of ATL - and any other hub. With the exception of some flow O&Ds which AirTran carries over ATL, most LCCs including WN and FL do not compete in the same flow markets that DL does.
WN and FL's statements only ensure that DL gets their capacity changes right so they help DL and not anyone else.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21748-delta-and-nwa/page__st__8
19 Sept 2005
Just a reminder that a company has the opportunity to create its own plan of reorganization and only if they fail, it is given over to the creditors. Therefore, an unsolicited merger is not likely. That's just the way bankruptcy works.
Bankruptcy is a process of maximizing the value to the creditors and that is rarely done by pulling out just a few assets - remember DL and NW are largely companies w/ significant assets and debts beyond their most lucrative assets. Also, shortcircuiting the bankruptcy process pulls value away from the creditors so it is very unlikely that they will support unsolicited bids for assets. It is also very unlikely that the creditors would be willing to allow bids for assets such as in TWA's final bankruptcy until it is shown that the company cannot successfully reorganize. Successful reorganizing is by far the best way to maximize creditor value.
If a merger between DL and NW happens, it will be because both airlines do what they have to do independently to get their businesses on track inside bankruptcy.
You also may be interested to know that the total size of DL and NW's international operations is about the same so far this year. However, DL is growing their international operation by shifting 767s from domestic to international flights - which they can do because they have a number of international capable 767s that are currently flying on the domestic system. Additionally, DL has talked about starting to fly 757s over the Atlantic so there are even more aircraft that could move from domestic to international operations.
NW has very few international aircraft that could move from domestic to international operations and in fact they are also removing older international aircraft from service such as the 747-200s that were flying JFKLAX (and had to be funded by cancelling JFKNRT). Although NW also has 757s, they do not have a NE gateway that could serve as a suitable gateway for transatlantic 757 service; DTW is probably suitable as a gateway for 757s to Europe only to cities in the UK and Ireland.
I think you will see DL become much more international in the next year. If being international is a determining factor in how quickly DL and NW return to profitability, DL is likely to win that contest.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21798-reports-are-that-dl-and-nw-will-merge/page__st__16
20 Sept 2005
Legally, DL and NW have to go through bankruptcy separately with no intention of merger. Only if it is determined that one or the other cannot emerge successfully on their own can they entertain a merger - which is exactly why US is merging in order to get out of bankruptcy. Assuming both DL and NW can show that they can reorganize and emerge as independent airlines, in order for them to merge, they have to show the court and both creditors committees have to agree that all creditors interests are at least as good with a merger as they would have been in a standalone operation.
There are some advantages to merging as part of the plan of reorganizaton - primarily around right sizing each airline to become a good partner. Many aircraft and facilities are not needed if they are to merge fairly quickly. But again, they have to convince the court and both sets of creditors that either one of them cannot emerge on its own or that the merger will give them at least as good of protection as they would have received if the airlines had emerged separately.
Bankruptcy experts pretty well say that airlines of the size of the legacy carriers need to take 18-24 months to get through the bankruptcy process if they plan of doing what has to be done to remain viable. As such, there will not likely be any decisions about mergers for probably a year at the earliest and then only with significant input from both sets of creditors. There is not alot of commonality between DL and NW's creditors - partially a reflection of the differences in their fleets.
The problem with NW's older aircraft is not noise but fuel economy. The DC-9 and DC-10 are at least 1.5 cents per ASM more expensive to operate than comparable current or even previous generation (MD-88/717) aircraft. NW will simply not be able to continue to operate aircraft with that kind of fuel penalty because other carriers will be able to reduce every other cost element to levels comparable with NW.
1. Employees or family members of the industry who largely participate because of the economic connections they have to aviation and the need to speak out, like most people, on things that matter to them at the most basic levels. Most of this group are able to meaningfully participate in the arenas of the industry that impact their lives and generally do not try to discuss larger scale, strategic issues about which they are not trained or experienced. Most online airline employees are rational but tend to be cynical, esp. in the airline industry where employees have incurred the brunt of cost cuts over the past 30 years.
2. Fans which does include some of the above. Often have strong loyalty to one carrier or another. Often get excited about lots of aspects of the industry but do not have the experience or knowledge to understand why things in the industry actually happen.
