Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?

ADrum23 wrote:

If I were flying from JFK, why would I want to go to LGW as opposed to LHR or LCY? They do not need to serve all three, JFK-LGW on BA never made any sense to me. LGW seems to be an airport more for leisure and LCC's.

LGW is the most convenient airport for a large portion of the population in SE England. NYC is obviously a major business destination, but that often overshadows the fact it is also a major tourist and VFR destination. I'd be surprised if BA cannot find success operating LGW-JFK. If they pull out I think it is more an issue of using that aircraft in a more lucrative market as opposed to LGW-JFK being a poor market.

bmacleod wrote:

My point being that service was AA (BNA-LGW). This would be first truly international carrier (outside North America as AC and WS currently serve BNA) for BNA - correct?

Laker Airways Bahamas also served BNA in the nineties on a scheduled basis. I believe this makes BA Nashville's 4th foreign airline.

Midwestindy wrote:

Doesn't BA have a 788 that will be delivered by end of september, and others scheduled for delivery in 2018? Why would they need to free up an extra 788, or am I missing something...

Over the next year BA will take delivery of the following 787 aircraft:

22SEP17 - 787-8 (G-ZBJI)
26MAR18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKR)
08MAY18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKS)
29MAY18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJJ)
31JUL18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJK)

The 787-8 arriving this year will be used to operate 6 x weekly to GIG.

dfwjim1 wrote:

Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?

Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL

I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier

Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c

Then, after that there are few other tiers

I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.

Wasn't there a strong rumour last year that BA was going to launch Nashville that didn't come to fruition?

I'd be very surprised if BA announced a new route this early in August.

LAX772LR wrote:

bmacleod wrote:

Also 1st European route for BNA.

well that part certainly isn't true, AA flew nonstop BNA-LGW for years.

Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. AA didn't get the route authority until they were drawing down the hub, it simply did not have the feed and not as much O&D. A lot has changed since then, a 788 is the perfect aircraft to make this service work.

GSTBA wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Doesn't BA have a 788 that will be delivered by end of september, and others scheduled for delivery in 2018? Why would they need to free up an extra 788, or am I missing something...

Over the next year BA will take delivery of the following 787 aircraft:

22SEP17 - 787-8 (G-ZBJI)
26MAR18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKR)
08MAY18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKS)
29MAY18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJJ)
31JUL18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJK)

The 787-8 arriving this year will be used to operate 6 x weekly to GIG.

Thanks for the info. What are they currently running on the LHR-GIG flight?

It doesn't seem like aircraft will be as big of a limitation to expansion by BA as some people have suggested, considering that by the end of 2018 they will have 2 more 788s, and 2 A321neos available (G-NEOP, and G-NEOR). That's without any potential upgauging they will more than likely do between now and the end of 2018.

LHRFlyer wrote:

Wasn't there a strong rumour last year that BA was going to launch Nashville that didn't come to fruition?

I'd be very surprised if BA announced a new route this early in August.

No, there were not any rumors last year. The Tennessean reported back in 2014 that they were a finalist for a route, competing with the likes of STL, IND, CLE, etc, but nothing official came after that until the Tennessean article posted late Thursday.

While I agree nothing is official and it is technically a rumor, the Tennessean is a legit site, so it does lead me to believe that an announcement will be made sometime within the next month or two (sometime between next week and October).

Midwestindy wrote:

dfwjim1 wrote:

Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?

Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL

I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier

Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c

Then, after that there are few other tiers

I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.

I'd argue DEN and LAS fall in between the first and second tier. They are similar sized to the cities you mentioned there.

ADrum23 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

dfwjim1 wrote:

Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?

Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL

I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier

Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c

Then, after that there are few other tiers

I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.

I'd argue DEN and LAS fall in between the first and second tier. They are similar sized to the cities you mentioned there.

Well I wasn't basing it off solely population...

southwest1675 wrote:

As some know, BA is supposed to announce a new A380 route next week. It's already a route being flown now. Some have said it could be a 787 route that will be replaced with that A380, and hopefully that 787 would fly the rumored BNA flight.

It doesn't work that way. If BA has no new planes coming in and they take an A380 off of one route to put it somewhere else, what plane would they use on the route that they took the A380 from? The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

That is not true.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .

...a rather nonsensical statement.

Midwestindy wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

That is not true.

Exactly, BA owns LHR, they can do what they want. Plus, even if that were the case, they are cancelling LHR-BGO and LHR-SVG as well as shifting LHR-ORY to LCY. This leads me to believe that both IND and BNA will be announced this fall.

LAX772LR wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .

...a rather nonsensical statement.

I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge

ADrum23 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

That is not true.

Exactly, BA owns LHR, they can do what they want. Plus, even if that were the case, they are cancelling LHR-BGO and LHR-SVG as well as shifting LHR-ORY to LCY. This leads me to believe that both IND and BNA will be announced this fall.

