Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Any Chance SLC Becomes The Next CVG Or MEM?  
User currently offlineflaps30 From United States of America, joined May 2009, 283 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12151 times:

With SLC being my home airport and an important part of the local economy, I was wondering if Delta has any plans to downsize this hub as they have done with CVG and MEM. Now I know each of these cities serves a different purpose in the grand scheme of Delta world, but is SLC safe as an important hub for DL? They do have a loyal following here (even though I usually fly WN) from the business community so are the yields playing a big factor here or could SLC still thrive for DL with average yields?


every day is a good day to fly
128 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineflyasaguy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12150 times:

Short answer...not a chance. DL likes to be top dog. See ATL, (SLC), MSP, DTW. SLC serves a very important role in the Delta network that cannot be accomplished by way of LAX or even a lesser extent, MSP. O/D is very healthy considering it's the only major airport...anywhere in the area. SLC held its own through the tough times and at one point was the only hub except for ATL that saw significant growth (32% over a 1 or 2 year period IIRC).


What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineLV From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 1991 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12111 times:

CVG and MEM were more victims of geography than anything. They were too close to DTW and ATL respectively. SLC is kind of geogrpahically unique. You don't have a lot of options unless you want to move the hub to DEN, PHX, LAS or something like that... and those options just aren't feasible.

User currently offlinetoobz From Finland, joined Jan 2010, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11950 times:

Short answer No Way. SLC is DLs turf on the west coast ( as west coast as can be for DL). DL has a huge FF base there and it has been noted that it is "strong" there.

User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11944 times:

Like everyone else has been saying, SLC is one of the last fortress hubs, especially out west, and a proftable one at that. DL is growing it instead of downsizing it. I do hope some of the RJ flying will be replaced by the incoming 717's though....*crosses fingers and toes*


Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11888 times:

I am biased on this answer but.......No chance the city is hubless and extremely unlikely Delta leaves or shrinks alot . If Delta ever left Frontier would fly into town so fast it would be ridiculous.

The new terminals will be built to actually get Delta an improved operation and was designed to meet Deltas top need of more mainline sized gates. The airport will get better for Delta soon and at low costs the airport has actual cash in the bank to invest unlike most of the airports considering these projects so it wont have some huge costs increase being thrown on Delta. Delta is totally in on the new terminals and wants it to happen. It has enough gates but just too many RJ only gates and too few maineline or large RJs. Delta has been consistently profitable in both the bad times and the high oil times in SLC. It has proven successful for years and Delta values the city they wont leave something so consistent and valuable.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11835 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 5):

I am biased on this answer but.......No chance the city is hubless and extremely unlikely Delta leaves or shrinks alot . If Delta ever left Frontier would fly into town so fast it would be ridiculous.

Hehe, if Frontier even survives to that point. But youre right, SLC and DL have almost the same relationship DL has with ATL. They arent going anywhere.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 11513 times:

I would think SLC is likely to see alot of skywest ordered Mitsubishi 90s down the road? The 717s might be perfect on the East Coast and replace alot of the 88s in ATL?

User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 11491 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flaps30 (Thread starter):

I think your airport is safe. SLC is a great place. Enjoy it.


User currently onlinebomber996 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 391 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11418 times:

SLC is to DL in the Mountian West as CLT is to US in the South East... a.k.a. not going away any time soon.

Peace   



AVIATION - A Vacation In Any Town, I Own Nothing
User currently offlinePHXFlyer16 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11383 times:

As others have said, every major needs a West/Mountain West hub. LAX is simply not doable as a major hub.

UA has DEN, US/AA has PHX, SW has multiple (PHX, DEN, LAS), and DL has SLC.


User currently offlineSevensixtyseven From United States of America, joined May 2011, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 11186 times:

Could we theoretically see Delta make a move into PHX should certain other airlines reduce their presence there? From multiple times flying to, from, and through PHX, T-4 is an excellent facility to use for connecting passengers.


Will that ex-HP 752 get delayed...again?
User currently offlineLV From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 1991 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 11154 times:

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 11):
Could we theoretically see Delta make a move into PHX should certain other airlines reduce their presence there? From multiple times flying to, from, and through PHX, T-4 is an excellent facility to use for connecting passengers.

I think SLC is more premium/ business oriented whereas PHX is more leisure oriented. I think yields would be lower at PHX vs. SLC. There is a massive presence of financial services around SLC and you can not discount how much traffic the LDS church generates.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 11022 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LV (Reply 12):

LDS is not high yield nor is the ski traffic. On the plus side, SLC has a big high tech sector.

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 11):

Why would that happen. So you're saying the Delta can make PHX work when AA/US can't. Explain that.


User currently offlineMIflyer12 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 956 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 10954 times:

Quoting LV (Reply 12):
There is a massive presence of financial services around SLC and you can not discount how much traffic the LDS church generates.

Actually, one can and should. DEN and PHX (serving much larger metro areas) also have far larger domestic O&D passenger volumes. DEN ranks #4; PHX # 11, SLC #32.

http://apps.bts.gov/programs/economi...vel_price_index/html/table_07.html

That's not to say that a few airports can't thrive on connecting traffic (CLT punches way above its weight), but it's geography as much as demographics that makes it work.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7175 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 10936 times:

Quoting LV (Reply 2):
CVG and MEM were more victims of geography than anything.
Quoting flyasaguy2005 (Reply 1):
Short answer...not a chance. DL likes to be top dog.
Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 10):
As others have said, every major needs a West/Mountain West hub. LAX is simply not doable as a major hub.

All of this. Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence but essentially that's not going to do anything to SLC. As others have said, LAX is too far out of the way to be a major hub and SLC is serving quite fine as a mountain west hub.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlinePHXFlyer16 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10784 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 15):
All of this. Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence but essentially that's not going to do anything to SLC. As others have said, LAX is too far out of the way to be a major hub and SLC is serving quite fine as a mountain west hub.

I wouldn't see SEA as a threat. Similarly, SFO is not a threat to DEN for UA and LAX is not a threat to PHX for US/AA.


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10720 times:

Quoting LV (Reply 12):

I think SLC is more premium/ business oriented whereas PHX is more leisure oriented. I think yields would be lower at PHX vs. SLC.

I wouldn't necessarily conclude SLC has more premium traffic than PHX. Most of DL's ops out of SLC are on RJs with either no premium class or very small premium class. SLC definitely has an overall higher average airfare than PHX mostly due to the heavy WN competition in PHX.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 10202 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Thread starter):
but is SLC safe as an important hub for DL?

Yes, I believe SLC is very safe as a DL hub. I don't know why DL would ever want to mess up the good thing they've got going there - DL seems to be doing quite well in SLC, and I don't see anything on the horizon that would change that.

And it's easy to see why: it's a great hub in many important ways: SLC benefits from its relatively good location, relatively good climate, relatively low costs, relative lack of other hub competition (only one other network hub in the Rocky Mountain region), and the fact that DL itself has no other hub that can replicate the traffic flows SLC handles.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 10):
every major needs a West/Mountain West hub.

No they don't. Economically and demographically, it's the least important region of the continental U.S., and the least critical one to have a hub in. There are only two true air hubs in the Mountain West region - DEN first and foremost, and SLC second. Both are spoken for, and I don't see that changing.

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 11):
Could we theoretically see Delta make a move into PHX should certain other airlines reduce their presence there?

That seems highly doubtful. SLC has two critically important things going for it that PHX doesn't: (1) SLC is in a better geographic location, and (2) SLC is less competitive.

PHX is too far south to serve as a meaningfully competitive connecting point for just about anything except its immediate surrounding region (CO, AZ, NM) and Hawaii, and it's also among the largest hubs for the nation's largest low-fare airline, meaning it's not a particularly high-yielding market, either. SLC, by contrast, is in a fine geographic position to serve as a connecting point to/from the Rocky Mountain region, and also to serve as a viable connecting point between the entire western U.S. and the east, and it's a market that DL handily dominates with little meaningful competition from Southwest or any other major carrier.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 15):
Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence but essentially that's not going to do anything to SLC.

Agree - SEA and SLC serve to very different purposes for DL as if anything compliment each other within the broader DL network, not compete with each other.

In my mind, DL's buildup in SEA is about one thing and one thing only: NRT. I suspect that in the last 12-18 months, DL has taken a holistic, strategic look at their Pacific network and come to the conclusion (correctly, I believe) that DL's exposure to, and reliance on, NRT as a hub for accessing the Pacific Rim is a major vulnerability. The long-term viability of NRT as a hub in its current form for DL is tenuous, in my view, and as such DL is trying to build a mainland U.S. hub that, in the long-run, can replace many of the traffic flows NRT now handles. And that's where SEA comes in.

Since SLC was never going to serve as DL's (or any airline's) major gateway to Asia, anyway, I don't see SEA detracting from SLC in this regard.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 9720 times:

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 11):
Could we theoretically see Delta make a move into PHX should certain other airlines reduce their presence there? From multiple times flying to, from, and through PHX, T-4 is an excellent facility to use for connecting passengers.

Why would DL try to cut out a niche where there are WN and AA/US are going to be the dominant players and they would have to establish themselves. They have hubs in ATL and SLC, which is the subject of this thread and not PHX, why would they need to establish another hub. Most of the airlines now are consolidating and trying to reduce their offerings to help increase fares to make more money. Adding PHX would add nothing to DL.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9649 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
There are only two true air hubs in the Mountain West region - DEN first and foremost, and SLC second. Both are spoken for, and I don't see that changing.

Agreed. Interesting to think that Denver, given it's market and geography, sustains 3 airline hubs: United, Frontier and Southwest. Any other similar sized market couldn't have the same level of hub operation. DL has this advantage - Salt Lake is right sized for one hub and DL has a good lock on it. It is probably the most developed, and successful, asset from the Western Airlines merger (other than their people) to date.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9612 times:

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):
Interesting to think that Denver, given it's market and geography, sustains 3 airline hubs: United, Frontier and Southwest.

True, although remember that while DEN does sustain hubs for three airlines, it really only has 1 true network hub that functions as a major hub operation specifically for the Rocky Mountain region. Frontier's coverage of the Rocky Mountain region is pretty sparse, and Southwest's is largely nonexistent. United's hub, on the other hand, serves essentially every single population center of consequence in the entire region, and - critically - connects it into a massive nationwide and global network (something else neither Frontier nor Southwest can offer).

But, in general, yes - DEN will always be top dog as hubs (airline, economic, demographic, political, cultural, etc.) go in the Rocky Mountain region. DEN is by far the largest and best-situated market in the region to handle connecting traffic flows going in all directions. Thus why it will always be the "gold medal" of hubs in the region, with SLC the "silver." The DEN-SLC dynamic in that region is similar to the ATL-CLT dynamic in the Atlantic Southeast.

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):
DL has this advantage - Salt Lake is right sized for one hub and DL has a good lock on it.

Agreed. Considering how small and geographically isolated the SLC market actually is as a population center (relative to other hubs in the U.S.), the hub DL has built there really is pretty impressive. But - again - that is driven largely by the systemic advantages SLC has as a hub.


User currently offlineSevensixtyseven From United States of America, joined May 2011, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9352 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 19):

I'm certainly not advocating a "move" of the SLC hub (by any stretch of the imagination), but perhaps an small expansion into PHX to take advantage of a few routes that might make them money.



Will that ex-HP 752 get delayed...again?
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9344 times:

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 22):
I'm certainly not advocating a "move" of the SLC hub (by any stretch of the imagination), but perhaps an small expansion into PHX to take advantage of a few routes that might make them money.

It's highly doubtful. Airlines are concentrating more and more of their capacity in strong hubs for a reason - that's how to make money. Thus why today, across the networks of the major U.S. network carriers, there is a very small portion of their capacity that does not touch one of their major hubs or focus cities. Besides, again, PHX is such a low-yielding market that I doubt it would be worth it for DL to fight for any of that local traffic, anyway - better to let the airline(s) with hub(s) there cater to it, and focus on their strong SLC hub.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24996 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9212 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 5):
If Delta ever left Frontier would fly into town so fast it would be ridiculous.

