Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LFs For QX At MMH, And UAX May Add MMH Next Winter  
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5772 posts, RR: 15
Posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2811 times:

I hadn't seen any numbers posted for QX's flights at Mammoth (MMH) this ski season. But I ran across this article.
http://www.news.sierrawave.net/easte...ervice-to-mammoth-called-a-success

QX last ski season operated LAX-MMH. This ski season QX and the ski resort added flights from SJC and RNO.

Load factors for 2009-2010 ski season as reported in this article:
LAX-MMH - 64%
SJC-MMH - 46% on the inbound flights and 53% on the outbound flights
RNO-MMH - 36%

Supposedly based on the results the ski resort will pay little to no money to Horizon as part of this year's revenue guarantee.

A Horizon spokesperson says that LAX and SJC flights will be back next winter but a decision has not been made about RNO flights.

An interesting comment at the bottom of this article about UAX possibly adding CR7s on SFO-MMH next winter:
"United Airlines may take on one flight a day out of the San Francisco Airport. The United flight would use a CRJ700, a 70 seat jet, rather than the 70 seat turbo prop planes that Horizon is using. This jet flight requires an additional environmental process which should be open for public comments in coming weeks."


"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1507 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2773 times:

I've noticed a fair amount of interline activity on the LAX-MMH-LAX flights, including a good number of east coast originations. Kudos to Resorts for getting the word out about the MMH area and helping to make the air service a success!


With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlinedurangomac From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 660 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2770 times:

Quoting FATFlyer (Thread starter):
This jet flight requires an additional environmental process which should be open for public comments in coming weeks."

My source says they might not need the additional review because at some point in the past a jet flew into MMH on a scheduled basis. Well just have to see. I think OO CR7 to SFO or LAX would be great.


User currently offlinesurfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2797 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2687 times:

Quoting FATFlyer (Thread starter):
This ski season QX and the ski resort added flights from SJC and RNO.

Well, to be fair, they added flights to AS/QX's Pacific Northwest hubs. Routings were SEA-RNO-MMH and PDX-SJC-MMH.

Quoting FATFlyer (Thread starter):
A Horizon spokesperson says that LAX and SJC flights will be back next winter but a decision has not been made about RNO flights.

I would be shocked to see RNO return. I was very surprised to see them added in the first place, given that Reno is a very small market and most of those folks would just cruise right down the 395 to Mammoth or go to closer Tahoe resorts. Why QX didn't route the SEA-MMH route through SMF is beyond me - SMF is a larger, wealthier market where QX and parent AS are much stronger and Mammoth is much harder to reach by road.

Quoting FATFlyer (Thread starter):
UAX possibly adding CR7s on SFO-MMH next winter:

Such a service would do well, but would really hurt the SJC flight. I bet QX will do everything in its power to prevent it from happening. I wonder if DEN-MMH could do well too?

Quoting aaway (Reply 1):
I've noticed a fair amount of interline activity on the LAX-MMH-LAX flights, including a good number of east coast originations. Kudos to Resorts for getting the word out about the MMH area and helping to make the air service a success!

Mammoth is owned by Intrawest (same company that owned Whistler) and is one of the country's largest ski resorts. It's not surprising to see those in the know going there.

Quoting durangomac (Reply 2):
OO CR7 to SFO or LAX would be great.

If the airport/resort are subsidizing QX's LAX flights, then UAX won't be flying to LAX too. SFO would be great, but again, it would kill the SJC flights. What ever came of the AA proposals in the 90s to start flying into MMH with 757s from ORD and DFW??



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineMacsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 520 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 3):
I would be shocked to see RNO return. I was very surprised to see them added in the first place

So was I. I fly LAX-RNO or RNO-LAX fairly often and just could not see why MMH made sense. If you are in RNO, all you have to do is drive 30 to 60 miles and you can ski in several great resorts. Why would you fly to MMH to ski at one?



Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5830 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2615 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting durangomac (Reply 2):
My source says they might not need the additional review because at some point in the past a jet flew into MMH on a scheduled basis.

I thought Royal West, back in the late 1980's to early 1990's, flew BAe-146's between LAX-MMH.

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 3):
Why QX didn't route the SEA-MMH route through SMF is beyond me - SMF is a larger, wealthier market where QX and parent AS are much stronger and Mammoth is much harder to reach by road.
Quoting Macsog6 (Reply 4):
just could not see why MMH made sense.

