Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Eagle To Fly To Manhattan, Ks.; Santa Fe  
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33182 posts, RR: 71
Posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10679 times:

In addition to the new destinations of Brownsville, Texas; Lake Charles, Louisiana; and Montgomery, Alabama discussed in another thread, American Eagle today also announced daily service to Manhattan, Kansas and Santa Fe, New Mexico.

American Eagle will be the only scheduled airline at Santa Fe and the only network carrier at Manhattan, whose current service is limited to Great Lakes.

It is great to see AA venture into new, smaller markets with little competition.


a.
79 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2939 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10677 times:

I assume all these new cities are via DFW?

User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33182 posts, RR: 71
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10653 times:



Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 1):
I assume all these new cities are via DFW?

Yes, all five from DFW; plus DFW-TLH.



a.
User currently offlineTimberwolf24 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 575 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10593 times:

Any chance that we will see new flight announced by AA or Eagle from ORD soon?


Living in LA, ORD/MDW will always be home!
User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10483 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter):
It is great to see AA venture into new, smaller markets with little competition.

Why, so they can charge oppressively high fares and torture the people of that market?

Honestly, I don't understand why so many on a.net appear to cheerlead the airlines' ongoing crusade to rip people off with extremely high fares.

I mean, would you want to pay several hundred dollars for the supposed "convenience" of flying on a tiny regional aircraft?

In this economy (frankly, it doesn't matter how the economy is), an airline should be working to charge affordable (notice, I said, 'affordable,' not cheapest) fares, so more people will be able to travel.

High fares are not (nor ever will be) the golden road to profitability.


User currently offlineCharlienorth From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1133 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10448 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):

In this economy (frankly, it doesn't matter how the economy is), an airline should be working to charge affordable (notice, I said, 'affordable,' not cheapest) fares, so more people will be able to travel.

High fares are not (nor ever will be) the golden road to profitability.

They're a business responsible for making a profit for they're shareholders,very simple premise.


User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6632 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10403 times:

Actually, the SAF flights have been announced about a week ago.

I wonder, could DFW-SAF succeed? DFW-ROW has been an unexpected success for AA, that they now have three daily flights on that route.

While Santa Fe is larger than Roswell, the distance to ABQ isn't very far, and thus, I would expect that most Santa Fe locals will continue to use ABQ. However, SAF may be attractive to tourists willing to pay for the convienience of not having to drive or take the Rail Runner to/from ABQ.

AA will try the route for 60 days, and if the route is successful, then it can stay longer. Generally, the summer is the peak travel season for New Mexico, so I am guessing AA is choosing the best time of the year for New Mexico traffic.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10401 times:



Quoting Charlienorth (Reply 5):

They're a business responsible for making a profit

True, but high fares do not equal instant profitability. Profit is maximized when marginal revenue = marginal cost, NOT when price is maximized.

These airlines can't just slap high fares on these flights and expect people to come running. No! They've got to actually attract passengers to their airline, which I think a lot of carriers have forgotten how to do.

My local airport (SGF), like Manhattan, KS, is a small market and we are at the mercy of 3 legacy carriers (AA, DL and UA), who charge extremely high fares and cause many people to drive to MCI, STL and TUL, or not fly at all.

Many people these days are forced to drive very long car trips because oppressive legacy carriers are charging $500 fares from these small airports, which are simply unaffordable to a lot of people.

Do these executives even care? Did they care about how, when I was younger, my family and I were forced to take long car trips to see relatives because we couldn't afford the insanely high fares the airlines were charging (they were $900 r/t for coach, from BWI-AVL) or TRI)? That's the story of many American families.

These airlines rape and pillage small communities (like Manhattan & SGF), all in the name of "maximizing profits." They don't care about making air travel affordable! It's all about themselves!

I am so sick and tired of airlines thinking of themselves as "for the elite." I believe that all law-abiding citizens of our country have the right to fly!

If you serve the people first, then profits will follow.


User currently offlineOrdflier From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10382 times:

If customers are willing to pay for the convenience then it is the right price. No problem with that.

