georgiabill
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:14 am

With the recent announcement of Independence Air ending it's service from MHT in early January 2006 USAirways dropping nonstops to PIT from MHT and Delta dropping mainline service to ATL and CVG for additional crj flights(for a loss of daily seats) Yet the airport expects to had nearly 4.5 million passengers use it this year. I believe it projects to a 7.5% increase over 2004. Through september the airport had averaged a 10% growth,while october showed a .5 growth(source Manchester Union Leader) So my question is this in 2006 is there any possibilities of seeing WN adding nonstops from MHT to PIT adding non stop service to PHX or OAK from MHT? USAirways perhaps adding service to PHX( probably unlikely) or restoring their service to PIT? For new carriers I think Frontier adding non stops from MHT to DEN would be successful. Spirit following WN's lead bracket BOS offer service to FLL with connections to the Caribbean. Airtran bringing mainline service between MHT and ATL.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:23 am

With US, DL, and DH cutting back... how many open gates are there are up there now? Wasn't that a primary sticking point before? You guys have a beautiful airport up there.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:28 am

Definitely one with Independence air pulling out. I am not sure if Northwest still needs 2 gates. So possibility of 2 gates being available
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:44 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 1):
With US, DL, and DH cutting back... how many open gates are there are up there now? Wasn't that a primary sticking point before? You guys have a beautiful airport up there.

DL only has one gate as is, so with them still being up there with Connection that won't affect anything. Gate 10, which was United until last year when they moved and DH took over, will become vacant. With US still likely having signifcant ops to LGA, PHL, and CLT from MHT, I doubt they will give up any gates. In fact, they could launch LAS service to compete with WN, who already operates on the route, and since the airport has a 9250' runway, it can handle the cross countries with ease. So I only see one gate becoming vacant with all this


MHT has been trying to woo B6 for a while, and they lost to BOS when massport told them not to compete with WN. Now that they have the 190's, I wouldn't be surprised to see MHT with 190 service. F9 could serve the airport, and this would be premptive against WN. I doubt UA would fly to DEN. AirTran I don't think will move here and keep BOS going.

The most noteable carrier that doesn't serve MHT is AA. Until DL moves everything to RJ's, ever other legacy carrier has mainline service into MHT, but AA has no presence there whatsoever, even with RJ's. That being said, I doubt they would launch DFW service, because of the whole wright debacle, and they are trying to give the impression that service is being hurt, not helped by easing restrictions on DAL, even though you would think they would want to compete with WN possibly going to DAL in the future. The only place that they would logically serve would be ORD. The 737 would be perfect for this route, but 737's don't serve ORD for AA, and I think the MD-80s are too big for the route. This would mean either 70 seat RJ's or ERJs if they serve the route. The other issue is the BOS hub that AA has. They don't want to take business away from their BOS hub, so thats another issue at work here. At the same time, UA has a monopoly on the ORD-MHT route, and WN competes from MDW. And UA has first class with the mainline, plus they can run the explus planes which also have first class. Could AA do something to compete? Yes they will. Will they? I give it only a 30 percent chance.

The only other possiblity is that since Gate 10 is right next to all the Southwest Gates, WN could try to pick it up and expand even more in MHT. It could happen. Will it? I think MHT would like someone else to serve it, so I don't know if they will let WN take Gate 10. I give it only about a 15 percent chance of happening.
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:16 am

Is there even really a market for all this service in the first place? I really never knew MHT was really that popular as an airport.
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:26 am

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 4):
Is there even really a market for all this service in the first place? I really never knew MHT was really that popular as an airport.

For some folks in the Metropolitan Boston area, it is a shorter drive time wise for them to use MHT than it is to use BOS, just as for some folks it's quicker for them to use PVD than BOS.
 
B752OS
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:07 am

Quoting Srbmod (Reply 5):
For some folks in the Metropolitan Boston area, it is a shorter drive time wise for them to use MHT than it is to use BOS, just as for some folks it's quicker for them to use PVD than BOS.

It all depends on where you live. I grew up in Boston and moved a few years back and I always chose BOS over PVD. I lived about halfway between both and chose BOS for the simple fact that BOS offers much more service than PVD.


I wouldn't be upset if MHT does not see daily service additions to PIT, PHX, OAK and DEN. Those are some lofty goals for a small airport that is still growing. Every airport in the New England region (BOS, PVD and MHT) all should see growth for 2005.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:08 am

Yes there is room for a minimum of one daily round trip between MHT and Den if not twice daily. PHX and or OAK would work,if not OAK,LAX definitely would work for WN. The airport is growing. It will never be BOS nor is it intended to be. It serves as a viable alternative for domestic service. Ample parking easy access.
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:13 am

First of all, where is Chris? He's usually all over MHT and NH-related threads....
Must be offline for the holiday.

Second of all -- I don't see AA, given their BOS hub. WN will likely expand, and maybe B6 would enter to compete to Florida, which would be great, although I imagine that is more likely to happen later on given B6's aggresive growth plan as it is. I could see US/HP expand to LAS and PHX maybe also. MHT is an awesome airport -- nice long runway, nice-sized terminal that allows easy-in, easy-out, but has all the amentities of a major airport.

Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

So with a gain in population of the areas it serves and the general upward trend in tourists to New England looking to avoid the hassles of BOS, I agree that demand for MHT traffic is likely to go up, now it's up to the airlines to figure this out and take advantage of it!
 
jay767
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:50 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:45 am

First off AA,forget it,second PHX is locked up for MHT in 2006 served by WN(just waiting for deliveries of more planes),F9 really depends on whether MHT can put a sweeter deal than PVD can put together,Airtran actively talking with Kevin Dillon and since DL pulled out all mainline service it looks better,US I doubt we will see PHX because WN will get to it much sooner,UA will never give us DEN,there was talk of DEN a couple years ago but nothing came out of it and UA has been downgrading aircraft size on ORD lately with the biggest being a 735 where we used to have 757's,A320's,a319's and 733's.
Spirit,Frontier,Airtran and Jetblue have all been very active in discussions with MHT,but I would only take Airtran as a very good bet,DL has left the MHT-ATL market wide open,no body wants to travel on those RJ's including myself,I would be glad to take an Airtran 717 because I travel the MHT-ATL-MCO route on DL a few times a year,I'll go back to DL when mainline comes back,and I think we will get DL mainline back on MHT-ATL in the spring.
 
B752OS
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:44 pm

Quoting Dartland (Reply 8):
Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

So with a gain in population of the areas it serves and the general upward trend in tourists to New England looking to avoid the hassles of BOS, I agree that demand for MHT traffic is likely to go up, now it's up to the airlines to figure this out and take advantage of it!

See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

As far as the Metro Boston population moving up north, its not as big as you make it seem, the bulk of the population of the metro area still is south and west of the city.
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:24 pm

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems

Well before the Ted Williams tunnel was built, the only way in was the Callahan tunnel, and the only way out was the sumner tunnel, which often got so backed up traffic wise that State Police would often detour passenger vehicles leaving north on 1A, which was a major inconvenience. The Ted helps make getting to the airport easier, but parking is way too expensive compared to MHT or PVD. Also, because all the TSA checkpoints are overcrowded, security is a pain in the neck in the airport. Also, ever tried picking up someone at Terminal B or waited for a courtesy vehicle? Its terrible. All the vehicles fighting for the same piece of curb. That parking garage there needs to go, and they should build a central check in hall for all the airlines, which would allow one central TSA point for eveyone, but they won't do it. Also, if there is bad weather at BOS, you will get ground delay programs as well.

PVD and MHT don't have any of these problems, and you can get to just about anywhere from there as you can from BOS. You may have to connect, but it sure beats 3 hours in an RJ.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14004
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:00 pm

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
Well before the Ted Williams tunnel was built, the only way in was the Callahan tunnel, and the only way out was the sumner tunnel, which often got so backed up traffic wise that State Police would often detour passenger vehicles leaving north on 1A, which was a major inconvenience. The Ted helps make getting to the airport easier, but parking is way too expensive compared to MHT or PVD. Also, because all the TSA checkpoints are overcrowded, security is a pain in the neck in the airport. Also, ever tried picking up someone at Terminal B or waited for a courtesy vehicle? Its terrible. All the vehicles fighting for the same piece of curb. That parking garage there needs to go, and they should build a central check in hall for all the airlines, which would allow one central TSA point for eveyone, but they won't do it. Also, if there is bad weather at BOS, you will get ground delay programs as well.

I agree with everything you wrote, and lucky me also got to sit for four hours a few months ago due to the radar problems they had.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
PVD and MHT don't have any of these problems, and you can get to just about anywhere from there as you can from BOS. You may have to connect, but it sure beats 3 hours in an RJ.

Connect? My favorite flight is the MHT-TPA non-stop on WN. On the other hand, when I needed to get to MSY, I thought I was on a bus - we made stops in Baltimore and Jacksonville.

I live 1/2 hour from MHT and about 1 hour to BOS. I'll only go to BOS when there's a particularly good routing. For instance, the last time I went into BOS was for B6 BOS-SJC nonstop. I have a strong preference for non-stops, I hate the idea of being stuck at a midpoint. After that, I shop based on cost. I tend to avoid flying the majors - I still resent the deep screwing they gave us when they were able to, not to mention some episodes of very poor service.

The only strong point of BOS is the presence of alternatives if you really have to get somewhere and your primary plans go south. That matters a lot to some people.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3382
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:13 pm

I'm here!

First off, everyone chimed in with very astute observations. I agree with pretty much all of them: WN expansion (yes); AA service (no); JetBlue (yes); Frontier (maybe).

MHT is a proven station. There is no airline executive that DOESN'T know about MHT. As for the 'legacy' carriers, they seem to be in a mode of retrenching...not growing. If AA had no desire to serve MHT when they were minting money back in the mid-to-late 1990s, they won't ever come. DL seems to be trying to force their customer base back to Logan in hopes of making that big new terminal work for them. United is curious...they'll run 757s through here and then, in the blink of an eye, move to 737-500s and RJs. I just don't get their scheduling philosophy. USAirways I see holding the status quo. Their merger with HP notwithstanding, I don't see new flights to new destinations.

The point about WN waiting for more aircraft before growing MHT is a very good one. We've been on the cusp of MHT-PHX service for a long while now, and I'm in the camp that says that it's 'all about the aircraft.' It'll come.