3. Big picture people sometimes management plants or those with former management experience but also very frequent flyers with business experience who understand the BUSINESS of aviation.
4. Naysayers and critics who rarely can find anything positive and who use internet chat forums as a mechanism for expressing their disdain for either specific people, the companies they support, or the companies themselves.
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that most of the responses to my discussion here have been from people who fall into group 4.
Despite repeated invitations to engage me and discuss specific topics, all they have been able to do is throw criticisms. The only reason why I am not surprised is because I know the posting style of each of the people after the first several and know they havent contributed anything of substance to this discussion forum and apparently dont have the ability or knowledge to coherently discuss the actual topic at hand.After 7 years of posting, I also know full well that I am going to say things that make some people uncomfortable. I have never hesitated to speak my mind often with emotion; many people in aviation dont want someone to tell them the truth, esp. if it does not bode well for their preferred airline.
It is worth noting that much of my criticism of other airlines is of those at the top tier of the US airline industry American and United. Both called themselves the worlds largest airline at one time and were. But both have made significant strategic missteps which have allowed more nimble competitors, including DL, to overtake them.
A look at the AA forum today will show that AMR is one of the most hated large companies in the United States ranked poorly by its customers, investors, AND employees. Of the 15 companies mentioned as the most hated in America, AA and UA are both on the list.
While AA continues to struggle with a lack of a ability to turn the company around and find a viable business plan including working cooperatively with labor, after the longest and most expensive bankruptcy in US airline history, UA was able to leapfrog DL as its more nimble network carrier by buying CO, the most successful US airline of the 90s. Yet DL is already on the verge of overtaking the new UA in both NYC and to Asia, markets where UA and or CO before had enormous advantages to DL. And if DL succeeds at a couple of strategic moves such as the LGA slot swap, AS acquisition, or development of a S. Florida Latin America gateway, UAs advantage gained through the merger is even more fleeting. And yet people are somehow surprised when I note that DL has a real possibility of overtaking its larger competitors in more dimensions than just size once again.
A discussion of DL and its fans and critics cannot exclude the deep reality that DL is probably one of the most disliked companies in the US among organized labor and its supporters. With the NW merger, DL set out to eliminate the labor-mgmt rancor that was part of the internal (and oftentimes external) NW experience for years and which continues to paralyze AA. Further, it is a miscalculation of UA/CO mgmts assessment of how easy it will be to merge UA and CO that will significantly limit the new UA. Whether you like what DL has done or not doesnt change the fact that they have succeeded pending essentially the final paperwork at what they intended to do with respect to maintaining DLs labor-mgmt relations and replacing those of NWs. It doesnt take a brain scientist to realize that DL will never be well-regarded by many specifically for what it has done to organized labor in the airline industry and given that this board is heavily frequently by pro-labor participants, I dont expect there will be any parties for DL anytime soon.
But there are plenty of pro-labor people on this forum who wont say anything positive about DL and I dont expect them to based on their own view of the industry - but who at least are smart enough to not criticize DL because they know there is validity to what I am saying.
There are no shortage of people on this forum who, like me, fit into group 3 above. Most like me have a preferred carrier as well; few have the resources to the do analysis I have done here.
I have been called a DL loyalist (to put it nicely) for years but that doesnt change the fact of what I have discussed.
The simple fact is that I expect to be judged on what I have written; I have posted excerpts from several posts that are 5 or more years old to show that I was just as bullish on my outlook about DL then as I am now. But it should also be noted that my estimation of where DL was going was pretty accurate. Thats not surprising when you actually understand the nature of the business and what drives it more than being focused on day to day events.
So let me share a few excerpts from my posts, particularly around the 2004-2005 period when the industry was headed into a downturn which ended up with NW and DL in BK, filing on the same day in the same bankruptcy court.
