Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More AA/US Merger News  
User currently offlinemattya9 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 130 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 18047 times:

Not a lot of new information here. However, it is stated in the article the PHX hub would remain the same size so it can take care of the domestic traffic out west while (assuming) LAX handles the international traffic and heavier cross country traffic. Of course this is all taken with a grain of salt and I'll believe it when I see it. Thoughts everyone?

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...ays-inches-toward-merger-deal.html

OPS 5


"You can do anything once."
101 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22931 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 18051 times:

Would Doug Parker say anything different to the Phoenix media?


I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineN737AA From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 17969 times:

Ask the folks in STL how that worked out for them....STL was to be a reliever hub for ORD and was supposed to grow...never happened. STL is just another spoke now.

N737AA


User currently offlinemilemaster From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1064 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 17966 times:

These AA/US merger threads are going to be fun to read 3 - 4 years from now.

User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 17404 times:

Quoting mattya9 (Thread starter):
it is stated in the article the PHX hub would remain the same size so it can take care of the domestic traffic out west while (assuming) LAX handles the international traffic and heavier cross country traffic.



If the merger does take place, PHX will not survive as a hub in the long term.

The bread & butter of the US hub in PHX is connecting the west coast to points east. Both AA & and surprisingly US have a very small presence in the Rocky Mountain states. What is the point of a PHX hub when the combined carrier has a very limited presence in the Rocky Mountain region?

DFW & ORD already exist as hubs to connect the west coast to destinations in the Midwest and East. Therefore, approximately 2/3 to 3/4 of US's connecting traffic in PHX would be siphoned off by ORD and DFW. LAX already serves as a intra-west connecting hub. It is not in an ideal geographic location, but PHX is not much better.

It would be a different story if the combined carrier had a massive presence in the Rocky Mountain states such as DL or UA, but they don't. Based on the current combined route map of US and AA, the only cities that really would benefit from keeping a PHX hub would be SLC, ABQ, DEN, BOI, ELP, TUC, DRO, GJT, and JAC. These are not enough destinations to warrant the expense of maintaining a hub in PHX.


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4057 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 17342 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
What is the point of a PHX hub when the combined carrier has a very limited presence in the Rocky Mountain region?
Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
It would be a different story if the combined carrier had a massive presence in the Rocky Mountain states such as DL or UA, but they don't. Based on the current combined route map of US and AA, the only cities that really would benefit from keeping a PHX hub would be SLC, ABQ, DEN, BOI, ELP, TUC, DRO, GJT, and JAC. These are not enough destinations to warrant the expense of maintaining a hub in PHX.

Maybe the new airline would choose to restart service in the intermountain West in the absence of a UA codeshare. HP used to serve quite a few markets in the region that were abandoned shortly after the US merger. I may be making an assumption, but my impression of an airline that truly wants to be a domestic powerhouse is that they would want a comprehensive, cross-country network especially in cases where they cannot rely on a codeshare. In this instance, the intermountain West would be the only real "hole" in the new AA network.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7583 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 17344 times:

Quoting mattya9 (Thread starter):
Not a lot of new information here. However, it is stated in the article the PHX hub would remain the same size so it can take care of the domestic traffic out west while (assuming) LAX handles the international traffic and heavier cross country traffic. Of course this is all taken with a grain of salt and I'll believe it when I see it. Thoughts everyone?

DL told the same thing to MEM and CVG.

That said, I dont think PHX suffers the same fate as MEM and CVG. I also dont think it will be the same size. I see a hub of about 200 departures of which about 70 are mainline. Mainline cities served would be those on the Coasts and other hub cities. RJ destinations served would be those in the Mountain West, Southwest, and Midwest.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineAAIL86 From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17237 times:

"Gov. Jan Brewer and other political leaders have launched an effort to keep the headquarters in Arizona."

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...ard-merger-deal.html#ixzz24V2aG9Z6

Maybe she could also ask him about restarting PHX-HNL-NGO with a couple leased A380s   



Next
User currently onlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7492 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17166 times:

Quoting milemaster (Reply 3):
These AA/US merger threads are going to be fun to read 3 - 4 years from now.