Heathrow Airport Limited OWN Heathrow LHR not British Airways BA so its not the case of 'they can do what they want'.

I think you meant that BA have or owns the largest share of the aviation market at LHR.

Cunard wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .

...a rather nonsensical statement.

I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge

Equal opportunity purveyor of saecasm, he nitpicks everyone, even when they are correct.

Midwestindy wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL

I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier

Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c

Then, after that there are few other tiers

I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.

I'd argue DEN and LAS fall in between the first and second tier. They are similar sized to the cities you mentioned there.

Well I wasn't basing it off solely population...

This argument seems to happen a lot. People get testy if they think their city should be higher and another one lower. I'm going to skip over these going forward!

airbazar wrote:

southwest1675 wrote:

As some know, BA is supposed to announce a new A380 route next week. It's already a route being flown now. Some have said it could be a 787 route that will be replaced with that A380, and hopefully that 787 would fly the rumored BNA flight.

It doesn't work that way. If BA has no new planes coming in and they take an A380 off of one route to put it somewhere else, what plane would they use on the route that they took the A380 from? The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

At earliest the flight begins with the summer season schedule 2018. Perhaps even further into the season. As posted, more 787's are coming online by then.

ADrum23 wrote:

and LHR-SVG

Still so tough to understand how that one couldn't be made to work.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Cunard wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

...a rather nonsensical statement.

I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge

Equal opportunity purveyor of saecasm, he nitpicks everyone, even when they are correct.

"Sarcasm" sweetie... and those who apparently can't spell and clearly can't count, are best served not admonishing anyone else.

At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?

msycajun wrote:

At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?

Agreed, I think they should wait until it is announced to run any stories like this, this article was written as if the route was already running. Very unprofessional journalism if you ask me....

LAX772LR wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

and LHR-SVG

Still so tough to understand how that one couldn't be made to work.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Cunard wrote:

I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge

Equal opportunity purveyor of saecasm, he nitpicks everyone, even when they are correct.

"Sarcasm" sweetie... and those who apparently can't spell and clearly can't count, are best served not admonishing anyone else.

Yeah you can blame my autocorrect and lack of reading before I send. Many thanks for pointing out my flaws.

Assuming this is true, I'm guessing the route isn't going to start until next spring, yeah?

msycajun wrote:

At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?

I did have a chat with a friend on mine who works at BNA in a non-airline role. He says there is a lot of chatter about this. I choose to believe its true. If not, it's not exactly going to help the the reputation of The Tennessean, which isn't all that great since Gannet cleaned house when they bought it.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?

I did have a chat with a friend on mine who works at BNA in a non-airline role. He says there is a lot of chatter about this. I choose to believe its true. If not, it's not exactly going to help the the reputation of The Tennessean, which isn't all that great since Gannet cleaned house when they bought it.

Some lady tweeted BA asking when it starts, and they replied with something like, "Can't tell you now, it'll ruin the surprise."

southwest1675 wrote:

Some lady tweeted BA asking when it starts, and they replied with something like, "Can't tell you now, it'll ruin the surprise."

Gotta love that response. That would have to drive a BNA enthusiast insane

777PHX wrote:

Assuming this is true, I'm guessing the route isn't going to start until next spring, yeah?

Not sure when BA's "summer schedule" begins, it varies by airline. The expanded FIS facility should be done by then. The permanent FIS building a couple more years down the read.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

777PHX wrote:

Assuming this is true, I'm guessing the route isn't going to start until next spring, yeah?

Not sure when BA's "summer schedule" begins, it varies by airline. The expanded FIS facility should be done by then. The permanent FIS building a couple more years down the read.

Yes. I believe BA announced SJC in early August.

LuxuryTravelled wrote:

Apparently, LGW-JFK could also be axed (again!)

I've heard it *could* be dropped to summer only, with Cape Town replacing it during the winter months. Nothing confirmed so won't read anything in to it until the airline announces otherwise.

Cheers

Ben

I live in BNA and I talked to a friend of mine this evening who commutes to London regularly since she's British and travels frequently for work and to visit family. The mayor's office called her to ask if she would appear at the announcement endorsing the new route and her response was "Are you kidding???" She is thrilled to shave off many hours of her trips.

sevenfeet wrote:

I live in BNA and I talked to a friend of mine this evening who commutes to London regularly since she's British and travels frequently for work and to visit family. The mayor's office called her to ask if she would appear at the announcement endorsing the new route and her response was "Are you kidding???" She is thrilled to shave off many hours of her trips.

Do you know when this is supposed to be announced?

Midwestindy wrote:

GSTBA wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

It doesn't seem like aircraft will be as big of a limitation to expansion by BA as some people have suggested, considering that by the end of 2018 they will have 2 more 788s, and 2 A321neos available (G-NEOP, and G-NEOR). That's without any potential upgauging they will more than likely do between now and the end of 2018.

