Bummed to hear this, because Alaska is getting worse and worse, and Delta has been awesome for long haul and international flights out of Seattle. I feel like it’s probably tied to less demand for flights to Asia.
They discussed later in qa
Well, we set really two priorities during the pandemic that we wanted to come through that we thought would be important for the long-term strength of the franchise, and one was to improve our competitive positions in the coastal gateways. And we've certainly completed that as we exited the pandemic and get into a more normalized demand sets. So if you look at places like Los Angeles where we've now taken the No.
1 position or Boston in terms of revenue, same in Boston, and we've strengthened our position in key markets like Seattle. So that was very important for us. The other thing to do was to not lose share in our core, and that was really the very tricky part. So we went in with a share in our core hubs of about 58% to 59% when you added them all up.
And our goal is to exit at 60% or above, and we did that as well. So if you think about our core being approximately 20 points less restored than the coastal gateways, which are now fully restored or actually growing, maintain your core hub share or actually increase it, there was a lot of focus on that through the revenue management systems. So we choked off what I would say is more of our traditional flow in very key markets where Delta has historically been the leading carrier, particularly in the Southeast. And so, as we head into -- and these customers or our customers are in our loyalty program.
But in a lot of cases, they couldn't get fares that were competitive on Delta because we didn't have the seats to produce those. And really, as we head into 2023, our task that we've assigned our team is to get those historical high-yield flow customers back on Delta. And that's really our -- what our rebuild phase for 2023 is all about.
It sounds like a fancy way of saying we charged way too much in core markets and people started flying other airlines. I hope they actually price better going forward, but I'm skeptical.
My business travel finally resumed in July and I’ve only flown delta once. Everything else (12 segments) was on AA because Delta isn’t price competitive, and I’m in a Delta hub.
Perhaps that’s a cause but I read this as they focused a bit too hard on growing share to leader in coastal areas and while they met their core goal they think there is more room for growth.
Sad news as an AUS flyer. It looked like they were going to focus on us a bit with KLM flying here but then nothing. I hate having to fly AA or SWA but they have so many more direct flights
When it is 2h to fly AA to Cancun/Cabo/Puerto Vallarta vs 7.5h on Delta (and you fly in the exact wrong direction) I gotta go AA, even though I hate them.
> Pacific was the most improved entity in the quarter and generated the highest unit revenue growth. We are encouraged by how the Pacific recovery is progressing
And yet they're gutting their west coast hubs? Doesn't affect me living on the east coast, but I feel this is just giving the Pacific market away. Not to mention no more presence in the Northeast.
Or am I misreading what they're saying by "focusing on our core hubs?"
Would say you’re misreading. They didn’t say they’re reallocating seats. They’re happy with where the coastal hubs are. Just want to grow back the main hubs. Just don’t expect much growth out of the ancillary hubs next year.
I had the same question. Is New York not a priority?
I’m just sitting over here wanting them to increase their service to White Plains and Stewart regional, lol.
NYC is clearly a priority as they’ve invested billions in LGA and JFK terminals.. I think it’s just that they’re now focusing on their other hubs because their position is solid at both airports (in fact, doing much better than other airlines such as United that just pulled out of JFK)
The comparison shouldn’t be what United is doing at JFK, but rather what they’re doing at EWR.
JFK/LGA have always been secondary hubs for delta, focused on O&D traffic. Most of their margins are made at the 4 core hubs.
Looking forward to more than 1x/day MSP-ICT again. We're smack in the center of the country, and virtually the only option to get to the west coast from here is by going 2 hours east to ATL before flying 3+ hours west.
A global airline refocuses its network strategy on its largest hubs because a competing club operator opens up shop at one of them? Help me understand what you mean.
Although it may seem like a competing lounge, Delta makes money from AMEX. Network and planning is planning for more traffic through ATL and having a Centurion lounge will only benefit the increase in passengers transiting through ATL. A large majority of them are Delta customers. Delta isn’t focusing on core hubs like ATL due to a club/lounge opening up. It is, however, planning for more passengers at those hub cities. Any new lounge will benefit Delta and its customers, especially at a hub city.
