Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO To Begin PKB-CLE. How Much Of A Hub Is CLE Now  
User currently offlineMainRunway From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 174 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10662 times:

are there that many connections still available to warrant commuter flights like this into CLE?
Here's the news release....

http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=84334

97 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3916 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10658 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

there hasn't been anything that has changed over the past 2 years or so other than the removal of CDG/LHR service.


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlinecle757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10646 times:

Yes there are alot of cities to connect to...LAX,EWR,MSP,ORD,MKE,YYZ,YUL,LGA,BOS,BWI,SFO,PHX,DEN,LAS,and on and on.


Cleveland the best location in the Nation
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10317 times:

Until the merger has been fully approved, CO and UA must operate as two competitors. Therefore, to see CO add flights to CLE is not really too surprising.

If the merger is approved, the CLE hub will be closed. CLE will unfortunately be a victim of the recent merger mania.


User currently offlinecle757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10310 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 3):
If the merger is approved, the CLE hub will be closed. CLE will unfortunately be a victim of the recent merger mania.

This is not a fact, nobody knows whats going to happen yet.



Cleveland the best location in the Nation
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10255 times:

Quoting cle757 (Reply 4):
Quoting EricR (Reply 3):
If the merger is approved, the CLE hub will be closed. CLE will unfortunately be a victim of the recent merger mania.

This is not a fact, nobody knows whats going to happen yet.

Of course it is not a fact since it has yet to happen. However, airline mergers with the scope and size of UA/CO will ultimately result in the reductions of hubs. There is too much cost and redundancy in the CLE hub. The combined airline will not need nor keep the CLE hub.

Nothing against the CLE operations. It works for CO today, but will not be necessary in a combined CO/UA. It will happen soon after merger is completed. If you do not believe me, just take a look at history.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11387 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10247 times:

It's a hub - albeit a small one - today. Nobody is disputing that.

I think the question is whether or not Cleveland will be able to sustain a hub in the future.

I, personally, don't think so - especially if/when the merger happens.


User currently offlineKcrwflyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3791 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 10019 times:

Quoting MainRunway (Thread starter):
are there that many connections still available to warrant commuter flights like this into CLE?
Here's the news release....

Come on, its EAS... the flight might as well go to CMH.

IAD didnt do well so I'm sure CLE will do GREAT. What with CLE being a much better and bigger hub than IAD....errr wait thats not right.

Kudos to PKB for screwing up the best EAS service they've ever had and ever will in nonstop service to IAD.


User currently offlineGlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 602 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 10011 times:

Post merger this will move to IAD and/or ORD.

User currently offlineKcrwflyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3791 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 10004 times:

Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 8):
Post merger this will move to IAD and/or ORD.

It'll go back to IAD unless the geniuses up there dream up something "better"...which in their eyes would probably be PIT.


User currently offlineGlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 602 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9964 times:

Post merger this will move to IAD and/or ORD.

User currently offlinegreenair727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9427 times:

Quoting EricR:
If the merger is approved, the CLE hub will be closed.

Not necessarily: ORD & EWR are already congested; IAD has the same weather patterns as EWR plus its also too far east to be a well-located hub; CLE has a large O&D with better than US average yields; and most importantly, CLE has had rough times, but its seen the bottom and now its on its way back up--it wouldn't make sense to divest now.


User currently offlinegreenair727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9367 times:

Furthermore (continuing the post from above), the trend for CLE is more--not less--service.


OAG 7/30/2010

No CLE changes

OAG 8/6/2010

AA: ORD-CLE 4>6 NOV-
AA: MIA-CLE 0>2 NOV-
DL: ATL-CLE 7>6 NOV-

OAG 8/13/2010

CO: CLE-PKB 0>4 SEP-

Also some CO SFO-CLE flights in Dec has been upgauged to 753 from 739.


User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9257 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9348 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 5):

Of course it is not a fact since it has yet to happen. However, airline mergers with the scope and size of UA/CO will ultimately result in the reductions of hubs. There is too much cost and redundancy in the CLE hub. The combined airline will not need nor keep the CLE hub.

