Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 11 Posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3793 times:
dont know whos idea this is but as of sept 21st it looks like uax will discontinue the sat mini hub that was in joint venture with TRANS STATES. all the other routes out of sat will continue but sad to see it end so soon, wish they could have made a better effort to promote it.my bets are that trans states pulled the plug as they iirc bore more of the cost burden than ua did..wonder where they are going to put those birds now.
RampRat74 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1455 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
I knew it wasn't going to last. One of the guys I worked with on the ramp in DEN transferred down there to become a supervisor. I think UA even paid for his move. I hope they don't have layoffs down there because of this.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2754 posts, RR: 7 Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
I was more surpised they tried it than I am of them discontinuing it. Can't fault them for trying though.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21208 posts, RR: 19 Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3749 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Thread starter): dont know whos idea this is but as of sept 21st it looks like uax will discontinue the sat mini hub that was in joint venture with TRANS STATES.
Hang on here, Captain. Wasn't that flying operated completely at-risk by TransStates? If so, the decision to discontinue service had nothing to do with UA.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
MtnWest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2111 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3699 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3): Hang on here, Captain. Wasn't that flying operated completely at-risk by TransStates? If so, the decision to discontinue service had nothing to do with UA.
Yes, it was all Trans States' idea and responsibility for these flights. They just happened to have the United Express name, etc attached.
It comes as no shock that these didn't last. At least to me.
Kanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3699 times:
Not a surprise at all... sad to see the services go but I didn't see the point in the first place.
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 11 Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3673 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Thread starter): dont know whos idea this is but as of sept 21st it looks like uax will discontinue the sat mini hub that was in joint venture with TRANS STATES. all the other routes out of sat will continue but sad to see it end so soon, wish they could have made a better effort to promote it.my bets are that trans states pulled the plug as they iirc bore more of the cost burden than ua did..wonder where they are going to put those birds now.
Cubsrule,
first refer to me as el capitain..next time quote the whole thread and u will see that "iirc bore more of the cost burden than ua did"......ua paid for the ground handling and some fuel and minimal marketing at best......trans states paid for basically everything else....
LambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2040 posts, RR: 39 Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3659 times:
The ill fated focus city was a result of some extremely poor route selection. Who in their right minds whould have thought that San Antonio-Omaha or Colorado Springs would be a profitable venture? Throw in Kansas City with a little YX competition and you have a lot of hopeless flights. Different cities probably could have meant a different fate.
Not trying to be a homer, but maybe they'll try the same thing in St. Louis. There are several routes such as DTW, MCI, CLE etc. they could put those birds on with the AX banner and make a go of it.
MrSTL From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 468 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3574 times:
Quoting LambertMan (Reply 7): Not trying to be a homer, but maybe they'll try the same thing in St. Louis. There are several routes such as DTW, MCI, CLE etc. they could put those birds on with the AX banner and make a go of it.
Might be the only way we see AA expand at STL..Not quite sure why these birds didn't go to STL to begin with as Trans States had to put RJ's on several previous J41 routes-- stretching the current fleet in utilization.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21208 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3119 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 6): next time quote the whole thread and u will see that "iirc bore more of the cost burden than ua did"......ua paid for the ground handling and some fuel and minimal marketing at best......trans states paid for basically everything else....
The point is that it's a touch misleading to say that UAex would discontinue the flying when it's really a TransStates (dba UAex) decision, but it's really a pedantic argument brought on by me being super-tired last night. I trust there are no hard feeligns.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Knope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2555 posts, RR: 31 Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2918 times:
I feel kind of bad for San Antonio because this gives them a bit of a black eye. With a different approach I think some of these markets might be worth flying. But this SAT experiment had a lot of strikes against it that were not SAT's fault:
--Flights generally not timed for SAT business traffic
--Most markets were 1x/day which is almost pointless for business travel
--Multiple schedule changes in only a handful of months is a good way to disorient frequent traveles in these markets
--The United brand just isn't that big a pull in SAT
Were somone like American or Continental to add a couple of well-timed RJs on SAT-ABQ or SAT-MSY and stick with it, it would probably turn out differently. Now San Antonio just looks like it can't support point-to-point service.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2754 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2693 times:
One train of thought is the local frequent flyer community. It's probably safe to assume most FF'rs in SAT are AA, WN or CO loyal fliers - so they probably had no qualms about making the connections in order to continue banking miles/segments than to switch to a few markets for UA. In addition, 1 fight daily isn't going to impact the market at all. If UA wanted to start a new focus city, they should have worked with a regional partner in a demographic they are stronger in, such as the west coast (PDX? GEG? BOI?) or midwest (MCI? OMA? DSM?), than to experiment with Texas. The same with TransStates - capitalize on your strengths.
Clipper471 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 726 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2667 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Their schedule as well as the website still have the flights well into October. What's up?
Knope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2555 posts, RR: 31 Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2598 times:
Quoting Clipper471 (Reply 12): Their schedule as well as the website still have the flights well into October. What's up?
When I try to book SAT-MSY and SAT-ABQ for 10/12 on United.Com it only shows connections. Are you still seeing the nonstops actually for sale someplace? (Online timetables are are often not updated as quickly.)
FCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2437 times:
STLGph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 28 Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2436 times:
Quoting MrSTL (Reply 8): Not quite sure why these birds didn't go to STL to begin with
They're already done up and "dedicated" so to speak for the United Express fleet. They were simply moved to other flying station assignments as GoJets took over the ERJ routes Trans States was flying.
it will be interesting to see where these planes end up now.
Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
MrSTL From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 468 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2161 times:
Here is an article on the Trans States/ UA Express pullbacks in SAT. Light passenger volumes, fuel costs and shortage of pilots are listed as reasons.
Flyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1919 posts, RR: 11 Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2095 times:
Quoting STLGph (Reply 15): it will be interesting to see where these planes end up now.
Would be nice to see a new domestic station opened up desparately needing more service I do agree with you, where are these birds going to end up. Obviously they all won't all be flying with a pilot shortage, but...a few should still be able to fly.
Shanderawx From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 127 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1895 times:
Maybe if UA tried to make a hub connecting people in SAT into Mexico on Mexicana, it would have eventually workjed.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31106 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
