Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Chico California Seeks LAX Flights  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24905 posts, RR: 46
Posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

On the heels of ACV trying to get a LAX flight, a business group in Chico are trying to drum up interest in linking the community with LAX.

Chico today has 4 United Express SFO flights, and wants a link to Southern California as well.

Chico’s proximity to Sacramento (~80-miles) have made previous attempts including even having a Federal SCASD grant in hand difficult to attract new air service.

Anyhow the folks in Chico now say they are in talks with Allegiant, Horizon and Skywest to try to get something going in the next year.


News story:
http://www.khsltv.com/

=

[Edited 2012-04-17 09:41:37]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6787 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2607 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Chico’s proximity to Sacramento (~80-miles) have made previous attempts including even having a Federal SCASD grant in hand difficult to attract new air service.

Let's all re-read that one and then lock the thread.  


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24905 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2314 times:

For fun I pulled of their 2007 SCASD grant information for an idea if what type of market Chico has.

They consider their catchment area is 260,000 people. About 90% of the areas air needs leak to other airports – primarily to SMF, and about 13% to folks driving to the Bay Area airports to catch flights.

Back when they got the SCASD grant for a Los Angeles service they projected the demand for LA Basin from the catchment area being 66,000 annual enplanements. That’s basically 180/day.

So even if Chico manages to reduce leakage to 75% for SoCal service that would only be ~45 people using a Chico per day. Barely a single 50-seat RJ, and very unlikely considering any viable service would need atleast 2x daily to have any schedule viability, which would mean 2 RJs with 50% LF essentially. Not a good proposition without lots of guaranteed cash for any operator to offset losses.

And yes, the biggest hurdle would be to overcome the attractiveness of the 5 airlines that already offer 44 competitive daily LA Basin flights 80-miles down the road at SMF.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinecic777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2173 times:

For me this is one of those "I wish" moments. I won't believe it until it actually comes to fruition. The news article says this has been talked about for a decade, but actually it has been talked about for well over a decade. The last version I remember was the city manager and the chair of the airport commission were teaming up to talk to UA, QX, and I think US.

This business group does make a few good points. SFO is one of the worst delay-prone airports in the nation. So why take the chance of booking a flight from CIC that connects through SFO? Obviously enough people do it or OO would have discontinued the service a long time ago. Why not just drive to SMF instead?

The flip side to driving to SMF is that the highway isn't all that great. It is two lanes for the better part of the drive, and it goes through a lot of small towns reducing the speed limit.

That being said QX recently discontinued service to RDD and ACV. So why would they want to give CIC a try? G4 also gave RDD a shot and discontinued the service although granted that was to LAS.

If they do manage to land the service I just hope the airline doesn't pull a MQ at ACV and use times that just don't present any additional opportunities to the travelling public. I hope for the best, but I'm not holding my breath.


User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5892 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1939 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
And yes, the biggest hurdle would be to overcome the attractiveness of the 5 airlines that already offer 44 competitive daily LA Basin flights 80-miles down the road at SMF.

Don't forget that the drive between CIC and SMF is between 1-1/2 to 2 hours down 99. It essentially drops you off into SMF. It would be tough for CIC to get any takers.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1757 times:

I just can't see this. OO's reduction in Brasilia capacity really damages the ability to run these flights.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):
I just can't see this. OO's reduction in Brasilia capacity really damages the ability to run these flights

I understand from my thread on OO flying more for AS/QX that the EMB-120 is on the outs, and will be phased out, I am unsure of what, if any other aircraft in this category (30 pax) is being considered. OO is going to have to make some decisions on whether to try and find a replacement for the EMB-120 or use CR2's and drop many cities that won't be able to support those CR2's, much like QX has done up here when the Q200 left the fleet. SeaPort type airlines are not the answer, IMO, there is a market for these smaller places like CIC, and someone with capital and some good alliances, like AS, UA, DL and hook smaller cities out on the west coast to The bigger regional airports like SEA, PDX, SMF, SFO, LAX, SAN. I think QX is doing great down in California, I'm sure most airlines have talks with cities to test waters in new areas. Heck at one time QX was supposed to start HIO-SEA 4 x daily with Q200's. But despite the Hi-Tech out there it wouldn't support those flights, even considering Hillsboro, Beaverton and Forest Grove populations.

[Edited 2012-04-18 03:07:16]


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1733 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 6):

Yeah, its pretty ridiculous that the airlines aren't paying attention to this market. The CR2 has no place in the modern market, but smaller props have plenty of use in higher yielding, short hops to hubs.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24905 posts, RR: 46
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1598 times:

Still would a 2x daily Prop even have a chance against those 44 flights to the LA basin from SMF?

In Chico's case it seems to be geography and relative closeness to SMF is the hard selling point for airlines. The attractiveness and leakage to SMF will be an ever present hurdle.

