Cory6188
Topic Author
Posts: 2612
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:29 am

Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:08 am

It seems as if in the past few years, CO always seems to have the most rumors about the unusual new international destinations that no other US airline services. They also seem to back up most of these rumors with service to many cities that no other US airline is willing to do. OSL, LIS, and BHX come to mind, and now there's pretty strong chances of new service EWR-LOS.

I'm sure that the other legacies are capable of starting service to new international cities as well, so why is it always CO that's at the forefront of starting service to cities that no other US carrier does?
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24600
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:19 am

There are many reasons...

1) Their fleet of ERJ-145XRs allows them to operate long-haul RJ routes with ease and efficiency.
2) Their fleet of internationally configured 757-200ERs allow them to open up new markets with a near ideal aircraft density configuration.
3) Their fleet of 767-200ERs allows them to open up smaller markets as well. And with it's low-density configuration (with a good number of BizElite seats) and good cargo capacity, they can make them profitable. The 762 is ideal for low density, premium routes, like Geneva and Lagos.
4) Their hub in Newark offers connections throughout the United States. And not just big cities...Little Rock, Tulsa, Omaha, Madison, Grand Rapids, Northwest Arkansas...they can offer a greater combination of one-stop European connections than any other US carrier, all on one airline.
a.
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:24 am

I think that their EWR position and fleet is a great match for many smaller (European) destinations.

If a city is a success - which many are - it pretty much guarantees CO the control of a certain market for quite some time.

Another good reason is that CO is not bound by an alliance (but will be soon), and that way they have more freedom of their flights. For example, there is no reason for AA to have NYC-Ireland service when EI, an alliance member, serves the route.

That is just my opinion.

-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
Cory6188
Topic Author
Posts: 2612
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:29 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:26 am

So when CO joins Skyteam, does that mean we'll see a major drop-off in the number of new international routes that they open up?

Even if they can codeshare with KL through AMS, which would you prefer? A non-stop all on CO metal or a connection with part of the trip on KL metal? I would hope that CO would stick with the former and continue expanding internationally.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:31 am

"does that mean we'll see a major drop-off in the number of new international routes that they open up?"

Rest assured, CO is not going to adopt the NWA method to International Alliances.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Cory6188
Topic Author
Posts: 2612
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:29 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:33 am

The NW method for international alliances would drive me nuts if I were a FF on NW. Who would want to make a connection to DTW/MSP/MEM, fly to AMS, and then have to take another connection in AMS on to KL metal? One connection in EWR, all on CO metal in one terminal connected entirely post-security would make much more sense and would be a much easier itinerary.
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:22 pm

Except to save money, Brits & Irish don't want to go to the mainland and then fly back over the Channel.
Expect the EWR-UK/Irish flights to stay.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 1:02 pm

As said before EWR is much of the reason. It has a huge O/D market to draw from. Although it might not be in New York, it draws a lot of traffic. Also it has the connection opportunities and is almost perfectly located geographically for a hub to Europe.

DL tries to offer service at JFK but struggles with connections because JFK is an international airport with little domestic presence (minus JetBlue, but not that many people go from JetBlue onto international flights compared to CO at EWR) because of its proximity to LGA. DL only has limited connections, which causes more difficulty in starting new routes up. UA at IAD also has potential, but it has a smaller east coast presence, IAD is not as perfectly located and most of all IAD draws off of a lot smaller O/D market to sustain the flights.

CO and EWR are perfect for expansion to Europe. CO at IAH is also an interesting story. The ERJs are proving themselves to work internationally. HP and CO are doing a good job of the small niche markets across the border.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
SR 103
Posts: 1618
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 6:19 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 1:05 pm

The NW method for international alliances would drive me nuts if I were a FF on NW. Who would want to make a connection to DTW/MSP/MEM, fly to AMS, and then have to take another connection in AMS on to KL metal?

I do! I have no problem connecting through DTW or MSP. The airports are very stress-free to connect though unlike EWR which is too big and crowded! I much prefer CLE as a connecting point than EWR or IAH.

One connection in EWR, all on CO metal in one terminal connected entirely post-security would make much more sense and would be a much easier itinerary.

Not to any of the places I have to go! I would still have to connect through AMS and catch a KL or NW flight to my destination if I flew CO via EWR. There is more to the world than just the European cities CO serves!

SR 103
 
flyibaby
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:23 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 1:25 pm

I think everyone here is forgetting about a "Continental-like" airline by the name of COPA. I don't exactly the financial ties they have to CO, but it seems as though CO has made a presence throughout latin america with this pseudo spin off. Ultimately, I think CO probably has the most current experience to date with testing international markets as a result of their own mainline service to a variety of markets, as well as being able to see the numbers that an airline such as COPA is drawing to their latin american hub. It is my opinion that they seem to be covered on all basis on thier own really without any NW/DL alliances.
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4444
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 3:17 pm

Flyibaby, CO owns 49% of Copa and is a very supportive partner.

I have to disagree with SR103. I also generally prefer the smaller hubs, but EWR is as good a hub as I've ever been through. I'm always surprised by how good the service is there, especially compared to JFK.
 
AMS
Posts: 1620
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 7:34 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:12 pm

Co is getting stronger with International flights by the day.
Also CO is offering a good product with good connecting possibilities at EWR and IAH; and also the departure/Arrival times are quite good compared with other carriers.

Regards,
AMS
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:54 pm

So when CO joins Skyteam, does that mean we'll see a major drop-off in the number of new international routes that they open up?
I think that since they have found a system that works, they will stick to it.

Who would want to make a connection to DTW/MSP/MEM, fly to AMS, and then have to take another connection in AMS on to KL metal?
 Innocent
I would go through DTW or MSP if I was going to a place that is directly served. Being an airplane nut, I might consider going through DTW or MSP and AMS - but that is usually a bit more expensive than a one-stop/direct flight from NYC.

-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
NYCAAer
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:22 pm

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Fri Sep 03, 2004 4:53 am

CO is the risk-taker because they're the most innovative US carrier at the moment. A good Business Class product, good employees, and as previously stated, a diverse fleet of int'l aircraft that allows them to serve different types of markets.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:21 am

CO has a large fleet of very flexible aircraft, and it is very young and efficient. This is one of the main reasons they are able to open these routes. They convinced Boeing to re-open the 762ER line, when there had been no orders in a long time, specifically so they could get something with excelent range, and efficiency that is right-sized. Having the 752s with 738s and 739s means they can use the 752s for longer hauls and the 737s for higher rep and lower yield flights. I actually think their fleet is one that really shows how to build a fleet with many types that works and does not drive a company down
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
pizzaandplanes
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 10:17 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Fri Sep 03, 2004 7:41 am

They also don't go into cities that other codoshare partners have already started example (delta:atl-bcn). Continental passengers will make a quick connection from iah,cle, or ewr. That also allows them to open up smaller cities like athens different than codoshare partners. So, in the end everyone is helping each other. Though I do think there should be a bcn seasonal flight for the cruise passengers.
A real man lands where he wants to
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Why Is CO The International Route Risk-taker?

Fri Sep 03, 2004 8:22 am

How does the EWR hub compare to the US hub at PHL? US seems to cover a decent variety of European destinations from PHL on widebody planes ... LGW, CDG, FRA, MUC, AMS, FCO, GLA, SNN, DUB, MAD, MAN, others?

They both seem like well thought out hubs for connecting USA passengers to Europe and back with only 1 stop. I think only CO and US can lay claim to that. Of course, CO has the added benefit of the NYC market for local traffic...
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh