Dsuairptman From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 848 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1617 times:
Let's assume US Airways bites the big one not too long from now.
While hundreds of flt. frequencies will be lost up and down the East Coast, there is the consideration of what will become of US Airways Express.
Seeing the Express divisions large presence and the number of contract carriers that provide the service, most serving only US, do you think we could see them Keep the US/USX banner and gradually mold a new route structure?
By this, I mean seeing the carries move the route map future out to the Midwest and develop a hub/focus city @ say MCI to points in the region, while continuing their strong hold the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast areas, continuing to provide service to cities that are more or less dependent on USX for air travel.
Also, to continuing building a presence in the lower Midwest, do you think they could find it viable to establish a focus city at a regional airport say between LIT and MSY?
Note this is just my theory for the short term, especially since if mainline goes done, the regionals still appear to be in a position to fly and meet the heavy demand of the markets they serve.
Also, does anyone see a probability that USX could morph into a new mainline entity, providing limited service to larger markets,while being upheld on a strong regional presence just a Cross Air did when Swiss Air went under?
Scootertrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 569 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1551 times:
Anything is possible, but the most likely outcome of a U Group CH 7 filing would be that the wholly-owned Express carriers (Piedmont, PSA and Mid Atlantic) would be dissolved as well. If any of these carriers was to morph into a new mainline, it would be Mid Atlantic with their EMB-170's. PSA would probably end up being bought at a bargain basement price by a CRJ operator. Piedmont (formally Henson... Now the merged "prop" Piedmont and Allegheny) would most likely be sent to the cornfields.
AZjetgeek From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 235 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1503 times:
According to US' website, they utilize nine carriers as part of their USX service. Granted, MidAtlantic was the one they created themselves and decided would fly Embraer 170's. If US defaults on its debt repayments and is forced to liquidate, there just won't be any USX.
Again, according to their website, Piedmont, Chautauqua, and PSA are wholly- owned subsidiaries of US Airways Group. Mesa Air and Air Midwest are owned by Mesa Air Group. That leaves ShuttleAmerica, Trans States and Colgan Air to fend for themselves and seek agreements with other carriers.
Mesa Air's biggest benefactor is HP. Losing US would hurt them, but not cripple them. It's my opinion that Mesa Air Group ought to consider merging either with Trans States if it intends to maintain a presence in the Midwest, or with PSA, if MAG decides it would rather expand its presence in Calif.
As I've said numerous times in other threads concerning the future of US, I do not want to see them go down. There is too much at stake here and I would hope that the FAA and other federal agencies tied to our country's domestic air market, will do all they can to prevent a Ch 7 liquidation of US Airways.
US653 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 161 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1394 times:
Actually, just to clarify, Chautauqua is not a wholly owned carrier. It's owned by Republic Holdings (I think that's what it's called). They also fly for American (American Connection), Delta (Delta Connection), and United (United Express).
US653...PHL-AUA...The best place in the Caribbean!!!
Akjetblue From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 790 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1283 times:
What about selling the wholly owned companies like Piedmont back to the employees?
Didn't TWA do something like that?
Not only would it add some cash to the bank, it would help keep the company afloat if mainline went under and it would most likely help the moral of the employees their? Kinda give it the ability that Crossair did for Swiss...?
Scootertrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 569 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1277 times:
Personally (being a Piedmont guy) I might go for a employee buyout. The fact is, however, that Piedmont is a wholly-owned subsidiary of US Airways Group. Therefore, Piedmont owns very little (if any) of it's assets. My fear would be that we would be buying the name only.
Besides, I am pessimistic about the viability of a prop airline in a RJ world.