Delta SEA Analysis
05-12-2014 | 11:10 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Well, I was using Great Circle Mapper and assumed the output was in NM. Web site doesn't specify, but if you do the sm/nm conversion we generally agree. Good catch.
05-12-2014 | 11:30 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 0
As for thumbing noses, I think it was a very hard decision by Alaska to let any codeshare agreement go. But if a partner carrier gives an ultimatum of only partner with us or else, then Alaska must feel they have the numbers to make it work. Truly so many things have to go right for Delta to attain their goals in SEA, it really is a larger gamble for Delta to go it alone rather than keep Alaska on as a strategic partner.
You think so Mr. gooddeal?
Perhaps you could list the "so many things" have "to go right for Delta to attain their goals in SEA."
While you are at it, perhaps you could explain why "it really is a larger gamble for Delta to go it alone rather than keep Alaska on as a strategic partner."
As to things that have to go right, gates. They have enough to meet their plans out to 2016. That's really about it. The ball is rolling. Construction planning is done for the larger sized ops and accommodations for new larger F/A and pilot lounges. Same for Sky Club space. Work starts next month I believe.
As to your thoughts on Delta's gamble, ask yourself this. They set out to be the dominant carrier in New York several years ago. Folks like you insisted it would never happen. Now, they are taking on a similar but not as difficult task in Seattle. This is part of Delta's four corners strategy and this is the last corner. What does Alaska potentially stand to lose after not deciding to be a strategic partner?
Basically, a lot.
Oh and P.S.
Gates used to be an issue in JFK and LGA. Solved it.
05-12-2014 | 12:30 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: Wicked Artsy, Moderately Fartsy
You think so Mr. gooddeal?
Perhaps you could list the "so many things" have "to go right for Delta to attain their goals in SEA."
While you are at it, perhaps you could explain why "it really is a larger gamble for Delta to go it alone rather than keep Alaska on as a strategic partner."
As to things that have to go right, gates. They have enough to meet their plans out to 2016. That's really about it. The ball is rolling. Construction planning is done for the larger sized ops and accommodations for new larger F/A and pilot lounges. Same for Sky Club space. Work starts next month I believe.
As to your thoughts on Delta's gamble, ask yourself this. They set out to be the dominant carrier in New York several years ago. Folks like you insisted it would never happen. Now, they are taking on a similar but not as difficult task in Seattle. This is part of Delta's four corners strategy and this is the last corner. What does Alaska potentially stand to lose after not deciding to be a strategic partner?
Basically, a lot.
Oh and P.S.
Gates used to be an issue in JFK and LGA. Solved it.
Perhaps you could list the "so many things" have "to go right for Delta to attain their goals in SEA."
While you are at it, perhaps you could explain why "it really is a larger gamble for Delta to go it alone rather than keep Alaska on as a strategic partner."
As to things that have to go right, gates. They have enough to meet their plans out to 2016. That's really about it. The ball is rolling. Construction planning is done for the larger sized ops and accommodations for new larger F/A and pilot lounges. Same for Sky Club space. Work starts next month I believe.
As to your thoughts on Delta's gamble, ask yourself this. They set out to be the dominant carrier in New York several years ago. Folks like you insisted it would never happen. Now, they are taking on a similar but not as difficult task in Seattle. This is part of Delta's four corners strategy and this is the last corner. What does Alaska potentially stand to lose after not deciding to be a strategic partner?
Basically, a lot.
Oh and P.S.
Gates used to be an issue in JFK and LGA. Solved it.
Specifically back to Alaska, they lose an established partner with feed and profit sharing into most everything east of SLC and that's not an easy loss. I don't think anybody at Alaska thinks starting to compete heavier in SLC is going to cripple Delta in SEA. I would say that despite Delta's carrier alliances in China, the competition in the Asian market is substantial and Alaska can find a new way to be a part of it other than only Delta. Either way, "so many things" need to go correctly for either to succeed but Alaska really deals in domestic exposure while Delta also has to manage its international (and the most profitable) exposure. Generally speaking, and without any hatred or ill will, Delta has a larger gamble to add their own domestic infrastructure along with the competition of Asian carriers than being in a relationship with Alaska as it existed previously. If it were that easy, Delta would have been here long ago.
05-12-2014 | 12:40 PM
#36
Line Holder
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: Left side of da jet
I used the generality "so many things" because there are "so many things" that have to go correctly for any airline to succeed. Rather than specifically list each detail I will say that just because you have a strategy doesn't guarantee it will work though...right? (Think PanAm, Eastern, or any other too big to fail carrier while also consideration of externalities like SARS, 9/11 or global recessions) I don't know who I am being lumped into with "folks like me" rationale but whatever pundits you are referring to were talking about NYC market strategy which, aside from just gates and jets, requires a different strategy than SEA. In referring back to NYC for a minute, "so many things" had to work out with partnerships, timing, costs and infrastructure...to hear you say it, four corners strategy just has guarantees. So, yeah, Delta has a large gamble to try and replicate that in a different market space like SEA and Asian markets. And "folks like me" agree that if they hit the right groove, it will work.
Specifically back to Alaska, they lose an established partner with feed and profit sharing into most everything east of SLC and that's not an easy loss. I don't think anybody at Alaska thinks starting to compete heavier in SLC is going to cripple Delta in SEA. I would say that despite Delta's carrier alliances in China, the competition in the Asian market is substantial and Alaska can find a new way to be a part of it other than only Delta. Either way, "so many things" need to go correctly for either to succeed but Alaska really deals in domestic exposure while Delta also has to manage its international (and the most profitable) exposure. Generally speaking, and without any hatred or ill will, Delta has a larger gamble to add their own domestic infrastructure along with the competition of Asian carriers than being in a relationship with Alaska as it existed previously. If it were that easy, Delta would have been here long ago.