For example... if an individual needs to get to Santa Fe currently, the option is either to fly commercial into ABQ and drive, or get go private into Santa Fe. Customers now have the option to go either into ABQ and drive or take the AE flight into SAF. If the price is high and the customer wants it then so be it.



ORDflier
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33182 posts, RR: 71
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10379 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 7):

I am so sick and tired of airlines thinking of themselves as "for the elite." I believe that all law-abiding citizens of our country have the right to fly!

Flying is not a right. If you can't afford local fares, tough luck, or move to a city with a cheaper airport.

Very few things are as market-price driven as air fares.



a.
User currently offlineTys777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 404 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10354 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 7):
I believe that all law-abiding citizens of our country have the right to fly!

Sorry, flying isn't a "right" entitled to us, it's more of a luxury to those who can afford it...



Is it bad that I get excited to see even a CRJ overfly? Man, what this place does to you
User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10333 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 9):
Flying is not a right. If you can't afford local fares, tough luck, or move to a city with a cheaper airport.

No, there is no excuse for airfares to be so high. Now, I am strongly opposed to government regulation (don't even get me started on Obama!), but I think these airlines need to have compassion for the people that they serve.

There is no excuse for a $900 r/t airfare to go 340 miles on a tiny regional jet. If you're flying to China and you get good service, then that's acceptable. But not on a short domestic flight.

Tiny communities like Manhattan, KS are going to get screwed by the airfares. We need to have lower airfares across the nation. Low airfares increase passengers, which causes businesses to boom in local economies.

Communities need affordable air transportation, and airlines can profit from it. It is possible.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11819 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10313 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
Honestly, I don't understand why so many on a.net appear to cheerlead the airlines' ongoing crusade to rip people off with extremely high fares.

I think many on A.net cheerlead when the see airlines expanding service, increasing choice, and providing new options to the traveling public. I fail to see the downside there.

Nobody is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to fly American Eagle to Manhattan, Kansas. If people don't want to pay what Eagle needs to charge to be profitable, Eagle will stop the flights. It's that simple.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
I mean, would you want to pay several hundred dollars for the supposed "convenience" of flying on a tiny regional aircraft?

Well, perhaps for some people, they would happily pay a bit more to fly nonstop to their intended destination, or with only a single stop instead of two, or on a 44-seat jet versus a 19-seat turboprop. Maybe they have a funeral they have to rush home for, or a meeting that will ultimately lead to new jobs being brought to the area. Point is that many people make many choices about how to spend their money all day long.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
In this economy (frankly, it doesn't matter how the economy is), an airline should be working to charge affordable (notice, I said, 'affordable,' not cheapest) fares, so more people will be able to travel.

Sounds great - for the Soviet Union in 1963.

Airlines aren't charities. They are profit-seeking corporations that exist to make money - even though they have such a hard time doing that.

Their goal should be to maximize revenue by optimizing costs and fares. Notice how I said maximize revenue by optimizing fares. This is because of the most fundamental basic principle of free market economics: supply and demand. Eagle can only charge a given price to satisfy as much demand as the market will sustain at said price. If Eagle charges too much, not enough people will buy, and if they charge to little, an excess of consumers will buy but at an assured loss to the company.

So no, airlines' goal these days should be to charge lower fares just so more people can fly. If people can afford to fly, great, and if they can't, then so be it, but airlines shouldn't drive themselves further into an economic hole so everyone has an equal shot of getting that great fare to Vegas.

It's called capitalism. (A dirty word these days, I know.)

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
High fares are not (nor ever will be) the golden road to profitability.

No, but excessively low fares are pretty much the "golden road" to losses and bankruptcy.


User currently offlineASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10299 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 7):
I believe that all law-abiding citizens of our country have the right to fly!

Flying isn't a "right". If you can't afford a car then you don't have one, do you? There are many more things in this country that a law abiding, tax paying citizen should have a "right" to, including health care but flying is a luxury - pure and simple. If you can afford it then you can partake - if not then you can't.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 7):
Do these executives even care? Did they care about how, when I was younger, my family and I were forced to take long car trips to see relatives because we couldn't afford the insanely high fares the airlines were charging (they were $900 r/t for coach, from BWI-AVL) or TRI)?