Not really. If you have no place to put the flights from the hub then you dont need to dump it.

Quoting commavia (Reply 6):

I, personally, don't think so - especially if/when the merger happens.

I do. ORD and EWR are so packed now, no way could they take the 250(?) flights at CLE. If UA/CO had a DTW(and what i mean by that is its right down the road, good bit of gate space, and doesn't have slots) then i would say yes, CLE is dead but with UA not having a place to move it to i say it stays.



yep.
User currently offlinecle757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9320 times:

CO is adding Q400s to ORD and BWI, which is addtional capacity.


Cleveland the best location in the Nation
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11387 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9321 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 13):
I do. ORD and EWR are so packed now, no way could they take the 250(?) flights at CLE. If UA/CO had a DTW(and what i mean by that is its right down the road, good bit of gate space, and doesn't have slots) then i would say yes, CLE is dead but with UA not having a place to move it to i say it stays.

Two points.

1. I think IAD stands to capture more of these connecting traffic flows than either ORD or EWR - largely because, again, as you said, both ORD and EWR are congested.

2. The combined company need not replace 250 CLE flights with 250 flights somewhere else. You can capture that vast majority of that capacity merely through upgrading existing flights in and out of other hubs with mainline flights versus RJs.

In a world where one airline has ORD, EWR, and IAD, there is absolutely no economic justification - in my mind - to have a hub in a market as small, and relatively economically and demographically stagnant, as CLE.


User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9257 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9300 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 15):

1. I think IAD stands to capture more of these connecting traffic flows than either ORD or EWR - largely because, again, as you said, both ORD and EWR are congested.

I would think IAD is to far east to replace CLE.

Quoting commavia (Reply 15):
2. The combined company need not replace 250 CLE flights with 250 flights somewhere else. You can capture that vast majority of that capacity merely through upgrading existing flights in and out of other hubs with mainline flights versus RJs.

I understand that, but even then IIRC CLE still has a pretty good bit of mainline now. (ie its not all RJ like CVG save 5-6 citys)

Quoting commavia (Reply 15):


In a world where one airline has ORD, EWR, and IAD, there is absolutely no economic justification - in my mind - to have a hub in a market as small, and relatively economically and demographically stagnant, as CLE.

I would agree is you had a place to put it.



yep.
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9270 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 15):
2. The combined company need not replace 250 CLE flights with 250 flights somewhere else. You can capture that vast majority of that capacity merely through upgrading existing flights in and out of other hubs with mainline flights versus RJs.

Do you think new UA will be able to just shed CRJ's and automatically upgauge on demand? If it is to happen, jets need to be ordered not CR7's. CO has about 5 737's on order for 2011 and UA none. Not going to happen anytime soon. If ordered now, it will be 4-5 years before the jets needed to pull it off are delivered. A lot can happen in that time.

Have you been to ORD? It's jammed. To handle 250 (or 150) flights as you suggest, they'd need a new terminal. If you are the new UA, do you want to spend that money?

If you close CLE, you will probably give 50% of the CO 8 or 9mm pax to DL. I seriously doubt new UA will be willing to give up that kind of marketshare as the whole purpose of the merger is to gain marketshare (which they have been losing to DL, thus the merger).


User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5351 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9215 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 15):
relatively economically and demographically stagnant, as CLE.

That certainly describes the "old Cleveland", in this recession the Cleveland MSA is doing rather well compared to the rest of the country and is a huge success compared to the "old Cleveland." Employment is actually UP y-o-y for June, the earnings decline is about half the national decline, and unemployment is less that the average. Even the population decline has slowed to almost imperceptible; and, to be a little heartless, the "right" people are leaving. No LeBron James jokes please.

Ten years ago, Cleveland would have been a leading national disaster in these categories. It's no longer true, partly because the damage has already been done and partly because the regional employment patterns are changing. Pittsburgh is perhaps the best example of "Rust Belt Renaissance' if I can invent a term; Cleveland is close behind.

