Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Houston Airport System Supports International HOU  
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9432 times:

http://www.fly2houston.com/0/3919418/0/83280D83283/

Now for UA's response...methinks they will try and move the IAH-AKL route to the west coast or something like that.

[Edited 2012-04-09 16:26:33]


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
110 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1761 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9378 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I doubt they'd move the AKL route. However, other routes could be impacted. From what we've heard so far, WN would be flying short international routes. That shouldn't pose a competition issue for S.America, Europe or Asia/Pacific routes on UA.

UA will certainly rattle sabres and issue all sorts of dire predictions.


User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5048 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9342 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):


UA will certainly rattle sabres and issue all sorts of dire predictions.

The proposal shows 5 gates initially expandable to 9 gates long term. It will be a thorn in UA's side but will hardly decimate the global hub they have at IAH. Let 'em rattle their sabres.



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineflyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 733 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9317 times:

Why should Houston care what some airline headquartered in Chicago thinks about this.

User currently offlineflyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 733 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9273 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Thread starter):
Now for UA's response...methinks they will try and move the IAH-AKL route to the west coast or something like that.

That doesn't sound too smart. They're trying to compete against the QANTAS SYD-DFW and DFW-BNE-SYD flights. Anyone who has to double connect to the west coast to get onto a flight to New Zealand or Australia would find it much more convenient to fly QANTAS out of DFW


User currently offlineflyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 733 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 9063 times:

There are other cities in the US that have more than one international airport. Why not Houston?

User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4581 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 8917 times:

Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 5):

There are other cities in the US that have more than one international airport. Why not Houston?

Pretty much. UA just wants to cry about it.


User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8695 times:

Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 3):
Why should Houston care what some airline headquartered in Chicago thinks about this.

Because despite losing the HQ's to Chicago, IAH as a hub was larger than ORD before the merger.

After the merger is is the largest Hub in United's system and growing.

It's a nice feather to have in your hat when trying to attract business to the city, as the hub in IAH could could connect companies to major business centers. Especially your energy crowd.

WN will probably offer some attractive destinations. Will they have a global reach from HOU ?

How will passengers connecting from say MEX.CUN,CZM,SAL,or GUA connect onto NRT,LHR,FRA ,AMS ? drive the nearly 40-50 miles from HOU to IAH ?

How many connections can WN offer non-stops from Mexico-Central America via hobby ? If passengers have to interline they've going to have spend some time and money to drive from HOU-IAH. Plus buy another ticket as WN does not have any agreements with anyone.

I totally understand being upset about about losing the HQ's. UA is still one of the larger employers,employing 17,000 currently. IAH has seen expansion and the new LOS route.

Diaz and Parker are making business decisions based on emotions.

I wish people would stop comparing Houston to New York having two international airports. Because a MSA of about 20 million versus 6 million is really comparable   


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8666 times:

So...you are saying WN should not be allowed to fly international from HOU?


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently onlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1628 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8660 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
I wish people would stop comparing Houston to New York having two international airports. Because a MSA of about 20 million versus 6 million is really comparable

Nobody specifically compared Houston to New York (at least not in this thread). New York isn't the only metro area with more than one international airport. Sure, Houston's 6+ million people isn't comparable to New York's 22+ million (going by CSAs), but is it comparable to the Bay Area's ~7.5 million? They have international service at all three of SFO, SJC, and OAK.

It's not like the expectation is for WN to develop a major international hub that rivals IAH similar to EWR vs. JFK. Allowing HOU to become an international airport would simply allow WN the ability to fly to Mexico, Central America, and northern South America to augment their domestic services. It also would potentially allow carriers from those regions another option for Houston service moving forward, which I could definitely see being appealing to Mexican LCCs.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8646 times:

Quoting steex (Reply 9):
ouston service moving forward, which I could definitely see being appealing to Mexican LCCs.

Right, as a side note they specifically mentioned that the 5 proposed gates could fit any 737 or 320 variant FWIW.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4581 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8620 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
How will passengers connecting from say MEX.CUN,CZM,SAL,or GUA connect onto NRT,LHR,FRA ,AMS ? drive the nearly 40-50 miles from HOU to IAH ?

Why is this even a question? WN isn't going to NRT, LHR, etc. People flying WN aren't going to be connecting to anyone...WN doesn't interline. If airlines want to feed their network, they need to offer the service. WN is wanting these routes to feed their network.

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
How many connections can WN offer non-stops from Mexico-Central America via hobby ? If passengers have to interline they've going to have spend some time and money to drive from HOU-IAH. Plus buy another ticket as WN does not have any agreements with anyone.

Again. WN doesn't interline. So this is all a pointless...errr...point. People will not be flying WN from Latin America to connect to UA at IAH. Are they flying on UA into IAH to interline on domestic WN flights? Not really.

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
I wish people would stop comparing Houston to New York having two international airports. Because a MSA of about 20 million versus 6 million is really comparable   

I wish people would use common sense before posting, but then again we don't always get what we want. :-P

I really don't see why WN should be kept from expanding internationally to benefit THEIR network. They aren't wanting to fly to these places to feed other airlines or replace them. The whole concept of people interlining and transferring between IAH and HOU is just foolish. Could it happen? Sure, but it won't be easy.


User currently offlineModernArt From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8620 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
Will they have a global reach from HOU ?

Somebody flying from Kansas City to see relatives in Central America doesn't need nor care for the global reach of United.

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 7):
How will passengers connecting from say MEX.CUN,CZM,SAL,or GUA connect onto NRT,LHR,FRA

None. But they will potentially connect thousands to places like San Antonio, Las Vegas, Nashville, Denver, et al.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4254 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8479 times:

No surprise here...and I think very wise for Houston to call United's Bluff on this.

The other thing here to note though is that the International capable gates are going to be common use, which means that some other carrier (Aeromexico maybe) could start international service at HOU as well. If United wants to see how this works...all they have to do is look at ORD and MDW for a good example.

The other thing is, where else is UA going to move some of the IAH service to? There is no other airport in the system that works as well for a latin america feed as IAH, and there is a need for some service over both oceans from IAH. Granted, it isn't going to become SFO to Asia, or EWR to Europe, but at the same time, both airports are maxed out. where IAH is spacious and can expand, not to mention a huge population base and a lot of fortune 500's.


User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8389 times:

Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 3):
Why should Houston care what some airline headquartered in Chicago thinks about this.

Because WN will only take you to the beach and United connects you to the world. Which is more important to the CIty of Houston in the long run?



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7247 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8377 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think this is a PR job for WN. They can't go very far anywhere with a 737.

Quoting drerx7 (Thread starter):
Now for UA's response...methinks they will try and move the IAH-AKL route to the west coast or something like that.

Your kidding, right?

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
UA will certainly rattle sabres and issue all sorts of dire predictions.

Serious? UA will destroy any attempt WN makes from HOU.


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19202 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8319 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 15):
They can't go very far anywhere with a 737.

Just to illustrate that this isn't technically true - but clearly WN won't do it - CM flies their 737s over 3,300 miles non-stop, e.g. PTY-MVD.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlinetype-rated From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 4974 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8293 times:

On the news tonight: Remember the city said that if there will be international flights from HOU, then Southwest will pay for the facilities used by them. They emphasized that no city money will be spent on this. I think that if Southwest paid for these gates I don't think they would be common use.


Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8205 times:

Quoting steex (Reply 9):
Nobody specifically compared Houston to New York (at least not in this thread). New York isn't the only metro area with more than one international airport. Sure, Houston's 6+ million people isn't comparable to New York's 22+ million (going by CSAs), but is it comparable to the Bay Area's ~7.5 million? They have international service at all three of SFO, SJC, and OAK.

Folks, you forget how far IAH is from HOU...it is the equivalent of FLL and MIA. The airports serve 2 different markets.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineJerseyguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8185 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cjpark (Reply 14):
Because WN will only take you to the beach and United connects you to the world. Which is more important to the CIty of Houston in the long run?

How is this going to hurt the city of Houston? UA isn't going to do anything to Houston if they allow this, their in a business to make money and their flight decisions arent based on personal feelings.



Frontier Early Returns Ascent Status| Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8082 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 14):
Because WN will only take you to the beach and United connects you to the world. Which is more important to the CIty of Houston in the long run?

Not accurate. Business is business, and if United didn't connect Houston to the world the other international carriers will. Look at what happened during CO stagnation at IAH in favor of EWR...the foreign carriers flourished.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 15):
Your kidding, right?

Ask Smisek that. They mentioned redeploying 787s elsewhere when they first got wind of WN plans.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2023 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8040 times:

Honestly, it may be healthy for UA. They could differentiate themselves from WN on international routes where they compete.

User currently offlineBC77008 From United States of America, joined Sep 2011, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7859 times:

You don't show up down here in Houston, Texas making threats and I think Smisek and team know this. IMO Smisek doesn't do such a good job at running an airline but he does know how to make the numbers look good. At the end of the day, if Houston is pulling in good numbers then there will be no retaliation for allowing Southwest to proceed with it's Hobby plan.


