The merger and use of equipment is not an excuse. I spend a fair amount of time in Houston and from talking to a good number of people in management plus reading the trade press I know that the merged company is trying maintain and increase its international presence with an ageing 757/767 fleet for thinner routes or those where range is required but a 777/747 isn't. Hold capacity to South America is very important to the new company as is deeper penetration in Europe against a strong Delta after the Northwest merger and a strong American with the benefit of the US long haul fleet on board. You obviously have no idea just how the conjunction of the merger and the 787 delays have disrupted what were Continental's plans. Anyway, that apart, the fact remains they need to fill aircraft ex LHR and are buying seats on BA as well as their pax, as I stated previously.
Yes while still trying to maintain such presence they can find the aircraft to restore other routes at the same time and I believe at the announcement of some of them was strong demand for direct flights and not connections. If United have a line of 787's delivered tomorrow they wouldn't put one into MAN.
I'm not getting into a subjective debate about the merits of Edinburgh and Manchester as destinations. I just rely on the figures
Fair enough but EDI is ahead of MAN on that list!
Why do you suppose DL may exit?. Their UK -US flights are under review to maximise the value of their involvement in Virgin. Delta have not pulled off the Atlanta route. They have upgraded the equipment and increased the capacity, it just flies as a code share. The colours on the fuselage don't matter as long as the service is acceptable and a profit is made. We also do not know the financial arrangement between the companies on this or any other service they decide to rejig.
I'm with Skipness One Echo general view on ATL, you don't give such a route up within good reason and then resume a route which was dropped a few years ago. Yes things have changed/improved but I can't see DL being around for the long haul.
There is no evidence that MAN is sitting on its hands with regard to westbound services. There is equally no evidence it isn't. That airport is a business and whilst it may offer announcements, sound bites and hints, its discussions, discounts and other terms are commercially sensitive. People on here may speculate, say what they would do and complain but from experience of international bidding and negotiation to bring people as opposed to aircraft to destinations, inc Manchester, the work that is needed is long term, constant and has more fits and starts than you would ever believe especially, and we have to deal with the facts, when there is over capacity two hundred miles away.
No evidence but we hear enough spoof about China and not a thing about the US.
Delta to JFK is already planned to be year round and bookable as such, so not sure why some are questioning if it will become year round?
Apologies my mistake but winter is a long way off being confirmed as demonstrated last year by AA/UA. Was it year round when announced of changed when they brought start forward,
Did a few scams of AA direct and via LHR and LHR is 100-200 more per passenger...