I should also note that the civic parties in the Parkersburg/Marietta EAS case *requested* CLE service in preference to their existing IAD flights.

[Edited 2010-08-13 07:32:32]


I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11387 posts, RR: 62
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9190 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 16):
I would think IAD is to far east to replace CLE.

I don't think so at all - most of CLE's traffic is moving between the Northeast and the rest of the country, and IAD is no more east than CLE is west for that traffic.

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 16):
I would agree is you had a place to put it.

They do. As I said, a mix of more flights and larger planes at ORD, EWR and IAD could easily do the trick.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
Do you think new UA will be able to just shed CRJ's and automatically upgauge on demand?

Generally, yep. It may not be effortless or instantaneous, but over a period of maybe 1-2 years, I definitely think they could achieve that no problem.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
Have you been to ORD?

Too many times to count.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
It's jammed.

It's also one of the largest airports, and local markets, on earth. And much of that "jam" is due to flying lots of flights with RJs. You take lots of flights to ORD with RJs, and a few flights to CLE with RJs, and combine them into fewer flights to ORD, and/or EWR, and/or IAD, with mainline and/or larger RJs, and you kill two birds with one stone: less congestion, one less (marginal) hub.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
To handle 250 (or 150) flights as you suggest, they'd need a new terminal.

First, I didn't say 150. It would be a mix of more flights and larger planes at ORD, EWR and IAD all.

Second, you wouldn't need a new terminal - at ORD or anywhere else.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
If you are the new UA, do you want to spend that money?

Yes, if it means I don't have to spend the money of operating an entire other hub that serves no operational or financial purpose.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
If you close CLE, you will probably give 50% of the CO 8 or 9mm pax to DL.

Not sure of it would be that much - but either way, yes, they'd lose some of that local traffic. But, again, does the marginal revenue contribution of capturing X% of that local CLE traffic outweigh the marginal cost of operating a fourth hub catering to the same traffic flows? Personally, I don't think so.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
I seriously doubt new UA will be willing to give up that kind of marketshare as the whole purpose of the merger is to gain marketshare (which they have been losing to DL, thus the merger).

Not really.

CLE - like every hub - is comprised of two types of traffic, connecting and local. If - hypothetically - the combined airline were to drop the hub, there would likely be little loss of those connecting passengers assuming sufficient capacity (either in the form of more flights or larger planes or both) was added into other hubs. On the local front, sure, they'd lose some of the local CLE traffic, but I doubt that local traffic is enough to justify all the rest once you have a very viable alternative (multiple alternatives, actually).

The purpose of this merger is not to gain market share - it is to increase profit. If the cost burden of operating an unnecessary and redudant hub in CLE is more than the cost of the loss of some amount of local Cleveland traffic


User currently offlinesteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9174 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9143 times:

Quoting Kcrwflyer (Reply 9):
It'll go back to IAD unless the geniuses up there dream up something "better"...which in their eyes would probably be PIT.

In that regard they could bark up the tree of the likes of Gulfstream...

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 13):
I do. ORD and EWR are so packed now, no way could they take the 250(?) flights at CLE. If UA/CO had a DTW(and what i mean by that is its right down the road, good bit of gate space, and doesn't have slots) then i would say yes, CLE is dead but with UA not having a place to move it to i say it stays.

What about IAD? Isn't IAD expanding its facilities there (more, extended runways and gate space?) I realize that this is solely about CLE, but doesn anyone on here speculate that EWR could lose a fraction of its traffic to IAD? I still see EWR as a sizeable base, but only a 2ndary hub to primarily focus on international flights. I see the primary hubs being IAD, ORD, DEN, and IAH. I guess your 2ndary hubs would be EWR, LAX, and SFO.

Quoting commavia (Reply 19):
Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 16):
I would think IAD is to far east to replace CLE.

I don't think so at all - most of CLE's traffic is moving between the Northeast and the rest of the country, and IAD is no more east than CLE is west for that traffic.

