dalca
Topic Author
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:36 am

Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:36 pm

With the US/AA merger and the upcoming news that US will leave Star Alliance and join Oneworld, is Star Allaince then not very badly represented in the South-eastern US?
IAD is the hub closest by to the north and IAH way to the west.

Is there an airport Star Alliance might want to start a mini-hub at in the area?
Zanair flight, please hold on finals as we have to clear rhino's off the runway. Next flight KUL-FRA-AMS Flown in A319,A
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3270
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:50 pm

I just think they will live without a hub in the area. I cant really see many options for them. In 2013 they are not going to create a new hub I just cant see that happening.
 
User avatar
redzeppelin
Posts: 893
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:30 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:56 pm

IAD (Europe), IAH (Latin Am.) and even ORD (Asia) aren't bad for providing international connections to the Southeastern states, nor are they bad for routing traffic to other areas of North America. The real issue is for routing traffic within the region. I think that is UA's problem more than *A's.
 
WAC
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 10:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:32 pm

CLT is the MEM of AA/US slow de-hubbing. For * alliance IAD is better positioned for a hub for(yield wise) for South-Easter US, and please not IAD is classed as in the South-eastern US...
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:34 pm

Quoting WAC (Reply 3):
CLT is the MEM of AA/US slow de-hubbing.

No it isnt. This argument is so incorrect on every level. Only someone clueless about geography, national economics and airline economics would make such a claim.
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:55 pm

One thing is sure: LH will continue to fly MUC-CLT. There is a lot of German investment in the area and they have some very lucrative corporate contracts that allow the route to perform well.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
 
USAirALB
Posts: 1652
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:59 pm

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 5):
One thing is sure: LH will continue to fly MUC-CLT. There is a lot of German investment in the area and they have some very lucrative corporate contracts that allow the route to perform well.

How can you be so sure? I've been thinking a lot about this route lately ever since the merger announcement. I understand the ties between CLT and Germany, and the route does have a lot of contracts (BMW, Siemens, Continental AG, Daimler come to mind) but is it enough to sustain a nonstop flight? Surely the summer A346 will go away. I've also considered LH switching the MUC flight to FRA.
E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/77W/319/320/321/333/343
 
unityofsaints
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:26 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:12 pm

It's a big loss. It seems like Star has been going backwards in recent years while Skyteam and Oneworld have been adding members. When I started collecting CO miles in 2008 I didn't expect the alliance weakening in this fashion...
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11428
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:19 pm

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 6):
I understand the ties between CLT and Germany, and the route does have a lot of contracts (BMW, Siemens, Continental AG, Daimler come to mind) but is it enough to sustain a nonstop flight?

The trouble is that demand to Germany is spread out over all of Germany. Siemens and BMW, obviously, have Munich connections, but Continental is in HAJ and Daimler is in STR. As between FRA and MUC, it's obviously easiest to get to HAJ from FRA, but STR is a closer question. With AA/US in Oneworld, though, I wonder whether CLT-LHR-STR is the easiest way to get to Stuttgart from Charlotte.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:22 pm

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 5):
One thing is sure: LH will continue to fly MUC-CLT. There is a lot of German investment in the area and they have some very lucrative corporate contracts that allow the route to perform well.
Quoting USAirALB (Reply 6):
How can you be so sure? I've been thinking a lot about this route lately ever since the merger announcement. I understand the ties between CLT and Germany, and the route does have a lot of contracts (BMW, Siemens, Continental AG, Daimler come to mind) but is it enough to sustain a nonstop flight? Surely the summer A346 will go away. I've also considered LH switching the MUC flight to FRA.

This route has been oft-discussed during the run up to the merger announcement. Is it possible that if LH leaves the route after the merger, US/AA would begin flying it? Or, as Cubsrule points out, could the German interests best be served via LHR?
 
User avatar
IrishAyes
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:04 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:25 pm

Quoting WAC (Reply 3):

CLT is the MEM of AA/US slow de-hubbing. For * alliance IAD is better positioned for a hub for(yield wise) for South-Easter US, and please not IAD is classed as in the South-eastern US...

