MCOtoATL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1752 times:
Now that Airtran has contracted with Air Wisconsin to do some commuter flights, what is in it for both of these carriers?
Will Airtran make money on this venture, or are they simply looking for more city choices for potential customers. Let's face it, they have to pay for the use of the planes and the employees (whom I assume will be employed by Air Wisconsin and not Airtran.) Will there be enough profit to go around?
What about Air Wisconsin? Why not simply develop these routes themselves instead of sharing the action with Airtran?
This may sound like dumb questions, but I have been pondering such issues. Will both carriers do well with this arrangement? The same could be asked about Continental and Continental Connection and America West and Mesa, etc...
Falcon Flyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1731 times:
I can't imagine that a company would enter into such a venture without it being financially beneficial. The press release states that the CRJs will serve AirTran's thinner routes so 717s can be redeployed elsewhere. So far, the airline has done quite well and I'm sure Joe's numbers crunchers have told him the plan is viable. At a time when cash and profitable airlines are few and far between, no company will just jump into anything without full researching it first.
LV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1722 times:
If you want to go from say MCI-MYR, before, you would go Delta. But now you can go Air Tran MCI-ATL then Air Wisconsin from ATL-MYR, both AirTran and AirWis make money since you are on each of their flight, and you wouldn't have been on either airline, but on a competitor if they didn't offer this option. Plus, AirTran has just gained market share from DL by getting you onto one of their planes for at least part of your flight.
JmhLUV2fly From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1640 times:
I have not read the responces to this post, but thought I would express my thoughts and opinions about the
AirTran JetConnect concept and having joined up with
Let me first say that I am employed with AirTran as a costumer service agent in PNS, a destination for JetConnect. With that said, let me first mention that AirWisconsin Airlines itself does not provide air transportation like the other major airlines, they are a contracted commuter that till before AirTran struck a deal with the carrier, only United Express utilized the airlines services. Essentially AWis. provides the planes and crew on the plane and you do the rest following AirWisconsins rules and guidelines.....aaaand this is where I tend to have a problem. I will very clearly state that I think the JetConnect concept is a smart idea, through utilizing the RJ's FL will be able to use those smaller planes on less profitable (if you will) and lighter load flights. Thus, the company will be able to utilize bigger a/c on larger and more profitable markets and also enable the airline to grow and begin service to other cities i.e. out west.
However, my problem begins and ends with the choice FL made in choosing to contract another carrier to provide its JetConnect concept. AirWisconsin is an excellent carrier, I have heard many great things about there reputation and performance.....and AirTran also has its unique and special qualities that makes it a succesful discount carrier. BUT, in my opinion, as a preliminary analyses, the two carriers together dont mesh. They are two different airlines with two different agendas. FL- focused on maximizing revenue keeping the airplanes in the air, cutting operation cost to the bare bone, and simplfying various operation procedures in order to maximize that revenue, a fast paced, quick turn around 25 minuite get em off and back on last off first on kind of carrier. The airlines caters to a certain customer those seeing air transportation at a great low price.
AirWisconsin on the other hand, has different agenda. They are focused on many smaller details, details that are fine and good...but could in time cramp AirTran's style, and in time create problems, create delays etc. This is just my opinion and preliminary observations....AirWisconsin has a very specific way they want things done...and I feel this along with other areas will create problems....essentially we as AirTran are relying on AWis to be there for us, to show up and fly the plane, if one of our 717's are late, thats our problem we live with that, if its one there's theres not much we can do....we have our hands tide....its a really tricky situation and AirTran will have to walk a strict line in order to make this conecpt and venture with AirWisconsin work.....well I will step off my soap box for now...these are just my observations and opinions.
Falcon Flyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1553 times:
Well said JMH.
There's no reason why the company couldn't have started the service itself. At a time when aircraft orders are few and far between, the acquisition of CRJs might have been financially viable and, as you stated, kept the operation in-house with better quality control. Hope it works out.
Lowfareair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1513 times:
Personally, I think FL made the right decision to contract it out. This way they don't need to negotiate a new payscale, and they give the job of running the operation to a team that has done regional jobs for years.