It shouldn't matter how far IAD is. When US closed the PIT hub, the extra traffic was split between PHL and CLT. So given that, I don't know why IAD would be too far east...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9097 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 19):
Generally, yep. It may not be effortless or instantaneous, but over a period of maybe 1-2 years, I definitely think they could achieve that no problem.

Again, with what planes? New builds are sold for a bit and I think the 4-5 years I suggested is much more realistic if at all. Remember, UA went from 600 to 300 mainline jets in the last 10 years so they are heavily into the RJ side.

I think you have to look at a comprehensive approach to the deal, and I'm sure the new UA will. There are tons of directions this could go:

1) Close CLE and route additional pax via DEN, EWR or ORD.
2) Take some EWR/ORD volume and move to the lowest operating cost location in the network, CLE
3) Make CLE the domestic connection point, ORD the international connection point (bringing new TATL to ORD volume)
4) Many others.

The answer is, only the new UA knows. Regardless, every hub at UA will have some impacts as a result to the merger and all of them are unknown at this point.

Quoting commavia (Reply 19):
CLE - like every hub - is comprised of two types of traffic, connecting and local. If - hypothetically - the combined airline were to drop the hub, there would likely be little loss of those connecting passengers assuming sufficient capacity (either in the form of more flights or larger planes or both) was added into other hubs. On the local front, sure, they'd lose some of the local CLE traffic, but I doubt that local traffic is enough to justify all the rest once you have a very viable alternative (multiple alternatives, actually).

It is my understanding that O&D at CLE is about 70%, so they could lose a good number of those passengers. They would have to work pretty hard to gain 7-8mm pax (which was 9-10mm pax in 2007). Is that a lot? It depends on how you look at it. Most a.netters say no and CLE is insignficant. However, it is about 25% of EWR's volume and I doubt it the new UA will just put that at risk. We also know that EWR and ORD cannot handle that type of uptick in demand instantaneously without modifications to the terminals and that also supports the 4-5 year theory.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11387 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9050 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 21):
Regardless, every hub at UA will have some impacts as a result to the merger and all of them are unknown at this point.

Well, some things are fairly certain.

ORD isn't going anywhere. Neither is SFO. Neither are EWR or IAH - both of those will probably grow. I think IAD has major upside potential. LAX and DEN are question marks do the ongoing competition, but I don't think they're going anywhere.

I myself think the only marginal hub is CLE.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 21):
It is my understanding that O&D at CLE is about 70%, so they could lose a good number of those passengers. They would have to work pretty hard to gain 7-8mm pax (which was 9-10mm pax in 2007). Is that a lot? It depends on how you look at it. Most a.netters say no and CLE is insignficant. However, it is about 25% of EWR's volume and I doubt it the new UA will just put that at risk. We also know that EWR and ORD cannot handle that type of uptick in demand instantaneously without modifications to the terminals and that also supports the 4-5 year theory.

First off, I have no idea if that 70% number is correct.

I find it a bit hard to believe considering how small the CLE market is as air hubs go in the U.S. these days, but even if that's true, I still don't know if that justifies an entire hub when other far larger, stronger markets can serve almost all of the same traffic flows.

And again - ORD, EWR and IAD definitely can all handle the connecting traffic now moving over CLE through a mix of more flights and larger planes. And for most connecting passengers, they're probably not even going to know/care where they connect through.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6572 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8986 times:

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 20):
In that regard they could bark up the tree of the likes of Gulfstream...

Who do you think is flying PKB-CLE?

Many on here don't seem to realize that CO has little to do with this route. It's an EAS route that Gulfstream bid on and won. All the risk is really on Gulfstream and CO really doesn't care.


User currently offlinejoeman From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8772 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 19):
Quoting fun2fly (Reply 17):
To handle 250 (or 150) flights as you suggest, they'd need a new terminal.

First, I didn't say 150.