That might have been true once - I don't think it is so true now.

I can't imagine Delta will ever pull down SLC, but IF it did I assume Southwest would be in like Flynn.

Frontier might add a couple of routes, but it has other fish to fry these days and why replicate DEN?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7175 posts, RR: 17
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8961 times:

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 22):
I'm certainly not advocating a "move" of the SLC hub (by any stretch of the imagination), but perhaps an small expansion into PHX to take advantage of a few routes that might make them money.

I do agree here, in some aspects. DL has been known for random upgauges into PHX and are the only US operator into PHX with "scheduled" (albeit seasonal) widebody service. They like PHX, that's something everyone can see. If an opportunity comes for DL to add a little more to PHX I can see it happening, but mostly to hubs and LAX. Maybe SEA but AS has that one covered.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 701 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8943 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 25):
They like PHX, that's something everyone can see

they don't like it enough to maintain the 6am departure to SLC,   that was a sweet flight for me on a Monday. Pretty much rules DL out for me on that run as the first flight is now too late into SLC for me unless I want to go the night before.(I don't)

I don't see SLC going anywhere but up for DL. The new terminal is basically theres' (WN are putting some cash into the deal but much less then DL). Airport has even hired an ex-DL property guy to manage the project for them. It's strong DL country in SLC, I know quite a few folks in SLC who don't even consider if there are any other options, they always opt for DL regardless.


User currently offlineflyasaguy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 9039 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
That might have been true once - I don't think it is so true now.
Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
Frontier might add a couple of routes, but it has other fish to fry these days and why replicate DEN?

I think the whole thing of it would be to VACATE DEN and let UA/WN duke it out and set up shop in SLC. This is not my personal opinion but just trying to convey what I think the others were getting at.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 8987 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 25):
Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 22):
I'm certainly not advocating a "move" of the SLC hub (by any stretch of the imagination), but perhaps an small expansion into PHX to take advantage of a few routes that might make them money.

I do agree here, in some aspects. DL has been known for random upgauges into PHX and are the only US operator into PHX with "scheduled" (albeit seasonal) widebody service. They like PHX, that's something everyone can see. If an opportunity comes for DL to add a little more to PHX I can see it happening, but mostly to hubs and LAX. Maybe SEA but AS has that one covered.

Don't hold your breath for anything other than Seattle, if that.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 8895 times:

Quoting flyasaguy2005 (Reply 27):
I think the whole thing of it would be to VACATE DEN and let UA/WN duke it out and set up shop in SLC. This is not my personal opinion but just trying to convey what I think the others were getting at.

Exactly. They would get much higher fares being top dog in SLC then duking it out with WN and UA. Delta wont leave or give them the opportunity but that is exactly why frontier would leave if SLC opened up. Delta wont leave but having SLC all to yourself and price power is much more powerful and profitable than sharing DEN and not having pricing power.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24996 posts, RR: 85
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 8823 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flyasaguy2005 (Reply 27):
I think the whole thing of it would be to VACATE DEN and let UA/WN duke it out and set up shop in SLC.

I can't imagine that ever happening and I see no upside to it.

Since it is all based on Delta leaving SLC, I can't imagine Southwest - or other airlines - allowing that void to remain and setting up shop at SLC would remove what has sustained Frontier at DEN.

mariner.



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 750 posts, RR: 1
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8646 times:

How is SLC used? Its seems like a lot of west coast to east flows through MSP, DTW, and ATL.

User currently offlinePHXFlyer16 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8323 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
No they don't. Economically and demographically, it's the least important region of the continental U.S., and the least critical one to have a hub in. There are only two true air hubs in the Mountain West region - DEN first and foremost, and SLC second. Both are spoken for, and I don't see that changing.

*sigh* here we go again...

Not sure if you fly on the west coast or not, but those of us who live here need a way to get from pout A to point B within the west. That requires a hub. Saying that the west coast is not important to warrant a hub is ridiculous.

You have to look at the airlines total network. AA was not competitive on its own because the entirety of its network relative to DL and UA was lacking. They lacked connecting hubs in the west and in the northeast. Many consumer, like myself, are loyal to our FF programs. We appreciate an occasional free flight, and will not fly an airline that can only get us where we are trying to go if it's to the east coast. We need to be able to move throught the west efficiently as well.

It's not about areas that are of less importance or less profitable. That may be true, but there is great significance in a network that covers the country. You may not make a lot of money flying someone from ABQ to SNA, but you keep their loyalty and earn more when you need to get them to JFK or MIA.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8282 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting questions (Reply 31):
How is SLC used? Its seems like a lot of west coast to east flows through MSP, DTW, and ATL.

Intrawest flying plus smaller cities that cant support service to MSP, the closest hub.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8283 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):
Agreed. Interesting to think that Denver, given it's market and geography, sustains 3 airline hubs: United, Frontier and Southwest.

Its not clear that it can. Are WN and UA making money there? Will F9 survive? It is likely that WN and UA are both losing money and subsidizing their losses with profits from other hubs.


User currently offlineflaps30 From United States of America, joined May 2009, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8239 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 34):
It is likely that WN and UA are both losing money and subsidizing their losses with profits from other hubs.

Not sure how true that is when speaking of WN at Denver. If they were losing money at Denver than how could one explain how Denver has risen all the way to # 5 in terms of daily departures from the top 10 in WN's network in just a few short years.



every day is a good day to fly
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8151 times:

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
*sigh* here we go again...

"Sigh" indeed.   

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
but those of us who live here need a way to get from pout A to point B within the west.

Fine. But with respect specifically to intra-west trafic flows, PHX is only good for connecting a very specific set of "Point As" to a very specific set of "Point Bs" - namely, connecting California with the southwest and Colorado. Beyond that, PHX is totally out of the way, non-competitive, and capable of catering to only yield-discounted connections. As has been said numerous times in numerous threads: why would somebody, for example, fly PDX-PHX-SAN when they could just fly nonstop or connect through more direct connecting points like SFO, LAX, SJC, even LAS? SLC, on the other hand, while also unable to viable serve as a connecting point for connections up and down the west coast, can at least cater to connections between the entirety of the west coast and the entirety of the mountain west. PHX, because of its inferior location (too far west and south) can't do that.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
Saying that the west coast is not important to warrant a hub is ridiculous.

Go back and read what I actually wrote. Nobody ever said the West Coast was not important.

My comments were referring specifically to the Mountain West, which is, indeed, the least important region of the country in which to have a hub - it's the least populated and least dense region of the continental U.S. The West Coast is an entirely different story - although neither SLC or PHX is a viable hub for connections up and down the West Coast.

However, while on the subject, there can only ever really be one true network airline megahub on the West Coast, and that's SFO, and that's already spoken for.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
AA was not competitive on its own because the entirety of its network relative to DL and UA was lacking. They lacked connecting hubs in the west and in the northeast.

Northeast, yes. West - inevitable and unavoidable no matter what. If you combine the West Coast and the Mountain West into just the "West," there are only three places that can really be true network airline megahubs today at network airline cost levels - DEN, SLC and SFO. All are spoken for already. With regards specifically for SLC, DL has the best possible hub it can have as far west as it can get - there's no further west DL can go and find a market capable of supporting a full-fledged network airline hub for connections up and down the West Coast. The best DL (and to some extent AA) can hope for are barbells north (SEA) and south (LAX), partly relying on partners (AS).

With or without a merger, AA would be unable to have a true hub in the Mountain West, and AA (along with DL) would be unable to have a true hub on the West Coast. PHX, unfortunately, is a viable hub for neither - it cannot cater to intra-West Coast connections, nor for Mountain West connections. It's a so-so hub for connections between the two, but even there, if one looks at the markets US currently serves out of PHX that are between PHX and DFW, AA already flies to virtually all of them nonstop from LAX.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
We need to be able to move throught the west efficiently as well.

Nobody ever disputed that.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
It's not about areas that are of less importance or less profitable. That may be true, but there is great significance in a network that covers the country. You may not make a lot of money flying someone from ABQ to SNA, but you keep their loyalty and earn more when you need to get them to JFK or MIA.

Sounds good on paper, and it is true that airlines may be willing to lose money in certain places in order to retain profitable business in others. But at some point the losses will start to outweigh the profits elsewhere.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 34):
Its not clear that it can. Are WN and UA making money there? Will F9 survive? It is likely that WN and UA are both losing money and subsidizing their losses with profits from other hubs.

  

I do not believe the current market conditions in DEN are sustainable. I still believe that at some point, something is going to have to give.


User currently offlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1897 posts, RR: 9
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8116 times:

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
Saying that the west coast is not important to warrant a hub is ridiculous.

He's not talking about the West Coast, he's talking about the Mountain West, reread his post and what he was responding to.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
AA was not competitive on its own because the entirety of its network relative to DL and UA was lacking.

No, AA was not competitive because its competitors DL and UA had gone through bankruptcy and greatly reduced their costs while AA hadn't.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
They lacked connecting hubs in the west and in the northeast

If all of that were logical and true, how did CO and US ever make any money? CO didn't have a West Coast hub or a true Midwest hub. US has no hub between CLT and PHX, a pretty huge gap, yet they're very profitable.


User currently onlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1541 posts, RR: 1
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8070 times:

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
If all of that were logical and true, how did CO and US ever make any money? CO didn't have a West Coast hub or a true Midwest hub. US has no hub between CLT and PHX, a pretty huge gap, yet they're very profitable.

This good to point out -- US may have a rather large number of backtracking itineraries, but they do manage to make it work and make money doing it. OTOH, maybe that's a great way for US fliers to rack up additional BIS miles with all that backtracking!

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):


I do not believe the current market conditions in DEN are sustainable. I still believe that at some point, something is going to have to give.

And it will be interesting to see who "wins", whenever it reaches that point. I can see arguments for any of the three at DEN winning out, not to mention whether it will keep two hub tenants (so just one player throws in the towel) or if it becomes a one-horse town hubwise.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8067 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
My comments were referring specifically to the Mountain West, which is, indeed, the least important region of the country in which to have a hub - it's the least populated and least dense region of the continental U.S. The West Coast is an entirely different story - although neither SLC or PHX is a viable hub for connections up and down the West Coast.

Looking through my travel agency bookings, I have quite a lot of pax going through SLC from the Pacific NW to SOCal and throughout the west. They dont sem to have a problem connecting through SLC, or even PHX.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
If all of that were logical and true, how did CO and US ever make any money? CO didn't have a West Coast hub or a true Midwest hub. US has no hub between CLT and PHX, a pretty huge gap, yet they're very profitable.

Amen!



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8053 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 39):
Looking through my travel agency bookings, I have quite a lot of pax going through SLC from the Pacific NW to SOCal and throughout the west. They dont sem to have a problem connecting through SLC, or even PHX.

Again - there's no question that such connections certainly exist. People fly BOS-MIA-MSY, too.

The point I was making is that such connections are in almost all cases likely sold at a substantial yield discount since, again, virtually nobody is going to pay the same fare to fly hours and hundreds of miles out of the way. And as such, you can't build a hub upon these connections. So sure, DL may sell some incremental connections between the Pacific Northwest and Southern California over SLC, but that is only a marginal amount of traffic layered on top of the primary function of the SLC hub - connections to/from the Mountain West, and heading east to the Midwest and East Coast.

The same is undoubtedly true of PHX - there are surely people who fly through PHX to connect up and down the West Coast, but because PHX is out of the way and there are so many nonstop options, this traffic is almost certainly at a considerable yield discount, and only incremental to the primary function of the PHX hub (connection people between California and points east).


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 41, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8043 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 4):
I do hope some of the RJ flying will be replaced by the incoming 717's though....*crosses fingers and toes*

How does the 717 do in the "hot and high" scenarios, like SLC in the summer?