Far from it. CLT is a high-yielding hub with a large amount of O&D traffic. MEM, on the other hand, was a hub inherited from DL purely due to the NW merger and initially was supposed to play a smaller "reliever" hub role in the DL network. Of course, everyone knew that the long-term practicality of this was unsustainable, and there were broader implications that as older, 50-seat RJs gradually retired, MEM's purpose in the DL hub network would diminish considerably. CLT is not even remotely near being filed in that same category.

As far as the impacts on Star, I'd argue that it will hurt, yes, but not to a huge scale. IAD and IAH can hopefully fill in some steps in the SE, and truthfully, I don't think that Star has much to worry about in terms of losing CLT's TATL and Latin American/Caribbean networks.

Truthfully, I think the bigger loss for Star overall will be losing JJ to OneWorld in a few months, as that presence in Brasil is key.
confidence is silent. insecurities are loud.
 
Joost
Posts: 1841
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:27 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:34 pm

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 5):
One thing is sure: LH will continue to fly MUC-CLT. There is a lot of German investment in the area and they have some very lucrative corporate contracts that allow the route to perform well.

It's still not certain IMO. These corporate contracts might fill say, 30 seats per flight? If these are sold at premium fares, they can be a very good reason to fly the route. But then even for the smallest 333, 187 seats to fill. Seats easy to fill with virtually unlimited USA connections from CLT, but harder when you only have the MUC network.

And for Daimler/Mercedes-Benz, based in STR, are probably more fond of using DLs STR-ATL-BHM connection.

If corporate contracts could fill such a route, wouldn't there be a non-stop OSL-IAH? (Even a route with hubs on both ends...)
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11428
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:39 pm

Quoting joost (Reply 11):
And for Daimler/Mercedes-Benz, based in STR, are probably more fond of using DLs STR-ATL-BHM connection.

Daimler Trucks (formerly Freightliner) has significant operations near Charlotte.

[Edited 2013-02-18 13:39:59]
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
USAirALB
Posts: 1652
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:48 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 8):
Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 9):

I think LH is probably going to sit back and see how the new AA handles Germany. Traffic from CLT-Germany is larger than traffic from CLT-LON. CLT-Germany will continue to be served, but the questions remains on who will do the flying. CLT-FRA can easily support a year-round flight, but I can see either LH or AA operating it. I believe LH can make CLT-FRA work without the US codeshare feed. As for MUC, there is a sizeable amount of O/D between the two cities, so it's really anyone's guess if LH continues to fly it.

Another big question is will/when will BA resume the CLT market.

Quoting joost (Reply 11):
And for Daimler/Mercedes-Benz, based in STR, are probably more fond of using DLs STR-ATL-BHM connection.

Daimler Trucks North America is based in Ft. Mill, SC, less than 16 miles south of CLT.
E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/77W/319/320/321/333/343
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11428
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:00 pm

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 13):
Daimler Trucks North America is based in Ft. Mill, SC, less than 16 miles south of CLT.


(Ticky tacky alert): I believe their headquarters is actually in PDX, but Freightliner is in Fort Mill and Statesville, Freightliner Custom Chassis is in Gaffney and Thomas Built Buses is in High Point. There's almost certainly more Daimler Trucks traffic to CLT than to PDX.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
IrishAyes
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:04 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:14 pm

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 7):
It's a big loss. It seems like Star has been going backwards in recent years while Skyteam and Oneworld have been adding members. When I started collecting CO miles in 2008 I didn't expect the alliance weakening in this fashion...

I don't think that's truly a fair/accurate assessment. Each alliance has its superior strengths and weaknesses. While each would ideally love to have as much market share dominance in as many regions as possible, that is nearly impossible to achieve. Airlines still need to be able to compete against each other in order to stay in the business, and as more members are added to the alliance, conflicts of interest start to rise. That has what has led to the recent game-changers that have spurred new tie-ups involving the Middle East carriers.
confidence is silent. insecurities are loud.
 
Joost
Posts: 1841
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:27 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:16 pm

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 13):
Daimler Trucks North America is based in Ft. Mill, SC, less than 16 miles south of CLT.