We should make a book

Quoting mattya9 (Thread starter):
Not a lot of new information here. However, it is stated in the article the PHX hub would remain the same size so it can take care of the domestic traffic out west while (assuming) LAX handles the international traffic and heavier cross country traffic.

This is what I've been saying would happen. PHX has too much of a hub here and, coupled with O&D to PHX during peak season, and the population here, US would be very stupid to close the hub. LAX is an obvious int'l destination and maybe with the dual west coast hub there would be an exponential increase of LAX-PHX routes (maybe one every half hour) to accommodate this.

Given this formula too, maybe PHX would see some of AA's 787s do some international service as well.


If this happens (as it rightfully should,) then the AA/US merger would be beneficial to DFW, LAX, and PHX altogether. LAX is too big to handle any sort of expansion, PHX is ripe for expansion, and DFW is fine where it's at.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineflyingsux From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 50 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17052 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
If this happens (as it rightfully should,) then the AA/US merger would be beneficial to DFW, LAX, and PHX altogether. LAX is too big to handle any sort of expansion, PHX is ripe for expansion, and DFW is fine where it's at.

I don't agree - what purpose would having a hub between LAX and DFW serve, especially so close to LA? Ask anyone who thinks CLE's days are numbered...


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 16969 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
If the merger does take place, PHX will not survive as a hub in the long term.

I still say it depends on where the hypothetical resulting airline's costs ended up, but I think Parker's emphatic and categorical statements that the hub would remain the same size are a total fantasy. Politicians are stupid, so they'll buy it, but it's a fantasy. I stand by my prediction from a month ago that the best case scenario for Phoenix would likely end up being a hub with daily departures in the low 200s, about 1/3 being mainline. (Some analysts apparently agree.)

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
It would be a different story if the combined carrier had a massive presence in the Rocky Mountain states such as DL or UA, but they don't. Based on the current combined route map of US and AA, the only cities that really would benefit from keeping a PHX hub would be SLC, ABQ, DEN, BOI, ELP, TUC, DRO, GJT, and JAC. These are not enough destinations to warrant the expense of maintaining a hub in PHX.

Yep.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 5):
Maybe the new airline would choose to restart service in the intermountain West in the absence of a UA codeshare. HP used to serve quite a few markets in the region that were abandoned shortly after the US merger.

Where? Where could they plausibly add that they don't already fly? Colorado Springs maybe? I just don't see much opportunity for growth there.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 5):
I may be making an assumption, but my impression of an airline that truly wants to be a domestic powerhouse is that they would want a comprehensive, cross-country network especially in cases where they cannot rely on a codeshare. In this instance, the intermountain West would be the only real "hole" in the new AA network.

A hypothetical "new AA" need not have a huge presence in the Rocky Mountain region in order to have a "comprehensive, cross-country network." From a strategic perspective, the Rockies are by far the least important region in the country for an airline to have a presence in. The region is vast and, outside of a few population centers, pretty much the most sparsely populated piece of the entire mainland U.S. The only way for a legacy airline to have a major presence in that region is to have a hub in Denver, or failing that, Salt Lake City. Failing that, there is no alternative. AA - with or without a merger - will be relegated to serving the region from the periphery, with flights nonstop to hub markets outside the area like DFW, ORD, etc. And that's just fine. An airline must have a presence in the Upper Midwest to have a "comprehensive, cross-country network." They also must have a presence in the Northeast. The Rockies are not critical.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 7):
"Gov. Jan Brewer and other political leaders have launched an effort to keep the headquarters in Arizona."

Good luck with that.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
Given this formula too, maybe PHX would see some of AA's 787s do some international service as well.

I doubt it. If United can barely manage a longhaul operation from Denver, which is a far more important market, and a substantially larger hub, with far more connectivity, I see virtually nothing out of Phoenix. The BA 747 is more than sufficient.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
LAX is too big to handle any sort of expansion, PHX is ripe for expansion, and DFW is fine where it's at.

Not quite.