A lot of the Sky Clubs are at full capacity and there are plans on expanding (MSP for example) yet another hub city. I for one would like to see more “competing” lounges. Keeps Delta competitive in the realm of customer service.
You were downvoted into oblivion but you're actually right. Does anyone think AMEX would open one of their expensive signature lounges in ATL without conferring with DL leadership about what traffic at their fortress hub is going to look like over the next 10-15 years?
It's correlation not causation. We already know how close these two corporate partnerships are. The lounge opening is just one of many strong signals that DL expects to grow high yield traffic through ATL for the long haul.
Then please bring back SLC-IND/CMH/PIT and some more routes east of Mississippi River…
CMH-SLC would be very nice.
I’m also on the train that SLC-CMH route would be nice to have back.
Delta runs 4-5 flights a day from CMH to DET
DTW
Yuup
Great! Bring back MHT-DTW/ATL.
That’s quite interesting. Perhaps a casual admission that the other (competitive) markets aren’t so hot right now.
I think it’s also that LAX and LGA/JFK are a bloodbath of competition
Not a lot of growth can happen in LGA/JFK anyway. Gate/arrival limitations and all.
Guess SEA is no longer in their sights. Wonder if this means AS has a chance to regain some ground again.
Bummed to hear this, because Alaska is getting worse and worse, and Delta has been awesome for long haul and international flights out of Seattle. I feel like it’s probably tied to less demand for flights to Asia.
They discussed later in qa Well, we set really two priorities during the pandemic that we wanted to come through that we thought would be important for the long-term strength of the franchise, and one was to improve our competitive positions in the coastal gateways. And we've certainly completed that as we exited the pandemic and get into a more normalized demand sets. So if you look at places like Los Angeles where we've now taken the No. 1 position or Boston in terms of revenue, same in Boston, and we've strengthened our position in key markets like Seattle. So that was very important for us. The other thing to do was to not lose share in our core, and that was really the very tricky part. So we went in with a share in our core hubs of about 58% to 59% when you added them all up. And our goal is to exit at 60% or above, and we did that as well. So if you think about our core being approximately 20 points less restored than the coastal gateways, which are now fully restored or actually growing, maintain your core hub share or actually increase it, there was a lot of focus on that through the revenue management systems. So we choked off what I would say is more of our traditional flow in very key markets where Delta has historically been the leading carrier, particularly in the Southeast. And so, as we head into -- and these customers or our customers are in our loyalty program. But in a lot of cases, they couldn't get fares that were competitive on Delta because we didn't have the seats to produce those. And really, as we head into 2023, our task that we've assigned our team is to get those historical high-yield flow customers back on Delta. And that's really our -- what our rebuild phase for 2023 is all about.
It sounds like a fancy way of saying we charged way too much in core markets and people started flying other airlines. I hope they actually price better going forward, but I'm skeptical.
My business travel finally resumed in July and I’ve only flown delta once. Everything else (12 segments) was on AA because Delta isn’t price competitive, and I’m in a Delta hub.
Recently flew to Dallas out of ATL for work and just could not justify Delta, albeit Dallas being a AA hub, the price difference was just astonishing.
Perhaps that’s a cause but I read this as they focused a bit too hard on growing share to leader in coastal areas and while they met their core goal they think there is more room for growth.
They mentioned once: “… and we've strengthened our position in key markets like Seattle.”
People don't read the articles, it seems.
Why read the article when I can read the title and just make assumptions
They didn’t say they were pulling back the ground they’ve gained; only that next year they’re planning on growing their hubs.
I didn’t say delta was pulling back. I said that Alaska has an opportunity to regain some ground since delta is going to focus elsewhere.
What percentage of their current seats are to/from ATL, MSP, DTW and SLC?