But on the German side, Daimler is still in Stuttgart, and their truck division (manufacturing) is in Worth, even further from MUC and closer to FRA. It doesn't make MUC very attractive. For intercontinental hubs from STR, FRA is closer than MUC.
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:30 pm

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 6):
How can you be so sure? I've been thinking a lot about this route lately ever since the merger announcement. I understand the ties between CLT and Germany, and the route does have a lot of contracts (BMW, Siemens, Continental AG, Daimler come to mind) but is it enough to sustain a nonstop flight? Surely the summer A346 will go away. I've also considered LH switching the MUC flight to FRA.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 8):
The trouble is that demand to Germany is spread out over all of Germany. Siemens and BMW, obviously, have Munich connections, but Continental is in HAJ and Daimler is in STR. As between FRA and MUC, it's obviously easiest to get to HAJ from FRA, but STR is a closer question. With AA/US in Oneworld, though, I wonder whether CLT-LHR-STR is the easiest way to get to Stuttgart from Charlotte.
Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 9):
This route has been oft-discussed during the run up to the merger announcement. Is it possible that if LH leaves the route after the merger, US/AA would begin flying it? Or, as Cubsrule points out, could the German interests best be served via LHR?
Quoting joost (Reply 11):
It's still not certain IMO. These corporate contracts might fill say, 30 seats per flight? If these are sold at premium fares, they can be a very good reason to fly the route. But then even for the smallest 333, 187 seats to fill. Seats easy to fill with virtually unlimited USA connections from CLT, but harder when you only have the MUC network.

And for Daimler/Mercedes-Benz, based in STR, are probably more fond of using DLs STR-ATL-BHM connection.

If corporate contracts could fill such a route, wouldn't there be a non-stop OSL-IAH? (Even a route with hubs on both ends...)

One thing you're all forgetting is the strength of the Munich hub, especially for intra-European connections. Yes, MUC does not have as much longhaul as Frankfurt does, but LH serves more European destinations from MUC than they do from FRA. There are frequent domestic connections, even to airports like STR or NUE which are relatively close by.

MUC is a wonderful airport to connect at - fast, easy, efficient. The place just works. It's a lot more pleasant than connecting at FRA, easier than connecting at Heathrow's Terminal 5 and streets ahead of the T3 T5 shuffle if connecting between AA and BA.

Then you need to consider that large corporate contracts with Lufthansa (BMW, Siemens, Daimler, etc.) are usually not route-based deals but more of a volume discount across the whole network. The company might have 15-20 longhaul destinations that they regularly book people to, and they're not going to negotiate something separate for each destination. It's usually better to concentrate on a few carriers that can offer a wide reach, and to make sure that the booking volume remains high. The higher your volume, the bigger your discount.

One other thing that LH has going for it: Miles & More has a very large number of members (and even a few fans) within the German corporate world. Those people with some influence over their travel plans will follow the miles.

MUC-CLT is going to stay, I am sure of it. And I think there is a reasonable chance that LH will start FRA-CLT, especially if US reduces their own services to Germany post-merger.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
 
User avatar
CV880
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:56 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:33 pm

Quoting dalca (Thread starter):
Is there an airport Star Alliance might want to start a mini-hub at in the area?

Maybe MEM as an east-west hub (as DL continues to pull it down) or BNA/BHM as an alternative to CLT. RDU is too close to IAD.

The LH flight will now become an O&D flight without *A and was once a 747 without an alliance. If the cargo demand is sufficient, it could possibly make it on it's own with something smaller than the A346, but certainly not the end of the world for CLT as US/AA will more than likely continue a presence in the CLT-Germany market.
 
intermodal64
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:39 pm

Would a Private Air type of operation have the range for CLT from either FRA or MUC? I remember they used to fly ORD-DUS for either LH or UA with an A-319. I just don't see filling 170 economy seats every day to CLT without a giant connecting bank in CLT to support those seats.
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:39 pm

Quoting joost (Reply 16):
But on the German side, Daimler is still in Stuttgart, and their truck division (manufacturing) is in Worth, even further from MUC and closer to FRA. It doesn't make MUC very attractive. For intercontinental hubs from STR, FRA is closer than MUC.

See my earlier post. MUC is very attractive.

