billreid
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:48 pm

So many bloggers are concerned US shouldn't merge with AA. They like AA as it is and don't like US taking over.

But in reality, wouldn't we just have AA with a new CEO and US would disappear?
If the HDQ remains at DFW, and the alliance remains OW, then doesn't it mean nothing else than a larger AA with a new CEO after CH-11?

So whats the beef unless you are a fan of the US brand?
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
whappeh
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:47 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:06 pm

The larger beef is that many armchair CEOs and backroom enthusiasts hate US for no real reason, other then one time in 2004 their brother's wife's cousin's housekeeper's dogwalker had SUCH AN AWFUL EXPERIENCE.

Its better for both airlines, beyond the obsessiveness with both brands.
-Travel now, journey infinitely.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 1733
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:18 pm

My biggest problem is having these super airlines. Choices would be more limited and tickets prices on monopolized routes would skyrocket. I dont want another big merger like this with two huge airlines like this. I cant support this
 
spiritair97
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:28 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:31 pm

MY problem with this whole thing is:

1. I don't trust AA
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second
3. US is one of my favorite airlines. I hate to think AA might drag it down with them and con them into letting AA stay the name of the airline.
4. With all of these super airlines, the prices are only going to rise, the choices and going to dwindle, and we are gonna be left with AA as the predominant carrier.
5. AA's poor excuse for a livery will be tainting US' nice airbuses, boeings,vand regional jets, instead of keeping US' much more elegant, eye-pleasing colorscheme, which should be the one to stay. AA's "livery" is just vinyl lettering stuck onto an unpainted, unfinished-looking aircraft. It looks like they cut their expenses by not finishing their planes!

Plus, moving the HQ from Charlotte to Dallas would be devestating to the city of Charlotte, and I would hate to see the city's main entity go away. People hate on US for absolutely no reason at all. If somebody has a bad experience of an airline, suddenly the airline is the worst airline in the world.
 
B757capt
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:11 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:33 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

Headquarters is not in Charlotte.

This is the problem, the public needs to be informed.

CLT will not be pulled down......

[Edited 2012-09-01 15:34:10]
The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
 
User avatar
treebeard787
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:03 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:55 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
moving the HQ from Charlotte to Dallas

US Airways has their HQ in Tempe AZ right now.
Allons-y!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:59 pm

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2):
tickets prices on monopolized routes would skyrocket

Which routes are "monopolized?" The DOJ does not allow for that, and concessions are made in mergers
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
boeing773er
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 7:23 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:11 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

I've heard you complain about AA's old planes so many times. Im not sure if you heard they have 737-800s, 777-200ERs which are relatively new. Also in the summer of 2011 AA placed an order for 430 new planes, and then they keep adding onto their 777-300ER order. It's ashame that they don't get there new planes right away.

I didn't mean to be rude but you have so many flaws in your post, and you just continue on posting it.

For example, US will be in control of the company. They are the one's who are buying them. With that, US will be the one who gives the OK to the new lively. So it will hopefully be extravagant for you.

The only thing that I can agree with you is that airfare will be going up if this merger goes through.
Work Hard, Fly Right.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:15 pm

Airfare will only likely go up noticeably on routes that currently only see competition between US and AA. People said the same thing before DL/NW and UA/CO but strangely enough it hasn't been as all-encompassing as it was predicted.

Which routes/markets are basically only served by US and AA?
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:26 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
Plus, moving the HQ from Charlotte to Dallas would be devestating to the city of Charlotte,

Even if they were headquartered in CLT I would have to strongly disagree it would be devastating. Charlotte just got a nice boost of high salary employees thanks to UTC buying Goodrich.

I frankly don't like either airline. I think them combining would be disastrous for consumers. I realize prices aren't exactly sky high but it isn't cheap to fly. Having one less choice will cause ticket prices to jump again. Not to mention I can't figure out how they plan to operate. LAX and PHX overlap to a degree, what role does CLT play when you have PHL to the north and MIA to the south. US makes it work now with PHL and CLT but what will happen when a third hub gets thrown into the mix. What alliance are they going to go to? Some claim that there is no way AA would leave OW but who says they don't hop over to *A. Theres just too many unknowns as a consumer to make me like it. Granted I have no say. I'm not a shareholder or creditor of either company so it doesn't directly affect me unless fares go up.
Blue
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3381
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:33 pm

Airfares NEED to rise. This industry is the only one where it seems to be okay for companies to not charge what is required to cover the costs of doing business. Airlines can only slash costs so much and have to have the ability to raise fares as cost increase. If it means consolidation to eliminate over capacity and increase fares thereby giving the airline pricing power, so be it.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:51 pm

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 10):
Airfares NEED to rise. This industry is the only one where it seems to be okay for companies to not charge what is required to cover the costs of doing business. Airlines can only slash costs so much and have to have the ability to raise fares as cost increase. If it means consolidation to eliminate over capacity and increase fares thereby giving the airline pricing power, so be it.

People who complain about airfares think nothing of paying $20,000 for a base model automobile...........the same car that cost $10,000, 10 years ago. If anything, airfares have probably gone up the least over the last couple of decades, compared to food, autos, gasoline, etc.