He probably means 150 as a more accurate count of what the operation has already been reduced to, maybe a little higher, but not by a whole lot, including the more recent EAS fllights already begun


25 Post contains images FlyASAGuy2005 : Thanks for that bit of info Jeff
26 EricR : I agree that ORD & EWR are already congested, I agree that IAD has the same weather patterns as EWR, I agree that CLE has have rough times and is
27 GSPflyer : I really think that CLE makes sense as a reliever to ORD, just like you could say MEM is a reliever to ATL in the DL network. In December, I flew GSP-
28 Post contains images Kcrwflyer :
29 Antoniemey : Awww... not even a little, teeny, tiny one? The guy is practically BEGGING to have jokes made about him at this point... Anyway... Will Cleveland rem
30 GlobalCabotage : ORD and IAD are not as bad as you think. CLE must be the DFW of the great lakes, or the STL of the great lakes in reality. This forum is extremely ant
31 Kcrwflyer : The plan for ORD will help it tremendously. Being able to land 3 parallels has already shown some helpful effects. I've never known IAD to be bad, as
32 TOMMY767 : CLE I think will sort of be the new "DL at CVG" a.net argument once the merger is complete. UA will shift the obligatory connecting traffic to ORD and
33 CALPSAFltSkeds : I agree that yields are the key. If WN (or other LLCs) goes in and erodes yields to current mainline routes, I think you'll see CLE go away. It would
34 Post contains images jimbobjoe : I'd argue that there is a little bit of a difference between the two. DL became dissatisfied with CVG before (perhaps way before) the merger. I'm not
35 joeman : and currently about the same size in terms of flight operations except for a transatlantic CVG-CDG
36 izbtmnhd : Let me second that, Massey. Places like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and St. Louis have been largely unaffected by the recession of the property
37 izbtmnhd : CLE/CAK has a fair amount of low cost routes already. AirTran has been expanding at CAK for years now but is constrained by its facilites. It annyoed
38 flyerboy1990 : Overall, we will see a decrease of UA/CO service but they will still maintain a sizeable operation. The NE Ohio area demands a certain amount of servi
39 fun2fly : I haven't seen the #'s lately, but SWA was 12% or so at one time and CO was 60+%. CO/UA should be 70% or so then. My understanding is that SWA had som
40 FWAERJ : FWA-CLE was dropped about this time last year. Whether the CLE hub stays or goes, I don't think we'll see FWA back for two reasons: 36% LFs, correspon
41 joeman : What a condescending joke that was. In a meeting designed to stroke the CO ego as well as that of city administration and reps of companies supportin
42 Post contains images steeler83 : Uh, my bad. I'm not sure how Cleveland is affected by this, if at all, but I know that if the Marcellus Shale gas drilling goes through, this could b
43 Post contains images MasseyBrown : CO likes the 60+ pax a day the route will generate. It works out to 15000+ pax a year they will interchange with Gulfstream. It's not a bonanza, but
44 atct : Okay something others failed to mention, the 1 1/2 year service of RegionsAir to CLE from PKB. I know, I was a flight attendant @ RegionsAir.... Anywh
45 Antoniemey : I know there are rumblings in the Youngstown area to keep drilling from happening there due to water pollution concerns. Still, if drilling does happ
46 CODC10 : Mostly unfounded (there has never been a spill due to hydraulic fracturing reported to the EPA, and the drilling takes place thousands of feet below
47 Antoniemey : What I've seen in the news is more about fracking water getting into wells or the reservoir, as most of the area around Youngstown relies on wells or
48 rampart : But, as Delta evolves, and perhaps eliminates CVG (or not?), they still wish to keep MEM, DTW, and MSP, along with ATL. Perhaps airlines this big nee
49 commavia : I would say two things: 1. I think the jury is very much still out on Memphis. I still do not believe that it will be viable long-term when other hub
