Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MHT IN 2007  
User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 583 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2051 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

MHT in 2006 saw a 10% decline in passengers from 4.3 million to 3.9 as a result of some of the carriers replacing mainline jets with regional jets,according to airport manager Kevin Dillon. He is hopefull of seeing an additional 70 flights per week by June 2007 (which will be a 13% higher than now) and 58 flights more per week than June 2006. Which translates into an additional 2987 more seats than June of 2006 or approximately 50 seats per flight. So it looks like more rj's for MHT in 2007. Personally I was hoping for additional mainline service and new routes. I believe there are several markets from MHT which I believe could support mainline service. MHT to FLL or MIA not only would serve south florida,but to bring connecting passengers for flights to the Caribbean and Central and South America. DEN and PHX would also be routes which I believe could be successful from MHT. Hopefully Southwest will eventually serve one or both of these routes. New carriers I would like to see at MHT would be Airtran to ATL, American to DFW and MIA and Frontier to DEN(assuming WN does not serve this route).Any thoughts would be appreciated.

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 583 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The figures quoted come from an article in the January 21st edition of the Manchester Union Leader newspaper in an article by Michael Cousineau(unionleader.com)

User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2028 times:

One immediate up-tick will come from two new Southwest nonstops: one each to Orlando and Midway. And although we've speculated on it to death, Phoenix is coming. The good news is that these two (perhaps three) nonstops commence early this year, which bodes well for our numbers in 2007. I wouldn't argue with the suggested markets you mentioned. It really is about a flow of planes from Boeing to Southwest, and where to slot them when they arrive.

The legacy carriers right now are entrenched with trying to either get or remain profitable, and with finding merger partners. They aren't looking to expand. So while AA might be nice, don't hold your breath. We need industry consolidation to start the domino effect, and then after dust settles we might see who's left standing. Then some growth might occur. Obviously this isn't a 2007 projection because these mergers are long & drawn-out affairs to propose, never mind pull off.

Dillon would like to think of himself as some wisened prognosticator, but he doesn't know. He really doesn't. He obviously has some insight and information none of us have, but only marginally. He's HOPING for there to be more flights and seats, but the airlines rule the roost on that.

Look for a flat year, or maybe even a bit of an 'up' year for MHT in 2007. I'm bullish and predict our 2007 numbers will be a bit above 2006, if only because of the new Southwest nonstops we know we're factually getting. Now, the travelling public just has to do their part and put themselves in those seats. I was on Southwest 405 from MHT-->BWI yesterday (N395SW). There were 63 aboard. Last night coming back I was on Flight 1929 (N767SW); even fewer on that one.

Chris in NH


User currently offlineOnetogo From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2028 times:

I'm sure ChrisNH will be able to add some very valuable insight into this discussion once he see's it.

User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4280 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

Quoting Georgiabill (Thread starter):
American to DFW

You have no idea how happy that would make me. Anything to avoid the headache called Logan! Unfortunately, it just does not appear that the demand is there overall (48 daily pax according to FareMeasure). I'll keep on dreaming, though.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2019 times:

unfortunately the article seems somewhat flawed, since they reference Usairways who has a "dummy/default" schedule after april, which is just copy/paste of previous schedules. I agree the bleeding has stopped but the article is not a correct indication of June 2007 advance schedules, since no airline has their 2007 schedules even close to finalized yet.


Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1995 times:

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 5):
unfortunately the article seems somewhat flawed, since they reference Usairways who has a "dummy/default" schedule after april, which is just copy/paste of previous schedules. I agree the bleeding has stopped but the article is not a correct indication of June 2007 advance schedules, since no airline has their 2007 schedules even close to finalized yet.

Correct point to make. The press will jump on anything bullish, but in this case reality will probably be something less than the article suggested. Those 'far-out' schedules often make no sense. I've seen them where United has a 737-500 shown as coming in from O'Hare, but there's no 737-500 going the other way. Stuff like that.

Since we are all armchair enthusiasts--albeit smart and savvy ones--we can take articles like these with a grain of salt. What I know to be true--two brand-new Southwest nonstops starting in March--are the only things I can base hope on. Everything else is simply conjecture.