Probably not. They are a for profit business. If they can make a profit at the fares they are charging then they probably don't care that you had to drive. Most airlines are aiming their product at a specific demographic - those that can afford a ticket.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
Why, so they can charge oppressively high fares and torture the people of that market?

A little dramatic, no? Torture? Nobody is forced to buy a ticket on any airline. There are other options. If AA is the only option to that city then my guess is they will be happy to have jet service that connects them to the rest of the world.


User currently offlinePudfw From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 121 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10273 times:

Seriously MAH4546 is right. Airlines can and should charge whatever the market will pay. This is capitalism.

I went to school at Purdue and American Connection had a flight to STL (2002 -2004 I believe) and I could connect to fly home to DFW easily. It was a lot easier than flying out of IND but about $75 more expense.

If I took a campus shuttle then it was $40 or if I drove it would cost me at least $50 to park over a few days. So bottomline it was more expensive but less hassle.

It was great I remember walking from my dorm to the Purdue Airport with my bag to get on a flight connecting to AUS. So much easier than flying from IND.

AA bailed on the route due to the subsidy running out that local leaders offered and there was not enough revenue to make it work. Plus IND is too close and most people only looked at the airfare not what they would pay for parking or lost time.

Anyway KSU is a bit more isolated than Purdue so it might work. Regardless price controls on these routes are ridiculous.


User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10274 times:



Quoting Commavia (Reply 12):
I think many on A.net cheerlead when the see airlines expanding service, increasing choice, and providing new options to the traveling public.

And I think it's great to see more air service and more choices. Competition is a wonderful thing!

Quoting Commavia (Reply 12):
It's called capitalism.

And I am all for capitalism.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 12):
If people don't want to pay what Eagle needs to charge to be profitable

But really, are $700 r/t fares (just to give an example) something Eagle needs to charge to be profitable? I really think that's overkill.

These airlines know what they need to charge to be profitable, but then they get greedy and try to charge way more than they need to get a decent margin.

I mean, there's people, like myself, who love to fly and dream a lot about flying, but are on limited budgets and can't afford to do it a lot. It pains me to see people from small communities being forced to drive long distances because they can't afford the outrageous air fares at their local airports.

That's just not right!


User currently offlineTSRA From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10277 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 11):
Tiny communities like Manhattan, KS are going to get screwed by the airfares.

I would think AA is more interested in screwing the gov fares going to Fort Riley and not so concerned about the community of MHK. I am surprised, however, that AA did not go consider going into FOE instead. Topeka is a larger city and is not to far of a drive to Fort Riley. Maybe they are counting on people driving to MHK instead of MCI?


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10262 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
I mean, would you want to pay several hundred dollars for the supposed "convenience" of flying on a tiny regional aircraft?



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 7):
These airlines rape and pillage small communities (like Manhattan & SGF), all in the name of "maximizing profits." They don't care about making air travel affordable! It's all about themselves!

Would you rather these communitites have NO air service?

People have two options. Pay the fare or dont fly. Its as simple as that.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10242 times:

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 15):
I mean, there's people, like myself, who love to fly and dream a lot about flying, but are on limited budgets and can't afford to do it a lot

Come on man, get down off the cross. It is not American Airlines duty to make sure that you can afford to fly by lowering their airfares. Nobody is creating an injustice here. I like a good steak dinner every now and again but I don't think it's Ruth's Chris steakhouse's obligation to provide a value menu so that I can afford to eat there, so I eat at the Outback Steakhouse or the Sizzler. It's not as close to my house, and the steaks aren't as good as they are at Ruths but I'll go there because it's what I can afford.

[Edited 2009-03-23 15:21:44]

User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10240 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 17):
Pay the fare or dont fly. Its as simple as that.

I'm not saying that air travel should be free. I know airlines have costs to cover. But they can cover their costs and be profitable, while still being affordable.


User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10195 times:



Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 18):
It is not American Airlines duty to make sure that you can afford to fly by lowering their airfares.

And since when did AA deserve to command a premium for their services??? I've flown them several times and I'm sorry, they don't deserve one bit of a premium for their domestic economy-class service.

If airlines want to be greedy and price gouge, then that's their prerogative. This is a free nation.

