Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO And State Of Ohio To Announce Agreement  
User currently offlinecle757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14359 times:

This should be interesting

http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/loc...eement-with-Continental-and-United


Cleveland the best location in the Nation
108 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesmoot4208 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1305 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14303 times:

If it's a plan to keep flight levels at their current levels, I don't expect the new UA to abide by it. Surely this is an agreement stating that flight levels will be reduced by XX% and after we will maintain those new levels for the long-haul.

User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14188 times:

A (big) step forward toward an October 1st closing date. My bet: keeping flight levels similar to old ones and adding new routes. Maybe even a 787 route to a European Star hub like FRA. The WEWS-TV link said that the press conference is at 3:30 PM. We'll see then.

On a related note, are the City of Houston and Texas Governor Rick Perry still raising a big stink about CO headquarters leaving Houston? It isn't like Texas lacks airline headquarters (AA, WN)...



Primary Airport: FWA/Alternate Airport: DTW/Not employed by the FWACAA or their partners
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14123 times:

yea DL said the same crap about CVG too, and then continuously blame the recession as an excuse to gradually pull the plug on CVG.

maybe CO should do the same, otherwise it'll be politically tough to downsize a hub during 5% unemployment times, but SO much easier when it's close to 10%.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25173 posts, RR: 48
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 14105 times:

Remember Delta was committed to CVG, AA to STL and US Airways to PIT and LAS.

As business events happen in the industry such proclamations are meaningless.
Only the competitive land scape and economics can define what happens to a city in the future.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 14052 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 3):
yea DL said the same crap about CVG too, and then continuously blame the recession as an excuse to gradually pull the plug on CVG.

Delta never reached a deal with the Kentucky Attorney General to keep CVG operations high. Just deals with local business groups like Cincinnati USA, and that's why Delta is wiggling out of them.

If it's a deal the Attorney General of the State of Ohio (or any other state/local government agency), then it has teeth. No deal with local or state leaders, just chambers of commerce and the likes = no teeth.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Remember Delta was committed to CVG, AA to STL and US Airways to PIT and LAS.

And that's because there was no brokered deal in the first place to maintain or keep DL at CVG, AA at STL, or US at LAS/PIT.



Primary Airport: FWA/Alternate Airport: DTW/Not employed by the FWACAA or their partners
User currently offlinesimairlinenet From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 912 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 14004 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 2):
On a related note, are the City of Houston and Texas Governor Rick Perry still raising a big stink about CO headquarters leaving Houston? It isn't like Texas lacks airline headquarters (AA, WN)...

Texas is doing fine, but all of a sudden Houston has lost both.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13979 times:

Interesting. I tend to agree that this is not, in the long-term, going to guarantee the stability and longevity of the hub. I'll be interested to hear exactly what the particulars of this agreement are, and what the airline(s) signed up for.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Remember Delta was committed to CVG, AA to STL and US Airways to PIT and LAS.

As business events happen in the industry such proclamations are meaningless.
Only the competitive land scape and economics can define what happens to a city in the future.

  

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 5):
If it's a deal the Attorney General of the State of Ohio (or any other state/local government agency), then it has teeth. No deal with local or state leaders, just chambers of commerce and the likes = no teeth.

I doubt it.

Maybe, but I would think/hope management isn't that stupid.

I find it almost impossible to believe that they would sign anything without an exit ramp of sime kind - sort of a "force majuere" for the whole thing - either economic conditions, unforeseen events/circumstances, etc. The state/city may have agreed to yet more tax breaks, etc. to subsidize the airline(s) into maintaining the hub. And the airlines may have even agreed to some form of a nominal break-up fee if they close the hub, but I still don't see that being a substantive impediment to them actually closing the hub post-merger down the road if they wanted/needed to. DL had subsidies tied up in keeping the pre-merger NW headquarters in Minnesota that they were willing to effectively walk away from - and I don't see why UA/CO would be any different.

I guess we'll see in a little while ...


User currently offlineMSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6564 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13906 times:

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 6):
Texas is doing fine, but all of a sudden Houston has lost both.

Overall, Houston isn't exactly hurting for corporate HDQ though. Just because they lost CO doesn't mean Houston has lost its stature as an important business mecca. Its pride might be hurt...but I say, join the club in that aspect.