First off, LAX actually does have room for expansion, and will soon have more - although I agree that LAX is not an ideal place for hub to flow people between "the west and the rest" (of the country, that is). PHX is "ripe for expansion" in terms of facilities, perhaps, but it's market is low-yielding and economy has been hit hard. DFW is the one that has both the facility and economic fundamentals for major growth.


User currently offlineAAIL86 From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 16853 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
If this happens (as it rightfully should,) then the AA/US merger would be beneficial to DFW, LAX, and PHX altogether. LAX is too big to handle any sort of expansion, PHX is ripe for expansion, and DFW is fine where it's at.

Well I certainly don't buy the theory that PHX is going to be de-hubbed ... but pray tell what kind of expansion are you thinking PHX is ripe for? I could see AA(US)/BA perhaps going twice daily on PHX-LHR (x2 332, maybe?) , but otherwise isn't that about it?

Quoting commavia (Reply 10):
Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 7):
"Gov. Jan Brewer and other political leaders have launched an effort to keep the headquarters in Arizona."

Good luck with that.

I was being sarcastic  

[Edited 2012-08-24 15:22:10]


Next
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7583 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 16722 times:

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 11):
Well I certainly don't buy the theory that PHX is going to be de-hubbed ... but pray tell what kind of expansion are you thinking PHX is ripe for? I could see AA(US)/BA perhaps going twice daily on PHX-LHR (x2 332, maybe?) , but otherwise isn't that about it?

Maybe a 777 to Hermosillo.  



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinecjpmaestro From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 16478 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 10):
First off, LAX actually does have room for expansion, and will soon have more - although I agree that LAX is not an ideal place for hub to flow people between "the west and the rest" (of the country, that is). PHX is "ripe for expansion" in terms of facilities, perhaps, but it's market is low-yielding and economy has been hit hard. DFW is the one that has both the facility and economic fundamentals for major growth.

One great thing about US Management and why they have been profitable and doing well during these times is because they are making their decisions on what makes economic sense to the airline. They aren't making decisions based on status or strategies that look good on paper, but make financial sense. That being said - in a US/AA combined entity I fully expect the US management team to be in charge and then if PHX is making money, it will stay. If routes or strategies out of LAX or DFW are not profitable, they will go. The routes in and out of PHX right now have to be profitable for the airline or they would go. This group would abandon the 'cornerstone strategy' quickly if it's made up of financial duds and if they can grow profitable operations out of PHX, then they will grow it.

One also has to argue that if they pull down the hub who would be there to pick up the slack? Phoenix is a major metropolitan city of nearly 4.5 million and growing and the airport is 14th busiest in the country (that may need some true-up, going by memory). There is demand here that 300+ US flight a day fill that someone would need to fly.


User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 888 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 16418 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
PHX has too much of a hub here and, coupled with O&D to PHX during peak season, and the population here, US would be very stupid to close the hub

As mentioned in other PHX threads, population size means nothing when it comes to yields. O&D can be handled fine by DL, UA, WN, and whats left of US to all snowbird cities during the winter time. It wouldn't be stupid, it would be prudent. For example I know that more than half of US' Hawaii flights are not profitable from PHX but its the only way they can maintain a presence in the market - these flights can be transferred to AA easily in LAX unless PHX will tolerate a fare increase to make these flights consistently profitable.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
PHX is ripe for expansion

PHX departures from 06 to 12 have fallen 9% for US. By comparison Charlotte is up 22%. With LGA winding down , PHX has become the most , if not close, to the most unprofitable hubs for US (US' words, not mine). So while yes, they might turn a small profit every year on PHX, if they can move a lot of the fleet to DFW and LAX for profitable expansion, why not.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 16393 times:

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 13):
and then if PHX is making money, it will stay.

And thus the question - will it be profitable? That is the central question.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 13):
If routes or strategies out of LAX or DFW are not profitable, they will go.

Obviously - that would be the case with or without a merger. The problem is that both of those places generate, in general, higher yields than PHX, and both are capable of handling, to one extent or another, virtually the exact same traffic flows that PHX does.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 13):
The routes in and out of PHX right now have to be profitable for the airline or they would go.

