Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:21 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
TYSflyer wrote:

First of all I do not think United has to have a SE hub to be successful.

I don't think it's been well established that the Southeast could support three superhubs (MIA isn't the SE). If UA established a 250-flight hub at BNA (very ambitious, but not impossible) it would get eaten alive by DL and AA which would continue to have more destinations, more frequencies, and larger/lower CASM aircraft.[/quote]
Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

There's a parallel with Delta's weakness in Texas. With AA at DFW, UA at IAH, and WN at HOU and DAL, there isn't room for another hub in Texas.

To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 444
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:22 pm

I connected through C/D a few times recently and I don't quite get the hate. Maybe some of its functional spaces are lacking, which I wouldn't know, but in terms of aesthetics and services, it seems adequate. It doesn't seem much shabbier than some of the ATL or CLT concourses, and it's certainly no LGA CTB. Obviously, the failure to build a train station at the concourse was a mistake, but other than that it seems to work alright. They should maybe focus on getting those costs down and therefore the number of flights up before building a new Taj Mahal concourse.

In terms of a new hub, I'd say that MCO might make the most sense. It's obviously a major destination and a fast growing region, plus it's increasingly important as a destination for South Americans. If they want a Latin America-focused hub, MCO might make sense. For the kind of Northeast-Southeast traffic that CLT serves, they might do well to work on making IAD more competitive.
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:24 pm

Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.[/quote][/quote]
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:26 pm

Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

Re Lack of DL hub in Texas
To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
TWFlyGuy
Posts: 430
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:31 pm

2travel2know2 wrote:
Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.
[/quote][/quote]

I mentioned GSO somewhat earlier. The problem is, it's just a small market. The result would be you effectively get a domestic hub with RJ's and a few mainline sprinkled in...which is what they already have in IAD. Even if you use E75s and E90s, which are nice, travelers in Northern Charlotte (Mooresville) who might be part of your catchment area will likely end up going to Charlotte unless your prices in GSO are rock bottom. Is that worthwhile? While hubs are built around the idea of connecting people, they only survive in areas that have a local market. CLT has benefited from low costs, the ability to use smaller aircraft that previous hubs didn't generally get to benefit from and a growing market in Charlotte.
 
evank516
Posts: 2175
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:56 pm

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:
klm617 wrote:
First of all CLT is not in the Southeast...


Huh? :shock: I'm not sure I understand this statement.


I was going to say, someone needs to go and re-take middle school geography. CLT is in North Carolina. North Carolina is part of the Southeastern United States. Thought the Census designates North Carolina as simply "the South".
 
OB1504
Posts: 3988
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:22 pm

VC10er wrote:
While I certainly am no expert, there is one thing I think United should do: make their presence at MIA better and stronger without making it a “hub”.
I have been going to MIA monthly for the past 5 months from EWR. The UA gates seem to be spread out between 2 concourses, G and H? (Right?). How many UA birds land at MIA everyday? About 15 to 20? The gate areas are disgraceful and generic. No United Club (correct?) why can’t they at least build something more competitive there even if they are WAY behind AA? It “seems” to me that with 15/20 flights to a spoke city are enough flights and daily pax to invest in the experience? What other spoke city in UA’s network have that many flights?
This is sort of an aside: but I’m shocked that United flies a 737 from SFO to MIA and just one non-stop a day. Couldn’t that be a much more attractive flight for Bay Area UA FF residents if it was a 752 with bed seats in F and more E+?


UA is currently spread between two concourses because there aren’t enough gates at G to accommodate their entire operation. G still has a couple of ground load gates without jet bridges, though in practice they’re never used for live flights.

Since the aviation department controls the facilities, renovating the gate areas is not up to UA. Fortunately, H is much nicer than G, and I think there might still be an unused space near H12 from a former CO lounge. I’m not too familiar with G other than it’s by far the airport’s worst concourse and the only one that hasn’t had major renovations in over 40 years. Some gates don't even have jet bridges, it's the only concourse that cannot handle international arrivals, and it's also the only concourse that doesn't have underground fuel lines so flights have to be fueled using tanker trucks. There’s a plan to demolish E, F, and G and consolidate them into two much longer concourses, but that’s at least 20 years away.

UA has always struggled to MIA for some reason. Not too long ago, they were flying a single daily RJ to ORD.

2travel2know2 wrote:
OB1504 wrote:
The ship has sailed for MIA or FLL to be a UA hub. If they were to try to build one now, they’d be caught in the middle of a bloodbath between AA, F9, NK, and to a lesser extent DL and WN.

MIA is actually pretty tight on gates at the moment. AA frequently runs out of gates, and F9 is now using twice as many gates at G while the remaining ones are being used as substitutes for remote parking since there’s a shortage of that too.odel but they haven’t seen the need to mess with the hub at FLL since it seems to be working for them.

So what's left for UA for a possible compact and reliable hub operation in South East USA?
FLORIDA
PBI: alternate to MIA/FLL?
RSW alternate to MIA/FLL ?
TPA: as an altternate to MCO
SFB: as an alternate to MCO (but UA doesn't fly there)
JAX: location-wise very close to the South, O/D could be there.}
THE SOUTH
BHM: close enough to ATL
CHS: interesting, but is there sizeable O/D ?
RDU: too close to IAD
BNA: Interesting but WN big there.
MEM: sure it wants someone to move and fill DL de-hubbing
MSY: too close to IAH

VC10er wrote:
While I certainly am no expert, there is one thing I think United should do: make their presence at MIA better and stronger without making it a “hub”.
I have been going to MIA monthly for the past 5 months from EWR. The UA gates seem to be spread out between 2 concourses, G and H? (Right?). How many UA birds land at MIA everyday? About 15 to 20? The gate areas are disgraceful and generic. No United Club (correct?) why can’t they at least build something more competitive there even if they are WAY behind AA? It “seems” to me that with 15/20 flights to a spoke city are enough flights and daily pax to invest in the experience? What other spoke city in UA’s network have that many flights?


Aren't UA United club members, qualified Mileage Plus members and passengers allowed to use Avianca lounge concourse J (as Avianca and United are both Star Alliance)?


In Florida, TPA would probably be the best option, but it’s still too far south to be a true southeast hub. Maybe MEM would be the best bet?

Most UA flights depart from G and it’s not connected behind security to H/J, so there’s no way to get to the Avianca lounge for the majority of UA pax.
 