Since the time I wrote, CO has been acquired by UA which continues to shrink the UA side of the operation in favor of CO because of COs lower costs; while AA struggles to find its own future, while also losing money and market position along with employee and customer loyalty. UA could be the best competition DL has but it is a long way from where UA/CO are right now to being a full fledged airline able to fully focus on being competitive with DL. US surprisingly is in the best position; at least their mgmt. has been honest about their strategic limitations and has built a company that works around what they have. WNs heyday expansion driven by fuel edging has ended, their costs are creeping up almost to levels comparable with DL, and they are now experiencing the same operational problems network carriers, and are once again banking on a merger to provide the strategic kickstart that they need despite failing at their only other major mergers (Muse Air).
Can DL lose its momentum and fall from leadership of the industry in the same way AA and UA did before? You better believe it. And when DL makes missteps that threaten its ability to continue its strategic leadership, then by all means lets discuss it. What is clear in this industry is that there a few strategic blunders that effect the outcome of the industry for a very long time; but as in life, more often than not opportunities open up and close because of long term patterns and choices, which repeatedly fail to address strategic needs.
But once again the invitation is to discuss topics of substance and not resort to character assassination. But I also have to recognize that in the absence of being able to engage in a meaningful discussion, that is all some people can do.
21 July 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/20796-2nd-qrtr-numbers/page__st__8
One thing I've learned since following this industry nearly 30 years ago is that Delta has always been the underdog - never had the sexy route structure, large markets, or political connections but somehow has outlived some of the big names of the industry including its far-better healed competitor Eastern and become the third largest airline in the US. There's something about Delta's DNA that many of you simply do not understand.
HG,
let me address each of your issues.
1. CVG and SLC have small LOCAL markets but they are very efficient and carry extraordinary amounts of connecting traffic - far beyond the size any comparably sized city has for service by any other airline anywhere in the world. Name a city comparable to CVG that has daily service to five Europe destinations during the peak summer travel season? Delta knows how to build hubs very well; they just scale them to the size of the local markets. ATL is a much bigger city and has far more air service by one carrier and its affiliates than any other city on the planet.
2. I'd like to see DL have a stronger west coast presence but that doesn't doom it. CO has even less presence in the western US but no one thinks they are on the verge of failure. There is a principle that good people and businesses make the best of the cards they are dealt. Delta has done an extraordinary job with the smaller business markets/larger leisure markets and increased low cost competition it faces.
3. To most of us, 400 RJs seem a bit excessive but that is how DL has developed its smaller secondary cities with so much connecting traffic. More recently, DL has deployed dozens of RJs in point to point flying overflying not only DL's hubs but also other airline's hubs. In the airline business, the carrier that has nonstop service usually dominates the market. DL's RJs allow it to serve dozens of markets nonstop that no one now or in the future will serve. Those are markets DL owns. There are never too many assets for something that profitably allows DL to own those markets. Based on the loads DL carries in and out of Florida and the statistics DL provides the DOT, they do in fact take ownership of the markets they begin unique RJ service in. If you doubt that, just look at the shrinkage going on by US Airways in the SE. DL not only has a stronger hub structure serving those cities but also has point to point RJ service to the top markets. Point your cursor over to the US board and read what US employees have to say about what DL has done to Greensboro, a former US stronghold. It's just one of many.
4. see #2. same logic. DL is the dominant airline to continental Europe and serves a number of markets which no other airline serves. Right now, Asia is not what DL does. NW doesn't do South America but Delta does. CO and UA don't do the SE but DL does.
5. I'd like to see London (actually any airport would do) from the NE on the DL network. New terminals won't make or break DL or any airline. Actually, AA will be paying more than $20 per passenger for their terminal at JFK; there is no way AA can be competitive with B6 in many markets when 10% or more of the average fare ends up in terminal expenses. Also, JFK is one of the few terminals in DL's network that are significantly below par. Given the terminal building boom that is going on and the growth of LCCs, DL's antiquated facilities at JFK might look pretty attractive when it comes to competing. As DL stabilizes financially and their presence at JFK grows, I'm sure they'll commit to even more improvements at JFK ABOVE and BEYOND the ones that are in the pipeline now.