JetBlue, if we are to believe what Neeleman says, will be here at MHT. He has said as much. I don't believe it EVER was a choice between Boston and Manchester, but rather which city would come first. MHT has proven itself to be a distinct market, or else US/NW/DL/UA wouldn't be here. So Neeleman may be in the same camp as Southwest: waiting on new planes. I don't subscribe to the thesis that JetBlue is 'afraid' of WN and won't compete head-to-head with them. If Neeleman wants to grow his airline, he's going to (eventually) run into Southwest. And there is enough distinction between WN and B6 to allow Neeleman to win his loyalists in cities where the carriers go against each other.

In the end, the gate issue is particularly troubling early in the morning and late at night. Then, the gates are all full. But if a carrier can schedule around those hours and remote-park an aircraft for their overnight turns at MHT, then they can make it work. It is true that 'there are no gates' if you insist on having one early in the morning or late at night. If you don't need a gate at those peak times, you can make it work.

My final point--a rather sad one--is that I see MHT actually regressing in terms of passengers in 2006 versus 2005. How can we not? Planes are smaller, and there will be fewer flights. The only way we--at best--plateau in terms of traffic in 2006 versus 2005 is if we land a major new carrier. Even then, I'm not sure that'll be enough to keep MHT from showing negative growth 2006 v. 2005.

Chris
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:29 am

Thanks Chris.

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

Agreed that BOS is one of the better major airports -- I live in Boston and find Logan amazingly convenient to the city (compared to NY, where I used to live, it's night and day!). The terminal structure is good and spread out -- no complaints really.

However, there are 2 hassles with BOS:
1) The trip from BOS north. If you live north of the city, or if you are going north of the city -- traffic can be horrendous. You literally have to plan the times you fly in and out around traffic, because it can mean a 40 min or a 2 hour trip to the airport. THAT is the hassle I'm referring to.
2) Ground hold delays. Almost everyday BOS has ground hold delays because they can't handle inbound traffic. Your liklihood of a non-weather delay is MUCH higher at BOS than MHT. And if weather turns for the worse, you can plan on a delay, whereas MHT can handle the traffic.

Also, while BOS is not bad as stated-- have you ever flown into or out of MHT? BOS may be a good airport, but MHT is like taking a train compared to flying out of BOS -- parking directly across from the terminal, small managegable gate area, limited taxiing -- it is one of the best airports I've ever flown into or out of as far as convenience goes, hands down.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3382
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:08 am

Dartland, you are preaching to the choir about the appeal of MHT. Anyone who has experienced MHT says all that you did.

Airports are a mix of air-side and land-side operations. In my own view MHT has the air-side covered. I've literally watched a Southwest 737 land and pull to a stop at its gate...in 30 seconds. No word of a lie. Southwest wants fast turn times? That's why they're at Manchester. On the departure side, you're never in the midst of a long conga line of planes waiting to take off...even during the busy morning push.

The land-side also is appealing at MHT. A huge parking garage, affordable parking fees, and access roads that will do nothing but improve with projects now underway. The terminal is efficient and attractive and getting from check-in counter to gate isn't the ordeal it can be at Logan.

The increased use of RJs can do nothing but make things worse for Logan. Remember why widebody planes came into being in the first place: To ease congestion at major airports. Now, we've come full-circle. Widebody jets are in the desert; RJs are everywhere. How can that NOT cause more air-side complications at Logan (or any airport)?

The wildcard in all of this is Virgin America. Indeed, many are wondering what has become of this carrier. This is not the best of times to be starting an airline, and just raising capital is tough (would YOU throw money at a new fledgling carrier?). But when they do see the light of day, they might be a carrier to watch.

Overall, carriers waiting in the wings know what's going on here. AirTran, for example, surely must know that Delta has pulled seats at MHT in a major way. They must know that people think an RJ from MHT to ATL is a little too much of a concession, and wouldn't they like a 717 instead? Of course they would. So, I think we've yet to see moves like this fully play out, where a new carrier steps in and capitalizes on the weakened state of the majors (in this case, AirTran taking advantage of a weak Delta).

2006 will be interesting at MHT. The powers that be have temporarily shelved plans to expand the terminal here, owing to the increased use of RJs and what the competitive landscape will end up looking like. It makes no sense to add more mainline jetways and gates if the trend is away from mainline jets. Until that trend settles out, the smart thing to do is exactly what they're doing: nothing.

I also think a smart play would be a stand-alone gate at MHT for incoming transtlantic charters. In the same way that Sanford works for Orlando, Manchester can work for Boston. The landing fees are lower, the hassles fewer. Charter carriers gravitate to that, and I think if we had the infrastructure in place to support this kind of one-off 'occasional' business (e.g. MyTravel, Monarch, et al), we'd do well. Boston is certainly not as popular as Orlando in terms of European visitors, but our market is not far from the top. Take skiing: Given the exchange rate, a family in Europe can actually get more for their money by coming here to ski than 'by just going to Switzerland.' And, oh, by the way, did someone say shopping?? The Wrentham Outlet Mall welcomes large groups of women in late November/early December who come with empty luggage and just 'shop till they drop.' Everything is just so much more affordable here. So, there's a lot of appeal to tour/charter organizers in Europe in coming to Manchester. For a host of reasons, those charter carriers in Europe could easily sell full planes to MHT on an occasional basis. If it's marketed and sold properly by our own people, and marketed and sold properly overseas, there's no reason why charter 757s couldn't be full of European shoppers and skiiers between November and March. I have a hard time believing that all Europeans care about is Mickey Mouse.

