PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2497 times:
F9: DEN-CZM, MCI-PVR, SLC-PVR all approved. Slated to begin 11/18/05.
UA: DEN-CZM approved. Slated to begin 10/31/05.
DL: SLC-PVR approved. Slated to begin 11/1/05.
I just love how UA and DL had to grab the route authority after F9 applied to these routes! Makes you wonder why they aren't looking into oppurtunities before a competitor does. I don't blame them for defending their networks, just kinda funny!
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7170 posts, RR: 45 Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2381 times:
Quoting PVD757 (Thread starter): why they aren't looking into oppurtunities before a competitor does
They are initially not interested in those routes because they are 100% leisure and, therefore, low-yielding. However, due to the "2 carriers of each country per city pair" rule under the bilateral, they don't want to take the risk of seeing a potential route from their hub being shared by two competing LCC's.
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 11957 posts, RR: 51 Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2362 times:
Quoting PVD757 (Thread starter): I just love how UA and DL had to grab the route authority after F9 applied to these routes! Makes you wonder why they aren't looking into oppurtunities before a competitor does. I don't blame them for defending their networks, just kinda funny!
Because these carriers all are reactive and not proactive.
Azstar From United States of America, joined May 2005, 541 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2290 times:
This is so typical of the legacy airline industry. DL and UA applied for the routes for NO OTHER REASON than a competitor did. So, instead of having one carrier possibly serve the routes profitably, there will be two airlines on each route likely to lose more buckets of cash. Unbelievable.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31104 posts, RR: 74 Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2219 times:
Quoting MD11junkie (Reply 3):
What do carriers need to show the DOT to apply for a route and have'em granted?
In terms of getting a US-Mexico route, very, very little. They just need to say "we will fly this route", and as long as there is an empty space for a carrier, they get it.
The only time they need to show more is when three or more airlines apply for the same route, like what is going on with MCO-CUN, since only two airlines will get it.
N160LH From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 279 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1919 times:
F9 will get dominated in SLC by DL on that route to PVR....
N160LH
"I do alright up in the air, its down on the ground that I tend to mess up..."
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7170 posts, 
From Argentina, joined May 2005, 3091 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31104 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22696 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