We need an airline in this country that actually cares about providing affordable air service to all people and the closest airline that I think meets that description is WN.

People need to understand that it's not about yourself; it's about serving others.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11819 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10167 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 15):
But really, are $700 r/t fares (just to give an example) something Eagle needs to charge to be profitable? I really think that's overkill.

Uh, have you opened a newspaper or turned on the TV lately? Airlines aren't exactly rolling in dough at the moment.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
And since when did AA deserve to command a premium for their services?

Since millions of people every year decided decided they deserved it. AA only commands a premium because people are willing to pay it. And obviously all those millions of people can't all be wrong, no?

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
I've flown them several times and I'm sorry, they don't deserve one bit of a premium for their domestic economy-class service.

Well, that's your decision. You can choose to fly whatever airline you want, and at whatever price you are willing to pay.

But for many of us, a particular airline - AA or any other - provides us with some level of service that we value, and thus we are willing to pay them a premium that we deem appropriate in order to receive that valued service.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
If airlines want to be greedy and price gouge

Oh boy, I knew it was only a matter of time before that lovely phrase - "price gouge" - came into the discussion.

This is not price gouging. Price gouging implies that there is some impairment in, or suspension of, some of the functions of the free market, giving the market actor the opportunity to exploit market imbalances and charge unreasonable prices, which that actor than takes.

That is not what is happening here.

Again - nobody is putting a gun to anyone's head and saying they must fly to Manhattan, Kansas on American Eagle. People and free to fly on Eagle if they want, or on Mesa, or drive, or do whatever else they want.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
We need an airline in this country that actually cares about providing affordable air service to all people and the closest airline that I think meets that description is WN.

Oh please, don't kid yourself. Southwest wants to make money just like everyone else. They're just better at it than everyone else at the moment because they run a great operation with a single fleet type, motivated employees, and have had a few years of labor hedges protecting them from exposure to market energy prices.

But let us not fool ourselves into thinking that Southwest is some sort of hippy cooperative with wings. They want to - and indeed, have to - make as much money as possible just like every single other publicly-traded corporation.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
People need to understand that it's not about yourself; it's about serving others.

Then join the Peace Corps. This is business. And in business it's about providing customers with a product they want, at a price they want to pay. And making money. Period.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21795 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10159 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
I mean, would you want to pay several hundred dollars for the supposed "convenience" of flying on a tiny regional aircraft?

If it meant not having to drive a few hours to a larger airport, perhaps.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 15):
It pains me to see people from small communities being forced to drive long distances because they can't afford the outrageous air fares at their local airports.

That's just not right!

So would you rather the people in big cities subsidize service to the middle of nowhere? That's not right either.

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
We need an airline in this country that actually cares about providing affordable air service to all people and the closest airline that I think meets that description is WN.

Not very close. Don't hold your breath for WN to start service to Manhattan, KS any time soon, or any of the other small cities you claim are getting screwed over - the market isn't there. At least the majors offer the choice.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10084 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 20):
People need to understand that it's not about yourself; it's about serving others.

Thats all well and good for Non profit organization or for Christian organizations, but the airlines are niether. They are there to maximize their profit, not to serve others.

Dont get me wrong, the idea of serving others is a noble concept, but its not the way of the airlines. Frankly I dont think it should be.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10075 times:

While I love to see AA think outside the box, this one is a real head-scratcher. If no one else has flown Central Kansas-DFW, what makes AA think it'll work for them? How long is that flight going to be, time-wise? I can't imagine spending a couple hours crammed in an ERJ that has no people on it!