Chris


User currently offlineCOFanNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1981 times:

I'd love to see more service to anywhere by anyone at MHT. I used to live in northeast Massachusetts and used Independence Air to get back and forth from college in DC. Of course once that failed, I started to go to BWI and fly WN up.

Its a convenient little airport. But I think it'll take more time to get people to see it as a real alternative to BOS. Once that happens, more demand should lead to more mainline flights and then the numbers will turn around. Until that happens, I think Dillon is being a little bit optimistic...which he should be, he wants his airport to succeed.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1934 times:

The reality is that people know about MHT and its benefits. I think word-of-mouth has done a good job of supplementing decent marketing. What has befallen MHT is not a lack of demand but a cut in supply. No, we're not filling 100% of the seats we now have...but neither is any other airport. That shouldn't be the gauge. What we do have is a situation where the investments, where they are being made, are being made at Logan. The legacy carriers are obviously very reluctant to give us more than token 'keep-the-doors-open' service to protect their already sizable investments at Logan. AA does this by not even flying to MHT; DL is doing this by downgrading here, and US has followed that same model to an extent. CO has next to nothing at MHT, although NW has been reasonably steady here. Bigger operations at regional stations mean more people, in an industry that really isn't adding more people.

I think we need to get through the winter season and see what the spring and summer bring in terms of flight schedules. I don't know when 'official' spring and summer schedules get loaded; perhaps Ricky knows. But that's going to be a good barometer in terms of answering the question du jour: 'Do we grow in 2007?' Like I said earlier, I do believe that the leakage is behind us and 2007 will be an 'up' year with respect to 2006.

Although I'm an optimist by nature, I've given up (for now) on hoping for (or expecting) new carriers at MHT. Perhaps the best to hope for is growth from the incumbents, who already know what MHT is doing for them. A look at the O&D stats will clearly point to opportunities that make sense, and rather than waiting for Southwest to connect some of these obvious points with their own 737-700s (say, MHT-DEN), United might be smart to do so first. There must be several such market pairs that would be attractive to Southwest, to the extent planes are available to serve them. Pre-emptive strikes by the incumbents would be a smart move, but they are too busy worrying themselves into a tizzy over mergers and whatnot.

It is abundantly clear, though, that passenger preference for MHT is and always has been sky-high. As I walked from the terminal to my car last night, I just did a mental tally of the license plates: Five New England states; Quebec; New Brunswick; New York...and that's just the cars I saw in one of the many lots.


Chris


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1908 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 2):
One immediate up-tick will come from two new Southwest nonstops: one each to Orlando and Midway.

My bad  ashamed . The two new flights are to Orlando and Philadelphia, not Chicago. Apparently it's an aircraft freed from the soon-to-be-terminated BDL-PHL route.

Chris


User currently offlineCOFanNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1894 times:

Kind of a dumb post on my part. I had really forgotten how far the airport had come from when I first remember using it (in the Concourse A/B days when I could pretty much sit anywhere on the plane) to the present.

I do agree that Logan is still seen as THE airport in New England (even though that thought makes me cringe). I think MHT should basically have the same domestic services as BOS. BOS will obviously remain the international airport of New England, but the time as come for both MHT and PVD to be as important domestically as BOS.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1872 times:

Quoting COFanNYC (Reply 10):
I do agree that Logan is still seen as THE airport in New England (even though that thought makes me cringe). I think MHT should basically have the same domestic services as BOS. BOS will obviously remain the international airport of New England, but the time as come for both MHT and PVD to be as important domestically as BOS.

Well, as much as we might like that to be the case, I don't think it is at all feasible. Cost structures won't allow that kind of blanketing of a region. Lost in the mix is the role Massport plays in 'pressuring' airlines to focus more on their airport (Logan) than on ours. Only a fool would believe that doesn't happen. But to the extent that problems occur at Logan--spiraling congestion, higher fees, lease rates, whatever--airlines may re-think the whole idea of focusing on Logan at the expense of MHT and PVD. MHT and PVD might one day resurface as a favorite place to go, if Massport gets too heavy-handed with their tennants. That's the fine line they have: Massport is a bully, no two ways about it. But they know that 50 miles to the north and south are two airports who would bend over backwards to get them in there. The problem is that the airlines, apparently, haven't made any noise. They seem to be happy with Logan and the way it's run. That's fine, but it also will keep Massport a bit on the honest side. If they turn up the heat on carriers--thinking that they won't go anywhere and take whatever Massport dishes out--then it could get interesting. Dillon, I'm sure, takes every opportunity to 'tweak' Massport whenever he gets an audience with airline big-wigs. Conversely, Massport probably does the same to MHT and PVD. All's fair in battle, I guess.