Specifically back to Alaska, they lose an established partner with feed and profit sharing into most everything east of SLC and that's not an easy loss. I don't think anybody at Alaska thinks starting to compete heavier in SLC is going to cripple Delta in SEA. I would say that despite Delta's carrier alliances in China, the competition in the Asian market is substantial and Alaska can find a new way to be a part of it other than only Delta. Either way, "so many things" need to go correctly for either to succeed but Alaska really deals in domestic exposure while Delta also has to manage its international (and the most profitable) exposure. Generally speaking, and without any hatred or ill will, Delta has a larger gamble to add their own domestic infrastructure along with the competition of Asian carriers than being in a relationship with Alaska as it existed previously. If it were that easy, Delta would have been here long ago.
05-12-2014 | 01:04 PM
#37
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 67
With the current leadership it should not be a large problem. They executed the NYC plan brilliantly. Seattle won't be as hard as there is only one small airline to deal with. Different leadership, I would not be as confident. These guys have achieved or overachieved on all of there plans thus far. I don't think anyone but the most delusional would think that Delta is invincible. But right here, right now they are knocking it out of the park. Tomorrow they could be striking out.
I used the generality "so many things" because there are "so many things" that have to go correctly for any airline to succeed. Rather than specifically list each detail I will say that just because you have a strategy doesn't guarantee it will work though...right? (Think PanAm, Eastern, or any other too big to fail carrier while also consideration of externalities like SARS, 9/11 or global recessions) I don't know who I am being lumped into with "folks like me" rationale but whatever pundits you are referring to were talking about NYC market strategy which, aside from just gates and jets, requires a different strategy than SEA. In referring back to NYC for a minute, "so many things" had to work out with partnerships, timing, costs and infrastructure...to hear you say it, four corners strategy just has guarantees. So, yeah, Delta has a large gamble to try and replicate that in a different market space like SEA and Asian markets. And "folks like me" agree that if they hit the right groove, it will work.
Specifically back to Alaska, they lose an established partner with feed and profit sharing into most everything east of SLC and that's not an easy loss. I don't think anybody at Alaska thinks starting to compete heavier in SLC is going to cripple Delta in SEA. I would say that despite Delta's carrier alliances in China, the competition in the Asian market is substantial and Alaska can find a new way to be a part of it other than only Delta. Either way, "so many things" need to go correctly for either to succeed but Alaska really deals in domestic exposure while Delta also has to manage its international (and the most profitable) exposure. Generally speaking, and without any hatred or ill will, Delta has a larger gamble to add their own domestic infrastructure along with the competition of Asian carriers than being in a relationship with Alaska as it existed previously. If it were that easy, Delta would have been here long ago.
Specifically back to Alaska, they lose an established partner with feed and profit sharing into most everything east of SLC and that's not an easy loss. I don't think anybody at Alaska thinks starting to compete heavier in SLC is going to cripple Delta in SEA. I would say that despite Delta's carrier alliances in China, the competition in the Asian market is substantial and Alaska can find a new way to be a part of it other than only Delta. Either way, "so many things" need to go correctly for either to succeed but Alaska really deals in domestic exposure while Delta also has to manage its international (and the most profitable) exposure. Generally speaking, and without any hatred or ill will, Delta has a larger gamble to add their own domestic infrastructure along with the competition of Asian carriers than being in a relationship with Alaska as it existed previously. If it were that easy, Delta would have been here long ago.
05-12-2014 | 01:59 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
With the current leadership it should not be a large problem. They executed the NYC plan brilliantly. Seattle won't be as hard as there is only one small airline to deal with. Different leadership, I would not be as confident. These guys have achieved or overachieved on all of there plans thus far. I don't think anyone but the most delusional would think that Delta is invincible. But right here, right now they are knocking it out of the park. Tomorrow they could be striking out.
That is a very thoughtful and insightful post. Now, why are you looking at my schedule? Are you thinking about coming up to the Wild Wild NYC?
If so, come on, bro!!
05-12-2014 | 02:11 PM
#39
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,265
Likes: 112
From: DAL 330
[QUOTE=NERD;1641568]With the current leadership it should not be a large problem. They executed the NYC plan brilliantly. Seattle won't be as hard as there is only one small airline to deal with. Different leadership, I would not be as confident. These guys have achieved or overachieved on all of there plans thus far. I don't think anyone but the most delusional would think that Delta is invincible. But right here, right now they are knocking it out of the park. Tomorrow they could be striking out.[/QUOTE]
DAL, like every other corporation is only one CEO change away from potential disaster. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope our team continues to do well, which as you suggest, is by no means guaranteed.
Scoop
DAL, like every other corporation is only one CEO change away from potential disaster. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope our team continues to do well, which as you suggest, is by no means guaranteed.
Scoop
05-12-2014 | 02:18 PM
#40
Line Holder
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: Left side of da jet
[QUOTE=Scoop;1641606]
So you guys think you have a good leader? A man who led one airline into bankruptcy and is now in charge of your operation? You're dreaming if you think that!
With the current leadership it should not be a large problem. They executed the NYC plan brilliantly. Seattle won't be as hard as there is only one small airline to deal with. Different leadership, I would not be as confident. These guys have achieved or overachieved on all of there plans thus far. I don't think anyone but the most delusional would think that Delta is invincible. But right here, right now they are knocking it out of the park. Tomorrow they could be striking out.[/QUOTE]
DAL, like every other corporation is only one CEO change away from potential disaster. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope our team continues to do well, which as you suggest, is by no means guaranteed.
Scoop
DAL, like every other corporation is only one CEO change away from potential disaster. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope our team continues to do well, which as you suggest, is by no means guaranteed.
Scoop
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