It's a Great Day for Hockey!
25 LAXdude1023 : Ahh...the ol' if this idea is so great, why arent other people doing it. Out of curiosity who else would fly DFW-Central Kansas? Bear one thing in mi
26 KaiGywer : So if AA is so evil, why don't you pick a different airline next time you go to Santa Fe? Oh wait....there are none.. In your mind, NO air service is
27 KstateinALB : This is the first time where I logged in on this site and went "What the hell?" This is such a surprise to me, living here in Manhattan. I have mixed
28 LAXdude1023 : DFW is twice as large as ORD for AA. By sending the plane to DFW, MHK fliers will have more options. AA has been downsizeing ORD recently, however DF
29 MAH4546 : Schedules not published, but it will be 2x daily, not just one flight. If it does well, this is a market that could probably welcome a flight to O'Ha
30 Aviationnut12 : I don't know what all the fuss is about, I mean an airline wants to start service to a new city and they can. Who said they have to charge affordable
31 Kevi747 : Wow!! What a can of worms was opened here. Well I, for one, am excited about the announcements. We're a business, not a charity. Everything in life is
32 Spacepope : I can't imagine that flight would be more than an hour, on jet equipment.
33 Cubsrule : I was thinking the same thing, actually. My guess is that the local market to Chicago is somewhat larger-- Kansas City sees about 20% more local pass
34 LAXdude1023 : I highly doubt that there going after the O&D. Its all about connections. Im sure ORD has more of a local maret to Kansas, but its more about connect
35 FlyAA757 : Isn't Manhattan also where Kansas State U is?
36 Cubsrule : I agree, but I think that's a wash. ORD is a better connecting point for New York, but DFW is a better connecting point for L.A. ORD is a better conn
37 EXAAUADL : Well Im sure MHK is happy to get what service they can. I am wondering is there a revenue guarantee They arent. Most people complain that airlines ar
38 1337Delta764 : As I said, I am expecting that most of the traffic on DFW-SAF and vice-versa will be tourist traffic from outside of New Mexico rather than local San
39 Chapavaeaa : Don't think that it has to be a result of a detailed market analysis. There are a host of reasons that AA (and other airlines) operates certain marke
40 Spacepope : Yes, it is. We won't hold that against them though, I'm sure at least some wildcats will be able to find the airport. Rock chalk Jayhawk!
41 LAXdude1023 : Where did I say that AA stared the market because of market analysis? Truth is I dont know why AA is starting DFW-MHK. But they have done their homew
42 PurdueAv2003 : I see these threads pop up now and then where someone spouts off about how airfare is too expensive, and I have to laugh every time. No one is going t
43 DiamondFlyer : I'm excited that one of the small airports in Kansas is getting some service which isn't EAS connected. Hopefully, down the road, this trend continues
44 KstateinALB : I wouldn't have expected that. I think 1x daily is fine, but 2x? Might be pushing it. I said before, if prices are not off the charts, it will work o
45 LAXdude1023 : There are fewer connections to fewer places from ORD than DFW. What really is the deciding factor is where people from Manhattan are traveling to. OR
46 Rampart : I agree with Iloveboeing. I have always thought that airlines are missing a big opportunity. They can charge a "premium" to the very few for the conv
47 Logos : Well, I just saw this and it's all pretty much been said, but you sure don't sound like you're "strongly opposed" to government regulation. It sounds
48 Rjnut : THis is your free market economics at work ( and Obama is not at all interested in regulating air fares ,,just you spewing right wing talking points)
49 Isitsafenow : AA must have done their homework on the route into DFW from central Kansas. HOWEVER, If there is a demand to go east, why not STL instead of ORD? I wo
50 Cubsrule : With a low-frequency station like MHK, it doesn't really matter how many flights there are. It matters whether the flight hits a bank that goes to th
51 Milesrich : Don't you just love it. Another opponent to government involvement, that is unless they have a personal issue that a totally unfettered free market c
52 Ssides : Thanks for stating an obvious -- yet so often overlooked -- fact. People bitch and moan about airfares, the complex pricing structures, etc., but the
53 LAXdude1023 : It matters reguarding the bank of flights on the hub end. Ill give you an example: I work in corporate travel. A woman was trying to get from MSN to
