Delta to unveil LGA expansion Friday noon

[WorldTraveler]

Early information includes new DL service to upstate NY, MIA, and DFW among other markets in first phase.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/15/idUS219260+15-Dec-2011+PRN20111215

Indications are that DL will serve every one of the top 20 markets from LGA.

 

[LGA / 037]

Early information includes new DL service to upstate NY, MIA, and DFW among other markets in first phase.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/15/idUS219260+15-Dec-2011+PRN20111215

Indications are that DL will serve every one of the top 20 markets from LGA.

Weight restricted MD80's to DFW and MIA to go after AA.... Replacing US Regional service with DL regional service to make Schmuck Schumer happy! WOW! How exciting! Yawn...............................

 

[WorldTraveler]

Weight restricted MD80's to DFW and MIA to go after AA.... Replacing US Regional service with DL regional service to make Schmuck Schumer happy! WOW! How exciting! Yawn...............................

let's see all the details but DL will accomplish at LGA what no other carrier has done at either LGA or JFK - which is to be one-stop-shop for all markets... not unlike what CO did at EWR. Airlines obtain revenue premiums BECAUSE they have the mass in their hub markets that other carriers don't have. The difference is that LGA is the preferred airport in NYC for short-haul business traffic.
.
You should not underestimate the importance of DL's buildup in NYC in providing the money DL can pass on to its stockholders and employees.

 

[LGA / 037]

let's see all the details but DL will accomplish at LGA what no other carrier has done at either LGA or JFK - which is to be one-stop-shop for all markets... not unlike what CO did at EWR. Airlines obtain revenue premiums BECAUSE they have the mass in their hub markets that other carriers don't have. The difference is that LGA is the preferred airport in NYC for short-haul business traffic.
.
You should not underestimate the importance of DL's buildup in NYC in providing the money DL can pass on to its stockholders and employees.

And we shall see with the perimeter rule in effect if that can accomplish what nobody else has been able to at LGA....................................

 

[WorldTraveler]

Here is the list of new flights... DL is adding service to practically every market that any other carrier serves nonstop from LGA.
The only notable market absence is YYZ which DL presumably leaving to its new codeshare partner, Westjet.
Of course, LGA still has the perimeter rule in effect but the advantage relative to EWR is that LGA is the preferred short haul airport for NYC.
This is obviously a big undertaking but no other carrier has done this in NYC... it is bound to create strategic advantages.

http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=18&item=162

 

[damajagua]

Here is the list of new flights... DL is adding service to practically every market that any other carrier serves nonstop from LGA.
The only notable market absence is YYZ which DL presumably leaving to its new codeshare partner, Westjet.
Of course, LGA still has the perimeter rule in effect but the advantage relative to EWR is that LGA is the preferred short haul airport for NYC.
This is obviously a big undertaking but no other carrier has done this in NYC... it is bound to create strategic advantages.

http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=18&item=162

Impressive indeed. Am surprised that the majority of flying
will be done with RJ's.

 

[shaka]

What flights are they cutting out of Reagan?

 

[WorldTraveler]

Impressive indeed. Am surprised that the majority of flying
will be done with RJ's.

remember that much of this was flown by US turboprops so this is a step up in capacity just by using 50 and 70/76 seat RJs.... This schedule is the lowest risk way to start over 100 new flights in a 6 month period.... some will undoubtedly be upgraded over time, some markets will not make it or be reduced to a smaller level, and other new ones will be started... that is just the way the process works in adding service.
.
There was no corresponding reduction in service announced but DL previously said they would fly DCA only to the hub markets. Since they have had 2 years to prepare for this slot deal, there was probably alot of capacity elsewhere in the system waiting to be used, including the MEM RJ pulldown this past fall which took place after it became known that the slot deal would be approved.

 

[signals]

For my area, Delta will give us jet aircraft as opposed to US-X's props. Great news for travellers. My question is will air fare increase because of a jet as opposed to prop? The service is definetly upgraded because people could take one day trips with less hassle.

 

[WorldTraveler]

For my area, Delta will give us jet aircraft as opposed to US-X's props. Great news for travellers. My question is will air fare increase because of a jet as opposed to prop? The service is definetly upgraded because people could take one day trips with less hassle.

there is currently no correlation between aircraft type and fares in the US - the same fares apply regardless of the type of aircraft used, and there are a number of market groups that have service operated by a combination of mainline, RJ, or turboprop markets.
The primary intent of the LGA expansion is to create a hub so that the connectivity at LGA will provide DL with the passengers to effectively compete against other carriers, particularly to/from other hubs where the hub carrier has the mass necessary to prevent other carriers from competing.
DL is counting on the NYC local market size plus the connections that will flow over LGA to be able to compete to markets such as IAH, DFW, and MIA.
As an example, DL is already obtaining average fares comparable to AA and UA in ORD-LGA on similar numbers of flights but by using smaller aircraft... and DL's LFs do currently trail AA and UA's who have the advantage of the ORD hub to fill seats. DL will focus on flowing secondary cities in the NE to these new markets.
Keep in mind many of these markets are also served by B6 from JFK... if anything DL will bring lower fares closer to NYC using jet aircraft and the competition will bring down fares to/from the fortress hubs noted above.
CO/UA also serves almost all of these cities nonstop from EWR so you now have three hub carriers competing for eastern US passengers from 3 different NYC airports. Many of the cities in the NE are served by CO/UA using RJs not unlikely what DL will do.
Competition always helps to bring down fares.

