SouthernDC9 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 263 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4608 times:
Quoting rafflesking (Thread starter): Oddly, despite the slot swap with DL - US has announced they are adding two new routes to DCA - from CVG and DSM.
This isn't odd though, since US got the DCA slots - right? Now I wish they would add XNA.
What does AA/US merger mean for CLT/JFK/PHX/North America/Southern Hemisphere/God's Plan for the Universe
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4432 times:
Holy cow - DSM's year of amazing news continues.
But how is this going to go over on US' 70 seat aircraft considering DL couldn't make it work on its own 75 seat aircraft - not to mention that DL has a pretty powerful market share in DSM compared to US, which up until recently only flew three flights a day between DSM and PHX?
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4402 posts, RR: 38 Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4394 times:
US may be thinking that their stronger array of connection possibilities at DCA may help make DSM-DCA work.
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4277 times:
Yes, that is a possibility ... but why not supply more seats to CLT and its even wider array of connetion opportunities to both the east coast and the southeast, instead of the risk of wasting two DCA slots (and 138 seats per day) on a market that has not worked for any airline in the past (UA, PMNW or DL).
Kudos to US for giving this route a shot, but I can't imagine the chances of success are that good - especially at 2x. Part of me thinks that because DSM has actually been a very lucrative market for them in the past 5-10 years (with the 3x to PHX and nothing else) US really wants to hang on to whatever market share they have in anticipation of WN's route planning/announcement out of DSM, so they're giving central Iowa travelers more options to fly US to destinations on both coasts (CLT and DCA now in addition to PHX).
Do you realize that with the DL service ending around July 10, DSM will have 3X DSM-DCA from May until July?
Overkill much?
IF US was smart, and they probably aren't, they WOULD upgrade DSM-PHX to an Airbus, basically saying to WN, "You're going to have to work for it to get DSM-PHX"
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4165 times:
Quoting evanbu (Reply 7): Do you realize that with the DL service ending around July 10, DSM will have 3X DSM-DCA from May until July?
Overkill much?
IF US was smart, and they probably aren't, they WOULD upgrade DSM-PHX to an Airbus, basically saying to WN, "You're going to have to work for it to get DSM-PHX"
Agreed - I feel like 2x Airbus to PHX plus one daily E-Jet to CLT and one daily E-Jet to DCA would be more than ample for DSM's size.
There thinking for DSM is probably since F9 is cutting a DCA frequency from both MKE and MCI, and given F9 already does ptp routes like MSN/GRR-DCA and they didnt want F9 to start DSM-DCA
Midwest Express offered DSM-DCA until they dropped it for NW/DL, so I would be surprised if F9 added DSM-DCA.
I have ALWAYS said, and yes you could call me crazy, but a Saturday only seasonal DSM-CUN flight would not only work, but it would do very well for whatever airline picked up that route.
jetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2660 posts, RR: 37 Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3986 times:
Quoting evanbu (Reply 7): IF US was smart, and they probably aren't, they WOULD upgrade DSM-PHX to an Airbus, basically saying to WN, "You're going to have to work for it to get DSM-PHX"
There's only 178 people per day in the DSMPHX market...That's 89 each way per day on average. The average fare is $178, which yields an average 15 cents a mile yield. Not great but not bad. US would be better off keeping a smaller aircraft with a higher yield than flooding the market with unnecessary mainline seats and diluting the yield by forcing connections to fill the planes.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3755 times:
I just looked at a dummy booking for June 6-12 r/t on DCA-CVG, and saw that US wants $500 while DL wants $358 - is US's market presence THAT strong at DCA that they can command that kind of premium on a route like CVG?
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3744 times:
Quoting LHCVG (Reply 12): I just looked at a dummy booking for June 6-12 r/t on DCA-CVG, and saw that US wants $500 while DL wants $358 - is US's market presence THAT strong at DCA that they can command that kind of premium on a route like CVG?