In the airline industry, it's virtually never that overly simplistic. But to use your simplified statement, again, the question is not whether PHX is profitable now. (Although, while I suspect PHX is profitable now, I also suspect it is the least profitable and lowest-yielding of USAirways' hubs.)

The real question is where PHX would stand at the "new AA," which is going to have substantially higher costs in various areas - including labor - than USAirways does now. Parker has made no secret of the USAirways strategy up to now: retrench to hubs they generally dominate, keep labor costs low, and use those lower costs to pay for the lower yields from their generally structurally disadvantaged hubs. Not sure that calculus will work post-merger.

In addition, much of the underlying logic and justification for a PHX hub goes away once a "new AA" has a viable alternative. USAirways today, with their "barbell" east/west network, has no alternative to PHX for accessing the western U.S. AA does.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 13):
One also has to argue that if they pull down the hub who would be there to pick up the slack?

Southwest.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 13):
Phoenix is a major metropolitan city of nearly 4.5 million and growing and the airport is 14th busiest in the country (that may need some true-up, going by memory). There is demand here that 300+ US flight a day fill that someone would need to fly.

Local demand is most definitely not filling those 300 flights. The PHX market alone, as low-yielding as it is compared with some other U.S. legacy airline hubs, could never profitably support anywhere near that amount of flights. Much of the capacity on those 300 flights are filled with connections - connections, again, that a "new AA" could either stop selling altogether (the lowest-yielding ones) or could easily shift to other hubs.


User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1559 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 16320 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 4):
If the merger does take place, PHX will not survive as a hub in the long term.

     

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
This is what I've been saying would happen. PHX has too much of a hub here and, coupled with O&D to PHX during peak season, and the population here, US would be very stupid to close the hub. LAX is an obvious int'l destination and maybe with the dual west coast hub there would be an exponential increase of LAX-PHX routes (maybe one every half hour) to accommodate this.

Realistically, just ask IAH about how promises to keep a big-city hub at full strength work out medium- to long-term. Things were fine for a while, then in 2012 IAH has begun to shrink. PHX will inevitably do the same. In fact, I would make a further analogy between the two to say that, like IAH, PHX is poorly located for a lot of domestic connecting traffic when you factor in that it will be sandwiched between company hubs at DFW and LAX after this hypothetical merger.


User currently offlineAAIL86 From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 16182 times:

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 16):
Realistically, just ask IAH about how promises to keep a big-city hub at full strength work out medium- to long-term. Things were fine for a while, then in 2012 IAH has begun to shrink. PHX will inevitably do the same. In fact, I would make a further analogy between the two to say that, like IAH, PHX is poorly located for a lot of domestic connecting traffic when you factor in that it will be sandwiched between company hubs at DFW and LAX after this hypothetical merger.

Not sure that's a fair comparison. Its true that there's been a very slight reduction at IAH by UA - but thats the result of UA punishing the city for its stance on WN at HOU. IAH has the among highest average fares in the country, mostly due to its robustly evergreen energy and marine traffic. PHX, however, has no such luxury. UA IAH-Europe/South America is massive, and thats with BA(2x 777), AF, KL, LH(1x 380), EK and QR providing international competition. PHX has one daily 744 - total.

Bottom line is - the very best outcome PHX can except (and I think I'm being a bit generous here) in the medium term is 225 daily hub flights on AA(US); and on the international side - perhaps 2x (332?) on PHX-LHR and maybe, just maybe in a dream scenario a JL 787 on PHX-NRT.... (did I also mention my DFW-HEL 787 dream?   ) Any more growth then then that would mean oil is back to $40 a barrel level.

As Commavia said, good luck with that.



Next
User currently offlineHiFlyerAS From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 944 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 16113 times:

PHX always struck me as a poor location for a hub unless you're going to Mexico. It's practically on the US-Mexico border and any city worth a darn would have n/s service to/from SEA, the Bay Area or LAX. The entire purpose of the US/AA merger talk is so Parker and gang can walk away from the PHX hub in favor of DFW.