Chris
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:08 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
For a host of reasons, those charter carriers in Europe could easily sell full planes to MHT on an occasional basis. If it's marketed and sold properly by our own people, and marketed and sold properly overseas, there's no reason why charter 757s couldn't be full of European shoppers and skiiers between November and March

Especially if they just tell unsuspecting Europeans its a flight to Manchester, and don't specify NH vs UK.  Wink
 
2travel2know
Posts: 2236
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:05 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:15 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
I also think a smart play would be a stand-alone gate at MHT for incoming transtlantic charters. In the same way that Sanford works for Orlando, Manchester can work for Boston.

Does MHT have an international gate? I read somewhere about charters to AUA from MHT, but AUA has US Customs and Inmigration overthere.
It seems that PVD does have US Customs and Inmigraton within the terminal, I think MHT should too. Not only to attract those Ski Charters from Europe, but for charters to the Caribbean and Mexico.
However, even with US Federal Inspection Facilities, I see it very unlikely for a Latinamerican or European non-charter airline to fly into MHT; Just imagine Ryanair flying to MHT or PVD and to SWF...
I don't work for COPA Airlines!
 
UN_B732
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 12:57 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:33 am

MHT-JFK with the 190s (which is what I could see jetBlue doing with the 190s) is not competing with WN. Only the Florida routes would put him head-to-head, which I believe he will only do when he absolutely has to (within a few years) as he wants to stretch out the time before going head-to-head against WN.
Once he goes head-to-head against WN, the fun begins.

Speaking of that, are there any routes where two or more LCCs compete in the US? Come to think of it, I can't think of any offhand. Perhaps NK competes with WN & B6 in some Florida markets, but it's not very widespread.
What now?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14004
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:19 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 16):

Especially if they just tell unsuspecting Europeans its a flight to Manchester, and don't specify NH vs UK.

Or, they can do what Ryanair does, and book tickets to MHT as "Boston"!  Smile
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
jay767
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:50 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:27 am

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 17):
I see it very unlikely for a Latinamerican or European non-charter airline to fly into MHT; Just imagine Ryanair flying to MHT or PVD and to SWF...

You are right,but nobody said manchester would ever attract daily european service,read carefully,we are talking about sporadic charters from europe and latin america.And I have once seen a ryan international 757 do AUA-MHT last winter and used gate 10,but the flight never made a return the following week or ever for that fact.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6954
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:30 am

Quoting Dartland (Reply 8):
Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

It's true that the BOS and MHT catchment area intersect somewhat however this large move of people north, is now over. In fact NH saw a decrease in population for the first time in a long time. This is because southern NH is now as expensive to live as many of Boston suburbs and NH also lost a lot of jobs over the last few years, mostly well paying high tech jobs.

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

It's not. It's mostly just a hype. I've been flying out of Boston for years without any problems. There were a couple of years during the renovation project when it was a bit of a hassle but today it's a really easy airport to use. The biggest problem I have with BOS is parking. It's way too expensive. There used to be a parking lot in S.Boston next to the court house at $7/day. I would hop on the T from there or take a cab to the airport, and that was great, even cheaper than MHT which is $8/day. But when the silver line went live, someone realized they could now charge as much as the airport lots so, no more cheap parking when flying out of Boston.

Ok, the traffic can be tough sometimes but the Spalding turnpike to MHT is no easy drive at rush hour either  Smile

I could be wrong about this but I think most of MHT traffic is leisure. That is why you see the legacy carriers drop service while the total number of passengers going through MHT is still going up. I believe SW and charter flights make up the bulk of the traffic from MHT and those numbers will continue to increase. People in southern NH have a lot of disposable income to spend on packaged vacations.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:07 am

I believe the most likely to occur in 2006. Airtran will enter the MHT market with their 717's with nonstop service to ATL 2 to 3x daily and perhaps another eastcoast market maybe CLT(1 flight daily) to give US a little competition. MHT will see WN add nonstop to PHX,maybe PIT with an outside possibility of LAX or OAK(just a gut feeling no info to back it up) Finally I think Frontier will return to New England with nonstop from both MHT and PVD to DEN, also NW returns yr nonstop MHT to MSP! If any of these occur I am going to try to get the Carnac segment on the tonight show LOL
 
deltairlines
Posts: 6877
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 4:47 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:45 am

Here's what I'm seeing for MHT in 2006:

Delta - Delta has dipped quite a bit over the past year at MHT. The year started off with 4x CVG (2x M88/2x CRJ), 3x ATL (2x M88/1x CRJ) and 2x LGA (2x CRJ). CVG is down to 3x CR7, ATL is at 5x (3x CR7/2x CRJ). That's quite a big decrease. Overall, I see Delta bringing back the evening ATL arrival/morning ATL departure, as this flight would (a) most likely have the highest yields (due to the way the MHT market works, it's more of an outbound market than an inbound, which MCO would be an example of). Of course, this would quite possibly be facilitied by...

AirTran - I would not be shocked to see them at MHT. Gate 10 is vacant for whoever wants it effective Jan. 3 or so. Southwest doesn't need a fifth gate, US doesn't really need a 3rd gate, so it'll be whoever wants it can have it. I could see AirTran running 3x 717 to ATL and 1x 717 to MCO (Just cause it seems like many new FL stations have 2 destinations, and FL won't touch BWI-MHT with a 10 foot pole, as WN has that market owned). And if AirTran doesn't come, it will be...

