We'll be a disaster for Qantas: Delta

[bambbbam2]

From
http://business.smh.com.au/business/well-be-a-disaster-for-qantas-delta-20090422-afej.html

DELTA AIR LINES has challenged Qantas's dominance of the Australia-United States route after describing its foray into the market as a "disaster" for the incumbent airline.


Qantas stands to lose more than 200 passengers a day - over half the seats on a standard jumbo jet - when Delta begins daily flights between Sydney and Los Angeles in early July.


Even before Delta launches services, the trans-Pacific route has been transformed in a matter of months from being one of Qantas's most profitable international legs to become loss-making, largely because of a dramatic drop in demand for business and first class travel.


Delta's network planning chief, Glen Hauenstein, said its flights in July would be "relatively full" because more than 30 per cent of seats were already booked.

 

[MAX_1]

After reading some of the reported issues in the below link, I wouldn't be in a hurry to use Delta.

Consumer complaints about Delta Airlines

 

[NM]

After reading some of the reported issues in the below link, I wouldn't be in a hurry to use Delta.

Consumer complaints about Delta Airlines

After reading some of those reported issues, I have come to the conclusion that Delta is no different to any other airline - they have customers who are ignorant of fare rules and have unrealistic expectations when it comes to service providers bending rules because they should be treated as an exception.

I saw few reports there that I considered were representative of any systemic customer service issues at Delta that would cause me not to choose to travel with the airline.

 

[BAM1748]

Have flown Delta, no better or no worse than others in the same class.

Be like Mcdonalds, serving 1,000,000 people per day, if they get 1% of people go back with the wrong order that's 10,000 people.

Important to look at the percentages as well as the actual number, that gives you the trend.

 

[markis10]

One plane load versus 7 from QF - not a disaster in my books, and it did not work for Pan Am, Continental or Northwest in the past, cannot see much changed in terms of the basics.

 

[ANstar]

One plane load versus 7 from QF - .

I only count 6 for QF?

BNE 1
MEL 1
AKL 1
SYD 3 (inc SFO)

Anyways with VA, effrectively 2 from SEP (ie MEL/BNE 1 and SYD 1) then that is 3 new aircraft flying that weren't there previosuly which is a big jump in capacity.

If Delta are interlining an average of 200 pax a day onto QF, then I presume those pax will mostly fly Delta.... so QF may need to cut more pacific capacity... will be interesting to see.

A friend of mine on an Air NZ LAX-AKL flight recently said the FA advised they had 190 seats in Y free!

 

[NM]

I only count 6 for QF?

Currently six as SYD-LAX has dropped from QF11, QF107, QF149 back to just QF11 and QF107.

 

[markis10]

I only count 6 for QF?

BNE 1
MEL 1
AKL 1
SYD 3 (inc SFO)

It is 6, I just added extra to account for the A380 capacity on the route , point being 2400 seats versus 300 is not exactly going to be a disaster, yes Virgin will not help but we also need to consifer the impact on UA as well in the mix. I would expect Delta to hurt them more.

 

[maninblack]

After reading some of the reported issues in the below link, I wouldn't be in a hurry to use Delta.

Consumer complaints about Delta Airlines

I have flown Delta a few times and rate them as okay...better than UA or AA. Their new business class seat product is the same as the Air Canada seat which is very good indeed, certainly better than the QF Skybed Mk1 version. (as long as you are happy with the angled layout, which does not bother me at all) Delta no doubt will be making special efforts to impress when they commence the route but also no doubt service will fall away over time.

As to Markis10's comments regarding PanAm, they flew the route for about 40 years very successfully but they were also in a totally different era so there is no real comparison to be made, similar re Continental.

 

[NM]

As to Markis10's comments regarding PanAm, they flew the route for about 40 years very successfully but they were also in a totally different era so there is no real comparison to be made, similar re Continental.

And both Pan Am and Continental operated aircraft that could not fly the route non-stop. CO used DC-10 aircraft with a stopover in AKL. I am not old enough to remember the Pan Am routes taken, but expect HNL was a significant player.

 

[aybee]

I have flown Delta a few times and rate them as okay...better than UA or AA. Their new business class seat product is the same as the Air Canada seat which is very good indeed, certainly better than the QF Skybed Mk1 version.

I agree - the new AC & DL seats are excellent. Have used DL in the past quite a few times NRT-LAX when they flew it and found their front cabin service to be at the upper level - for U.S. carriers that is.

My own personal opinion is the DL reported piece above is alluding to QF no longer being able to treat the Trans-Pac as a cash cow, rather than a direct threat to service levels etc.

 

[straitman]

And both Pan Am and Continental operated aircraft that could not fly the route non-stop. CO used DC-10 aircraft with a stopover in AKL. I am not old enough to remember the Pan Am routes taken, but expect HNL was a significant player.

I flew Pan Am to LAX via HNL in 1982. Good guess NM.

 

[docjames]

PanAm did do SYD-LAX nonstop with 747SPs in the 80s

 

[tuapekastar]

I went MEL-LAX on Pan Am in 1978. I cannot recall if there was a stop, but if there was, it was AKL and definitely not HNL, as I'm positive I've never been there.

So I guess there was a mixture of routes going on.

 

[markis10]

As to Markis10's comments regarding PanAm, they flew the route for about 40 years very successfully but they were also in a totally different era so there is no real comparison to be made, similar re Continental.

Pan Am had sole rights to the route as US carrier for many years up until the late seventies after the "transpacific case" and of course were the launch customer for the 747SP which allowed non stop routings. They operated for that 40 years under a regulated (protected) environment, and in fact it was the removal of the protection that saw them exit the Australian market two years later when CO and NW came in along, with the sale of the route to United along with some aircraft (two of which subsequently had issues with gear collapses on the transpac route). I was working in the tower at KSA for the last flight!

Pan Am of course was also the only real airline hijacking to have occured in Australia as well with the Clipper 816 incident at KSA. My point was that we had CO, NW and Pan Am all competing with QF and they survived, in recent times even UA had to reduce capacity and Mel services, I dont think Delta will have to much impact.

On a separate note - here's a nice foot shot from a SYD-LAX PAN AM NON STOP FLIGHT - QF009's predecessor???

1981 - flying on a nonstop Pan Am B747SP from Sydney to Los Angeles photo - Don Boyd photos at pbase.com

 

[maninblack]

Pan Am had sole rights to the route as US carrier for many years up until the late seventies after the "transpacific case" and of course were the launch customer for the 747SP which allowed non stop routings. They operated for that 40 years under a regulated (protected) environment, and in fact it was the removal of the protection that saw them exit the Australian market two years later when CO and NW came in along, with the sale of the route to United along with some aircraft (two of which subsequently had issues with gear collapses on the transpac route). I was working in the tower at KSA for the last flight!

Pan Am of course was also the only real airline hijacking to have occured in Australia as well with the Clipper 816 incident at KSA. My point was that we had CO, NW and Pan Am all competing with QF and they survived, in recent times even UA had to reduce capacity and Mel services, I dont think Delta will have to much impact.

On a separate note - here's a nice foot shot from a SYD-LAX PAN AM NON STOP FLIGHT - QF009's predecessor???

1981 - flying on a nonstop Pan Am B747SP from Sydney to Los Angeles photo - Don Boyd photos at pbase.com

I was not suggesting DL will crush Qantas! only that they have a decent product and will provide some competition. What you point out above is true but almost "ancient history" and it is QF who have benefited most from a regulated (protected) market :!:

By the way Pan Am also flew their SP's non-stop LAX-MEL.

 

[markis10]

What you point out above is true but almost "ancient history" and it is QF who have benefited most from a regulated (protected) market :!:

By the way Pan Am also flew their SP's non-stop LAX-MEL.

Qantas were not protected in any way from CO/UA/NW and AA in the 80s and 90s, and the contraction of UA's services was certainly not "almost" ancient news by comparison.

I have no idea as to the product on offer from Delta however their connections/codeshare capability for onwards traffic beyond the gateway port is lacking in comparison to QF and V, thats a big thing in the airline world and over time will impact yields.

 

[maninblack]

Qantas were not protected in any way from CO/UA/NW and AA in the 80s and 90s, and the contraction of UA's services was certainly not "almost" ancient news by comparison.

I have no idea as to the product on offer from Delta however their connections/codeshare capability for onwards traffic beyond the gateway port is lacking in comparison to QF and V, thats a big thing in the airline world and over time will impact yields.

Right, the UA contraction is not almost ancient history but the rest is, different times, different circumstances.

Skyteam offers a fairly extensive route coverage in the US/Mexico/Central America, I think somewhat more extensive than V can offer.

 

[ANstar]

Qantas were not protected in any way from CO/UA/NW and AA in the 80s and 90s, ..

Weren't QF a government owned airlien then, so in effect being protected as they didn't have to make a profit.

 

[markis10]

Weren't QF a government owned airlien then, so in effect being protected as they didn't have to make a profit.

Yes that is a good point but at the same time the US airlines had their interesting bankruptcy laws to hide behind, in effect offering similar protection in some ways.

Regardless my view has also been echoed by Brett at Virgin, in short Delta have a lot more to lose and will find it a lot hard to make the route profitable than the Australian airlines for a variety of reasons that have occurred in the past and in the opinion of those in the industry, in some cases running airlines, they still remain valid.

For instance if you look at the connection issue, yes Delta have good connections at home, but little here, and when you look at inbound demographics of travellers, from memory 90% of each plane will be going beyond Sydney as part of their trip.

If Delta expand to Brisbane and Melbourne they will be more of a force, a single flight to Sydney with liitle connection capability for onward travellers is hardly a disaster for Qantas or V, thats not to say the increased competition is not welcome