MD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7 Posted (8 years 11 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3867 times:
Will Airtran ever expand at DFW or LAX?? , I kknow FL serves ATL,BWI,LAS,MCO and LAX from DFW pretty good up against the monster there (AA) . And from LAX they serve DFW and LAX but is there any chance that they will add new destinations??? BWI or MCO??? . I hope they can expand from these cities in the near future.
In the future I can see them:
Flyibaby From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1017 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3760 times:
I don't know if they have the available gates in MCO for transcon flights, plus that market is kinda inundated right now. I too however am surprised that they don't beef up DFW a little more, unless they are just awaiting new equipment.
SeaTran From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 58 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3714 times:
AirTran must establish itself beyond a single-hub operation at ATL. July DOT ratings prove that.
I think AirTran will slowly expand at DFW. DFW can touch almost every city currently in the AirTran route system with both fleet types. It is a much more centrally located city than ATL.
At LAX, I hope they expand. I totally agree that LAX-LAS would be a great starter route for West coast point-to-point flying. I'd love to see LAX or another West coast city become the focal point for developing a "barbell" shaped route system for AirTran. To become a truly national airline, they need to establish a West coast route system. However, for the time being I see very little West coast capacity being added. There may be a couple of West coast cities added over the next year or so, but it's doubtful they will serve anywhere but ATL.
Ideally, I would like to see AirTran develop central and western US hubs. Candidates for the central US would be DFW, DEN, or HOU. Candidates for a western US hub would be SLC, LAX, SFO, SMF, OAK, or SEA.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25137 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3672 times:
The September issue of ATW has an interview with CEO Joe Leonard.
The article does touch on expansion plans for Airtran. Its mentions that loosing ATA's Midway operation "was definitely a disappointment", and would have allowed the airline to diversify beyond ATL.
Going forward, while ATL which currently accounts for 70% will continue to be the nucleus of the network, the airline will not focus on only one or two megahubs, but will instead develop numerous minihubs/focus cities.
The airline is not particularly looking to open many new cities, but instead will inter connect current ones. While Atlanta is the first city to connect to a new spoke, much future growth will come from further connecting the minihubs/focus cities to the spoke city.
In regards to Dallas the article mentions the carrier currently serves the top 6 of 10 markets, and is in no hurry to grow.
Quoting SeaTran (Reply 2): I totally agree that LAX-LAS would be a great starter route for West coast point-to-point flying
You've gotta be kidding right? The LAX-LAS market is extremely competitive and is very well served by Southwest, America West, United and American. Between them they have 36 daily flights. In addition there are near 50 additional daily flights between the other Southland airports (BUR,SNA,LGB,ONT) and Vegas.
Airtran would be foolish to use its resources enter the middle of such an already saturated low fare market. Kinda reminds me of the repeated times Delta has tried nudge into and run LAX-SFO shuttle services, to only fail as the SoCal-Bay Area market is pretty well covered by incumbents.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
SunValley From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3651 times:
Airtran knows that while major emphasis will be at ATL, they must fully diversify into other focus & point to point cities. One major difference between WN & most others (including B6) is that there is very little reliance on one major hub operation. As we have seen in the past, weather & disaster in 1 hub city can almost completely shut an airline down until the weather or problem is over. Remember the 3 day spring storm in DEN in 2002- Frontier came to an almost complete standstill across the board. This is costly. On the other hand, multiple hubs-focus cities and point to point traffic can keep a portion of operations running, without the cancelling of 100% of a companies flights, as passengers & cargo can be routed through other hub & focus operations.
PHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7519 posts, RR: 24
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3609 times:
For a while it did seem that FL was going to expand at DFW, but it somewhat slowed partly due to:
1. Reduced revenue due to last year's hurricane season which disrupted many of its Florida operations as well as its ATL hub.
2. For a while, FL was focused on efforts to expand at MDW via bidding for some of TZ's assets & gates; which was thwarted by WN.
3. Around the same time, WN started pondering a Dallas expansion: it first looked into the DL gate offer at DFW, but turned it down mainly due to the leasing conditions; then WN broke its silence on W/S A and started an effort to get it repealed as a means to expand out their home base at DAL.
Personally, I would wish that FL reconsider some modest expansion at DFW; especially since efforts (from the Feds) to repeal the W/S A are on hold for now due to more pressing matters (S.C. Justice vacancy, Katrina/Rita relief).
I noticed that FL actually dropped one of its BWI-DFW non-stop flights some time back. Since I now have friends that live in the Dallas area, I'm, personally, still hoping for them to add PHL-DFW non-stop service since AA's & US' fares (even advance purchases) can get a bit high at times.
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
Tundra767 From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2005, 430 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3501 times:
LAX-SFO would be a good one for them. I know it seems like everytime I have a last minute trip I need to take up there the fares on AA,UA are really high. Put a little low fare compition on the LAX-SFO ( not OAK ) run.
Stirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3179 times:
Quoting Laxintl (Reply 3): the airline will not focus on only one or two megahubs, but will instead develop numerous minihubs/focus cities.
Sounds like another little whacky airline that flew up and down the east coast once upon time, not too long ago.
Eastern Airlines, and the Great Silver Fleet, or Hockey Stick; depending on your perspective.
Proudly protecting the Eastern Seaboard against a communist invasion with hubs/focus cities in places like;
Houston, Boston, Washington-National, Charlotte, Chicago-O'Hare, Miami, St Louis, New Orleans, San Juan, Philadelphia, Tampa, Baltimore, My Basement, Panama City, Panama, Louie's Cheesesteak Stand, New York-LaGuardia, Orlando, and of course Atlanta.....That airline was everywhere; God Bless 'Em.
LACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4008 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3149 times:
How about LAX-SJC? Everyone seems to forget about SJC. The only one with true jet service is WN and if FL was to start service I think they'd blow AAEagle out of the water and UAExpresss with 717s73Gs vs ERJ/CRJs.
In addition isn't gate space at LAX kinda tight? Are they in T3?
How about ONT? I think this would be great for FL to expand at on the west coast as ONT could easily pick up the volume and it seems there are plenty of gates available there as well..