Af773atmsp From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2735 posts, RR: 1 Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5004 times:
I went on to mspairport.com looking at the airlines that fly to MSP. While I was looking at the airline competition 2004 page it said that two new airlines are planning to fly to MSP. Does anybody know what the airlines are?
Pilottim747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1607 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4922 times:
It says that two domestic low-fare carriers and two international flag carriers "have expressed interest" in serving MSP. A far way from planning on serving MSP
My guess is that the Metropolitan Airports Commission (owner and operator of the airport) has been talking with more airlines than just those in the report. I'm sure they've at least talked with JetBlue and Southwest. As for international carriers? Perhaps Lufthansa and British Airways, I know for sure they talked with them a few years ago.
Aviation Photographers & Enthusiasts--Coordinate your life.
NWBOS From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 161 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4782 times:
European routes struggle in the winter at MSP, especially LGW. They have suspended the route and/or cut frequencies the past couple of years. Another carrier's entry would seem unlikely at this point. A NW or AF CDG flight seems more likely (and been rumored many times on this board), but I would suspect that one of the MSP-AMS frequencies would be cut if that happened. If BA was allowed to come in, NW would be up in arms because they've always been trying to get into Heathrow.
RandyWaldron From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 324 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4691 times:
Quoting Af773atmsp (Thread starter): went on to mspairport.com looking at the airlines that fly to MSP. While I was looking at the airline competition 2004 page it said that two new airlines are planning to fly to MSP. Does anybody know what the airlines are?
The 2004 page...hmmm. We're 3/4 of the way through 2006. Is that pertinent information? NWA will fight like a rabid dog to keep competition out of that market, especially on international routes. At the rate the airline industry is going, no one should be relying on so-called "progressive" statements made two years prior for future, i.e. 2007, service speculations.
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3599 posts, RR: 20
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4622 times:
Even though the info is old from the site, sure is fun to think about.
Though NW will fight to keep competition out of MSP, MAC and the Twin cities will want to attract airlines so that NW is charged with "monopolistic practices".
If there are two domestic carriers adn two Internationals, my vote are for:
B6 - Which could work
WN - Which might be more of a problem. It depends on where they fly.
They would use the HHH as is planned for all non-skyteam to move there.
Lindberg terminal is to go all Skyteam
AF - Skyteam member owner of KLM
AM - Skyteam member that could do it with narrow body craft
LH...why? They serve DTW (auto industry) and ORD (big O&D)...why would they want MSP? Could it be sustained?
BA...see above. Anyway LGW is seasonal could MSP sustain year round
EK...they seem to want to be at every international airport
I don't live in MSP anymore, but I know there is a lot of politiking going on to attract more diverse businesses, to help increase support for a large sproting event bid in 2020. (Airport expansion, mass transit expansion, hotel construction etc...anyone aware of the coincidences?)
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
Because under Bermuda II, they cannot. Only a US carrier could, but then again, neither UA or AA fly longhauls out of MSP. Only Northwest does, but they are not part of Bermuda II and thus cannot fly into Heathrow.
Here's a topic on Bermuda II which explains a bit this treaty.