GlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 601 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5006 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."
TOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6178 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4989 times:
I'm confused. ORD seasonal flights on CO metal? What did your friends mean by this?
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
goldenstate From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 528 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4986 times:
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?
GlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 601 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4894 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.
SlcDeltaRUmd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2456 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4843 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.
drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4774 times:
Quoting SlcDeltaRUmd11 (Reply 4): ORD is a much better connection hub from where most of the skiiers are coming from over IAH
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4335 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.
joeljack From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 873 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4249 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.
Deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8590 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4217 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.
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3970 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
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, RR: 25 Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3941 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?
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3907 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
Avconsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3666 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.
GlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 601 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3060 times:
I've heard that NAS, FPO, BGI, and HUX are potential candidates for this winter.
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2628 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.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2573 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
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2451 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.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2150 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
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2103 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]
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2087 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
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2027 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]
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2024 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
JasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1994 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 kgaiflyer: In fact, hasn't Continental done stuff like this with United in the past?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 601 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, 
From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2017 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