50 rampart : Hasn't Memphis been growing for DL recently? I think it has better geographic traffic distribution than Atlanta for E-W, which is what DFW would be d
51 commavia : MEM is what it is now. I still - personally - don't think it will be a DL hub long-term. I originally thought it would have happened, and I was clear
52 ncflyer : I agree CLE and ORD overlap hugely, but so do DTW and MSP. The situations aren't analogous, I get that, in that MSP and DTW are bigger O&D markets
53 commavia : There is, of course, overlap in the markets DTW and MSP serve - particularly east-west traffic. Yes. But DTW could not replicate the traffic flows MS
54 Post contains images CODC10 : Before I digress too far off-topic, I will point out that the drill bore is encased in a nonpermeable sheath that is designed to prevent such leakage
55 joeman : Likewise, I can't think of a single EWR/IAD connecting traffic flow that the other can't replicate
56 commavia : Europe-North America, for starters. And in the case of IAD and certainly EWR, that's nothing to sneeze at. But that's besides the point. CLE cannot r
57 kgaiflyer : Funny you say that. Back in the day when Piedmont Airlines operated out of PKB with larger YS-11B turboprops, service went to CMH and not CLE.
58 MasseyBrown : That's true if you accept a circuitous routing to ORD for those Michigan and Indiana points that cannot support nonstops to IAD or EWR. That traffic
59 kgaiflyer : Will this include PKB-CLE O&D? For instance, what if I live in Parkersburg and have a referral to a medical facility in Clevelend. Do I want to c
60 joeman : Bearing in mind the point of connecting traffic flow patterns as addressed in the original quote, not entitlements due to market size and/or civic pr
61 commavia : Huh? My point is simple. CLE is a small market with economic fundamentals that are hardly stellar. It exists today as a "reliever hub" solely because
62 joeman : Let's try this again: Repeat, I'm addressing connecting traffic flow patterns stemming from the following original quotes that you chose not to repea
63 commavia : Right, and yet where is the confusion? I said it, meant it, and still mean it: there is no traffic flow CLE handles that can't easily be replicated b
64 MasseyBrown : But then what are you going to do with the 50-seaters? Under the terms of the mortgage, CO is stuck with those 50-seaters for about 4 more years and
65 fun2fly : I've been saying 5 years is the CLE timeline for many reasons, some below: 1) as noted above, ERJ's are here for some time 2) integration will take 2
66 joeman : OK, You convinced me: It's great for IAD and EWR that they won't have any overlapping connecting traffic flow. Anything past that statement will have
67 GlobalCabotage : ORD could easily handle additional flights with the new runways. The problem is, UA/AA/others want frequency, not better utlilization of aircraft. The
68 fun2fly : AMEN! Then we wouldn't be crammed in RJ's for 2+ hrs too.
69 Post contains images MasseyBrown : ORD, EWR, and IAD ... you think of them as efficiency; I think of them as concentration camps.
70 EricR : But the key word is CO. Under a combined UA/CO, the CLE hub will be redundant. The connecting capacity at CLE can be absorbed by the existing operati
71 xms3200 : Will the last CO employee leaving CLE, ...PLEASE!!!! remember to turn off the lights so we...the CEO's can get our maximum bonus. Thank You, Managemen
72 swacle : On the subject of CO's CLE hub, I heard today (and this is strictly hearsay) that AeroMag, the deicing company here at CLE, was told to staff for a 70
73 xms3200 : 70 flights a day, is that for both COEX & CO
74 cle757 : Not true, the flight schedule for the winter is already in and its well over 70 flights. We heard this rumor last month.
75 swacle : Very glad to hear this! Don
76 fun2fly : A few points on this. 1) all those connecting pax in ORD could be routed via CLE cheaper and more operationally efficient 2) you would lose some port
77 GlobalCabotage : Big jets connecting to barbie jets at ORD vs. barbie jets connecting to smaller barbie jets at CLE is not a money saver. Maybe a time saver, but not a