As azjubilee says, airlines seem to be the only ones that aren't allowed to raise their prices to cover their costs. All of you that WANTED de-regulation and thought it would be best for the consumers, here's what you get.....if you want de-regulation to lower fares, you can't complain too much when it also might mean HIGHER fares.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
N62NA
Posts: 4006
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:58 pm

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2):
My biggest problem is having these super airlines.

Horse has already left the barn on that one, regardless of whether AA and US merge.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):

Which routes are "monopolized?" The DOJ does not allow for that,

We've got dozens of "monopolized" routes right now out of MIA and DFW on AA.

And, to be fair, there are dozens of "monopolized" routes right now out of ATL on DL and EWR on UA.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5840
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 12:06 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second

If I had a "c" note for evrey time I have seen a US 733 or 734 fly over my house I would have millions by now.
 
dlramp4life
Posts: 994
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 6:23 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 12:36 am

I know it has to happen but my "beef" with the merger is: US is what is left of the legacy of what HP created PHX close to 30 years ago. I have lived in PHX awhile and saw it grow within HP and now US, it is just a little sad that the PHX hub will be downsized to a focus city and that HQ will be moving to Dallas. But hey it is how the industry works
SEA Ramp, wettest place on earth
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 12:42 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 12):

People who complain about airfares think nothing of paying $20,000 for a base model automobile...........the same car that cost $10,000, 10 years ago.

In fairness, base models come with a lot more than they did ten years ago. The vehicle I drive is the "base" model of its lineup, but still has power everything, a/c, 6sp trans, a ridiculous warranty, free preventative mx, right about 40mpg, and decent stereo w/cd, mp3, etc. This was literally unheard of in a $20,000 automobile as recently as 2000. Today it's just about standard.

You really can't say the same about airfares. While they've only risen in step with inflation, relative to ten years ago, service is awful, you have far fewer choices, you pay what amounts to another full fare to make any changes to your tickets, you pay for you bags, food, boarding passes, seat assignments, etc, as well, and airlines are generally uncooperative as all hell when ever something goes wrong.

I remember my girlfriend (sometime around 1999) causing me to miss a flight, because ( & I'm not kidding about this), she needed my help finding her cat. When I arrived at the airport, I explained the situation, sans bullshit, and was re-booked on the next flight. Free of charge. On a coach fare. From Travelocity. Imagine trying that one today.

If airlines want to raise their fares, they need to earn it. For the record, not only myself, but my company (and quite a few others from what I understand) will travel WN or B6, even on fares up to 20% more because they fit a category we call "Least Worst." Granted my company has space-positive agreements with most of our clients, but we do occasionally have to buy travel, and when that happens, the money doesn't go to expensive carriers with crap service and policies (Where possible of course). Just sayin...

You're right, cars a lot more expensive. But at least there exists some justification.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 13):

We've got dozens of "monopolized" routes right now out of MIA and DFW on AA.

And, to be fair, there are dozens of "monopolized" routes right now out of ATL on DL and EWR on UA

And a bunch out of LGA, CLT, LAX, PHX, DTW, MSP, DEN, and probably a few others I'm not thinking of. Route monopolization most definitely does exist, and mega mergers will not solve or help that issue.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
F9Animal
Posts: 3649
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:14 am

I just don't want to lose another airline. Yeah, I am greedy, and am so saddened to see some great paint jobs leave our skies. Miss TWA, America West, Continential, Northwest, and the list goes on. Oh yeah, miss Republic too. Mergers have taken away some great photo ops. That is what the beef really is for a.nutters!
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
HAL
Posts: 1741
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 1:38 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:26 am

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 10):
Airfares NEED to rise. This industry is the only one where it seems to be okay for companies to not charge what is required to cover the costs of doing business.

  

The degree of double-standard on this board is sometimes astounding. One one hand, people rant that the airfares are too high, then in the next post, they complain that their favorite airlines are cutting service or folding or declaring bankruptcy. Here's a news flash people: Running an airline is EXPENSIVE! There are huge costs involved, and is will not get cheaper. Asking for a $99 (or even $299) trans-contiental fare is asking for the airline to lose money on you.

It costs a lot to fly. Get over it.

HAL

cue the Allegiant/Ryanair boosters in 3... 2... 1...

[Edited 2012-09-01 18:27:37]
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:41 am

Finally some smart thinking about this potential disaster:

Quoting whappeh (Reply 1):
The larger beef is that many armchair CEOs and backroom enthusiasts hate US for no real reason, other then one time in 2004 their brother's wife's cousin's housekeeper's dogwalker had SUCH AN AWFUL EXPERIENCE.

I never flew US, but I know many people here in PHX who have. Not ONCE have they complained about the service. AA on the other hand....every time I see someone on FB complain about a flight, I ask them "Is it AA?" and they say "yes it is."

Most common complaint is delay due to aircraft issue or lost luggage.

