Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA (CO) To Add More ORD Seasonal Svc. This Year?  
User currently offlineGlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 605 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6733 times:

I don't want to believe rumors, but I've heard from several friends in Chicago that UA will add a few more seasonal routes out of ORD this winter. They would not give specifics, but said "north of the equator and south of Key West."

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6929 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6716 times:

I'm confused. ORD seasonal flights on CO metal? What did your friends mean by this?


"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlinegoldenstate From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 583 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6713 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

More seasonal service to the Caribbean from a northern city and key hub during the winter of a year which has so far seen very strong revenue recovery?

Sure, it makes sense.


User currently offlineGlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6621 times:

Sorry Tommy767, but I've assumed UA/CO are starting to operate as one (even though the merger has not been approved and they have 2 operating certificates, but they've exchanged financial info, are both members of *, ...).

I've heard some cities in Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America will see new service during the ugly ORD winters.


User currently offlineSlcDeltaRUmd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3636 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6570 times:

Once the merger goes thru i would hope united to start ORD-EGE service on a 757-200.

That may mean IAH-EGE goes from a 757 to a 737-700. ORD is a much better connection hub from where most of the skiiers are coming from over IAH. Since they have DEN as an option I think UA didnt want to compete with AA which dominates this route and EGE in the winter. Now they will be larger i hope they restart this route.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5209 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6501 times:

Quoting SlcDeltaRUmd11 (Reply 4):
ORD is a much better connection hub from where most of the skiiers are coming from over IAH

Not so fast...alot of that is O&D.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6062 times:

Definitely an incorrect assumption. Even though they've announced plans for a merger and even though they are star, doing this would be illegal under antitrust rules. They do not have antitrust immunity domestically nor the ability to share revenue domestically. Until the merger actually happens, each carrier still needs to deploy its resources as effectively and as profitably as possibly. In general, it is more profitable to operate one's own metal if the market exists than to code share. So if co makes a lot of money on o/d traffic from iah to ege- and I believe they do, then co will continue to use whichever metal that allows them to maximize this revenue opportunity.

Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 3):

Sorry Tommy767, but I've assumed UA/CO are starting to operate as one (even though the merger has not been approved and they have 2 operating certificates, but they've exchanged financial info, are both members of *, ...).

I've heard some cities in Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America will see new service during the ugly ORD winters.



User currently offlinejoeljack From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5976 times:

Quoting SlcDeltaRUmd11 (Reply 4):
Once the merger goes thru i would hope united to start ORD-EGE service on a 757-200.

That may mean IAH-EGE goes from a 757 to a 737-700. ORD is a much better connection hub from where most of the skiiers are coming from over IAH. Since they have DEN as an option I think UA didnt want to compete with AA which dominates this route and EGE in the winter. Now they will be larger i hope they restart this route.

It's my understanding that all the 737 series won't do EGE very well with it's short runway. With all the ski equipment etc on this flight, they need the grossly over-powered 757 on this. United makes a A320 work but with only flying to DEN, they can get away with it.

Same situation at JAC, just not as extreme. A A320, A319, or 73G has a little better range but you don't see those types of planes flying 1,000 mile routes from JAC even. Everything is a 757 on UA, AA and DL except the short flights to SLC and DEN where the other work, or even a CRJ works.

The 757 is just a perfect airplane for these high elevation, short runway, high luggage airports.


User currently onlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5944 times:

Quoting joeljack (Reply 7):

It's my understanding that all the 737 series won't do EGE very well with it's short runway. With all the ski equipment etc on this flight, they need the grossly over-powered 757 on this. United makes a A320 work but with only flying to DEN, they can get away with it.

I would bet money DL's "rocket ship" 73Ws can. They do ATL-EYW-ATL non-stop with full PAX/cargo.



yep.
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23296 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5697 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 6):
Even though they've announced plans for a merger and even though they are star, doing this would be illegal under antitrust rules.

There's nothing illegal about CO starting ORD-EGE or UA starting EWR-AUA tomorrow. It wouldn't be any different from AA starting IAD-EGE or DL starting IAH-SJU except that the codeshare would help fill the plane.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently onlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7803 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5668 times:

Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 3):

I've heard some cities in Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America will see new service during the ugly ORD winters.