Another factor is declining population in the region. The heydays of the 1980s and 1990s--the high-tech miracle--paved the way for lots of people to come to the Boston area and into southern New Hampshire. But that boom went bust, and 'Larry Bird ain't walking through that door, folks.' People are moving away from New England, not to it. Climate, cost of living, and waning job opportunities are catalysts for the shift which doesn't seem to have an end. That, too, plays a role in how much air service the region can support.

I think there's a whole long list of cities Manchester should logically be connected to via nonstop service. The O&D numbers bear them out. We just need the industry to nurse itself back to health, and the airline landscape will look decidedly different on the back end than it does now. I would rather have four healthy airlines than eight sick ones.

Chris


User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3414 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1872 times:

...or at least much closer where it makes sense. To think that places like DEN, IAH, DFW, STL, MCI, MKE, SLC, SEA, SFO, IND, ORF, LAX, SAN, MIA, PBI, CMH, RDU, and even MEM are ONLY served nonstop from BOS is out of balance IMHO.

While BDL has service to most of those too, BDL doesn't really serve the greater BOS catchment area, so it's not of any benefit to eastern New Englanders as a whole.


User currently offlineBoslax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1844 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 11):
MHT and PVD might one day resurface as a favorite place to go, if Massport gets too heavy-handed with their tenants. That's the fine line they have: Massport is a bully, no two ways about it

If what you mean is that Massport is taking a hard stand with its airline tenants and demanding they use or lose their gates, then I'm glad they're bullies. Massport's recent agreement with Delta and Terminal A will allow Massport to gain control of I believe 8 gates. The new Massport CEO, Tom Kinton, has been there for over 20 years and has the respect of his staff, the airlines, the airport industry, and Trot Nixon (that's a joke for you Sox fans). Anyway, Tom K is the furthest thing from a bully.

In regards to MHT and PVD resurfacing as a favorite place to go - I believe with Southwest continuing to increase their share of the local O&D passenger market (WN/MHT=50%, WN/PVD-=45%), it becomes more and more difficult for network carriers and other LCC's to profitably serve MHT and PVD. Just look at the decline in traffic at MHT and PVD the last year and a half - its been the network carriers that have lost considerable traffic due to all of the service cutbacks and mainline jet replacements. The costs may be higher at BOS but the operating margins are strong.


User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1802 times:

Quoting COFanNYC (Reply 10):
I do agree that Logan is still seen as THE airport in New England (even though that thought makes me cringe). I think MHT should basically have the same domestic services as BOS. BOS will obviously remain the international airport of New England, but the time as come for both MHT and PVD to be as important domestically as BOS.

With respect to both PVD and MHT, that will never happen. Both of those airports don't have the facilities to match what Logan does. BOS is located right next to the city and is much easier to get to for the bulk of the region, all of Suffolk county, the bulkf of Norfolk, Middlesex and Plymouth counties. Add in the fact that there is much more air service and BOS is the obvius choice. That is not to smack down MHT and PVD, they are just located in smaller cities with less tourist and business traffic as well.

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 11):
Another factor is declining population in the region. The heydays of the 1980s and 1990s--the high-tech miracle--paved the way for lots of people to come to the Boston area and into southern New Hampshire. But that boom went bust, and 'Larry Bird ain't walking through that door, folks.' People are moving away from New England, not to it. Climate, cost of living, and waning job opportunities are catalysts for the shift which doesn't seem to have an end. That, too, plays a role in how much air service the region can support.