User currently offlinecessna2 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 330 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13800 times:

CO/UA doesn't need CLE...It will be interesting to see the exact details...but for now I think this video pretty much sums up my opinion of CLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN0WqSeCKW8

cessna2


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13768 times:

Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 8):
Just because they lost CO doesn't mean Houston has lost its stature as an important business mecca. Its pride might be hurt...but I say, join the club in that aspect.

Same goes for when I lived in Chicagoland. Amoco was sold to BP in London. Bank One was sold to New York-based JPMorgan Chase. Firestone was bought out by Tokyo-based Bridgestone and moved US HQ to Nashville. US Robotics, based in Schaumburg, was bought by Silicon Valley heavyweight 3Com. Lucent was bought out by Alcatel, based in Paris (France, not Illinois). I remember a Chicago Tribune article about how Chicago-based companies were leaving because of "merger mania".

To its credit, Chicago gained Boeing, Mead Johnson, and many other companies. And Chicago is a still a big corporate powerhouse.



Primary Airport: FWA/Alternate Airport: DTW/Not employed by the FWACAA or their partners
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5174 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13680 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 2):
On a related note, are the City of Houston and Texas Governor Rick Perry still raising a big stink about CO headquarters leaving Houston? It isn't like Texas lacks airline headquarters (AA, WN)...

Honestly no...ironically IAH has received more new air service announcements from the 'hometown' airline post merger announcement than in the last few years. AKL, LOS, ASE so far. IAH's outlook seems to be rosier with the expanded capability of the combined CO/UA than what CO has done.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1038 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13243 times:

Continental, United airlines agree to keep at least 90% of flights at Cleveland Hopkins for 2 years after merger

http://www.cleveland.com/business/in...kins_for_2_years_after_merger.html


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13150 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 12):
for 2 years after merger

So there we have it.

As others have been discussing for months, it will probably take them that long just to fully combine their networks anyway, and sort out aircraft allocations, schedule integration, and hub optimization. In essence, this basically contractually enshrines and institutionalizes what many people expected anyway.

So that's not surprising. In addition, the specific provisions about what happens after the 2-year period, for the following 3 years, provides an easy, soft landing for the hub if (when) it eventually closes.


User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3942 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13145 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

no mention of mainline vs regional aircraft. so if they basically eliminate mailine birds to the hubs only CLE will continue to lose more jobs based on this announcement.

Good to see though that jobs wont be out the door at such a rapid pace, but I think this is just a timeline for the demise of CLE.



okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4663 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13083 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 12):
for 2 years after merger

That pretty much sums up everything

CVG is now 2 years past the DL/NW merger, there was a lot more to cut there, but they are standing on the edge of the cliff today and probably wont make it to 3 years as a true hub (large focus city yes, hub no)

I think the difference is we have seen DL and NW play around with the focus city concept, but CO and UA have stayed very very true to their hubs and have done probably the least amount of focus city flying or point to point of any of the US carriers, so I can see why many people are seeing it as "all or nothing" but perhaps they will give it a whirl.



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1038 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13082 times:

I think I predicted the 5 year outline awhile back. A few years for CLE to prove itself. If not, then the RJ's and airport lease come to an end and close the doors. Now, CLE fliers need to vote w/their butts and fill up CO jets if they want to keep them there long term. Pretty UA/CO friendly. NOTE: they both signed the deal.

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16862 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12863 times:

Some specifics;

Quote:
The agreement between Cordray's office, Continental and United calls for the merged carrier to maintain minimum daily departures from Hopkins at no less than 90 percent of the two airlines' average daily departures in the past year.
For three years after the initial two-year protection, the carriers agreed to maintain other, potentially lesser, flight levels.
Quote:
For three years after the initial two-year protection, the carriers agreed to maintain other, potentially lesser, flight levels.

If the merged company has a system-wide slump in departures -- from a double dip recession, say, or some other setback -- the company will be allowed to cut Hopkins departures more deeply. But the cuts cannot exceed 25 percent more than the average reduction in domestic departures at the airlines' other hubs in Newark, Houston, Chicago, Denver, Washington Dulles, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
If the Cleveland hub performs more than 15 percent worse than the new airline's overall network, and loses more than $25 million, then the airline can cut minimum daily departures by close to 75 percent of current levels.
If the airline loses more than $40 million at its Hopkins operations in the second year of the deal, the settlement agreement allows the airline to cut its Hopkins departures by 50 percent in the third year and 85 percent in years four and five.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25173 posts, RR: 48
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12782 times:

Sounds like a nice draw down plan for CLE.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12757 times:

This agreement kind of rubs me the wrong way in the sense that UA/CO say "2 years" but honestly what is going to happen after that? I think we all know...