JetBlue - they have new E-190s coming in, and they need to put them somewhere. NYC isn't highly served out of MHT (4x CO to EWR, 6x props to LGA on US), so having 3-4 E-190s on MHT-JFK should work. Also, I would expect to see a MHT-FLL route at least once a day, as this is an unserved market here, and would have an advantage over WN (who requires a stop in BWI, TPA or MCO to get down to FLL). This could come with FL if NW gives up a gate (since they'll be down to 4-5 daily flights, no real need for 2 gates).

American - still don't see them coming to MHT. They wouldn't be able to compete effectively against UA's 2 class offering to ORD plus WN to MDW, and DFW is too thin of a route potentially (it's a long route for an MD-80, toward the end of its range, so some headwinds on MHT-DFW could hurt loads/cargo).

United - I see maybe some more mainline coming back to ORD, plus maybe an odd CR7 to IAD. However, I don't see DEN...it's right at the edge of the range for an E-170, and out of the range for a CRJ-700 (at least based on DEN-RDU, which is 300 miles shorter)...meaning a 737-500 would have to be used, which I don't see unless ORD gets some upgrading beforehand. At this time, that would mean maybe Frontier with an A318, but I'm not convinced of this.

Continental - I expect the status quo. It's been pretty constant over the past 3 years.

US Airways - I expect some more mainline toward the end of the year. Once the HP/US merger gets further, some aircraft will be able to be reallocated to PHL-MHT, and quite possibly maybe an upgrade on CLT-MHT. No major changes to PIT/DCA/LGA.

Southwest - BNA is gone. Yet, I'm convinced that PHX will be added this year (either US or WN will take it). I'd expect maybe some tinkering with service throughout the year though...maybe adding a flight or two here and there...only new destination I could see is PHX though.

Air Canada - status quo...I'm just happy that we get service to YYZ, and I'm doubting we'll see Dash 8s to YYZ (although I'd love to see MHT-YUL come back).

Jeff
 
CentPIT
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:48 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:50 pm

I don't think we will see PIT-MHT return in the near future. I think Pittsburgh has a better chance of seeing the non-stop service return on WN. MHT from PIT probably isn't on the top of Southwest's list though either. I think the next destination from Pittsburgh for southwest will be FLL or LAX.
Pittsburgh International: US Airways---160 daily departures! (52 destinations)
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3382
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:08 pm

I'm actually encouraged about new airlines starting servicce at MHT. We talk about AirTran, Frontier, and JetBlue. A case can easily be made for all three, with the CEO of one (JetBlue) actually on record as saying he'd pick Manchester as well as Boston.

What Manchester has going for it, mostly, is an enviable track record. Post 9/11 when ALL major airports were losing traffic, guess which one grew...and consistently? Yep. So you can be sure that airline executives at these carriers know all about MHT. They know the score. They know it's not a 'question-mark' market, and they also know they can do very well right out of the chute.

Other intangibles that would appeal to 'new' carriers: First, MHT does a GREAT job of removing snow and keeping its runways open. That's why FedEx and UPS use MHT as a regional hub for New England. Believe me, no one should diminish the importance of simply remaining operational while other regional airports are closed.

Second, we either have or soon will have CAT III on all four runways. Third, road access to/from the airport will receive a major boost with the new Merrimack River crossing. That project finally received all its permits (thank you, nesting Bald Eagles) and is now underway...albeit a few years late.

Fourth, you have Airport management that really has done a great job of making MHT attractive to the public in terms of affordable and plentiful parking. If people like the airport, the airlines will too. Aside from just getting to Boston's Logan Airport, the next biggest pain point is the cost to park there. At MHT, we don't have an agency hell-bent on lining its coffers and padding its nest (see: Massport). Eight bucks will pay for your parking spot at MHT for a full day. That privilege will cost you three times as much--24 dollars--at Massport-ville. Twelve of those Massport dollars go to Mr. Ticket-taker at the garage exit. Eight dollars go to new carpeting at Massport HQ. The final eight help fund Massport's next 'Boston-Herald-not-allowed' booze cruise.

Finally, landing fees are low at MHT. An airline exec will pull his (or her) hair out over rising fuel prices, and they'll look anywhere else to make up the difference. In the whole scheme of things, landing fees may look like a trivial line item. But airlines looking at the Boston market and deciding between, say, Providence and Manchester may see expense areas like this as a deciding factor. Truth is, you never really know how the criteria stack up. It could be a mix of tangible and intangible things. Mr. AirTran could take a liking to the decor down in baggage claim at MHT, and make his decision based on that. Or, his prime rib was cooked just right at the airport restaurant. Silly? Sure. But in the end, we never really know. Airport management can do all the dog-and-pony shows they want, and cause death by Powerpoint.

The winning formula is to get the airline executives to VISIT Manchester...see the place in action. And I believe MHT management has done a decent job there. You can't have them thinking Manchester is some bucollic village in New Hampshire with cows grazing next to the runways. Some Top Dog at an airline who only knows New Hampshire for presidential primaries, church steeples and cows isn't going to be swayed by any Powerpoint presentation. Gotta get 'em up here.

Bottom line is that the tangible things about Manchester--the things that we know--are pretty attractive to any carrier wishing to serve the airport.

Chris in NH
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:55 pm

Quoting CentPIT (Reply 24):
MHT from PIT probably isn't on the top of Southwest's list though either.

