Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AirTran At CHS  
User currently offlineKchs29418 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 14 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2627 times:

The introduction of AirTran into the Charleston SC market has been a breath of very fresh air. Last year, we were whining, moaning and complaining about the lack of competition here and the sky-high prices. Upcoming trip to STL for the significant other and myself $350 round-trip, which couldn't have been had for less than $600 here back in the bad old days.

Anyone know how the load-factors have been out of here or where I could get that information? I suspect some of the local area die-hard Delta frequent fliers are still going with the legacy perhaps out of force-of-habit of the almighty frequent-flier-miles (can't say I blame them) but I believe AirTran will be here on a more than seasonal basis from here on out.

Those of you who read this board and are employed by AirTran........................thanks for coming and you can count on thousands of us using you as our primary carrier for years to come!

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTOLtommy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3292 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2620 times:

Quoting Kchs29418 (Thread starter):
The introduction of AirTran into the Charleston SC market has been a breath of very fresh air.

That's great, as long as others in the market don't use FL's entry as a way to get better fares on the legacy carriers. Use it or lose it!


User currently offlineJetJeanes From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2458 times:

there is talk when winter rolls around , they will roll out, so it may very well be a seasonal city


i can see for 80 miles
User currently offlineSCflyboy From United States of America, joined May 2007, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2393 times:

You can purchase tkts on their web site thru FEB 2008. Also their route map does not show it as Seasonal Service anymore (Just Seattle & Portland). I say there here at CHS to stay!

User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2279 times:

Quoting TOLtommy (Reply 1):
That's great, as long as others in the market don't use FL's entry as a way to get better fares on the legacy carriers. Use it or lose it!

Exactly. Airtran has the right-sized equipment (717) and a strong hub (ATL) for CHS to feed into, so there's no reason they can't succeed in CHS. But if consumers simply use the low-fares to fly on legacy carriers, Airtran will leave and CHS will end up with high fares and poor service.

The folks in TLH are kicking themselves now for not supporting Airtran. Since FL left, DL has slashed almost all mainline service and fares have skyrocketed. Hopefully, CHS will learn from this.


User currently offlineDeltaDAWG From United States of America, joined May 2006, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2181 times:

I recently flew FL on ATL-BOS-ATL on with the return coming home on Monday (7/2/07) and I spoke with several people around me in coach (company would not spring for Biz) and I approximated about 20-25 folks heading to CHS on the BOS-ATL flight.

It seems as if CHS is working well for FL. Makes me wonder though if MYR is kicking themselves for letting FL slip away.



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
User currently offlineBcoz From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2021 times:

Quoting SCflyboy (Reply 3):
I say there here at CHS to stay!

Yeah... I kind of doubt that CHS would be a seasonal destination for FL. The Trident area has enough other business to keep things running year round.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall and see the glares between gate counters at A1 and A2,3, and 4 when both FL and DL are loading ATL flights (the glares varying on who has the bigger load factor).

I'm flying to CHS in August on US. Going to be weird coming in on US on Concourse B. Back when I lived there A-1 was UA (727 to ORD) and then UAX, A2 and A3 was DL, and A4 and A5 was US.

bcoz


User currently offlineGr8SlvrFlt From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1606 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1885 times:

My understanding is that Delta's aim was to make AirTran too expensive a proposition for TLH. By flooding the market with capacity, Delta caused the subsidies to AirTran to increase to the point TLH was unwilling to keep paying. Delta was successful in their efforts and the people of TLH are back where they began.

User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1762 times:

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 12):
Airtran wouldnt have needed more government money if the people of the city were using them.

Why should the government subsidize one carrier when it competes against another? If you can;t compete in the market fair and square without market subsidies then maybe you shouldnt be playing in the market.

But, as we all know, LCC's are the "darling" of the industry and play by different rules...

Quoting BlueheronNC (Reply 9):
Even in the public sector, surveys were taken showing that employees were ignoring the state-mandated requirement that they fly AirTran out of TLH instead of Delta "as long as the schedule is convenient"; so many people erroneously claimed "schedule conflicts" just so that they could continue flying Delta. Many of my friends cited their long-standing frequent flier miles relationship with DL, but you know what...they always complain when it comes time to redeem their miles how difficult it is to find rewards flights!