"He waited his whole damn life to take that flight. And as the plane crashed down he thought 'Well isn't this nice...'"
User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7836 times:

If HOU gets a F.I.S. and WN won't fly HOU-PTY, then CM could fly there.
As in NYC, CM won't fly to the same airport used by CO (now UA).
CM flying to HOU could take care of real Houston O/D (enough for an E190 service couple of days per week) while UA IAH could take care of connecting traffic.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlinehohd From United States of America, joined May 2008, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7819 times:

What is UA afraid of? A little competition for some of its leisure destinations to Mexico or C. America ? Most of these travellers are price sensitive and may not be profitable for UA anyway. And we are talking about just a few cities. Southwest is going to pay 100% of the cost of building the terminal. It is no cost to the city. IAH has now the highest hub airfares in the country and especially to Mexico/Central America it is quite high.

My and my family travelled many times to Mexico, Central America, No. South America and we had to use my Onepass miles to do it since prices were outrageous. Some of my friends who wanted to come with me, but bailed after checking the fares. Most of them I know go via DFW, Miami or LAX or use TACA/Aeromexico for cheaper fares.

UA is stating that WN is welcome to start international flights from IAH, how about UA starting services from Hobby ?


User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 25, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8054 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 14):

Because WN will only take you to the beach and United connects you to the world. Which is more important to the CIty of Houston in the long run?

Who cares WHERE the destination is as long as the city of Houston gets those passengers, whether via IAH or HOU. The more they can add, the more money that can enter Houston.

Quoting BC77008 (Reply 22):
Houston is pulling in good numbers then there will be no retaliation for allowing Southwest to proceed with it's Hobby plan.

Absolutely!

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 21):
Honestly, it may be healthy for UA. They could differentiate themselves from WN on international routes where they compete.

Agreed!

Why is UA and those posting here so against it?

1. WN is going to pay for it, you will not, so don't whine about losing money for those who are Houston Residents.

2.There are people in Houston who are equally loyal to Southwest, as there are others equally loyal to United and will fly the respective airline as they so desire regardless of which airport the airline is flying out of. Why does UA care where WN serves intl? UA is NOT going to get that passenger regardless.

If a WN Passenger is going to fly WN out of HOU intl, they are going to do the same at IAH for WN as well. Either way United is not getting that passenger, so why does United care? They are not getting that passenger either way.

Regardless of the carrier, every airport should make every attempt to help ALL carriers wishing to serve. Houston as a city will suffer more by not allowing WN to fly intl out of HOU, then UA will suffer by any amount by WN flying intl at HOU.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11517 posts, RR: 61
Reply 26, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7701 times:

United's implied (or not-so-implied) threats to scale back or deemphasize the hub are likely empty, just as were AA's regarding DFW when the whole Wright Amendment debate was raging 5-6 years ago. United recognizes the jewel of a hub they've got in Houston and certainly aren't going to jeopardize that or throw it away simply because Southwest starts flying a few 737s per day to the Caribbean or Central America.

I don't think one could honestly disagree with Southwest's assertion that adding more capacity, and more flights, to their Hobby hub - whether those flights are domestic or international - would tend to strengthen that hub and, by extension, that airport (of which Southwest's hub comprises virtually all the capacity).

Nonetheless, I also do think United does have a legitimate point in saying that, just as added traffic at Hobby will tend to strengthen connecting traffic flows and "lift all boats" at that hub, to the extent that those added traffic flows come as a result of share shift from United's existing flights on overlapping routes to Bush, that share shift would tend to weaken some connecting traffic flows to the overall detriment of United's existing hub.

The fact that many of the shorter-haul (i.e., within 737 range) international markets Southwest could plausibly serve from Houston are likely some of United's most profitable (high-volume, low-competition VFR markets in Mexico/Central America, etc.) only further serves to explain and reinforce why United is so opposed to this.


User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7645 times:

This international flights @ HOU issue kind of remind me when AA added capacity from FLL to some of it major international markets nearby just to stop other airline(s) to grab a share of their market.
If UA is so concern about WN taking Houston international O/D passengers from them, it's UA which should add some service out of HOU with smaller yet cost-effective aircraft to its key profitable destinations in Mexico, Central America and Caribbean before WN does it.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6792 posts, RR: 34
Reply 28, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7542 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 17):
On the news tonight: Remember the city said that if there will be international flights from HOU, then Southwest will pay for the facilities used by them. They emphasized that no city money will be spent on this. I think that if Southwest paid for these gates I don't think they would be common use.

But that's a fallacy ultimately and the media is doing a terrible job of telling this story. Once again, the teflon WN gets a free pass and plays that whole 'david/goliath' card which is a crock.

If you fly internationally, you need FIS and Customs. Those are Federal resources. IAH is already understaffed and behind complement given the growth of other intl flying at IAH.

Throw HOU into the mix, and where are those resources coming from? That's the question no one seems to want to broach with WN. So it's all well and good that they want to built their own terminal, but that's a very small piece of the overall puzzle.

Moreover, since WN is non-IATA, there's no connectivity, alliance feed, etc at HOU if they were to do it. It's a massive waste of resources when IAH has the intl capability now, the airfield capacity, and HAS is failing if it wants to treat HOU as IAH...it's ridiculous, actually.

I don't think UA is afraid of the competition per se--that angle has been overworked already--but the points are valid given the fight CO and now UA has to wage all the time with HAS. Remember, for the Term E project, it was CO that was the general contractor, project lead and that's why it came in on time and under budget. The FIS facility, however, speared by HAS, went grossly over schedule and was also over budget if I recall. If Houston wants to build the goodness that's been going on for some time, they should focus on IAH for intl growth, not HOU.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25045 posts, RR: 46
Reply 29, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7452 times:

Simply put, United wants to avoid further competition so whatever restrictions Hobby operates under the better. Every passenger on WN is potentially one less passenger on UA.

Look at AA and its die hard opposition to lifting of the Wright Amendment at Dallas Love.


At the end, I do hope Hobby does open up. The more options for the consumer the better.

The theory of protecting IAH as the Houston gateway does not do anything for anyone but protecting the United hub, and was the exact same line of argument used by AA to keep things under wrap at Love.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6792 posts, RR: 34
Reply 30, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7430 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
Simply put, United wants to avoid further competition so whatever restrictions Hobby operates under the better. Every passenger on WN is potentially one less passenger on UA.

Look at AA and its die hard opposition to lifting of the Wright Amendment at Dallas Love.


At the end, I do hope Hobby does open up. The more options for the consumer the better.

The theory of protecting IAH as the Houston gateway does not do anything for anyone but protecting the United hub, and was the exact same line of argument used by AA to keep things under wrap at Love.

Not a valid comparison in context.

For DECADES, WN operated practically rent free at DAL. They had the mother of all sweetheart deals and the Wright Amendment, while I was and remain against it on principle, was an artificial inhibitor. They should have pulled the lid off and then charged WN regular DFW rates for rents, landing fees, etc. They got the benefit, especially in their infancy and maturation eras, of having the deck stacked in their favor.

They now seek that same thing--taking a domestic older airport that was kept open and now trying to grow it for incremental revenue. I don't have a problem with the competition part of this, even if UA might (and apparently does), but the FIS facility, staffing and resources are entirely valid points that even intl carriers have taken note of.


User currently offlinerdh3e From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 31, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7416 times:

Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 3):
Why should Houston care what some airline headquartered in Chicago thinks about this.
Quoting apodino (Reply 13):
No surprise here...and I think very wise for Houston to call United's Bluff on this.
Quoting Jerseyguy (Reply 19):
How is this going to hurt the city of Houston? UA isn't going to do anything to Houston if they allow this, their in a business to make money and their flight decisions arent based on personal feelings.
Quoting BC77008 (Reply 22):
if Houston is pulling in good numbers then there will be no retaliation for allowing Southwest to proceed with it's Hobby plan.

Here is the one response I can make to all of you. CO and now UA has been a tremendous partner to the city of Houston. Recently Smisek signed up for $1B in terminal improvements at the airport.

This is all under the pretense that there would be ONE international airport in Houston - IAH. Which is what the government promised UA/CO for all these years.


User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3811 posts, RR: 34
Reply 32, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7238 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 17):
On the news tonight: Remember the city said that if there will be international flights from HOU, then Southwest will pay for the facilities used by them. They emphasized that no city money will be spent on this. I think that if Southwest paid for these gates I don't think they would be common use.

While I agree that no city money will be spent on new facilities at HOU, I'm not so sure WN is going to be the one paying for the facilities.

The memorandum to the Mayor from HAS Aviation Director says that Southwest is proposing the project be funded by increasing HOU's PFC from $3.00 to $4.50. It goes on to say that all incremental operating costs would be covered by a common use fee charged to the specific airlines using the FIS.

As far as WN just picking up stakes and moving to IAH, the aviation director noted that there are insufficient gates to accommodate a complete relocation of Southwest, absent construction of a new terminal. Doing so would cost the City and Southwest between $500million and $1billion, redundantly duplicate the recent investment recently completed at Hobby, and could leave Hobby with only non-commercial general aviation traffic and an unworkable cost structure.

LoneStarMike


User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 968 posts, RR: 51
Reply 33, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7239 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 32):
For DECADES, WN operated practically rent free at DAL. They had the mother of all sweetheart deals and the Wright Amendment, while I was and remain against it on principle, was an artificial inhibitor. They should have pulled the lid off and then charged WN regular DFW rates for rents, landing fees, etc.