If I have a choice between, for example, STR-FRA-LAX and STR-MUC-LAX, I would go via MUC every time.

And STR-MUC-xxx (where xxx is a longhaul destination) is going to be faster than driving or taking the train to FRA and then flying nonstop from there as long as the connection time is reasonable.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:43 pm

Quoting intermodal64 (Reply 19):
I just don't see filling 170 economy seats every day to CLT without a giant connecting bank in CLT to support those seats.

That's because you're forgetting the giant connecting bank at the MUC end.

Quoting intermodal64 (Reply 19):
Would a Private Air type of operation have the range for CLT from either FRA or MUC? I remember they used to fly ORD-DUS for either LH or UA with an A-319.

That was for LH. Privatair have also flown AMS-IAH for KLM, so the range is not an issue. It would certainly be a possibility, but I think LH can make CLT work on their own metal.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
 
Birdwatching
Posts: 3574
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 10:48 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:53 pm

I don't have much of a clue about United's history, but didn't MIA use to be some sort of a United hub at some point? I remember flying from JFK to SCL in 2002 and it was via MIA. So MIA must have been a hub for LatAm traffic at one point.
Or what about MCO, could that be built into a Star Alliance hub? Or too much leisure traffic?

Soren   
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
 
musapapaya
Posts: 990
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:02 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:16 pm

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 10):
Truthfully, I think the bigger loss for Star overall will be losing JJ to OneWorld in a few months, as that presence in Brasil is key.

But star is still the biggest alliance in the world, and with things like avicana and taca in south america...... can they not sort of hold their position?

of coz i cannot tell for sure, i have never been there and never understood how things work, but just thought i bring it up for discussion...
Lufthansa Group of Airlines
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:33 pm

Quoting cv880 (Reply 18):

MEM is too close to IAH. We have one group of A.netters who think CLT should be closed and another think MEM should be a hub for another airline other than DL. Neither will happen.
 
martinrpo1
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:40 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:44 pm

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 4):
No it isnt. This argument is so incorrect on every level. Only someone clueless about geography, national economics and airline economics would make such a claim.

I agree 100%. CLT is a valuable asset for the new AA, specially if they want to compete with DL's ATL.
 
WAC
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 10:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:45 pm

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 10):
Far from it. CLT is a high-yielding hub with a large amount of O&D traffic. MEM, on the other hand, was a hub inherited from DL purely due to the NW merger

CLT is a hub for US and is an inherited hub purely due to merging with US (AA as a couple of destinations out of CLT). Like with DL/NW AA/US will have limited resources, and need to decide which hubs to concentrateon . CLT is not viable to be an international hub with JFK, PHL, ORD and DFW being better positioned as international hubs. O&D can served with the regional airlines that currently serve the majority of domestic destinations. So in other words being de-hubbed and evolving as a focus city.
 
ouboy79
Posts: 4111
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:48 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:56 pm

Quoting WAC (Reply 26):
CLT is a hub for US and is an inherited hub purely due to merging with US (AA as a couple of destinations out of CLT). Like with DL/NW AA/US will have limited resources, and need to decide which hubs to concentrateon . CLT is not viable to be an international hub with JFK, PHL, ORD and DFW being better positioned as international hubs. O&D can served with the regional airlines that currently serve the majority of domestic destinations. So in other words being de-hubbed and evolving as a focus city.

I really don't think you quite understand how well CLT has performed and how much of a factor it is. Who said anything about being a strong international hub? CLT has always been about being a monster domestic hub and the only competitor to ATL in the Southeast. Now CLT is a large international port for US when it comes to going south, but much of that is expected to go to MIA. Even with that shift, it isn't going to reduce capacity all that much.

Comparing it to MEM just highlights of lack of education on the dynamics of CLT and what it actually is.
 
User avatar
CV880
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:56 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:21 am

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 27):
Quoting WAC (Reply 26):
CLT is a hub for US and is an inherited hub purely due to merging with US (AA as a couple of destinations out of CLT). Like with DL/NW AA/US will have limited resources, and need to decide which hubs to concentrateon . CLT is not viable to be an international hub with JFK, PHL, ORD and DFW being better positioned as international hubs. O&D can served with the regional airlines that currently serve the majority of domestic destinations. So in other words being de-hubbed and evolving as a focus city.