Back to 30-seat props, their economics are still do not work that well -- for example OO says its E120 direct operating cost is about $1,800/hr. CIC-LAX would be around 1:30 block hours. That means assuming a 80% LF, the one-way fare would need to be $105 to break even on the trip. Not very realistic when today's SMF-LA basin average one-way fare is $81. And the OO $1,800 does not cover the additional things ground handling, airport and traffic(eg GDS) cost.

So without a nice subsidy I don't see even small prop working.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinecic777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1502 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Still would a 2x daily Prop even have a chance against those 44 flights to the LA basin from SMF?

It might

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In Chico's case it seems to be geography and relative closeness to SMF is the hard selling point for airlines. The attractiveness and leakage to SMF will be an ever present hurdle.

  

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
for example OO says its E120 direct operating cost is about $1,800/hr. CIC-LAX would be around 1:30 block hours. That means assuming a 80% LF, the one-way fare would need to be $105 to break even on the trip. Not very realistic when today's SMF-LA basin average one-way fare is $81. And the OO $1,800 does not cover the additional things ground handling, airport and traffic(eg GDS) cost.

Let's use the average SMF-LAX fare of $81. Is that the real total cost? Figure roughly 90 miles to drive Chico to Sacramento. Assume the average automobile gets 30 mpg and Chico to Sacramento is 90 miles with gas at $4 a gallon. That is $24 roundtrip taking the cost of that $81 ticket to $105. Factor in parking for a day in the economy lot at $10 a day. Now one is looking at $115 if they are there just for one day. Add another $10 a day, and that total cost can start adding up real quick. There is no parking fee that I know of at CIC.

As I said in my previous post I'd really like to see this happen, but I'm also reasonable enough to not hold my breath. It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out. Who knows? If the service gets started it may surprise us all.

With all this said I find it funny in other threads when others reference cities in northern CA they almost always overlook CIC.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1481 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):

Still would a 2x daily Prop even have a chance against those 44 flights to the LA basin from SMF?

Sure, for the same reasons SBA attracts flights. You also likely have enough government traffic to back fill, with a major CSU campus in Chico.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Back to 30-seat props, their economics are still do not work that well -- for example OO says its E120 direct operating cost is about $1,800/hr. CIC-LAX would be around 1:30 block hours. That means assuming a 80% LF, the one-way fare would need to be $105 to break even on the trip. Not very realistic when today's SMF-LA basin average one-way fare is $81. And the OO $1,800 does not cover the additional things ground handling, airport and traffic(eg GDS) cost.

Actually, a $105 OW average wouldn't be bad at all. Not to mention that OO/UAX tends to get even more for such trips if they are O&D. Tried pricing FAT-LAX lately?



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlinecic777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1431 times:

Quoting cic777 (Reply 9):
That is $24 roundtrip taking the cost of that $81 ticket to $105. Factor in parking for a day in the economy lot at $10 a day. Now one is looking at $115 if they are there just for one day. Add another $10 a day, and that total cost can start adding up real quick. There is no parking fee that I know of at CIC.

I need to pay more attention sometimes.  

Actually the $24 I said should be $12 since it is one way. Still when one factors in for their time (especially the business person), I still think it could be worthwhile.

LAXintl, I agree with you for the mostpart. I think you make some valid points.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24905 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1221 times:

Its $81 average one-way excluding taxes and fees. Difference would be $48 on a round-trip.

And in reality that back of napkin $105 o/w is the break-even fare for the EMB-120 direct operating cost. Add in airport, ground handling, overhead, distribution charges etc, plus a wee bit profit margin (eg DOT allows 5% mark up on EAS) that needed fare will certainly be even higher for a direct CIC flight.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
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...
BHX Seeks Direct Flights To China posted Tue Dec 6 2011 18:59:49 by MCO2BRS
Transaero Former LAX Flights Schedule posted Mon Oct 25 2010 11:19:24 by airlittoralguy
American Eagle SAF-LAX Flights A Failure? posted Sun Mar 14 2010 19:29:47 by 1337Delta764
DL Move LAX Flights To JFK T4 posted Mon Feb 23 2009 22:15:14 by RetroLivery
V Australia Confirms Date For LAX Flights. 3X-week posted Mon Dec 22 2008 06:53:49 by Juventus
Alternatives To V Australia Canc Syd/lax Flights posted Thu Oct 2 2008 18:15:39 by REALDEAL
CX To Discontinue 1 Of Their 3 Daily LAX Flights posted Mon Aug 11 2008 17:12:52 by LACA773
BBC News To Be Shown On AF LHR-LAX Flights posted Sun Apr 6 2008 04:44:40 by TUIflyer
SIA To Cancel TPE-LAX Flights posted Tue Mar 25 2008 02:50:58 by Flying Belgian
DL Extra LAX Flights For Thanksgiving? posted Sun Nov 25 2007 21:01:28 by Modesto2