1. Any airline could have operated under the terms of the Wright Amendment along side WN long before WN became the powerhouse it is today. No one chose to.

2. DAL has a completely different cost structure than DFW. Assessing DFW rates on DAL operations would have been a disaster for the City of Dallas and sent virtually all traffic away.


User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7194 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 33):
This is all under the pretense that there would be ONE international airport in Houston - IAH. Which is what the government promised UA/CO for all these years.

United has no clothes in this dispute-----as Cleveland is finding out, nothing is or should be forever and times have changed and for Houston to miss this opportunity to work with SWA would be one of the more stupid mistakes they could ever make!!


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11517 posts, RR: 61
Reply 35, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7211 times:

Interesting ...

News reports from AvWeek are now beginning to delve more deeply in the Southwest/City of Houston claims and underlying analyses, and the United claims and analyses in rebuttal.

According to United and William Swelbar (a well-known aviation economist and MIT academic they paid to run their analyses), the City of Houston's analysis used to support international service from Hobby implicitly assumes that "fares will go down 55% and traffic will grow by 181% in the local market" when Southwest enters these international markets. To the extent that that is true, I agree with United that presumption is simply unrealistic in today's environment. As any casual observer of Southwest and the industry overall in recent years would likely agree, assuming that simply the mere presence of Southwest entering a market is highly unlikely, in this day and age, to lead to 181% O&D stimulation.

The United analysis also apparently identified specific markets where added competition on international routes would lead to reduced traffic flows and require a decrease in capacity from United. The United analysis apparently identifies 30 markets where service would need to decrease, and 4 where it would need to end altogether, as part of an overall 6% capacity reduction projected for the entire hub. Further, this conclusion leads to the conclusion, by extension, that United would have to lay off about 1,700 workers and forgo the recently-announced capital investment.

Perhaps most critically, and most centrally to United's protests, is the ultimate conclusion that, "the negative impact of the required schedule reduction by United at IAH in response to the introduction of redundant international service at Hobby will overwhelm the expected modest increase in traffic at Hobby that might be created." In essence - United doesn't dispute that Southwest at Hobby would obviously lead to some traffic stimulation and growth there (although United does dispute the level of stimulation), but it claims that more traffic net-net will be lost at Bush than will be gained at Hobby.

Again - I think many of United's threats likely are empty, and I don't for a second think the Bush hub is in question no matter which way things end up going at Hobby. Nonetheless, some of the claims by United - if true - certainly do raise some questions about the veracity of the Southwest/City analyses. But, alas, I suppose that is to be expected - of course both sides are going to put into their report whatever ground rules and assumptions they think they can plauisbly get away with that are most likely to tend to favor their position.


User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3811 posts, RR: 34
Reply 36, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7128 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 29):
If you fly internationally, you need FIS and Customs. Those are Federal resources. IAH is already understaffed and behind complement given the growth of other intl flying at IAH.

Wouldn't they still have to hire more customs agents if Southwest moved to IAH?

Quoting slider (Reply 29):
Throw HOU into the mix, and where are those resources coming from? That's the question no one seems to want to broach with WN. So it's all well and good that they want to built their own terminal, but that's a very small piece of the overall puzzle.

Are you asking where the money is coming from to pay for the staffing of more customs agents?

United says global Hobby would cost jobs, flights at IAH

Quote:
But Hart said that even if Southwest doesn't prove competitive at Hobby, United is concerned that federal budget restraints will stretch Customs officers too thin between Hobby and Bush, which United contends already is understaffed.

"This is a huge issue for us and Southwest has yet to operate an international flight, so I don't expect them to understand it," Hart said.

Kelly dismissed the staffing issue Tuesday, saying it is paid for by a $17.50-per-international-passenger fee.

Is that not correct?

LoneStarMike


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25045 posts, RR: 46
Reply 37, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7074 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 32):
They should have pulled the lid off and then charged WN regular DFW rates for rents, landing fees, etc.

Why? Each airport has its own cost structure. Why should DAL fees have anything to do with DFW?

It actually would be illegal what you suggest cross subsidize DFW with fees at DAL even if it there was a single airport authority that ran both. (look at how LAWA must firewall LAX vs ONT vs VNY)

Quoting slider (Reply 32):
They now seek that same thing-

I thought you just said its not a valid comparison between HOU and DAL, but you are making it as well.

Quoting commavia (Reply 37):
The United analysis also apparently identified specific markets where added competition on international routes would lead to reduced traffic flows and require a decrease in capacity from United. The United analysis apparently identifies 30 markets where service would need to decrease, and 4 where it would need to end altogether

Ah poor United.

The inability to face competition is more a problem for CO/UA. For years they have enjoyed essentially monopoly position in virtually all Houston-LatAm/Carrib markets (with some amazing high O&D fares to show).

With a little competition in the future they certainly will see their margins erode, but its ultimately up to UA themselves to either become more competitive, lower their cost, or cede the market if they cant compete. Its the way the open market works.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1628 posts, RR: 9
Reply 38, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7057 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 37):
But, alas, I suppose that is to be expected - of course both sides are going to put into their report whatever ground rules and assumptions they think they can plauisbly get away with that are most likely to tend to favor their position.

That's really the issue. Nothing put out by either WN or UA can be taken at face value since they're both going to skew their assumptions and statements to the extreme direction that best makes their point.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 39, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7036 times:

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 33):
Which is what the government promised UA/CO for all these years.

There are no restrictions on Hobby and no agreement in place besides the fact that there was no commercial FIS at HOU. The fact of the matter is that there is no legitimate or legal reason to stop WN at HOU. The other issue is that the City of Houston has hired seperate entities to analyze the impact, so it is not as onesided as people think. Personally I want them to start because we are getting reemed by UA down here on fares. My flight to BWI and LGA this weekend is damn near $600.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineBC77008 From United States of America, joined Sep 2011, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6934 times:

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 33):

"This is all under the pretense that there would be ONE international airport in Houston - IAH. Which is what the government promised UA/CO for all these years."


This promise should have been made in writing. Smisek is a lawyer after all. If he didn't get a promise in writing, then that's his mistake.



"He waited his whole damn life to take that flight. And as the plane crashed down he thought 'Well isn't this nice...'"
User currently offlineSplitterz From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6908 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 11):

I really don't see why WN should be kept from expanding internationally to benefit THEIR network. They aren't wanting to fly to these places to feed other airlines or replace them. The whole concept of people interlining and transferring between IAH and HOU is just foolish. Could it happen? Sure, but it won't be easy.

They shouldn't. But why should Houston have to build WN a customs facility in HOU?


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 42, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6817 times:

Quoting Splitterz (Reply 43):
They shouldn't. But why should Houston have to build WN a customs facility in HOU?

Because it would benefit Houston if other carriers utilized it, its not an exclusive use facility. In fact, Did anybody bother to look at the attachments on HAS? It looks as though the FIS staffing may come from the existing staff that operates for private ops as they specifically outline that their will be apron space for private aircraft to utilize the FIS. It looks as tho the existing FIS will be folded "moved" if you will to the terminal.

I am just not sold that 5 gates will decrease the amount of traffic in Houston and IAH - it doesn't seem like sound logic. In the event that UA does scale back or lose traffic then the market will be right sized or other carriers will come in. Just like Emirates, Singapore, Viva Aerobus, Alaska, and Qatar all set up shop underneath the stagnation of Continental. I've said it before - if fares will be dropped then it will stimulate pax for both carriers. If UA matches WN fares internationally - I and every other loyal ff on UA will still fly UA. Now WN pax may go back to WN for their international travel...if they travelled internationally to that extent to begin with.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6792 posts, RR: 34
Reply 43, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6801 times:

Quoting LoneStarMike (Reply 38):
Wouldn't they still have to hire more customs agents if Southwest moved to IAH?

Perhaps incrementally--especially since theyre ALREADY short staffed. But to have a total redundant staff at HOU would be grossly inefficient because it would drive more net headcount overall.

Quoting LoneStarMike (Reply 38):
Is that not correct?

On factual basis, yes, but again as I stated, the per intl pax fee isn't even covering the impact of all intl flights in IAH right now! And that includes not just UA, but also KL, AF, BA, EK, QR, SQ, etc, etc....


User currently offlinerdh3e From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 44, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6769 times:

Quoting BC77008 (Reply 42):
This promise should have been made in writing. Smisek is a lawyer after all. If he didn't get a promise in writing, then that's his mistake.

Correct.

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 41):
Personally I want them to start because we are getting reemed by UA down here on fares. My flight to BWI and LGA this weekend is damn near $600.

This will have zero effect on that. This agreement is for INTL flights. Last time I checked HOU, BWI and LGA are all domestic destinations....


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4254 posts, RR: 6
Reply 45, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6475 times:

Thinking outside the box here. If WN adds more Int'l flights to HOU...that means that the Houston Airports would collect more in PFC's and Landing fees. This would add revenue to the Houston Airports System, which would not only help HOU, but also IAH as well, so this is a win for UA because more revenue for the Houston Airports means that UA is unlikely to see an increase in PFC's or Landing fees in the near future. Additionally, if this is bankrolled by WN, the additional revenue would be more likely to be spent improving IAH than HOU.