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2):
My biggest problem is having these super airlines. Choices would be more limited and tickets prices on monopolized routes would skyrocket. I dont want another big merger like this with two huge airlines like this. I cant support this

   It's called a triopoly. Either chose one of 3, or get screwed.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second

   Yep. Sans the A320 orders.

Quoting treebeard787 (Reply 5):
US Airways has their HQ in Tempe AZ right now.

Which is why lots of people here don't wanna see the merger happen. Too many jobs lost. Not what the valley needs.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
AA94
Posts: 650
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:53 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

Really? Again with this tirade?

The fact that you say that US HQ is in Charlotte shows how poorly informed you are. While Charlotte is a major hub for US, the headquarters is in Tempe, AZ.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
3. US is one of my favorite airlines. I hate to think AA might drag it down with them and con them into letting AA stay the name of the airline.
AA has better brand recognition than US does, plain and simple. Regardless of your opinion of AA's "cheap" color scheme, that scheme is what people notice. AA has been around since the DC-3 era. While I agree that their livery could use some freshening up, it makes good business sense to use the more recognizable brand.

AA isn't "conning" US into anything ...

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 19):
Which is why lots of people here don't wanna see the merger happen. Too many jobs lost. Not what the valley needs.

Agreed. But complain to Doug Parker about that. Everyone acts like AA is "stealing" US away from PHX. No. Doug Parker is going after AA and volunteering to move the HQ to DFW.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 19):
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second

   Yep. Sans the A320 orders.

Right, because those 733s and 734s are the pinnacle of modern aircraft.  

[Edited 2012-09-01 19:54:39]
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
User avatar
crj900lr
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:44 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:50 am

Quoting AA94 (Reply 20):
Right, because those 734s and 735s are the pinnacle of modern aircraft.

735's? you mean 733's? And those 734's will be gone real soon.
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:58 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

MY problem with this whole thing is:

1. I don't trust AA
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second
3. US is one of my favorite airlines. I hate to think AA might drag it down with them and con them into letting AA stay the name of the airline.
4. With all of these super airlines, the prices are only going to rise, the choices and going to dwindle, and we are gonna be left with AA as the predominant carrier.
5. AA's poor excuse for a livery will be tainting US' nice airbuses, boeings,vand regional jets, instead of keeping US' much more elegant, eye-pleasing colorscheme, which should be the one to stay. AA's "livery" is just vinyl lettering stuck onto an unpainted, unfinished-looking aircraft. It looks like they cut their expenses by not finishing their planes!

Plus, moving the HQ from Charlotte to Dallas would be devestating to the city of Charlotte, and I would hate to see the city's main entity go away. People hate on US for absolutely no reason at all. If somebody has a bad experience of an airline, suddenly the airline is the worst airline in the world.

Well, Don, let's look at your points.

#1 I get. Some people don't trust US, F9, FL, WN, Obama, Romney, or Monsanto. You don't trust AA.

#2 AA average fleet age, 15 years. US average fleet age, 12.8 years. I was at DFW last week, and didn't see anything ratty, or similar to the re-entry vehicle paint flaking you see on some of US 734s and others.

#3 AA dragging down US. OK, it's your opinion, and I somewhat agree. US has been getting better marks in customer service, and, was down there in the dirt with AA not so long ago. I think they drug down the BA product in the alliance. But then, IB improved in the hook up. They're all working their way up to mediocrity, slowly but surely.

#4 Prices NEED to come up. They are artificially low due to a glut of seats. Airfares have not kept pace with inflation, or the cost of doing business.

#5 I'll bet that once inside the craft, at a ticket price they are happy with, most real airline customers don't remember what color the craft is, and don't care. The AA scheme is on it's way out anyway. Marketing, post BK, and operational needs will drive that. How about a white fuselage, with an Ionesphere blue and carribean blue stripe?

About the CLT HQ? Well, ........   
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:05 am

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 22):
#4 Prices NEED to come up. They are artificially low due to a glut of seats. Airfares have not kept pace with inflation, or the cost of doing business.

That's the last thing any consumer wants to hear. Prices rising = less people able to fly.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
Mir
Posts: 19093
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:18 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 24):
That's the last thing any consumer wants to hear. Prices rising = less people able to fly.

It's tough love, though, and it's the truth. The airlines cannot keep going with the prices they're charging now. It's unsustainable.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:19 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 24):
That's the last thing any consumer wants to hear. Prices rising = less people able to fly.

There'd be alot more people unable to fly if AA folded. I've never understood why the "consumer" movement fails to understand that the airlines are a BUSINESS. They need to turn a profit to stay in business. They are NOT a public utility, able to stay in business regardless of whether they turn a profit or not, existing solely to provide transportation for the public as most metro transportation systems do. Without a profit, they can't fly or even order those shiny new planes that everyone seems to want. Without a profit, they can't do any of the upgrades to service that are needed.  
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
KDAYflyer
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:37 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:26 am

Quoting billreid (Thread starter):
So many bloggers are concerned US shouldn't merge with AA. They like AA as it is and don't like US taking over.

For me it is a service issue.

