Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Regional Subsidiaries: When Did They Come Around?  
User currently offlineJBAirwaysFan From United States of America, joined May 2009, 953 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2653 times:

I was just looking at a picture on here of a Delta Airlines Farichild Hiller FH-227C (Acquired By Northeast Airlines). It showed no display of the "Delta Connection" Brand. So my question to you is: When did the regional subsidiaries (example: Delta Connection, USAir/US Airways Express, American Eagle) of the major carriers come around? According to that picture, that FH-227C appeared to be a part of the Delta Mainline fleet.

Here is a link to the picture:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Delta...airchild-Hiller-FH-227C/1642529/L/

[Edited 2010-01-22 06:46:04]


In Loving Memory of Casey Edward Falconer; May 16, 1992-May 9, 2012
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3164 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2610 times:

Not in the USA, but in the Netherlands, KLM founded NLM CityHopper already in 1966. In 1991, after KLM took over Rotterdam-based Netherlines, the company was rebranded into KLM cityhopper.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © NJP
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pkaviation



User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2565 times:



Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Thread starter):
When did the regional subsidiaries (example: Delta Connection, USAir/US Airways Express, American Eagle)

Those are not subsidiaries. They are not even companies. They are simple brands. With the exception of American Eagle, which is a company and differs from American Connection, the brand.

But to help answer your question:

ASA became the first regional to use the Delta Connection branding on March 1, 1984.

Air Wisconsin, Aspen Airways, and WestAir were branded as United Express on May 1, 1985.

I'm not sure when US Airways Express and American Connection were first used.

Same with American goes with Continental. There used to be a Continental Express, which was a subsidiary. It shut down and now there is the Continental Connection brand, but I'm not sure when that one began.


User currently offlineItalianFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1099 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2553 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):
I'm not sure when US Airways Express and American Connection were first used.

Technically, the USAirways Express brand, which was Allegheny Commuter System goes back to the codeshare agreement between AL and Henson Aviation and forged in 1968. It was Allegheny that came up with the concept of regional partners more than 40 years ago.


User currently offlineThePinnacleKid From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 724 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2534 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):
There used to be a Continental Express, which was a subsidiary. It shut down and now there is the Continental Connection brand, but I'm not sure when that one began.

The "Continental Express" brand you are referring to is the company now known as ExpressJet. Continental Express was, like Eagle, the purchase of several feeders for Continental (Rocky Mountain, BarHarbor, Britt Airways, etc) and combined to form the company as a wholly owned. They were renamed and spun off in the post 9/11 environment as a separate entity. The "Continental Express" operating identity is still used however on Regional Jet flights flying for Continental (opb. ExpressJet and Chautauqua)... the "Continental Connection" identity is used to denote regional Turboprop flights (Commutair, CapeAir, Gulfstream Intl, and Colgan)



"Sonny, did we land? or were we shot down?"
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2523 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):
With the exception of American Eagle, which is a company

American Eagle was a brand before it was a company. Many airline flew under the American Eagle name before AA bought most (if not all) of them and turned them into what they are now.

Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):
There used to be a Continental Express, which was a subsidiary. It shut down and now there is the Continental Connection brand, but I'm not sure when that one began.

Continental Connection is the name used for non-jet affiliates, like Gulfstream and Colgan. Continental Express is just a brand though, being used both by ExpressJet and Chautauqua.

ExpressJet was once the primary regional for CO, flying under the Continental Express name and was wholly owned by them. XE started as an independent affiliate, was purchased by CO in the mid 90s and spun off in 2002. They are now on their own again and of course had their branded operations for a while and they still fly a lot of charters.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2467 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 5):
Continental Connection is the name used for non-jet affiliates, like Gulfstream and Colgan. Continental Express is just a brand though, being used both by ExpressJet and Chautauqua.

Ahh, I get how that works. Those crazy people at CO.  Silly


User currently offlineTharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1861 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2430 times:

To the OP, if I understand it correctly, the concept came post-regulation in order to attract more business on both ends. A Delta/Delta Connection flight pair appeared before a Delta/RandomCommuterAirline flight pair.

Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):


ASA became the first regional to use the Delta Connection branding on March 1, 1984.

How did the relationship work at first? Was it just a simple code-share, with ASA bearing the risk, or was Delta already bearing risk from the beginning?


User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2408 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 2):

I'm not sure when US Airways Express and American Connection were first used.

American Connection first came around after the AA-TW merger when AA inherited the TW Express contracts with Chautauqua, Trans States, and Regionsair (Now defunct). Since American Eagle was an actual company and not a brand by then, the TW Express flying was rebranded as American Connection to honor the remainder of the contracts from those days.

The original reasons for regionals were great, and if they were still used for that purpose they still would be, but what the regionals have turned into makes me sick to my stomach, as it does many people. Yet the profitable carriers are the ones that don't use regional affiliates today (B6, WN, and even FL despite the OO deal now), and carriers heavily dependent on regional lift (UA, US, CO, AA, and DL) are struggling more. Coincidence, I think not.