Increased competition aside, this could actually benefit UA in the long run.


User currently offlineusflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6492 times:

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 33):

Why didn't UA or CO have a problem with it when the HOU master plan was released several years ago as it includes an international terminal? Obviously Houston had planned for nternational capabilities at Hobby since they included it in the 2003 master plan.

http://system.gocampaign.com/files/file.asp?f=11429



My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6358 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 28):
This international flights @ HOU issue kind of remind me when AA added capacity from FLL to some of it major international markets nearby just to stop other airline(s) to grab a share of their market.
If UA is so concern about WN taking Houston international O/D passengers from them, it's UA which should add some service out of HOU with smaller yet cost-effective aircraft to its key profitable destinations in Mexico, Central America and Caribbean before WN does it.

Or better yet, UA should be preemptive and start to drop fares to potential WN destinations now to get people hooked on flying UA. the FF program is a huge retention item. The high fares only bolster the WN case to Houston. For example, I am trying to book some tickets BZE-IAH in August and UA want $846.

Quoting slider (Reply 29):
If you fly internationally, you need FIS and Customs. Those are Federal resources. IAH is already understaffed and behind complement given the growth of other intl flying at IAH.

you got that right....you don't want to be stuck in the arrival line behind QR, EK, BA and SQ....with 4 FIS agents working the line. Its horrible.

Quoting commavia (Reply 37):
4 where it would need to end altogether

If the market is that thin to those four destination, it would be unlikely that WN would enter. MID I think is one of those destinations.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineSevensixtyseven From United States of America, joined May 2011, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5933 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 15):
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 16):

3365 miles..to be specific..that's at the very edge of the range, but you could do as north as Houston-Anchorage, or as south as Houston-Lima.
The one problem I see is HOU's runway length. They would have to extend 4/22 and maybe 12R/30L by 1000 or 2000 feet..but a look on google maps makes me think that wouldn't be easy. Theoretically possible, but not easy.



Will that ex-HP 752 get delayed...again?
User currently offlineSplitterz From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5919 times:

Quoting n471wn (Reply 36):
United has no clothes in this dispute-----as Cleveland is finding out, nothing is or should be forever and times have changed and for Houston to miss this opportunity to work with SWA would be one of the more stupid mistakes they could ever make!!

Hardly. WN wouldn't come close to the amount of money that UA brings into the area. I would think they would want to continue that healthy relationship with an airline that has supported the city for a long time.


User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 50, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5902 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Splitterz (Reply 54):
Hardly. WN wouldn't come close to the amount of money that UA brings into the area. I would think they would want to continue that healthy relationship with an airline that has supported the city for a long time.

You missed the point------Houston can have it both ways as United has no credibility when they say what they will and will not do.


User currently offlineSplitterz From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5791 times:

Quoting n471wn (Reply 56):
Quoting Splitterz (Reply 54):
Hardly. WN wouldn't come close to the amount of money that UA brings into the area. I would think they would want to continue that healthy relationship with an airline that has supported the city for a long time.

You missed the point------Houston can have it both ways as United has no credibility when they say what they will and will not do.

Sure, but why can't WN operate out of IAH? UA has stated that it would have no issue in such a scenario. Why doesn't WN petition Dallas for international ops, or have Atlanta build a new airport?

If customs in IAH is a short-staffed as some say, why the heck would you further string out your resources to another airport?


User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 52, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5675 times:

Quoting Splitterz (Reply 59):
Why doesn't WN petition Dallas for international ops

Wright Amendment Law forbids International Operations at DAL, or otherwise WN would.

Curiously...this is the same United who SUPPORTED deregulation back in the 1970's, also spouting and promoting competition and encouraging it...now..United doesn't want it.

UA had no protest for international operations at MDW when it was built, they should not have any at HOU, period.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineusflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5648 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 63):

or in 2003 when international facilities were included in the HOU master plan.



My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 968 posts, RR: 51
Reply 54, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5558 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 63):
Wright Amendment Law forbids International Operations at DAL, or otherwise WN would

Sigh... the Wright compromise is riddled with issues, but this is a big one. It may take years, but it will be revisited one day, I have no doubt.

Quoting Splitterz (Reply 59):
Sure, but why can't WN operate out of IAH? UA has stated that it would have no issue in such a scenario.

Give us one reason WN should be seeking UA's endorsement for how to run their operations.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12981 posts, RR: 100
Reply 55, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 4964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I find it interesting that WN is going international from HOU. The scale of the operations will not be huge. The competition? It will stimulate O&D. We can argue to the degree, but there is still a 'LCC effect' when routes are opened.

Quoting steex (Reply 9):
It also would potentially allow carriers from those regions another option for Houston service moving forward, which I could definitely see being appealing to Mexican LCCs.

  

Quoting cjpark (Reply 14):
Because WN will only take you to the beach and United connects you to the world. Which is more important to the CIty of Houston in the long run?

Stimulating business. Houston's other business is growing. Airlines are a tiny fraction of the total 'Metropolitan GNP.' The value is better connectivity at a lower fare.

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 20):
They mentioned redeploying 787s elsewhere when they first got wind of WN plans.

They're being diverted to EWR for a while anyway. The NYC yield is increasing nicely. This has nothing to do with WN at HOU, but rather profit from EWR.

Quoting BC77008 (Reply 42):
This promise should have been made in writing. Smisek is a lawyer after all. If he didn't get a promise in writing, then that's his mistake.

"A verbal contract isn't worth the paper its written on."   

Quoting usflyguy (Reply 64):
or in 2003 when international facilities were included in the HOU master plan.

Yep. UA/CO missed their window to protest.

WN is going international. UA had better be ready for that. Since its best to 'grow from strength,' I see quick expansion out of HOU. Then I expect either FLL or MCO. Due to the current fares, HOU is a wise start.

Does WN's union contracts allow outsourcing of ground handling at international stations?

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 56, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 69):
Yep. UA/CO missed their window to protest.

Exactly...that was the time frame where CO was more focused on EWR and they were comfortable at IAH. WN also had pretty much stagnated at HOU.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineairlineaddict From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4853 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting slider (Reply 29):


If you fly internationally, you need FIS and Customs. Those are Federal resources. IAH is already understaffed and behind complement given the growth of other intl flying at IAH.

Throw HOU into the mix, and where are those resources coming from? That's the question no one seems to want to broach with WN. So it's all well and good that they want to built their own terminal, but that's a very small piece of the overall puzzle.

That's exactly right. As a former volunteer at IAH, I saw wait times for foreign nationals at Customs and Border Patrol exceed 3 hours during the peak arrival time. Having to share CBP staff with HOU will cause longer wait times and could potentially hurt connecting traffic at IAH because of the amount of connection time it takes to transit.

There's already a case study in having to share CBP resources between airports and the docks/ports: LAX. Even if there are additional CBP fees coming in from more flights, the government is very slow to react to CBP staffing shortages.

For the CEO of WN to say otherwise is either a lie or pure ignorance.


User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 58, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4719 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 11):
Again. WN doesn't interline. So this is all a pointless...errr...point. People will not be flying WN from Latin America to connect to UA at IAH. Are they flying on UA into IAH to interline on domestic WN flights? Not really.

Thats the point....what do you do with the people that DO want to connect to somewhere southwest DOESN't fly from Hobby. And there are alot of places.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 11):
I really don't see why WN should be kept from expanding internationally to benefit THEIR network. They aren't wanting to fly to these places to feed other airlines or replace them. The whole concept of people interlining and transferring between IAH and HOU is just foolish. Could it happen? Sure, but it won't be easy.

No one twisted their arm and FORCED them to leave IAH 7-8 years ago.

Or do people like to 'forget' they left on their own ?


User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 59, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4709 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 25):
Who cares WHERE the destination is as long as the city of Houston gets those passengers, whether via IAH or HOU. The more they can add, the more money that can enter Houston.

Yes and we all know how much the money spent in an airport helps the local economy. Not a whole lot.

Alex, maybe you will answer this question.

Is FIS at Hobby actually needed?



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlinedadoftyler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 60, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4668 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 59):
Alex, maybe you will answer this question.

Is FIS at Hobby actually needed?

I'll answer for Alex, CJ.

Yes, FIS is needed at Hobby if the Houston community wants Southwest or any other Hobby-serving carrier to fly international. Does United's thesis that "one international airport has been the plan" make sense? No. The aviation department has confirmed that. Does United's implication that Southwest should start service at IAH make any sense? Not at all. No more than it would make sense for United to divorce some of it's international service at IAH and move it to HOU. Or for Southwest to begin service from DFW. (You remember those debates....right?) Southwest international at Hobby allows for feed for their 150+ domestic flights a day at Hobby. True, the local mix won't be as low as UA has at IAH--which is better for Houston than a higher connecting percentage--but connecting traffic will still be very important. And why does Houston need Southwest flying international, out of our Hobby home? Fares. Southwest will offer a lower priced product. Look at existing fares between Atlanta and FL's international destinations--which Southwest now controls from Dallas, BTW--and United's IAH pricing...controlled from Chicago...and the different is significant.

