Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA And SEA  
User currently offlineAlexinwa From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1149 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2289 times:

I was looking at the upcoming schedule at SEA for today and saw something rather depressing.

As of Nov 1st, UA will only operate 28 mainline flights a day. Along with 16 UAE. Total 44.

WN has 36 daily out of SEA.

I remember the good ole days when UA alone had over 70 mainline flights a day. UAE added another 36 or so.

Its so sad to see UA in the shape it is in.


You mad Bro???
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

alex,
i too remember when ual had alot of flights in and out of sea but, ual is tweeking the schedule to hopefully make it more profitable.



bus driver.......move that bus:)
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1878 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

From what I know however, UA still flys some wide body jets into SEA, which is a nice touch, in addition to that, PDX has a 67 now too I believe

User currently offlineAlexinwa From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2198 times:

Back in the day UA flew as many as 14 DC10/747/767 a day in/out of SEA. The DC10 went to ANC, YVR, ORD, DEN, SFO, IAD, and HNL. 747's to NRT, HKG, and ORD. 767's to SFO, DEN, LAX, IAD, and ORD.

Today the 777 to DEN(1) and NRT(1), along with a 763 to DEN.

The one thing about the new schedule is that most of the ORD/DEN flights are 757's. A few 757's in the SFO and LAX schedules as well.



You mad Bro???
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2176 times:

I remember when United was the powerhouse here in Seattle. They pretty much ruled and could leverage their size and route network to be able to capture a high percentage of the business markets in this part of the country.

No more. Alaska has grown exponentially over the past 10 years and as such, has taken over dominance of Seattle. With Alaska's expansion into transcon flying and the connecting of Alaska with certain routes in the lower 48, they are slowly beginning to position themselves as a carrier to be reckoned with, not only here, but in the west as a whole.

Alaska has successfully penetrated the California market, and as a result has weakened further United's position not only in north/south flying, but eastbound from both all the western states. With the strategic decisions Alaska has enter into code-share agreements with NW, HA, AA, and now DL, those carriers feed into Alaska's system and Alaska's passengers can connect onward, making Alaska a much stronger competitor to United in markets outside the west.

As a result, United is relegated to flying its core routes, ORD, DEN, LAX, SFO, JFK, IAD from Seattle. There isn't much left for them to fly.

Should United drop the SEA-NRT route (note there is NO mention anywhere that they are discussing this...this is for conjecture only), then you will see further reductions. The DEN/ORD routes are heavily dependent on connecting traffic and should the route be dropped, then you will see even further dramatic reductions.

It is a sad thing to see. However, the reality of the Seattle marketplace is that Alaska has won the war for the Seattle market. Their expansion now is wholly designed to align themselves with some other airline alliance (perhaps SkyTeam?) in order to create a network of small carriers who can share the traffic while not having the overwhelming overhead that a larger carrier would be forced to maintain.

Is this indicative of what is happening to United elsewhere? That is the question.




David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineUadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2149 times:

BAW,
look at mia...ual is down to 6 flights a day, look at where ual was flying back in the 1990s and its hard to believe it, they too have ceeded mia over to AA.



bus driver.......move that bus:)
User currently offlineBaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2110 times:

UAdc8contrail:
You are quite correct. In fact, the writing on the wall for Miami was written more than ten years ago.

American was the dominant carrier at Miami, then (help me with history) United purchased some carrier's routes into South America and then tried to go toe to toe with American. The difficulty for United was that American was already so entrenched in Miami that United had to use enourmous resources to build up its route net in South America in order to compete with AA, let alone the other airlines that flew to South and Central America. Since AA historically has been far better at marketing its product than UA (UA being the stronger of the two carriers operationally) AND already had a strong northbound traffic base, it was nearly impossible for United to a real player, especially in generating northbound originating traffic (which is where the real money is in South America) from BUE/SAO/RIO, etc.