78 commavia : Nope. Eliminating an entire (superfluous) hub is cheaper and more operationally efficient - all that traffic can be moved just as easily over ORD, IA
79 Post contains links KarlB737 : Yes, a reference was made to that effect. This was it from back on July 22: Courtesy: USA Today AirTran CEO: CLE Has Potential If Merged United Downs
80 EricR : In addition to the points that Commavia made in reply 78 one thing to keep in mind, the domestic connecting traffic will not all be transferred to OR
81 Post contains links izbtmnhd : Cleveland's MSA's current "economic fundamentals" are much better than most of the "New United" hubs. The two strongest hub MSA's in terms of year-ov
82 izbtmnhd : CAK can only handle so much right now. I know that F9 is waiting for the county to expand facilites further. They've had a lot of success in NE Ohio
83 Antoniemey : And then there's Youngstown, which is basically equidistant between CLE and PIT, with CAK just slightly closer. Really, CLE draws from all of "Northe
84 flyguy89 : I don't doubt that the facts you cite are correct or that an airline could run a mid-sized, efficient and profitable hub network from CLE, but the tr
85 izbtmnhd : I can assure you they are correct. I have no doubt the new UA brass could be thinking the same way as you. I hope they enjoy trying to squeeze busine
86 Post contains links PITrules : In addition to IAD, according to the link you provided- http://www.bls.gov/EAG/ - a quick look at both DEN and IAH show a lower unemployment rate tha
87 izbtmnhd : The unemployment rate alone is not a good barometer of economic health. Places like Cleveland and Pittsburgh have seen their rate increase lately due
88 commavia : But neither captures the really relevant metric - which is what the long-term strategic value of the market is to the airline. Cleveland - a relative
89 MasseyBrown : What factors would you use to calculate that metric, long-term strategic value?
90 commavia : . Demographics - long-term population trends (i.e., population change over 5-, 10-, or 20-year cycles) . Gross Metropolitan Product . Gross Metropoli
91 izbtmnhd : Honestly, using long term population trends to me are worthless. To say that Cleveland has lost population in the past will mean that it will forever
92 Antoniemey : Technically Cleveland DID have a residential property crash... one of the ways the city of Cleveland and the inner suburbs coped with the large numbe
93 Post contains images commavia : But using short-term trends are somehow more predictive of the future? Right. Right, but that doesn't negate the fact that, again, it doesn't really
94 izbtmnhd : Right! Cleveland isn't a downtrodden manufacturing center anymore like you portray it. It's climbed out of ahead of 200 or so other US metros in expa
95 joeman : Way to go izbtmnhd!!!!
96 fun2fly : Nice work izbtmnhd. Another interesting little fact is that CO management is very impressed with Ricky Smith. "He's a real operation a knows his stuff
97 joeman : 7th largest in terms of population. Simple fact, nice playing field for remaining hubs to suck on. Let's not get into all the repetitive "Mine is bet
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...
How Much Of Airbus' Success Is Down To Leahy? posted Wed Jan 30 2008 16:13:41 by Virgin747LGW
How Much Of This Flight Is In Darkness? posted Mon Oct 29 2007 02:25:04 by Cumulus
UAL To Begin Mainline Service Again Out Of STL posted Fri Oct 16 2009 20:31:17 by STLUAL747
CO To Begin NAN-HNL And NAN-GUM posted Thu Aug 6 2009 11:05:32 by UA2162
CO To Triple JFK-CLE For September? Why? posted Wed Aug 6 2008 11:05:27 by LUV4JFK
SWF To Begin European Flights By End Of 2008 posted Wed Feb 13 2008 22:39:47 by Lufthansa411
How Much Cargo Space Is Allocated For Pax Bags? posted Mon Jan 7 2008 22:38:53 by Kaitak744
How Much Crown Space Is Available On 767's? posted Wed Mar 21 2007 19:23:21 by Byrdluvs747
How Much Of This Flight Would Be In Darkness? posted Fri Jul 7 2006 17:02:51 by Drinkstrolley
Flight Trackers...how Much Of A Delay posted Fri Sep 23 2005 20:00:16 by PSAjet17