54 Cubsrule : I wonder how many passengers are that shrewd, though. I know I don't always check when the next flight is (or I'd never use MEM), and I consider myse
55 BMI727 : I have a great excuse. People will pay it! Also, let's remember that RJs are not the cheapest things to be flying around either.
56 ABQopsHP : Any idea what equipment is going to be used in the DFW-SAF market? The SAF airport is at about 7000ft altitude....im guessing weight restrictions will
57 Chapavaeaa : Sorry LAXdude1023....I equated "homework" with Market Analysis. I agree that they have done a lot of research/homework. They have a good idea of the
58 Charlienorth : A quick question,I flew out of Lake Charles about 3 years ago and the terminal was a very small "post hurricane" structure,did they repair the old ter
59 KstateinALB : It's an Embraer 135/145...
60 1337Delta764 : The DFW-SAF flight will use an ERJ-140. Not sure about the DFW-MHK flight.
61 Us330 : Terry Maxon from the Dallas Morning news mentioned that the route to Manhattan was supposedly an EAS route, and that is why they have not publicized t
62 KstateinALB : Can it be an EAS route if they already have service to MCI and DEN?
63 Caspian27 : ZV used to fly there at least 3 times a day from MCI and most flights were completely full.
64 DiamondFlyer : I doubt it's an EAS route, if its on a jet to MHK. Manhappenin already has EAS on Great Lakes to MCI and DEN, so its not as if there isn't service. A
65 KstateinALB : I thought so, especially if they already had service to MCI and DEN. IMO, it was a matter of time when another carrier came in. With the troops comin
66 Cubsrule : Columbia, Missouri has ~150,000 people and 102 daily air carrier seats-- I'm not sure how a population of 50,000 entitles Manhattan to new service.
67 Iowaman : Because this new flight is with a jet, it's automatically disqualified from EAS subsidies. However, ZK is currently subsidized til March of 2010 at ~
68 KstateinALB : Sorry, I mistyped what I said in reply 66. I meant to say it was most likely the reason why they decided to add service. It also depends on the marke
69 Milesrich : Manhattan is the county seat of Riley County and the county has over 100,000 people. Claiming Manhattan has 50,000 would be like claiming that Moline
70 Rampart : Metro population estimates aside, I am assuming that the combination of a large (and growing) military base + the university provide a more substanti
71 Cubsrule : OTOH, there's probably some level of traffic to Jefferson City, and MHK doesn't have a good analog for that. This is all missing the point, though. A
72 KstateinALB : That would be my guess as well. I wonder how much this will affect the flights to MCI/DEN in terms of passenger loads.
73 SurfandSnow : I'm sure the Santa Fe service will do well. Santa Fe is a popular tourist destination in its own right as well as the most logical gateway to New Mexi
74 SLUAviator : Great Lakes' last flight will depart before the first Eagle flight arrives. When I flew for Great Lakes, when another carrier would venture onto our
75 Rampart : Good point. There's Topeka, but they have their own airport (and are also closer to MCI). -Rampart
76 PiedmontINT : Ah, but FOE doesn't have any commercial service at all... Also Topeka itself (especially the western part where more people live) is quite a bit clos
77 Ikramerica : AE was in SAF recently, as was DL, but they pulled out. I think DL were from LAX, IIRC, and AA was DFW, with LAX weekends (or did that never start?).
78 MAH4546 : It never launched. Had to do with the FAA, IIRC.
79 SW733 : Hardly far. About an hour in the air, maybe a few minutes more. Amen! No
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...
American Eagle To Offer Seasonal DFW-BUF posted Mon Mar 17 2008 12:58:58 by ERJ170
American Eagle To Pre-Screen Pilots In Albany posted Thu Feb 14 2008 13:25:19 by KarlB737
American Eagle To Vieques - Did It Ever Operate? posted Wed Jan 2 2008 02:36:49 by Airevents
American Eagle To Samana, D.R., Plus AA JFK-MCO posted Mon Aug 20 2007 15:04:44 by Commavia
American Eagle To Resume MIA-SRQ Service posted Sun Aug 12 2007 00:11:13 by MAH4546
American Eagle To Resume MIA-SAV posted Sat Aug 11 2007 23:49:27 by MAH4546
American Eagle To Fly DFW-ROW posted Sat May 5 2007 09:01:40 by ABQ747
American Eagle To Resume 2nd Daily PIA-DFW! posted Thu Feb 15 2007 22:18:56 by FlyPeoria
American Eagle To Fly ORD-YHZ posted Tue Feb 13 2007 17:04:11 by EXAAUADL
American Eagle To Resume JFK-BWI posted Mon Feb 6 2006 03:53:27 by MAH4546