6. False. Most of DL's cash is NOT restricted. read the financial statements before you make assertions like that. Your credibility goes to pieces when you spout inaccuracies. Let me point you in the right direction:
http://biz.yahoo.com...h013a.html?.v=1
Like all legacy airlines, DL has a significant amount of debt. Unlike others, DL has considerable flexibility by being largely non-union that allow DL to do things like change pensions without getting into the battles such as have happened at UA and now NW. DL will be spending alot of money on debt service but will be able to do that because of the productivity of their employees and their more efficient operation.
In fact, just six months into DL's restructuring, it has achieved a CASM BELOW AA and CO's mainline operation. Did you catch that? DL is a lower cost producer than either AA or CO, the two airlines everyone thinks will be most likely to win.
In this business, the lowest cost producer wins and it also gets rewarded with being able to manage more assets.
DL also has considerable tax assets (mentioned in a previous posting) that will allow DL to avoid paying income taxes for years to come. Bet you didn't bothe to notice that JetBlue will send a check to Uncle Sam and his friends that amounts to a whopping 45% of their income before taxes. Doesn't that just suck working so hard and giving almost half of it to the government.
No, life is no bed of roses for DL but to think that any of the six reasons you mention will send them off the edge is itself not in touch with reality.
--
Finally, if Delta has been able to cut costs this dramatically OUTSIDE of bankruptcy, you don't want to know what it can do with the benefits of bankruptcy on its side. If the lowest cost producer chooses to go into bankruptcy and further cut costs and shore up its balance sheet, everyone else is in serious trouble.
18 July 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/20563-anybody-heard-the-dl-merger-rumor/
NW is at a crossroads in its existence for sure. They have major issues confronting them - perhaps more than any other airline so far: labor strife (nothing terribly new for NW but the fragile economy could turn any hiccup into pneumonia), high fuel prices with a fleet that is 1/3 composed of inefficient aircraft, alliance jockeying, plus being the last of the legacies to restructure.
There are many positive things that could be said about a DL-NW merger but one thing can be said: it will require alot of outside help to pull off. It doesn't appear that CO is real interested in playing the merger game as acquiree which leaves NW's future even more cloudy if consolidation occurs but CO could easily do something with either NW or UA with outside help. Realistically, DL and NW need someone more than CO does. Lots of AA people think AA would go after NW but I'm not sure they would be willing to pay the price of absorbing all of NW just to get the beyond Japan rights since AA already has a fairly significant presence to/from NRT. Further, the gov't might have problems with the size of AA's midwest presence if they combined w/ NW and it isn't realistic to think they would buy NW and tell the gov't they are selling off the midwest hubs in order to get the deal passed. In contrast, neither CO or DL have a significant enough midwest presence to really pose a threat when combined with NW. CVG, while a good sized hub, is largely connecting traffic.
It is very possible that part of NW's strategy if anything goes wrong in the restructuring game is to head to bankruptcy court, torch all kinds of contracts, and put themselves up for sale.
28 August 2005 and following
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21382-katrina-assures-that-delta-wont-be-alone/
Katrina has already been called one of the most powerful hurricanes ever. 1/3 of Gulf of Mexico oil production has already been taken down and it is very likely that some of that capacity will be damaged and cannot be quickly returned to service after the storm passes. Oil will certainly be the first flight for takeoff on Monday morning. Oil in the mid-$70s is almost certain and $80 is not at all out of the realm of possibililty.
Those kind of oil prices will ensure that Delta will not be the only airline filing chapter 11 in the near future; in fact, AA and CO might not want to get too comforable on the sidelines.
You can bet that the petroleum infrastructure (and shipping from the Port of New Orleans although that is less of an issue to the airlines) will return to service as quickly as possible. Oil companies will make money by returning capacity to service, although prices could continue to go up. We still haven't heard any reports on damage to oil production facilities offshore so that is still a big wildcard.
All of this only confirms that DL will be in bankruptcy soon but so will alot of other airlines. The events of this summer and esp. this last week will have a lasting impact on the economy; it may well be that airlines that go into service now will fare better than those that wait.
5 Sept 2005
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21561-a-new-business-plan-must-be-forthcoming/
We have passed another weekend and Delta has not filed for chapter 11 which leads me to believe it won't have for two more weekends since I doubt if they will file on the weekend of 9/11. Regardless of whether a bankruptcy filing is coming, there is no doubt that a large scale business plan change is needed and will be coming. I also believe DL realizes bankruptcy doesn't alter the need for change.