Quoting LV (Reply 2):
You don't have a lot of options unless you want to move the hub to DEN, PHX, LAS or something like that... and those options just aren't feasible.

When I worked at SLC, there was a rumor floating around for years, after the DL/WA merger, that DL was exploring moving the SLC hub to LAS. Don't know if this was something actually thought of or just something started in a lunchroom, somewhere.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 42, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8001 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 41):
How does the 717 do in the "hot and high" scenarios, like SLC in the summer?

You know, Im not sure. Back in my TWA days, we didnt send them anywhere west of COS and DEN, neither of which actually saw the 717's before AA bought our assets. I would assume with the BMW engines and relatively light body it would have no isues, like the MD-90's once all the bugs were fixed. DL I think might be sending a few 717's west to get rid of some CRJ flying, but I expect them mainly to be out of ATL, DTW, and LGA.

Quoting mayor (Reply 41):
When I worked at SLC, there was a rumor floating around for years, after the DL/WA merger, that DL was exploring moving the SLC hub to LAS. Don't know if this was something actually thought of or just something started in a lunchroom, somewhere.

I've heard that, and DEN, and PHX...and so on...lol...then again I hear TransPac service rumours out of SLC too, like resumption of NRT flights, SLC-SIN and SLC-HKG...LOL...as much as I would love to see them...



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 43, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7947 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Thread starter):

Not going anywhere. IIRC this summer it will see the most mainline it has a long time. 320/319 to *most* major cities. (ie IAH is getting a airbus this summer, as is DEN/AUS/SAT.....these have been big RJs for a long long time.

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 11):

no. Delta wouldn't touch PHX for the same reasons AA would leave(which IMO they won't)

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 15):
Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence

Not anyone who can read a map.

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
Frontier might add a couple of routes, but it has other fish to fry these days and why replicate DEN?

his point is someone would leave Denver, I agree with that.

Quoting questions (Reply 31):

SFO-SLC-DFW or SFO-MSP-DFW.....which would you do?

Quoting mayor (Reply 41):

How does the 717 do in the "hot and high" scenarios, like SLC in the summer?

I don't believe great but not terrible(ie anything with a JT8D)

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 42):
DL I think might be sending a few 717's west to get rid of some CRJ flying, but I expect them mainly to be out of ATL, DTW, and LGA.

You will likely see more big RJs and more 319/320 take over flying in SLC. Delta has made it fairly clear the 717 wont be going to the western hubs. Not likely MSP will even get a base. (ATL/DTW maybe NYC)



yep.
User currently offlinePHXFlyer16 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7918 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
Fine. But with respect specifically to intra-west trafic flows, PHX is only good for connecting a very specific set of "Point As" to a very specific set of "Point Bs" - namely, connecting California with the southwest and Colorado. Beyond that, PHX is totally out of the way, non-competitive, and capable of catering to only yield-discounted connections. As has been said numerous times in numerous threads: why would somebody, for example, fly PDX-PHX-SAN when they could just fly nonstop or connect through more direct connecting points like SFO, LAX, SJC, even LAS? SLC, on the other hand, while also unable to viable serve as a connecting point for connections up and down the west coast, can at least cater to connections between the entirety of the west coast and the entirety of the mountain west. PHX, because of its inferior location (too far west and south) can't do that.

Funny how you brought PHX into this, and I didn't even mention it in my post. My post was an argument that AA needs a hub west of DFW. WIthout a hub west of DFW, nobody would consider AA for flying within the western US. There is virtually no loyalty to AA on the West coast because of this. True, it may be OK if you are heading east to fly direct, or though DFW or ORD, but most people are loyal to a carrier that able to get them nearly everywhere they need to go without having too much inconvenience. If you live in the West and travel often within the west, the present AA is not your airline. Therefore, it will likely not be your airline when you do head east.

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
My comments were referring specifically to the Mountain West, which is, indeed, the least important region of the country in which to have a hub - it's the least populated and least dense region of the continental U.S. The West Coast is an entirely different story - although neither SLC or PHX is a viable hub for connections up and down the West Coast.

Doesn't matter. West or Mountain West, as a major 3 airline, you need a hub in the west, weather that's in the West or Mountain West.

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
With or without a merger, AA would be unable to have a true hub in the Mountain West, and AA (along with DL) would be unable to have a true hub on the West Coast. PHX, unfortunately, is a viable hub for neither - it cannot cater to intra-West Coast connections, nor for Mountain West connections. It's a so-so hub for connections between the two, but even there, if one looks at the markets US currently serves out of PHX that are between PHX and DFW, AA already flies to virtually all of them nonstop from LAX.

Unless you live in California, there is no chance of connecting through LAX. The AA LAX hub is mostly O&D. Nobody wants to connect through that nightmare. I would consider DEN, SLC and even maybe SFO as ways to get where I need to go through the west. I would not go through LAX, and most people would agree with me.

Is PHX ideal location-wise and yield-wise, no. Is there any alternative for AA/US? No. Other than folding the market, which they cannot afford to do. If you're going to be a top three US airline, you've got to have to have a presence on the west coast. Relying on AS is a joke, and is partly why AA has struggled.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
No, AA was not competitive because its competitors DL and UA had gone through bankruptcy and greatly reduced their costs while AA hadn't.

Are their costs high? Sure. But they are also high because they thought they were a big dog and wanted to be right up there with UA and DL. They were trying to play with the big boys without being able to do so network-wise. They were esentially performing the role of a legacy and had high costs as such, but had huge gaps in the NE and West.

They had no presence in the west and northeast, so relied on AS and B6. Sorry, but there's a reason the other big legacies do their own flying in these areas.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 38):
This good to point out -- US may have a rather large number of backtracking itineraries, but they do manage to make it work and make money doing it. OTOH, maybe that's a great way for US fliers to rack up additional BIS miles with all that backtracking!

Ding, ding! Someone who get's it! Backtracking is not ideal, but would I rather backtrack to DFW or to PHX? Is the lesser of the evils. And for a good fare, it works just fine. Combine that with one of the largest and fastest growing metros in the US and it works.

Again, not ideal, doesn't print money, but it serves a valuable purpose in a network. As a legacy you cannot have the gap that AA has without US out west.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 45, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7905 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 43):
You will likely see more big RJs and more 319/320 take over flying in SLC. Delta has made it fairly clear the 717 wont be going to the western hubs. Not likely MSP will even get a base. (ATL/DTW maybe NYC)

Thats what I was thinking...and what I said. We might get one in SLC as an equipment swap, but that would be highly unlikely...thats also why DL took the MD-90's out of SLC. MSP was just better suited for them, and the 319/320's are doing good for SLC.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 46, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7884 times:

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
My post was an argument that AA needs a hub west of DFW.

And my post was an argument that no viable hub exists west of DFW for AA, or west of SLC for DL.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
WIthout a hub west of DFW, nobody would consider AA for flying within the western US.

So essentially no net change from now, where AA relies on partners for intra-west traffic. No problem.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
There is virtually no loyalty to AA on the West coast because of this.

   Right ...

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
If you live in the West and travel often within the west, the present AA is not your airline.

Actually there are lots of people who travel up and down the West Coast who use AS for such regional itineraries and AA for longer-haul. But that's irrelevant. In general, yes, AA has neither the hubs nor the cost structure - and you ned both, not just one - to be a competitor in the intra-West market. DL (SLC) and UA (SFO/DEN) both have viable hubs in the region. AA doesn't, and won't, with or without a merger.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Therefore, it will likely not be your airline when you do head east.

... except that, again, there are many people who defy this logic.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
West or Mountain West, as a major 3 airline, you need a hub in the west, weather that's in the West or Mountain West.

If one was available, fine. But a viable hub isn't available. Again - there are three, and all three are already spoken for. As such, AA will continue to focus on building up their local presence in L.A., strengthening its network in and out of, if not between, markets in the region, and enhancing partnerships with domestic (AS) and international (OW, etc.) carriers. I'm sure they'll be just fine.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Unless you live in California, there is no chance of connecting through LAX.

Same with PHX. Again - PHX is in a horrible location for connections from just about anywhere except AZ, CA, or HI. Beyond that, PHX is way out of the way for just about everything. And therein, again, lies the key distinction versus SLC - SLC is in a better location to handle connections to/from CA, but also the entire rest of the West Coast and Mountain West. Critical difference.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Is there any alternative for AA/US? No.

Sure there is. DFW. PHX is only in a good location for connections to/from AZ, CA and HI - DFW can handle just about all of those same connections. What little intra-west connectivity PHX now handles can easily be shifted, to at least a certain extent, elsewhere, and the PHX operation "right-sized" to cater to some connections but more O&D.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Other than folding the market, which they cannot afford to do.

Nonsense. The difference between the actual necessity of the PHX operation and the perception among PHX fans of the necessity of the PHX operation is enormous.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
If you're going to be a top three US airline, you've got to have to have a presence on the west coast.

... which AA has now, and will continue to have, regardless of any merger.

But AA need not have an actual hub in the region. It would be nice to have one, but unfortunately no viable ones are available.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Relying on AS is a joke, and is partly why AA has struggled.

  

Hardly.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Are their costs high? Sure. But they are also high because they thought they were a big dog and wanted to be right up there with UA and DL. They were trying to play with the big boys without being able to do so network-wise. They were esentially performing the role of a legacy and had high costs as such, but had huge gaps in the NE and West.

There is so much factually and historically inaccurate about this that I literally do not know where to begin.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
And for a good fare, it works just fine.

And therein, yet again, lies the key problem. That critical caveat - "for a good fare" - makes all the difference.

DL doesn't need to rely on "good fares" to make their SLC operation work, nor does UA with SFO. Those hubs work because of where they are located, and because they are directly in the path of lots and lots of convenient connections. DL's primary use for SLC is to get people in and out of the Mountain West, and between the West Coast and points east - in both cases SLC is not out of the way, and therefore doesn't require "a good fare" to induce people to inconvenience themselves. PHX, on the other hand, has very little of this. The only connections for which PHX actually is in a good location, and thus for which "a good fare" is not generally required to get people to tolerate schedule inconvenience, are those in and out of CA, AZ and HI.

And, as has been discussed before, in the context of the combined "new AA" network, there are virtually none of these CA/AZ/HI-originating/-bound connections that couldn't be handled via another hub. Therein lies the other problem for PHX compared to DL's hub in SLC and UA's hubs in DEN and SFO - those hubs serve unique roles within their airlines' networks that no other hub can replicate. DL could never use MSP to serve the Mountain West in the same way that it does via SLC. UA could never serve the West Coast from IAH the way it does via SFO. That's just geographic reality. PHX has no such unique geographic position - virtually every single traffic flow PHX handles can be easily replicated by other AA hubs - and in many if not most case, actually better than those traffic flows can be handled via PHX.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Combine that with one of the largest and fastest growing metros in the US and it works.

You missed one other ingredient for this "combination" - the bankruptcy-era costs of US today.

It is my opinion that PHX - almost certainly the lowest-yielding of US' hubs - is only profitable today at its current levels of capacity because of the low costs (labor, etc.) of US. Parker has essentially implied as much in the past - that US' network was only profitable at lower labor costs, and thus why US employees have been stuck at bankruptcy-level compensation for years. The problem with that calculus is that those bankruptcy-era costs will be coming to an end in the next 6-12 months. At that time, AA is going to have to raise revenue commensurate with raising costs. And in every other combined AA-US hub market, AA should be able to do that relatively easily through capacity discipline and network optimization - except PHX. It will be very difficult to raise revenue sufficiently in PHX, with its intense low-fare competition and low yields. And thus why I - and many others - expect PHX to suffer material capacity reduction. Catering to low-yielding local traffic and "good fare" out-of-the-way connections may work at US cost levels of today, but not AA's cost levels of tomorrow.