The A321neos on order are the standard shorthaul version, with shorthaul seats, no IFE etc, they aren't LRs. They're ordered as replacements for the life-expired european-config 763s. Do be careful what you wish for in terms of transatlantic service....
And of course to upgauge to free up 788s they need to have something to upgauge with - those two 789s is all there will be, barring service reductions elsewhere or schedule swaps with partner airlines.
There's certainly scope for new or resumed routes in 2018, maybe one or two starting in May and another one or two in October, but the equipment could also be used to increase frequency. And a large batch of 772ERs are due for refit starting in 2018 (going 10-across in Y unfortunately) which means the airline has to create a temporary pool of spare aircraft to cover this, there's only one maintenance spare 772ER in the entire fleet at the moment.

ADrum23 wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Adipasquale wrote:

My first guess would be 787s from LHR, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it served by 777s from LGW.

Pretty sure it would be a 787-8 from LHR. Could work, I think a 777 from LGW could fail due to plane size, fuel efficiency vs 787 and lack of a proper number of connections at LGW.

It seems BA from LGW is only interested in serving US leisure destinations (with the exception of OAK and JFK, the latter of which might be cut). Other than those two, the other BA LGW destinations to the US are FLL, MCO and TPA (thought I'm not sure why BA out of MCO goes to LGW instead of LHR).

Actually I think BA is considering OAK a leisure destination. We all know they are flying the route in response to Norwegian, but OAK can be a leisure gateway for the extensive tourism draw of San Francisco and the surrounding areas.

ayoungblood2 wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

ayoungblood2 wrote:

My guess is that this construction is being made with a very long term future in mind. There is a growing white collar population in the Nashville metro area, and those people will be able to afford to travel more. I wouldn't be surprised to see increased service to the Caribbean, and maybe at some point in the future a flight to CDG, LGW, or FRA operated by a carrier like Norwegian or Condor. After all, Southwest is starting a Cancun flight in November in addition to the Delta and American flights.

I wonder if BA's expansion (AUS, MSY and now possibly BNA) is to fend off Norwegian to some degree. That's a lot of second tier cities in a short time frame to be added. Keeping in mind that for each city added, that takes some pax off of AA's flights that are connecting to AA/BA TATL metal.

I would assume so. However, I think its very safe to say that DY appeals much more to leisure travelers and BA would carry more business travelers. With that said, however, I do think that BA feels threatened by DY and rightfully so. After all, DY offers direct service to multiple cities from destinations in the US. For example, out of FLL DY flies direct to six European destinations, whereas BA only has service to LGW. Some passengers are willing to sacrifice comfort and luxury in order to arrive at their destination sooner. I think that BA is trying to compensate for this by beating DY into some of those second tier cities and establishing presence and brand loyalty there before DY comes in.

BA will carry anyone that buys a ticket. While traditionally, you could be more picky, I know most companies are looking at the impact to their expenses when their employees travel. If DY is cheaper, that's who you're flying. Amazing to see the proliferation of low cost competition in the international arena.

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

What complete tosh......

BA have always had more than enough slots @ LHR since the BD take-over; what they have been short of it suitable L/H aircraft to utilize those slots.

BA have some room for movement now, with 787 deliveries, and revised retirement schedules to look at totally new destinations. They will also be able to access recent-decent 777's coming into the 2nd hand market soon. I could even see BA lengthen their 744 retirement plan to provide additional aircraft to address expansion/ Norweigian. BA also have access to hired resources from UK airlines like 'Titan', and have hired aircraft from QR recently too.

BA have just cancelled LHR-Stavanger/Bergen and have shifted ORY flights to LCY freeing up more slots. I also understand they are looking to fly to just one Milan airport from LHR in the future, so either MXP or LIN flights could shift to LCY and/or LGW creating more LHR slots.

If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

Could hear something this Wednesday.

SelseyBill wrote:

If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

Slots have never been the issue, well not since they took over BD. But launching 6 or more new TATL destinations within 18 months, that's a real stretch. Not such a problem if they are less than daily, of course...
Planes are still the issue. Extending the lives of 744s isn't going to help because they don't plan on withdrawing any more until the end of 2018 anyway. Realistically they aren't going to launch new routes in January or February as these are traditionally the lowest months for TATL traffic.
They've announced a refit programme for the 772ERs that will require either one or two planes to be out of service at a time from early 2018 onwards which will stretch the fleet further. Titan can't help very much, apart from the A318 they've just leased from BA, the only TATL capable planes they possess are 2 752s and a 763.
787s with confirmed delivery dates still to be delivered are 1 x 788 at the end of September this year; 1 x 789 end March 2018; 1 x 789 early May 2018; 1 x 788 end of May 2018; 1 x 788 end of July 2018. Now by my reckoning they still have one more 788 to come after that. So yes, there are six planes, eventually, but there's still those 772 refits to cover, there's the whole of the rest of the world to consider. If you extended the 18 months to more like 2 years, there's a realistic prospect of the first 787-10 coming, the very first A350-1000s will have got past the crew and engineering training stage and into traffic, the 772 refits will be completed.
So yes, if they want to introduce (rather than just announce) 6 new transatlantic routes in 18 months, something will have to give - in two years it is much easier. I'm still to be convinced that there are no new routes anywhere in the world outside the USA in prospect.

southwest1675 wrote:

Could hear something this Wednesday.