I believe changes will be announced soon, perhaps this week, along these lines:
Network - DL has hinted at additional service from JFK and to Latin America. Some of these are with new aircraft but some are with existing aircraft which probably means some reallocation is coming. I think it is likely that DL will thin its presence in Florida and possibly CVG and SLC.
Although crude oil is settling back a bit, I have not heard anything to say that jet fuel is coming off of its elevated heights. $2 plus jet fuel was unimaginable just a couple months ago and will require major and lasting changes at every airline.
Personnel - layoffs are quite likely but I think it is also likely that DL will change personnel policies so as to make employee careers more short-lived for many employee groups. I believe Song has personnel policies like JetBlue's which requires employees to leave after a few years. Someone correct/ enlighten me on both carriers' policies.
Fleet and financing - both of these are probably more closely tied to a chapter 11 filing but I think it is possible but probably a stretch that DL could succeed at an out of court restructuring. Either way, the fleet will change and debt will be restructured inside or outside of bankruptcy.
Because this business is so competitive, whatever changes DL makes will almost certainly require a response by other carriers. Being largely non-union, DL does have an advantage that they can make some HR related changes that other carriers cannot. The next few weeks will be interesting
The reality is that DL has done far more network restructuring outside of BK than any other airline has in BK. Given that network is the largest determinant of an airline's success, they are doing what needs to be done. While costs have to come down, DL has largely shown that it can get that under control as good as if not better than competitors. These moves will go a long ways toward fixing DL's revenue underperformance relative to the industry.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21767-how-will-southwest-respond/
16 Sept 2005
My response to rumors that WN would move into ATL:
There aren't enough gates in ATL right now. Airtran wants more gates but can't obtain them. WN would not try to step into a market as big as ATL without being able to significantly grow it. Further, there are LCCs in every major WN market from ATL already.
DL and NW aren't cutting capacity in their local markets; they are cutting connecting capacity. DL had a very low percentage of local traffic in DFW and a very high percentage of flow traffic in CVG relative to the size of the local market which DL dominated. The legacies have O&D revenue management systems and O&D controls that allow them to determine how much local vs. flow traffic they take. DL could reduce capacity in ATL by 20% (not saying nor is there any indication that they are) but still be fully competitive w/ every carrier on nonstop flights out of ATL - and any other hub. With the exception of some flow O&Ds which AirTran carries over ATL, most LCCs including WN and FL do not compete in the same flow markets that DL does.
WN and FL's statements only ensure that DL gets their capacity changes right so they help DL and not anyone else.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21748-delta-and-nwa/page__st__8
19 Sept 2005
Just a reminder that a company has the opportunity to create its own plan of reorganization and only if they fail, it is given over to the creditors. Therefore, an unsolicited merger is not likely. That's just the way bankruptcy works.
Bankruptcy is a process of maximizing the value to the creditors and that is rarely done by pulling out just a few assets - remember DL and NW are largely companies w/ significant assets and debts beyond their most lucrative assets. Also, shortcircuiting the bankruptcy process pulls value away from the creditors so it is very unlikely that they will support unsolicited bids for assets. It is also very unlikely that the creditors would be willing to allow bids for assets such as in TWA's final bankruptcy until it is shown that the company cannot successfully reorganize. Successful reorganizing is by far the best way to maximize creditor value.
If a merger between DL and NW happens, it will be because both airlines do what they have to do independently to get their businesses on track inside bankruptcy.
You also may be interested to know that the total size of DL and NW's international operations is about the same so far this year. However, DL is growing their international operation by shifting 767s from domestic to international flights - which they can do because they have a number of international capable 767s that are currently flying on the domestic system. Additionally, DL has talked about starting to fly 757s over the Atlantic so there are even more aircraft that could move from domestic to international operations.
NW has very few international aircraft that could move from domestic to international operations and in fact they are also removing older international aircraft from service such as the 747-200s that were flying JFKLAX (and had to be funded by cancelling JFKNRT). Although NW also has 757s, they do not have a NE gateway that could serve as a suitable gateway for transatlantic 757 service; DTW is probably suitable as a gateway for 757s to Europe only to cities in the UK and Ireland.