The last 4 times I flew US, they lost my luggage each time. I did not have a pleasant experience in getting them back either. The people involved were very matter of fact, offered me nothing (including a simple apology) for my trouble, all four flights were overbooked and they had to go through the "we'll give you a free ticket to get off the plane" routine, the service on board was terrible (rude FA's), the planes were dirty and very worn inside to boot.

AA, on the other hand has been the exact opposite for me. If AA becomes US, AA is doomed.
 
Mcoov
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:14 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:28 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
2. AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second

Ultimately, they both balance out. AA has the newer shorthaul and longhaul fleet with new B738s, A321s, B772ERs and B77Ws to be arriving very soon, while US has the newer medium-haul fleet, with 70 A321s already and more on the way.

The biggest issues I see are the following:
1.) Merging the workforce. AA has been having issues with its labor since the mid-1990s, and US and HP have yet to merge their crew lists 7 years after the fact.
2.) Merging the FrequentFlyer programs. AAdvantage is significantly better, so it will definitely be the one kept. However, the issue of merging DividendMiles with AAdvantage may be a lot of trouble. Then again, it may not.
3.) Merging the fleets. I would rather AA hold its own so that it can take delivery of all those new 738s, A319s, A321s, 737MAXs, and A320NEOs, instead of having Airbuses -- ranging from pre-owned to antique -- and ancient Boeings to acquire alongside the old 762s, 752s, and MD82s that are going to need to be retired. Plus, a US/AA merger may also put the A350-800 and -900 orders in jeopardy.
4.) Maintaining and improving the quality.
a) Of the big six that existed from roughly 2001 to 2009, US was definitely at the bottom. That's not to say that US was a bad airline, but CO, NW, DL, UA, and AA all outranked it. This gave US a reputation for having less than exceptional service. I last flew on them just before the HP merger, so things may be different.
b) At the same time, AA has had some problems of its own, leading to its 2011 bankruptcy declaration. It has gained its own reputation of unreliability, especially in its regional fleet MQ. (I personally have not had any problems.)
c) People see the shady, scary US or AA merging with the pristine and incorruptible AA or US, and get upset that their favorite airline is getting tarnished.

And no matter what changes, be they overall better or worse, people will complain of a reduction of service and quality.

TL;DR: Butthurt, butthurt everywhere.

[Edited 2012-09-01 20:29:33]
 
hz747300
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:49 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 23):
That's the last thing any consumer wants to hear. Prices rising = less people able to fly.

Seriously though, it is not a right and if it means less people flying then that's the breaks. I think people forget that in addition to a likely "triopoloy", there is Southwest. I believe their motto is "You are now free to move about the country." And it's true, if you can plan correctly you often find a $49 or $99 fare pre-taxes.

If service is drawn down, and demand is there, then Southwest can fill the void, or someone else, a regional player like Alaska.

If prices rise, and service draw downs, and there is no demand, then no void will need to be filled.

It's the price of oil remains where it is, then it has held a position that is typically 3x more than what it was, with fares approximately the same. Let alone an increase in labor costs. It's nuts.
Keep on truckin'...
 
spiritair97
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:28 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:52 am

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 7):

I have read my post, and there are not many flaws in it. Yes, I realize that I made a mistake about the HQ. My bad. Sorry. The fleet, Besides the 738s and 772s, Is very old and ratty.

Quoting AA94 (Reply 20):

I am not poorly informed, I made a mistake. Again I say, sorry.

Based on your username, I don't think we're evr going to see eye-to-eye. Let's just agree to disagree. ayou think they have better brand recognition, I think people notice their planes because they are unpainted and look unfinished. Not everybody is remembering them for their livery because it is nice, granted some are, but most just remember it because it is different. Not better, not worse, it is just different because it isn't painted.

And, I'm not saying the 733s and 734s are the best, but they are being phased out fairly soon. The old MD80s aren't going anywhere relatively soon, and a lot of people who are flying AA out of their biggest hubs are probably flying on an old Mad-dog. US has a319s 320 s 321s, as well as E175s and 190s doing domestic and North American routes, which are MUCH nicer than the old 757s 767s, some 777s, MD80s, and some 737s that AA is flying.

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 22):

The fleet age is not much less now, but give it a few months when the 733s and 734s are gone, that will be WAY DOWN.

And again, about the Charlotte HQ, that was my mistake, and I apologize.
 
avroarrow
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2001 10:40 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 4:50 am

FWIW I worked with/for a VP of tech for a major Texas based company who is big time STAR affiliated and has a major preference for US over CO and UA, so in his case if US and AA merge it would be a match made in heaven since AA is the official preferred airline of the company, but US has better options via his home airports. (YYZ and BUF). Hey, a decade ago who would have thought that HP would be in this situation, my head is spinning.
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
 
User avatar
CV880
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:56 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:11 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 23):
That's the last thing any consumer wants to hear. Prices rising = less people able to fly.

Yep, Greyhound & Trailways with wings got here faster than many of we "oldtimers" thought it would.

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):

It's tough love, though, and it's the truth. The airlines cannot keep going with the prices they're charging now. It's unsustainable.