User avatar
FoxtrotSierra
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 7:06 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:41 pm

MCO would be a good idea except for the fact that while DL doesn't officially consider it a hub, it is one of the largest, if not the largest focus city in their network, with nonstops to both AMS and GRU, not to mention a massive VS operation as well. For a focus city, you can fly DL/VS to AMS, LGW, MAN, GLA, and GRU from MCO and DL has a pretty robust domestic network as well, much stronger than anything UA or AA offers out of MCO or even DL's other focus cities, although AA has MIA. DL has a decent amount of traffic connecting through MCO, but there are still some gaping holes, like SFO or anything in Texas, but the east coast and midwest has surprisingly good coverage.

TLDR; DL's MCO operation is less of a focus city and more of a mini hub- not ideal for a potential UA SE hub.

Image
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6194
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:49 pm

2travel2know2 wrote:
Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

Re Lack of DL hub in Texas
To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.


No, SAT or AUS couldnt. Their only Latin American O&D is to Mexico and thats it. Even to DFW, the O&D is pretty much all Mexico with SAL, SJO, and LIR thrown in. Houston is the only one that truly generates massive amount of O&D to everywhere in Central America.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:09 pm

2travel2know2 wrote:
Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work.


GSO would be a lousy market even now for a hub, but to be fair, that was a Continental Lite operation, which was doomed anyway.
 
T773ER
Topic Author
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:13 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:00 am

2travel2know2 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
TYSflyer wrote:

First of all I do not think United has to have a SE hub to be successful.

I don't think it's been well established that the Southeast could support three superhubs (MIA isn't the SE). If UA established a 250-flight hub at BNA (very ambitious, but not impossible) it would get eaten alive by DL and AA which would continue to have more destinations, more frequencies, and larger/lower CASM aircraft.

Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work. If UA wants that hub in that region, it'd have to be a very niche oriented operation to differ itself from the hubs nearby,ready to please a loyal O/D base wishing and supporting traffic to selected non UA hub routes.

There's a parallel with Delta's weakness in Texas. With AA at DFW, UA at IAH, and WN at HOU and DAL, there isn't room for another hub in Texas.

To this day O/D traffic in AUS or SAT complain that no matter where they want to fly they've to fly via DFW or IAH or DEN or PHX?
IMHO, either SAT or AUS could support some DL flights to their premium markets not having non-stops and specially to Mexico and perhaps Central America.[/quote]

From rumblings at DL, AUS is expected to see an increase in this kind of traffic, especially once the C series arrives.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:00 am

Could Birmingham support a small United hub? Seems to be situated quite nicely geographically. I doubt they have the necessary gate space though. An expansion would probably be a necessity. Seems to me, that BNA is too close to IAD, and MEM is too close to ORD to be viable SE hubs. BHM isn't that different from ATL, as far as positioning goes. I think it could have Delta shaking in their boots. Birmingham is a pretty large city as well.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
kavok
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:14 am

ual763 wrote:
Could Birmingham support a small United hub? Seems to be situated quite nicely geographically. I doubt they have the necessary gate space though. An expansion would probably be a necessity. Seems to me, that BNA is too close to IAD, and MEM is too close to ORD to be viable SE hubs. BHM isn't that different from ATL, as far as positioning goes. I think it could have Delta shaking in their boots. Birmingham is a pretty large city as well.



Economically, BHM is no where near big enough to support any type of hub or focus city. It is also not growing no where near the rate that BNA, CLT, RDU, etc. are. It would be the equivalent of some airline opening a midwest hub at CMH or GRR. Not enough O-D or business traffic.


As for MCO, just about every LCC and their brother makes the Mickey Mouse run. And then you have DL who already capitalizes on the high yields in the front of the plane from MCO. Too much competition at MCO = not enough profit.
 
User avatar
admanager
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:50 am

Atlwarrior wrote:
United had a chance to have a southeast hub when Eastern Airlines went out of business in Atlanta. .

TWA jumped into Atlanta after Eastern's demise. They got up to about 60 flights daily. In 1991, United had just bought the Pan Am routes and were starting the Miami hub buildup.
 
ITB
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:50 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:07 am

T773ER wrote:
Cost Per Enplaned Passenger (CPE)

CLT 1.35
ATL 2.38
SLC 3.69
FLL 3.94
MCO 4.66
TPA 5.02
PHX 5.79
MSP 6.32
MDW 7.61
DFW 9.50
BWI 9.51
DTW 10.01
SEA 10.10
IAH 10.62
PDX 10.68
SAN 10.71
DEN 10.80
LAS 11.05
HNL 11.36
DCA 13.44
BOS 13.45
PHL 14.58
LAX 14.83
ORD 15.16
SFO 16.67
LGA 18.68
MIA 19.87
IAD 21.00
JFK 25.45
EWR 28.05


The current CPE figure for IAD is 18.97, not 21.00. Since 2014, it's been falling and will continue to do so, as no major capital projects are currently in the works.

Source: MWAA 2017 Annual Budget, pages 6 and 7.

Signatory Airline Average Cost Per Enplanement Comparison by Year

The 2017 Budget results in a signatory airline average cost per enplanement (CPE) (total airline costs divided by the number of signatory enplaned passengers) of $14.12 at Reagan National and $18.97 at Dulles International.

At Reagan National, the decrease of 0.2 percent from the 2016 average CPE is reflective of the changes included in the new Airline Agreement providing for additional debt service coverage charges to the airlines for airline-supported cost center debt and no prior year application of NRR, an increase in non-airline revenues, and a modest forecasted increase to 2017 enplanements.

At Dulles International, the decrease of 15.9 percent from 2016 average CPE reflects a projected 1.9 percent increase in enplanements, a decrease in O&M expenses including debt service, an increase in non-airline revenues with offsets of $40.0 million NRR from Reagan National to airline supported cost areas, application of the $25.0 million grant from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the application of $1.5 million of the Airports Authority’s share of NRR for rate abatement at Dulles International. Also, $45.0 million of PFCs will offset a portion of debt service at Dulles International as previously discussed for the AeroTrain.


http://www.mwaa.com/sites/default/files/2017_budget.pdf


To be sure, CPE is a useful metric to compare airports and their respective competitiveness. If an airline can process a passenger through a hub for only $2 or 3 dollars versus $18 or 25, it's a meaningful advantage. ATL's low CPE is a principal reason why Hartsfield-Jackson is so successful. But other factors, in addition to CPE, are useful in determining the efficiency and true value of a hub. At IAD, for instance, about 65 percent of the traffic is O&D. That's a figure that will light up the eyes of any airline exec.