I really don't think you quite understand how well CLT has performed and how much of a factor it is. Who said anything about being a strong international hub? CLT has always been about being a monster domestic hub and the only competitor to ATL in the Southeast. Now CLT is a large international port for US when it comes to going south, but much of that is expected to go to MIA. Even with that shift, it isn't going to reduce capacity all that much.

  

Parker said that the flights would increase....even if not, AA is not going to let DL have the whole pie. MIA doesn't cut it for domestic connectivity.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:22 am

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 4):
Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 4):
Quoting WAC (Reply 3):
CLT is the MEM of AA/US slow de-hubbing.

No it isnt. This argument is so incorrect on every level. Only someone clueless about geography, national economics and airline economics would make such a claim.

Actually, CLT isn't particularly big as U.S. (the country, not airline) hubs go.

In domestic O&D passenger counts it ranks #31, below Kansas City and Sacramento, which don't have hubs, down with SLC.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/programs...vel_price_index/html/table_07.html

In international arrivals, CLT ranked 17th (between Detroit and Seattle) for 12 months ending 9/2011, with less than 1/7 the count of JFK. (For the people arguing that PHL or CLT are going to be the new AA's premier gateway TATL, I just don't see it.)

The big threat in the area is ATL, ranking 3rd in domestic O&D and 6th in international arrivals, with far more flights and far more destinations served than CLT.

Rather than getting MEM'd, CLT is a candidate to be MSP'd: it could lose a few dozen flights and be forced to justify its high flight count regularly in big, mega-network hub traffic simulation scenarios.
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting WAC (Reply 26):
Like with DL/NW AA/US will have limited resources, and need to decide which hubs to concentrateon . CLT is not viable to be an international hub with JFK, PHL, ORD and DFW being better positioned as international hubs. O&D can served with the regional airlines that currently serve the majority of domestic destinations. So in other words being de-hubbed and evolving as a focus city.

It will have even fewer resources if it de-hubs CLT.
 
WAC
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 10:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:17 am

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 30):
It will have even fewer resources if it de-hubs CLT.

Well it will have more aircraft if it de-hubs CLT to concentrate on other larger international hubs

What I am saying is that CLT is like MEM where regionals play and will play a bigger role in the new AA. CLT US ops is widely done by regionals, and thus easier to de-hub than an airport which has considerable more mainline flying, (job relocation/redundancies vs contracts with regionals)

This was the strategy with DL and MEM.

With reduced capacity, you have more pricing power and better yields.

By de-hubbing CLT and making it a focus city the new AA will be able to that. Also CLT being a finance center can cope with higher fares. By downsizing they will only match O&D and not cater to connecting flight at CLT.

Is MEM and CLT the same? No. CLT has a greater economy and catchment area than that of MEM but it is similar to MEM in the context of a combined DL/NW and a combined AA/US, it has a great amount of regional airlines flying from it, which mean it is easier to downsize and contract out to regionals.

In my opinion both CLT and MEM are good opportunites for hubs, but their respective hub-airlines being merged their positions are likely to (or in the case of MEM already) change from hub airport to focus cities. CLT will be a larger DCA/LGA, and by larger cos it does not have air traffic/capacity restrictions

AA pioneered modern day RM and RM systems, and the whole basis of these airline consolidations is to cut costs, optimize revenues and increase efficiency. In order to do this it is essential that some downsizing somewhere will happen and I think CLT is on top of AA/US list as it has so much regional flying out, and the least mainline flying, so easier to de-hub.
I think CLT will become a focus city with regionals doing more domestic flying with reduced capacity, with a daily link (or two) to LHR and who knows maybe even mad thought of MAD one day.
 
intermodal64
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:25 am

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 21):
That's because you're forgetting the giant connecting bank at the MUC end.