No. Usually, when a carrier first loads flights, the fares are often a bit off until the get a feeling for the market. When US first loaded DCA-PNS, they were asking for $500 r/t for advanced purchase fares. But after a week or two, the advance purchase fares fell to a more reasonable level $250-300.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3713 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 13): No. Usually, when a carrier first loads flights, the fares are often a bit off until the get a feeling for the market. When US first loaded DCA-PNS, they were asking for $500 r/t for advanced purchase fares. But after a week or two, the advance purchase fares fell to a more reasonable level $250-300.
Ahh ok then. I thought it was a little odd they would be that far off, but it makes sense that they have to adjust.
evanbu From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 376 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3648 times:
Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 11): Quoting evanbu (Reply 7):
IF US was smart, and they probably aren't, they WOULD upgrade DSM-PHX to an Airbus, basically saying to WN, "You're going to have to work for it to get DSM-PHX"
There's only 178 people per day in the DSMPHX market...That's 89 each way per day on average. The average fare is $178, which yields an average 15 cents a mile yield. Not great but not bad. US would be better off keeping a smaller aircraft with a higher yield than flooding the market with unnecessary mainline seats and diluting the yield by forcing connections to fill the planes.
In the words of "Field of Dreams", if you build it, they will come. It's no secret how many Iowans live in Arizona. America West had mainline up until a few years back, and the bottom line is that if you provide a larger aircraft, it will be full. WN will probably take full advantage of US running a CRJ 2X daily on that particular route.
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4402 posts, RR: 38 Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3650 times:
Quoting planespotting (Reply 6): Yes, that is a possibility ... but why not supply more seats to CLT and its even wider array of connetion opportunities to both the east coast and the southeast, instead of the risk of wasting two DCA slots (and 138 seats per day) on a market that has not worked for any airline in the past (UA, PMNW or DL).
Regarding other airlines, I don't know. Regarding US, they may believe that DCA has greater O & D potential--and thus possible higher yields--than does adding CLT capacity. Greater O & D than CLG + greater connecting possibilities than DL offered at DCA, may be the reasoning.
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3606 times:
Quoting evanbu (Reply 15): It's no secret how many Iowans live in Arizona. America West had mainline up until a few years back, and the bottom line is that if you provide a larger aircraft, it will be full.
I think this is likely - I would need more fingers and toes to count the number of people I went to college or high school with in Iowa who at one point called Arizona home for at least a few years of their adult lives (or who are my parents/grandparents age and moved there semi-permenantly for retirement).
And if Southwest comes to the market offering $140 each way three months out (currently that's the lowest one-way from OMA-PHX nonstop) , those planes are going to be full.
reramprat From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 8 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3527 times:
Does anyone see WN trying to attack US at DSM on BOTH fronts with a direct flight to BWI? I agree that the competition at DSM is about to get very interesting.
jetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2660 posts, RR: 37 Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting evanbu (Reply 15): In the words of "Field of Dreams", if you build it, they will come. It's no secret how many Iowans live in Arizona. America West had mainline up until a few years back, and the bottom line is that if you provide a larger aircraft, it will be full. WN will probably take full advantage of US running a CRJ 2X daily on that particular route.
Sure you can fill planes...that's not the point. You want to profitably fill airplanes. I could theoretically start an airline and put 747's on DSM-PHX, charge $1 a seat and fill every single seat.
The number one point of business is offering slightly less supply than there is demand. When you put more supply than demand, the price has to drop to stimulate demand. The lower the price goes the lower the margin. The lower the margin the less money we make. Let's go ahead and roll the A380's out to DSM since it's the new up and becoming market for large aircraft to every destination in the world.