Doug Parker is a very capable manager and AA has been prospering under his leadership. But his crowing about his CLT superhub seems a bit overblown. Yes, the CPE is low and because of that the hub's probably a big moneymaker. Compared to EWR, JFK, LAX, MIA, or IAD, however, CLT doesn't have nearly the same number of premium flyers. And as any airline exec worth his or her salt will tell you, it's all about yield. So even though CLT and ATL have very low CPEs, the O&D premium passengers of EWR, etc., in some respect, even things out.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4275
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hubs

Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:43 pm

Super80Fan wrote:
catiii wrote:
Super80Fan wrote:
UA has no hub in New York. They don't operate out of JFK, they have a couple hub flights out of LGA, and most of their presence is in Newark, New Jersey, which is connection heavy and doesn't have the O&D traffic JFK and LGA have. That leaves them with ORD, IAD (and that's up in the air), IAH, DEN, and SFO. American and Delta in comparison have a much stronger domestic market that covers not only business heavy routes but also leisure traffic. DL and AA also have shuttle routes between NYC and Boston/DC. United has none of that. Like I said in a previous post, compared to the other two United has a fantastic international network but domestically they are lagging behind.


Now that I realize you have an axe to grind, it makes it even more laughable that you say EWR does not serve NYC.


It's even more laugable you consider EWR to be NYC. Look I get it, you work for United's marketing department and this is where your budget goes to but it's not going to work. Delta, JetBlue, and American are the kings of New York.


EWR is a New York City metropolitan airport, period. Yes, it is in New Jersey as is the Statue of Liberty. It is a half hour from my apartment in Manhattan, even less by a few minutes if there is no traffic. If I’m not mistaken UA may have the most daily departures in the NYC Metropolitan area vs other airlines. The fact that it’s solidly in NJ, makes a mental barrier for some, but only a mental thing that can be overcome. Regardless EWR is a major NYC airport.

I think United’s huge ad campaign in NYC that is attempting to help overcome negative “perceptions” that EWR is either far (because it’s in NJ)...or less chic than JFK Is working (I’m basing that only on word of mouth. It would be great if someone had the stats on the effectiveness of the ads)
Also, many people I work with use Newark, not just for flying United but due to its convenience. They fly in/out on BA and LH and many others. In fact I work with some very savvy business travelers from Europe who always fly into EWR because they love how close it is to Manhattan and they don’t have the prejudices we do in the tri-state area.[

I think once UA finally finishes with the renovations, TV will be a great experience, it will strengthen UA’s reputation. In fact it’s already very crowded. Isn’t United already doing well financially out of EWR?
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
BTVB6Flyer
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:20 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:49 pm

Speaking from TPA's side, does TPA even have the room for any UA hub? I know TPA is planning a Airside D international airside, but that's only like 13-14 gates.

In the past TPA proposed a North Terminal complex but that was axed some time ago.

Hypothetically, if UA decided TPA for a S. American centric hub connecting to USA P2P routes, how TPA would expand.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1741
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:52 pm

kavok wrote:
Economically, BHM is no where near big enough to support any type of hub or focus city. It is also not growing no where near the rate that BNA, CLT, RDU, etc. are. It would be the equivalent of some airline opening a midwest hub at CMH or GRR. Not enough O-D or business traffic.
BMH is nowhere near the size of CMH. CMH served more than 2.5X's as many passengers as BMH in 2016 and is still not big enough to support a hub.

I think UA's best option for the southeast is a combination of IAD and IAH.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:39 pm

B737900ER wrote:
superjeff wrote:
B737900ER wrote:
The demographics aren’t there though. The south doesn’t have a population that travels far from home. There aren’t many large businesses headquartered there either. For the large part it’s an economically depressed region. That’s why out of the entire region you have two airlines that operate one hub each. Texas by itself has more than that. LA and Chicago both multiple airlines hubbed there, but the southeast? There isn’t a business case for additional service or you’d see it.

You guys are giving the south way too much credit.


I assume you're joking. American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines all based Dallas or Atlanta; United has a major operation in Houston. Coca Cola, Time Warner, Bank of America, AT&T, Exxon, Toyota U.S., and a whole bunch of etceteras between Dallas and Miami (including Charlotte and Atlanta). And people in the Southern part of the country travel every bit as much as people elsewhere. Major hubs in the Southeast (except Texas) include American at Charlotte and Miami, Delta in Atlanta, etc.

Texas and Florida are not culturally in the south. If they are then why are we having this discussion since UA has a hub in IAH? Like I said, two hubs in the region. That’s all it will support. If there was money to be made UA, B6, and WN to name a few would be trying to move in. They are not.



For WN, ATL is their 9th largest station and BNA #14. WN has already moved in

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5100
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:18 pm

flymco753 wrote:
Where would UA go in the Southeast though? ATL has DL, MCO is basically growing into a DL focus city, MIA has AA while FLL has Spirit, Southwest, and JetBlue, I wonder who would make the most sense if UA ever did build a Southeastern hub or focus city.

All of the stations mentioned?? UA flies out of. So we take revenue out of those areas and we compete there just like any other airline. If any of them become really HOT?? We'd be in there like "white on Rice" ! Obviously we need to strengthen the hubs we have, just like DL and AA need to defend the hubs they have. There's no real demonstrated urgency tp have a SE Hub we have plenty of service to the Southeast from most all of our hubs.
United left Miami way back when because MIA sought to raise OUR landing fees to build a new terminal for American. And? I agree with them.
There was nothing in it For us, So why participate?? American didn't help pay for the terminal in Chicago when we built it.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:47 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Where would UA go in the Southeast though? ATL has DL, MCO is basically growing into a DL focus city, MIA has AA while FLL has Spirit, Southwest, and JetBlue, I wonder who would make the most sense if UA ever did build a Southeastern hub or focus city.

All of the stations mentioned?? UA flies out of. So we take revenue out of those areas and we compete there just like any other airline. If any of them become really HOT?? We'd be in there like "white on Rice" ! Obviously we need to strengthen the hubs we have, just like DL and AA need to defend the hubs they have. There's no real demonstrated urgency tp have a SE Hub we have plenty of service to the Southeast from most all of our hubs.
United left Miami way back when because MIA sought to raise OUR landing fees to build a new terminal for American. And? I agree with them.
There was nothing in it For us, So why participate?? American didn't help pay for the terminal in Chicago when we built it.


If UA is not the most convenient or efficient carrier to points, from points, or between points in the SE USA, you aren't going to see the demand at all. And that's a big percentage of domestic trips, particularly of cities too small for viable LCC competition. An LCC can do JFK-LAX, but is unlikely to do TYS to SEA.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14636
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:48 pm

jagraham wrote:
B737900ER wrote:
superjeff wrote:

I assume you're joking. American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines all based Dallas or Atlanta; United has a major operation in Houston. Coca Cola, Time Warner, Bank of America, AT&T, Exxon, Toyota U.S., and a whole bunch of etceteras between Dallas and Miami (including Charlotte and Atlanta). And people in the Southern part of the country travel every bit as much as people elsewhere. Major hubs in the Southeast (except Texas) include American at Charlotte and Miami, Delta in Atlanta, etc.

Texas and Florida are not culturally in the south. If they are then why are we having this discussion since UA has a hub in IAH? Like I said, two hubs in the region. That’s all it will support. If there was money to be made UA, B6, and WN to name a few would be trying to move in. They are not.



For WN, ATL is their 9th largest station and BNA #14. WN has already moved in

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0


. . . And WN pretty well brackets the region (and sells connections handled by AA and DL over their southeast hubs) with 6 other hubs.
Last edited by Cubsrule on Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:55 pm

FoxtrotSierra wrote:
MCO would be a good idea except for the fact that while DL doesn't officially consider it a hub, it is one of the largest, if not the largest focus city in their network, with nonstops to both AMS and GRU, not to mention a massive VS operation as well. For a focus city, you can fly DL/VS to AMS, LGW, MAN, GLA, and GRU from MCO and DL has a pretty robust domestic network as well, much stronger than anything UA or AA offers out of MCO or even DL's other focus cities, although AA has MIA. DL has a decent amount of traffic connecting through MCO, but there are still some gaping holes, like SFO or anything in Texas, but the east coast and midwest has surprisingly good coverage.

TLDR; DL's MCO operation is less of a focus city and more of a mini hub- not ideal for a potential UA SE hub.

Image


This to me looks like a bunch of O&D flights to MCO. UA had a hublet at MCO in the 80s but when they acquired the PA latin routes, it went away in favor of MIA. Any airport in Florida isn't going to make sense as a domestic hub. You'd need a lot of flights to Caribbean/Latin America, and even then, it's debatable given the fact south of Florida routes are very well covered.
 
User avatar
11725Flyer
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:10 pm

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:
2travel2know2 wrote:
Nobody has mentioned (yet) that Continental had a "sort of a hub operation" in GSO for a short while. If it was to compete with DL at ATL, US Air at CLT and AA at RDU and BNA at that time, it didn't work.


GSO would be a lousy market even now for a hub, but to be fair, that was a Continental Lite operation, which was doomed anyway.


I can remember seeing the Lite planes in Miami. Cities served by Continental Lite and GP Express were ATL, BHM, BNA, BWI, MDW, CHS, CLE, CMH, CVG, DAY, DCA, EWR, GSP, IAH, ILM, IND, JAX, LGA, MCO, MIA, MSY, MYR, ORF, PBI, PHL, RIC, RSW, SAV, SDF, and TPA.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:34 am

AAvgeek744 wrote:
sevenfeet wrote:
I'm sure the powers at be in Nashville would love a UA hub, even a small one. The airport is already undergoing a major expansion, BA is coming to make a connection to Heathrow and the city has undergone it's biggest transformation in the city's history in the last 10 years. Southwest has largely been the beneficiary of it, having made Nashville work when AA couldn't do it back in the early 90s. Since then, JetBlue has returned and all the other players are doing more business...even AA.


I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.
 
ITB
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:50 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 3:20 am

ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
sevenfeet wrote:
I'm sure the powers at be in Nashville would love a UA hub, even a small one. The airport is already undergoing a major expansion, BA is coming to make a connection to Heathrow and the city has undergone it's biggest transformation in the city's history in the last 10 years. Southwest has largely been the beneficiary of it, having made Nashville work when AA couldn't do it back in the early 90s. Since then, JetBlue has returned and all the other players are doing more business...even AA.


I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


WN is now the dominant airline at BNA. It would take a determined, long-term effort by UA, or, similarly, DL or AA, to establish a sizeable hub in Nashville. Gaining market share may be very challenging, as WN would fight tooth and nail on virtually every route. That, and the many years of operating a potentially marginal operation, would give any airline exec serious reservations.

As it now stands at BNA, the US Big3 fly mainly to their respective hubs. WN has settled in with most of the other routes it deems worthwhile, such as SAN, MCI, BWI, OAK, PIT, and so forth. After that the pickings thin out quickly.

The hubs of Big3 are now centered around international flying. In recent years, the only new creation of a hub has been at SEA with DL, which has focused on international flying to Asia. Could the same be put in place at BNA, but focused on Europe and South America? Sure, it's possible, but very unlikely. The risk would be overwhelming. Imagine the fallout if UA shrunk its operations at IAD to create a hub at BNA, or somewhere else in the south. And then that new hub failed to live up to its expectations, for one reason or another. That would be an egregious miscalculation so severe it would become infamous.

UA can cover most of the southern US adequately with its hubs at IAH and IAD. There's little need for a true southern hub. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.
 
jumbojet
Posts: 2957
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:01 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:11 am

ITB wrote:
[. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.


Then what do you call DTW and MSP? They are almost exactly between ATL and SLC. 700 miles is all that separates Atlanta from Detroit.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:17 am

ITB wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:

I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


WN is now the dominant airline at BNA. It would take a determined, long-term effort by UA, or, similarly, DL or AA, to establish a sizeable hub in Nashville. Gaining market share may be very challenging, as WN would fight tooth and nail on virtually every route. That, and the many years of operating a potentially marginal operation, would give any airline exec serious reservations.

As it now stands at BNA, the US Big3 fly mainly to their respective hubs. WN has settled in with most of the other routes it deems worthwhile, such as SAN, MCI, BWI, OAK, PIT, and so forth. After that the pickings thin out quickly.

The hubs of Big3 are now centered around international flying. In recent years, the only new creation of a hub has been at SEA with DL, which has focused on international flying to Asia. Could the same be put in place at BNA, but focused on Europe and South America? Sure, it's possible, but very unlikely. The risk would be overwhelming. Imagine the fallout if UA shrunk its operations at IAD to create a hub at BNA, or somewhere else in the south. And then that new hub failed to live up to its expectations, for one reason or another. That would be an egregious miscalculation so severe it would become infamous.

UA can cover most of the southern US adequately with its hubs at IAH and IAD. There's little need for a true southern hub. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.