Herein, yet again, lies another important difference versus the other hubs you're comparing PHX to. DL's SLC operation is already optimized to operate at the company's current cost levels. Capacity and network optimization have already occurred. SLC doesn't have to worry about having to justify its existence with operating costs about to jump.

[Edited 2013-04-28 12:27:05]

User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24996 posts, RR: 85
Reply 47, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7862 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
I do not believe the current market conditions in DEN are sustainable. I still believe that at some point, something is going to have to give.

People have been saying that for seven years, but as an abstract concept, without regard to what is happening on the ground - where something has given.

The number of routes where all three airlines compete has been reduced quite dramatically - and may yet reduce more. Conversely, on some of the remaining tripartite routes, a fourth airline has turned up, not always the same airline.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 43):
his point is someone would leave Denver, I agree with that.

I dunno why Frontier at DEN is even involved in this, what it has to do with the topic. The chances of Frontier leaving DEN and slim to none and Slim left the building a long time ago.

More on topic, if (fantasy land) Delta ever left SLC, no one airline would have that market on its own.

mariner

[Edited 2013-04-28 12:39:27]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 48, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7867 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 46):
So essentially no net change from now, where AA relies on partners for intra-west traffic. No problem.

LCC is doing something to make money, IMO....PHX is a part of this. (and proof of this is the fact that is has one of the highest mainline %s in the country.)


Oh and you're looking at things, IMO, as AA does now. You, nor I, know what Parker will do. IMO PHX stay right about where it is now. Maybe a little smaller aircraft as things get balanced.



yep.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 49, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7819 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 48):
LCC is doing something to make money, IMO....PHX is a part of this.
PHX is part of it - no question. But again, in my view, it's part of it for two reasons: (1) US has the lowest costs of the legacy carriers, and (2) US has no alternative. Post-merger, both of those justifications go away.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 48):
Oh and you're looking at things, IMO, as AA does now.

Probably. But I think the numbers - and the geography - honestly speak for themselves.

Look at a map - there are virtually no connections PHX now handles that DFW, LAX or ORD cannot handle as well or better. Plus, I continue to believe that PHX is almost certainly the lowest-yielding of US' hubs. So continuing to operate a hub in PHX post-merger of the same scale and scope as US has there now would essentially mean concluding that it was more efficient to operate a hub at network airline costs in a market dominated by a lower-cost carrier, and with virtually no unique network role. Perhaps this is AA thinking, but I struggle to see how that makes sense.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 48):
You, nor I, know what Parker will do. IMO PHX stay right about where it is now. Maybe a little smaller aircraft as things get balanced.

The future is unknown - no question about it.

But again, I simply do not understand how, with substantially higher costs than US has now, Parker will be able to justify to shareholders continuing to put so much capacity into a market as low-yielding as PHX - particularly when those traffic flows are superfluous to flows over other hubs. I'm not saying the PHX operation will simply be reduced to the hubs and nothing else, but I just cannot square the economic and geographic factors PHX will have working against it with the hub US now operates there.

It would be different if PHX were like SLC is for DL, and served some unique role that no other AA hub could fill, and that could give AA access to some higher-yielding connecting flows to offset the lower-yielding local and connecting traffic PHX now handles. But I don't see any such role.

[Edited 2013-04-28 12:42:39]

User currently offlinePHXFlyer16 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7780 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 49):
Look at a map - there are virtually no connections PHX now handles that DFW, LAX or ORD cannot handle as well or better. Plus, I continue to believe that PHX is almost certainly the lowest-yielding of US' hubs. So continuing to operate a hub in PHX post-merger of the same scale and scope as US has there now would essentially mean concluding that it was more efficient to operate a hub at network airline costs in a market dominated by a lower-cost carrier, and with virtually no unique network role. Perhaps this is AA thinking, but I struggle to see how that makes sense.

What? Anything west of DFW to any other destination west of DFW is better connected through PHX.

We get it, PHX is south, but it's better than going all the way to DFW.

This premise that AA only sucked because their costs were too high is a joke! If their creditors believed that exiting bancruptcy with lower costs would fix the airline they would've done it. The fact is that much more was wrong with AA, including no significant presence in the NE and West.

Do they rely on AS and B6 to fill the gaps? Yes. Is it a good idea, no.

I think the mentality that AA was doing everything right except their costs were too high is a joke. There were other problems and if that wasn't the case then Horton would still be running the show and AA would be making a go of it alone.

There were many problems that AA could not fix. Brining in DP means he's in charge and will change the things that AA couldn't or wouldn't. If you expect AA to keep doing what it's done in the past with more planes you are sadly mistaken.


User currently onlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1541 posts, RR: 1
Reply 51, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7741 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 43):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 15):Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence
Not anyone who can read a map.

And especially with the partner AS hub there. At best any DL-to-DL connectivity would be similar to UA at FLL where they connect some very specific places that SLC is perceived as suboptimal for with what else they run out of SEA. But even then, AS probably already hits everything worth running, and SLC isn't too far away to handle that traffic on DL's own equipment wherever they feel the need to serve it themselves instead of relying entirely on AS.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 52, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7656 times:

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
What? Anything west of DFW to any other destination west of DFW is better connected through PHX.

We get it, PHX is south, but it's better than going all the way to DFW.

Nobody is suggesting DFW is a viable connecting point for intra-west connections. My point was that PHX really isn't much of one, either.

I again come back to - look at a map, and more specifically, the current US route map. The list of connecting markets "west of DFW to any other destination west of DFW" that US now serves conveniently via PHX is slim. And most of that can be handled via LAX. For connections between CA and AZ, NM, CO and UT, AA already flies to basically all of the same markets via LAX as it is. And for connections into this region of the Pacific Northwest or elsewhere, PHX is already so far out of the way as to be rendered largely meaningless, anyway. As examples, SFO-DEN is shorter via LAX than via PHX. Same with SAN-SLC. SMF-ABQ PHX is shorter by 75 miles. Same with FAT-TUS.

There are certainly some markets that cannot be served via LAX - SNA, BUR, LGB, etc. But, in general, if you actually plot on a map the intra-west connections for which PHX is today a truly viable competitor (and by that I mean connections for which PHX does not have to rely on deep discounts to get people to connect there), there are few where PHX is appreciably more convenient than LAX. And when you expand the view to include all connections, not just those limited to intra-west, there are very few for which PHX is appreciably more convenient than LAX, DFW, ORD, etc. Thus why I continue to say that PHX is largely unnecessary as a hub in its current form. So sure, PHX may still have value as a large local operation that does cater to some connections, but it's just hard to find too many connections for which PHX is truly unique and cannot be replicated.

The same cannot be said of SLC, which is - going back to the point of this thread - why it has so much value for DL, and why it would make little sense for DL to close or move the hub there.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
This premise that AA only sucked because their costs were too high is a joke!

Well I think AA's results post-merger largely vindicate that it was, in fact, the cost side of the equation that was the larger part of the problem. AA has managed to almost entirely close their revenue gap relative to DL, and in many cases overtake UA, without any meaningful network restructuring (closing hubs, etc.) - and that's before AA has even had the opportunity to fully utilize all the new tools it now has at its disposal after jettisoning non-competitive union contract restrictions.

The fact that AA's unit revenues are now just about on par with DL and UA, and the fact that AA is going to end up delivering full recovery to pre-restructuring creditors and even some value back to pre-restructuring shareholders, pretty much indicates to me that yes, it was, indeed, mostly costs that were the problem. There were other problems, certainly. But looking back now with nearly 18 months of hindsight, it appears that costs were, in fact, the biggest issue that needed addressing.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
Do they rely on AS and B6 to fill the gaps? Yes. Is it a good idea, no.

Nobody is suggesting that. I'm suggesting that the gaps AA relies on AS to fill today are gaps that will still require AS to fill going forward. The US network in PHX does not fill them!

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
I think the mentality that AA was doing everything right except their costs were too high is a joke.

Well when you find somebody expressing that mentality, or making that "joke," I encourage you to express your opinion. In the interim, back here in reality, nobody is suggesting such things. What I was suggesting is that any network limitations AA had in the western U.S. will largely still exist post-merger. AA's hub structure today is ideal largely for connecting between the western U.S. and somewhere else, and not for connections within the western U.S. That will still be the case with or without a hub in PHX because is in a generally poor location and not an ideal network airline hub market, unlike, for example, SLC, which is actually in a pretty good location and has several dynamics working for it as hub markets go (little meaningful competition, for example). What AA would need to have to meaningfully build up their presence in the west would be a hub in SLC, DEN or SFO. But those hubs are already taken.

As such, unlike DL and UA, AA is left largely with hubs - LAX, PHX, DFW, etc. - that cater to connections between the west and somewhere else, rather than within the west itself.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
There were other problems and if that wasn't the case then Horton would still be running the show and AA would be making a go of it alone.

Yikes. I'm not saying that the merger isn't a net positive - it most definitely is. The combined network is going to be an impressive one, and US will fill several key network holes that AA had. But the west is not really one of them.

AA has a gap there now, and largely still will post-merger. By way of market access and traffic flows, PHX really adds very little that isn't already served by the combination of LAX/DFW/ORD. It adds some, but very little. If AA could add a hub like DL has in SLC that would provide unique connecting flows, and new market access, that would be a different story. But for the most part, PHX offers more of the same connecting flows that AA hubs already serve now.

The east coast is a whole other story, where the US hubs and network will add enormous new market access and connectivity to the already-large AA network, and catapult AA overnight into having arguably the best, or among the best, hub structures in the region.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):
Brining in DP means he's in charge and will change the things that AA couldn't or wouldn't. If you expect AA to keep doing what it's done in the past with more planes you are sadly mistaken.

The need to turn this into an AA-vs-US thing speaks volumes about the insecurity of PHX. This has nothing to do with AA, or US. It has to do with geographic and economics, and in my opinion both are working against PHX post-merger. PHX is simply not a viable competitor for SLC or DEN. It just isn't.

[Edited 2013-04-28 13:30:13]

User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 53, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7572 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 15):
Some may see DL's buildup at SEA as threatening to SLC's existence but essentially that's not going to do anything to SLC.

A DL Acquisition of AS via a merger would change this and SEA along with MSP and what DL can do at LAX would make SLC redundant however

Quoting mayor (Reply 41):
When I worked at SLC, there was a rumor floating around for years, after the DL/WA merger, that DL was exploring moving the SLC hub to LAS. Don't know if this was something actually thought of or just something started in a lunchroom, somewhere.

This actually was discussed back in 1997-1998, but the growth of SLC and the Wasatch Front have negated this talk. Also the SLC Department of Airports has kept a debt free budget for several years now allowing extremely low costs, as well as DL monopolization of gates keeping the options for WN minimal. But that said there are some who don't want SLC to rebuild their terminals, concourses or parking structures or add a 4th runway to the west and would prefer
WN to become the dominant SLC carrier as it has elsewhere in the west.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 51):
very specific places that SLC is perceived as suboptimal for with what else they run out of SEA.

Trans-Pacific locations since SEA isn't the bloodbath $$$-wise that LAX is. SEA is percieved as being under-served given the proximity to YVR and a bigger local market.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 54, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7543 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 47):
More on topic, if (fantasy land) Delta ever left SLC, no one airline would have that market on its own.

WN would expand VERY quickly in SLC and would own it faster than they've destroyed F9 in DEN. I also might add that DEN wanted Western, and this was a major justification for building DIA, but DL made it clear by 1991 that they intended to remain in SLC given the high costs of DIA.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24996 posts, RR: 85
Reply 55, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7530 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 54):
WN would expand VERY quickly in SLC and would own it faster than they've destroyed F9 in DEN.

Certainly Southwest would expand dramatically and quickly at SLC, as I've already said.

I am not sure how they have "destroyed" Frontier at DEN, since last year Frontier made a full year profit, the first full year profit since 2003, with more than 85% of its business still at DEN.