On the bright side, it will be good to maybe see something other then 738/739 to the west coast. Maybe some UA 757 from CLE to LAX and SFO.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7138 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12693 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 13):
So there we have it.

As others have been discussing for months, it will probably take them that long just to fully combine their networks anyway, and sort out aircraft allocations, schedule integration, and hub optimization. In essence, this basically contractually enshrines and institutionalizes what many people expected anyway.

So that's not surprising. In addition, the specific provisions about what happens after the 2-year period, for the following 3 years, provides an easy, soft landing for the hub if (when) it eventually closes.

Can I ask? Since we are in a deregulated industry and since Ohio is offering nothing in return for this commitment, is this a legal agreement?

"the company will be allowed to cut Hopkins departures more deeply"

How nice that they might be allowed...what is clear is that UA/CO wants very much to cut flights at CLE, but are not being allowed to by this "agreement" which one might call blackmail. Regardless, it won't matter as I agree that 2 years was probably the window anyway to close the hub. What's really funny is that this "investigation" by the AG should really be to protect consumers from market domination. CO/UA have no interest in domination, they want to get the hell out. Hard to see how that is even in the purvey of the Ohio AG.

It will be interesting to see the LCC reaction to this. It either causes them to forget CLE for 2 years or to want to make those 2 years a living hell by trashing the whole place and forcing UA to sit through it. Probably the former. I expect UA to now drop to the barest minimums of what it will take to satisfy this agreement almost immediately. We're talking the smallest possible RJs and even EAS turboprops wouldn't surprise me within a year. They should bid on every EAS route from Michigan to West Virginia. They can satisfy the # of jobs guarantees by moving around RES center staff and other "off the line" personnel. You'll probably have a crew base with everybody dead-heading to Chicago eventually. The whole thing is a desperate joke.


User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12684 times:

I read the news flash....heres the fun part.....define the word HUB....how many flights make up a HUB?
How many gates make up a HUB? How many flights in a bank to use the word HUB.
Remember, Dayton and Piedmont?.........When the Piedmont HUB opend there, I believe there were six banks a day using 8 gates..then expended a bit until USAIR showed up with new signs and some paint.

Lawyers....on your marks---get set----GO.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2620 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12559 times:

The agreement already has some outs for UA/CO, but the biggest out would be an intentional change in operations that would change the economics at CLE to make the operation a loser. Someone talked about 757 vs. 738/739ER - if that adds costs to the flights, then it could mean the "hub" would be canceled.

I'm not accusing UA/CO of trying to make CLE a loser, but if WN steps it up or something worse happens to the economy (if that's possible), then some tweeks can make CLE a loser. Once the schedules get bad timings, or UA/CO really messes with service is when you could see people trying to avoid CO/UA, cementing the end of the "hub".?

Now, if the economy gets better and/or the merger changes the 50 seat scope clause, maybe 70 seaters run through the large hub and 50 seaters continue at CLE, hopefully at a profit. But, I do think the agreement indicates that the merged carrier will not be looking to expand CLE, so forget TATL or widebody service and just hope CLE can be profitable at or slightly below its current operational level. It still is CLE's hometown airport and must have a solid FF base that's worth something. Not that CLE's lack of excitement is to blame, but cities like CLE, CVG, IND, CMH, etc. are basically lucky to have a "hub" carrier due to their size, economics and location.


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 12430 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 12):
Continental, United airlines agree to keep at least 90% of flights at Cleveland Hopkins for 2 years after merger

http://www.cleveland.com/business/in....html

The interesting thing about the article is that it mentions that 90% of flights will be kept, but it mentions nothing about seats. Therefore, they could still considerably downsize without reducing flights. Everything in the article refers to departures, not seats.


User currently offlineBoeing1970 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 12373 times:

So it would cost the new UA $20 million to shut down CLE as a hub on day one...

Hmmmm....

Amount wasted at CLE due to overlap with ORD vs. $20 Million = Cost Benefit.....

Write the check and walk away.


