njdevilsin03
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:03 am

Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:48 am

Why doesn't Pan Am expand become a large carrier? I mean why do they only service a few routes witha few 727's and some jetstreams? Has anyone ever thought of buying that small airline and expanding it to a large airline like it was once before. Every few years someone starts an airline named PanAm they live a few years and then fizzel out then another one trys it and the same thing. Any reason why the names PanAm or Eastern or Piedmont, TWA or even Western can't be started once again? And become something large?
717, 727, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 753, 762, 763, 777, DC9, MD80, DC10, L1011, ERJ, CRJ, ATR, DH8, A300,
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:50 am

Any reason why the names PanAm or Eastern or Piedmont, TWA or even Western can't be started once again?

...ownership by entities who have no interest in doing so, perhaps?  Laugh out loud
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Thrust
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:17 pm

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:29 am

in addition to ConcordeBoy's well-illustrated points, the current Pan Am has only 727s and 737s...none of which have nearly the range fly the routes of Juan Trippe's "Chosen Instrument." The likelihood it will regain its throne and slim to none...it has been replaced by the many international carriers we see today...the world would have no use for it. The first things you need to fly international routes are giant jetliners or at least jets with ranges at least 300 or 500 nautical miles over 3,000 nautical miles, neither of which Pan Am has. Pan Am probably is neither interested in nor willing to spend the money on expanding internationally...and don't forget that this Pan Am is not the same organization as Juan Trippe's Pan Am Big grin
Fly one thing; Fly it well
 
DeltaMD11
Posts: 1678
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 4:56 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:10 am

To correct a little bit of what Thrust said above, the current Pan Am only flies a fleet of 727's. Some of them have the QuietWing system installed (lovely winglets, look very classy). They are associated with Boston Maine Airways which fly Jetstream 31's (and one or two CASA C-212's based in the Caribbean which I presume are used as small cargo haulers but am not definite on that). As far as expansion, they're kind of a wing and a prayer operation. While they do have some scheduled flights, most of their work is done as a charter specialist. They are based out of the former Pease Air Force Base (Portsmouth, NH). I don't think that they will see any kind of large expansion coming anytime soon (can we say podunk?). They do have a small market in Florida and Caribbean, which they should be really trying to capitalize on. Last year, they bought 22 ex-United 727-200's. It was said at that time that 12 would be put into service, and the rest are going to be used as parts lifeboats.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Carlos Aleman - SJU Aviation Photography
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jason Bisson

Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7797
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:15 am

You gotta have money to buy new planes and expand
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
njdevilsin03
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:03 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:23 am

What I ment was can someone start one fo these big airlines and paint it and name it like one of the old airlines and begin a route structure similar to ones they had?
717, 727, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 753, 762, 763, 777, DC9, MD80, DC10, L1011, ERJ, CRJ, ATR, DH8, A300,
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18186
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:48 am

Njdevilsin03:

The short answer is no. The name and logo are copyright of the owners, even if those owners are bankrupt.

Pan Am 2 paid the original Pan Am - or their creditors - for the right to use the name, brand and logo.

When Pan Am 2 went bust, Guilford Transport bought the name, brand and logo from Pan Am 2 - or their creditors - and started Pan Am 3 - the present Pan Am.

Even if this Pan Am were to fold, the name, brand and logo would belong to Pan Am 3 and you would have to pay them for the right to use it.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Lono
Posts: 1136
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:47 pm

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:53 am

Very cool ..... 727's!!!!!
Nice to see some are still out there!!
Wally Bird Ruled the Skys!
 
StarCruiser
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 12:12 am

RE: Why Not A New PAN Am?

Mon Jul 05, 2004 1:34 pm

I miss Pan Am too, but some charlatan's trying to capitalize on the name won't bring them back. I don't care how much money he has. Sometimes it's better to let a fine airline name die and rest in peace. I think this is one of those cases.

So far as their returning to the old route structure is concerned, if the Real Pan Am couldn't do it, I doubt any new guy can. We have too many airlines as it is.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 747classic, 9w748capt, alomar, Baidu [Spider], qf789, reality, sierra3tango, wjcandee and 211 guests