All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

Hahah. Whoever considers IAH, DFW, and even AUS to be "third-tier" markets has been living in a box.

DFWLHR is 4-5x per day on OneWorld/JV IAG in good times. Canceling BA metal out of there is akin to withdrawing from a major market like SEA, LAX, MIA, ORD, BOS, etc.

IAHLHR is 2x per day in good times on BA in addition to 2X UA IAHLHR. Not a chance in hell.

AUS was a smashing success out of the gate. Up-gauged to a 744 for a minute and then eventually a 77W IIRC with even more premium capacity. BA has had tremendous success with niche markets like BNA, MSY, AUS that compelled them to take risks with CHS and PIT.

hohd wrote:

All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

I'm curious, since when did BA start flying to CLT again?

skipness1E wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

I think you need to remember the furlough scheme ends in Oct and many of those on it become unemployed the next day. The Chancellor said last week we are heading for the biggest recession in living memory. So, no, the return to normal won’t resemble the same level of activity by quite some way.
All of that means that airlines will have to retrench. For example, AA flying B777s out of CLT/PHL-LHR looks ambitious IMHO. Expect all the new US routes flown by BA on the B788 to be dropped. The A380 will, IMHO, not return this year to BA if at all. You’re looking at a collapse in medium term demand the likes of which we haven’t seen. That’s before existing incomes get slashed by higher taxes to lay for all the borrowing. I forget that a lot of peeps on here have never seen a real recession like the 70s or 80s.

Just don’t see it myself.

We’ll have a recession like 2008 for sure but BA still flew the vast majority of their schedule.

You’ll be surprised how quickly things will come back.

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

Except there’s no underlying problem like the 2008 crash. We’ll see a V shaped recovery, perhaps a deep and sharp one. People will want to get back to their daily lives as quickly as possible.

The markets really don’t think we’re seeing a massive recession, they’re on the way back up already.

BA have wanted an excuse to get rid of staff for a long while, now here is the perfect opportunity. Most will be re-employed on a new cheaper contract!

hohd wrote:

All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

PHL might not be tier 1 city then because service for BA won't start until July

skipness1E wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

I think you need to remember the furlough scheme ends in Oct and many of those on it become unemployed the next day. The Chancellor said last week we are heading for the biggest recession in living memory. So, no, the return to normal won’t resemble the same level of activity by quite some way.
All of that means that airlines will have to retrench. For example, AA flying B777s out of CLT/PHL-LHR looks ambitious IMHO. Expect all the new US routes flown by BA on the B788 to be dropped. The A380 will, IMHO, not return this year to BA if at all. You’re looking at a collapse in medium term demand the likes of which we haven’t seen. That’s before existing incomes get slashed by higher taxes to lay for all the borrowing. I forget that a lot of peeps on here have never seen a real recession like the 70s or 80s.

Just don’t see it myself.

We’ll have a recession like 2008 for sure but BA still flew the vast majority of their schedule.

You’ll be surprised how quickly things will come back.

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

I know fleet plans have been changing on a weekly basis and will no doubt change again with the government's foolish quarantine policy but the A380 was planned to return in September. The 747 will soon be doing some South African repatriation flights.

I remember back in 2009 - some of the best performing routes back then were the longhaul leisure destinations from LGW - it'll the same this time around. It's no wonder the latest plan had MCO as a daily flight from July, double daily in August and Tampa as a 5x week with meaningful returns to UVF, ANU and CUN.

BA is well placed to take advantage of the return to normality - European rivals will be saddled with debt, as will US carriers. BA also has one of the more flexible fleets with the ability to add and withdraw capacity quite quickly. For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo. Competition from Virgin and Norwegian will be substantially lower and while the likes of PIT and CHS won't come back this summer, I'd be surprised if they're not back by summer 2021.

BA777FO wrote:

For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo.