25 TOMMY767 : In the case of CO at CLE currently, it's barely a hub. Especially when you factor in UA's hubs at DEN, IAD, SFO, it makes CO's presence at CLE look r
26 STT757 : If you read the article it's actually five years of maintaining service levels. Two years at 90% of the current operation then dropping in the three
27 Post contains images OA412 : on all 3. This doesn't really guarantee anything. It's been nearly 2 years since the DL/NW merger and we're still seeing the gradual draw-down of CVG
28 ncflyer : Cleveland invested zillions in trying to keep the steel industry alive, rather than turning to new industries with longer term growth potential Now it
29 Post contains images enilria : + exactly I guarantee it won't be a "hub" in 3 years. We already know what their simulations show.
30 Post contains images GlobalCabotage : No brainer. Pay the $20MM and move on. UA/CO will lose more than $20MM over 5 years at CLE. At least they had the "male anatomy" to do this and not be
31 Post contains links and images commavia : Yep. Again: this basically just enshrines what we all already saw coming - and gives us a timeline to plan on. The airlines have obviously signed up
32 ncflyer : By the way in addition to $20MM isn't CO on the hook for hundred million(s?) to retire debt for concourse D.
33 Post contains images OA412 : Yeah that's it. . At the end of the day, CO is still signing an agreement that will likely be presented in Ohio as a promise to commit to CLE. Regard
34 RiddlePilot215 : Somewhere in the ballpark of $136 million last time checked. I'll try to find the Plain Dealer article that referenced that structure and Continental
35 ncflyer : Then you'd have to wonder why that wasn't part of the press release. That sure gives CLE better leverage than a measley $20MM. That's probably less t
36 bcoz : While I don't disagree, who is there to legitimately go after given Cleveland's location and proximity to hubs and/or large operations of other carri
37 drerx7 : No legacy carriers. Think Southwest and Air Tran filling the void.
38 commavia : Maybe - to an extent - but not really much. Again: how much did Delta have to deal with from that NW agreement with the state of Minnesota when they
39 bcoz : From a PR standpoint, I don't know if the city wants to publicly hold that over the head of a carrier they are trying to convince to stay in town. Bu
40 RiddlePilot215 : Because those are just loan payments. It's not a one-time cash settlement for breach of contract. So regardless of if CO is actually there or not the
41 FWAERJ : More WN flights at CLE? Sure. As for FL... they're happy at CAK.
42 STT757 : B6 to BOS, LGA, JFK, MCO would be nice.
43 PITrules : They're happy at CAK.. because there is a legacy hub at CLE. If that hub goes TU, I wouldn't expect to see FL sit on the sidelines only to watch othe
44 Post contains links mariner : Hmmmm? http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=3238331 "AirTran has identified Cleveland in particular as a market it would be interested in en
45 PlanesNTrains : Well, the outcome will ultimately be the same, whether they have an "agreement" or not. The only reason UA/CO would even sign such a deal is because
46 Avconsultant : Do not forget employees who are transfered from TX to IL will take a tax hit. I am surprised, the company chose to HQ in Illinois unless there was a
47 boilerla : The reasons for UA staying in Chicago have been outlined before. Back in 2006 Chicago UA made a deal to move UA's headquarters from Elk Grove, IL to
48 CALMSP : why would htey have to build a new "operations center" in Houston had the company been based in Houston?
49 boilerla : They wanted their operations center to be near their corporate HQ. Considering how integrated operations is into the rest of the company, it makes pe
50 bjorn14 : Plus they will have to pay an IL state income tax which TX does not have IIRC.
51 PITrules : Half the HQ/admin is already there... As apposed to United requiring Chicago to break the leases on Continental's downtown Houston HQ? As you mention
52 United1 : The issue with both UAs and COs current operations centers is neither was designed to handle an airline the size of the new United. Also realize that
53 jetskipper : The new UA/CO is more concerned with the tax burden for the corporation and in turn the shareholders that it is the individual tax burden that employe
54 CALMSP : plenty of room to have the operations center in downtown houston. so this nonsense of it not being feasible is just that. nonsense. I have no idea wha
55 Boeing1970 : I'm going to go out on a limb and say that CO/UA doesn't owe a dime on the debt service for the terminal. The airport likely financed the debt with C