Look at this perspective... QX already flies multiple RT's between SEA-RNO. Flights between SEA-SMF are all mainline. QX added to the RNO run because it made sense of them to extend one QX run rather apply new resources to the SEA-SMF run. I believe the QX runs the Q400 on the SEA-RNO-MMH-LAX route.


User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1477 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2537 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm not convinced a CR7 could make money into MMH. If QX's highest load factor is 64%, I can't imagine a CR7 could make money at that load factor unless the fares are significantly higher. But if they end up being that much higher, people may still choose SJC.

User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5772 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Quoting durangomac (Reply 2):
My source says they might not need the additional review because at some point in the past a jet flew into MMH on a scheduled basis. Well just have to see.

Thanks, I know there were concerns about jet noise along with the aircraft size from the environmental community when AA was considering flights. I wonder how it will play this time.

Quoting durangomac (Reply 2):
I think OO CR7 to SFO or LAX would be great.

UAX flights would actually be a return for the brand to MMH. There were United Express flights to the area back in the 90s.

And I miss the old FAT-MMH flights on some of the small carriers.

Never know when something might come back, like a name. Sierra Summit above Fresno was just sold to the former president at Kirkwood (Tim Cohee). He is bringing back the China Peak name from the resort's early years in the 60s and 70s. He also plans to upgrade the resort into nicer regional draw.

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 3):
What ever came of the AA proposals in the 90s to start flying into MMH with 757s from ORD and DFW??

Vision Air had also thought about MMH but that is another story.

Regarding AA, there were battles between environmentalists and the airport over a number of issues. I also heard AA wanted a high per flight revenue guarantee.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):
Flights between SEA-SMF are all mainline.


Yes, for SMF to see flights to MMH it would have to use a tag on PDX-SMF. But that duplicates the SJC tag.

First thought that I had to replace RNO was to tag onto STS-SEA. Provides easy access from Marin, Napa, and Sonoma areas. But with SFO possible also that might be too much starting out of the Bay Area in the same year.

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 6):
I'm not convinced a CR7 could make money into MMH. If QX's highest load factor is 64%, I can't imagine a CR7 could make money at that load factor unless the fares are significantly higher. But if they end up being that much higher, people may still choose SJC.

It probably depends upon the revenue guarantee/subsidy that the resort provides UAX.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1477 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2466 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 7):
It probably depends upon the revenue guarantee/subsidy that the resort provides UAX.

Would they provide that though after having proved that service can work on QX? I thought the point of the initial revenue guarantee was to get anyone to come in and start service because MMH thought it would work and needed to back it up with something.

I wonder if a revenue guarantee to OO would have negative consequences for MMH's relationship with QX especially if MMH is stops paying QX for their service.


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5772 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2437 times:

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 8):
Would they provide that though after having proved that service can work on QX? I thought the point of the initial revenue guarantee was to get anyone to come in and start service because MMH thought it would work and needed to back it up with something.

Good question, I haven't dug into it to find out what the gossip is about any revenue guarantees discussions for next season. But most small and midsized airports have programs like revenue guarantees/fee waivers for any new route, it seems to almost be the standard for new routes now for at least the first year.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
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...
Upsetting Incident For Me At Prague And IST posted Sat Nov 4 2006 14:35:41 by Pilotaydin
UAX Ground Handling Up For Review At ORD posted Fri May 1 2009 08:09:49 by RampRat74
Call For Witnesses At AUH, OBF And LDE posted Wed Aug 2 2006 20:25:40 by Breiz
Dedicated Gates For JAL & ANA At ITM And HND? posted Mon Oct 11 2004 16:15:46 by Mozart
Allegiant Hiring F/As For New Bases At DEN And RNO posted Wed Feb 12 2003 17:00:40 by FATFlyer
Small Changes For DL At NGO? posted Wed Apr 14 2010 22:01:34 by centrair
Applying For A Job At BA--More Than I Ever Thought posted Tue Mar 30 2010 00:56:16 by UA777222
AF A32Xs Based At CDG And At ORY posted Mon Mar 8 2010 11:07:34 by LY777
Concorde F-BTSD Engines Restart For Rollout At LBG posted Thu Feb 4 2010 00:00:12 by MadameConcorde
UA At FLL And PBI posted Wed Jan 27 2010 17:50:11 by Tommy767