How do you know?

SelseyBill wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

What complete tosh......

BA have always had more than enough slots @ LHR since the BD take-over; what they have been short of it suitable L/H aircraft to utilize those slots.

BA have some room for movement now, with 787 deliveries, and revised retirement schedules to look at totally new destinations. They will also be able to access recent-decent 777's coming into the 2nd hand market soon. I could even see BA lengthen their 744 retirement plan to provide additional aircraft to address expansion/ Norweigian. BA also have access to hired resources from UK airlines like 'Titan', and have hired aircraft from QR recently too.

BA have just cancelled LHR-Stavanger/Bergen and have shifted ORY flights to LCY freeing up more slots. I also understand they are looking to fly to just one Milan airport from LHR in the future, so either MXP or LIN flights could shift to LCY and/or LGW creating more LHR slots.

If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

This was my thinking. Which is why I will say again, it is not out of the realm of possibility that BA could announce both BNA and IND this fall.

ADrum23 wrote:

southwest1675 wrote:

Could hear something this Wednesday.

How do you know?

I was just making an assumption. BA announced SJC AUS MSY on a Wednesday. The original article stated we could hear an announcement as early as this week. We shall see.

CrawleyBen wrote:

LuxuryTravelled wrote:

Apparently, LGW-JFK could also be axed (again!)

I've heard it *could* be dropped to summer only, with Cape Town replacing it during the winter months. Nothing confirmed so won't read anything in to it until the airline announces otherwise.

Cheers

Ben

LGW to Cape Town is already served seasonal during the winter months from November till March.

If LGW to JFK does revert to a seasonal only service and that's only an IF at this stage as nothing has been confirmed by BA but if that is the case it may be possible to increase some long flying to the current destinations ex LGW or maybe open up a new seasonal route to the likes of the Seychelles.

SelseyBill wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

Either you completely misunderstood my post or you quoted the wrong post. My comment was with respect to BA launching LHR-BNA this year (not in 18 months), and the lack of aircraft to do it. It was never about the slots.
Sure I admit that my statement was not 100% correct. Another way to find the equipment to start LHR-BNA could be by reducing some frequencies on a different route or routes to free up an airplane. But my point was that adding an A380 to another route isn't going to magically free up the right equipment to start LHR-BNA this year.

airbazar wrote:

SelseyBill wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

Either you completely misunderstood my post or you quoted the wrong post. My comment was with respect to BA launching LHR-BNA this year (not in 18 months), and the lack of aircraft to do it. It was never about the slots.
Sure I admit that my statement was not 100% correct. Another way to find the equipment to start LHR-BNA could be by reducing some frequencies on a different route or routes to free up an airplane. But my point was that adding an A380 to another route isn't going to magically free up the right equipment to start LHR-BNA this year.

And they are ending 3 routes this year in October, thus, freeing up equipment. And they have plenty of 788's (what will be used on the BNA-LHR route) to use (which wouldn't even begin until Spring/Summer of next year).

I really hope they announce the route within the next 72 hours so we can end this thread

airbazar wrote:

SelseyBill wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.

What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.

Either you completely misunderstood my post or you quoted the wrong post. My comment was with respect to BA launching LHR-BNA this year (not in 18 months), and the lack of aircraft to do it. It was never about the slots.
Sure I admit that my statement was not 100% correct. Another way to find the equipment to start LHR-BNA could be by reducing some frequencies on a different route or routes to free up an airplane. But my point was that adding an A380 to another route isn't going to magically free up the right equipment to start LHR-BNA this year.

LHR/LGW-BNA is not going to start this year anyway, it is going to start in 2018 and likely not until late spring/early summer, so they don't need a plane this year anyway....

ADrum23 wrote:

I really hope they announce the route within the next 72 hours so we can end this thread

Would be nice.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?

I did have a chat with a friend on mine who works at BNA in a non-airline role. He says there is a lot of chatter about this. I choose to believe its true. If not, it's not exactly going to help the the reputation of The Tennessean, which isn't all that great since Gannet cleaned house when they bought it.

Of course there is a lot of chatter about it. I bet it came up after the article came out.

Announcement press conference happening now. Five days a week service on BA...service beginning May 2018.