Kid quote of the Day: "I'm under the weather. But aren't we all under the weather? I mean, that's how gravity works, right?"

which phase was this 'dot' in?
 

We also just added SEA - LAX (RJ) starting in April and going to 3x/day by summer. I though I'd see that included in George's post on the 2 phases of L.A. ramp up. Or is that the SEA part of the "4 corners" strategy and therefore an entirely different dot?
Anyway, I found it interesting from a "compete with AK vs. work with them" standpoint, and would love to hear what transpired between the two front offices, if anything, before we announced it.

Duplicity on routes and between hubs (oh yeah SEA is not a hub for Delta:rolleyes:) is generally not a good idea if you intend to merge. You want the least overlap possible to gain approval from the powers that be.

Nope, SFO LAX was covered under Phase I...

[insert FTB graphic here]

Phase I LAX "expansion"
LAX SFO daily [RJ]
LAX BNA 738
LAX JFK up-gauge 4 of 7 daily from 757 to 763)

The interesting part of the Phase 2, is the tit-for-tat with Virgin America, something that is unlike anything we have done so far. In fact last time Virgin America introduced flights from LAX it was to BWI a week or two after Delta pulled out of that market...

Cheers
George

I agree with you. I'm just wonder if AS is interested in selling.

I'm assuming they aren't.

George, I was talking about Seattle, you're saying SFO (that's San Francisco, right?:D) Are we taliking past each other (posting past each other), or am I missing something?
Jack, I agree, that's one of the reasons I find it interesting. Did we really need more lift on the route to feed our international stuff and Alaska couldn't or wouldn't do it, or what?

I as well. So I'm wondering what it would take to talk them into it.

Enough money for their shareholders.

EVERYTHING is for sale! :D

GJ

Tender an offer, if it's not accepted by the board, pursue a hostile takeover. DL has access to a a lot of cash right now.