User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5010 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

As noted, Allegheny created the Allegheny Commuter realtionship in '68. But this was a marketing relationship with Henson, Henson was not a subsidiary of Allegheny.

Judging by the OP's use of the word subsidiary, I'm wondering if he meant the first wholly owned regional subsidiary. In the US, I'm not sure which airline was the first to buy it's regional partner.

Anyone?



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2386 times:



Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 9):
I'm not sure which airline was the first to buy it's regional partner.

Horizon was purchased by Alaska in 1986. As far as airlines with multi-airline regional systems, I think that American was first. Simmons Airlines and Wings West were the first to be purchased in the summer of 1987.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6126 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2376 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 8):
The original reasons for regionals were great, and if they were still used for that purpose they still would be, but what the regionals have turned into makes me sick to my stomach, as it does many people. Yet the profitable carriers are the ones that don't use regional affiliates today (B6, WN, and even FL despite the OO deal now), and carriers heavily dependent on regional lift (UA, US, CO, AA, and DL) are struggling more. Coincidence, I think not.

You thesis is wrong. The low cost carriers (B6, WN, FR, etc) do not use regionals simply because they are "low cost" and regionals are not part of their model. The leagacy carriers "had" to use regionals to get around their much higher costs.

It really comes down to 'Scope'.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2331 times:



Quoting Planemaker (Reply 11):
You thesis is wrong. The low cost carriers (B6, WN, FR, etc) do not use regionals simply because they are "low cost" and regionals are not part of their model. The leagacy carriers "had" to use regionals to get around their much higher costs.

I stand by what I said and you have made my point. The fact that the LCC's are able to keep costs low without outsourcing and making money shows to me that there is bad leadership at the Legacies, whose business model has evolved into outsourcing to save costs. However, given the fact that they are still losing money anyways, tells me that its better to save costs inside than by trying to outsource, because on paper while it looks good to bean counters, a lot of problems come out that actually can make it more expensive in the long run. Scope actually makes it harder for a mainline carrier to outsource, which is why I am saying that Scope is the reason that there aren't more RJ's then there already are. If they could look inward at ways of saving money and costs as opposed to outsource everything, your employees would be happier, more productive, and thus costs naturally decrease as a result. Thats how it works for WN and B6.


User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6126 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2286 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
I stand by what I said and you have made my point.

No such thing, the opposite, in fact.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
The fact that the LCC's are able to keep costs low without outsourcing and making money shows to me that there is bad leadership at the Legacies, whose business model has evolved into outsourcing to save costs.

You cannot compare apples to oranges... as you are doing. The LCC's are very much p2p without legacy costs while the mainline carriers are network carriers, domestic AND international... with legacy costs.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
However, given the fact that they are still losing money anyways, tells me that its better to save costs inside than by trying to outsource, because on paper while it looks good to bean counters, a lot of problems come out that actually can make it more expensive in the long run.

Nice theory but it doesn't work that way. There are no "lot of problems".

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
Scope actually makes it harder for a mainline carrier to outsource, which is why I am saying that Scope is the reason that there aren't more RJ's then there already are.

There aren't anymore new RJs precisely because they don't need anymore. Almost all scopes virtually allowed unlimited 50-seat or less RJs.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 12):
If they could look inward at ways of saving money and costs as opposed to outsource everything, your employees would be happier, more productive, and thus costs naturally decrease as a result. Thats how it works for WN and B6.

It doesn't work for WN and B6 because they are NOT domestic/international NETWORK carriers.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1876 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2226 times:

Horizon flights all operate under their "sister" airline's designator "AS". Horizon is the only airline that comes to mind that is truely a completely different brand as opposed to most "Express" operations.

User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2091 times:



Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13):

You cannot compare apples to oranges... as you are doing. The LCC's are very much p2p without legacy costs while the mainline carriers are network carriers, domestic AND international... with legacy costs.

I still believe that the legacies can be more competitive in the domestic cost area with the LCC's then they are. Your argument aside, what needs to be done is to compare costs on a flight by flight basis, rather than a big picture. The question I would pose then, is how to CASM's on overlapping routes compare. One route I think is ripe for comparison would be the PHX-LAS route, presently served by WN and US. WN flies the route with all 737's, and I believe US is mostly A320 family with maybe an occasional CR9 thrown in. But for the sake of comparison lets use the mainline flights on US. Both flights require about the same amount of fuel, 2 pilots and 3 flight attendants. The WN pilots are paid more than the US pilots, and I think the WN flight attendants would be paid more than the US ones. Plus each flight uses about the same amount of rampers and gate agents, again, with WN people probably making a little more. Labor and fuel are the two biggest costs for an airline, and US is cheaper here than WN is. Airport space is a non issue since those costs would be close to identical for both companies, as would landing fees. The only real thing I question here is how much of the cost of maintaining HQ and the corporate level stuff would be charged to this one flight. It would have to be equal across the whole route system for both carriers. But basically speaking, to operate this one flight shouldn't be much different for either carrier. If there is a significant difference, then something is wrong with one company. I may be missing something here.