Your aguments didn't make sense in the Love Field battle. They make even less sense in this one. Hobby needs to have international capability.

DoT


User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 61, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4638 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 58):

Thats the point....what do you do with the people that DO want to connect to somewhere southwest DOESN't fly from Hobby. And there are alot of places.

Simple..they just don't fly Southwest!

How is it ANY different from people flying one airline into JFK, and switching over to LGA on different or same carriers, which AA and DL do all the time. It isn't.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 59):

Is FIS at Hobby actually needed?

Yes...you know my answer for it.

Dadoftyler explained it far better then I did.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineaviationbuff08 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4581 times:

WN has not even operated an International flight to date with Pre-merger WN's reservation systems and airplanes. They are having great difficulties integrating FL into WN and were not even talking about code-sharing. And we are debating WN building an international terminal, talking about the blind leading the blind here. This should be interesting to watch unfold.

If I were UA, I would just ensure that WN doesn't get city assisted funding with building an international terminal at HOU and force them to spend their own money at building it.


User currently offlineaznmadsci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3661 posts, RR: 5
Reply 63, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4550 times:

Out of curiosity, does the PFC's of IAH and HOU "stay" for the respective airport or do they all funnel into a communal HAS account?


The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineusflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4513 times:

Quoting aviationbuff08 (Reply 62):

That's exactly what WN wants to do... Build their own terminal.



My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25045 posts, RR: 46
Reply 65, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4509 times:

Quoting aznmadsci (Reply 63):
Out of curiosity, does the PFC's of IAH and HOU "stay" for the respective airport or do they all funnel into a communal HAS account?

PFC funding stays, and is spent at the facility they are collected at.

Big no-no to divert such dollars, or utilize them for non authorized uses.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineBoeing12345 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4433 times:

It's not just United that thinks this is not a good idea. Lufthansa says it would have to reconsider plans to bring in the A380 due to reduced International traffic at IAH. Lufthansa also stated there is plenty of gate space at terminal D and facilities to handle the increase in traffic.

User currently offlineModernArt From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 67, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4396 times:

Quoting Boeing12345 (Reply 66):
Lufthansa says it would have to reconsider plans to bring in the A380 due to reduced International traffic at IAH. Lufthansa also stated there is plenty of gate space at terminal D and facilities to handle the increase in traffic.

Lufthansa's musings are hogwash.
1) Lufthansa is bringing the A380 to Houston this summer. SWA's international terminal won't be up and running for a few years.
2) Lufthansa is able to connect its jumbo flight to hundreds outbound Star Alliance partner United flights from IAH.

SWA's domestic network at Hobby will be key to its success as an international operator, just like United's domestic banks are key to the profitability of its behemoth international ops at IAH.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1675 posts, RR: 1
Reply 68, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4387 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Boeing12345 (Reply 66):
It's not just United that thinks this is not a good idea. Lufthansa says it would have to reconsider plans to bring in the A380 due to reduced International traffic at IAH.

That doesnt make any sense. How does WN flying to latin america from HOU result in less traffic on LH to IAH even taking into consideration LH connects traffic to UA in IAH going to Latin America???

Let me tell you something about airlines. They are full of BS. We've all followed AA and DAL. The hollow AA threats have gone back years. First they said theyd have hundreds of flights at DAL if the WA was lifted to permit one stop flights. All empty threats as is United's here.


User currently offlineBC77008 From United States of America, joined Sep 2011, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 58):
No one twisted their arm and FORCED them to leave IAH 7-8 years ago.

Or do people like to 'forget' they left on their own ?

Southwest did that out of the generosity of their hearts to be nice to Continental, another Texas-based carrier, and now look at how they are being treated! This is the thanks they get for being nice!



"He waited his whole damn life to take that flight. And as the plane crashed down he thought 'Well isn't this nice...'"
User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 70, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4290 times:

Quoting BC77008 (Reply 69):
Southwest did that out of the generosity of their hearts to be nice to Continental, another Texas-based carrier, and now look at how they are being treated! This is the thanks they get for being nice!

CO tried HOU-EWR and left the route, maybe that's how CO thinks they returned the favour of WN leaving IAH?



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 71, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4120 times:

www.freehobbyairport.com

I've signed the petition myself, but its worth a look to all others to add to the discussion.

There is alot of useful albeit biased information on the site - I love how WN underscores United's move to Chicago..."CHICAGO based United-Continental" and my favorite is "United-Continental will continue to have a stranglehold on at least 29 other markets from Houston". One thing of note I did not realize that Calgary was a larger market than Cancun from IAH. I know the oil connection and what not I just didn't realize it was greater than CUN.

[Edited 2012-04-11 11:16:09]


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 72, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4066 times:

Quoting BC77008 (Reply 69):
Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 58):
No one twisted their arm and FORCED them to leave IAH 7-8 years ago.

Or do people like to 'forget' they left on their own ?

Southwest did that out of the generosity of their hearts to be nice to Continental, another Texas-based carrier, and now look at how they are being treated! This is the thanks they get for being nice!

What was I thinking ? After reading Gary Kellys words here at the end of the article. I mean they had the IAH-DAL market. I would have thought they were printing money all those years on that head to head with CO.

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2005/01/24/daily45.html

When I go to work I need to start thanking all the WN employees for the hard work my coworkers put in everyday.

Should we bake WN cookies for their kindness I ask ?


Ther irony is people say UA is trying to keep them from competing with UA.

The facilities are set up at IAH. FIS is there.

Operating out the same airport with UA at IAH would be the ultimate action of competing.

They have a strong product right ?

Why spend the money when the facilaties are already in place. Because I'm WN I would think there is a confidence I can go into IAH and go toe to toe with UA. Because that is what I do right ? Go into the Hubs of large airlines and compete.

[Edited 2012-04-11 12:12:19]

[Edited 2012-04-11 12:13:21]

User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4581 posts, RR: 23
Reply 73, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3995 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 72):
Operating out the same airport with UA at IAH would be the ultimate action of competing.

Yes until afternoon storms roll in, as normal, and delays back everything up. Why congest everything into IAH when you can try to divide things into two different airports?

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 72):
Why spend the money when the facilaties are already in place. Because I'm WN I would think there is a confidence I can go into IAH and go toe to toe with UA. Because that is what I do right ? Go into the Hubs of large airlines and compete.

Let's actually think this through. The cost of relocating the entire HOU operation to IAH is probably much much much much more than just financing the construction on the new HOU terminal. The WN network is going through HOU. That is where passengers will connect. This really isn't that difficult to understand.

One of the main staples of WN's success is working to avoid going directly into main hubs and dealing with congestion. The only times they've gone into major hubs is when it made sense and it has worked most of the time. DEN the company flooded capacity and has made it work so far...plus UA and F9 were/are weak at the time. BWI they charged in when US was weak and on the ropes and filled the void very well. ATL they are getting thanks to a merger and the airport isn't nearly as delay prone as it was before the 5th runway. PHL they tried to go in and muscle in but US is too strong there, so they've pulled back. The last airline that I can remember that has effectively picked up a hub and moved it was WestPac. We remember how well that worked. All the other major airports they've gone into recently are mainly to add them to the network to grow business traffic, but aren't major WN operations.

There is zero chance of WN, or really any airline, being able to effectively/successfully pick up a hub and move it across town. If Houston would like to fully fund such a move, then WN would probably listen...for a second or two. Then they'll either tell Houston have a good one and launch the international service out of SAT, AUS, MSY, etc.


User currently offlinehohd From United States of America, joined May 2008, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3961 times:

For all those loyalists on UA's behalf:

I have been a loyal Continental/United customer for more than 20 years and even I support this. United has made IAH as the priciest hub in the country, plus they charge outrageous prices to the south of the border. They are competitive from other cities though, so IAH is essentially a transit point for UA. Except for business travel and a few leisure customers, most from Houston fly the competition or charters to destinations south of the border. In reality UA has very little to lose anyway.


User currently offlinefreakyrat From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 849 posts, RR: 1
Reply 75, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3907 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No one has mentioned Runway lengths at HOU. The longest is 7600 feet. It seems enough for a B737-700 maybe not for an 800 with full load and fuel. I don't know.

User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 76, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

Quoting freakyrat (Reply 75):
No one has mentioned Runway lengths at HOU. The longest is 7600 feet. It seems enough for a B737-700 maybe not for an 800 with full load and fuel. I don't know.

Well, SY and NW have gotten a DC10 in and out of there, albeit lightly loaded charters. Within the last year we have seen a private 763 and a charter 762 in a couple of times. Full load and fuel in a -800 may be tricky though.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 77, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3904 times:

Quoting dadoftyler (Reply 60):
I'll answer for Alex, CJ.

Yes, FIS is needed at Hobby if the Houston community wants Southwest or any other Hobby-serving carrier to fly international. Does United's thesis that "one international airport has been the plan" make sense? No. The aviation department has confirmed that. Does United's implication that Southwest should start service at IAH make any sense? Not at all. No more than it would make sense for United to divorce some of it's international service at IAH and move it to HOU. Or for Southwest to begin service from DFW. (You remember those debates....right?) Southwest international at Hobby allows for feed for their 150 domestic flights a day at Hobby. True, the local mix won't be as low as UA has at IAH--which is better for Houston than a higher connecting percentage--but connecting traffic will still be very important. And why does Houston need Southwest flying international, out of our Hobby home? Fares. Southwest will offer a lower priced product. Look at existing fares between Atlanta and FL's international destinations--which Southwest now controls from Dallas, BTW--and United's IAH pricing...controlled from Chicago...and the different is significant.

