Iowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4463 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5262 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Mariner (Reply 6): I would have thought it would be exactly the other way around. Why not offer the MDW pax something different from WN, not something similar.
Well there probably is a few people that want something different than WN, but then again people are more concerned about price. People near MDW are most likely acustomed to low fares and not willing to pay more than 20 bucks more then WN's fare to fly UA Mainline. Also, your username reminded me Frontier flies to DEN, there is lots of competeion between the three, thus the need for low fare TED.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 26284 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5242 times:
Quoting Iowaman (Reply 8): your username reminded me Frontier flies to DEN, there is lots of competeion between the three, thus the need for low fare TED.
I suppose that's my point. Why join the mob? Why not give 'em something different?
I take your point about fares, and you may be correct, but United mainline doesn't seem to charge much more than any LCC on routes where they dirtectly compete. In fact, on a lot of routes, United mainline is sometimes cheaper than the LCC competition.
Stirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5188 times:
Because it would go against the "grain" of what Midway is becoming, a low-fares airline airport. Airlines by serving Midway, align themselves with that identity.
The public is developing the perception, if they have not already, that by traveling out of Midway-The Budget Airport, they are somehow saving money. Almost second-class status in Chicagoland.
(Besides hubs, and a few cities, how many airports does UA and TED serve together; excluding SFO, DEN, LAX....?)
Keeping TED separate from Mainline is a difficult task. UA doesn't need to muddle the identity of it's core brand in it's strongest market; Chicago.
I say the perfect arrangement until such time Ted is spun off, or goes away. (Which we all know is going to happen someday, it's only inevitable)
Wondering if it should be done, SFO>>OAK, LAX>>BUR/ONT....?
Mexicana757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3053 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (10 years 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5093 times:
Quoting GalvanAir777 (Reply 2): But why? It seems to me anyway that the other bigs AA and DL do well out of MDW?
I think AA isnt doing that good at MDW, they only have three flights to DFW. The four American Eagle flights to LGA no longer operate. When I do flight tracker checks those flights dont appear anymore.
Midway7 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5071 times:
I think the majors AA and UA missed the boat several years ago when MDW was half empty. They should have went in there and did what ATA ended up doing. The problem is they weren't interested in the late 90's and their balance sheets went to hell after 2000.
Now, due to their lack of foresight, they have SWA to deal with. From all indications SWA is and will remain a big player in the Chicago market. Its my opinion that they are grabbing a lot more O&D traffic than people think.
At who's expense will SWA prosper, a few years back I would say AA. However, with UA's vicarious financial position and AA's more aggressive position at ORD the past few years, it is anyone's ballgame right now.
I think the majors did not realize what MDW would turn into after the new terminal was built. It's no longer a small, unfunctional, secondary facility catering to flight to MCO. It's a modern - fully functional 39 (I believe) gate facility capable of competing with ORD to a much greater extent.
Jdaniel001 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5045 times:
Quoting Midway7 (Reply 13): It's a modern - fully functional 39 (I believe) gate facility capable of competing with ORD to a much greater extent.
How are the gates allocated. It sound like the city only had 1 gate for TED or am I wrong? Or is TED subleasing from another carrier.
I think UA is making the right decision by easing TED into MDW. They are taking the travelers who are confused or whatever by the ATA bankruptcy and pullout of some of the service there. UA would be smart to add more service and frequency slowly.
SLUAviator From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 357 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5019 times:
There was an article in Crain's Chicago Business a few weeks ago saying that WN is going to seriously expand at MDW this year. By serious expansion, they said as much as 30%. The article quoted a WN exec who said they have 25 gates at MDW, and they would love to run 10 flights per day from each. 250 flights a day out of MDW sounds like WN has UA and AA square in their sights. Oh... I forgot to mention, the title of the article was "Southwest Smells Blood."
Drive to ORD in that case. As I said people just care about price, price and price. There is some variety with F9 having PTV's, etc. UA is trying to get TED as a recognized low-fare airline, even though it's part of UA. Maybe I'm doing a bad job explaining it.
Quoting Mariner (Reply 11): Or, oddly, in Mexico. I can't see the logic, for example, of mainline DEN/CUN, and Ted DEN/SJD. Which is DEN/PVR - mainline or Ted? Does it matter?
Not really, just F9 competition, and DEN to CUN seems to have fairly high fares still, which is obviously a popular destination.
Quoting SLUAviator (Reply 15): 250 flights a day out of MDW sounds like WN has UA and AA square in their sights.
It won't affect UA and AA all that much, just the additional flights will clog up MDW more than it already is so it turns into ORD.
SLUAviator From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 357 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (10 years 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4967 times:
WN having 250 flights a day out of MDW will directly affect UA and AA. They are competing head to head on lots of routes which will drive prices down. That hurts both UA and AA. The big difference is the airport--either origin or destination. I think a lot of people would go to MDW instead of ORD and arrive in OAK instead of SFO if it saved them money. WN is going after the big boys, and there is practically nothing UA and AA can do to stop them.
Frequentflykid From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4904 times:
The whole status thing really confuses me. I understand that some people think that by them flying, say, ORD-LAX on UA versus MDW-LAX on WN gives them a certain status or stigma. However, the overwhelming majority of people aren't going to care or remember who they are flying. A 747 and a 737 are all the same to most people and they don't care. They want the cheapest way from Chicago to Los Angeles. Besides people who find it easier to use one over the other or business people, they don't care if they use O'Hare or Midway. Cheap sells, obviously...
: I think cheap sells only to liesure travelers. I think the business travelers have a status thing and want the rewards of flying a larger a/c (with m
: Location does definently matter, but I think the business people actually prefer smaller planes because it's quick boarding and unloading, and also q
: One thing that is never mentioned is the distribution of the population in greater Chicagoland. The western suburbs, (Naperville, Downers Grove, Oakbr
: True to a sense. Maybe a day trip. But is someone knows they are going to be gone a few days. They don't care about getting on and off quickly, they
: Isn't TED essentially mainline? Other than not having First Class and being painted a different color it is the same as UA mainline and is operated by
: I would say in this case, MDW is a leisure/discount destination that's now served from two cities with Ted service to other primarily leisure destina
: It is, but with the added seats they are more competitive against other LCC's. But you probably already knew that.
: i absolutely agree, when I lived in Chicago, I occasionally fly out of MDW, from the mid 90's to the early 2000(AA MDW-LGA and ATA MDW-LGA/JFK). I st
: I wouldnt be so sure of that. Living in Joliet myself, We almost exclusively fly out of O'hare. Even when we lived nearly a stones throw away(Oak Law
: When UA added MDW-DEN service, I was dumbfounded. Why would a carrier that is already bleeding uncontrollably expose itself to the fare wars at MDW? S
: Connection opportunities with other TED flights maybe? UA has to protect its marketshare. I can quote hundreds of examples where an airline (against
: ok..i should have said "most people".......especially if there are flights from MDW to their destination... i'm totally against the 3rd airport....AA