     
 
olddominion727
Posts: 420
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:43 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

@spiritair... I don't know how old you are or how long you've actually been flying commercial aviation, but at least for every one person that would want US over AA, there's 4-5 that want AA over US. Do the math. Obviously the majority has found something different that what you have experienced.
 
USAIRWAYS321
Posts: 1705
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:31 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:51 am

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 16):
In fairness, base models come with a lot more than they did ten years ago. The vehicle I drive is the "base" model of its lineup, but still has power everything, a/c, 6sp trans, a ridiculous warranty, free preventative mx, right about 40mpg, and decent stereo w/cd, mp3, etc. This was literally unheard of in a $20,000 automobile as recently as 2000. Today it's just about standard.

You really can't say the same about airfares. While they've only risen in step with inflation, relative to ten years ago, service is awful, you have far fewer choices, you pay what amounts to another full fare to make any changes to your tickets, you pay for you bags, food, boarding passes, seat assignments, etc, as well, and airlines are generally uncooperative as all hell when ever something goes wrong.

Truth.
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4636
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:59 am

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):

Plus, moving the HQ from Charlotte to Dallas would be devestating to the city of Charlotte, and I would hate to see the city's main entity go away.

As we've already covered the CLT HQ gaff, let's get to the other mistake you make:

CLT is US's largest hub and is growing. It is sticking around.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
People hate on US for absolutely no reason at all.

People hate on lots of things for no reason at all; kind of like you hate on AA for really, no reason at all (other than their "old" fleet, which is actually comparable to US's).

Quoting dlramp4life (Reply 15):
it is just a little sad that the PHX hub will be downsized to a focus city

I don't see that happening in the current environment. LAX can't pick up any slack, and DFW is just a touch too far east for a lot of the traffic.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 6:37 am

If I have to be selfish, I'd be opposed to any merger because I like US the way it is, I am on the record as being far less impressed with AA, and given the most recent example, I can't believe that a merger is going to be a "best-of-both-worlds" situation.

I do believe the merger will happen, however. I can only hope the MD80s will be retired post-haste (I've had way too many issues with them) and that US employees will be in charge of setting cabin service standards because I happen to think US has the best crews in domestic F for the time being. If that were to come, I might actually fly the new entity a lot more than the combination of my current flying on AA and US, because I am getting tired of UA...

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 16):
You really can't say the same about airfares.

It is an excellent point, but for the chicken-and-egg question. What came first? Lower fares or service cuts? My take is that airlines tried to raise fare, but the flying public simply wasn't (and still isn't) willing to pay more, so they voted with their feet and went with the airlines that were willing to cut services in order to keep fares low. If more passengers had been willing to pay for more service, we'd still have them...

The car industry is but one of many where there is an unwritten agreement among the largest manufacturers to keep adding features, bells and whistles to their products to keep from lowering prices, or even to raise them. For whatever reason (Southwest? Jetblue?), the airline industry isn't one of them.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has no clothes.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:00 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):

It's tough love, though, and it's the truth. The airlines cannot keep going with the prices they're charging now. It's unsustainable.

-Mir

Spirit does just fine with that. I don't like them very much, and I don't want this to be the case, but they may be onto something.

For now, though, IMHO, WN & B6 are able to do a great job, at a reasonable price, and don't seem to be losing money. We all know here that the matrix that allows for this to be so is quite complex, so I won't reduce my point to "They're great; everybody else bad", but that's the way it's been working out lately.

Quoting hz747300 (Reply 28):

Seriously though, it is not a right and if it means less people flying then that's the breaks.

Less people flying means more airlines dying. Those are also the breaks. Keep in mind that airfares are not the sole source of income for any airline either. Almost every major carrier, for example, turns away at least some USPS cargo on most flights. If the situation was that dire, they would find a way to accept more cargo. There's no shortage of it.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 29):
The fleet, Besides the 738s and 772s, Is very old and ratty.

I have never seen a rat aboard an AA flight. Have you?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 34):

CLT is US's largest hub and is growing. It is sticking around.

Indeed. There is the obvious value as a TATL reliever for a lot of midwest/west coast to Europe flow. But as well, this is will provide a tremendous value for South East connections as well.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 34):

People hate on lots of things for no reason at all; kind of like you hate on AA for really, no reason at all (other than their "old" fleet, which is actually comparable to US's).

Most of what people say they hate about AA could just as easily be said for anyone else. Though I have had a few not so super experiences with US lately, overall I would say that they are just a little better than the average legacy. They definitely have more of a "trying" feel than most others, & I think that should count for something.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 34):

Quoting dlramp4life (Reply 15):
it is just a little sad that the PHX hub will be downsized to a focus city

I don't see that happening in the current environment. LAX can't pick up any slack, and DFW is just a touch too far east for a lot of the traffic.

Also agree. PHX has its place. Unless US/newAA just totally wants to cede the southwest & mountain zones to WN & UA.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 35):
What came first? Lower fares or service cuts? My take is that airlines tried to raise fare, but the flying public simply wasn't (and still isn't) willing to pay more, so they voted with their feet and went with the airlines that were willing to cut services in order to keep fares low. If more passengers had been willing to pay for more service, we'd still have them...