DEN is profitable for at least one airline there, but I'm still not sure what Frontier has to do with any of this.

mariner

[Edited 2013-04-28 14:32:46]


aeternum nauta
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 56, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7494 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 53):
This actually was discussed back in 1997-1998, but the growth of SLC and the Wasatch Front have negated this talk.

The rumor was pretty hot and heavy around the time that DL was trying to decide which hub to downsize, SLC or DFW.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 53):
But that said there are some who don't want SLC to rebuild their terminals, concourses or parking structures or add a 4th runway to the west and would prefer
WN to become the dominant SLC carrier as it has elsewhere in the west.

There always seemed to be a faction that never liked the fact that DL came in and took over Western, their "hometown" airline......this same faction, in the media and government, embraced WN like they were Western, no matter what DL had done for the airport and the city since the merger.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 57, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7454 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 53):
A DL Acquisition of AS via a merger would change this and SEA along with MSP and what DL can do at LAX would make SLC redundant however

I don't see how you figure. Even if - big if - DL and AS were to merge, and SEA and SLC were to be united within the same network, the fundamental purpose of the two hubs would still be different. SEA works a connecting hub between the continental U.S. and Asia, and along the west coast and to Alaska. SLC works as a connecting hub to/from the Mountain West, and east-west across the country. SEA cannot replicate the role SLC fills in the network, and likewise SLC cannot replace the role SEA fills in the network.


User currently offlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1897 posts, RR: 9
Reply 58, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7426 times:

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
No, AA was not competitive because its competitors DL and UA had gone through bankruptcy and greatly reduced their costs while AA hadn't.

Are their costs high? Sure. But they are also high because they thought they were a big dog and wanted to be right up there with UA and DL.

Then every other major carrier that declared bankruptcy must have the same story, why you think that's unique to AA I'll never know.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):

Ding, ding! Someone who get's it!

The point he was making was an argument against your point if you'd read his post more carefully and the comment of mine he was replying to. You say backtracking is no big deal but that companies also must have hubs in the West and Northeast to make money...something doesn't add up here.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
WIthout a hub west of DFW, nobody would consider AA for flying within the western US.

If you were at all that intimately familiar with the West Coast market, you'd know that many who frequently have intra-West travels maintain dual accounts with either WN or AS as well as a network legacy for longer distance travels, WN and AS undoubtedly dominate the West Coast market and are usually preferred over network carriers for their intra-West travels.

Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 44):
There is virtually no loyalty to AA on the West coast because of this.

Yeah, I guess that's why AA dominates the transcon market that DL and UA are rushing to try and compete with them on  


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 59, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7416 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 46):
Same with PHX. Again - PHX is in a horrible location for connections from just about anywhere except AZ, CA, or HI.
Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 50):

What? Anything west of DFW to any other destination west of DFW is better connected through PHX.

We get it, PHX is south, but it's better than going all the way to DFW.

This premise that AA only sucked because their costs were too high is a joke! If their creditors believed that exiting bancruptcy with lower costs would fix the airline they would've done it. The fact is that much more was wrong with AA, including no significant presence in the NE and West.

Do they rely on AS and B6 to fill the gaps? Yes. Is it a good idea, no.

I think the mentality that AA was doing everything right except their costs were too high is a joke. There were other problems and if that wasn't the case then Horton would still be running the show and AA would be making a go of it alone.

There were many problems that AA could not fix. Brining in DP means he's in charge and will change the things that AA couldn't or wouldn't. If you expect AA to keep doing what it's done in the past with more planes you are sadly mistaken.

PHX is not a great connection city as the airline that flies there is not a great one to fly. I prefer to fly from SLC or SEA if I have to connect anywhere or DFW for that matter. Better connecting schedules and shorter transit times if I have to connect. I prefer to go direct but that is sometimes not an option. The flights from my home to Europe don't really time that well though PHX and I would like not to have to spend more than a couple of hours connecting not a night coming back. I also do not like travelling through LAX. That leaves out PHX realistically and makes it more economical to connect through DFW, SFO or SLC.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 60, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7402 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 49):
PHX is part of it - no question. But again, in my view, it's part of it for two reasons: (1) US has the lowest costs of the legacy carriers, and (2) US has no alternative. Post-merger, both of those justifications go away.

Well I would have agreed with you till I saw US had a 60%+ mainline % at PHX. Why is that a big deal to me? generally when the legacies run into WN they match frequencies with RJs(big or small) but US is holding its own with mainline. Either they are burning money and don't care or they are doing a good job at handling WN. With US running WN out of PHL and WN building up DEN as they have, I wouldn't be surprised to hear US is giving WN a fair run for their money. (is profitable)

Quoting commavia (Reply 49):
Probably. But I think the numbers - and the geography - honestly speak for themselves.

The issue is you're looking at the market....we don't know how well US is doing in PHX. As i said it could be a huge money pit, but generally airlines can't cover up a 300 flight a day money pit in Q1. With US making money this quarter, I think it shows that all the hubs are profitable.

How DFW changes that? no Idea. AA may be happy with a small hub at LA and then everything else is Dallas and to the easy. IMO they will keep a large chunk of PHX's capacity the same.

Quoting commavia (Reply 49):
Parker will be able to justify to shareholders continuing to put so much capacity into a market as low-yielding as PHX - particularly when those traffic flows are superfluous to flows over other hubs.

two things.
1) you watched AA's management run the company into the ground and no one gave a crap. They wanted GA to stay on but he retired. I have very little faith that any airline is going to run the CEO out of town at this point. (I mean come on, Leo ran Delta into the ground....no one cared, look at whats going on at UA....no one seems to care)
2)Parker is smart, PHX won't stay around if it is a money pit. As i said, I don't think it is. IMO the AA merger just makes it that much stronger.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 51):
But even then, AS probably already hits everything worth running, and SLC isn't too far away to handle that traffic on DL's own equipment wherever they feel the need to serve it themselves instead of relying entirely on AS.

I wouldn't go that far. If Delta is going to keep expanding at SEA they will either add feed or buy AS. The point is, none of this will have any relation to SLC.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 53):

A DL Acquisition of AS via a merger would change this and SEA along with MSP and what DL can do at LAX would make SLC redundant however

Why? is Salt lake city suddenly going to move into Cali or Washington? Again....map. SLC is the only hub that can do what it does. If Delta moves the only other city that could handle the flows is Denver. period. No one is going to fly SFO-SEA-DFW. No one is going to fly PDX-LAX-BWI. (ok that last one would work over MSP/DTW....but you get my point) It also is the only hub that can have any meaningful rocky mountain presence.
If Delta/AS merger PDX and the AS's p2p network would be cut, LAX and SEA would grow. SLC would also likely grow capacity.

Quoting commavia (Reply 57):
I don't see how you figure. Even if - big if - DL and AS were to merge, and SEA and SLC were to be united within the same network, the fundamental purpose of the two hubs would still be different. SEA works a connecting hub between the continental U.S. and Asia, and along the west coast and to Alaska. SLC works as a connecting hub to/from the Mountain West, and east-west across the country. SEA cannot replicate the role SLC fills in the network, and likewise SLC cannot replace the role SEA fills in the network.

this. SLC fits into any possible network of any merger Delta could have. AS, B6, NK hell even the little talked about DL/AA merger. The only merger that was ever really talked about that would have likely hurt SLC(and even then, not sure it would have) was DL/UA. DEN/SLC are about the only places that can provide the flows they do.



yep.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7390 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 60):
Well I would have agreed with you till I saw US had a 60%+ mainline % at PHX. Why is that a big deal to me? generally when the legacies run into WN they match frequencies with RJs(big or small) but US is holding its own with mainline. Either they are burning money and don't care or they are doing a good job at handling WN.

Thus my point - US mainline is the lowest-cost network carrier there is! That is why they are able to hold their own against WN in PHX. But post-merger? With costs that will surely be higher than US has today? Therein lies my skepticism.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 60):
With US making money this quarter, I think it shows that all the hubs are profitable.

Again - profitability now does not necessarily portend profitability later, at substantially higher costs. In order for Parker to keep all of the (expensive) promises he has made to various constituencies, he is going to have to boost revenue materially. I see that being plausible in most of the new combined carrier's hubs, but I question how much pricing power AA will be able to extract in PHX. That is the key point I'm trying to make.

[Edited 2013-04-28 16:15:17]

User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 62, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7375 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 61):

Thus my point - US mainline is the lowest-cost network carrier there is! That is why they are able to hold their own against WN in PHX. But post-merger? With costs that will surely be higher than US has today? Therein lies my skepticism.

lower cost than RJ flying? While the CASM of say a CR9 is fairly high, I would still think that YV or OO would beat US mainline cost.

now, your key point, this will change big time post merger (would AA still have the lowest CASM or would they go back above DL?) which could cause big time changes.

Quoting commavia (Reply 61):
Again - profitability now does not necessarily portend profitability later, at substantially higher costs. In order for Parker to keep all of (expensive) the promises he has made to various constituencies, he is going to have to boost revenue materially. I see that being plausible in most of the new combined carrier's hubs, but I question how much pricing power AA will be able to extract in PHX. That is the key point I'm trying to make.

I agree 100% with what you're saying. I'm just looking at the flip side too. I personally don't think PHXs future as bad as some make it out to be.

but one thing that doesn't help, DFW is probably the only other hub besides ATL that I think could handle ~1,000 flights a day.



yep.
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 63, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7345 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 60):
Leo ran Delta into the ground....no one cared,

Well, WE certainly cared, not that it mattered much what we thought.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 64, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7324 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 63):
Well, WE certainly cared, not that it mattered much what we thought.

and I'm betting you, like the rest of the employees would have given his worthless ass the boot looooong before the BOD did. (and I'd say Ronny would have had the shoe drop on him after the lovely idea that was 7.5)
and don't get me started on his little followers.....lookin at you Fred Reid and Michele Burns....

but no one gives a piss what the employees want. (at least in this case)



yep.
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 65, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7296 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 64):
and I'm betting you, like the rest of the employees would have given his worthless ass the boot looooong before the BOD did. (and I'd say Ronny would have had the shoe drop on him after the lovely idea that was 7.5)
and don't get me started on his little followers.....lookin at you Fred Reid and Michele Burns....

but no one gives a piss what the employees want. (at least in this case)

I always thought that Grinstein, when he was on the Executive hiring committee, always felt bad about hiring Leo, and that's why he did such a good job during the bankruptcy.


Actually, 7.5 wasn't that bad of an idea, considering that the company was new to these waters and had never had to do anything like that, before.


As far as Leo's henchmen (or women), it's probably best I don't vent my feelings about them on here. All in all, when the BOD decided to can Ron, they should have kept a new hiring, in house. There were several that were pretty well qualified, but my favorite was Whit Hawkins.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 66, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7277 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 65):

I always thought that Grinstein, when he was on the Executive hiring committee, always felt bad about hiring Leo, and that's why he did such a good job during the bankruptcy.

Grinstein is just a people person. He did all the same things Horton and Tilton did, he just did it the right way. Employees take a pay cut, Gerry, Jim and Ed take a pay cut. Employees get the pension cut he gave his to the employee care fund. Just doing the right thing. (and you can also compare....AA's labor went to US airways for a buy out, Delta's employees made it very clear they didn't want it)

Though I have heard things about him. I talked to one pilot who was at WA and he said at the time of the merger Gerry made it very clear he wanted to see Delta outsourcing any flying smaller than the 757. Of course that could all be horse poo. well before my time  
Quoting mayor (Reply 65):

As far as Leo's henchmen (or women), it's probably best I don't vent my feelings about them on here. All in all, when the BOD decided to can Ron, they should have kept a new hiring, in house. There were several that were pretty well qualified, but my favorite was Whit Hawkins.

I think the idea was to find a "money" guy to fix and continue Rons plans. Who knows.....I don't think Leo is doing anything much now. IIRC Ron is a CEO of like an autozone type company here in the south.