I think you will see DL become much more international in the next year. If being international is a determining factor in how quickly DL and NW return to profitability, DL is likely to win that contest.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/21798-reports-are-that-dl-and-nw-will-merge/page__st__16
20 Sept 2005
Legally, DL and NW have to go through bankruptcy separately with no intention of merger. Only if it is determined that one or the other cannot emerge successfully on their own can they entertain a merger - which is exactly why US is merging in order to get out of bankruptcy. Assuming both DL and NW can show that they can reorganize and emerge as independent airlines, in order for them to merge, they have to show the court and both creditors committees have to agree that all creditors interests are at least as good with a merger as they would have been in a standalone operation.
There are some advantages to merging as part of the plan of reorganizaton - primarily around right sizing each airline to become a good partner. Many aircraft and facilities are not needed if they are to merge fairly quickly. But again, they have to convince the court and both sets of creditors that either one of them cannot emerge on its own or that the merger will give them at least as good of protection as they would have received if the airlines had emerged separately.
Bankruptcy experts pretty well say that airlines of the size of the legacy carriers need to take 18-24 months to get through the bankruptcy process if they plan of doing what has to be done to remain viable. As such, there will not likely be any decisions about mergers for probably a year at the earliest and then only with significant input from both sets of creditors. There is not alot of commonality between DL and NW's creditors - partially a reflection of the differences in their fleets.
The problem with NW's older aircraft is not noise but fuel economy. The DC-9 and DC-10 are at least 1.5 cents per ASM more expensive to operate than comparable current or even previous generation (MD-88/717) aircraft. NW will simply not be able to continue to operate aircraft with that kind of fuel penalty because other carriers will be able to reduce every other cost element to levels comparable with NW.
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #19
I found several more threads from the 5 years ago period +/- that provide insight into what was going on with DL and NW and into what people on here thought...
interesting trips down memory lane.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22401-international-expansion/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22654-usa-today-mechanics-strike-at-northwest-appears-over/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22874-judge-approves-19-temporary-cuts-for-iam-workers/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/24217-this-airline-could-collapse/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/27484-delta-will-survive-and-thrive/
interesting trips down memory lane.
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22401-international-expansion/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22654-usa-today-mechanics-strike-at-northwest-appears-over/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/22874-judge-approves-19-temporary-cuts-for-iam-workers/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/24217-this-airline-could-collapse/
http://airlineforums.com/topic/27484-delta-will-survive-and-thrive/
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Actually, I suspect most of the posts are from people in your Group 1. There are a few pot-stirrers who have no connection to the industry, but knowing the people responding to you from 10 years of this forum, they're almost all current or former employees.
And I'd probably expand your Group 4 to include the koolaid drinkers about one carrier or the other, i.e. those who rarely admit fault with their target.
But that's just a minor issue, WT... The bigger issue that some folks are bringing up is one of transparency and disclosure.
If you have the time to write pages and pages of analysis (much of which is a fair assessment), then you might want to dedicate a few minutes for transparency and disclosure purposes.
I've made no secret about who I am for the 10+ years I've been writing analysis on the web forums, nor did I hide it on the 8 years before that when I was moderating on Usenet or Plane Business.com
Heck, I even use my own name, and link to my blog with a full disclosure statement about current and past employers...
I'm not expecting you to go to that extent -- I do it for my own reasons -- but most of the other "career forum participants" around here have come clean about their background. When people question me, at least I know there should be no mystery surrounding who I am, and where my perspective is framed.
You don't have to disclose your name, but if you're not honest and up-front about your background or qualifications to comment/analyse, then there's really no reason you should expect anyone to treat your posts any differently than forum-vomit posted by some of the folks in my expanded version of Group 4....
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #21
First of all, E, I appreciate very much that you took the time to read what I wrote and that you are participating in the DL forum.
As I have noted before, my desire is to see the DL forum become more focused on business aspects - or at least have a balance between labor related issues and other things as other boards on this forum have.
Your post highlights several points.