User currently offlineiFlyLOTs From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 479 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day ago) and read 15522 times:

PHX really has no need to be a hub, others in the potential network (DFW, LAX and even ORD to an extent) can pick up the slack. What does it really offer to the network of the future airline? Not much that isn't already served through the other hubs.

I do wish to ask a question though, what would the fleet look like if this merger actually happens? I assume the MD-80s and 734s would be the first ones out as well as some of the older 757s and 767s, but what else would happen? And what would be moved to replace the MDs and 734s?



"...stay hungry, stay foolish" -Steve Jobs
User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1559 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 14916 times:

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 17):
Not sure that's a fair comparison. Its true that there's been a very slight reduction at IAH by UA - but thats the result of UA punishing the city for its stance on WN at HOU. IAH has the among highest average fares in the country, mostly due to its robustly evergreen energy and marine traffic. PHX, however, has no such luxury. UA IAH-Europe/South America is massive, and thats with BA(2x 777), AF, KL, LH(1x 380), EK and QR providing international competition. PHX has one daily 744 - total.

That wasn't meant to be taken too literally - just to draw the broad outline that PHX is certainly a larger city than say STL, MEM, CVG, CLE, etc., and that if a city the size of IAH can see some reducations (given the strengths you mention), then surely PHX is somewhat expendable. But it is true that there are some significant caveats as you point out.


User currently onlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7492 posts, RR: 18
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 14770 times:

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 11):
but pray tell what kind of expansion are you thinking PHX is ripe for? I

Latin American service, and I can't tell you how long the airport and community has been pressing for Asia service.

Rumors still flying like a swarm of bees about NRT service from US -_-



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinejporterfi From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 14743 times:

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 18):
PHX always struck me as a poor location for a hub unless you're going to Mexico. It's practically on the US-Mexico border and any city worth a darn would have n/s service to/from SEA, the Bay Area or LAX. The entire purpose of the US/AA merger talk is so Parker and gang can walk away from the PHX hub in favor of DFW.

  

This pretty much sums things up. PHX works now because US uses it as a gateway to cities on the West Coast and to compete with AA at DFW. However, if US and AA merged, DFW would prevail: it has a bigger O&D yeild, and is in a better location in terms of the entire country (and is also far enough from LAX that US/AA could build LAX up also). PHX, aside from flights from hubs which cater to O&D passengers would only serve smaller cities in the West (inland states) if US/AA did not have enough demand for flights from DFW (or LAX) to those cities. In that case, PHX would act as a funnel to generate enough capacity to those cities. But I'd say regional flights at best to smaller Western cities, and I actually don't even think that will happen.


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4057 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 14666 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 10):
Where? Where could they plausibly add that they don't already fly? Colorado Springs maybe? I just don't see much opportunity for growth there.
Quoting commavia (Reply 10):
It would be a different story if the combined carrier had a massive presence in the Rocky Mountain states such as DL or UA, but they don't. Based on the current combined route map of US and AA, the only cities that really would benefit from keeping a PHX hub would be SLC, ABQ, DEN, BOI, ELP, TUC, DRO, GJT, and JAC. These are not enough destinations to warrant the expense of maintaining a hub in PHX.

It depends on what you mean by plausible. If HP could serve all those markets pre-merger, I don't see why a huge new AA couldn't, with the entire domestic network to feed the routes. And yes, COS is an obvious add as well as BIL, GTF, PVU, and the Colorado ski markets which HP also used to serve. Throw in CPR, FMN and ROW, there is still FLG and RNO...saying that the reason not to serve these markets is because they aren't a major player in the region is a circular argument.

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 14):
With LGA winding down , PHX has become the most , if not close, to the most unprofitable hubs for US (US' words, not mine). So while yes, they might turn a small profit every year on PHX, if they can move a lot of the fleet to DFW and LAX for profitable expansion, why not.

PHX is easily the least profitable hub for US but it's a necessary one. Tell me how many routes could be effectively moved to LAX from PHX, taking into consideration that LAX has very little room for expansion. Maybe the Hawaii flights?


User currently onlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7492 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 14591 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 23):
Maybe the Hawaii flights?

