Delta Pulling Out of Some EAS Markets
07-15-2011, 07:24 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by Jughead
Really? This is why the merger was a bad idea?
You're right - let's keep running the MSP-Podunk, SD flights with 4 people so Farmer Bob can vacate to AZ during the winter months, after the beet harvest is complete.
The idiots in ATL have more of a clue than you will ever know.
You're right - let's keep running the MSP-Podunk, SD flights with 4 people so Farmer Bob can vacate to AZ during the winter months, after the beet harvest is complete.
The idiots in ATL have more of a clue than you will ever know.
07-16-2011, 11:27 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,414
Originally Posted by jayray2
I'm sure they have good reasons to do what they do. However one really has to scratch their head when they pull Saabs they can't fill up out of cities and replace them with 200s.
07-16-2011, 01:31 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: 320
Posts: 709
You also have to remember they might have lost 14 million because these cities were bid on with the Saab flying them and delta switched alot of them to the 200 months ago. Such as Bemiji, Aberdeen, Waterloo, pellston. So they are loosing money because they choose to fly the 200 their when it was priced for the Saab and it scews the load factors. Personally i am split on this decision mainly because i know it is alot of cities XJ flies too
07-17-2011, 02:52 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: A320/321 FO
Posts: 1,114
From a financial standpoint, I don't understand why Delta feels it is profitable to eliminate all turboprop flying to their EAS destinations. With oil prices at an all time high, it just doesn't make sense to me. Plus, flying turboprops on short hops into small airfields (as most EAS routes are) seems more cost-effective to me. I've never been the "bean counter" type, so would someone with hard facts enlighten me please?
Thanks,
Lax
Thanks,
Lax
07-17-2011, 02:53 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by Trip7
Replace them with 200s? They are pulling out of the cities or drastically reducing service. Total capcity for each EAS city is either being eliminated or greatly reduced.
07-17-2011, 04:28 PM
#18
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: M88B
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Laxrox43
From a financial standpoint, I don't understand why Delta feels it is profitable to eliminate all turboprop flying to their EAS destinations. With oil prices at an all time high, it just doesn't make sense to me. Plus, flying turboprops on short hops into small airfields (as most EAS routes are) seems more cost-effective to me. I've never been the "bean counter" type, so would someone with hard facts enlighten me please?
Thanks,
Lax
Thanks,
Lax
07-18-2011, 02:26 AM
#19
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Anyone who watched the numbers realized some of NWA's route structure would not survive the merger. For year NWA's O&D markets had been in decline and the Company experienced declining load factors even though they had been aggressive in shrinking capacity. The combination of networks with Delta did not get a genuine "synergistic" pop since the code share agreements had already harvested much of this low hanging fruit.
Certainly not blaming NWA for what was really the result of demographic shifts by people who travel to the cities.
By acquiring these markets, Delta has little choice but to adjust accordingly.
Certainly not blaming NWA for what was really the result of demographic shifts by people who travel to the cities.
By acquiring these markets, Delta has little choice but to adjust accordingly.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
wannabepilot
Flight Schools and Training
34
07-07-2008 12:15 PM