Actually, I'm thinking German and surrounding European points of origin, with some degree of loyalty to STAR. (FRA and MUC are indeed my preferred connecting hubs!) But these folks will arrive CLT with no place to go, really. You can bet that today the traffic in back of those planes depends heavily on connections at both ends, especially for a metropolitan area of fewer than 2 million people. If LH can protect the business traffic on Private Air, one would think that there are lower-risk (or perhaps more strategic) opportunities for a large Airbus somewhere else in the world.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 2183
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:34 am

Quoting WAC (Reply 31):
CLT US ops is widely done by regionals, and thus easier to de-hub than an airport which has considerable more mainline flying, (job relocation/redundancies vs contracts with regionals)

CLT has 255 daily mainline flights plus another 200 70/90-seater flights. That is more than every other hub except for DFW. It is a well established, profitable 600+ flights a day megahub. It is what gives US its massive North-South East Coast presence (something AA does not have at all) It cannot be compared to MEM and is not going anywhere.
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:53 am

Quoting WAC (Reply 31):
What I am saying is that CLT is like MEM where regionals play and will play a bigger role in the new AA. CLT US ops is widely done by regionals, and thus easier to de-hub than an airport which has considerable more mainline flying, (job relocation/redundancies vs contracts with regionals)

This was the strategy with DL and MEM.
Quoting usflyer msp (Reply 33):
It is what gives US its massive North-South East Coast presence (something AA does not have at all) It cannot be compared to MEM and is not going anywhere.

And the other major difference between DL and MEM and US/AA and CLT is that the role of MEM as a hub was largely duplicated by other hubs in the DL network, especially ATL. With some exceptions (most notably MIA to the Caribbean and Latin America), the role of CLT as a hub is largely not duplicated by other hub cities in the combined US/AA network.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 3711
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:19 am

Maybe instead of starting a southeastern focus city in another city, how about UA try to muscle out US/AA from CLT?

[Edited 2013-02-18 18:47:18]
Beauty is watching a 787 bank to make a short final. Bliss is watching that 787 with a good beer. Nirvana is all of that with a beautiful woman on your side.
 
point2point
Posts: 2080
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:54 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:34 am

Yes, there will be a bit lost for the current *A with CLT eventually converting to OW.

But the question going forward is how much does OW really need CLT?

And yes, CLT currently competes with ATL as a Southeastern hub. However, ATL is the WORLD to DL....... and I think that we can agree that DL will most certainly move heaven and earth in interest of their ATL hub. But now with US going to AA and OW, the metrics are drastically different for CLT, and does the newly merged AA/US really want to spend valuable resources fighting with DL and ATL in the Southeast?

Parker really was limited in what he could do with US, and with that, he is to be commended for what accomplished with what he had and he really did a remarkable job with US and CLT. Now another question is does Parker really want to continue battling with DL and ATL in the Southeast, when now he has a whole new world network to contend with? Charlotte suddenly may not meet with the likes of NYC, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas and Miami, along with Philadelphia and Phoenix even, all domestically, and then maybe with LHR, MAD and NRT internationally thrown into the mix.

Another question is how importantly will the airlines value O&D traffic? And when (not if) fuel costs increase, focusing on the O&D becomes especially important. Carriers will set a minimum (let's say at least 50%, I think that this is a good number at present) and if flights aren't performing to the set O&D standard, they will be axed. CLT has probably one of the highest connect percentages of domestic airports.

From reviewing the scheduling at CLT...... there currently seems to be about 7-8 banks. I think CLT could easily cut down to 3-4 banks, which would be more than sufficient for its O&D, and still be a viable hub for the new AA/US. From some 650 flights cut to 350 flights could easily be done.

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 17):
One other thing that LH has going for it: Miles & More has a very large number of members (and even a few fans) within the German corporate world. Those people with some influence over their travel plans will follow the miles.

MUC-CLT is going to stay, I am sure of it. And I think there is a reasonable chance that LH will start FRA-CLT, especially if US reduces their own services to Germany post-merger.

There is more than likely the need for a CLT-Germany flight. At present, CLT has a US daily to FRA, and an LH daily to MUC. I think that the new AA/US will keep the FRA flight initially. But without the *A feed both to and from, LH will drop the CLT-MUC flight and move it to FRA. Then only time will tell if CLT can support two dailies into Germany with *A feed. I would think that AA doesn't have any luck with FRA, and will give LHR to CLT while taking away FRA, and LH will be the carrier with CLT-FRA.