We could debate the composition of the members of the board but it probably isn't terribly meaningful because everyone who participates in a specialized topic forum such as this have some interest and aviation does create loyalties... aviation evokes emotions - always has, always will.
I believe there are 3 things that help establish credibility of a person on these forums....
1. The authenticity of the information which they present. There is nothing more or less authentic about anyone's facts unless they are indeed actual facts. There are alot of opinions on forums like this and anyone w/ a brain should be able to tell the difference. Whether DL does or does not have certain tools at the disposal of its employees is factual; whether people believe they are sufficient is opnion. Half of the enjoyment for me in participating in these forums is seeing how people interpret their reality with regard to the airline industry.
I have never hesitated to backup the facts I present on this or any other forum. Some folks tried to argue that without academic citations, my work is invalid. I would simply argue that the facts or any kind are the facts whether they are properly cited or not. If there are multiple data sources, then there could indeed be differences of opinion about what facts should be used.... but I also have made it clear that I have NO PROBLEM with telling anyone HOW or WHERE I obtained the information I use in any of my analysis. There is a great deal that is public information and accessible to anyone. Airlines send volumes of information to the SEC because they are publicly traded companies. All kinds of high level or regional financial data can be gleaned from airline financial reports - whcih are readily aviailable to anyone who wants to look. Passenger boarding data and schedules are also readily available. The only data which I quote is individual market (or grouped market) revenue data which is publicly available but which most people do not know how to access or have the means to access it. I could easily make my arguments w/o that individual market level data but the details do confirm the larger trends which I present.
As I have repeatedly said before, if you or anyone isn't sure how I come up w/ my data, I have problems w/ telling you where it comes from.
2. Credibility also is estalbished by the accuracy of what one has posted in the past. I have participated in this and other aviation forums for more than 7 years. I have a track record I am not ashamed of. Other than arguing for quite some time that DL did not need to go into BK, I have been pretty accurate with what I have said would happen in the industry. I was right that DL did more restructuring before it began BK proceedings wihch also allowed them to accomplish so much once they were in BK - and also allowed them to spend less time in BK than any of its network peers this decade.
People can argue with what I say today but I need only point to what I said "yesterday" and invite them to check back in a couple years to see whether what I said becomes true. I have no need to prove that I am right; if I am it will become true in time.
3. The final point - and the one you raise revolves around credentials. I would argue there that is the LEAST important element. If I told you and the forum that I AM or WAS the CEO of DL - or a consulting firm, would that change your opinion? Mgmt and analysts of all kinds are blasted on a pretty regular basis on these forums so I doubt if credentials mean as much as you want to think.
I will say that I do not work in any aspect of the airline industry - but have been involved in it enough in the past and have the education to know what I am talking about.
I would also say that there are people on here that I enjoy reading that aren't "mgmt types" but have as good if not better grasp on what is going on than those who actually get paid to manage. There are also people who don't have alot of education but who are more intelligent and better communicators than many who are highly educated.
I am a communicator; it is a large part of what I do for a living. I enjoy the airline industry, understand it very well, and don't mind sharing my thoughts and opinions - as well as the facts that others don't know exist or know how to interpret.
Finally, there are people who participate in these and other forums who have not self-disclosed but who I know and know that they have the credentials to speak.
This is an anonymous discussion forum; I have self-disclosed to some people off-line and have met some people in these and other forums face to face. But that is more likely to be on the basis of my desire to know them as persons than to push my aviation thoughts.
Finally, I am well aware that there are people who don't want to acknowledge who I am as much because what I says steps on some people's toes. Because I am not involved in the industry in any way, I am beholden to no one. I have called mgmt, labor, and the gov't on the carpet when that is appropriate - and will continue to do so.
But ultimately, I am content to share what I know w/ those who are interested and wiling to believe me. If they want to hear me, that is fine. If they don't, we'll see again down the road whether I was right or not.
You should also know that I have written more to people offline about the information in this post than I have on this thread itself.
Again, thanks for coming over to the DL forum... hope to see you and others who enjoy looking at the business aspects of the indstry on a regular basis.
As I have noted before, my desire is to see the DL forum become more focused on business aspects - or at least have a balance between labor related issues and other things as other boards on this forum have.