Again, I'm not talking about a major hub that would rival ATL and CLT, I am talking about a small hub like the kind DL has at CVG (basically a glorified focus city with some connecting traffic). UA could build out Concourse A at BNA with new gates (how many would depend on how big they want the operation) since they have it all to themselves (actually could in theory build more than WN since WN shares with AA in Concourse C). What would be wrong with this? The focus would be to provide some connections to the Southeast, relieve a bit of ORD and IAD and connect TPAC traffic via a flight to NRT for those who wish to avoid the heavily congested ATL and ORD (CLT doesn't have TPAC service right now, so I'm not counting that here).

Yes, WN would fight, but UA would have the advantage of having Concourse A to themselves with the ability to build it out with more gates and in theory, build more than what Southwest currently has. WN has about 15 gates, Concourse A could be rebuilt with almost double that, thus, allowing UA to build a sizable mini-hub at BNA. Over time, local corporate travels would flock to UA (especially Nissan and Bridgestone) as they would provide more connections, especially international.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I think UA could make a small BNA hub/focus city profitable. If DL can make megahubs like ATL and DTW along with smaller hubs/focus cities like CVG and RDU co-exist and profitable, UA (and AA) should be able to do the same.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:19 am

jumbojet wrote:
ITB wrote:
[. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.


Then what do you call DTW and MSP? They are almost exactly between ATL and SLC. 700 miles is all that separates Atlanta from Detroit.


I think he may have been referring to the southern part of the country (in particular Texas) between ATL and SLC, where no DL hub currently exists.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2091
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:07 am

crazytoaster wrote:
I think it would be really hard for UA to create a new southeast hub. ATL is such a beast that competing against without any real presence already would be extremely difficult. CLT is similar. Is there really enough passengers for another hub? Not even factoring in WN and B6 which both have focus cities in the region.

I think UA would be better served in beefing up DEN. It is there best hub location wise for connecting traffic. DFW is a good competitor for some of the traffic flows that go through DEN. But SLC and PHX pale in comparison to DEN. SLC being just a smaller metro and PHX being a little too far south. I think UA would do much better at making DEN their "cheap megahub". The new DEN expansion plans shed more light in that they want to expand their as well.


Adding some E175 flights at DEN for connecting passengers in the Midwest at a lower cost hub than ORD would make some sense. With UA picking up some used Airbus A319 aircraft this would also make some sense. Some of the cities near ORD that United Express flies to can support a daily Airbus flight to DEN and offer passengers a better west connecting experience.
 
ITB
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:50 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:11 am

ADrum23 wrote:
jumbojet wrote:
ITB wrote:
[. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.


Then what do you call DTW and MSP? They are almost exactly between ATL and SLC. 700 miles is all that separates Atlanta from Detroit.


I think he may have been referring to the southern part of the country (in particular Texas) between ATL and SLC, where no DL hub currently exists.


Yes, I was. Not that DL needs another hub, but if they're looking to put down a presence in the southwest, AUS might make for a nice focus city.

BNA could be an appropriate location for a UA focus city. It would depend on a lot of factors and a lot of analysis, the most important being how does UA benefit. UA doesn't need any more hubs, so any expansion probably would be modest.

If MWAA can drive down CPE at IAD to 15 or less, Dulles will become a much more appealing asset to UA. In the coming years, the modernization program at ORD will push the airport's CPE dramatically higher, maybe to 25 or even 28. The CPE at EWR is already sky high, and there's little indication it's coming down anytime soon. That will leave IAH and IAD as more cost-efficient hub options in the midwest and east.
 
blockski
Posts: 693
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:13 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
ITB wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


WN is now the dominant airline at BNA. It would take a determined, long-term effort by UA, or, similarly, DL or AA, to establish a sizeable hub in Nashville. Gaining market share may be very challenging, as WN would fight tooth and nail on virtually every route. That, and the many years of operating a potentially marginal operation, would give any airline exec serious reservations.

As it now stands at BNA, the US Big3 fly mainly to their respective hubs. WN has settled in with most of the other routes it deems worthwhile, such as SAN, MCI, BWI, OAK, PIT, and so forth. After that the pickings thin out quickly.

The hubs of Big3 are now centered around international flying. In recent years, the only new creation of a hub has been at SEA with DL, which has focused on international flying to Asia. Could the same be put in place at BNA, but focused on Europe and South America? Sure, it's possible, but very unlikely. The risk would be overwhelming. Imagine the fallout if UA shrunk its operations at IAD to create a hub at BNA, or somewhere else in the south. And then that new hub failed to live up to its expectations, for one reason or another. That would be an egregious miscalculation so severe it would become infamous.

UA can cover most of the southern US adequately with its hubs at IAH and IAD. There's little need for a true southern hub. Comparatively, when one looks at the DL hub map, there's a huge gap between ATL and SLC. Does DL need a southwest hub, like UA needs a southeast hub? No, not at all. DL is fine as it is, and so is UA.


Again, I'm not talking about a major hub that would rival ATL and CLT, I am talking about a small hub like the kind DL has at CVG (basically a glorified focus city with some connecting traffic). UA could build out Concourse A at BNA with new gates (how many would depend on how big they want the operation) since they have it all to themselves (actually could in theory build more than WN since WN shares with AA in Concourse C). What would be wrong with this? The focus would be to provide some connections to the Southeast, relieve a bit of ORD and IAD and connect TPAC traffic via a flight to NRT for those who wish to avoid the heavily congested ATL and ORD (CLT doesn't have TPAC service right now, so I'm not counting that here).

Yes, WN would fight, but UA would have the advantage of having Concourse A to themselves with the ability to build it out with more gates and in theory, build more than what Southwest currently has. WN has about 15 gates, Concourse A could be rebuilt with almost double that, thus, allowing UA to build a sizable mini-hub at BNA. Over time, local corporate travels would flock to UA (especially Nissan and Bridgestone) as they would provide more connections, especially international.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I think UA could make a small BNA hub/focus city profitable. If DL can make megahubs like ATL and DTW along with smaller hubs/focus cities like CVG and RDU co-exist and profitable, UA (and AA) should be able to do the same.


It’s an interesting idea, but DL didn’t set up their hub at CVG with WN as a competitor, which completely changes the calculus for any airline doing so now.

RDU is a better example of what would be required for UA at BNA, but even that wasn’t against nearly the size of what WN already operates at BNA.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:08 pm

ITB wrote:
WN is now the dominant airline at BNA.

