UA735WL From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 140 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8640 times:
Searching through United.com recently, I've noticed that in January the 319 and 738 are showing as equipment on some of UA's flights SFO/LAX-AUS-SFO/LAX (in addition to several other preexisting CR7 freqencies). What could be the reason behind this? Could it be an attempt to scare B6 off the route? Or possibly a pre-emptive attack on any attempt by VX? In any case, it seems that these markets are already saturated....any thoughts?
ORDBOSEWR From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 379 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7877 times:
I believe this is a function of the merger. There are many former CO ff in AUS.
I know many people in AUS and some of which are former AA fliers who have switched to UA after the merger.
The ability for these folks to fly non-stop to these other cities then connect rather than the connection to IAH that most did. I mean AUS to IAH is like hourly and all 737's. The ability to flow some of those connections to other hubs is better for the new UA.
Try the first week of January. The 3rd definitely has 738s to SFO and LAX (Maybe they sold out. ) Also, this looks like it could be a permanant upgauge, as mainline types are also showing as late as July. (Haven't checked any later than that.)
aaexecplat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 633 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 7047 times:
As a former CO Plat and current UA Plat located in AUS, let me tell you that much of the capacity has gone to RJ since the merger. CO used to fly frequently between AUS and IAH on all mainline equipment. Since the merger, many daily frequencies have gone to RJ. SFO and LAX have also been mostly RJ. My response has been to fly less on UA. Switching planes in IAH from Terminal B to Terminal E or C is the pits and I refuse to do it.
Or perhaps the market just demands the additional capacity??! For some reason, everyone these days seems to think an up-gauge in equipment has to be a result of something or in retaliation to a competitor! Why not just let the market dictate what capacity is needed??
"Things change, friends leave, life doesn't stop for anybody." -- EAT'EM UP EAT'EM UP KSU!!
You are absolutely correct-market does determine aircraft type. However, I think that in this particular instance, it IS a move against potential competiton- in this case VX or B6. IMO, UA thinks that there is enough demand to fill another mainline aircraft to SFO and LAX. Their solution to this is simply to immediately upgauge one of their flights and capture the yields for themselves rather than wait for B6 or VX to swoop in and steal a potential oppertunity for profit. Sad, really.....I would love to see VX here in AUS.
Longhornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3232 posts, RR: 44
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 6448 times:
Quoting ORDBOSEWR (Reply 2): I know many people in AUS and some of which are former AA fliers who have switched to UA after the merger.
Really? I know a lot that did exactly the opposite. The new UA has absolutely decimated the mainline offering in Austin, much to the dismay of the FF elites.
AA provides, by far, the most number of F seats out of Austin, and the most mainline aircraft. I just looked at UA's schedule for next Monday (a heavy business travel day), and they only have 3(!) mainline departures out of Austin. Three. Two 737s to IAH, and 1 A319 to DEN.
Cameron has it exactly right. Many former CO elites have switched to flying AA. And those of us who primarily already flew AA have also reduced our flying on UA. The volume difference in the Admital's Club vs the UC or the old Pres Club is very telling...
Only question to Cameron...did you account for the EWR flights?
Indeed I did. So many hubs I can't keep them all straight! So yes, add on 2 to 3 daily 737s to EWR, and we have a total of 5-6. AA has more than that before 7:30 AM.
Keep in mind the combined CO and UA (pre-merger) used to run (give or take):
15x IAH (at one point, it was all mainline)
5x DEN (mix of mainline and RJs)
3x EWR (of course, all mainline)
3x SFO (1x mainline)
2x IAD (1x mainline)
In addition to the RJs from ORD. LAX is a relatively recent addition (last 3-5 years or so, as I recall), and has been all RJ, as well.
So not only have we seen a considerable reduction in F seats, but a considerable reduction in seats period.
IAH has been drawn down by over 50%, EWR by a third, and SFO has been reduced, despite increasing the frequency.
I have to wonder what UA's strategy is in Austin now. Of course, they have the numbers available to them and we don't, but I am very surprised to see UA appearing to concede Austin to the likes of AA and WN. They've always been the third carrier in Austin (even combined), but there doesn't appear to be any effort to be a dominant player. Of course, Austin is probably one of the few non-hub cities in their system that has service to all of their domestic hubs, but the size and frequency has dropped off considerably.
Do you live in AUS? For the largest airline in the world, UA has a ridiculously small presence in AUS, one of the fastest growing metro areas in the country (70k new households per year). Not to mention that Austin is a high yielding market with tons of business and political consulting/lobbying travelers. Take a look at average airfares in AUS....and the mysterious 757 you speak of only happens during ACL, SXSW or Formula 1....