Considering how they call MHT/PVD their Boston Gateways (which makes me laugh, but I digress) and how they seem hellbent on killing US on PIT-PHL... going after US's high-yield route of PIT-BOS (via MHT/PVD) seems the next logical step since they can't get anywhere near PIT-NYC (sorry, ISP wouldn't cut it in my book.) Then I look for B6 using their JFK theory to try and jump into PIT-NYC's high yields... unless Airtran(?) can beat them to it on PIT-LGA/EWR or for some reason Continental would decide to start a war on PIT-EWR (very doubtful). I can't see why PIT-MHT was dropped on US though, I flew that numerous times last summer (04) and never saw an empty flight... and many of those people were destinationed to PIT... not just connecting through. It's not like the flights were cheap either to be crap yields.
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Wed Dec 28, 2005 8:47 pm

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
The Wrentham Outlet Mall welcomes large groups of women in late November/early December who come with empty luggage and just 'shop till they drop.'

A bit off topic, but isn't the wrentham outlet mall substantially closer to PVD than either BOS or MHT? Its 30 miles south of Boston near 495, and not too far from Gillette Stadium. Unless you are refering to something else, like North Conway.

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 25):
Second, we either have or soon will have CAT III on all four runways.

Do you have a link on this? I can see 35 becoming CAT III and possibly 17 but not 6 or 24. If all 4 runways become CAT III this will give it a major advantage over BOS in bad weather, since BOS only has one CATIII approach, to 4R. The downside to this is when BOS tanks, guess who gets a lot of the diversions?
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3382
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:55 am

Actually, I may be a bit premature on the CAT III designations for 6-24. I thought I heard something about this being in the works. 6-24, itself over 7,000 feet in length, is set to undergo lengthening for the mandated thousand-foot overuns (the Route 28 roadway will actually get submerged and the lengthened runway will go above it). I was under the impression that CAT III was part of that project.

As for the 'Wrentham Mall Gals,' yes, I'm talking about the Wrentham that is closer to PVD than it is to Boston. But these ladies--part of mall lore already--choose scheduled carriers, and that, of course, means Logan.

Finally, Southwest calling MHT and PVD their 'Boston gateways' can be construed as laughable...but both stations are doing fabulously. They devised a strategy to capture a major metro market without actually flying into that market, so I can't really laugh AT them. But I will laugh WITH them  Smile. Many of us on the MHT Yahoo Group have been prognosticating about 2006, and none of us really see MHT-PIT being added by Southwest. There are too many better opportunities and too few planes to go around. Is MHT-PIT on someone's list at Southwest? I'll bet it is. But I'll also bet it sits far below MHT-PHX, MHT-FLL, and more MHT-LAS or MHT-MDW flights in the pecking order. We lose the two nonstops to Nashville, and the smart money among us says that those two flights will go to PHX, LAS, MDW, or any of their Florida destinations. The appetite for MHT-Florida is huge.

Chris in NH
 
CentPIT
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:48 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:16 am

Why is WN dropping MHT-BNA?


I think WN will add PIT-PVD before PIT-MHT; if either ever occur. PIT-PVD is still run by US with 4 daily (3 CRJ and 1 E70). I think WN will challenge US before running an unoccupied route. Unless the market is good (PIT-MHT), I am not sure why US would drop it if they were making money?


 confused 
Pittsburgh International: US Airways---160 daily departures! (52 destinations)
 
B752OS
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:38 am

Quoting Apodino (Reply 27):
A bit off topic, but isn't the wrentham outlet mall substantially closer to PVD than either BOS or MHT? Its 30 miles south of Boston near 495, and not too far from Gillette Stadium. Unless you are refering to something else, like North Conway.

No it isn't. The difference in distance between it and BOS and PVD is less than 10 miles. It's right off 495 exit 15. Besides, I would not exactly call it as a magnet for tourists.

Quoting CentPIT (Reply 29):
Why is WN dropping MHT-BNA?

They would rather route all that connecting traffic somewhere else.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 2:26 am

Quoting CentPIT (Reply 29):
I think WN will add PIT-PVD before PIT-MHT; if either ever occur.

Feasible. Which one (MHT/PVD) is actually closer to the CBD of Boston? I will be surprised to see WN allow US to keep a high yield route like that (meaning BOS) much longer from PIT.
 
warreng24
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:38 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 2:49 am

Quoting Jay767 (Reply 9):

I believe that the UA ORD-MHT downgrades are due to the seasonals. They were still running 757's and 733's for the holiday's. The 757's are scheduled to go away the first week of Jan 06. I think 757's will kick out the RJ's when spring and summer travel seasons kick's off.

UA MHT-DEN would be GREAT for pacific domestic and international connections. Maybe one day 881/882 will be MHT-ORD-NRT-BKK.  

Down with the evil empire (Massport).

[Edited 2005-12-28 19:00:03]
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:09 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 31):
Feasible. Which one (MHT/PVD) is actually closer to the CBD of Boston? I will be surprised to see WN allow US to keep a high yield route like that (meaning BOS) much longer from PIT.

I think PVD is slightly closer, but the difference between the two is negligible. MHT is probably a slightly easier ride, because you don't have to deal with the Braintree split on 93 North, or driving right through the middle of the PVD CBD. That being said, I don't know how high yielding the route is, but I flew BOS-PIT the other day on ZW, and it was a CRJ. If it was higher yielding, I would expect 737's, not CRJ's.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6954
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:11 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
Given the exchange rate, a family in Europe can actually get more for their money by coming here to ski than 'by just going to Switzerland.' And, oh, by the way, did someone say shopping??