56 United1 : ...so whats cheaper? Expanding the current center in Houston ripping out the technology and installing new tech all while continuing to run the world
57 bcoz : FL (and F9) Texas has no income tax. Illinois has a 3% across-the-board income tax. Chicago does not have a city income tax. bcoz
58 Post contains links izbtmnhd : A point: NE Ohio, economically, is doing better than the Chicagoland area. A few people on this thread are trying to paint an opposite picture. Again,
59 fun2fly : NO!!! Please. This would be the worst part of the merger. Give me a CO 739 w/Direct TV anytime over a UA 757. I believe the agreement gives CLE / OH
60 TOMMY767 : The worst part of a merger is an upgrade from a 739 to a 757? Really? It costs money for the Direct TV on CO and currently IFE on UA's 757s is comple
61 STT757 : Directv is free in First Class on CO.
62 fun2fly : More of a joke Tommy on the "worst part." However, have you ever flown the two a/c. If so, you'll agree with the statement. Just finished 6 hrs on a
63 drerx7 : The CO739s are a much better experience than UA757s; however, I flew the UA75 that had the new seats and it was nice...still miss the PTVs. With that
64 TOMMY767 : UA's 757 seats are among the best in Y. I find them very comfortable with the adjustable headrests and they have held up very well. Even though CO ha
65 STT757 : Honestly you should, it's a world of difference between CO's 737-900ERs and UA's 757s. I was impressed with how good of shape the UA 757s I flew on r
66 dxing : How long does a movie last at the theater? If the flight is more than 2-3 hours long you're not spending anymore for the live tv than you would spend
67 drerx7 : Even though money is tight...$6/$7 isn't going to dig that deep in my pockets if I am flying on CO or the like anyway.
68 boilerla : I never said room in downtown Houston was an issue, and neither have UA or CO. It all came down to money. They have --NO-- incentive package to move
69 TOMMY767 : Maybe. I wouldn't fly a 739 EWR-LAX when I could take a 757 instead and hopefully down the road with the merger in a place, a 763 or 777. I'm actuall
70 SurfandSnow : Well, it's nice for folks in CLE to know that they will more or less enjoy what they do now for the next few years. But, all good things must come to
71 dutchflyboi : oh so true.... and the CO people getting their IAD base back, that CO abandoned for CLE ...way back!
72 fun2fly : I certainly did not have the new 757 either way in June to AUA. I'd bet the role of the former UA 757's changes with the new UA. 184 seats on a 757 v
73 TOMMY767 : History can literally repeat itself! Initially I doubt it. Word on the street is CO will take their 757s and move them to IAD for TATL action. They h
74 greenair727 : That was when things were going south for CLE, but now the city is on the way up. With the money and O&D in CLE, it would not make any sense for
75 drerx7 : Right, the oldest 757 will more than likely head to the desert or the used car showroom as 738s/739s are rolling in with regularity. The remaining on
76 TOMMY767 : IDK because even DL is keeping the old 5500 NW 757s around as they need the additional lift. UA's are younger then that are are arguably in better sh
77 drerx7 : Remember though, UA put out a RFP for replacement of the oldest 757s. It was expected to be a battle between the A321 and 739ER; now with CO's backlo
78 Slider : Pretty much. It’s a move of appeasement in order to keep the PH Attorney General from protesting the merger. Smisek pledged to not cut service, so
79 TOMMY767 : I want to say that there aren't even that many UA 757s that are "old." Some were delivered in 1989 and 1990, but quite a few were also delivered betw
80 enilria : I read the agreement verbatim. Not only are seats never referenced, there is no scenario where they would have to pay the full $20 million penalty. F
81 drerx7 : You do remember that UA did just send out a RFP for the 757 fleet right? There is a lengthy thread on 321 vs 739 for this RFP. This is not opinion th
82 TOMMY767 : No I do not. How long ago was this?
83 PGNCS : Thank you for your very good point. I was thinking along the same lines, that the worst that could happen was for UA to have to pony up $20 million f
84 Post contains links Boeing1970 : Could be why Boeing is suddenly talking about a NB replacement too. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=atf7n83RzBDA
85 vin2basketball : I think at the base, it's a win-win deal for both United and the city of Cleveland. United is able to satisfy the DOT, DOJ, and even President Obama's