I look at the metro Boston area, Southern New Hampshire and Northeast Rhode Island as one large region. Just like NYC includes both north Jersey and southern Connecticut, I do the same for Boston; everything is just so close. With that being said, Massachusetts has seen a stabilized population over the last few years. We lost over 200,000 jobs after the late 90s/early 2000s, of which more than 80,000 have been gained back. The unemployment rate in Massachusetts has gone down and remains steady so we are on our way back. I really believe that Patrick is going to do good things for the state, especially in the areas of improving our public schools and colleges and universities. One thing to note, one of the biggest factors for companies moving to new areas or opening up offices and bases in areas is due to the quality of the local work force, just ask Merck when they chose Boston over northern New Jersey for their new labs.


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8493 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1786 times:

Quoting B752OS (Reply 14):
One thing to note, one of the biggest factors for companies moving to new areas or opening up offices and bases in areas is due to the quality of the local work force, just ask Merck when they chose Boston over northern New Jersey for their new labs.

And that is exactly why they are leaving New England. Fidelity Investments, one of the largest employers in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire is building a brand new campus in N.Carolina because that's where the workforce is. People can't afford to live here anymore, especially new college grads with high college loans. They're moving south and the jobs are going with them. Like Fidelity, many others are leaving. Gillette was another big one that left.

Having said that, there's still a lot of money in the area. The entire Northeast has very deep roots and it's not going to change overnight. The demand for air travel here will continue to increase at a decent pace.


User currently offlineVega From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1774 times:

MHT's largest O&D destination after Orlando is Philadelphia, with about 11 daily flights (WN + US). That does not consider passengers connecting to domestic or international flights at PHL - primarily on US. Why isn't that enough to satisfy the needs of a community the size of Manchester, with Logan 50 miles down the road? I'm not posing an argumentative ? here, just curious as to why another airline would want to add services to an already well served, very localized market.

User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1735 times:

Quoting Vega (Reply 16):
just curious as to why another airline would want to add services to an already well served, very localized market.

Good question! If that BDL-PHL aircraft was a 'PHL' aircraft, then I'd probably pick a different city too! I'm glad we got the 6th flight, but I'm not sure the market needs it. Then again, I'm an armchair quarterback & no more. I defer to the folks at Southwest who deem that 6th MHT-PHL circuit necessary.

Chris


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12739 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1666 times:

Quoting Boslax (Reply 13):
If what you mean is that Massport is taking a hard stand with its airline tenants and demanding they use or lose their gates, then I'm glad they're bullies. Massport's recent agreement with Delta and Terminal A will allow Massport to gain control of I believe 8 gates. The new Massport CEO, Tom Kinton, has been there for over 20 years and has the respect of his staff, the airlines, the airport industry, and Trot Nixon (that's a joke for you Sox fans). Anyway, Tom K is the furthest thing from a bully.

I guess it's best to say that Massport always acts in its best interest, but so do the airlines! As you note, they will make payments on very underutilized gates just to keep their competition from getting them. It's not like the airport operator can just make new gates out of whole cloth. And they've shown they will ditch gates via bankruptcy when it suits them too.

Bottom line is both sides make long term investments in a very cyclical market, so it's never going to be a smooth relationship.

Quoting Boslax (Reply 13):
In regards to MHT and PVD resurfacing as a favorite place to go - I believe with Southwest continuing to increase their share of the local O&D passenger market (WN/MHT=50%, WN/PVD-=45%), it becomes more and more difficult for network carriers and other LCC's to profitably serve MHT and PVD. Just look at the decline in traffic at MHT and PVD the last year and a half - its been the network carriers that have lost considerable traffic due to all of the service cutbacks and mainline jet replacements. The costs may be higher at BOS but the operating margins are strong.

Another point that should be made is many legacies are focusing most of their energies on international flying these days, so it's only natural that some domestic operations will be downsized and some expansion opportunities will be ignored.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineFlyboyaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1655 times:

Those numbers don't suprise me. Southwest is a great thing for smaller airports...but it's like Wal Mart moving into a small town....they compete so hard that they drive away other competition....then all there is left is....WAL MART. MHT isn't big enough for all the other airlines to compete head to head, seat for seat with WN....hopefully they don't lose too much service from other legacies.

