Garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5313 posts, RR: 53 Reply 3, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2448 times:
Well, looks like Independence Air is going to happen. Coming from someone who lives in a potential Independence Air destination, here's hoping they provide a quality LCC service that will stick around and catch on here in the Southeast and serve some of the markets AirTran has ignored.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
Potomac From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2385 times:
i heard heard something similar, voodoo, a while back, about Indy doing its own thing while also still serving as a UX carrier. frankly, i think it would be better for both parties to have a clean break. UA doesnt need to add any more confusion to its mainline, TED, intl, and UX product offerings, and Indy needs market distinction to hit the ground running.
N6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2380 times:
I've never fully understood this story. Why does ACA want to NOT be affiliated w/ UAL anymore?
My understanding is that UAL tried to cram through some significant changes to the contract they had with ACA using option that the bankrupcy proceeding gave them to get out of existing contractual obligations. ACA said that the changes proposed by UAL were unacceptable and that they would be willing to just terminate the agreement if UAL chose to exercise its rights.
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2376 times:
it also means UA will probably lose a big chunk of their total Express fleet. While IAD may be propped up by bringing in other carriers, those planes are coming out of UA's other hubs or from RJ growth that UA desperately needed to become RJ competitive w/ AA, CO, and DL.
It does smell very much of UA's participation in Mesa's takeover attempt. I don't think ACA will just roll over and forgive UA w/o costs of some kind.
Potomac From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2354 times:
dont forget that UA was paying a fixed fee to ACA for each flight it operated, regardless of passenger load and ontime performance. in many ways it was not a profitable arrangement for UA.
UA certainly won't be able to completely and immediately fill the void of service and aircraft left when ACA breaks away. logically the new UX will start out with replacement service in markets driven by demand and profitability, though i'd imagine that they may not be able to - and probably will even choose not to - restore the same service.
a successful UX operation at IAD isn't necessarily defined as being the same operation that ACA ran. a sort of clean slate to determine service may be a good thing.
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
agree, Potomac. its the backfill issue that everyone seems to miss. there are also very few RJ's at LAX or SFO. AA has a few but isn't putting anymore there because they are needed elsewhere. DL and CO have plenty they could use but aren't. AS has done the best job of developing new routes from California hubs w/ RJ's; if anyone else decided to join them, UA would be in a world of hurt. Meanwhile, AA and DL are adding RJ's to every viable point in the midwest.
Bistro1200 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 337 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2293 times:
The type of contract UA was seeking with ACA is the same "cookie-cutter" type arrangement that UA has with Skywest, Mesa, and Air Wisconsin. Why ACA balked at the same style of contract that the other three accepted is interesting, it is a large gamble on their part and CRJs don't have the low costs that 737s + A320s do.
I don't think that UA was "behind" the Mesa bid, if they were it would be public info by now since the bankruptcy proceedings pretty much make every action subject to court approval, especially one of this size. It is convienient, sure, for them but I don't think UA is swimming in resources to back a takeover bid. The non-binding MOU was in place to show that UA would utilize them if Mesa were able to get ACA. This would be the basis for private finance companies to underwrite financing to buy ACA by Mesa.
As a Mesa shareholder, I am glad to see the stock up about 4% today on the news!
Measure to the millimeter, mark with a crayon, cut with an axe.
UALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2244 times:
UA would have done better either way. With ACA as a UAX carrier under new management that could improve its performance under a contract that pays them for performance. Or as an independent ACA is whistling past the graveyard not acknowleging that the only reputation they have in the frequent flyer world is crummy, and they are going to compete with UA and Wn in the WAS area. They won't last long. They will eventually be sold to someone.
Worldtraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
Have a look at CO and DL's hubs and you'll see how RJ's can be used. The few RJ's which UA has deployed at SFO/LAX are turboprop or mainline replacements. UA has done very little network growth using RJ's and they still have a large turboprop operation in California. Contrast that w/ DL and CO who have very few turboprops left and have used RJ's to open new, long routes which passengers use because they are nonstop.
UA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2206 times:
SFO/LAX are in the same position as MIA... settled on the extreme edge of the country, and only suitable for international and North-South connections.
There's not a lot of new RJ spoke routes that can be done (althought a few are in the pipeline, like SFO-COS)... With the exception of international connections, there is not a lot of connectivity out of LAX and SFO that can't be done via DEN. There simply isn't that much traffic between Durango, CO and Japan, for instance.
You can never expect SFO or LAX to have the amount of RJ service that mid-continental hubs have.
RJs are also impractical on the short, super frequent intra-california sectors where most UAX EMB-120s reside.
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4419 posts, RR: 35 Reply 18, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2185 times:
Praise the Lord! ACA should be allowed to try its bold experiment, and they were right to raise antitrust concerns in their lawsuit against Mesa. Today's Rochester Democrat and Chronicle had an editorial praising Sen. Schumer and Rep. Walsh for calling for an antitrust investigation into Mesa's bid. UA and its Star partner US Airways have a big vested interest in stopping Indy Air. Rochester and many other East Coast markets could benefit greatly if Independence Air succeeds.
Now we'll see whether Skeen & Co. can produce. The operational and ground issues UAPHLCS and others have mentioned are not insubstantial. The Rochester airport confirmed in the paper today that ACA has approached them about getting their own gate space independent of UA. So it sounds like ACA is laying groundwork for their own operation. But they've got lots of work to do before late spring.
Worldtraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2184 times:
your logic would say EWR shouldn't have much RJ svc but it does, even considering the denser population on the e. coast. DL uses RJ's on from LGA, JFK, and BOS for both connecting and point to point missions. Also, DL and CO have many RJ routes from CVG and CLE that are shorter than some of the United Express EMB California routes.
You are right about MIA - again AA hasn't been forced to put RJ's there but will (and are) as their facility and fleet allow.
notice that turboprops are more accepted in pleasant weather operations. RJ's are preferred when getting out of dodge and above the weather is a priority.
Kohflot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (9 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2130 times:
Or as an independent ACA is whistling past the graveyard not acknowleging that the only reputation they have in the frequent flyer world is crummy, and they are going to compete with UA and Wn in the WAS area. They won't last long.
Does this mean you've recently sold your ACA shares? Pretty harsh words for someone who still sees a potential financial benefit from the company..