You can't possibly even begin to compare skiing in the Alps with skiing in New England. I go to Europe skiing almost every year. Even with the euro as high as it is agianst the dollar, a skiing vacation is still cheaper in Europe than in Colorado, for us East Coasters. I just came back 2 days ago from 10 days in Austria. A mid-week lift ticket here costs over $50. A mid week lift ticket in Austria cost me 34 Euros. Hotels and food is also cheaper over there at a small guesthouse. And then there's the actual quality of the skiing which is not even on the same level.

Skiing is definately one thing you will not see Europeans fly to MHT for  Smile
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:24 am

It's not about the skiing, it's about the "New England Experience"

Agreed you'll maybe get more tourists for fall foliage (which is unarguably the best in the world in NH and VT), but I've seen European tourists at VT ski resorts.

Don't ask me why, but they come! (and I was just at Mt. Snow and Stratton last weekend where is POURED on Sunday night....so really, I'm lost on this one, but I've seen them!)
 
airbazar
Posts: 6954
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:06 am

Quoting Dartland (Reply 35):
Agreed you'll maybe get more tourists for fall foliage (which is unarguably the best in the world in NH and VT), but I've seen European tourists at VT ski resorts

So have I, but very few. I suspect skiing may have not been the main intent of the visit or they may even be expats. One thing that MHT and NH could capitalize on, is shopping trips. As it is, this year there were news reports of Europeans taking weekend trips to Boston and NY for Christmas shopping. NH could expand their "No sales tax" publicity campaign all the way across the pond. Combine that with the Summer and Fall natural resources of New England (we do have nice beaches and lakes, and great seafood), and you've got a good recipe to attract the charter crowd.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:47 am

Quoting Apodino (Reply 33):
but I flew BOS-PIT the other day on ZW, and it was a CRJ. If it was higher yielding, I would expect 737's, not CRJ's.

But what was your fare? PIT-EWR is all RJ's too... over a dozen when you add up CO and US. The yield is in the fare.
 
RL757PVD
Posts: 2539
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 1999 2:47 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:10 am

Quoting Georgiabill (Reply 22):
believe the most likely to occur in 2006. Airtran will enter the MHT market

Im gonna disagree with most of you and say Airtran is far from likely in 2006. If the MHT-ATL market was so strong then DL wouldnt have downgraded like they did.

A quick look at the FL route map will show many other cities that would take a higher priority over MHT such as STL LIT PHX SEA SAN and maybe even ALB or PWM, and thats just looking domestically.

One thing with Air Tran is they like it when airports give them $$$$. With WN controling over 40% of the market at MHT (this # may get close to 50% in 2006) I guarantee they will be quite upset if the airport gives $$$ to competing carrier. Small airports can get away with better incentives such as DAY CAK and DAB, but when there are more mouths to feed (airlines) airports have to be very careful how they offer $$$ to new airlines. ICT is a very good example of this. It would not suprise me to see FL or JB at PWM before MHT for these reasons and also avoiding WN and BOS canibalization.
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
 
jay767
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:50 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:05 am

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 38):
Im gonna disagree with most of you and say Airtran is far from likely in 2006. If the MHT-ATL market was so strong then DL wouldnt have downgraded like they did.

Oh and you know as fact,because you are dead wrong and didn't bother to find out that MHT-ATL loads were outstanding,around 90% full on those MD88's,the reason for dropping mainline wasn't anything to do with loads,it had to do with yields,DL was forced to structure fairs to compete with LCC fairs(WN) which did not work for them and they were losing money,Airtran wouldn't have to lose money like DL did trying to match LCC fairs,why,because Airtran is an LCC,There is a big MHT-ATL market for low yield customers and Airtran would thrive on it,sorry but Airtran will enter MHT in 2006.
 Wink
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:13 am

This all being said, and im all for for NE airport growth, but is MHT even trying to lure all this new service? Chris i know you mentioned all that stuf about infstructure and the CAT III, but is the airport actually goin to UA, US, B6, Airtran or Frontier and saying hey, look at our low landing fees, great access and hell, were not massport?
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
RL757PVD
Posts: 2539
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 1999 2:47 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:16 am

I do not doubt flights were full...the passenger #'s proved that...However, MHT-ATL hasnt had strong O&D traffic #'s, which is the bread and butter. Airtran could easily be sucessful in MHT, just lookng at the holes in the route map however, shows many more likely higher priority candidates.

The LCCs are the future of the domestic system and I beleve each FL F9 and JB will be at each MHT PVD and BDL in the next 5-8 years...but not 2006. Dependng on WN and UA....2006 could be the year for F9, but ill go on the record as saying ill be suprised if MHT gets FL in 2006 without throwing huge amounts of $$$ at them.
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
 
jay767
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:50 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:55 am

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 40):
but is the airport actually goin to UA, US, B6, Airtran or Frontier and saying hey, look at our low landing fees, great access and hell, were not massport?

Your kidding right,because UA mainline and US mainline already serve MHT,it just sounds like you didn't think they were already there,I might have understood you.

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 41):
ill be suprised if MHT gets FL in 2006 without throwing huge amounts of $$$ at them.