Well, that's an interesting question. I think honestly it was fares "lowering" first. I say this as I remember that happening in times like the late 1980s, long before fuel became anything like an issue. It's my supposition that airlines really only were thinking quarter to quarter, with no realistic long term view of what they were getting themselves into.
While vacationers & VFRs got used to the idea of lower fares, the airlines began to pay for that on the backs of corporate accounts and business travel, as those fares (e.g. last minutes & alterations have actually risen quite dramatically over the years).
Airlines like WN, who at the time catered to VFR (although contrary to myth, were never averse to business travel either) seized on this and outdid the legacies. There was then a situation where the legacies were competing not only with each other, but with airlines they'd never heard of or taken seriously, like WN, ValueJet, PeopleExpress, et al. Since these "new" entrants had much lower cost structures, they were also able to compete for business travel, and really put a stitch on the legacies, who by now had to offer lower fares and full service to stay in the game.


I guess what I'm getting at is that legacy cost structures were the real problem, when competing with LCCs that do not have that issue, and as well had it only their side that no one really expected service or frills out of them. There are a lot of other factors involved, but we fast forward to today and see that everyone had pretty much the same advance purchase fares, but we still see legacies with a great deal of $1000+ walk-up fares. For that fare, we still have check-baggage fees, poor seating assignments, and whatever else folks don't like about legacies. And the problem with that is that it is no longer just people voting with their feet, but companies too now.
The pounding UA is taking in DEN is a great example of this, made all the worse by the very real possibility that WN is doing so at a loss themselves.
So to answer your question, I think it was fares first. The service cuts come when the airlines cannot afford them. Or claim that anyway. Like many business travelers, I've become accustomed to a standard that WN offers. I don't mind foregoing premium class awards and no meals, but I will not pay to check a bag or change a ticket date. Some airlines will come up with excuses for that, and that's fine. I come up with itineraries that do not include them as a result.

To address your last sentence, I think you're right. VX is a great little airline, & I enjoy flying with them when they positive space us, but I think the fact that they've had few revenue positive quarters is not a good sign. It's a shame. They're doing a good job, but people are flying NK instead.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:29 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
People hate on lots of things for no reason at all; kind of like you hate on AA for really, no reason at all (other than their "old" fleet, which is actually comparable to US's).

Maybe on median age, but since AA has soooo many more "old" planes than US has - the MDs far outnumber the US 737 Classics - the impression is that overall the AA fleet is older based on percentage of fleet.

I'm also pretty sure that the 737s are slated for retirement well before the AA MDs can possibly be considering how many there are.
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:55 am

I'm a resident of Australia who has elite status in OW and Star, and I buy probably 12 First Class tickets per year for domestic travel in the USA.

I often CHOOSE to fly US Airways: their First Class product is as outdated and inferior as every other US airline, but their fares are reasonable and they are a well-run airline.

My experience of AA is of a second-rate and failing airline whose management and in many cases staff think that they are something special, but whose standards are an embarrassment to OneWorld. (This is a common perception here in Australia, where passengers who transfer from QF to AA at DFW describe experiencing a fall in standards compared with QF domestic which reminds them of paying money to jump off a cliff).

I am pretty happy with the idea of US Airways acquiring AA and going through the motions of changing the name to AA and basing themselves at DFW while they actually transform AA up to US standards of management and value for money.
 
spiritair97
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:28 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:33 pm

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):

First, I did not mean thatthey would dismantle the hub at CLT. I meant, thinking that it was their HQ, that many jobs would be lost. Again, for the millionth time, I am sorry. Humans make mistakes. Move on.

Second, I distrust AA for a very good reason. Only ten percent of the mail they carry for the USPS is screened. In a documentary about AA, somebody working for the postal service stated that this is a problem, and it is not a matter of IF something is going tovhappen, but WHEN. So, Sorry if I do not want to e on that flight on which something happens.

It seems that many people disagree with me and my thoughts. That's fine, you don'thave tovsee it my way, but I am sticking with my points. And my age and longevity in my field has nothing to do with what I am saying, and I don't get why everybody is jumping all over me for what I said. I said it was MY problem! If you don't like it or agree with it, get over it and move on! Don't start trying to find things wrong eith it so you have something to argue about with the person who doesn't like the airline you do!
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:40 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 38):
Second, I distrust AA for a very good reason. Only ten percent of the mail they carry for the USPS is screened. In a documentary about AA, somebody working for the postal service stated that this is a problem, and it is not a matter of IF something is going tovhappen, but WHEN. So, Sorry if I do not want to e on that flight on which something happens.

I'm not a huge fan of AA, but I have to say that every airline handles mail the same way as AA does. If it's not screened, that's on the USPS, not the airline. If you don't trust AA, then you can't trust anyone else either - regardless if anyone else made a documentary.
That being said, almost the entirety of what airlines carry is First Class letters and paper mail, not boxes. The boxes are probably the small percentage being screened. Once someone figures out how to fit a bomb inside a letter-sized envelope this may change, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
 
aztrainer
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:17 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:10 pm

Quoting HAL (Reply 17):

The degree of double-standard on this board is sometimes astounding. One one hand, people rant that the airfares are too high, then in the next post, they complain that their favorite airlines are cutting service or folding or declaring bankruptcy. Here's a news flash people: Running an airline is EXPENSIVE! There are huge costs involved, and is will not get cheaper. Asking for a $99 (or even $299) trans-contiental fare is asking for the airline to lose money on you.