Your aguments didn't make sense in the Love Field battle. They make even less sense in this one. Hobby needs to have international capability.

The question was is FIS needed at Hobby? Meaning has IAH reached its saturation point?
No it has not. But thank you for spinning off into the talking points we will hear until this issue is decided.

Concerning your Wright Amendment comments you will never convince me that any airline has the right to dictate public policy concerning operations at city owned airports. Nor will anyone ever be able to convince me that real airline competition can only be had by separating the airlines at different airports within the same markets.

The idea that the Houston Aviation department supports this effort is not surprising. Any government agency has for its first responsibility to create its own relevance. Building another terminal for FIS at the airport only ensures more to manage for this department which will result in a bigger department and budget. Government is not concerned with duplicity and waste.



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 78, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3894 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 77):
Nor will anyone ever be able to convince me that real airline competition can only be had by separating the airlines at different airports within the same markets.

Wow, so you say LGA/EWR should be closed for JFK...FLL for MIA..BUR/ONT/SNA for LAX...BFI for SEA..MDW for ORD...and on and on and, just so airlines can TRULY compete.

Understood.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 77):
airline has the right to dictate public policy concerning operations at city owned airports.

Nor does government have the right to restrict access in any way shape or form for whatsoever reason at any airport so long as it is publicly owned and not Private (example Branson, Missouri)

Every airport regardless of the location should have the right to allow ALL airlines equal access to gates, and FIS should they want international service. Just so you don't think I am Pro-WN here, I am Pro Competition, I would think the same for any airline that wants FIS at the respective airport.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 79, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3781 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 73):
There is zero chance of WN, or really any airline, being able to effectively/successfully pick up a hub and move it across town. If Houston would like to fully fund such a move, then WN would probably listen...for a second or two. Then they'll either tell Houston have a good one and launch the international service out of SAT, AUS, MSY, etc.

Like I said earlier....no one made them leave IAH.

Maybe we should have left the 686 million we put up for the current expansion and told the city of Houston keep their 288 and pull the rest out their backside. Aaaaaaand told them to have a good one. I'm sure WN would fill in the entire void right ?

Again...no one is keeping them from competing with anyone.

Very curious...why did they turn done the incentives to go to DFW in 2005 ? Surely they had nothing fear getting in the ring with AA right ?

No one is getting in their way of competition. They could have flown anyone they wanted from DFW. Very curious they said no when it was time to put up or shut up.

This whole issue seems like a recurring theme

http://www.redorbit.com/news/technol...west_airlines_starting_service_at/


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 80, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3750 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 79):
Like I said earlier....no one made them leave IAH.

With all due respect, your argument is ridiculous. WN always had a single route to DAL to try and cater to the O&D - that was it, they never had a decent operation at IAH. The fact of the matter is that Continental had the opportunity to protest this situation back in 2003 when the master plan of HOU put forth by the City of Houston implicated a FIS. Now that they have our fares here sky high they want to hold onto that monopoly. You might as well be putting forth the argument to close Hobby, Love Field, Midway, LaGuardia...I could go on.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4581 posts, RR: 23
Reply 81, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3617 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 79):
Maybe we should have left the 686 million we put up for the current expansion and told the city of Houston keep their 288 and pull the rest out their backside. Aaaaaaand told them to have a good one. I'm sure WN would fill in the entire void right ?

Again...no one is keeping them from competing with anyone.

Exactly no one is keeping them from competing with anyone...except United-Continental apparently wants to keep them from being able to operate from a long standing/existing station. Sounds pretty anti-competitive to me.

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 79):
Very curious...why did they turn done the incentives to go to DFW in 2005 ? Surely they had nothing fear getting in the ring with AA right ?

Why go into a busy airport when you have an under utilized facility that you've used for decades? This is a point that you seem to be completely ignoring, because honestly it does weaken the whole "Team UA" argument quite a bit. How much do you think the ontime reliability of the airport is going to be impacted by taking on ~150 additional flights a day immediately? Southwest has been at Hobby since 1971...since Day 1. There is no reason why they should be forced to relocate in order to expand operations.

The funny thing is that this can be argued back and forth over and over again. At the end of the day, Southwest will operate international flights from Houston Hobby. United will continue to operate international flights from Houston. In 5 years this will be an after thought. Every airline must adopt or die to the new environment...Southwest is doing what they must. United did what they needed to...it just required a little help by the bankruptcy courts.


User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3811 posts, RR: 34
Reply 82, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3592 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 81):
Southwest has been at Hobby since 1971...since Day 1.

Actually, they started at IAH on Day 1 and moved to HOU later that year (in Nov.) They went back to IAH in 1980 (coinciding with the closure of BPT) and left IAH a second time on April2, 2005.

LoneStarMike


User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4581 posts, RR: 23
Reply 83, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3541 times:

Quoting LoneStarMike (Reply 82):
Actually, they started at IAH on Day 1 and moved to HOU later that year (in Nov.) They went back to IAH in 1980 (coinciding with the closure of BPT) and left IAH a second time on April2, 2005.

My bad. LOL Forgot about that.


User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 84, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3352 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 78):
Wow, so you say LGA/EWR should be closed for JFK...FLL for MIA..BUR/ONT/SNA for LAX...BFI for SEA..MDW for ORD...and on and on and, just so airlines can TRULY compete.

Understood.

Good try; ironically you actually named some airports in markets where capacity cannot meet demand. Additional airports and services are justified (actually needed). You cannot say the same for Houston and Dallas can you?

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 78):
Nor does government have the right to restrict access in any way shape or form for whatsoever reason at any airport so long as it is publicly owned and not Private (example Branson, Missouri)

Every airport regardless of the location should have the right to allow ALL airlines equal access to gates, and FIS should they want international service. Just so you don't think I am Pro-WN here, I am Pro Competition, I would think the same for any airline that wants FIS at the respective airport.


How and When does an airline wanting something make it a necessity?

As long as the Federal Government controls and manages the airspace and who uses it they have every right and reason to limit airport usage. The cities that own the airports should have the ability to restrict usage based on ownership rights of the airports.



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 85, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 3263 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 84):
You cannot say the same for Houston and Dallas can you?

Uhhhh yes you can? What are you    on?
IAH couldn't not absorb WN ops if it was even an option. IAH has a few gates available in A...that's it.
Above all else Houston obviously can, otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 84):
How and When does an airline wanting something make it a necessity?

When the company wants to make money.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 84):
As long as the Federal Government controls and manages the airspace and who uses it they have every right and reason to limit airport usage. The cities that own the airports should have the ability to restrict usage based on ownership rights of the airports.

Welcome back to 1965?

You cannot possibly be serious with this weak argument? It contradicts everything about free enterprise.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5499 posts, RR: 28
Reply 86, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

This whole kerfufle is funny. With a metopoltan area of over six million people, there area actually people who, with a straight face, argue that only one airport should have international service. Sorta silly, really.

Of course, it is not just about Houston-area travelers - but if it were, the distance IAH is from so much of the area is a real issue; it does not have the benefit of being very centrally located like DFW is in its market area.

So United wants MORE government help in suppressing competition? Like a combined three trips through bankruptcy court is not enough?

Things that make you say, "hmmm..."



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineJerseyguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3154 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 79):
Maybe we should have left the 686 million we put up for the current expansion and told the city of Houston keep their 288 and pull the rest out their backside. Aaaaaaand told them to have a good one. I'm sure WN would fill in the entire void right ?

Sure you should have because we all know you didnt gain anything from the deal. That was just a nice gift to the City of Houston, right?



Frontier Early Returns Ascent Status| Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 88, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 85):
When the company wants to make money.

And that makes it the publics responsibility to pony up to provide it right? Wrong again!

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 85):
Welcome back to 1965?

You cannot possibly be serious with this weak argument? It contradicts everything about free enterprise.

There is a reason why the airline industry is so heavily regulated, and it has nothing to do with free enterprise.



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlineusflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3014 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 88):

Anyway, why should the public be responsible for a portion of that construction at IAH that is used by 1 airline?

There is enough demand that they can justify building an additional $1 billion dollar terminal but not enough that Southwest can an build a 5 gate international terminal?

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 79):

Pack up and leave? Where would UA move all those Central and South America flights to? Denver? IAH is their only southern hub.



My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 90, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2959 times:

Quoting cjpark (Reply 88):
And that makes it the publics responsibility to pony up to provide it right? Wrong again!

Well first of all, Southwest is footing the bill. Second of all, the PFCs incurred for the use of the FIS that is COMMON USE at both IAH and HOU benefit my city - so I'm for it.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 88):
There is a reason why the airline industry is so heavily regulated, and it has nothing to do with free enterprise.

Uh, its not that heavily regulated...remember deregulation.

Quoting usflyguy (Reply 89):
There is enough demand that they can justify building an additional $1 billion dollar terminal but not enough that Southwest can an build a 5 gate international terminal?