 

[eolesen]

It's an interesting build up, but risky...

• While some consider LGA the preferred airport for NYC, I'm not so sure that's a universal opinion.
  
  Having the rail transit options into Manhattan at EWR and even JFK make a difference to many, and there's nothing comparable at LGA (unless the on-again-off-again water taxi is back in service from the MAT).
  
• The EWR hub probably works better for UACO because they not only can carry day-trippers heading into Manhattan, but flow traffic on top of that, and the availability of an airside connection for those changing terminals.
  
  DL's challenge is that they have to not only manage the split airport connections, but they also have split terminals at LGA with no airside connection that I'm aware of.
  
  Ironically, it may be easier to make a connection at LGA from DL's regional operation to the US Shuttle than it would to connect to the DL shuttle... The original slot-swap plan from 2009 included US moving into the MAT, but that idea seemed to have died along the way. The MAT is definitely more convenient for the shuttle crowd, but kills off any reasonable online connects.
  
• The US operation had turboprops, which offer lower operating costs, lower landing weights, and arguably, lower complexity. DL's use of RJs will possibly be seen as more favorable by customers, but has higher fuel expenses, higher landing fees
  

Throw all those together, and I'm not convinced that it will work out quite as nice as EWR does. It's better than nothing, but at a cost.

 

[WorldTraveler]

It's an interesting build up, but risky...

• While some consider LGA the preferred airport for NYC, I'm not so sure that's a universal opinion.
  
  Having the rail transit options into Manhattan at EWR and even JFK make a difference to many, and there's nothing comparable at LGA (unless the on-again-off-again water taxi is back in service from the MAT).
  
• The EWR hub probably works better for UACO because they not only can carry day-trippers heading into Manhattan, but flow traffic on top of that, and the availability of an airside connection for those changing terminals.
  
  DL's challenge is that they have to not only manage the split airport connections, but they also have split terminals at LGA with no airside connection that I'm aware of.
  
  Ironically, it may be easier to make a connection at LGA from DL's regional operation to the US Shuttle than it would to connect to the DL shuttle... The original slot-swap plan from 2009 included US moving into the MAT, but that idea seemed to have died along the way. The MAT is definitely more convenient for the shuttle crowd, but kills off any reasonable online connects.
  
• The US operation had turboprops, which offer lower operating costs, lower landing weights, and arguably, lower complexity. DL's use of RJs will possibly be seen as more favorable by customers, but has higher fuel expenses, higher landing fees
  

Throw all those together, and I'm not convinced that it will work out quite as nice as EWR does. It's better than nothing, but at a cost.

the simple fact is that data shows that LGA and JFk are the preferred airports for NYC originating traffic; in market after market - I believe including IAH to NYC - LGA where permissible and JFK if LGA is not allowed by the perimeter rule - is a larger market than from EWR (and not that EWR-IAH is a UA/CO hub to hub market).
.
CO built a great operation at EWR and it is a full service hub for NYC - but DL obviously doesn't believe it needs to have a one size fits all in a market that is more than twice the size of just about any other market in the US. DL simply needs to serve the top markets from either LGA or JFK - and in some cases by serving many of those markets from both JFK and LGA, DL has a higher share of the NYC local market than CO/UA can have from EWR plus to/from its other hubs from LGA/JFK.
.
But let's also keep in mind that DL's obvious strategic target is far less attempting to pass UA in NYC but rather to remain on par... and DL will move a signficant amount of revenue from other carriers who have previously been stronger at LGA and/or JFK.
Let's also keep in mind that those who say that US failure at LGA bodes poorly for DL fail to recognize that US never served anywhere close to the number of business markets that DL does - and AA has at times - and both AA and US pulled down a number of high profile if potentially low yielding markets such as to/from Florida.
.
RJs are still lower CASM aircraft than the turboprops that US once flew and large RJs flown by regional partners do have CASMs comparable to some mainline aircraft... they can compete quite effectively.
.
I'm sure a large part of DL's decision to move forward with the LGA hub is the success DL has had in LGA-ORD, attaining a 15% market share and receiving average fares up against AA and UA which have large hubs and huge historic presences in the market - even though DL basically has served the market on a point to point basis using E170 class jets.
.
DL never has been interested in creating connections to/from the BOS-LGA-DCA Shuttle and, again, their success with LGA-ORD combined w/ AA's decision to remove AE service probably has allowed them to reconsider that it isn't worth diluting its revenue in the Shuttle markets by adding capacity... and again, some of those markets can be served on a connecting basis over JFK where DL will retain sufficient capacity to serve those connecting markets it wants to serve and where it competetively makes sense to do so.
.
Of course any new business venture involves risk - just like life. But DL has shown that it has a pretty good sense of the correct balance between risk and innovation.
.
BTW, DL has launched a fare sale for the new markets... presumably the schedules are now in all distribution channels.