Despite the A.net community being against anything RJ, RJ's can be profitable. And there are markets that are profitable with them. There is nothing wrong with PHX-DSM being an RJ market. It doesn't mean Iowa is weak. It doesn't mean US doesn't want to control the market. It doesn't mean US has anything against DSM. It doesn't mean any of the emotional things this forum breeds. US has people who's living is making money for the airline by placing the right aircraft on the right routes and on the right schedule to put supply to the demand. They go to work every day and that is all they do.
We on the other hand, come on to an online forum in our spare time while the dinner is in the microwave and try to do their jobs from the armchair. I'll trust that the airline knows what they are doing, and we only half way know at best. There's more to making a profit than filling an airplane.
HPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3661 posts, RR: 8 Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3395 times:
Quoting reramprat (Reply 18): Does anyone see WN trying to attack US at DSM on BOTH fronts with a direct flight to BWI? I agree that the competition at DSM is about to get very interesting.
I don't think DSM is the kind of market that these carriers really want to start some kind of battle over. I also don't think DCA is really all that interchangeable with BWI. In any case, I would not expect DSM-BWI.
If for some reason WN decided to kill US's yields by building up DSM, US may well simply move out to CID which has a sizable market of its own.
Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 19): Despite the A.net community being against anything RJ, RJ's can be profitable.
90% of the RJ hate on here is all about how uncomfortable and unfriendly to tall people they are, not about profitability concerns. Personally I don't really have a problem with them and understand they fill a niche...the niche of serving cities that have less than a million residents.
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3216 times:
Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 19): Let's go ahead and roll the A380's out to DSM since it's the new up and becoming market for large aircraft to every destination in the world.
Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 19): The number one point of business is offering slightly less supply than there is demand.
No one is saying US isn't doing a good job right now on DSM-PHX with RJs, because they are. It's obviously been a great niche route for them out of DSM for a long time. We're just saying that by leaving RJs on the route they are probably:
a) leaving revenue on the table
b) ripe for the picking if WN chooses to fly DSM-PHX
Maybe WN won't even mess with the route and the few of us clamoring for mainline will be left shaking our heads.
You're right to point out that RJs definitely don't mean the city or geographical area served is weak - just that the route is either undersized or underserved. Evanbu and I happen to think it's underserved, and from what I've heard anecdotally, it is and US Airways knows it, and that's their choice, which is cool.
But if WN comes in with its low-cost strategy and structure and decides to put a 73G on the route, their service will be superior, and both the flying public and US will know it, and I doubt they'll fight for it.
mah584jr From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 495 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3140 times:
Quoting WROORD (Reply 23): Good news for CVG. I wish they added DCA from ORD. Both UA and AA keep the duopoly high prices on this route.
I think they should add ORD as well. I know there's quite a bit of capacity on the route already but there's no reason not to start service to a market that size.
I think some of it has to do with the fact that their alliance partner UA already serves the route. Perhaps they don't want to step on any toes. However, both carriers operate to Philadelphia, no reason why they can't both serve DCA.
25 sydscott: Or US could strike a codeshare agreement with AA for ORD-DCA...............
26 boberito6589: There already is a codeshare agreement on flights from ORD-DCA with UA... just not for people traveling ORD-DCA only
27 joeljack: I think this will do ok at 2x daily. There is good traffic on this route. I wonder if a E170 is over kill though? It would surprise me if the afternoo
28 IPFreely: There are probably 5-6 possible routes for WN to start from DSM. DSM-MDW is probably a given and DSM-STL is very possible. Westbound possibilites are
29 tjwgrr: Apparently GRR has been in talks with US. This was in our local paper yesterday: "Could US Airways return to Ford Airport after a more than 6-year hia
30 OzarkD9S: Still hoping for DCA-STL on US. With DL leaving and AA downgrading to Eagle, there should be an opportunity there with DCA connex. Of course the consp
31 Web: I hope this is true! With the slot swap, GRR will be out of a daily DCA flight (I don't really count F9's route - it's 3x weekly, the timing is terri
Sponsor Message: 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2007, 307 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 263 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2079 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