86 LAXdude1023 : I dont see why CLE couldnt support LAX, SFO, DCA, LAS, PHX, FLL, MCO, BOS, LGA, IAH, ORD, DEN, IAD, and, EWR. Beyond that, Im not sure.
87 Antoniemey : In other words, CLE could lose "hub" status but keep pretty much the same number of seats overall... not a bad deal, really.
88 vin2basketball : RSW is a lot of O&D 600+ pax PDEW TPA is 300+, and yields are decent at $0.19 ATL- their FFs will want it, very very high yielding PBI- 150+ O&am
89 flyerboy1990 : I agree with this. Despite me hating to see a CO draw-down of CLE, I do believe that it will remain with a significant amount of flights. Like others
90 TOMMY767 : Well I mean that's all CO mainline at CLE is right now. No reason why they can't support those destinations in the future UNLESS they want to take th
91 drerx7 : That's true, the aging process continues. However, I agree, it remains to be seen what the fleet plans are - the only thing that I see as concrete is
92 flyerboy1990 : I didn't realize UAs 757s were so new. Naturally, the combined carrier will want to shed the oldest models but isn't CO already pretty stretched in fl
93 peanuts : So exactly how many nails does a coffin need? This is about 50 of them already... Like I said before, a draw down is a weaning process. This is a soli
94 genybustrvlr : You may have won the battle, Cleveland, but you will not win the war!!!! This is a pathetic attempt by the Ohio AG to exploit a high profile situation
95 TOMMY767 : Also keep in mind that DL said the same thing when they acquired NW that they would get rid of the old build 757s and DC9s. Well looks like plans cha
96 STT757 : [ The difference is CO has a nice backlog of of 737s (40+) that they are taking delivery, while DL had a handful some of which they were selling to ot
97 United1 : While it's likely that UAs 757-222s will be replaced by 737-922ERs (or something new from Airbus/Boeing) it's worth noting that the oldest 752s in UA
98 TOMMY767 : Possibly. CLE is more or less an RJ hub right now and I think it will continue to stay that way with the exception of IAD which will go mainline at s
99 STT757 : CO has been flying 757s across the Atlantic since 1995, today they all fly Trans-Atlantic which means they have much less cycles than UA's 757s which
100 United1 : Anything is possible...CLE will at least add mainline service to ORD and IAD. Just a handful actually...the majority of UAs 752s were delivered betwe
101 AADC10 : UA's pilots contract has a clause that any hub to hub flights must be mainline, so CLE to any other hub will be mainline but everything else will pro
102 Post contains images kgaiflyer : One thing that confuses me is formerly flying 735s on the former BWI-CLE-MDW route. The planes were filled with rarely an empty seat. Now there are f
103 drerx7 : Sounds like Southwest won. Unless there are more people like me, I go home to Houston frequently from dental school in Nashville - I stopped flying C
104 TOMMY767 : Instead it's "What happened to CO?" They likely just took the a/c and moved it to IAH or EWR and replaced it with an RJ. As of the last few years the
105 drerx7 : I don't think its fair to attribute the same measuring stick to GUM. The geography and subsequent connectivity I think lends itself to GUM being a le
106 STT757 : Would you consider Pan Am/DL's former FRA operation a hub? Or DL's NRT operation, or AA's former SJU operation hubs?.. It's called raising fares and
107 TOMMY767 : IIRC, DL at FRA and AA at SJU some 10 years ago is bigger then CO at GUM currently. I'm assuming DL is somewhat bigger at NRT currently as well.
108 United1 : SJU was larger then 20 flights a day by a fair bit but DLs FRA and NRT hubs were/are right around the low to mid 20s in terms of flights a day.
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...
Advantages And Disadvantages Of Airbridges To LCCs posted Mon Oct 20 2003 13:10:06 by Pe@rson
WSJ: UA-CO Are Expected To Announce Merger Monday posted Thu Apr 29 2010 15:22:46 by HouStrategies
UA CO And NH Seek To Form A Pacific JV posted Wed Oct 28 2009 00:34:34 by United1
Any Airport Issues @ BKK Due To State Of Emergency? posted Sun Apr 12 2009 10:36:40 by Readytotaxi
FR To Announce LGW, BIQ And NTE From MRS posted Tue Jan 27 2009 00:48:26 by Pe@rson
PANYNJ, CO And FAA To Test GPS Navigation At EWR posted Wed Dec 17 2008 19:19:15 by STT757
When CO Joins Star, What Happens To Taca And Copa? posted Wed Oct 15 2008 16:37:30 by CODCAIAH
CO Flight Out Of SNA Returns Due To Smell Of Smoke posted Fri Aug 8 2008 06:05:28 by PilotNTrng
GE Aviation To Announce Launch Of New Engine posted Fri Jul 11 2008 07:46:18 by ENU
Idea Of How To Bring The Y1 And NSR Sooner posted Thu Jul 3 2008 10:02:14 by DL767captain