Kevin Dillon himself said he expected them this year,all I can say is watch this space.
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:15 am

Quoting Jay767 (Reply 42):
Your kidding right,because UA mainline and US mainline already serve MHT,it just sounds like you didn't think they were already there,I might have understood you

i ment expansion, others spoke on expanding to MHT-DEN and increasing MHT-ORD with ua and some PIT and more PHL with US.
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
B752OS
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:10 pm

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 32):
Down with the evil empire (Massport).

Are you kidding me??? How old are you? Two?

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 38):
A quick look at the FL route map will show many other cities that would take a higher priority over MHT such as STL LIT PHX SEA SAN and maybe even ALB or PWM, and thats just looking domestically.

I am going to have agree with you on this one. There certainly are a slew of markets more deserving of service. I would say that PVD would see FL before MHT does.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 36):
and great seafood),

New England has THE BEST seafood anywhere.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 36):
NH could expand their "No sales tax" publicity campaign all the way across the pond. Combine that with the Summer and Fall natural resources of New

I doubt that promoting no sales tax to the Europeans will egt them to jump to the state. When you have the lure of being on Park Ave. in NYC, as oposed to the only decent shopping area in NH, (The Rockingham Mall), to say there is no sales tax is laughable. For someone from Europe, the best attractions in New Englad are of course Boston, Cape Cod, Newport and the foliage in NH and VT.
 
jay767
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:50 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:14 pm

Quoting B752OS (Reply 44):
I doubt that promoting no sales tax to the Europeans will egt them to jump to the state.

I doubt that promoting anything new hampshire would be a sell,we are a small and quaint state,but I do believe cheaper landing fee's and the fact that Logan has an already overly busy international terminal with not many or if any slots available would be a good selling point to a charter carrier like britannia ect.,I certainly feel they would consider MHT for those reason's,but I don't believe for one minute they would come just for the sole purpose of visiting our state,but a charter carrier could consider MHT a gateway to greater boston.We have the runway,we just need a gate to handle widebodies and have customs,completely feasible.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6954
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:44 pm

Quoting Jay767 (Reply 45):
Quoting B752OS (Reply 44):
I doubt that promoting no sales tax to the Europeans will egt them to jump to the state.

I doubt that promoting anything new hampshire would be a sell,we are a small and quaint state,but I do believe

You guys have nooo idea. All of my family and a great number of friends live in Europe. When they come to visit they can't get enought of NH's and Maine's Outlet Malls. When you pay 100+ Euros for a pair of Levis or a Ralph Lauren polo shirt in Europe, the NH outlet malls are a huge attraction to those who know about them. The problem is, most Europeans who visit the area don't know they can buy a pair of authentic Levis and Ralph Lauren polo shirts for $20 at the Kittery and N.Conway Outlet malls. Instead they go to the Prudential Center Mall in Boston and pay 3 times as much which is still cheaper than back home.

I know of people who come here from Europe with shopping lists from their friends and relatives and pay for the entire trip by re-selling it back home.
According to a recent Boston Globe report, Boston (not NY City), is a premier weekend shopping destination for people from Iceland.

5th Avenue is great but it's not much cheaper than Europe and the NY sales tax is huge. Trust me on this, Europeans are suckers for brand name stuff at cheap prices. I think that NH and MHT have a huge untapped market here.

And like i said, it's not all about shopping. It's the whole package including natural beauty, New England charm, and good food.
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:31 pm

I think Airbazar is right on.

And don't forget -- you don't even have to go all the way up to N. Conway -- you have the outlet mall in Tilton 30 min. north of the airport!
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:06 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 37):

But what was your fare? PIT-EWR is all RJ's too... over a dozen when you add up CO and US. The yield is in the fare.

Didn't pay a fare. I was in the Jumpseat.
 
PVD757
Posts: 3032
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 8:23 pm

RE: MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations

Fri Dec 30, 2005 4:08 am

Quoting B752OS (Reply 30):
Quoting Apodino (Reply 27):
A bit off topic, but isn't the wrentham outlet mall substantially closer to PVD than either BOS or MHT? Its 30 miles south of Boston near 495, and not too far from Gillette Stadium. Unless you are refering to something else, like North Conway.

No it isn't. The difference in distance between it and BOS and PVD is less than 10 miles. It's right off 495 exit 15. Besides, I would not exactly call it as a magnet for tourists.

BOS-Wrentham Village: 46 minutes, 39.7 miles
PVD-Wrentham Village: 37 minutes, 31.17 miles

Quoting Apodino (Reply 33):
Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 31):
Feasible. Which one (MHT/PVD) is actually closer to the CBD of Boston? I will be surprised to see WN allow US to keep a high yield route like that (meaning BOS) much longer from PIT.

I think PVD is slightly closer, but the difference between the two is negligible. MHT is probably a slightly easier ride, because you don't have to deal with the Braintree split on 93 North, or driving right through the middle of the PVD CBD. That being said, I don't know how high yielding the route is, but I flew BOS-PIT the other day on ZW, and it was a CRJ. If it was higher yielding, I would expect 737's, not CRJ's.

DRIVING:

PVD-BOS: 1 hour + 8 minutes (59.88 miles)
MHT-BOS: 1 hour + 2 minutes (54.85 miles)

CROW FLIES:

PVD-BOS: 49 miles
MHT-BOS: 45 miles