Quoting mayor (Reply 65):

Actually, 7.5 wasn't that bad of an idea, considering that the company was new to these waters and had never had to do anything like that, before.

so of the ideas were terrible. ie the outsourcing of ramp in the hubs, though DFW was the only one to have it happen.



yep.
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 67, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7181 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 60):
Well I would have agreed with you till I saw US had a 60%+ mainline % at PHX. Why is that a big deal to me? generally when the legacies run into WN they match frequencies with RJs(big or small) but US is holding its own with mainline.

Well there is a simple reason for this. Contrary to what it may appear at first glance, there are a large number of destinations out of PHX where US faces no N/S competition with WN.

The following is a list of N/S routes from PHX on US that does not have any WN N/S competition:
ANC
YVR
YEG
YYC
HNL
OGG
LIH
KOA
SJO
MEX
PVR
SJD
GDL
CUN
ZIH
MZT
IAH
DFW
ORD
DCA
BOS (recent WN addition)
ATL (recent WN addition)
CLT
JFK
PIT
HMO (regional)
BFL (regional)
MRY (regional)
DSM (regional)
SBA (regional)
SBP (regional)
PSP (regional)
FAT (regional)
YUM (regional)
TUC (regional)
FLG (regional)
DRO (regional)
GJT (regional)

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 60):
generally when the legacies run into WN they match frequencies with RJs(big or small) but US is holding its own with mainline.

This is also the case in PHX. You just need to look at the routes where they compete head to head instead of just looking at the % of mainline US has in PHX. As mentioned above, there are a lot of cities where US & WN do not compete with N/S service, hence part of the reason for the high percentage of mainline flying.

When you look at the routes where US & WN do compete head to head with N/S service, US often has some degree of regional service. For example, the following list contains cities that are served N/S by both US & WN with some degree of US regional partner service:
SAN, SJC, SNA, BUR, ONT, OAK, ABQ, AUS, SAT, ELP, MCI, RNO, SLC


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 68, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7190 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 66):
Though I have heard things about him. I talked to one pilot who was at WA and he said at the time of the merger Gerry made it very clear he wanted to see Delta outsourcing any flying smaller than the 757. Of course that could all be horse poo. well before my time

I really doubt that, because, even though he was on the BOD, Grinstein left DL and went to Burlington Northern. On top of that, that would be more than half of the fleet, after the merger.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 66):
IIRC Ron is a CEO of like an autozone type company here in the south.

Aaron's Rents, they rent furniture, electronics, appliances, etc.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 69, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7100 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 56):
The rumor was pretty hot and heavy around the time that DL was trying to decide which hub to downsize, SLC or DFW.

By 2002-2003 DEN came back into the mix "IF" UA ended up going completely into a Chapter 7 liquidation. In that scenario SLC & DFW would have been jetisoned for DEN.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 70, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 7039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 53):
A DL Acquisition of AS via a merger would change this and SEA along with MSP and what DL can do at LAX would make SLC redundant however

No it wouldnt, it would actually strengthen SLC, just as DEN is helped by SFO and LAX.


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 71, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 6930 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 69):
By 2002-2003 DEN came back into the mix "IF" UA ended up going completely into a Chapter 7 liquidation. In that scenario SLC & DFW would have been jetisoned for DEN.

And THAT, considering all other factors staying the same at DEN, may have been a monumental mistake, in my eyes. Would the same thing happen to DL if WN were to come in, then?



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7175 posts, RR: 17
Reply 72, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6745 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
Quoting PHXFlyer16 (Reply 32):
*sigh* here we go again...

"Sigh" indeed.

Ok from here on out, instead of drawing out these long threads to unneccessary lengths about who deserves/gets what, why don't we all agree to disagree here  



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 73, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6618 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 70):
No it wouldnt, it would actually strengthen SLC, just as DEN is helped by SFO and LAX.

DEN is much further east in realtion to SFO & LAX as well as substantially larger a market than SLC is from LAX or SEA in that scenario.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 74, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6235 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 67):
When you look at the routes where US & WN do compete head to head with N/S service, US often has some degree of regional service. For example, the following list contains cities that are served N/S by both US & WN with some degree of US regional partner service:
SAN, SJC, SNA, BUR, ONT, OAK, ABQ, AUS, SAT, ELP, MCI, RNO, SLC

On some of these cities, US trumps WN also by offering their biggest narrowbodies (A321, and 757's on select flights) in addition to the Express flying in the severe offpeak times



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 75, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6032 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 74):
Quoting EricR (Reply 67):
When you look at the routes where US & WN do compete head to head with N/S service, US often has some degree of regional service. For example, the following list contains cities that are served N/S by both US & WN with some degree of US regional partner service:
SAN, SJC, SNA, BUR, ONT, OAK, ABQ, AUS, SAT, ELP, MCI, RNO, SLC

On some of these cities, US trumps WN also by offering their biggest narrowbodies (A321, and 757's on select flights) in addition to the Express flying in the severe offpeak times


I don't see any 757's on those routes. I do see some with A321's, but in those few ocassions (ie. SNA, SLC) PHX is the only hub connected to those spokes (albeit SLC does have 1 redeye to CLT). SAN is the only one where I could see some basis to this point, but WN runs 12 N/S while US only runs 7.


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8189 posts, RR: 24
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6025 times:

Short answer: absolutely. Despite what others say, every hub has to prove itself every day in today's climate. SLC ain't ATL.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5956 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 76):
SLC ain't ATL

It also ain't DEN, PHX or LAS in the more immediate region.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 78, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 5896 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 76):
Short answer: absolutely.

Shorter answer: slim and none.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 76):
SLC ain't ATL.

What is?



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 79, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5741 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 75):
I don't see any 757's on those routes. I do see some with A321's, but in those few ocassions (ie. SNA, SLC) PHX is the only hub connected to those spokes (albeit SLC does have 1 redeye to CLT). SAN is the only one where I could see some basis to this point, but WN runs 12 N/S while US only runs 7

They have been operated in the past (PHX-SAN, PHX-SNA, PHX-LAX), not sure about the schedules now, aside from a bunch of A319/320/321's and CRJ's thrown in...

Quoting N766UA (Reply 76):
Short answer: absolutely. Despite what others say, every hub has to prove itself every day in today's climate. SLC ain't ATL.

Very true...but it is prety similar in how committed DL is to it.

Quoting mayor (Reply 78):
What is?

The only answer wouild be ATL...lol...the one and ONLY ATL.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 80, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5540 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Thread starter):
(even though I usually fly WN)

Interestingly it is the WN loyalists so to say that don't like the idea of rebuilding the terminals, concourses & parking structures at SLC.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 81, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5402 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 80):
Interestingly it is the WN loyalists so to say that don't like the idea of rebuilding the terminals, concourses & parking structures at SLC.

Well, it isn't the extra traffic that WN has brought to SLC that has made it necessary, for sure.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinemplsjefe From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5414 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N766UA (Reply 76):
Short answer: absolutely. Despite what others say, every hub has to prove itself every day in today's climate. SLC ain't ATL.

SLC ain't DTW or MSP either as both are cash cow hubs for DL (MSP often listed as the most profitable, while AL largest margins overall) and print $ for DL.

SLC has a very important role in the current network which I am guessing will continue, assuming nothing dramatically changes. If DL does ramp up LAX and SEA as they have been, or especially deepens it ties or even 'acquires' AS, anything could happen. SLC may just not be a large enough O&D market to maintain a large connecting hub if LAX and SEA are really at play. In either of those cases, SLC will stay a "hub" for sure, but may be decreased some to a more CVG level.

Just some thoughts, not meaning to ruffle too many feathers with this post. Just my own 2 cents.

mplsjefe


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 83, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5263 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 81):
Well, it isn't the extra traffic that WN has brought to SLC that has made it necessary, for sure.

Havent they drawn down SLC in the last decade or so in favor of DEN, PHX, and LAS?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 84, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5245 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 83):

Quoting mayor (Reply 81):
Well, it isn't the extra traffic that WN has brought to SLC that has made it necessary, for sure.

Havent they drawn down SLC in the last decade or so in favor of DEN, PHX, and LAS?

With respect to PHX, WN is actually down over the last decade from 200+ daily flights to 167 daily flights.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 85, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5180 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 84):
With respect to PHX, WN is actually down over the last decade from 200+ daily flights to 167 daily flights.

Still, thats not as bad a hit as from what SLC was in the 90's to what it is now...



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 86, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5004 times:

Quoting mplsjefe (Reply 82):
If DL does ramp up LAX and SEA as they have been, or especially deepens it ties or even 'acquires' AS, anything could happen. SLC may just not be a large enough O&D market to maintain a large connecting hub if LAX and SEA are really at play. In either of those cases, SLC will stay a "hub" for sure, but may be decreased some to a more CVG level.

The big catch with SLC is it is a substantially growing O&D market, with roughly only half the passenger load being connecting DL passengers, a significantly higher percentage than say ATL where it is more of a 1-3 margin. This might be the caveat that has in the past and in the future keep DL in SLC. CVG and MEM on the other hand have been low or stagnant growth markets for DL/NW. The big draw of MSP has been its level of fortune 500 companies, but geographically it isn't in as great a position to do for the western part of the continent what SLC can do as far as connecting passengers from the Mountain & Pacific Time Zones. What hurts SLC is facilities since it isn't set up to handle more than 1 or w wide-bodies daily to Europe or Asia given the FIS desk is very limited which is why the city is moving forward with a new overall masterplan.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 87, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4882 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 86):
The big catch with SLC is it is a substantially growing O&D market, with roughly only half the passenger load being connecting DL passengers, a significantly higher percentage than say ATL where it is more of a 1-3 margin.

The population of the state of Utah has almost doubled since the 90s with most of that along the Wasatch Front.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 88, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4791 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 86):
What hurts SLC is facilities since it isn't set up to handle more than 1 or w wide-bodies daily to Europe or Asia given the FIS desk is very limited which is why the city is moving forward with a new overall masterplan.

and the new masterplan looks good! Just out of curiosity, how much bigger would the FIS be, and how many gates would be connected to it?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 89, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4554 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 87):
The population of the state of Utah has almost doubled since the 90s with most of that along the Wasatch Front.

Which is why DL won't walk away from SLC despite the perception that it'll never have the O&D that DEN, PHX or LAS offer.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 88):
and the new masterplan looks good! Just out of curiosity, how much bigger would the FIS be, and how many gates would be connected to it?

I'm only concerned about them under-building if anything. As for more gates connected to the FIS desk, it will be much more than the current 3 along concourse D.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 90, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4518 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 89):
Which is why DL won't walk away from SLC despite the perception that it'll never have the O&D that DEN, PHX or LAS offer.

Also, you wouldnt believe just how many major Utah corporations and religions have massive corporate travel contracts with DL exclusively. There's always underlying reasons besides just O&D, Connectin pax, etc...SLC is quite firmly, a DL fortress.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 89):
I'm only concerned about them under-building if anything. As for more gates connected to the FIS desk, it will be much more than the current 3 along concourse D.

Im not too worried about underconstruction. I just hope they dont stop halfway through like PANYNJ did with AA's Terminal at JFK.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 91, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4313 times:

LAS has shown it has the o&d to be a hub for multiple airlines but does not have the last minute business travel or high enough fares to sustain a legacy hub. LAS has alot of business trips to conferences and stuff but its often known very far in advance and not last minute high fares even. LAS simply cannot be a legacy hub it shows you need more than o&d to survive as a hub for a legacy. For southwest or an all coach carrier on the other hand LAS is a much better fit which is why they have taken over. No legacy could have a hub at LAS its the worst fit possible.

Delta chased Southwests dreams out of SLC a while ago which now turned out to be brilliant. With such a solid buildup in DEN clearly Southwest is entrenched and is not going anywhere.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 92, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4189 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 91):
Delta chased Southwests dreams out of SLC a while ago which now turned out to be brilliant. With such a solid buildup in DEN clearly Southwest is entrenched and is not going anywhere.

Thanks to Frontier's lackadaisiacal management and shrinking! I remember right after the Morris Air merger there were rumours WN was trying to take over ALL of the B Concourse...now they've even given up a gate or two to an expanding DL! Last flight I took into SLC (OO CR7 from STL) parked at B13.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 93, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4008 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 90):
Im not too worried about underconstruction.

IF AF/KL have an LHR slot to give up, how well would SLC compete in the DL network to potentially land it?



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 94, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3843 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 93):
IF AF/KL have an LHR slot to give up, how well would SLC compete in the DL network to potentially land it?

I'm pretty sure one of the other hubs that are screaming for another daytime flight would have toppriority, but as far as a new destination from LHR, SLC should be at the top of the list. I think all other hubs/focus cities are served aside from MEM and CVG.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 95, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3822 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 94):
I'm pretty sure one of the other hubs that are screaming for another daytime flight would have toppriority, but as far as a new destination from LHR, SLC should be at the top of the list. I think all other hubs/focus cities are served aside from MEM and CVG.

In the same time period when AA got the RDU-LHR and BNA-LHR routes, we thought SLC-London had a chance instead of one of those AA city pairs but politics reared its ugly head and we lost out. We were even working out the myriad of customs details ahead of time, we were so sure.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 94):
I'm pretty sure one of the other hubs that are screaming for another daytime flight would have toppriority, but as far as a new destination from LHR, SLC should be at the top of the list. I think all other hubs/focus cities are served aside from MEM and CVG

Things could change but as of right now Delta has said its priority is SEA, a 2nd to DTW, then SLC. Could take some time but i would hope Summer 2014 is a possibility for SLC-LHR or maybe 2015.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2968 posts, RR: 7
Reply 97, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3802 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 95):
In the same time period when AA got the RDU-LHR and BNA-LHR routes, we thought SLC-London had a chance instead of one of those AA city pairs but politics reared its ugly head and we lost out. We were even working out the myriad of customs details ahead of time, we were so sure.

Didn't DL apply for SLC-London around the 2000 time frame? I seem to recall that. AA applied for SJC-LGW also.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 98, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3781 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 97):
Didn't DL apply for SLC-London around the 2000 time frame? I seem to recall that. AA applied for SJC-LGW also.

I seem to recall that too. Didnt pan out, BUT, hopefully soon SLC will see an LHR link...maybe even AMS *wishful thinking*



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 99, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3776 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 97):
Didn't DL apply for SLC-London around the 2000 time frame? I seem to recall that. AA applied for SJC-LGW also.

I don't recall when it was. Those on A.net can probably recall better than I. All I remember is that the DOT was going to grant TWO gateways and since the stipulation was that no two gateways could go to one carrier and that the entrants were DL with SLC-London and AA with RDU-LHR and BNA-LHR, we thought we had it made. Little did we know that a group of politicians and the airport authorities in Tennessee also had applied, thereby circumventing the rules. As soon as it was granted to them, AA was allowed to operate it. That's the way I remember the story, in any event.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 100, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3759 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 97):
Didn't DL apply for SLC-London around the 2000 time frame? I seem to recall that. AA applied for SJC-LGW also.

I thought Delta Applied for SLC-LHR and AA got RDU both and BNA first?

I do think SLC-LHR will happen. I thought years ago the CEO of Delta said in a speech to employees that SLC-LHR was a when not if flight but slots are just too expensive at LHR. The Virgin Atlantic deal might really help down the road to have a good timed slot happen.


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 101, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3651 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 100):
I thought Delta Applied for SLC-LHR and AA got RDU both and BNA first?

Those were to LGW. DL wanted SLC-LGW since only AA, CO & UA had LHR rights at the time.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 96):
Delta has said its priority is SEA, a 2nd to DTW, then SLC.

MSP is also a potential LHR frequency, but I think DL would be dumb to start doubling that one up before adding SLC.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9286 posts, RR: 14
Reply 102, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3672 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 93):
IF AF/KL have an LHR slot to give up, how well would SLC compete in the DL network to potentially land it?

Should be the next city to get a LHR slot

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 96):

Things could change but as of right now Delta has said its priority is SEA, a 2nd to DTW, then SLC. Could take some time but i would hope Summer 2014 is a possibility for SLC-LHR or maybe 2015.

And already has the slots for SEA and DTW.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 98):

I seem to recall that too. Didnt pan out, BUT, hopefully soon SLC will see an LHR link...maybe even AMS *wishful thinking*

AMS will be a while. LHR will happen first.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 100):

I do think SLC-LHR will happen. I thought years ago the CEO of Delta said in a speech to employees that SLC-LHR was a when not if flight but slots are just too expensive at LHR. The Virgin Atlantic deal might really help down the road to have a good timed slot happen.

Delta said in the JV paperwork SEA-LHR, DTW-LHR #2 and SLC-LHR will happen.



yep.
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 103, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3654 times:

It was 1993 when DL applied for SLC-LGW, but the frequency went to AA RDU-LGW since USDOT Sec' Federico Pena had a bone to pick with DL for not pulling the SLC hub and moving it to DEN...so hence the dirty politics behind it all.


DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 104, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3635 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 102):
AMS will be a while. LHR will happen first.

Oh I know that...just wishful thinking on my part, lol.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 102):
Delta said in the JV paperwork SEA-LHR, DTW-LHR #2 and SLC-LHR will happen.

I know it'd be too much to ask, but Im crossing my fingers for an A330 on the route, lol.    As it is, Im tired of the 767's, having 21 segments on the -300's alone... 
Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 103):
It was 1993 when DL applied for SLC-LGW, but the frequency went to AA RDU-LGW since USDOT Sec' Federico Pena had a bone to pick with DL for not pulling the SLC hub and moving it to DEN...so hence the dirty politics behind it all.

Dontcha hate it when politics get in the way? I cant say the RDU flight hasnt been good for AA, it has, though...



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 105, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3596 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 103):
It was 1993 when DL applied for SLC-LGW, but the frequency went to AA RDU-LGW since USDOT Sec' Federico Pena had a bone to pick with DL for not pulling the SLC hub and moving it to AND CURRENT: Denver - International (DEN / KDEN), USA - Colorado">DEN...so hence the dirty politics behind it all.

Wouldn't surprise me, but I remember the other scenario, too..........AA got RDU-LHR AND BNA-LHR, even tho the DOT's own rules stated that one carrier couldn't get two awards. Maybe it was a combination of the two scenarios.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 106, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3559 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 104):
I know it'd be too much to ask, but Im crossing my fingers for an A330 on the route, lol. As it is, Im tired of the 767's, having 21 segments on the -300's alone...

Probably a 763ER during the less volume winter months but during the summer months I wouldn't rule out a 772ER...availability of equipment being the issue of "if." If AMS ever happened, I'd put my assumptions on KL to do it. According to the SLC website in the past they've been approached by LH about a FRA route and VS for LHR/LGW.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 107, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3545 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 105):
Wouldn't surprise me, but I remember the other scenario, too..........

As mayor of Denver, Pena planned and moved ahead with the DIA plan assuming that Western would jump at moving the SLC operation to DEN with an airfield and terminals with more capacity, and was not at all pleased when DL made therir disinterest known. CO had pulled the plug as well.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 104):
I cant say the RDU flight hasnt been good for AA, it has, though...

RDU may be the smaller of the two Carolina twins (with CLT), but it is a mini version of MSP with "Fortune 500" appeal.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 108, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3527 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 107):
As mayor of Denver, Pena planned and moved ahead with the DIA plan assuming that Western would jump at moving the SLC operation to DEN with an airfield and terminals with more capacity, and was not at all pleased when DL made therir disinterest known. CO had pulled the plug as well.

Well, by that time, DL was pretty well established in SLC, including having already built the hangar and the res building. Doesn't seem very realistic on Pena's part to think that DL was going to move, then.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19371 posts, RR: 58
Reply 109, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3521 times:

Quoting flyasaguy2005 (Reply 1):

Short answer...not a chance. DL likes to be top dog. See ATL, (SLC), MSP, DTW. SLC serves a very important role in the Delta network that cannot be accomplished by way of LAX or even a lesser extent, MSP. O/D is very healthy considering it's the only major airport...anywhere in the area. SLC held its own through the tough times and at one point was the only hub except for ATL that saw significant growth (32% over a 1 or 2 year period IIRC).

Not just O&D to SLC, but transfers to the surrounding mountain resorts.

SLC is to DL what DEN is to UA. It is essential and irreplaceable in the network.


User currently offlinecschleic From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1246 posts, RR: 0
Reply 110, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3509 times:

I could be wrong, but would think that SLC has lower operating costs than DEN. It certainly has better weather which probably reduces delays and related costs.

User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7521 posts, RR: 28
Reply 111, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3433 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 106):
Probably a 763ER during the less volume winter months but during the summer months I wouldn't rule out a 772ER...availability of equipment being the issue of "if."

I highly, highly doubt DL would but a 77E on SLC-LHR. No way. It would be 763/764 or A330-200. Most likely 763ER to start. DL doesn't fly 777s to LHR.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 112, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3375 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 106):
Probably a 763ER during the less volume winter months but during the summer months I wouldn't rule out a 772ER...availability of equipment being the issue of "if." If AMS ever happened, I'd put my assumptions on KL to do it. According to the SLC website in the past they've been approached by LH about a FRA route and VS for LHR/LGW.

I could see a mix of 332/333 equipment in the summer, and 763 to round out the fall and winter and most of spring. a 772ER (in DL's current fleet) would too much for the route, especially when the 772 could be used elsewhere on much higher yielding routes.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 107):
As mayor of Denver, Pena planned and moved ahead with the DIA plan assuming that Western would jump at moving the SLC operation to DEN with an airfield and terminals with more capacity, and was not at all pleased when DL made therir disinterest known. CO had pulled the plug as well.

It still boggles my mind why someone at the mayoral level of a large city such as Denver would think an airline would just up and move its fortress hub (even before the 1983-84 shakeup, Western was pretty big in SLC) from a fairly low-cost hub to an exorbitant cost hub, especially with all the infrastructure that it had at the time (as well as planned project such as the new Res Center and hangar).


Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 107):
RDU may be the smaller of the two Carolina twins (with CLT), but it is a mini version of MSP with "Fortune 500" appeal

I agree, and I dolove both CLT and RDU as well as the cities they serve (not to mention the incredibly good food there!)

Quoting mayor (Reply 108):
Well, by that time, DL was pretty well established in SLC, including having already built the hangar and the res building. Doesn't seem very realistic on Pena's part to think that DL was going to move, then

  

Quoting cschleic (Reply 110):
I could be wrong, but would think that SLC has lower operating costs than DEN. It certainly has better weather which probably reduces delays and related costs.

SLC has far lower costs than DEN has, even with this new terminal project. From what I know, SLC is the one fo the very few, if not only airports in the US that have virtually no debt and the new construction is already budgeted and will not add debt to the SLC airport's fee structure.



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 113, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3291 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 112):
I could see a mix of 332/333 equipment in the summer, and 763 to round out the fall and winter and most of spring. a 772ER (in DL's current fleet) would too much for the route, especially when the 772 could be used elsewhere on much higher yielding routes.

My caveat on the 772ER would be that equipment would be down the road for DL out of SLC for LHR. I’m not sure even if any of the concourse D gates (1, 3, 5 connected to the present FIS desk) can take an aircraft that big. 763ER, 764ER or the A332 are all workable and were designed for such sizes back in the day.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 112):
It still boggles my mind why someone at the mayoral level of a large city such as Denver would think an airline would just up and move its fortress hub (even before the 1983-84 shakeup, Western was pretty big in SLC) from a fairly low-cost hub to an exorbitant cost hub, especially with all the infrastructure that it had at the time (as well as planned project such as the new Res Center and hangar).

