Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Virgin USA To Be Based In Philly  
User currently offlineKevin From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 1135 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9323 times:

Virgin is in talks with Philadelphia and Pennsylvania officials about locating the headquarters for a new low-cost airline in the city.
The company, to be called Virgin USA, would operate flights from the Philadelphia Int'l Airport.

Way to go Virgin!

48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9202 times:

Heh, sorry buddy, but in talks doesn't mean it will be so.

With WN's recent announcement of low fare service at PHL, VSUSA will have trouble.

N


User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4429 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9131 times:

Kiss 'em goodbye. If they are based in Philly, WN will kill Virgin USA off.

They're better off finding a market with good O&D traffic, where an established LCC has NOT entered on a big scale,


User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4429 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9115 times:

P.S. Virgin America is a better name I think.

User currently offlinePotomac From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9052 times:

yeah, i'd suggest renaming the topic, because it hasn't been decided yet. virgin america/virgin usa is looking at 5 or 6 potential sites for both a airline hub and site for corporate HQ. they are PHL, IAD, JFK, BOS, and either LAX or SFO.



User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4429 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8920 times:

PHL, IAD, JFK, BOS, and either LAX or SFO

All of which are Cactus-related.  Laugh out loud

No, seriously, I'd say their best bet is either BOS or SFO. IAD would be good if they decided to purchase ACA and use their existing infrastructure to start the airline. Otherwise, you'll have two upstarts at IAD both trying to make a foothold, and both might eventually die as a result.

JFK has jetblue, Branson might as well forget that one. PHL has WN. Not yet fully established, but once WN gets going with it's PHL service, it'll be hard to compete with. LAX is serviced by a myriad of LCCs, even if none of them are actually based there. SFO has LCC service as well, but, the situation is not the same as LAX and I imagine SFO would be a better location to attempt starting.

I'd lay my money on BOS though.


User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1593 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8880 times:

Kiss 'em goodbye. If they are based in Philly, WN will kill Virgin USA off.

Why can't an LCC base it's operation where it can get the best deal. I do not think they want to start a super hub at PHL. A focus city, perhaps.

WN is based at DAL and not every Southwest flight passes through there (for obvious reasons).

Another example would be AirTran based at Orlando. An important focus city for them but not their primary hub.



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4429 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8768 times:

WN hasn't even truly established it's service to PHL yet as far as I know, but, once they do, they'll be fairly difficult to compete with.

If Virgin USA is planning to establish itself in a city, typically that city will be the most important in the network. Unless Virgin USA plans to be more of a point-to-point airline, in which case much of it's route network will have flights that bypass PHL altogether. But if they're planning on hubbing out of their base of operations, then they have to seriously consider the competition. WN will be a worthy adversary. And it's got brand recognition. Here in the USA, SRB's product is not known as well as he probably thinks it is.

I wish him the best of luck. Which is why I hope he doesn't start the airline in PHL, LAX, or IAD.


User currently offlineMidway2airtran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8714 times:

I think Virgin America could do well in PHL, even with WN. The one hurting in that case would be US. Guess we will see where Virgin America really goes.



"Life is short, but your delay in ATL is not."
User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3326 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8646 times:

I think they want the airline up and running within a year or so. Well gates at BOS will not even be available for at least another 2 years, not only that but BOS is seeing more and more LCC's now too, with Airtran and now Jetblue.

I dont think IAD would be that bad, JFK has jetblue, PHL i dont think WN will cause much of a problem with only 14 flts to start. LAX has a ton of LCC's, and SFO though not as many LCC's still has a frequent problem with delays. MCO just doesn't cut it for a type of operation like this.


User currently offlinePotomac From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8649 times:

i think BOS is unappealing bcs it offers limited connection opportunities (i'm not talking about connecting to virgin atlantic flights either). plus, it is delay prone with a miserable runway configuration, and facilities are limited.

i dont think branson is afraid of running up against an existing LCC, but i think he'd rather do it against an unproven ACA/independence in IAD vs. JetBlue at JFK. and PHL seems unappealing not so much due to WN (though on their own i dont think they'd be much of a deterrant), but also bcs PHL is up there as being delay prone too.

i dont think LAX and SFO are serious contenders, as much as they were just being considered if a west coast based LCC ended up being the choice, which i dont think it will be.

just my thoughts of course...


User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1593 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8626 times:

Virgin has name recognition in California, Vegas, Florida, New York, Boston and Washington DC. Not a bad place to start.


Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineUSAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 53
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8630 times:

Somehow I think while maybe their corporate HQ could be here in Philly, I doubt PHL will be their main hub...reason being VS doesnt serve PHL, and I would think that Virgin USA would want some feeder traffic from regular VS flights...maybe VS to PHL is in the cards????

Greg



Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
User currently offlinePotomac From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8556 times:

on that note, i do know that virgin usa is evaluating cities both as potential hubs and sites for corporate HQ. if you add those considerations - office/facility space, proximity to airport, cost and quality of living for employees, tax incentives, etc., it paints a different picture of the cities under consideration.

User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16691 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8521 times:

"If Virgin USA is planning to establish itself in a city, typically that city will be the most important in the network."

I agree with USAFHummer, just because they might make Philadelphia their Corporate headquarters does not mean they will make PHL their base of operations.

US Airways is based in Arlington Virginia, Airtran is based out of Orlando even though their largest hub is ATL etc..

Where a Company's Corporate Headquarters is located has more to do with friendly business enviroment than operations, although that does play it the process.

I think PHL is very likely the focus of Virgin America, which might be one of the reasons WN decided to make the first move.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8367 times:

Virgin Atlantic feeding the hub will be of less importance than you think.

US law will still apply - the code-sharing and feeding will require approval since one will be a domestic carrier and the other international.

N


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8370 times:

US Airways' HQ at Crystal City is very close to DCA, which is US Airways most important non-hub city.

The rumors have been out there about AirTran returning to ATL as its' HQ. Supposedly, the reason why the merged companies kept MCO as the HQ is that it was cheaper to keep MCO as the HQ than it would be to get out of the building leases that AirTran had at MCO at the time of the merger. And Valujet had a smaller number of employees that would have to be transferred when compared to the amount of staff they would have needed to transfer to ATL if it were to be the HQ.

As for Virgin USA, they will definitely hub out of an current VS city; the US offices of Virgin Atlantic are in Norwalk, CT. Supposedly, Virgin USA has set up offices in NYC for the time being; I still think that Virgin USA and Virgin Atlantic will share the same office buildings up in Norwalk.


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8346 times:

BOS and OAK are better choices!!!

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8327 times:

Neither BOS nor OAK are good choices. BOS as has been mentioned is exceptionally delay prone and offers zero US connecting opportunities.

OAK is a Southwest city and a jetBlue city, also with limited domestic connecting opportunities except up and down the heavily competitive west coast.

N


User currently offlineAs739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5997 posts, RR: 24
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8057 times:

Oakland has no room what so ever Behramjee. Airlines are battling it out in OAK for gates and the airport is currently 7 million pax/per year over capacity. Not a chance!
ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7955 times:

If they started with a B6 type scheme, they could have two hubs, one on the west coast, and one on the east coast. BOS could be the east coast hub, and SFO could be the west coast hub. With the reopening of terminal 2 in SFO, there will be a few more gates open to work with.

User currently offlineAs739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5997 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7896 times:

Unfortunatly for SFO, the high cost of living and high landing fee's and rent cost may kill any chance of SFO. SFO has the second highest fee's in the nation from my understanding (someone correct me if I'm wrong). The rent here is unreal. Copa, I have learned more that AA want the whole T2 for themselves, all 13 gates. Now I'm sure the airport will have some say in that. Would be nice to have Virgin USA here, but time can only tell.
ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3326 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7900 times:

i can tell you it is highly unlikely BOS will be a hub. Gates will not be open for another 2 years, and i doubt Branson wants to open the airline that far away. Not only that but BOS is horrible for connections, delay prone, and already has Airtran and JetBlue.

As for VS in PHL, it has been rumored for a while that VS has expressed interest in PHL. I know it deviates from their typical lesuire or Big business markets such as LAX and NYC, but it could be a possibility


User currently offlinePhilaboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7859 times:

As a Philadelphia resident, of course I am thrilled about Virgin's possibilty of coming to PHL, however, I do think that it is a good location when it comes to geography with major cities in the Northeast. another possibility Virgin could consider is PIT. I know the city iteself isn't doing so well, and USAirways threatening to stop PIT as a hub might open a door for Virgin.
Anything's possible.


User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7800 times:

AS739X- Will AA expand SFO with more flights intenationally or more domestic service?