Any airport where WN is the dominant carrier provides UA with one advantage going in, even if to start as a focus city, International travel, that is the opening that UA could invest in to build traffic, the question is whether the surrounding area has enough traffic to support TATL, Caribbean and South / Central American traffic, or in simple terms, international traffic outside of comfortable 737 range.

In any event, I think they would need to invest some funds to try a focus city first then build it into a hub.
 
phatfarmlines
Posts: 1570
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 12:06 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 2:28 pm

BTVB6Flyer wrote:
Speaking from TPA's side, does TPA even have the room for any UA hub? I know TPA is planning a Airside D international airside, but that's only like 13-14 gates.

In the past TPA proposed a North Terminal complex but that was axed some time ago.

Hypothetically, if UA decided TPA for a S. American centric hub connecting to USA P2P routes, how TPA would expand.


A long-ago lore was that CO was to set up Latin American operations out of its then-new Airside A. CO had also set up a regional feed at TPA via GP Express (Not to be confused with Gulfstream, now Silver Airways, which at the time was partnered with UA). At the time, this would have competed with DL at MCO, AA at MIA, as well as UA out of MIA with its PA-inherited routes.

Now since that time, the competitive landscape has changed with WN being the dominant carrier, and I could see the 737MAX/320NEO series creating new long-haul opportunities to the south. Whether UA takes up on that, I don't know, but it's likely a higher probably for the incumbent LCCs in TPA.
 
AAplat4life
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 3:22 pm

What is lost in the discussion is that United’s net profit last quarter was higher than American’s even though United had about $1B less in revenues (and about $1B less in expenses). The market is upset with United because it cannot sustain revenue growth, but in the long term I do not dismiss United’s strengths. This discussion about the benefits of the Atlanta hub for Delta is interesting and has a lot of merit, but establishing a hub in the SE is not going to replicate the dynamics of Atlanta for UAL. Although I did not read Mr. Parkers’s comments as being negative towards UAL, I do view them skeptically as deflecting the question about why Delta produced about double the net profit of American last quarter.
 
Nola
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu May 29, 2014 1:40 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:00 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Where would UA go in the Southeast though? ATL has DL, MCO is basically growing into a DL focus city, MIA has AA while FLL has Spirit, Southwest, and JetBlue, I wonder who would make the most sense if UA ever did build a Southeastern hub or focus city.


Maybe MEM but that’s too close to ORD. Anywhere else is too close to IAH. UA really had not much SE presence before it merged with CO.



At one point, before an economic downturn, UA even looked at MSY as a potential hub, which didn't make sense for domestic routings as it isn't omnidirectional, but did make some sense as a jumping off to Latin America. With the merger with CO, though, they have that at IAH. RDU would probably be the only potential southeastern hub for them unless they want to look at FLL and have really low yields due to the LCC/ULCC activity there.
 
flyjoe
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:10 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:44 pm

Nola wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
flymco753 wrote:
Maybe MEM but that’s too close to ORD. Anywhere else is too close to IAH. UA really had not much SE presence before it merged with CO.


RDU would probably be the only potential southeastern hub for them


Agree, RDU is the only reasonable SE hub option out there, but does it siphon traffic away from IAD? It opens up discussions about IAD value in the network with EWR to the north and RDU, less than 300 miles to the south. Obviously IAD has value with its international lift/demand that's not the same from RDU.

BNA is a hot city and could be a viable option. Aside from the competition with WN already mentioned, does BNA bring a lot of additional value from what already goes through IAH and ORD? Sure, they're not capturing the JAX-IND or CHS-STL traffic, but is that enough of a value?
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:08 pm

flyjoe wrote:
Nola wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:

RDU would probably be the only potential southeastern hub for them


Agree, RDU is the only reasonable SE hub option out there, but does it siphon traffic away from IAD? It opens up discussions about IAD value in the network with EWR to the north and RDU, less than 300 miles to the south. Obviously IAD has value with its international lift/demand that's not the same from RDU.

BNA is a hot city and could be a viable option. Aside from the competition with WN already mentioned, does BNA bring a lot of additional value from what already goes through IAH and ORD? Sure, they're not capturing the JAX-IND or CHS-STL traffic, but is that enough of a value?


The thing about RDU is that it is too close to IAD and has too much competition with the DL focus city there. Honestly, I think UA would face more fierce competition from DL at RDU than WN at BNA.

BNA does bring a lot of value by providing an alternative to the congested (and delay-prone) ORD and IAH. It's a much simpler layout to navigate. It would not need to be a huge hub the size of IAD, perhaps something a little bigger than what DL has at CVG.
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:17 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
sevenfeet wrote:
I'm sure the powers at be in Nashville would love a UA hub, even a small one. The airport is already undergoing a major expansion, BA is coming to make a connection to Heathrow and the city has undergone it's biggest transformation in the city's history in the last 10 years. Southwest has largely been the beneficiary of it, having made Nashville work when AA couldn't do it back in the early 90s. Since then, JetBlue has returned and all the other players are doing more business...even AA.


I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


Not going to happen. BNA Vision has already stated that once the temporary IAB is taken down, A returns to it former state. That means narrow, with 7 or 8 gates. So you are looking at a max of 100 flights if you time them right. UA is not going to spend money on a small hub that will likely fail.
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:18 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
sevenfeet wrote:
I'm sure the powers at be in Nashville would love a UA hub, even a small one. The airport is already undergoing a major expansion, BA is coming to make a connection to Heathrow and the city has undergone it's biggest transformation in the city's history in the last 10 years. Southwest has largely been the beneficiary of it, having made Nashville work when AA couldn't do it back in the early 90s. Since then, JetBlue has returned and all the other players are doing more business...even AA.


I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


Not going to happen. BNA Vision has already stated that once the temporary IAB is taken down, A returns to it former state. That means narrow, with 7 or 8 gates. So you are looking at a max of 100 flights if you time them right. UA is not going to spend money on a small hub that will likely fail.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:45 pm

AAvgeek744 wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:

I would not be so sure. BNA has a very good mix of carriers and fares that keep the competition honest. You cannot compare the AA hub to what WN has become in Nashville. Besides, there way be two or three empty gates max right now.. I suspect once the expansion is complete, the new gates are already spoken for, or at least carriers are looking at them.

I think the real answer is no US carriers if going to "create" a 200+ flight a day hub. Some growth where available, sure. But adding totally new hubs, it ain't gonna happen.