Exactly. I have yet to see a legitimate argument against Southwest starting international ops from Hobby. Whether you are for or against WN, there is no legally binding defense against it. If the city prevents funds from going to moving and adding to the existing FIS at HOU then how much revenue would be missed out on when WN diverts those international resources elsewhere. UA is not going to add capacity to Latin America, maybe a few new routes here and there, but there is no incentive to dump capacity and lower their outrageous fares in Houston.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 91, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2907 times:

Everyone thinks WN will come in and offer drastically lower fares on HOU-SAL (for example)....WN may lower their fares....but just lowering them $100 would go a great way in stimulating demand.

I know I (and my family) would probably travel to Houston from BZE 3X as much if we didn't have to pony up between $700 and $1000 for the 900 mile flight every time. And UA knows (in BZE's case anyway) that those flights are pretty full at those fares.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 92, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 91):
I know I (and my family) would probably travel to Houston from BZE 3X as much if we didn't have to pony up between $700 and $1000 for the 900 mile flight every time. And UA knows (in BZE's case anyway) that those flights are pretty full at those fares.

True that FLL isn't in the same county as MIA and aren't administrated by the same entity, but look how the foreign-based (and FLL) competition have stimulated travel to South East Florida. With the excuse of protecting CO Houston has made itself an expensive destination, not good for Houston but excellent for CO (now Chicago-based UA).
If fares to Houston were at par with MIA from many places in Latinamerica and Caribbean, lots of people would choose to travel to Houston as often they do to MIA/FLL.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 93, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2805 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 92):
If fares to Houston were at par with MIA from many places in Latinamerica and Caribbean, lots of people would choose to travel to Houston as often they do to MIA/FLL.

I would argue that from certain C. american destinations probably more often

Realistically, based on current UA service, I see WN with its 5 gates starting the following from HOU
3Xdaily MEX
2Xdaily to CUN, MTY, SAL, PTY, LIM (if its doable performance wise)
1Xday to SAP, GUA, SJO, BZE, MBJ, BOG, GDL

Possibilities also include
SDQ, KIN, POS, LIR, GCM and CZM

That would provide a nice base of flights to start from



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6792 posts, RR: 34
Reply 94, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2748 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 86):
This whole kerfufle is funny. With a metopoltan area of over six million people, there area actually people who, with a straight face, argue that only one airport should have international service. Sorta silly, really.

No, it's not.

It's about allocating finite resources, in this case, precious FIS personnel that are ALREADY short-handed. There has been a ton of investment into IAH to build it into an intl powerhouse since it had lagged most other major intl gateways (especially considering Houston is so large as you astutely note). When you work to build something of that scope, it's fruitless to then deliberately detract from those efforts, dilute the intl focus at a major gateway airport, and, most critically, attempt to steal away inspectors and Federal resources that can and should be best optimally used at IAH.

There are two critical issues that are important to note here, slightly nuanced, that are not getting the appropriate attention I think. It's not a fear of or aversion to competition per se. UA, and Co before it, have plenty of experience battling with and competing with LCCs, etc. But in this case--and this is the nuance--is that the otherwise even-playing field is NOT in fact level because of artificial constraints, those being Fed FIS/CBP resources.

It's a legit barrier to entry ultimately, is it not?


User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5499 posts, RR: 28
Reply 95, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2722 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 94):

There are two critical issues that are important to note here, slightly nuanced, that are not getting the appropriate attention I think. It's not a fear of or aversion to competition per se. UA, and Co before it, have plenty of experience battling with and competing with LCCs, etc. But in this case--and this is the nuance--is that the otherwise even-playing field is NOT in fact level because of artificial constraints, those being Fed FIS/CBP resources.

This is, without a doubt, the single most substantive basis for discussion.

Hobby is already, and will remain, a Customs Rights airport. If there is a demand for international service which is substantial enough to support Southwest’s planned international ops from KHOU (presumably significant, since they do not typically do things in small measures), then the mandatory infrastructure will have to be provided. If CBP understaffs any facility, wherever it might be, that’s a political problem which should be immediately and aggressively addressed, but is certainly no basis for denial of otherwise-needed air service.

Don’t forget: CBP is infrastructure, the instrument of policy - not the creator thereof.

So, it is an issue, but not a barrier. Now would be the time to aggressively work with federal policy makers to ensure that any shortages of qualified CBP personnel are rectified. Maybe take a little bit of DHS' bullet budget?



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 96, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 94):
No, it's not.

It's about allocating finite resources, in this case, precious FIS personnel that are ALREADY short-handed. There has been a ton of investment into IAH to build it into an intl powerhouse since it had lagged most other major intl gateways (especially considering Houston is so large as you astutely note). When you work to build something of that scope, it's fruitless to then deliberately detract from those efforts, dilute the intl focus at a major gateway airport, and, most critically, attempt to steal away inspectors and Federal resources that can and should be best optimally used at IAH.

There are two critical issues that are important to note here, slightly nuanced, that are not getting the appropriate attention I think. It's not a fear of or aversion to competition per se. UA, and Co before it, have plenty of experience battling with and competing with LCCs, etc. But in this case--and this is the nuance--is that the otherwise even-playing field is NOT in fact level because of artificial constraints, those being Fed FIS/CBP resources.

Yet there are airports that have very few international flights...SAT, MDW, MSY, TPA that are completely overstaffed with FIS personnel.

This is a policy issue....



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4254 posts, RR: 6
Reply 97, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2622 times:

If I may weigh in here. Regardless of the level of airline service at HOU...it is always going to exist as an airport regardless of the amount of airline service at the airport, just like DAL, MDW, and BUR to name similar types of airports. The reason for this is even without the airline service, with the amount of corporate aviation out there, they need for those airports exist. That aside, lets now say that an airline like Southwest wants to serve Houston. Southwest will need a terminal for said operations. Now we can either build that terminal at HOU or IAH for the same amount of money. Southwest chooses to build said terminal at HOU. I don't see the issue with this. Southwest has made a decision that they can serve Houston better from HOU than they can IAH. And because the terminal costs are the same at either airport (In this case WN is footing the bill), really CJParks argument about split airports doesn't hold water with me. HOU can handle it, it doesn't cost anyone any more money at either place, and there is no NIMBYism in play here that I can think of.


The reason it was a much bigger deal at DAL is because DAL and DFW are operated by different groups. Both airports definitely had the infastructure. But by staying at DAL and not moving to DFW, DFW doesn't get landing fees and PFC's and all the other benefits from WN, and by default, AA gets the shaft as well. Here in HOU, the airports are all run by the same authority, which means that the there is no revenue gained or lost by either keeping WN at HOU, or moving them to IAH, and in that case, allowing WN to run their own business the way they choose to, is prudent in this case, and the constitution of the US does not allow one airport to be favored over another.

Also think about this. Allegiant, which for years has been the most profitable airline in the country, chose to serve Phoenix via Mesa, and not Sky Harbor. NK has done the same thing. Allegiant tried to shift SFB service to MCO, but couldn't make money so they went back to SFB for good. There are plenty of more examples of this. Is this also wrong?


User currently offlineusflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 98, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2493 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 97):

You are wrong! Why? Because UA says so!

So... If WN starts international service at IAH, they can handle the additional traffic with the same number of gates and FIS/CBP officers as they have now? That seems to be what UA is saying by stating that WN should go international from there. If not, what's the big deal? They're being selfish and they want any additional officers destined for Houston to go to IAH.



My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
User currently offlinecjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 99, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2265 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 90):
Well first of all, Southwest is footing the bill. Second of all, the PFCs incurred for the use of the FIS that is COMMON USE at both IAH and HOU benefit my city - so I'm for it.

Who pays the PFC's? The public! No matter how you spin it the public always pays whether in use fees or taxes.

Again since when does an airline wanting something make it a necessity?

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 90):
Uh, its not that heavily regulated...remember deregulation.

Ever hear of the Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration?



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12981 posts, RR: 100
Reply 100, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2004 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Southwest is going to start international expansion. Their 1st choice is HOU. If that is denied, their 2nd choice will be another city!

"Southwest will continue to expand internationally at other U.S. cities if it cannot do so at Hobby, leading to fewer local air travelers at Hobby, diversion of connecting passengers from Houston and the loss of associated economic benefit," Diaz wrote.

Quote from From:
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...ouston-aviation-director-side.html

So the question is, for city of Houston, does it benefit them more to open the required facilities at HOU or to force WN to hub at another city? Seriously, without the connections HOU offers, international flights out of Houston for WN would be trivial. They would instead launch service from another airport in most likely another state.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 73):
The WN network is going through HOU. That is where passengers will connect. This really isn't that difficult to understand.

  

WN is obviously going to launch international service from airports that they already have a significant presence. I'm actually surprised they didn't start from either FLL, BWI, MCO, or LAX (terminal 2?). Either HOU provides the FIS and associated services, or WN starts the service elsewhere and offers Houston O&D traffic connections elsewhere (e.g., FLL to the Caribbean).

Whichever airport launches international service from is likely to gain the most connections and thus the most jobs. Now since WN flies out of MDW, Dallas is out of the consideration for obvious reasons.

