Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Does Ryan Intl Operate Airtran Flights?  
User currently offlineNycfuturepilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 791 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3136 times:

I was on-line booking a flight to LAX and one of the options that cam up was Airtran but it was operated by Ryan Intl. Whats the story with this?


Father, Son, HOYA spirit
21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJetskipper From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 405 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3122 times:

The B-717 doesn't have the range to operate ATL-West Coast. So until AirTran aquired aircraft with suitable range they subcontracted Ryan to operate the service. When AirTran starts to recieve the next gen 737's, Ryan will get the boot.

User currently offlineNycfuturepilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 791 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3069 times:

Are the west coast routes profitable for them?


Father, Son, HOYA spirit
User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

With the first 737 deliveries about 3 months away, I'm wondering if we will see the 737 show up in the schedule soon.

User currently offlineBeltwaybandit From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3002 times:

It's called a "wet lease" where the aircraft and crew are operated for the lessee. The aircraft (although painted like Airtran) is operated by Ryan Int'l and on Ryan's FAA Operating Certificate.

With Ryan as a middle-man, there is probably little, if any, profit in the deal for Airtran. It's a placeholder until the Airtran equipment can catch up.

[Edited 2004-03-24 23:05:52]

User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2174 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2877 times:

AirTran is not currently seeing a profit at both it's LAX and SFO stations. LAS, however, is profitable.

As for Ryan, AirTran signed a one year contract. They've been operating on AirTran's behalf since June 4, 2003..... they'll be gone soon. Don't know how the contract extension is going to work yet....

Travis


User currently offlineWidgetBoi From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1432 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2845 times:

Travatl,

Is the contract with Ryan the ONLY reason that flights to LAX and SFO aren't turning profits?

jeremy


User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2174 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2805 times:

Yep.....although they were slow to start, both local and connecting traffic has dramatically increased. New SFO service starts in May as well. More service to both cities should be seen this fall....

Travis


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2749 times:

Another reason the flights aren't profitable is that the people in ATL are still flying with DL instead of FL on those routes. We came into the ATL-SFO market at the time when the fare was $727.00 one way. AirTran became the price leader in that market with a fare of $115.00 or so, one way.

The ATL people need to realize the concept of "use it or lose it".
If they don't support the carrier who drove the price down, the carrier cannot continue to bleed red ink on the route. The people of ATL and other cities, like DFW where I work, need to support the low cost carrier because without us in the market, the good folks are getting screwed with high air fares !!

Just my two cents..........



User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2742 times:

Kudos to Jay Davis. Kudos.

User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2727 times:

Agreed Jay. Especially when the product is as good or better.
I'm wondering if frequency isn't the problem out west though. I realize you can't have the chicken before the egg and FL can't be flying empty planes just to have frequency, but 2 departures compared to 8 or 9 on DAL makes it tough. How does FL do with 7 dailys to ATL compared to DAL to ATL load wise?


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2677 times:

We do well from what I am told about the DFW-ATL runs.

The airline business is a VERY testosterone driven business.
For example, when we just announced expanded service from
DFW to BWI in June, adding one more flight, the AAnti-Christ
added another themselves. I think they now have 9 flights a day
to BWI.

Same situation in ATL with Widget.......when we started SFO service, DL added about 4 more flights a day. You can't tell me they are making a ton of $$$$ on that route either..........

I know this will never happen, but why can't we just all get along?

There is plenty of business in both ATL and DFW for both AA and FL and DL.
Why do we have to "one-up" the other airline???? Doesn't make sense to me to be adding even more flights just because your pissed that our airline adds another flight........we are sooooooooo small at DFW compared to AA and DL that it isn't even funny. Yet they continue to add capacity and the industry as a whole has not even begun to fully recover...........stupid moves in my opinion on both parts by AA in DFW and Widget in ATL.




User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2647 times:

I think it's all about staying power in the end. Flooding the market is stupid if your competitor isn't going away (which I hope FL doesn't or like WN in PHL). I would think that over time AA and DL would come to the conclusion that FL isn't leaving and hike the fares back up so that everyone makes more money.

User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2598 times:

We are not going anywhere! We are a profitable company and have over $300 million in the bank............



User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2587 times:

I'm betting that when the 737s arrive LAX will go to at least 3-4 a day and with that frequency comes more business travelers. I had heard on a conference call that were it not for paying the ryan air wet lease fees, LAX would be profitable with FLs own aircraft.

User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

I would tend to agree with you on everything you just wrote Quickmover!
We just needed to start service to LAX and SFO from ATL and that was the only choice available more or less, at the time.

Ryan has done a good job with the service, we just will do a better job with our own cabin staff and pilots.........



User currently offlineRumorboy From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2557 times:

Don't expect the 737s to fly to the west coast right away. From what I have heard they will stay around the southeast for a while. Mainly doing ATL-MCO,ATL-FLL, ATL-TPA, ATL-BWI. Flying from one maintenance facilty to another. Keeping a eye on the bird before they cut it loose to the west coast. I think Ryan may be around until the end of the year. They did the same thing when the 717s first came on line.

User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Jay,

I don't suppose those 737s could arrive any earlier than June could they? Isn't there some sort of trial runs that have to be made before a new aircraft enters service? Are we looking at July before they enter service?


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2534 times:

I don't have the answers to those questions. I'm sure they will be up on line ASAP..........no doubt. Just not sure of the dates.




User currently offlineRumorboy From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2497 times:

737s will be here in June and will start revenue service July 1st. They do have to do proving runs but thats suppose to only take a couple of weeks. There are already pilots going through class(check airman and sim instructors).

User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

I wonder why we didn't order the 737's with the winglets? I do understand that they cost $1 million for a pair, but you'd think with the fuel savings that the plane realizes in the long run, they would pay for themselves.

We might "re-think" this issue since fuel is now sky-rocketing !! I know we don't do nearly as much long-haul flights on a 737 as WN which is where the winglets really come into play, but ATA has them on theirs.........

Any thoughts????



User currently offlineQuickmover From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

Since they are already announcing new service for June, these jets should be in the schedule soon.

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...
Why Does WN Not Operate International Flights? posted Sun Apr 10 2005 13:00:14 by Gilesdavies
Does Ryan Int'l Operate Airtran Routes From MCO? posted Mon Nov 17 2003 20:52:22 by 727LOVER
Why Does Sandford Get More Int. Flights Than Mco posted Tue Oct 17 2006 23:22:13 by Fll2993
Why Does CO Cancel Its BRU Flights So Often? posted Thu Dec 30 2004 15:43:20 by Flying Belgian
Does Ryan Intl Have A Scheduel? posted Fri Jun 18 2004 00:14:20 by Kcrwflyer
Does LTU Only Operate Charter Flights? posted Mon Nov 3 2003 03:31:30 by BA
Why Does USAir Have So Many Flights Out Of Lga? posted Wed May 16 2001 23:51:58 by Ishky15
Why Does Canada Get The Scum Of Flights To The US? posted Fri Jun 3 2005 20:06:04 by ETStar
Why Does AF Operate Both A32X And 737s? posted Sun Sep 12 2004 20:52:08 by GoMEA
Does Hokkaido Intl. Airlines Operate The 762? posted Wed May 19 2004 21:45:46 by Pe@rson