I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


Not going to happen. BNA Vision has already stated that once the temporary IAB is taken down, A returns to it former state. That means narrow, with 7 or 8 gates. So you are looking at a max of 100 flights if you time them right. UA is not going to spend money on a small hub that will likely fail.


"A returns to its former state."

And the existing IAB off of A is demolished, thus, allowing room for an additional 10 new gates (at least), plus, widening the existing corridor (which was in the original BNA Vision plans) would allow for several new gates there as well. So we are looking at going from 7 gates to as many as 20-22, which is about the size of UA's Concourse B at ORD.

Why would the hub fail? If they do it right, it should be profitable. At some point, UA (and AA for that matter) is going to have to catch up with DL and begin building mini-hubs/focus cities if they want to stay competitive.
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:11 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

I disagree, BNA would love a UA hub. Anything that would grow the airport and increase the number of passengers they are for. I don't think it would be a large hub on the scale of ATL and CLT, but a smaller niche hub (like DL at CVG) that could capture some of the southeast traffic that they are missing out on. Plus a UA hub would drastically help with landing a flight to Tokyo (NRT), which BNA wants badly due to the increasing Asian ties to Middle Tennessee (partly via Bridgestone and Nissan). Having a BNA UA hub with a flight to NRT could help route some connecting traffic to Asia from the southeast that do not want to connect in ATL or ORD, thus increasing the loads and making it profitable. UA has a hub at NRT, so they could launch the flight themselves (with a 788 or 789) or have Star Alliance partner All Nippon do it.

Where could UA find the space for a hub at BNA? UA and Air Canada have Concourse A all to themselves, and once the existing IAB building is demolished as part of BNA Vision, Concourse A could be completely rebuilt and expanded with at least 10-20 new gates and new United Club. And I think people are overestimating WN's impact on BNA, WN has larger operations in ATL and they and DL seem to coexist just fine there. UA opening a hub would lead to more competition and better fares, which I am all for.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I doubt it will happen, but you never know.


Not going to happen. BNA Vision has already stated that once the temporary IAB is taken down, A returns to it former state. That means narrow, with 7 or 8 gates. So you are looking at a max of 100 flights if you time them right. UA is not going to spend money on a small hub that will likely fail.


"A returns to its former state."

And the existing IAB off of A is demolished, thus, allowing room for an additional 10 new gates (at least), plus, widening the existing corridor (which was in the original BNA Vision plans) would allow for several new gates there as well. So we are looking at going from 7 gates to as many as 20-22, which is about the size of UA's Concourse B at ORD.

Why would the hub fail? If they do it right, it should be profitable. At some point, UA (and AA for that matter) is going to have to catch up with DL and begin building mini-hubs/focus cities if they want to stay competitive.


I suggest you refer your comments to MNAA. The have said A returns to it's pre-construction status when the temporary IAB is removed. They did not mention new gates. With 6 new gates on D, and the at least some of the new IAB gates being swing gates, BNA will have added gate space, albeit spread around. They are not going to build 14 more gates on the end of A based on an idea from someone on a.net thinking it's a good idea for a UA hub.. My comment about failure was based on the fact A will have 8 gates, and you can squeeze out only so many flights. UA has known for years they do not have a presence in the southeast. Not to mention they would likely overlap many WN routes, which WN will fight to protect. Had United truly been interested, would they not have approached MNAA and said "hey we'll open a focus city if you give us 20 gates?" They didn't, so it's not going to happen. Your obsession with AA adding a mainline flight to ORD is more likely to lead to all 8 flights being mainline before UA would build any sizeable ops at BNA. That's something most of us know won't happen either.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:56 pm

AAvgeek744 wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:

Not going to happen. BNA Vision has already stated that once the temporary IAB is taken down, A returns to it former state. That means narrow, with 7 or 8 gates. So you are looking at a max of 100 flights if you time them right. UA is not going to spend money on a small hub that will likely fail.


"A returns to its former state."

And the existing IAB off of A is demolished, thus, allowing room for an additional 10 new gates (at least), plus, widening the existing corridor (which was in the original BNA Vision plans) would allow for several new gates there as well. So we are looking at going from 7 gates to as many as 20-22, which is about the size of UA's Concourse B at ORD.

Why would the hub fail? If they do it right, it should be profitable. At some point, UA (and AA for that matter) is going to have to catch up with DL and begin building mini-hubs/focus cities if they want to stay competitive.


I suggest you refer your comments to MNAA. The have said A returns to it's pre-construction status when the temporary IAB is removed. They did not mention new gates. With 6 new gates on D, and the at least some of the new IAB gates being swing gates, BNA will have added gate space, albeit spread around. They are not going to build 14 more gates on the end of A based on an idea from someone on a.net thinking it's a good idea for a UA hub.. My comment about failure was based on the fact A will have 8 gates, and you can squeeze out only so many flights. UA has known for years they do not have a presence in the southeast. Not to mention they would likely overlap many WN routes, which WN will fight to protect. Had United truly been interested, would they not have approached MNAA and said "hey we'll open a focus city if you give us 20 gates?" They didn't, so it's not going to happen. Your obsession with AA adding a mainline flight to ORD is more likely to lead to all 8 flights being mainline before UA would build any sizeable ops at BNA. That's something most of us know won't happen either.


Let me clarify, I am not suggesting this will happen, I am simply pointing out how it could happen if UA was interested (which they clearly have more important things to focus on right now) and why BNA would be the most logical choice if UA decided to build something in the southeast (as opposed to RDU, MEM, MCO, FLL, etc). Also, IF hypothetically UA was interested, they would pay for a Concourse A expansion, not MNAA. It would be separate from the ongoing BNA Vision.

BNA is fine as it is, traffic is growing steadily and new destinations are being added, a UA hub would simply be a nice bonus. However, on the other hand, a UA hub might actually be detrimental to BNA simply by the fact that it would cause a huge spike in traffic and lead to congestion. Assuming this hypothetical UA hub opened up and WN stayed relatively the same, we would see BNA traffic jump from 14 million to at least 25-30 million, which I don't think the airport is capable of handling well.

Finally, about that AA mainline to ORD, I am not going to discuss it anymore. If it happens, it happens. If not, it's not the end of the world.
 
User avatar
southwest1675
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:03 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:27 am

ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

"A returns to its former state."

And the existing IAB off of A is demolished, thus, allowing room for an additional 10 new gates (at least), plus, widening the existing corridor (which was in the original BNA Vision plans) would allow for several new gates there as well. So we are looking at going from 7 gates to as many as 20-22, which is about the size of UA's Concourse B at ORD.