25 A330323X : Does Bermuda II let VS fly LHR-PHL? My memory is kinda rusty, but I seem to think that there's some number of pax required if two carriers from the sa
26 Gigneil : I'm pretty sure PHL is an LHR city and therefore VS can fly there if they want. N
27 747firstclass : A330323X, Bermuda II does allow for direct flights PHL-LHR for US carriers. In times past both TW and AA flew that route. However, the catch is that t
28 A330323X : I realize that PHL is a LHR city. BA flies a 747 and a 777 daily PHL-LHR. My question is whether BA and VS are both allowed to serve PHL-LHR at the sa
29 USAFHummer : BA currently flies twice daily PHL-LHR-PHL with a 744 and 772...VS to PHL is one of the most often mentioned rumors regarding new intl service at PHL.
30 AA777MIA : Did AA fly PHL to LHR or PHL to LGW at that time...???
31 Goboeing : Is there enough demand to fly 4-5 flights a day from PHL to London? BA has 2, US sometimes has 2, and another seems like it would be too much. Nick
32 Post contains images USAir330 : Virgin @ PHL!!!! Can't wait to see those 747's or A340's flying over the city!
33 USAFHummer : Its still just a rumor USAir330, and has been as long as Ive been on a.net...dont get excited yet... Greg
34 Aloha717200 : What is Bermuda II? filler filler filler (this is ridiculous)
35 Jcooke : Is there enough demand to fly 4-5 flights a day from PHL to London? BA has 2, US sometimes has 2, and another seems like it would be too much. US typi
36 Ckfred : What would be interesting is if Virgin were to go to ORD. VS used to fly ORD-LHR until 9/11. ORD would love to get a LCC into ORD, but JetBlue is balk
37 Usairways85 : The only two carriers flying PHL-LON are US and BA US has a daily 333 and a seasonal second daily flight with a 762 BA has two daily flights, a 744 an
38 NWA330Tony : I Have to agree with philaboy I think PIT would be a better spot then PHL and right now the area could sure use the good news so they can tell USAirwa
39 BN747 : What a bloodbath this is shaping up to be??? And on so many levels! It really is shaping up as a notorious philly street fight! WN moves in on US's tu
40 Legacyins : Virgin USA representatives will be in San Francisco on Monday to hear a sales pitch from the local business community. Our new Governor Arny already h
41 Copaair737 : Well, I think that SFO would be a great place for Virgin USA to hub at, but thats just me.
42 Lhr001 : Reality Check- PHL... NO Los Angeles... Definitely A Choice San Francisco... Definitely A Choice In the scheme of Richard Branson.. San Francisco and
43 Copaair737 : If it is between SFO and LAX, i see SFO getting it, because of more availible gates compared to LAX
44 Usairways85 : ok first, what does the amount of international carriers have to do with the hub Branson picks. The airline cannot be solely based on connecting paxs
45 Gigneil : PHL would have problems sustaining a major player such as Virgin Atlantic on a daily basis to London! How are they going to support a whole team of fl
46 Lhr001 : Gigneil, First it is important to stress one thing. The international traffic that is fed into SFO and LAX is more than 10 x that of PHL. It is good t
47 Sebwhite : Don't forget SFO-YUL and SFO-YYC.
48 Lhr001 : Sebwhite, Thank you for the additional flights. The Air Canada operation at SFO is very nice in reference to their on-going association with Star Alli
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AN-12 To Be Based In Canada. posted Fri May 19 2006 19:20:00 by Wolsingerjet
Jetstar To Be Based In Avalon posted Tue Feb 24 2004 09:33:16 by Flyinghighboy
New Easyjet Hub To Be Based In Brussels? posted Tue Nov 26 2002 14:50:29 by A330DAT
AC's Low-cost Airline To Be Based In YVR posted Wed Aug 15 2001 19:00:44 by Jiml1126
Flight Attendants In USA To Be Certified posted Tue Dec 16 2003 03:03:06 by Brido
Concorde to be banned in USA posted Fri Feb 12 1999 00:28:44 by L-188
Emirates A380 To Be Delivered In April/Fly In July posted Wed Apr 26 2006 12:00:28 by Singapore_Air
Was The MD12 Going To Be Built In Long Beach posted Mon Apr 24 2006 02:56:59 by 747400sp
Big LH Long Range Order To Be Announced In March posted Tue Feb 28 2006 00:44:04 by Bolu340
Ryanair To Be Exposed In Channel 4 Documentary posted Tue Feb 7 2006 01:05:31 by BAxMAN