TMBishop7
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:01 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:21 am

MFR used to have 4x daily UAL737 to SFO before the year 2000...now UAL runs 7x EMB-120 and a 1x CRJ...but pax rates have been rising about 1%/yr and with a new terminal on the way, why would UAL give up what used to be close to a monopoly in Southern Oregon? People from Jackson, Jospehine, and Klamath county use MFR...a population of over 300,000.
After UAL started reducing capacity...HP and DL jumped in with daily CRJ service I talk to people all the time that would rather drive to SMF or PDX to avoid being on a puddle jumper ...it seems that if an airline brought in even a EMB170 they would instantly dominate Southern Oregon.
Thoughts?
"Who we are, is who we were"
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4713
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:36 am

The situation is the same at BFL - after AA and AE pulled out completely, only United Express was left. And instead of expanding, there were only a 4-5 flights a day to LAX and two to SFO.

HP came in with four flights a day to PHX - and quickly upgraded to CRJ-200's, then CRJ-700/900's (I forget which one), and then LAS was added. Continental now has three ERJ flights to IAH, and Delta has added two flights to SLC.

When you add in the fact that BFL has a brand new, state-of-the-art terminal with jet bridges, one would think that with United Express already there, expansion plans would be in the works. Sadly, no.

Now, I can understand the EM2 flights to SFO and LAX - those are mostly business passengers - but there is no service to DEN. FAT, just up the road, has two airlines flying there (UA and F9 Expresses), and BFL, one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the country, can't seem to get one.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:40 am

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1):
BFL, one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the country, can't seem to get one.

Although the other way to look at it is that Fresno is also one of the fastest growing areas in the country and still is waiting for flights to IAH.  Wink
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
UnitedFlyer
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:43 pm

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:36 pm

I woiuld be delighted to see mainline UA back IN MFR! Hopefully when the new terminal opens, we will see more passengers fly out of MFR. Anybody know the plans for the new terminal?
 
AirlineBrat
Posts: 483
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 7:40 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:37 pm

Instead of Jetblue further saturating an already saturated east coast market with more service. Why don't they take the west coast more seriously? United is shrinking their west coast schedule and WN and AS only care about big markets. Jetblue could have a field day using EMB-190's in cities such as GEG, PUW, BLI, BOI, EUG, MFR, RDM, BIL, MSO, ACV/RDD, SMF, MRY, FAT, BFL, RNO, SJC, SLO, SBA, YUM etc etc. Their traditional 1-2 flights a day would meet the needs of many of the above cities. I would love to see QX add service at this magnitude but they will not have enough Q-400's to really expand to markets that could use more service to more destinations. Now all we need is to figure a good centrally located hub for all this new service. SMF would work however winter fog would be a problem. How about RNO? It was a great hub in the past and currently has lots of empty gates.......
I'm leavin on a jet plane. Don't know when I'll be back again....
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:50 pm

Quoting Airlinebrat (Reply 4):
Instead of Jetblue further saturating an already saturated east coast market with more service. Why don't they take the west coast more seriously? United is shrinking their west coast schedule and WN and AS only care about big markets. Jetblue could have a field day using EMB-190's in cities such as GEG, PUW, BLI, BOI, EUG, MFR, RDM, BIL, MSO, ACV/RDD, SMF, MRY, FAT, BFL, RNO, SJC, SLO, SBA, YUM etc etc. Their traditional 1-2 flights a day would meet the needs of many of the above cities. I would love to see QX add service at this magnitude but they will not have enough Q-400's to really expand to markets that could use more service to more destinations. Now all we need is to figure a good centrally located hub for all this new service. SMF would work however winter fog would be a problem. How about RNO? It was a great hub in the past and currently has lots of empty gates.......

There's a reason that no airline flies large aircraft to/from places like PUW, BLI, EUG, MFR, RDM, ACV/RDD, MRY, BFL, SBA and YUM. Once upon a time, most of these places actually had mainline jets. Way before regional airline partner networks were nearly as extensive as they are today. Airlines were losing lot's of money flying to these places but did it anyway, simply to provide a vast network. Today, airlines are less inclined to subsidize a money losing route simply to say they fly to a lot of cities. They go where the money is. If there were money to be made in these cities, they would be there.

Horizon is adding a fair amount of service up and down the coast just recently. From LAX they fly nonstop to EUG/MFR/RDM/BOI/SUN/RNO and soon to STS. I imagine, as they add more Q400's, you'll start to see more destinations from LAX added and possibly even some more intra-California services. Nobody will ever cover the west coast again like Hughes AirWest used to.
 
AirlineBrat
Posts: 483
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 7:40 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:19 pm

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 5):
There's a reason that no airline flies large aircraft to/from places like PUW, BLI, EUG, MFR, RDM, ACV/RDD, MRY, BFL, SBA and YUM. Once upon a time, most of these places actually had mainline jets. Way before regional airline partner networks were nearly as extensive as they are today. Airlines were losing lot's of money flying to these places but did it anyway, simply to provide a vast network. Today, airlines are less inclined to subsidize a money losing route simply to say they fly to a lot of cities. They go where the money is. If there were money to be made in these cities, they would be there.