I do think the leadership at DL 2nd guessed themselves throughout the Leo Mullin era (1996-2004). The State of Utah made some fuel tax concessions back in 1999, but even then once UA found themselves in receivership and a liquidation was potentially on the table, without question DL had plans on the table as recently as 2003 to pull the plug on the DFW and SLC hubs and make a move on DEN despite the exurbanite costs that airport had incurred.

One other advantage SLC has that should also will be noticed by DTW in the years ahead is “Right to Work” laws, that will only strengthen DL as a predominantly non-union carrier. For years I couldn’t help but conclude this was part of the reason Gerry Grinstein moved the Western operation to SLC from LAX since part of Western’s financial problems was too much union activity throughout the rank and file employee classifications. Amazingly 2 decades later Grinstein as DL CEO was able to clean up the rubble from Leo’s reign of management terror and position the carrier to grab NW in a merger…and effectively use the merger process to clean up the union culture that had become financial poison to them. MSP is at a distinct disadvantage now to both SLC and DTW since Michigan enacted Right to Work legislation last year.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 114, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3259 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 113):
My caveat on the 772ER would be that equipment would be down the road for DL out of SLC for LHR. I’m not sure even if any of the concourse D gates (1, 3, 5 connected to the present FIS desk) can take an aircraft that big. 763ER, 764ER or the A332 are all workable and were designed for such sizes back in the day.

Well, D2 can certainly accomodate a 777, I've seen it done.....of course, D4 isn't usable then. D-1 was DL's gate when D concourse was built and it was made to accomodate any a/c in the DL fleet, at the time. We have had, even before the DL/WA merger, Tristars (equip swap) park at D-1. Of course, after the merger, D-1 was used for that, all the time as well as C-6, C-13, D-13, D-6 & D-2 on a regular basis.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 115, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3180 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 113):
My caveat on the 772ER would be that equipment would be down the road for DL out of SLC for LHR. I’m not sure even if any of the concourse D gates (1, 3, 5 connected to the present FIS desk) can take an aircraft that big. 763ER, 764ER or the A332 are all workable and were designed for such sizes back in the day.

The 772 can fit, it opts as a substitution when a 763 is out of commision on the morning ATL flight (or even the 130PM departure). I've seen it done, and rode on it once. The new terminal layout hopefully will have the widebody gates sufficiently spaced to alleviate the problem.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 113):
I do think the leadership at DL 2nd guessed themselves throughout the Leo Mullin era (1996-2004). The State of Utah made some fuel tax concessions back in 1999, but even then once UA found themselves in receivership and a liquidation was potentially on the table, without question DL had plans on the table as recently as 2003 to pull the plug on the DFW and SLC hubs and make a move on DEN despite the exurbanite costs that airport had incurred.

I knew DFW was going to get axed, however, going through the reports of the time, SLC was in no danger, but was thrown in as a "what if" scenario.

Quoting mayor (Reply 114):
Well, D2 can certainly accomodate a 777, I've seen it done.....of course, D4 isn't usable then. D-1 was DL's gate when D concourse was built and it was made to accomodate any a/c in the DL fleet, at the time. We have had, even before the DL/WA merger, Tristars (equip swap) park at D-1. Of course, after the merger, D-1 was used for that, all the time as well as C-6, C-13, D-13, D-6 & D-2 on a regular basis.

   didnt DL bring in the DC-8's for a while, as well?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 116, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3123 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 115):
didnt DL bring in the DC-8's for a while, as well?

Yes, for a short time after the merger, DL was using the DC-8-71s. We even had one or two as an equipment substitution before the merger.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 115):
I knew DFW was going to get axed, however, going through the reports of the time, SLC was in no danger, but was thrown in as a "what if" scenario.

I can recall the employees being told that one hub was going to get axed and it was between us in SLC and DFW. DFW lost out because, for the most part, their costs were higher.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 117, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 116):
I can recall the employees being told that one hub was going to get axed and it was between us in SLC and DFW. DFW lost out because, for the most part, their costs were higher.

That and, I assume here, no one wants to playa distant 2nd fiddle to AA's dominance at DFW? How many flights did we have at DFW at its peak?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2740 posts, RR: 1
Reply 118, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3095 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 112):
SLC has far lower costs than DEN has, even with this new terminal project. From what I know, SLC is the one fo the very few, if not only airports in the US that have virtually no debt and the new construction is already budgeted and will not add debt to the SLC airport's fee structure.

Per Denver WIngtips March 2013

http://business.flydenver.com/info/n...tions/wingtips/2013MarchLarge.html

Sometime around 2025, DEN will have paid off their original bond and

Looking to DIA’s financial future, Day talked about the major opportunities on the horizon, in 2025, when the airport’s original bonds are paid off. DIA could then become one of the lowest-cost airports in the country, according to Day.

“Do you think that would make DIA an appealing destination?” Day asked. “That’s a legitimate option to consider and if that’s not the definition of a ‘paradigm shift,’ I don’t know what is.


and a.netters won't have DEN to kick around anymore as a high cost airport.

Will it even get lower than SLC.......?

 


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 119, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3089 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 118):
and a.netters won't have DEN to kick around anymore as a high cost airport.

Will it even get lower than SLC.......?

Probably not lower than SLC, then the only barrier for anyone wanting to hub DEN would be trying to go up against WN and UA. Still though, 2025 s a ways off...



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2740 posts, RR: 1
Reply 120, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 119):
Probably not lower than SLC, then the only barrier for anyone wanting to hub DEN would be trying to go up against WN and UA. Still though, 2025 s a ways off...

Yeah, 2025 is a bit of a ways off...... so if any a.netters want to be kicking DEN around as a high cost airport........ you only have some 11+ years to do it........

 


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 121, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3026 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 120):
Yeah, 2025 is a bit of a ways off...... so if any a.netters want to be kicking DEN around as a high cost airport........ you only have some 11+ years to do it........


I think however SLC Airport financial planners have taught DEN and other airports around North America a valuable financial lesson in recent years.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 122, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3019 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 121):

I think however SLC Airport financial planners have taught DEN and other airports around North America a valuable financial lesson in recent years.

Not sure how other airports, in the U.S., of this size or larger, do it, but I do remember that SLC was self funded by landing fees, rents, etc. As far as I know, nothing is funded by the city of Salt Lake or by the State of Utah.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2740 posts, RR: 1
Reply 123, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2998 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 121):
I think however SLC Airport financial planners have taught DEN and other airports around North America a valuable financial lesson in recent years.

Maybe....... I have to wonder though..... that the initial costs for the new DEN were to be $3.5B, and then the automated baggage fiasco pushed the airport costs over $5B and delayed the opening for over a year, and how much of this overrun contributed to the CPE dollar-wise that the airlines had to pay? Probably close to some 50% more? I remember seeing a chart from 2003 (don't know how to find it again though) where the CPE of DEN was something close to $17 at the time, and the next highest was ORD at some $8 and some pennies. A lot has changed since then...... as ORD had billions in renovations and its CPE skyrocketed past DEN, and LAX recently announced improvements that will cost over $5B, and how much that will push up CPE there. And also MIA...... there CPE will be near $30. And of course, the New York CIty airports (EWR, LGA, JFK) all have the highest CPEs in the nation right now.

So yes, the fact that SLC saved, and now can renovate and has reserve to get this done is a big plus for it..... and can keep its CPE down low, shows smart management. Also, now is good time to get these renovations and improvements at airports done, since interest rates are probably as low as they can get.

Quoting mayor (Reply 122):
Not sure how other airports, in the U.S., of this size or larger, do it, but I do remember that SLC was self funded by landing fees, rents, etc. As far as I know, nothing is funded by the city of Salt Lake or by the State of Utah.

I could be mistaken, but from my observations, is it that most U.S. commercial airports are self-sufficient? Yes, I believe that they all receive from the FAA, but as for general city and state funds contributing to airports....... I'm not sure that there are that many commercial airports out there that do, maybe with some exceptions such as BKG or ECP?

And I do think that SLC will continue as a strong DL hub, and may even grow some, as well as with time becoming attractive to other carriers....... and will not see the same fate as MEM or CVG.

 

[Edited 2013-05-08 16:01:02]

User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 124, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2952 times:

Extremely well managed airport. Stash cash while you are running near full capacity then rebuild exactly taking requests to keep your hub carrier happy and keeping costs low.

Delta would never leave they would be setting up another carrier for new terminals, low costs, and growing area to hub. Delta basically paid for alot of the new construction already thru years of stashing cash off their fees. Delta wont leave besides leaving a consistantly porfitbale city for years you would be setting the competition up with a gem at low operating costs.


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 125, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2901 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 123):
I could be mistaken, but from my observations, is it that most U.S. commercial airports are self-sufficient? Yes, I believe that they all receive from the FAA, but as for general city and state funds contributing to airports....... I'm not sure that there are that many commercial airports out there that do, maybe with some exceptions such as BKG or ECP?

In Canada some of the larger airports YYZ, YVR, YUL even YYC must actually pay rent to Transport Canada which is why domestic airfares comparatively north of the border are higher...both AC and WS campaigning to end this practice since they can't compete with the U.S. model.

Quoting point2point (Reply 123):
And I do think that SLC will continue as a strong DL hub, and may even grow some, as well as with time becoming attractive to other carriers....... and will not see the same fate as MEM or CVG.

Interestingly WN now plans to curtail their FL inherited presence in ATL and embark on MEM. I think CVG will be a matter of when than if since it is no longer advantageous for DL to try to squeeze them from coming in there. WN in SLC however will keep DL honest with theri fares to the higher O&D markets SLC passengers fly to. But the growing market and forthcoming terminal, concourse and parking structure rebuild in SLC will likely attract other carriers particularly ohters such as WS, LH, VS as well as Jpont Venture partners AF & KL.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 126, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2723 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 121):
I think however SLC Airport financial planners have taught DEN and other airports around North America a valuable financial lesson in recent years

I believe they have.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 125):
. WN in SLC however will keep DL honest with theri fares to the higher O&D markets SLC passengers fly to. But the growing market and forthcoming terminal, concourse and parking structure rebuild in SLC will likely attract other carriers particularly ohters such as WS, LH, VS as well as Jpont Venture partners AF & KL.

Like they have been since 1994 or so? LOL, I wonder just how much pressure WN puts on DL in SLC (if any at all).



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 127, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2699 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 126):
I wonder just how much pressure WN puts on DL in SLC (if any at all).

Mostly fare pricing on the thicker O&D routes, but yes, DL has chased WN from SLC city pairs and they are significantly less than they were under the Morris Air branding WN bought nearly 2 decades ago.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 128, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2656 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 127):
Mostly fare pricing on the thicker O&D routes, but yes, DL has chased WN from SLC city pairs and they are significantly less than they were under the Morris Air branding WN bought nearly 2 decades ago.

That much I remember, fares were insane out of SLC in the early 90's...



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
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...
Any Chance Aeromar Replaces The ATRs With RJs? posted Tue Jul 12 2005 21:57:06 by Juventus
Bird Flu The Next SARS, Or Worse? posted Mon Feb 2 2004 16:35:39 by FFlyer
Any Chance To Fly The Airbus Beluga? posted Thu Jul 17 2003 13:43:21 by LH744
Who Will Be The Next Airline Or City To Serve Dab? posted Tue Jul 30 2002 16:08:20 by Micstatic
Any Guess On What The Next Southwest City Will Be. posted Thu May 17 2001 08:32:50 by US Air/TWA Fan
Any Chance PR Will Order The A380 Or B748? posted Sun Feb 24 2013 00:49:42 by Mortyman
Any Chance For The B 747X Or The Nla? posted Sun May 6 2001 05:35:33 by United Airline
Any Chance For A Return Of The "Red Tail"? posted Sun May 9 2010 19:01:18 by toxicmegacolon
MEM The Next IAH? posted Fri Jan 30 2009 17:39:29 by CMHARJ
Any Chance Of An Increase In Freq. On BTR-CVG posted Thu Sep 13 2007 15:16:23 by Ryanrap1