I believe UA already has seasonal weekend service to alot of points in the Caribbean. I believe they serve SXM, AUA, LIR, MBJ, PUJ, STT, CZM, and maybe one or two others on Saturday's only during the winter. I know that United has a contract with Funjet to help fill the planes, but what more would they want to add?



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26128 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5634 times:

I know United it returning to Jamaica this winter. The islands tourism folks announced such.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAvconsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5393 times:

Quoting joeljack (Reply 7):
It's my understanding that all the 737 series won't do EGE very well with it's short runway.

From '01 to '04 I flew in their regularly on a UA 737-300 during ski season. Today it's served with a CRJ which would be more challenged in the summer months opposed to winter. While it's 6500 elevation it does have a 9000' runway.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 8):
I would bet money DL's "rocket ship" 73Ws can. They do ATL-EYW-ATL non-stop with full PAX/cargo.

My neighbor has flown that route several times. Weight restricted both ways. EYW-ATL is severely weight restricted, less than 65 pax some days. . It's a "Special 121" airport. Meaning the trickiness on the approach with thermals coming off the water challenging a stabilized approach. Plus its a Day Time Only airport for 121 service. Apparently FL is weight restricted from MCO. ALPA has raised safety concerns concern to both companies.

That is a tricky airport that can get you into a lot of trouble fast with limited to no options. It is flat and on an island with no geographic obstacles that can create complacency.


User currently offlineGlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4787 times:

I've heard that NAS, FPO, BGI, and HUX are potential candidates for this winter.

User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4047 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4719 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting joeljack (Reply 7):

EGE-EWR is a 737-700



okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4355 times:

i agree. there's absolutely nothing illegal about CO starting that route. But, the planning people at CO, as of now, cannot coordinate flights/ schedules/ fares/ availability with UA people. That is what is illegal as of now. UA and CO have antitrust immunity to coordinate schedules and fares over the Atlantic, but not domestically. They share revenues over the Atlantic, but they do not domestically. CO could, of course, if they want to, start ORD-EGE. However, until they can share revenue, until they can coordinate their schedules, until they can manage inventory together, United would still make more money routing passengers through Denver than on a Co operated, UA* flight. there's nothing stopping CO from starting the route, but until the carriers are actually merged it would still make UA more money to have the flight on their own metal.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 9):
There's nothing illegal about CO starting ORD-EGE or UA starting EWR-AUA tomorrow. It wouldn't be any different from AA starting IAD-EGE or DL starting IAH-SJU except that the codeshare would help fill the plane.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23296 posts, RR: 20
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4300 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 15):
However, until they can share revenue, until they can coordinate their schedules, until they can manage inventory together,

There are some actions they can take that are legal. CO can, obviously, look at UA's schedules. Taking JAC as an example (because it's more in season right now than EGE), CO could look at the ORD-JAC schedule, see a hole in the morning, and add a morning flight. CO can also, AFAIK, give as much of the plane to UA to sell as it wants. Now, that might create some P&L abnormalities between UA and CO but given that it's just one route and that they'll soon be merged anyway, that's not the end of the world.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2701 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4195 times:

It wouldn't be a surprise if UA starts flying ORD-PTY-ORD to connect to/from CM (CO codeshare) flights there..


I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4178 times:

I used to do the code share work. That is not how codeshare works. The operating carrier gets the majority of the revenue, the airlinecoding on the route gets a slim fraction of the revenue - just a small royalty for selling the ticket. They do NOT allocate a portion of the seats on the route- that's not how the current codeshare works. Coding helps an airline maintain a presence in a market that they want to serve but don't because their resources can be more profitably used elsewhere. Co and ua cannot apportion the seats on a hypothetical ord-ege yet because that action would violate the antitrust laws, which they haven't gotten immunity fro
yet for domestic flights. Again, co could if they want put a flight I to a bank at ord, but ua is NOT bound at this point to put its code onto the flight. Ifua really sees the opportunity they will use their own metal.


quote=Cubsrule,reply=16]
Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 15):
However, until they can share revenue, until they can coordinate their schedules, until they can manage inventory together,

There are some actions they can take that are legal. CO can, obviously, look at UA's schedules. Taking JAC as an example (because it's more in season right now than EGE), CO could look at the ORD-JAC schedule, see a hole in the morning, and add a morning flight. CO can also, AFAIK, give as much of the plane to UA to sell as it wants. Now, that might create some P&L abnormalities between UA and CO but given that it's just one route and that they'll soon be merged anyway, that's not the end of the world.