 

[Edited 2013-02-18 19:12:13]
 
flyguy89
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:44 am

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 17):
MUC-CLT is going to stay, I am sure of it. And I think there is a reasonable chance that LH will start FRA-CLT, especially if US reduces their own services to Germany post-merger.

CLT-MUC has about 35 PDEW, not enough to support a daily flight on LH's smallest a/c, the A333 even with the MUC hub to support it, the flight needs feed from CLT just as much as feed from MUC...and that's even assuming those 35 passengers remain loyal to LH or *A when in fact most will probably switch to AA.

As for LH starting CLT-FRA, you're dreaming. I seriously doubt AA would forfeit the route to LH and don't think LH is really interested in an expensive battle with AA in a relatively small market.
 
USAirALB
Posts: 1652
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:03 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
I seriously doubt AA would forfeit the route to LH

Maybe, but if you look at AA's track record in Germany you can't be so sure.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
CLT-MUC has about 35 PDEW, not enough to support a daily flight on LH's smallest a/c

I still think there is enough demand on CLT-MUC to support a nonstop flight, although I'm sure it won't be daily. If LH drops it, I'm willing to bet AA would pick it up.
E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/77W/319/320/321/333/343
 
flyguy89
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:19 am

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 38):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
I seriously doubt AA would forfeit the route to LH

Maybe, but if you look at AA's track record in Germany you can't be so sure.

Their recent track record is all the more reason for them not to forfeit it if they hope regain some scope in the German market.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 38):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 37):
CLT-MUC has about 35 PDEW, not enough to support a daily flight on LH's smallest a/c

I still think there is enough demand on CLT-MUC to support a nonstop flight, although I'm sure it won't be daily. If LH drops it, I'm willing to bet AA would pick it up.

AA picking up the route is certainly a possibility, but it's all too early to tell at this point with many new variables to consider, namely the amount of traffic LHR will siphon off as, as cubsrule pointed out, CLT-Germany is pretty spread out. In either case though, with many of the high-yielding O&D contracts likely going to AA, it's very doubtful LH will stay on the route.
 
LOWS
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:37 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:08 am

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 40):
Isnt CLT the 4th largest hub in terms of daily departures.

Yes, but it's also something like 80% connecting traffic.
 
jmc1975
Posts: 2893
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2000 10:57 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:54 am

Quoting dalca (Thread starter):
Is there an airport Star Alliance might want to start a mini-hub at in the area?

In the 21st Century, airlines don't just start mini-hubs hubs for kicks & giggles as they did in the 1990s (ie. HP in CMH or CO Lite in GSO). Any consideration would take place if any of the existing Star Alliance markets could not be served profitably via IAD, IAH, EWR or ORD on UA metal.
.......
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:33 am

Quoting dalca (Thread starter):
Is there an airport Star Alliance might want to start a mini-hub at in the area?

With US' departure, the only domestic Star carrier in the USA will be UA. I doubt that UA will try to establish a hub just to connect points within the southeast. Those markets are dominated by DL and WN/FL, with US and AA minor players at CLT and MIA. UA can capture some of the transcon and international passengers from the region but there is probably not a suitable available hub city in the region. UA wants to close CLE as a hub and will probably wait until there is enough demand to warrant moving into the deep south.
 
LH422
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:21 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:06 am

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 20):
And STR-MUC-xxx (where xxx is a longhaul destination) is going to be faster than driving or taking the train to FRA and then flying nonstop from there as long as the connection time is reasonable.

From the airport, maybe, but not from downtown Stuttgart. The train from Stuttgart main station to Frankfurt airport takes 72 minutes. That's only 45 minutes less than it takes to get to Stuttgart airport. Plus, the train runs every 30 minutes without any checkin delay, whereas there are only five flights STR-MUC per day (except Thursdays, where there is a DE (!) flight). Only in rare cases will that get you to your destination quicker.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:17 pm

It seems like a lot of people think that UA needs a hub in the either the deep south or Florida my questions are where would this hub be located and why do so many of you believe that the mid atlantic hub IAD in inadequate and UA now needs a hub in the deep south? What major city in the deep south or Florida has a growing population which is underserved air traffic wise and has a growing economy with economic and business ties to either Europe, Asia or South America that could even support a UA mini hub operation?