United then tried to link its strong Orient base to South America; however, it could not do so via Miami. Once AA had code-share agreements in place with certain Asian carriers, AA could carry traffic between Asia and South America with one connection service at DFW and JFK. United tried to carry them via JFK and ORD; however, with the number of destinations that AA offered v. United, it was difficult to generate northbound traffic from South America to Asia.

United also tried to end run American by building up its flying to Dulles and JFK, then later Chicago. The reality, however, is that most business conducted with South America in the US is done in the Miami area (although California is growing fast). AA understood this from the beginning, hence, really focused in on building local presence in South America while bringing its resources to MIA. As such, AA was able to turn MIA into its third fortress hub (behind DFW, ORD). Then when AA was able to get into the Caribbean in one fell swoop, building up SJU as its Caribbean hub and shuttling passengers from Caribbean points into Miami direct, there was really no place for United to go...They could not capture the deep south; the north of South America was a nightmare, and AA in the Caribbean with the feed from North American points to those two cities, there was no place for United to go.

Like Seattle, it was a sad thing to see. Frankly, I believe United had a far better product to South America than AA. However, AA played the South American market better than United.





David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineJakob77 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2064 times:

UA bought Pan Am's South American routes if i'm not mistaken.

User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2003 times:

UA bought Pan Am's South American routes if i'm not mistaken.

Yes, I think that's right. I also believe AA purchased it's South American routes from Eastern, who originally acquired them from Braniff.

Charles, SJ



The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineOrd From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1972 times:

"However, AA played the South American market better than United."

What AA did was commit resources to Miami in part by eliminating hubs in Nashville, San Jose and Raleigh. If UA were to have built up Miami the planes would have needed to come from somewhere, and it would have been a bad move to reduce service at one of the five hubs (where UA was #1 in each market) just to go head-to-head with AA in Miami.

As for Seattle, it simply got caught after deregulation of not being a UA hub. UA has tried to maintain a good size presence there (much larger than AA and DL), but the fact is UA is a hub airline and must concentrate its resources at its hubs.


User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

Their expansion now is wholly designed to align themselves with some other airline alliance (perhaps SkyTeam?)

My guess would be OneWorld given their already well-established relationships with AA, BA, QF and CX.

But then again...

Charles, SJ

[Edited 2004-10-27 23:51:56]


The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

Perhaps UA could have tried to serve South American cities from LAX and MIA rather than from ORD, IAD, and JFK. That might have worked to attract traffic originating in South America. This is just speculation now, as it's probably too late to try.

User currently offlineBahadir From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1780 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 1736 times:

UA is here to stay in SEA. The SEA-NRT flight is always doing well with a lot of freight moving back and forth. It is also nice alternative to connect in SFO. There are a lot of folks connecting in NRT to other Asian destinations. On top of that let us not forget the Star Alliance airlines serving with UA codeshare to CPH and Asia.

The schedule always goes down a bit compared to the summer time. SEA has been doing well for UA and will still do..



Earthbound misfit I
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...
UA In SEA And N Gates posted Sun May 22 2005 06:36:35 by Alexinwa
UA And CO -- Common Ancestor posted Fri Dec 8 2006 07:51:20 by N328KF
It's Time For UA And CO posted Sat Nov 18 2006 07:24:56 by Lufthansa
AA/UA And The WTC 9/11 Memorial posted Fri Oct 6 2006 20:50:07 by Nycfly75
UA And QF Accident At Melbourne-ATSB Final Report posted Tue Sep 19 2006 06:59:26 by Biddleonia007
UA And The 757s posted Sat Sep 16 2006 19:50:07 by FL370
UA And The New Seats posted Mon Aug 28 2006 18:43:31 by FL370
UA DC10's SEA-HKG posted Tue Jul 25 2006 06:13:34 by Alexinwa
UA And 737-700's? posted Thu Mar 30 2006 05:48:42 by Alaska737
UA And NW At JFK posted Thu Mar 2 2006 02:00:23 by WDBRR