 

[NYCDelta]

It's an interesting build up, but risky...

• While some consider LGA the preferred airport for NYC, I'm not so sure that's a universal opinion.
  
  Having the rail transit options into Manhattan at EWR and even JFK make a difference to many, and there's nothing comparable at LGA (unless the on-again-off-again water taxi is back in service from the MAT).
  
• The EWR hub probably works better for UACO because they not only can carry day-trippers heading into Manhattan, but flow traffic on top of that, and the availability of an airside connection for those changing terminals.
  
  DL's challenge is that they have to not only manage the split airport connections, but they also have split terminals at LGA with no airside connection that I'm aware of.
  
  Ironically, it may be easier to make a connection at LGA from DL's regional operation to the US Shuttle than it would to connect to the DL shuttle... The original slot-swap plan from 2009 included US moving into the MAT, but that idea seemed to have died along the way. The MAT is definitely more convenient for the shuttle crowd, but kills off any reasonable online connects.
  
• The US operation had turboprops, which offer lower operating costs, lower landing weights, and arguably, lower complexity. DL's use of RJs will possibly be seen as more favorable by customers, but has higher fuel expenses, higher landing fees
  

Throw all those together, and I'm not convinced that it will work out quite as nice as EWR does. It's better than nothing, but at a cost.

I don't understand the assertion about split hub connections. DL has never said they are trying to connect pax from LGA to JFK. I think what this transaction brings to DL is more options for travelers. If DL can increase corporate contracts by even 10-15% or if more people join DL's FF program due to the increased flying out of LGA, then that increases loyalty. If you fly DL out of LGA and gain elite status, or your company uses DL exclusively, and you then have to fly a trans-con or internationally, you'll go to JFK and fly DL or a Skyteam partner. DL has made it clear that with almost 50% of the slots at LGA, they expect to gain more corporate accounts and frequent flyers. Basically, DL will have LGA for O&D, and JFK with limited domestic to feed the international flying. Incidentally, even Smisek at UA said in an interview that if he had his way, domestic would be flown to feed international primarily. I'll see if I can find a link to that interview.

I don't know there is any concrete evidence that one airport is preferred by business travelers, but having lived in NYC for 6 years, anecdotally at least, it appeared that LGA was considered "the" airport for business travelers. Of course, those on the west side of Manhattan may prefer EWR.

As for the argument that the majority of this new flying is on an RJ (both 50 & 70 seats), I think for a fair comparison, we should look at all the UA flying out of EWR that lies within the LGA perimeter and see how much is on regional vs. mainline. I only had time to look at a few cities, but the following are all RJ ops (12/27/11):
EWR-BUF/SYR/ALB/PWM/PVD/PHL/IAD/RIC/CMH/CVG/DTW/MSP/STL/MEM/BNA/TYS/SAV/CHS/PIT/GRR/DAY/BWI. Other large cities, such as ATL & MSY saw only 1-2 mainline, with the majority RJ's.

I think the bigger issue for all airlines, is what happens when the 50 seaters are gone? Nobody is currently making them and as they get older, require more maintenance, and fuel stays high, the cost outweighs the benefits for these small jets.

 

[jimntx]

Back before I entered the glamorous life of the flight attendant, I traveled on business all the time. If an RJ was the only way to get there, I had to have a very compelling reason to go, or I didn't. In fact, there were some places I would drive rather than take an RJ in those days. I know a number of others who feel the same way. One of the reasons that Southwest has been so very successful at STL is that as soon as AA took over the TW operation at STL, they started either eliminating nonstop service to a number of cities or substituting American Eagle/American Connection RJ service to those destinations--such as, STL-MCI. (A number of Southwest employees have expressed their gratitude to me for us giving them several of those markets. )

I can't imagine many business travelers choosing an RJ on a long flight like LGA-IAH or LGA-DFW if a real airplane is available from the same or (for New York) nearby airport--particularly, if the price is the same or almost the same. With the train service to EWR, one can get from midtown to EWR about as quickly as to LGA at certain times of the day.

And, god forbid, if the trip should involve a change of planes in Atlanta. I would almost rather change plane in MIA than ATL. I guess we'll see if I'm in the minority or the majority.

 

[BABABOOY]

I believe the simple fact that the RJ's Delta uses have a F/C will make a difference.
I don't believe UACO over at EWR have f/c on their RJ's.
This is a great/smart begining for LGA and if the market warrants we will see Mainline
on some routes.