klm617 wrote:enilria wrote:izbtmnhd wrote:
Oh Lord. Most people commenting on a.nut constantly kept CLE out of any discussion of TATL service and would always mention CMH as more "viable". Now CLE has two carriers while CMH still has zero which makes the CLE situation "hideous". OK. Whatever.
I think all these airports have a reasonable chance of scoring EI. I'm sure subsidies will play a large role.
Two new carriers on the same route previously unserved is pretty much by definition hideous. Has nothing to do with it being CLE. DFW is likely very similar with 3 carriers! Unserved markets just don't ramp up fast enough to support that kind of growth. Even after they ramp up the question then turns to yield because a) very hard to fill all those new seats and b) each carrier will be trying to push the other out in order to make the market long term viable.
Thank you for always being the voice of reason on this forum always seeing things objectively saying things sometimes that people don't want to hear you have my greatest respect sir.