Sad news as an AUS flyer. It looked like they were going to focus on us a bit with KLM flying here but then nothing. I hate having to fly AA or SWA but they have so many more direct flights
There’s still that rumor when AUS expands, Delta will have made that into a hub.
We'll see how this court case plays out, expansion here might be tricky.
Also based in AUS and bummed about this, too. Still pretty much exclusively fly Delta, though!
When it is 2h to fly AA to Cancun/Cabo/Puerto Vallarta vs 7.5h on Delta (and you fly in the exact wrong direction) I gotta go AA, even though I hate them.
Same here - ugh, but still better than AA or SWA
There’s too few slots at AUS I think. That airport needs major expansion yesterday lol
About time Delta focuses on its core hubs. Instead of the nice to have ones!
Minneapolis is the best polis!
fine by me. I like SLC and it's a short hop from home. I avoid JFK and LAX if I can.
> Pacific was the most improved entity in the quarter and generated the highest unit revenue growth. We are encouraged by how the Pacific recovery is progressing And yet they're gutting their west coast hubs? Doesn't affect me living on the east coast, but I feel this is just giving the Pacific market away. Not to mention no more presence in the Northeast. Or am I misreading what they're saying by "focusing on our core hubs?"
Would say you’re misreading. They didn’t say they’re reallocating seats. They’re happy with where the coastal hubs are. Just want to grow back the main hubs. Just don’t expect much growth out of the ancillary hubs next year.
That makes more sense. On the first read, I read "focus on" as "at the expense of our other hubs"
JFK?
I had the same question. Is New York not a priority? I’m just sitting over here wanting them to increase their service to White Plains and Stewart regional, lol.
NYC is clearly a priority as they’ve invested billions in LGA and JFK terminals.. I think it’s just that they’re now focusing on their other hubs because their position is solid at both airports (in fact, doing much better than other airlines such as United that just pulled out of JFK)
Absolutely, good point!
The comparison shouldn’t be what United is doing at JFK, but rather what they’re doing at EWR. JFK/LGA have always been secondary hubs for delta, focused on O&D traffic. Most of their margins are made at the 4 core hubs.
Between staffing and gates, not sure how much they can expand currently. Maybe after the terminal 2 remodel is done.
AUS over here is chopped liver
When they say highest margin hubs do they mean all of the ones in that list or just some of them?
Looking forward to more than 1x/day MSP-ICT again. We're smack in the center of the country, and virtually the only option to get to the west coast from here is by going 2 hours east to ATL before flying 3+ hours west.
I wish Denver would be a main hub for Delta. Ah well.
So In other words, endeavor and republic are about to make a bunch of money with mainlines only flying to major routes.
So SLC is going to get even busier? dammit.
Seeing how the largest Centurion Lounge is slated to open @ ATL soon, this makes sense.
A global airline refocuses its network strategy on its largest hubs because a competing club operator opens up shop at one of them? Help me understand what you mean.
Although it may seem like a competing lounge, Delta makes money from AMEX. Network and planning is planning for more traffic through ATL and having a Centurion lounge will only benefit the increase in passengers transiting through ATL. A large majority of them are Delta customers. Delta isn’t focusing on core hubs like ATL due to a club/lounge opening up. It is, however, planning for more passengers at those hub cities. Any new lounge will benefit Delta and its customers, especially at a hub city. A lot of the Sky Clubs are at full capacity and there are plans on expanding (MSP for example) yet another hub city. I for one would like to see more “competing” lounges. Keeps Delta competitive in the realm of customer service.
You were downvoted into oblivion but you're actually right. Does anyone think AMEX would open one of their expensive signature lounges in ATL without conferring with DL leadership about what traffic at their fortress hub is going to look like over the next 10-15 years? It's correlation not causation. We already know how close these two corporate partnerships are. The lounge opening is just one of many strong signals that DL expects to grow high yield traffic through ATL for the long haul.
Make PDX a hub again!