But they aren't....many of us preferred transiting in IAH over flying RJ...so many have gone to AA where we transit in DFW...I don't have the numbers, but if I were a betting man, I would guess that yields in AUS have been falling in AUS while AA and Southwest yields have been rising since last year.
Searched some random dates and United.com is showing UA891 (319) and UA1087 (739ER) operating AUS-SFO on 3/9/13 and 3/6/13 respectively. I'm not sure how to check the schedual for the entire year, but from what I've been finding, it exists. (Correct me if I'm mistaken)
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 18): The 737 doing AUS-LAX is overbooked. Im sure it was an upgage for the holiday, nothing more to look into it than that.
Probably right. I have not found another mainline AUS-LAX. That doesn't mean it isn't there, though....
AUS-SEA is a fascinating market. On paper, there should be more than enough traffic between two of the leading high-tech areas in the country.
AA was the first carrier to enter the market with a single daily nonstop in 2007. The route didn't last much more than a year, if that. I'm positive this was influenced by both the global financial crisis/ensuing recession, as well as AA's internal financial problems/Cornerstone Strategy.
AS benefits from being able to feed their flight with all of their other Pacific Northwest destinations, but they are in a pretty unique position to do that.
UA would have some limited feed from their trans-Pacific route(s?) if timed correctly, but even still the route would be primarily driven by P2P traffic.
AA was in a similar position when it tried the route (sans the onward Asia connections), and clearly didn't have as much success as they would've liked. How much that failure was a result of AA's internal issues/geopolitics, and how much of it was the route being unable to sustain the necessary margins to continue the route.
According to DOT data, there are approximately 250 PDEW between AUS-SEA (as of Q2 2012). AS is capturing approximately 46% of that, which equates to about 115 passengers.
Based on some very rough math I did with October 2012 data, AS had 5152 seats for sale each way (according to Flightaware, 12x 738 and 19x 739 for the month of October), and enplaned 9360, which equates to 4680 each way, for a load factor of 90.8%.
Using DOT's Q2 numbers, that would seem to indicate that about 76% of AS' traffic is P2P (115/151 [which is derived from 90.8% LF * 166 average seats per day]), which would mean about 24% (or 36 passengers) is connecting.
I'm going to keep going, but if I'm making incorrect assumptions or missing something, please correct me.
As it stands, there are only about another 125 people being carried on this route among all of the other carriers. WN (which is the only other carrier I can easily find market share info on), gobbles up another 32 PDEW.
While a nonstop could certainly take some of the traffic from other airlines, even if you were to split all the remaining passengers evenly between AA, DL, US, UA, and B6 (all of which provide easy, logical connections to SEA), you're still only looking at ~20 PDEW for each carrier. UA would have to either create a lot of demand based on having the nonstop and successfully poach most of the remaining traffic (unlikely), or generate a lot of connecting opportunities, which they simply don't have. The AUS-Asia market can't number more than ~20 PDEW. Even if they were to capture ALL of that (which they obviously wouldn't come anywhere close), you're still looking at a deficiency of almost a third to fill up a CR7, or 3/4 to fill up a 737/A320. I have a very hard time believing a 2/3 full CR7 on a 1,770 mile stage length could be profitable, and I'm equally skeptical a 1/3 full A319 wouldn't (even with cargo revenue, which I'm sure could be sizable on this route) would be.
TL;DR: I don't think the AUS-SEA market could support a second daily nonstop, much less a second carrier, on the route.
huxrules From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 5822 times:
I now fly DL out of AUS because of weather problems between AUS and IAH. If there is bad weather in AUS you will be delayed- then the weather moves to houston and you get delays at IAH. I missed two flights (and spent hours in the airport) because of this. Since you have to connect somewhere I just go through Atlanta.
aaexecplat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 633 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5634 times:
Quoting UA735WL (Reply 19): Searched some random dates and United.com is showing UA891 (319) and UA1087 (739ER) operating AUS-SFO on 3/9/13 and 3/6/13 respectively. I'm not sure how to check the schedual for the entire year, but from what I've been finding, it exists. (Correct me if I'm mistaken)
Those are short term capacity increases because of SXSW and spring break...AISD gets out on 3/8/13 and is back on 3/19/13. SXSW is being held from 3/7/13 through 3/17/13.
Outside of these special circumstances, UA flies all RJ to SFO and LAX...
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1754 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5567 times:
Quoting aaexecplat (Reply 23): Those are short term capacity increases because of SXSW and spring break...AISD gets out on 3/8/13 and is back on 3/19/13. SXSW is being held from 3/7/13 through 3/17/13.