Horizon is adding a fair amount of service up and down the coast just recently. From LAX they fly nonstop to EUG/MFR/RDM/BOI/SUN/RNO and soon to STS. I imagine, as they add more Q400's, you'll start to see more destinations from LAX added and possibly even some more intra-California services. Nobody will ever cover the west coast again like Hughes AirWest used to.

Good points. But still..... I live 5 miles down the road from ACV. UA Express used to have 12 flights a day to SFO, several to PDX, 2 a day to CEC and 2 a day to SMF. With UA Express, we are down to 6-7 flights a day to SFO, 2 to CEC and 2 to SMF. QX used to fly 3 Q200's to RDD/PDX and SEA but cut that down to 1 PDX/SEA flight a day when they started the LAX flights. Locals are begging for restoration of more flights north but QX says that they do not have enough aircraft to add service. UA Express dumped ACV-PDX after 9/11. Competition is gone but the demand is still there.

There is enough demand for new service eastbound towards DEN or SLC and the local airport officials are working on it. RDD officials are part of those talks as well since our partnership was successful in gaining new service to LAX. We received grants (Headwaters Fund) and essential air service support to cover the new QX service from ACV/RDD to LAX and those flights have been really popular. There are lots of SoCal students attending Humboldt State University.

The demand for new service to small markets is there but it seems like the only way small to medium markets can get new service is to guarantee profits for the first year of service. Local businesses have been instrumental in that regard. EUG, ACV/RDD, RDM, MFR etc have used this tactic with great success. It would also be nice to see some more competition in the ACV -Bay Area market. It is amazing to see $500 rt tickets from ACV to SFO while a rt ticket from ACV to SoCal is normally less than $250.
I'm leavin on a jet plane. Don't know when I'll be back again....
 
TMBishop7
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:01 am

MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:22 pm

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 5):
Once upon a time, most of these places actually had mainline jets. Way before regional airline partner networks were nearly as extensive as they are today. Airlines were losing lot's of money flying to these places but did it anyway, simply to provide a vast network. Today, airlines are less inclined to subsidize a money losing route simply to say they fly to a lot of cities. They go where the money is. If there were money to be made in these cities, they would be there.

True, but I also think that United pulled the 37's and put them where they felt threatened by other carriers. I'm sure they thought they could get away with flying puddle jumpers to places like MFR and no one would care. I bet they threw'em up against AS, maybe trying to add some frequency that they lacked...?
"Who we are, is who we were"
 
UnitedFlyer
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:43 pm

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:01 pm

I wonder if a 737 or an Airbus would be functional for the UAX route to DEN? My understanding is that flight is very popular
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:20 am

Actually, MFR is better off in someways that with just the UA's 737 service to SFO. The airport direction was quoted in the Mail-Tribune that he actually preferred the new service to what UA provided. MFR now has non-stops to PHX, LAS, LAX, SFO, SLC, DEN, PDX, SEA, EUG which serves the traveler needs better.

Quoting UnitedFlyer (Reply 8):
I wonder if a 737 or an Airbus would be functional for the UAX route to DEN?

Continental once ran it route with a 727 didn't work for them, of course apparently not much work for them in the late 80"s.

Quoting TMBishop7 (Thread starter):
People from Jackson, Jospehine, and Klamath county use MFR...a population of over 300,000.

Don't sell yourself short, MFR is also popular with Curry County in Oregon and Del Norte in California.
 
UnitedFlyer
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:43 pm

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:28 pm

Quoting AirCop (Reply 9):
wonder if a 737 or an Airbus would be functional for the UAX route to DEN?

Continental once ran it route with a 727 didn't work for them, of course apparently not much work for them in the late 80"s.

Perhaps now with the increased passenger flow this route could handle a larger aircraft. If not a larger aircraft, then at least more frequency. Too often, I have been forced to go to SFO to go east because I could not leave at a time to catch one of the limited flights to DEN.
 
ThreeWests
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 4:00 am

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:47 pm

I used to work for OO in MFR back when there were two daily 50 seat CRJs flights to DEN. They were going out with a 80% plus load factor - and then UA pulled one. We were told that they needed the airplanes out east to fill in the holes that ASA/Independence left. In the meantime DL, also operated by OO, came in with two 50 seaters and before UA could catch a break MFRs eastbound passengers were flying via SLC.
If you can read this your flying too close
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:14 pm

Quoting UnitedFlyer (Reply 10):
Perhaps now with the increased passenger flow this route could handle a larger aircraft

1999 or 2000 in that time period UA was planning to start 733 service to DEN from MFR,(one r/t daily) my brother in Ashland thought it was going to be a big deal. For some reason, UA didn't start it up due to lack of aircraft, money whatever. Always thought it would work as would ACV-RDD-DEN.
 
UnitedFlyer
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:43 pm

RE: MFR Traffic And Terminal Improvements

Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:34 pm

If passenger counts continue their upward push, perhaps we could see a mix of UAX and UA mainline between SFO and DEN? Probably wishful thinking on my part... Smile

Quoting AirCop (Reply 12):
I used to work for OO in MFR back when there were two daily 50 seat CRJs flights to DEN. They were going out with a 80% plus load factor - and then UA pulled one. We were told that they needed the airplanes out east to fill in the holes that ASA/Independence left. In the meantime DL, also operated by OO, came in with two 50 seaters and before UA could catch a break MFRs eastbound passengers were flying via SLC.

Yeah, too bad about that, seems like they lost some marketshare there....