User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3414 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1645 times:

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 15):
And that is exactly why they are leaving New England. Fidelity Investments, one of the largest employers in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire is building a brand new campus in N.Carolina because that's where the workforce is.

Fidelity is building either thier 2nd or 3rd building on thier large ampus in Smithfield, RI to house hundreds of jobs from former Boston offices as well.


User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3414 posts, RR: 16
Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 17):
Good question! If that BDL-PHL aircraft was a 'PHL' aircraft, then I'd probably pick a different city too! I'm glad we got the 6th flight, but I'm not sure the market needs it. Then again, I'm an armchair quarterback & no more. I defer to the folks at Southwest who deem that 6th MHT-PHL circuit necessary.

I'm sure that offering 6 flights from both PVD and MHT offers a better chance for WN to grab more of the eastern NE region demand. I wonder how well other carriers are doing in the BOS-PHL market. Perhaps WN sees this as a strategic move to pull more PHL pax from BOS to the outlying airports...

one thing for sure, is that WN knows what they are doing and I'm sure they see something in adding this flight to MHT.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1623 times:

It's also rather telling for BDL that the planes weren't repurposed there (when the decison was made to axe BDL-PHL). As far as I know, Bradley lost those flights and got no new ones in return.

User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 583 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1607 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just a side note in the Wednesday edition of the Manchester Union Leader in an article written by Tom Fahey it was reported that the state's Executive Council was to vote on spending an additional $423,000.00 on design work for the Manchester/Boston Airport access road from the F.E. Everett turnpike. In 1998 this project had a projected cost of $75,000,000.00 and now is projected to cost nearly $152,000,000.00 when completed in 2011(assuming no more eagles decide to nest where bridge is to be built). Work on the bridge is to begin this summer(First 2 construction contracts go out for bid this spring).This project will make access to the airport easier as many travelers will no longer need to use Brown Avenue.

User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3414 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (7 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1596 times:

improved access is always good for any airport. While it certainly won't impact passenger traffic that much at all, the intermodal (bus, commuter rail, car rental and other amenities) facility at PVD is a huge step in the overall 'package' PVD will have to offer it's passengers. Having direct access to RT 95 has always been a big reason people think PVD is convenient.

25 Boslax : BOS has been able to hold onto their PHL traffic. The lastest O&D passengers data shows some interesting data. BOS-PHL O&D,Fare YE 2q05 642,440, $85
26 PVD757 : yes it does. And I agree that the revenue picture for WN at PVD & MHT to PHL has imoproved to the point that they are adding service despite downward
27 B752OS : Well if you knew anything about Boston businesses, you would know that Proctor and Gamble BOUGHT Gillette and that is why they are no longer based he
28 Bagoldex : In the case of fidelity, the jobs that are being opened in places like North Carolina and Rhode Island are not especially high end jobs. These are mos
29 ChrisNH : USA Today's very popular 'Today in the Sky' notes that Southwest is angling to get one more gate at RDU, to go with the four they have now. RDU ranks
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What’s Ahead In 2007 For Airbus And Boeing? posted Wed Jan 10 2007 00:29:29 by BoomBoom
Jetblue Confirms 6 To 8 Cities In 2007 posted Fri Jan 5 2007 14:21:25 by Lowecur
Expected A345 Or 777LR Orders In 2007? posted Thu Jan 4 2007 17:35:40 by DIA
Airbus/Boeing Goals In 2007 posted Wed Jan 3 2007 11:21:11 by WINGS
LAX Upgrades In 2007 posted Wed Jan 3 2007 01:58:32 by Travelin man
Commercial Aviation In 2007 posted Mon Jan 1 2007 07:17:58 by Speedbird747BA
NW In 2007, Adding More Things. posted Mon Jan 1 2007 01:02:40 by Burnsie28
Dubrovnik Airline In 2007, Any News? posted Sun Dec 31 2006 20:16:24 by 717fan
Will Sales Pick Up For The CRJ-900 In 2007? posted Sun Dec 31 2006 05:16:53 by CRJ900X
EK To LAX From DXB And AKL In 2007 posted Wed Dec 27 2006 00:10:57 by JDFlyVC10