I was just about to post that because those mainline have already sold enough seats to overbook an RJ.
The only valid opinions are those based in facts
: In all seriousness...it looks like ATL is getting its delays down and making it more attractive to connect there! http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/loca
: What do you expect exactly? DL is an extemely large airline as well and they don't dominate AUS either. I don't live in AUS but I do know that UA rem
: As mentioned above, United like other airlines upgadge aircraft and add routes for the holiday season only. One example is CLE-SAN that only appears f
: Define a strong spoke. They've drawn their presence down by over half. NS
: Does United (formerly CO)still have a club in AUS? It is not showing up on their webpage anymore under US clubs.
: It must be a mistake on their website. While it doesn't show up on the link for US Clubs, it does appear if you click on the link to show all clubs.
: So it does. You are right it seems to be a glitch. I still can't get it to show up when I click US only, and it isn't on the drop down menu but magic
: You are in dreamland and you lack some knowledge around what's going on around AUS. AA has shrunk but it is still much bigger than UA, and UA flying
: Wow fail on my part, curious if I was the only one to read this as UA adding Mainline Capacity to AUS(Standing for Australia)-SFO/LAX and was going to
: You are correct that Delta does not dominate, but they have grown traffic about 10% in each of the past couple of years and have moved from a very mi
: Yep. I'm currently UA gold, and fluctuate between gold/plat. I don't mind changing at Term C or E in IAH, but B to C or E is terrible. I'm still flyi
: Sounds like the typical CO way to me -- packed RJ's, right size everything.
: It's been interesting to see this AUS operation evolve over the years. Prior to 9/11, PMUA had an all-mainline station with service to ORD, DEN, SFO,
: There are a lot of stats that get lost in the cracks, here. Not only do you have the tech businesses, but you also have the music industry.....yes, N
: I am sure we have seen each other. I am always in white dress shirt, grey suit, and with a black Timbuk2 bag. Every Tuesday from 6a-6:30a.... ACL is
: At little of topic....but AUS would be a nice little place for B6 to set up a small hub and then grow it. They could start by offering AUS-SEA/LGB/JFK
: How does one have to "deal" with DFW? It's by far the best mega-hub in the country, and one of the best in the world for the amount of connecting tra
: Not to digress but I disagree completely. I find it horrid for connecting, but the few times I've been O/D there it was fine. back in the Mueller day
: In addition to those two events (and SXSW already mentioned) there are some other high-profile races being held this year. March 1-2 - GRAND-AM Road
: The missing piece in your concept of UA following DL's strategy, however, would be the actual mainline aircraft to operate the routes which you claim
: I've heard it is 75mph now! Did they get a bypass around Bastrop? IH-10 to 71 was a better route for me than 290 normally. fewer stops but it depende
: Yes, I was using the list as the ideal makeup of a small hub for B6
: 739s are not 1:1 replacement for 757. They will also be used to replace the 735 and ERJ See I'm perplexed that this is the atmosphere this thread has
: Sadly, no. But they've made it a freeway almost all the way to the river crossing east of town. It is 75 east of that light, and save for one town tr
: That's what I'm thinking - while I guess more mainline would be nice, I don't really begrudge them 2-class/E+ RJ service given that the alternative w
: Q400 are the pits. Wait until they start operating the Q's into AUS. Then it will be mass hysteria of how UA is screwing AUS over!
: There were far more mainline aircraft flying AUS-IAH even as recently as two years ago. The RJ's with F class have largely replaced mainline aircraft
: Where to exactly? IAH? EWR is the same frequency as it always has. Again, who the hell cares? The new United wants to connect AUS pax to all the othe
: UA also flies AUS-CUN on the Weekends.
: You've created a narrative in your head for how things were, but just because you say so doesn't make it true. I remember when I first noticed CO had
: Boo freaking hoo -- so less F seats for a 30 minute flight down to IAH? Give me a break. So one less bloody mary and no moving map displays for AUS p
: I just checked UA's website and this Spring AUS-EWR is going to 4 daily!.. I don't remember a time AUS-EWR has anything more than 3 daily. Historical
: I couldn't care less. I'm fortunate enough to fly American. But I do know that I'd rather sit in Y on a mainline jet than Y on a CR7, for any amount
: I don't know about you, but I still find them preferable to a CRJ or Jungle Jet. I'd probably take a CR7, and definitely an E170, but still hardly th
: No carrier has operated EWR-AUS 5-6x a day. 2-3x mainline per day on EWR-AUS is more than sufficient.