146 319 320 343 722 732/3/4/5/G/8 744 752/3 762/3 772 AR8 AT7 CRJ/7/9 D9S/4/5 ERJ E70/5 E90 FRJ L15 M88 M90
[/quote]


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23296 posts, RR: 20
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3877 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 18):
They do NOT allocate a portion of the seats on the route- that's not how the current codeshare works.

When carriers are about to merge, they absolutely do. That's how both US/HP and DL/NW did it - and why you'd see inventory on flights on one carrier's reservations system but not the other.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3830 times:

Yes you did. But that was after the regulatory approval had been granted and on paper one company already had the other. That hasn't happened yet with ua/co and won't till next year. Until then they are still two carriers that are separate and are competing.


uote=Cubsrule,reply=19]Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 18):
They do NOT allocate a portion of the seats on the route- that's not how the current codeshare works.

When carriers are about to merge, they absolutely do. That's how both US/HP and DL/NW did it - and why you'd see inventory on flights on one carrier's reservations system but not the other.
[/quote]


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23296 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3814 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 20):
Until then they are still two carriers that are separate and are competing.

...but there's no (legal) reason they couldn't manage the inventory that way sooner. That doesn't mean they will - there are good reasons not to. But the government wouldn't stop them from doing it.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3754 times:

Yes there is. Making joint decisions on inventory allocation is illegal unless you have antitrust immunity from the government. Ua and co only have this immunity over the Atlantic, not domestically. Unttil they get merger approval any such discussions domestically would be illegal.


e=Cubsrule,reply=21]...but there's no (legal) reason they couldn't manage the inventory that way sooner. That doesn't mean they will - there are good reasons not to. But the government wouldn't stop them from doing it.[/quote]


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23296 posts, RR: 20
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3751 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 22):
Making joint decisions on inventory allocation is illegal unless you have antitrust immunity from the government.

Yes - but unilateral decisions are not. CO could let UA sell 80% of the airplane (just like EI lets UA sell most of the airplane on IADMAD today).

What would be illegal is UA telling CO to let UA sell 80% of the inventory. But CO can make that decision unilaterally.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 301 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3721 times:

Yes there is. Making joint decisions on inventory allocation is illegal unless you have antitrust immunity from the government. Ua and co only have this immunity over the Atlantic, not domestically. Unttil they get merger approval any such discussions domestically would be illegal.


e=Cubsrule,reply=21]...but there's no (legal) reason they couldn't manage the inventory that way sooner. That doesn't mean they will - there are good reasons not to. But the government wouldn't stop them from doing it.[/quote]


25 Cubsrule : But, again, CO could allocate a lot of inventory to UA on their own. P.S. If you highlight the text you want to quote and use the "quote selected tex
26 Post contains images kgaiflyer : In fact, hasn't Continental done stuff like this with United in the past?
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...
UA To Add BIL-ORD posted Sat Mar 4 2006 22:52:07 by UA_727
AI To Add More Flights To London, LAX And ORD posted Thu Oct 28 2004 10:46:05 by Airish
CO To Add 20 More Weekly Flights To Cuba... posted Thu Oct 25 2001 23:04:05 by MAH4546
UA & CO To Merge! #3 posted Wed May 5 2010 23:26:35 by SA7700
UA & CO To Merge! #2 posted Mon May 3 2010 12:24:13 by SA7700
UA & CO to Merge! posted Mon May 3 2010 02:56:01 by UA191
CO To Add IFE On All 737NG And 753 posted Tue Jan 29 2008 12:20:44 by TUIflyer
Rumor: US To Add More Flights To PIT posted Mon Mar 26 2007 06:18:03 by Luketenley
JetBlue Expected To Add More SWF Flights posted Mon Jan 8 2007 17:16:52 by FA4B6
Gol To Add More EZE Services (EZE-GRU / EZE-GIG) posted Thu Nov 23 2006 13:28:51 by LipeGIG