How final is this decision? What other steps must be passed before WN is able to launch international service from HOU?

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 101, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1914 times:

So how long is going to take to have that International concourse @ HOU ready?


I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6792 posts, RR: 34
Reply 102, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1889 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 95):
Don’t forget: CBP is infrastructure, the instrument of policy - not the creator thereof.

So, it is an issue, but not a barrier. Now would be the time to aggressively work with federal policy makers to ensure that any shortages of qualified CBP personnel are rectified. Maybe take a little bit of DHS' bullet budget?
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 96):
This is a policy issue....

For both comments, however, it's my contention that this is a barrier and a legitimate one. You are both correct that there is a policy aspect to this, but the execution of it is a real concern. We'd like to think that this business is unregulated, but that's a misnomer and has been since so-called 'deregulation'. There are few barriers to entry for anyone to start an airline, but there ARE legitimate and real issues pertaining to scarcity and personnel allocation, Federal budgeting and staffing, etc.

This is a huge issue. History shows that when it comes to CBP staffing, it's very much a zero-sum game: there won't be incremental headcount for this, which means they're coming from IAH in all likelihood which means every other airline--UA included--will be inconvenienced as a result. So for those who want to make the fairness argument, that knife cuts both ways.


User currently offline737tanker From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 261 posts, RR: 0
Reply 103, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1820 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 101):
So how long is going to take to have that International concourse @ HOU ready?


It will most likely happen faster than it is going to take for WN to fix their IT so it can handle international reservations!

[Edited 2012-04-16 10:03:31]

User currently offlineIAHworldflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1798 times:

So most of the argument against WN opening up international service from HOU comes down to the amount of FIS agents needed and whether these agents will be pulled from IAH. I could see this as a legitimate argument, however, under re-disricting IAH will continue to be in Sheila Jackson Lee's 18th district, and it looks like Gene Green will take over HOU from Pete Olsen. Anyone who has lived in Houston for a while knows that both Jackson-Lee and Green are very good about bringing home federal dollars ( pork) for their districts. They also have both stayed in office for a very long time, despite the fact that they are Democrats in a very Republican state by providing above average constituent services. Were HOU to get the go ahead for FIS facilities, I would expect both of these politicians to insure that staffing dollars were inserted in the federal budget that did not cannibalize the staff levels at IAH.
Another point which I have not seen discussed much here is that HOU has a catchment area, that while overlapping with IAH, is certainly distinct for a large population within the Houston-Galveston MSA. For some living in Pearland, League City, or Friendswood, the drive to IAH is 40-50 miles or more. I know that Houston is no New York, but if you can imagine people in Morristown, NJ being told their only option for international flights was JFK, they would not be happy. And since IAH and HOU are operated by a single entity ( HAS), just like the PANYNJ operates EWR and JFK, the revenue streams equal out and are a net plus for the airport operators. Since CO ( UA) discontinued their commuter service to EFD several years ago, that market is ceded more and more to WN at HOU.


User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1148 posts, RR: 1
Reply 105, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1764 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 37):
Quoting commavia (Reply 37):
Quoting commavia (Reply 37):

All that you SAY is True HOWEVER look at the finer Point?? IF Hoston OVERTLY ignores UAL's concerns? Then UAL has NO reason other than to continue the South American International service the Hub is in PLACE for and the PRIME reason FOR the Merger,,and ALL future international service to Europe OR Asia can be TAG end flights TO IAH and they need NOT originate @ IAH.. and that Includes the proposed IAH-AKL B787 flight than can be flown just as easily out of LAX. and connected IAH TO lax.. Can't it?? I mean if it's about what CAN be done?? There ALSO sems to be some misconception that Moving the whq to Chicago was a choice... It WASN'T!! Smisek agreed TO that condition because the BOD at
UAL said this is the WAY it WAS GOING to Be..(ergo the 55-45% split in owenership) I believe that's why Larry Kellner departed so abruptly.Kellner was a SEASONED veteran who could have run the combined UAL effectively. Tilton and Smisek are " Pitch Men." Neithe rRan or Run United day to day. Hell Nobody actually KNOWS What they REALLY did or DO!!


User currently offlineIAHworldflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 106, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1734 times:

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 105):
Kellner was a SEASONED veteran who could have run the combined UAL effectively. Tilton and Smisek are " Pitch Men." Neithe rRan or Run United day to day.

These men's backgrounds are what's important. Kellner had been the CEO of a California bank before being recruited to CO by Gordan Bethune. Smisek has always been a lawyer and finance man. Kellner had the "big picture" experience of running a large organization, while Smisek tends to have a focus on the numbers. Strictly my opinion, but I think Larry did a better job of building teamwork within the organization.
As to you other point, if UA pulls the AKL service, it won't be because WN is flying Mom, Dad, and the 3 kids to a beach vacation in Cancun. If the AKL service makes Smisek money, he will keep it. If not, then oh well. The only thing UA is worried about is their high margins on near Latin American services due to competition. There's something out of whack when a ticket to BZE costs as much as a ticket to Paris.


User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 107, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 100):
WN is obviously going to launch international service from airports that they already have a significant presence. I'm actually surprised they didn't start from either FLL, BWI, MCO, or LAX (terminal 2?). Either HOU provides the FIS and associated services, or WN starts the service elsewhere and offers Houston O&D traffic connections elsewhere (e.g., FLL to the Caribbean).

Whichever airport launches international service from is likely to gain the most connections and thus the most jobs. Now since WN flies out of MDW, Dallas is out of the consideration for obvious reasons.

How final is this decision? What other steps must be passed before WN is able to launch international service from HOU?

FLL is not an option for WN. WN have publicly stated that the want a middle off the USA / gulf coast airport for their int' ops. They have publicly stated that they will use AUS or SAT if HOU doesn't want to play ball. Right now IAH is a nightmare in the international FIS line certain times of the day...if WN were to (hypothetically) open at AUS (Vs HOU) at is was a breeze you would see a lot of traffic get diverted. That would definitely be worse for HAS and Houston in general than having an International terminal at HOU.

For these reasons I see this a done deal.

Quoting 737tanker (Reply 103):
It will most likely happen faster than it is going to take for WN to fix their IT so it can handle international reservations!

A close friend of mine who works at HOU tells me, HOU could have a temp facility ready in about 8 months.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 108, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1694 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 107):
A close friend of mine who works at HOU tells me, HOU could have a temp facility ready in about 8 months.

For what I've seen of HOU, if they're willing to set for temporary F.I.S. in 8 weeks HOU could get one, albeit for only one arrival every 60-75 min.
See the kind of in-terminal International gates w/ F.I.S. airports like CHS, ORF, MKE, ELP, TUS (just as examples) have.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 109, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1635 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 108):
For what I've seen of HOU, if they're willing to set for temporary F.I.S. in 8 weeks HOU could get one, albeit for only one arrival every 60-75 min.
See the kind of in-terminal International gates w/ F.I.S. airports like CHS, ORF, MKE, ELP, TUS (just as examples) have.

They need top have 3 gates arrival minimum to start. Departures can go from any gate. The real issue is not immigration. It is CPB and secure baggage claim



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12981 posts, RR: 100
Reply 110, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1610 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 107):
FLL is not an option for WN. WN have publicly stated that the want a middle off the USA / gulf coast airport for their int' ops. They have publicly stated that they will use AUS or SAT if HOU doesn't want to play ball.

Interesting. Than 'coastal' international operations will be a future growth mode.

Oh, you probably noticed my typo. DAL not MDW... oops.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 107):
For these reasons I see this a done deal.

I agree. I was trying to lay out the 'game theory' as to why Houston (or the Houston FAA) not providing this position would be at a loss. Where WN launches international service is 'annointed' to receive quite a bit of expanion.

Quoting IAHworldflyer (Reply 104):
I could see this as a legitimate argument, however, under re-disricting IAH will continue to be in Sheila Jackson Lee's 18th district, and it looks like Gene Green will take over HOU from Pete Olsen.

Interesting point... this will ensure job growth.  
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 107):
HOU could have a temp facility ready in about 8 months.

Thank you. I'm not sure if that is quick or slow... but it sounds reasonable for a government process.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
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...
JetBlue In Houston, TX (HOU) posted Sat Jul 22 2006 19:19:32 by InTheSky74
Can HOU Handle International Flights? posted Fri Apr 21 2006 05:44:39 by Luisde8cd
International Gate @ HOU? posted Sun Dec 11 2005 17:12:15 by 2travel2know
Midwest - Start Serv To HOU (Houston) posted Mon Jul 11 2005 17:54:41 by Saigonhouston
WPost: Dulles Preparing For International Growth posted Sat Mar 31 2012 08:18:33 by washingtonian
Bizarre Find At Miami International Customs posted Fri Mar 23 2012 13:43:28 by flymia
Houston Mayor Complains About UA Delay posted Wed Mar 21 2012 01:35:17 by planenutz
Southwest HOU To South America? Yes! posted Fri Mar 16 2012 15:12:03 by type-rated
Four Aircraft Hit By Lightning Near Houston posted Sun Mar 11 2012 16:31:02 by LGWflyer
Cambridge Gets International Scheduled Route... posted Fri Mar 9 2012 09:14:24 by Pe@rson