As I understand it, the profit from these flights is made by IAG cargo, and not BA.
They are just paid the operating costs, with IAG Cargo being the Company that benefits, and shows on the yearly returns at IAG Mansions.

skipness1E wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

I think you need to remember the furlough scheme ends in Oct and many of those on it become unemployed the next day. The Chancellor said last week we are heading for the biggest recession in living memory. So, no, the return to normal won’t resemble the same level of activity by quite some way.
All of that means that airlines will have to retrench. For example, AA flying B777s out of CLT/PHL-LHR looks ambitious IMHO. Expect all the new US routes flown by BA on the B788 to be dropped. The A380 will, IMHO, not return this year to BA if at all. You’re looking at a collapse in medium term demand the likes of which we haven’t seen. That’s before existing incomes get slashed by higher taxes to lay for all the borrowing. I forget that a lot of peeps on here have never seen a real recession like the 70s or 80s.

Just don’t see it myself.

We’ll have a recession like 2008 for sure but BA still flew the vast majority of their schedule.

You’ll be surprised how quickly things will come back.

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

Is that just like how they may not restart Gatwick ops? Oh wait......

BA said they may have to cut up to 12000 jobs, and may not restart Gatwick.
Well the threat to Gatwick never lasted long, and I suspect 12000 is massively exaggerated


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

BA777FO wrote:

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

Lets hope they take advantage of the situation and get some cruise pilots lined up, that would help the bottom line when good times return.

Junglejames wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Just don’t see it myself.

We’ll have a recession like 2008 for sure but BA still flew the vast majority of their schedule.

You’ll be surprised how quickly things will come back.

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

Is that just like how they may not restart Gatwick ops? Oh wait......

BA said they may have to cut up to 12000 jobs, and may not restart Gatwick.
Well the threat to Gatwick never lasted long, and I suspect 12000 is massively exaggerated


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Did they announce definitively that LGW would not be cut?

Johnwaynebobbet wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

Lets hope they take advantage of the situation and get some cruise pilots lined up, that would help the bottom line when good times return.

Cruise pilots would be more expensive than FPPs anyway

TUGMASTER wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo.

As I understand it, the profit from these flights is made by IAG cargo, and not BA.
They are just paid the operating costs, with IAG Cargo being the Company that benefits, and shows on the yearly returns at IAG Mansions.

That's not true. IAG Cargo performs centralised functions but the annual results breakdown total IAG Cargo revenue per op-co. That's the whole point of IAG - they provide a streamlined centralised operation for functions that can be centralised (such as offering customers more choice of routes and freight products) but revenues are allocated to each op-co. BA made £711m in cargo revenues last year, just under ¾ of total IAG Cargo revenues.

BA777FO wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Just don’t see it myself.

We’ll have a recession like 2008 for sure but BA still flew the vast majority of their schedule.

You’ll be surprised how quickly things will come back.

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

I know fleet plans have been changing on a weekly basis and will no doubt change again with the government's foolish quarantine policy but the A380 was planned to return in September. The 747 will soon be doing some South African repatriation flights.

I remember back in 2009 - some of the best performing routes back then were the longhaul leisure destinations from LGW - it'll the same this time around. It's no wonder the latest plan had MCO as a daily flight from July, double daily in August and Tampa as a 5x week with meaningful returns to UVF, ANU and CUN.

BA is well placed to take advantage of the return to normality - European rivals will be saddled with debt, as will US carriers. BA also has one of the more flexible fleets with the ability to add and withdraw capacity quite quickly. For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo. Competition from Virgin and Norwegian will be substantially lower and while the likes of PIT and CHS won't come back this summer, I'd be surprised if they're not back by summer 2021.

You sound quite relaxed about your colleagues in the cabin losing their jobs? I am sure your statement about being paid more than FOs might be true for the top of their pay scale compared to pilots at the beginning of their career. If you are one of the pilots being let go, the Daily Mail or The Sun might be taking on staff with a sensationalist nature...

Westerwaelder wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

I know fleet plans have been changing on a weekly basis and will no doubt change again with the government's foolish quarantine policy but the A380 was planned to return in September. The 747 will soon be doing some South African repatriation flights.

I remember back in 2009 - some of the best performing routes back then were the longhaul leisure destinations from LGW - it'll the same this time around. It's no wonder the latest plan had MCO as a daily flight from July, double daily in August and Tampa as a 5x week with meaningful returns to UVF, ANU and CUN.

BA is well placed to take advantage of the return to normality - European rivals will be saddled with debt, as will US carriers. BA also has one of the more flexible fleets with the ability to add and withdraw capacity quite quickly. For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo. Competition from Virgin and Norwegian will be substantially lower and while the likes of PIT and CHS won't come back this summer, I'd be surprised if they're not back by summer 2021.