Why would the hub fail? If they do it right, it should be profitable. At some point, UA (and AA for that matter) is going to have to catch up with DL and begin building mini-hubs/focus cities if they want to stay competitive.


I suggest you refer your comments to MNAA. The have said A returns to it's pre-construction status when the temporary IAB is removed. They did not mention new gates. With 6 new gates on D, and the at least some of the new IAB gates being swing gates, BNA will have added gate space, albeit spread around. They are not going to build 14 more gates on the end of A based on an idea from someone on a.net thinking it's a good idea for a UA hub.. My comment about failure was based on the fact A will have 8 gates, and you can squeeze out only so many flights. UA has known for years they do not have a presence in the southeast. Not to mention they would likely overlap many WN routes, which WN will fight to protect. Had United truly been interested, would they not have approached MNAA and said "hey we'll open a focus city if you give us 20 gates?" They didn't, so it's not going to happen. Your obsession with AA adding a mainline flight to ORD is more likely to lead to all 8 flights being mainline before UA would build any sizeable ops at BNA. That's something most of us know won't happen either.


Let me clarify, I am not suggesting this will happen, I am simply pointing out how it could happen if UA was interested (which they clearly have more important things to focus on right now) and why BNA would be the most logical choice if UA decided to build something in the southeast (as opposed to RDU, MEM, MCO, FLL, etc). Also, IF hypothetically UA was interested, they would pay for a Concourse A expansion, not MNAA. It would be separate from the ongoing BNA Vision.

BNA is fine as it is, traffic is growing steadily and new destinations are being added, a UA hub would simply be a nice bonus. However, on the other hand, a UA hub might actually be detrimental to BNA simply by the fact that it would cause a huge spike in traffic and lead to congestion. Assuming this hypothetical UA hub opened up and WN stayed relatively the same, we would see BNA traffic jump from 14 million to at least 25-30 million, which I don't think the airport is capable of handling well.

Finally, about that AA mainline to ORD, I am not going to discuss it anymore. If it happens, it happens. If not, it's not the end of the world.


BNA could have been like CLT in my opinion.
Herb Kelleher 1931-2019
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2497
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:15 am

southwest1675 wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:

I suggest you refer your comments to MNAA. The have said A returns to it's pre-construction status when the temporary IAB is removed. They did not mention new gates. With 6 new gates on D, and the at least some of the new IAB gates being swing gates, BNA will have added gate space, albeit spread around. They are not going to build 14 more gates on the end of A based on an idea from someone on a.net thinking it's a good idea for a UA hub.. My comment about failure was based on the fact A will have 8 gates, and you can squeeze out only so many flights. UA has known for years they do not have a presence in the southeast. Not to mention they would likely overlap many WN routes, which WN will fight to protect. Had United truly been interested, would they not have approached MNAA and said "hey we'll open a focus city if you give us 20 gates?" They didn't, so it's not going to happen. Your obsession with AA adding a mainline flight to ORD is more likely to lead to all 8 flights being mainline before UA would build any sizeable ops at BNA. That's something most of us know won't happen either.


Let me clarify, I am not suggesting this will happen, I am simply pointing out how it could happen if UA was interested (which they clearly have more important things to focus on right now) and why BNA would be the most logical choice if UA decided to build something in the southeast (as opposed to RDU, MEM, MCO, FLL, etc). Also, IF hypothetically UA was interested, they would pay for a Concourse A expansion, not MNAA. It would be separate from the ongoing BNA Vision.

BNA is fine as it is, traffic is growing steadily and new destinations are being added, a UA hub would simply be a nice bonus. However, on the other hand, a UA hub might actually be detrimental to BNA simply by the fact that it would cause a huge spike in traffic and lead to congestion. Assuming this hypothetical UA hub opened up and WN stayed relatively the same, we would see BNA traffic jump from 14 million to at least 25-30 million, which I don't think the airport is capable of handling well.

Finally, about that AA mainline to ORD, I am not going to discuss it anymore. If it happens, it happens. If not, it's not the end of the world.


BNA could have been like CLT in my opinion.


CLT is substantially larger and even with a disproportionately large corporate presence to its size, potentially, in part, because of the airport. People tend to discount CLT and consider it a smaller city than it is.
 
catiii
Posts: 3647
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:47 pm

Super80Fan wrote:
catiii wrote:
Super80Fan wrote:
UA has no hub in New York. They don't operate out of JFK, they have a couple hub flights out of LGA, and most of their presence is in Newark, New Jersey, which is connection heavy and doesn't have the O&D traffic JFK and LGA have. That leaves them with ORD, IAD (and that's up in the air), IAH, DEN, and SFO. American and Delta in comparison have a much stronger domestic market that covers not only business heavy routes but also leisure traffic. DL and AA also have shuttle routes between NYC and Boston/DC. United has none of that. Like I said in a previous post, compared to the other two United has a fantastic international network but domestically they are lagging behind.


Now that I realize you have an axe to grind, it makes it even more laughable that you say EWR does not serve NYC.


It's even more laugable you consider EWR to be NYC. Look I get it, you work for United's marketing department and this is where your budget goes to but it's not going to work. Delta, JetBlue, and American are the kings of New York.


I actually work for one of the other three carriers you mentioned. I, however, am not stupid enough to think that UA is not a competitor in NYC, and that EWR is not relevant to NYC.

Good try though.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1469
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Doug Parker on United's Lack of a Southeast Hub

Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:03 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
flyjoe wrote:
Nola wrote:


Agree, RDU is the only reasonable SE hub option out there, but does it siphon traffic away from IAD? It opens up discussions about IAD value in the network with EWR to the north and RDU, less than 300 miles to the south. Obviously IAD has value with its international lift/demand that's not the same from RDU.

BNA is a hot city and could be a viable option. Aside from the competition with WN already mentioned, does BNA bring a lot of additional value from what already goes through IAH and ORD? Sure, they're not capturing the JAX-IND or CHS-STL traffic, but is that enough of a value?


The thing about RDU is that it is too close to IAD and has too much competition with the DL focus city there. Honestly, I think UA would face more fierce competition from DL at RDU than WN at BNA.

BNA does bring a lot of value by providing an alternative to the congested (and delay-prone) ORD and IAH. It's a much simpler layout to navigate. It would not need to be a huge hub the size of IAD, perhaps something a little bigger than what DL has at CVG.



DL seems pretty spread Out with battles in LAX,SEA,BOS,MCO, and im sure i've missed one or two fronts. RDU/IAD Could they work has two Large Focus Cities?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos