FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6776 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 2466 times:
Yeah, I was kind of surprised by the MSP-PNS launch. I had kind of expected we'd get DTW-PNS before MSP. I think the reasoning for launching the route is two-fold:
1) Backfill demand lost in the trimming of MEM. PNS is losing one flight to MEM as NW is chopping a few banks out of the MEM hub. However, NW runs the highest LF's of any carrier at PNS. The MSP-PNS route should bring the extra capacity to makeup for the MEM loss.
2) PNS has a lot of snowbirds who come down to escape the cold. Many of them come from the upper Midwest which is well served by MSP.
Also with the CO/DL/NW alliance, DL and CO can put their codes on this flight which should help it. It will be interesting to see how the route does.
Mikey711MN From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1410 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 2297 times:
PVD757 & JpetekYXMD80, I first thought that NW's move in on MKE might spell the end of YX, but now I'm not so convinced. Granted, if NW started MKE-SFO or MKE-SEA service, that would speak greater volumes for NW's intentions, but it's not like the MKE demand for those destinations will just up and vanish if YX does.
Which brings me to my point: if you're a big carrier like NW who enjoys a loyal following at a medium-sized city like MKE who is competing against a slow-and-steady company like YX, why would you want to send them to their grave only to have to inevitably fight a bigger battle the next day when someone like (just for current examples) FL, WN, or B6 shows up?
It'd be kind of killing the goose who lays the golden eggs. I hope that the both of them can operate successfully in MKE for the good of the people there. (where I grew up! )
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3430 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 2260 times:
What's stopping them from coming in now? Oh that's right, YX is kryptonite for LCCs. If WN wanted MKE, they would've made it happen already. Just because one airline likes a route doesn't mean that everybody does.
Nwcoflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 695 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months ago) and read 2239 times:
NW is not trying to put YX out of business! There is something called competition. From the LA area to Vegas there many airlines including AA, UA, WN, HP, NW, and B6 just to name a few. Nobody is putting anybody out of business. NW has loyal flyers in the MKE area, and it just makes it simpler to give n/s flights to the most frequently traveled destinations. Also, if a SEA-MKE service is added, it will not be an attack on YX. SEA is just like MKE, very loyal to NW. Pairing between the two would not be illogical, in my opionion.
NW CEO Richard Anderson stated that NW would continue to increase MKE service, so I hope that there will not be a NW is attacking YX forum every time NW adds a new destination from MKE.
Mizzou65201 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 196 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months ago) and read 2211 times:
NW had something between a mini-hub and hub at MKE back in the 80s and early 90s, after the NW-Republic merger but before NW shut it all down in Sept. 1992, leaving only MSP, DTW and MEM service. Hence, the WorldClub location at MKE Concourse E, probably the most visible remnant of the old hub, apart from the somewhat large number of gates (though NW did give up two to CO within the past year, leaving NW with six gates)
Now MKE seems to be turning more into a "focus city." Still a loyal FF base from the old hub days. I don't see the number of flights being added as predatory to YX, and as a born and raised MKE-an I am very loyal to Midex...
How would MKE-SEA be even possibly seen as predatory to YX when YX doesn't even fly the route?
Mikey711MN From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1410 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months ago) and read 2169 times:
Mizzou, I think you may have misunderstood my post. NW flying those two routes--MKE-SFO and MKE-SEA--would speak volumes for their intentions to stay in Milwaukee a while and therefore not be even remotely construed as a move against YX's market share. It would show, at least in my mind, that there was pent-up demand on those routes that they could capitalize on.
While not every route fits every airline's business plan, a paying customer is a paying customer. The Milwaukee area seems to have enough of them for both YX and NW to make money on the same city pairs.
IndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2037 times:
The B717 is saving YX big bucks (in fuel/maintenance). The aircraft are costing the airline very little for the first couple years as the airline purchased them with back-loaded leases... if YX can't turn it around over the next couple years, then they'll pay for them big time.
- - -
NW has always seen a market at MKE (they tried hubbing them a decade ago)... the city has provided a huge revenue stream to NW over the years and has received DC-10 (and currently B753) service to MSP and DTW. Personally, I don't buy that NW is launching flights from MKE to key cities to "kill" YX... if the flights prove to be successful - and they are gradually developing - then they'll stay, regardless of whether YX does or not.
UPSfueler From United States of America, joined May 2003, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1985 times:
So they are not flying the DC9s out of MKE anymore? If not I will pay the extra 40 dollars to fly out of ORD to get on one again. Back in May of this year I flew out of MKE going to JAX via DTW. I really liked NW and hope to fly them again soon. We came back into MKE on a DC9-30 from DTW.
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 47
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1863 times:
Also has anyone thought by NW beefing up the number of flights and cities offered might be a preemptive strike to keep other LCC's out for the time being?????? That right there might buy Midwest more time.
Mlsrar From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1417 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1846 times:
Northwest is not leveraging their size to put YX out of business. Additionally, in spite of their rather ubiquitous rebranding and division of the business silos, I feel it will have the potential to keep them competitive and bring them to profitablity.
Northwest has been throwing up very attractive billboards all around town, and is the official airline sponsor of Miller Park!
With their saver service launch, PHX, LAX, and DEN have had impressive loads. (This is in spite of F9 who, ironically enough, shares a gate with United)
Back to the topic. The MKE-SFO route was converted to a one-stop in MCI. Now, they've dropped to one flight per day, and are abandoning the route for the season anyway. They have not stated intentions to resurrect the route in the spring. With NW offering nonstop service to SFO, it will likely prosper, as LAS and LAX already have.
Additionally, Mark Travel Corp., parent company of Funjet is using YX for charters to PVR and LAS next year...no more ATA. This means higher loads, and a chance for NW to pick up the slack for LAS.
There is room for both carriers to excel, and also for FL to prosper. I think the verdict is still out on F9...no one really knows they're here!
I mean, for the right price I’ll fight a lion. - Mike Tyson
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7890 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1603 times:
There's still plenty of -9's in and around MKE.
NW uses MKE as a focus city as it also steals traffic from the north side of Chicagoland, and NW has minimal service in that market.
NW isn't starting MKE-SFO, that was only rumored. Judging that DTW-SFO is down to 3 dailies, I highly doubt you'll see this route happen. In all likelihood these are the routes you'd see NW add out of MKE in the future: FLL, TPA, SEA.