Apparently most of those hawaii flights are heavily influenced by O&D



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
25 mattya9 : That's what I was thinking as well. Keep PHX for more of a domestic/Latin America hub and put the more profitable/popular routes in and out of LAX. I
26 commavia : Depends on what you mean by "entire domestic network." Because of Phoenix's generally terrible location (for everything other than connections in/out
27 AAIL86 : Pretty much every airport board worth beans presses for more service for their airport. MIA keeps talking a lot about Asia service- and they haven't
28 EricR : I still stand by my prediction from a month ago that the best case scenario for Phoenix would likely end up being a hub with daily departures in the l
29 klkla : That's the problem. They wouldn't be moving to LAX. They would be moving to #1 DFW and #2 ORD which make much more sense as connecting hubs than PHX.
30 LHCVG : I think you raise a good point we need to remember here. PHX might in fact make a decent reliever/complement to LAX in isolation, but when you have b
31 osubuckeyes : I agree RJs are not feasible for most PHX destinations for the very reasons you state here, hence the industry is trying to trend away from heavy RJ
32 wdleiser : Yet IAH is still UA 's largest hub. Flowing in some United birds that have the economy plus reduces seats in the IAH market. Also, cutting flights th
33 commavia : Two things: first, when I said "regional," I wasn't necessarily meaning just 50-seat RJs. I was thinking of some level of turboprop flying, and prima
34 phxa340 : You have stated this 3 times within the last 6 months and everytime I have provided with you the facts which you seemingly ignore. Less than half of
35 apodino : There is talk about Geography on here...but let me remind you people that PHL, which is US most profitable hub, is not exactly in a great geographical
36 tropix : PHX will go the way of CVG, MEM, PIT, STL... It's all about the bottom $ and anyone will say anything to drive the deal for US, and not for AA.
37 HPRamper : It won't, because it can't. Yeah, I could see a drawdown via losing all the LAX traffic (which would have its own flights to the major markets) and l
38 commavia : Wrong on both counts. PHL is, indeed, in a great geographical position. It is penetrated deep enough into the northeastern population cluster to pull
39 southwest737500 : Actually CLT is the most profitable
40 phxa340 : Not true , Kirby has said that DCA is .
41 PHX787 : If all three of you are gonna criticize me for having apparent false information, I too feel justified to say this: GET YOUR FACTS LINED UP TOO.
42 phxa340 : I posted exact O&D for Hawaii passengers on US. Not sure how more specific you want me to get . My posts include stats , yours never do .... Just
43 HPRamper : I never said PHX was on the coast. DL likewise doesn't have a hub on the coast, yet SLC serves as their hub for the West Coast and Mountain West and
44 PHX787 : This is what I keep referring to: US has perfect capabilities of operating a hub at LAX (like DL does) and at PHX (like SLC for DL) and DFW (like a s
45 LAXdude1023 : Outside of the few destinations it currently serves in Mexico, PHX has a zero percent chance of being a Latin America hub. Outside of Mexico, PHX has
46 lucky777 : The fact that you keep attempting to show the viability of a PHX hub, only to have it shot down by more intelligent reasons as to why it won't work s
47 commavia : Again - you're talking about hubs used to move people between the west and somewhere else. I was talking specifically about intra-west (and by that I
48 HPRamper : The entire point of what I was getting at is this: neither AA nor US has a "western" network nor a true west coast hub. As you mention, the only real
49 commavia : Yep - just as is basically the case now for AA, and USAirways. PHX, today, only provides meaningful connection opportunities between California and C
50 HiFlyerAS : You're right....not any more. The growing purpose of hubs is solely the moving people between mid-sized cities (or smaller) or onto international fli
51 hz747300 : It seems reasonable that US/AA would pull down. And I think the suggestion of 200 daily departures with only 1/3 mainline is the BEST case scenario. I