It costs a lot to fly. Get over it.

HAL

The LLC's will have their niche market shares, but what I think make people the most upset is the nickle and dimeing of the cost of travel. The age old adage of supply and demand comes to mind also. People can budget to fly, but if the airfares are too high people will choose to go to a different destination or use a different mode of transportation. Sometimes the LLC's are not the cheapest flights between two destinations and sometimes they are, but people need to do their homework and compare fares. I also think the public gets angry when they "feel" an irregularity in fare structure.

I also think that their is a segment of the population that pays higher cost to have a better experience on their travels. I live 7 miles from IWA/AZA and G4 is starting up a route to HNL. The local paper has run cost analysis of G4 route costing $475 and then they compared US and HA. They quoted HA's as being $850 R/T, but I can tell you that my family will still fly HA on our trips to Hawai'i for the simple fact of the 767 (hopefully the A-330 someday) amenities and flight schedule. I feel I get very reasonable fairs from HA due to the fact that I book 9 to 12 months out.

The funny thing about this is that we are watching reacquisition of the deregulation
 
AA94
Posts: 650
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:25 pm

Quoting Mcoov (Reply 26):
1.) Merging the workforce. AA has been having issues with its labor since the mid-1990s, and US and HP have yet to merge their crew lists 7 years after the fact.

  

Both AA and US have issues with their workforces, no question. But if US can't even handle a crew list merge with HP, then why would we add a particularly volatile group of AA pilots into the mix? Doug Parker is whispering happy thoughts into the union's ear, but who knows what will happen with the labor situation down the road. Seems like a nightmare for all involve.

Quoting Mcoov (Reply 26):
3.) Merging the fleets. I would rather AA hold its own so that it can take delivery of all those new 738s, A319s, A321s, 737MAXs, and A320NEOs, instead of having Airbuses -- ranging from pre-owned to antique -- and ancient Boeings to acquire alongside the old 762s, 752s, and MD82s that are going to need to be retired. Plus, a US/AA merger may also put the A350-800 and -900 orders in jeopardy.

  

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 28):
The fleet, Besides the 738s and 772s, Is very old and ratty.

Old? Yes. But ratty? Not so much. Recently flew a 757 that was in immaculate condition.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
People hate on lots of things for no reason at all; kind of like you hate on AA for really, no reason at all (other than their "old" fleet, which is actually comparable to US's).

  

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 36):
Maybe on median age, but since AA has soooo many more "old" planes than US has - the MDs far outnumber the US 737 Classics - the impression is that overall the AA fleet is older based on percentage of fleet.

I would agree. According to Airfleets, US has 40 737s in service with an average age of 22.5 years. AA has 192 MD-82/83s in service with an average age of 20.8 years.

The average age of the fleet overall isn't really a good measure, I suppose. On the whole, AA has many more aging aircraft than US does. 767s average 19.8 years old. 757s average 12.5 years old. But it's the 183 737s with an average age of 6 years that really stabilizes the AA overall fleet age.
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
User avatar
b727fa
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 8:21 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:45 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
If somebody has a bad experience of an airline, suddenly the airline is the worst airline in the world.

ANY business is only as good as my last experience with them. We have to re-earn every customer every day, every flight, every ticket.

Quoting mayor (Reply 11):
As azjubilee says, airlines seem to be the only ones that aren't allowed to raise their prices to cover their costs.

As has been said, it seems we're the only industry expected to provide our product at a loss...not with loss leaders, like the popcorn at the Wal-Mart snack bar that is subsidized by the $50 in crap you buy on the main floor, but at a total loss. It's insane.

Now, when the Industry catches on to the theory of "loss leaders" (ie, the fare) and they can price out the profit margin elsewhere (charge for carry on? $4 to use cc on purchase? premium seats? etc.) suddenly pax are being nickle and dimed to death...but it happens in every business.

Gas stations operate on a similar profit margin to airlines. Why do you think you pay $1.50 for a Twinkie? Gas sales don't cover the cost of doing business--and they make their money on the "extras."

Sound familiar?
My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
 
AAIL86
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:51 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 3):
AA has old, ratty aircraft that look like they will stop running any second

This is a common theme we keep hearing, but I strongly disagree with you on this. It's very true that the Mad Dogs and 767s are older and lack many of the amenities newer and and flashier aircraft have, that doesn't mean they are ratty.
Its true that mid-life aircraft can have issues that newer ones generally won't have, but in general those planes are well maintained and clean.
They are doing the job the customer wants - moving people around without a lot of fuss.

Quoting koruman (Reply 37):
(This is a common perception here in Australia, where passengers who transfer from QF to AA at DFW describe experiencing a fall in standards compared with QF domestic which reminds them of paying money to jump off a cliff).