Quoting BlueheronNC (Reply 9):
The AirTran switch to CRJ is the other 5% of the equation. When given the choice between flying a cramped RJ versus a "Delta Shuttle" outfitted 738 with 35" seat pitch and all leather seats, what do you think people are going to choose? AirTran needed to at least offer a product on par with Delta. That's not to say that if they did, the obstinance of the people of TLH would've allowed them to be successful, but the CRJ killed off any chance of that being the case.

So FL offered an incovenient schedule and uncomfortable aircraft in the market. And you blame the people of Tallahassee for taking their business elsewhere?

Quoting Gr8SlvrFlt (Reply 10):
My understanding is that Delta's aim was to make AirTran too expensive a proposition for TLH. By flooding the market with capacity, Delta caused the subsidies to AirTran to increase to the point TLH was unwilling to keep paying.

And the problem with that is...? Why shouldn't DL do everything it can to keep its market share when the State of Florida is subsidizing a competitor? Where is the level playing field in that? Does Pepsi, when it wants to being a new beverage to a market that Coke has already established itself in, go to government and say "hey, subsidize us so we can get off the ground and compete against Coca-Cola?"


Now if the city has no commercial air service at all, and the city wants to offer a subsidy to start up service that's one thing, but to offer a subsidy to compete aginst incumbetn carriers in the market is something completely different.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 8):
Had the people of TLH used the Airtran service, subsidies wouldn't have been necessary.

See above and again, why are subsidies necessary anyway?

I'm never ceased to be amazed by how people get so worked up over an airline having a monopoly in a city, and setting proces accordingly. It is simple supply and demand. Unless you want the industry to be reregulated (which is a legitimate argument) and prices set accordingly, the market bears what the market bears.


User currently offlineBlueheronNC From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1753 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 18):
Please provide a link to this. I don't remember FL ever boasting that TLH was successful and I followed FL's time in TLH pretty closely.

I'm not sure it was said in so many words, but this is how the October 15, 2003 Tallahassee Democrat article categorized the situation:

"Tallahassee city officials said Tuesday they're pleased a contract with AirTran airlines has been renewed for a third year without the $1.5 million in supplemental money the city has supplied for the carrier in each of the past two years.

The agreement renews "automatically unless they want to discuss issues with us," said Phil Inglese, assistant director of aviation for the city. "They haven't approached us this year."

AirTran Director of Marketing Tad Hutcheson said the decision not to request another subsidy was caused by several factors, including high passenger volume and the airline's ability to match capacity with demand over the past six months. "We are encouraged with the results we are seeing in Tallahassee," Hutcheson said, "and I think we have finally matched capacity and demand."

---
Is this really how it went down? Tallahassee was willing to extend subsidies, AirTran didn't accept them because they gave the impression that things were going well, and then they pulled out? If so, that's pretty cold.


User currently offlineBlueheronNC From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1741 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 19):
So FL offered an incovenient schedule and uncomfortable aircraft in the market. And you blame the people of Tallahassee for taking their business elsewhere?

That was two years into their service of Tallahassee. If TLH passengers had flown with AirTran during the 717 days, they would've have switched us to RJ service to try to boost load factor numbers.

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 19):
Unless you want the industry to be reregulated (which is a legitimate argument) and prices set accordingly, the market bears what the market bears.

Historically, in certain antitrust schemes, it would be considered illegal and predatory for a particular company to "loss lead" a certain market just to drive another competitor out because that company has a revenue source from somewhere else.

[Edited 2007-07-06 18:33:38]

User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1729 times:

Quoting BlueheronNC (Reply 20):
Is this really how it went down? Tallahassee was willing to extend subsidies, AirTran didn't accept them because they gave the impression that things were going well, and then they pulled out? If so, that's pretty cold.

What happened was that Airtran had converted TLH to a JetConnect market hoping that less capacity and greater frequency would make TLH work. However, when Airtran decided to abandon JetConnect, it meant one of two things: either dump a lot of capacity by bringing 717's back to TLH or leave TLH. Obviously, Airtran chose the latter.