You sound quite relaxed about your colleagues in the cabin losing their jobs? I am sure your statement about being paid more than FOs might be true for the top of their pay scale compared to pilots at the beginning of their career. If you are one of the pilots being let go, the Daily Mail or The Sun might be taking on staff with a sensationalist nature...

Not at all, I think they're being treated terribly. No one should have their contract ripped up and it goes to show that employee rights in the UK are way below par. They're also being badly let down by Unite though. Unite are refusing to negotiate claiming they couldn't possibly when on furlough but that's not the case. Unite is also spreading misinformation saying all 42,000 employees are having their contracts ripped up, again, not true.

I'd be surprised if pilots are made compulsory redundant. There'll be voluntary packages, some pilots will take temporary secondmenta back to the RAF but CR, unlikely. They couldn't crew the operation before this all kicked off.

Not sure what you're saying I said was sensationalist though. It was factually correct, although I should have clarified it was Eurofleet and Worldwide CSDs and CSLs as opposed to maincrew.

BA777FO wrote:

Westerwaelder wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

BA won't cut 12,000 staff. This is a "don't let a good crisis go to waste" moment - a final opportunity to push through getting rid of Eurofleet and Worldwide cabin crew who are paid more than most of the FOs on the A320 (even some longhaul DEP FOs too!) and possibly outsource ground handling at LHR like at LGW with GGS. All above-wing staff are being proposed to be essentially TUPEd to GGS, which is just below wing at the moment. 12,000 was a worst case scenario - it was their opening salvo and among some departments the local figures have already been shown to be unworkable.

I know fleet plans have been changing on a weekly basis and will no doubt change again with the government's foolish quarantine policy but the A380 was planned to return in September. The 747 will soon be doing some South African repatriation flights.

I remember back in 2009 - some of the best performing routes back then were the longhaul leisure destinations from LGW - it'll the same this time around. It's no wonder the latest plan had MCO as a daily flight from July, double daily in August and Tampa as a 5x week with meaningful returns to UVF, ANU and CUN.

BA is well placed to take advantage of the return to normality - European rivals will be saddled with debt, as will US carriers. BA also has one of the more flexible fleets with the ability to add and withdraw capacity quite quickly. For now, the 77W is bringing in useful and substantial amounts of cash from cargo. Competition from Virgin and Norwegian will be substantially lower and while the likes of PIT and CHS won't come back this summer, I'd be surprised if they're not back by summer 2021.

You sound quite relaxed about your colleagues in the cabin losing their jobs? I am sure your statement about being paid more than FOs might be true for the top of their pay scale compared to pilots at the beginning of their career. If you are one of the pilots being let go, the Daily Mail or The Sun might be taking on staff with a sensationalist nature...

Not at all, I think they're being treated terribly. No one should have their contract ripped up and it goes to show that employee rights in the UK are way below par. They're also being badly let down by Unite though. Unite are refusing to negotiate claiming they couldn't possibly when on furlough but that's not the case. Unite is also spreading misinformation saying all 42,000 employees are having their contracts ripped up, again, not true.

I'd be surprised if pilots are made compulsory redundant. There'll be voluntary packages, some pilots will take temporary secondmenta back to the RAF but CR, unlikely. They couldn't crew the operation before this all kicked off.

Not sure what you're saying I said was sensationalist though. It was factually correct, although I should have clarified it was Eurofleet and Worldwide CSDs and CSLs as opposed to maincrew.

Does the RAF have a pilot shortage then?

Arion640 wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

Westerwaelder wrote:

You sound quite relaxed about your colleagues in the cabin losing their jobs? I am sure your statement about being paid more than FOs might be true for the top of their pay scale compared to pilots at the beginning of their career. If you are one of the pilots being let go, the Daily Mail or The Sun might be taking on staff with a sensationalist nature...

Not at all, I think they're being treated terribly. No one should have their contract ripped up and it goes to show that employee rights in the UK are way below par. They're also being badly let down by Unite though. Unite are refusing to negotiate claiming they couldn't possibly when on furlough but that's not the case. Unite is also spreading misinformation saying all 42,000 employees are having their contracts ripped up, again, not true.