But to be fair, QF international offers an excellent product for a 17 hour flight- and the average AA flight time from DFW is 2 hours. I don't disagree that AA(and the other US domestics) need to improve their service consistency, but this isn't a fair comparison for me....
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamim Franklin
 
EWRandMDW
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:28 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:11 pm

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 10):
Airfares NEED to rise. This industry is the only one where it seems to be okay for companies to not charge what is required to cover the costs of doing business. Airlines can only slash costs so much and have to have the ability to raise fares as cost increase. If it means consolidation to eliminate over capacity and increase fares thereby giving the airline pricing power, so be it
Quoting mayor (Reply 11):
People who complain about airfares think nothing of paying $20,000 for a base model automobile...........the same car that cost $10,000, 10 years ago. If anything, airfares have probably gone up the least over the last couple of decades, compared to food, autos, gasoline, etc.

The difference is that the car can last many years and provide a lot of service, meaning a lot of trips, whereas an airfare increase will affect each trip separately.

I see most US airlines eventually going down the path of the US Postal Service. That venerable institution is planning to cut back on deliveries and close many post offices. Why? Because people don't correspond via paper-based mail as much any more. I think as technology evolves, more and more businesses will use e-meeting services making an actual trip to another city less necessary. I own a small business and I've completed many projects for clients hundreds and even thousands of miles away without ever physically meeting them. The work gets done, I get paid, everybody's happy, except for maybe UA, AA, CO (when it was an independent CO), even DL from which I had no need to purchase tickets. I still fly, but I always try to take WN simply because they don't have all those g-damned fees.Yes, I know their fares may not always be cheapest, but the overall travel cost for me almost surely is.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:17 pm

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 38):
Second, I distrust AA for a very good reason. Only ten percent of the mail they carry for the USPS is screened. In a documentary about AA, somebody working for the postal service stated that this is a problem, and it is not a matter of IF something is going tovhappen, but WHEN. So, Sorry if I do not want to e on that flight on which something happens.

Blame the USPS, not the airlines. It is THEIR responsibility to screen those pieces of mail that QUALIFY for screening. Obviously, that person in the documentary didn't understand the system, either, which probably shouldn't surprise me.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
b727fa
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 8:21 pm

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:18 pm

Quoting EWRandMDW (Reply 44):
I know their fares may not always be cheapest, but the overall travel cost for me almost surely is.

And you realize that when they're "...not always the cheapest..." it's because they've simply rolled "...all those g-damned fees" into the price. You get that, right? You're paying on one side or another.
My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
 
aeroblogger
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:53 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:21 pm

My biggest qualm with the merger is that US would go to oneworld. I love Star Alliance and I love US Airways - I'd hate to have to pick.
Airports 2012: IXE HYD DEL BLR BOM CCU KNU KTM BKK SIN ICN LAX BUR SFO PHX IAH ORD EWR PHL PVD BOS FRA MUC IST
 
WESTERN737800
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:06 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:38 pm

Quoting AA94 (Reply 19):
AA has better brand recognition than US does, plain and simple. Regardless of your opinion of AA's "cheap" color scheme, that scheme is what people notice. AA has been around since the DC-3 era. While I agree that their livery could use some freshening up, it makes good business sense to use the more recognizable brand.

Exactly. The AA name has been around much, much longer than the US name. As a child I remember seeing AA planes, I don't remember seeing US airplanes.

Quoting Mcoov (Reply 26):
Merging the workforce. AA has been having issues with its labor since the mid-1990s, and US and HP have yet to merge their crew lists 7 years after the fact.

That is the biggest problem I see. I think combining both US and AA pilot groups would be a nightmare.
I don't really care for AA or US, I don't like one more than the other. Quite simply the AA name has been around much longer, and at least I think has got to be the more recongizable of the two so it should be the name it they do end up merging.
Bring back Western Airlines!
 
EWRandMDW
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:28 am

What's The Beef If US Becomes AA?

Sun Sep 02, 2012 3:40 pm

Quoting B727FA (Reply 46):
And you realize that when they're "...not always the cheapest..." it's because they've simply rolled "...all those g-damned fees" into the price. You get that, right? You're paying on one side or another.



I do realize that WN factors many of these costs into their fare. However, I did a little experiment where I checked the UA and WN websites for fares from Chicago to Newark, leaving Chicago on Sept 9 and returning on the 12th. I tried to match departure times as closely as possible. By the way, I live near both ORD and MDW and fly to EWR which is closest to many of my clients. LGA and JFK and PHL are non-starters for me. Even if fares were lower, the difference would be eaten up by extra tolls getting out of/back to NY or PA, and the time lost in transit.

UA leave ORD 8:55 AM 9/9/12; leave EWR 4:29 PM 9/12/12 fare, with tax, but before fees $409.60
WN leave MDW 8:10 AM 9/9/12; leave EWR 5:35 PM 9/12/12 fare, with tax, but no luggage fee or snack fee $293.60

From the start, without doing anything else I'm saving $116.00. In both cases I chose the lowest available fare.

I've found that flying WN, which has a near-monopoly at MDW, is in most cases far more cost effective than the rest.