52 Post contains links and images phxa340 : Ignoring everyone else's comments because you simply don't like picture they paint is irrational but some things he states are accurate , like the fa
53 Cubsrule : . . . not to mention DFW or ORD. AA's decrepit 763s and US' equally awful 762s are both pretty good airplanes for ORD/DFW-Hawaii.
54 PHX787 : If they could, why don't they?
55 slcdeltarumd11 : Yeah plus SLC and DEN really don't need PHX to connect thru much with full hubs of their own. PHX would be much better to connect the passengers thru
56 HPRamper : Like I said... "In an interview Wednesday, US Airways President Scott Kirby listed, in order, the four most profitable major airline operations in th
57 HPRamper : I think that's an oversimplification. Just because a certain market has a hub doesn't mean everyone there will fly the hubbing carrier especially whe
58 phxa340 : Yes , I linked the article to prove your point. Guess I could have worded that better. Probably not the west coast as most cities have direct flights
59 commavia : True, but playing devil's advocate, the "rest of the country" that is feeding those PHX-Hawaii flights pretty much all has plenty of nonstop capacity
60 YankeesFan : Since US Air and AA are in different alliances. Would AA join Star or would US Air join Oneworld?
61 Flighty : Yeah but -- if Latin America keeps growing, and the USA relaxed transit visas somewhat, DFW actually could link Asia, Europe and North Am with Latin
62 EricR : The only problem with that analogy is that the UA/CO merger integration process is still in its infancy stages. It has taken DL 4 years to draw down
63 phxa340 : Parker has stated US is going to OneWorld if the merger happens. ... true , but they also need to look where they can send one of their planes to get
64 apodino : One thing to note here....I was reading an article that says US is currently operating more flights at PHX than AA is at LAX. Commavia has suggested t
65 flyingsux : Bringing it down to what CLE is now (and has been) seems very likely. In my opinion, it will serve a simuliar purpose in a combined US/AA merger as C
66 Tan Flyr : I would add the service from BFL & SBA to PHX to the list..for sure the BFL flights do well. SBA i have no info, maybe someone else does. maybe e
67 commavia : None. But then that's a moot point, because T4 could never even absorb the current US schedule at T1 as-is today. LAX is one of two major stations in
68 phxa340 : I think he is bringing this up with a valid reason. Because back in the day , many many FF's chose Star because they had 3 options Stateside. Since C
69 HPRamper : The difference is that MEM and CVG were completely replaceable. DL has stated CVG has been right-sized based solely on its O&D numbers and as suc
70 phxa340 : US Silver Status is so hopelessly devalued that why wouldn't its customers jump ship. WN gives frequent fliers for lower tier status more benefits th
71 HPRamper : Like I already mentioned, even with a pulldown, US (or AA) would probably still have more nonstop destinations from PHX than WN. Especially longhaul
72 EricR : You said (and accurately so) that there is not much population between PHX & DFW. With that said, why would you need PHX to connect to most of th
73 HPRamper : Any city that can't support multiple DFW nonstops would need PHX. Since there is really no room to add flights at LAX, it's down to DFW or PHX. That
74 commavia : Absolutely right. But the point many of us are making is this: are these cities ... ... enough to justify an entire hub in PHX? That is really the cr
75 KGRB : Prior to the US/HP merger, those FFs were HP-loyal not loyal to Star or US. What makes you think they wouldn't stick with the merged US/AA? UA isn't
76 apodino : But the thing is, AA doesn't have commanding market share in LAX either, and you can make an argument that once Wright goes away in 2014 (Which would
77 HPRamper : Maybe not a 350 departure hub, but taking into account that the O&D of PHX itself will support flights to most major markets, plus flights to the
78 commavia : One could argue that, but I feel quite strongly that it would be wrong. The elimination of Wright Amendment restrictions in 2014 is not going to dram
79 apodino : After writing my last post, I began to think of the merger would do for the terminal situation in some airports. So here are my thoughts... PHL - US k