I'm all for the idea of expanding UA however, I ask these questions because I don't see where United will find a place to fit in in down there. AA, DL, and US will vigorously defend their turf in MIA, ATL, and CLT, most other airports especially in Florida are fractured meaning there is no one dominate airline but they are dominated mostly by low cost carriers. So what state and city could UA get into start a mini hub and make that station profitable in lets say 3-5 years after opening?
 
YYZYYT
Posts: 905
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:41 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:31 pm

From my point of view (living near YYZ), CLT is a huge asset: in that it provides great conenctions from BUF (which sees more than a few cross-border travellers) to Sun destinations (FLA or the Carribean). US had by far the best schedule out of BUF for my family. I hope that doesn't change (even if it means no *A points).
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:44 pm

Quoting jayunited (Reply 47):
It seems like a lot of people think that UA needs a hub in the either the deep south or Florida my questions are where would this hub be located and why do so many of you believe that the mid atlantic hub IAD in inadequate and UA now needs a hub in the deep south? What major city in the deep south or Florida has a growing population which is underserved air traffic wise and has a growing economy with economic and business ties to either Europe, Asia or South America that could even support a UA mini hub operation?

I think that's a pretty solid take on things. As was pointed out in a previous thread, the only real weakenss for Star is intra-SE/South, which US and DL have pretty well locked up. Star/UA is just fine where they are, connecting the SE to the rest of the U.S. and the world as needed, which they they do pretty well through their existing hubs.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:48 pm

Quoting point2point (Reply 42):

Tell me where AA isnt getting their QSI fair share of O&D traffic and where they will be able to by shutting down CLT? So cut profitable service to CLT and add marginal flights in NYC or LAX. As for 50 seaters going away , CLT and every other hub would see a reduction in departures but that has nothing to do with the merger. Still no one has answered where the lost CLT traffic will be recaptured.


It's amazing that we have two simultaneous incorrect arguments on this thread. One is CLT will shut down or shink by 50%, the other is UAL will have to have a hub in the SE. This web site is enough to give anyone a migraine.
 
AAIL86
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:48 pm

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 17):

MUC-CLT is going to stay, I am sure of it. And I think there is a reasonable chance that LH will start FRA-CLT, especially if US reduces their own services to Germany post-merger.
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 5):
One thing is sure: LH will continue to fly MUC-CLT. There is a lot of German investment in the area and they have some very lucrative corporate contracts that allow the route to perform well.

As much as it it would be great for my relatives in the CLT area to keep LH, I wonder about MUC-CLT. Contracts or not, the loss of a Star hub on the other end will be a blow to the route. I do see US keeping CLT-FRA, though, mainy because AA HAS to grow in Germany post merger.

Quoting intermodal64 (Reply 32):
Actually, I'm thinking German and surrounding European points of origin, with some degree of loyalty to STAR. (FRA and MUC are indeed my preferred connecting hubs!) But these folks will arrive CLT with no place to go, really. You can bet that today the traffic in back of those planes depends heavily on connections at both ends, especially for a metropolitan area of fewer than 2 million people.

This is exactly what I was thinking. Losing that feed to the US SE will be trouble.
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamim Franklin
 
wingnutmn
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:27 am

RE: Star Alliance Without CLT

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:02 pm

Quoting WAC (Reply 3):
CLT is the MEM of AA/US

Wrong, it is the MSP of the new company

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 10):
CLT is the MEM of AA/US

CLT is no longer the crown jewel of a SE US hub. You are right though, it has a lot of corporate contracts and O&D. You are going to experience what MSP did during this merger. A high O&D and lots of corporate traffic. You just will see the aircraft change to mostly A319 and ERJ170/145 and your international routes will be to main OW hubs. Will you keep a lot of routes? yes. Will the size of the aircraft get smaller? Yes. Will the hub go away? No. Just won't have the same influence it currently carries.

Wingnut
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!

Who is online