And contrary to the rantings of a few bitter ex-FL employees, Airtran doesn't want to rely on subsidies forever. The goal is to get markets to be independently profitable as fast as possible.

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 19):
If you can;t compete in the market fair and square without market subsidies then maybe you shouldnt be playing in the market.

True, but then I guess DL shouldn't be competing in the market either. They couldn't compete and had to file BK.


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3817 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1702 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 19):
Why should the government subsidize one carrier when it competes against another? If you can;t compete in the market fair and square without market subsidies then maybe you shouldnt be playing in the market.

But, as we all know, LCC's are the "darling" of the industry and play by different rules...

I fully agree that if you cant compete in the market fair and square you shouldnt be there. I wouldnt say that LCC's play by different rules though.

One problem is that there are many markets that may prove successfull that an airline wont even consider going to without a subsidy. I think they are fine if its just startup money, in case the new service tanks. I do not support the long-term funding of a flight though. If it cant support it self, the aircraft should be used somewhere else.


User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1676 times:

Quoting BlueheronNC (Reply 21):
If TLH passengers had flown with AirTran during the 717 days, they would've have switched us to RJ service to try to boost load factor numbers.

Huh? So you're saying that AirTran would have ultimately screwed TLH passengers anyways after they developed the market? That makes no sense.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 22):
True, but then I guess DL shouldn't be competing in the market either. They couldn't compete and had to file BK.

I don;t disagree with that.

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 23):
One problem is that there are many markets that may prove successfull that an airline wont even consider going to without a subsidy. I think they are fine if its just startup money, in case the new service tanks. I do not support the long-term funding of a flight though. If it cant support it self, the aircraft should be used somewhere else

If there are other airlines competing in the market, then it isn't "just fine" if it is startup money. If you had built a market in, say, retail clothing in a certain city, and then across the street a competitor opens up with his start up costs funded by the government, is that fair?


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3817 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1660 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 24):
if there are other airlines competing in the market, then it isn't "just fine" if it is startup money. If you had built a market in, say, retail clothing in a certain city, and then across the street a competitor opens up with his start up costs funded by the government, is that fair?

Cant really compare a retail clothing store to an airline, in terms of the service provided to the community it serves.

Nobody said it was fair. Thats just the way it is. If you want to get in to whats fair and what isnt, we could sit here and pick apart the whole industry for days.


User currently offlineBlueheronNC From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1658 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 24):
Huh? So you're saying that AirTran would have ultimately screwed TLH passengers anyways after they developed the market? That makes no sense.

Sorry, excuse the typo. They WOULDN'T have switched to RJ had the initial 2-year 717 run been successful.


User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1648 times:

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 25):
Cant really compare a retail clothing store to an airline, in terms of the service provided to the community it serves.

Then what is it, a utility or a business? You can't have it both ways and say its a necessity, but the free market should prevail.


User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2173 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1623 times:

Why does EVERY AirTran thread about a new market invariably revert to the TIRED Wichita and Tallahassee discussions. It's over, move on.

As for the original poster - thanks! We look forward to serving the people of Charleston.


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...
Airtran At DCA posted Thu Apr 5 2007 19:31:10 by UGA777
AirTran At MSY Back To 5 Flights posted Fri Jan 5 2007 14:31:12 by BNinMSY
Airtran At FLL posted Tue Nov 28 2006 18:17:11 by WDBRR
Mistake By Airtran At EWR posted Tue May 23 2006 07:38:00 by Mycrj17
AirTran At TPA posted Fri May 13 2005 05:54:18 by TLHFLA
AirTran At IND Bookings? posted Fri Apr 8 2005 17:11:38 by 7E72004
AirTran At MDW - What Could Happen? posted Mon Oct 25 2004 17:37:50 by Jerion
AirTran At Akron/Canton posted Mon May 24 2004 22:54:44 by As739x
When Will We See AirTran At SEA? posted Sat Apr 10 2004 19:35:38 by BCAInfoSys
Incident With Airtran At DCA posted Sun Jan 4 2004 21:12:34 by N323er