80 Beardown91737 : LAX plays an important role to the current AA, but the operation isn't that big. If we are really talking about a 33% reduction at PHX, it would still
81 flyingsux : CLE actually is profitable. They have good O&D traffic. Plus, it's a good reliever for EWR and ORD especially on RJ's. CLE was needed when it was
82 N737AA : If there is a merger, this will NEVER happen. I suggest you read the STL playbook and reconsider your position. Hawaii is not a market AA really care
83 avek00 : No, FFers chose United, US Airways, or Continental for their journeys, all of which happened to belong to the Star Alliance. If US merges with AA, mo
84 LAXdude1023 : No, you really couldnt argue that. WN is going to get 16 gates at DAL, they currently have 15. The only thing they are going to be able to do is fly
85 phxa340 : Huh ??? FF's are loyal to alliance to earn points for themselves. The whole point of an alliance to a consumer is that if I am in Europe I will fly L
86 lucky777 : Does anybody see PHX morphing into sort of a LAS-on-steroids operation that LCC currently runs at LAS? Or perhaps how Delta runs MCO where you have mu
87 ckfred : Remember that STL made a lot of sense, before 9/11. The delays at ORD were horrible, espeically during the summer of 2000, which was very stormy. Hav
88 phxa340 : No for two reasons. the LLC growth is happening in Phoenix but at Mesa-Gateway airport , not at PHX. And LAS is huge tourist destination year round t
89 HPRamper : Read the STL playbook? Maybe, if somehow AA ends up acquiring US and not the other way around, that would be useful. As things stand now, what AA car
90 N737AA : Hmmmm.....BNA, RDU, SJC, SJC (again with QQ), STL.....it's what AA does. See below. If there is a merger AA will be the buyer......at least thats wha
91 bobnwa : What is the source you are hearing that from and is it a reliable source for this type of info?
92 Post contains links stlgph : http://phx.corporate-ir.net/Phoenix.zhtml?c=117098&p=irol-sec From what it seems, if you take a close look at the SEC filings, AMR made a profit i
93 hz747300 : I think the point is that the points in US Dividend Miles would convert to OneWorld points at some point after the merger, and those flyers will just
94 N737AA : EX VP of AA Operations...... N737AA
95 phxa340 : You are both missing what I am trying to say. A lot of people chose Star Alliance, not US Airways, because they had 3 US Airlines they could airlines
96 hz747300 : They'll still have to one-hop it most places then. When traveling outside the US on overseas flights, it would not matter as unless they were going t
97 HPRamper : WN would probably expand but they don't have enough planes to fully backfill that capacity, nor would they want to pull their planes off more profita
98 phxa340 : Agreed but by the time US even begins to draw dawn PHX if at all (Min 5 Years away) I have a feeling WN will be a different type of Airline with inte
99 Beardown91737 : I can see some sense to the *A argument. It used to be my choices were 1) UA, 2) HP (and now US), 3) DL, and 4) WN. Now with HP becoming US and in Sta
100 Post contains images PHX787 : Two scenarios can happen, but given the incidents at CVG and MEM, people opt for the latter. Same with everyone else in Tempe
101 Post contains links TWA85 : Per this artical, US and AA have agreed on a NDA and negotiations for a potenital merger are set to begin. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...S&am
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...
AA/US Merger=Fare Hikes + US Future? posted Mon Apr 23 2012 11:47:36 by SWALUV
Shocked By AA Union Support For AA/US Merger posted Sat Apr 21 2012 18:15:43 by kakk80
More Industry Consolidation (besides AA/US)? posted Thu Aug 2 2012 12:08:24 by BDL757
Would An AA/US/B6 Merger Work? posted Tue May 15 2012 17:31:21 by TWA85
AA/US Frequent Flyer Program Post-Merger? posted Sat Apr 21 2012 13:32:00 by ckfred
AA/US - Which Possible Alliance After Merger Or Buyout? posted Sat Apr 21 2012 11:41:05 by Drmlnr1
US/AA Potential Merger: Potential Hubs/Networks? posted Sat Apr 21 2012 04:52:58 by LAXdude1023
AA Dismisses US Merger posted Fri Feb 3 2012 09:57:36 by USAirALB
AA US & B6 Combined Merger Possible? posted Wed Nov 30 2011 18:51:11 by Metrojet732
More AA News: Org Changes, Order 35 737s posted Wed Jul 21 2010 06:52:40 by commavia