But the other side of the equation you haven't mentioned is RASM. Somehow its remaining flat at WN, who again does not outsource, but yet its down at all the other carriers. I haven't looked at the financial reports carefully enough, but my question would be how much of the lost RASM is domestic, and how much is international.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13):
Nice theory but it doesn't work that way. There are no "lot of problems".

The problem is though, by syphoning yourself off to the lowest bidder, there is a very good chance that low quality is a part of why they are the lowest bidder. And if this is because of things like Maintenance, or not enough crews, or cutting corners, it affects the operation of said carrier, and a lot of controllable problems which lead to things like misconnected passengers, lost baggage, cancelled flights. And the widespread use of RJ's leads to weight restrictions way too frequently. These things all have a negative effect on customer service. Plus the airline has to compensate the passenger for an involuntary bumping, and in the case of a controllable problem which is frequent at the regional level for the reasons I have stated, this often means a hotel room for the passenger, accomodations on another airline which sends business to competition, plus means and stuff. Given the discounts that airlines negotiate with these companies it might not seem like much, but it adds up over time, so the balancing act becomes that we are saving X dollars up front but if its costing us Y dollars in the long run, are we really saving? In fact, a regional airline a couple of years ago contracted with a MX provider in YUL against the advice of everyone in their company because they had the cheapest up front price. However it soon became apparent that this shop was incompetent and couldn't deliver anything on time and costs went up. It got so bad that the airline eventually swallowed pride and looked for someone else. Then the FAA revoked the companies mx certificate.


User currently offlineBNAFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

I'm surprised no one brought this up, unless I overlooked it. The photo lshown in the link in comment #1 is a FH-227 Delta inherited in it's merger with NorthEAST waaaay back in 1971/72. They flew them for a couple years to some smaller New England communities, but those routes and planes went away long before deregulation. I don't believe any subsidies were involved.

User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6126 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1877 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 15):
I still believe that the legacies can be more competitive in the domestic cost area with the LCC's then they are. Your argument aside, what needs to be done is to compare costs on a flight by flight basis, rather than a big picture.

They already have become more competitive via Chap 11, etc but you cannot compare a network legacy carrier with an LCC. And you certainly do have to look at the 'big picture'.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 15):
And if this is because of things like Maintenance, or not enough crews, or cutting corners, it affects the operation of said carrier, and a lot of controllable problems which lead to things like misconnected passengers, lost baggage, cancelled flights.

Sounds like some mainline carriers (including WN and their FAA trouble last year)!



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6798 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1776 times:



Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Thread starter):
According to that picture, that FH-227C appeared to be a part of the Delta Mainline fleet.

Probably it was?

Allegheny was the uncontested leader among US airlines, wasn't it? When did they start-- around 1970?


User currently offlineBNAFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 1676 times:



Quoting Timz (Reply 18):
Probably it was?

Allegheny was the uncontested leader among US airlines, wasn't it? When did they start-- around 1970?

The DL FH-227 was indeed mainline, as I posted previously, inherited from the NE merger. I recall they flew it JFK/LGA to New Bedford, Keene, Lebanon, and probably a couple more smaller cities.

Allegheny was the uncontested leader among US airlines? Clarify that please? Other than being one, if not the first airline to offer "commuter" flights, not sure I get this comment.


User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24914 posts, RR: 22
Reply 20, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 1585 times:



Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13):
You cannot compare apples to oranges... as you are doing. The LCC's are very much p2p without legacy costs while the mainline carriers are network carriers

It varies, even among carriers considered to be LCCs. For example, Southwest sells online connections and transfers their baggage. Few LCCs in Europe do that. If you want to connect on EasyJet or Ryanair you have to make two separate bookings, claim your bags at the connecting point, and check in again, as if it was a completely separate transaction. And if the first flight is late and you miss the connection, you get no refund.


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...
747 Noses - When Did They Change? posted Tue Oct 7 2003 11:23:32 by Lapper
When Did They Close Kai Tak Intl. posted Thu Dec 27 2001 16:11:35 by RC Pilot
717's Where Did They Come From? posted Mon Jul 30 2001 22:28:33 by Pilothica737
When Did Modern Bag Tags Come Into Use posted Mon Jul 23 2007 13:37:12 by Lincoln
When Did The A-300 Come Out? posted Sun Aug 1 1999 03:10:06 by Dazed767
When Did CX Start Service To LAX? posted Sat Jan 16 2010 14:23:38 by 747400sp
LIS New Gates: When Will They Open? posted Fri Jan 1 2010 08:03:15 by Airbazar
When Did Airbus Emerge As A Serious Competitor? posted Sun Dec 27 2009 06:07:13 by Faro
FC Barca Trip To AUH - Which Airline Did They Use? posted Sun Dec 13 2009 14:27:47 by Sabena332
When Did Int'l Premium Cabins Become So Fancy? posted Thu Nov 12 2009 16:34:37 by RJpieces