Your post highlights several points.
We could debate the composition of the members of the board but it probably isn't terribly meaningful because everyone who participates in a specialized topic forum such as this have some interest and aviation does create loyalties... aviation evokes emotions - always has, always will.
I believe there are 3 things that help establish credibility of a person on these forums....
1. The authenticity of the information which they present. There is nothing more or less authentic about anyone's facts unless they are indeed actual facts. There are alot of opinions on forums like this and anyone w/ a brain should be able to tell the difference. Whether DL does or does not have certain tools at the disposal of its employees is factual; whether people believe they are sufficient is opnion. Half of the enjoyment for me in participating in these forums is seeing how people interpret their reality with regard to the airline industry.
I have never hesitated to backup the facts I present on this or any other forum. Some folks tried to argue that without academic citations, my work is invalid. I would simply argue that the facts or any kind are the facts whether they are properly cited or not. If there are multiple data sources, then there could indeed be differences of opinion about what facts should be used.... but I also have made it clear that I have NO PROBLEM with telling anyone HOW or WHERE I obtained the information I use in any of my analysis. There is a great deal that is public information and accessible to anyone. Airlines send volumes of information to the SEC because they are publicly traded companies. All kinds of high level or regional financial data can be gleaned from airline financial reports - whcih are readily aviailable to anyone who wants to look. Passenger boarding data and schedules are also readily available. The only data which I quote is individual market (or grouped market) revenue data which is publicly available but which most people do not know how to access or have the means to access it. I could easily make my arguments w/o that individual market level data but the details do confirm the larger trends which I present.
As I have repeatedly said before, if you or anyone isn't sure how I come up w/ my data, I have problems w/ telling you where it comes from.
2. Credibility also is estalbished by the accuracy of what one has posted in the past. I have participated in this and other aviation forums for more than 7 years. I have a track record I am not ashamed of. Other than arguing for quite some time that DL did not need to go into BK, I have been pretty accurate with what I have said would happen in the industry. I was right that DL did more restructuring before it began BK proceedings wihch also allowed them to accomplish so much once they were in BK - and also allowed them to spend less time in BK than any of its network peers this decade.
People can argue with what I say today but I need only point to what I said "yesterday" and invite them to check back in a couple years to see whether what I said becomes true. I have no need to prove that I am right; if I am it will become true in time.
3. The final point - and the one you raise revolves around credentials. I would argue there that is the LEAST important element. If I told you and the forum that I AM or WAS the CEO of DL - or a consulting firm, would that change your opinion? Mgmt and analysts of all kinds are blasted on a pretty regular basis on these forums so I doubt if credentials mean as much as you want to think.
I will say that I do not work in any aspect of the airline industry - but have been involved in it enough in the past and have the education to know what I am talking about.
I would also say that there are people on here that I enjoy reading that aren't "mgmt types" but have as good if not better grasp on what is going on than those who actually get paid to manage. There are also people who don't have alot of education but who are more intelligent and better communicators than many who are highly educated.
I am a communicator; it is a large part of what I do for a living. I enjoy the airline industry, understand it very well, and don't mind sharing my thoughts and opinions - as well as the facts that others don't know exist or know how to interpret.
Finally, there are people who participate in these and other forums who have not self-disclosed but who I know and know that they have the credentials to speak.
This is an anonymous discussion forum; I have self-disclosed to some people off-line and have met some people in these and other forums face to face. But that is more likely to be on the basis of my desire to know them as persons than to push my aviation thoughts.
Finally, I am well aware that there are people who don't want to acknowledge who I am as much because what I says steps on some people's toes. Because I am not involved in the industry in any way, I am beholden to no one. I have called mgmt, labor, and the gov't on the carpet when that is appropriate - and will continue to do so.
But ultimately, I am content to share what I know w/ those who are interested and wiling to believe me. If they want to hear me, that is fine. If they don't, we'll see again down the road whether I was right or not.
You should also know that I have written more to people offline about the information in this post than I have on this thread itself.
Again, thanks for coming over to the DL forum... hope to see you and others who enjoy looking at the business aspects of the indstry on a regular basis.
Similar threads