I'd be surprised if pilots are made compulsory redundant. There'll be voluntary packages, some pilots will take temporary secondmenta back to the RAF but CR, unlikely. They couldn't crew the operation before this all kicked off.

Not sure what you're saying I said was sensationalist though. It was factually correct, although I should have clarified it was Eurofleet and Worldwide CSDs and CSLs as opposed to maincrew.

Does the RAF have a pilot shortage then?

I'm not sure - there may be a shortage of experience that ex-officers can provide. Not all roles will be flying jobs but the number going across from BA to the RAF will be 3 figures (I'd imagine low 3 figures) and they've been in a 3 way discussion with BA, RAF & BALPA for a little while now. It will be temporary, not a permanent move.

BA777FO wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

BA777FO wrote:

Not at all, I think they're being treated terribly. No one should have their contract ripped up and it goes to show that employee rights in the UK are way below par. They're also being badly let down by Unite though. Unite are refusing to negotiate claiming they couldn't possibly when on furlough but that's not the case. Unite is also spreading misinformation saying all 42,000 employees are having their contracts ripped up, again, not true.

I'd be surprised if pilots are made compulsory redundant. There'll be voluntary packages, some pilots will take temporary secondmenta back to the RAF but CR, unlikely. They couldn't crew the operation before this all kicked off.

Not sure what you're saying I said was sensationalist though. It was factually correct, although I should have clarified it was Eurofleet and Worldwide CSDs and CSLs as opposed to maincrew.

Does the RAF have a pilot shortage then?

I'm not sure - there may be a shortage of experience that ex-officers can provide. Not all roles will be flying jobs but the number going across from BA to the RAF will be 3 figures (I'd imagine low 3 figures) and they've been in a 3 way discussion with BA, RAF & BALPA for a little while now. It will be temporary, not a permanent move.

Interesting, thanks.

It’s time to buy IAG shares, could make a nice little investment.

chrisp390 wrote:

Rumor is the route was a very bad performer.

Please clarify which route you are referring to.

bb

Brickell305 wrote:

Junglejames wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

I think, honestly that’s delusional. BA are cutting 12,000 staff. This isn’t like 2001 or 2008.

Is that just like how they may not restart Gatwick ops? Oh wait......

BA said they may have to cut up to 12000 jobs, and may not restart Gatwick.
Well the threat to Gatwick never lasted long, and I suspect 12000 is massively exaggerated


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Did they announce definitively that LGW would not be cut?

Was mentioned on here somewhere.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

izbtmnhd wrote:

Tech isn’t slipping by this depression, we’re only at it’s infancy. Budgets have only begun to shrink and expenditures for tech are second only to labor at most organizations. Changes are coming for all sectors.

Maryland hasn’t yanked the subsidy yet. If they do, I agree BWI is in trouble. Yet if it stands I stick by my prediction BWI will be back before most other secondary US markets, even AUS.

Austin will be okay....

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news ... s_headline

lhrnue wrote:

With introducing a 14 day quarantine for arriving passengers in the UK (excluding the common travel area) from 8th of June, the British government just killed the British aviation and holiday industry.

And saved their citizens' lives, ya know, the more important part of their job. Now there will be brits left to take the flights next year

izbtmnhd wrote:

AUS is not coming back for a long time no matter how it performed in 2019. Same goes for MSY, PIT and PDX. I don’t see CHS ever coming back.

hohd wrote:

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Of course there's many more factors than just yield (e.g. available fleet, traffic flows, connections, contracts, tourism strength, etc) that weigh in favor of the large connecting hubs.

That, and until business travel in the post-COVID era can be indemnified against the possibility of infection during travel, we'll likely see int'l business lag far behind int'l leisure and ethnic/VFR traffic; thus no one really knows at this point how and through what means the airlines will respond. Not even the airlines themselves.

IrishAyes wrote:

BA has had tremendous success with niche markets like BNA, MSY, AUS

BA to commence Portland on September 2nd according to airline route.

Arion640 wrote:

BA to commence Portland on September 2nd according to airline route.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... t-20may20/

I still have my doubts on that actually happening, but it will be interesting to see.

If it does, perhaps it would be to stop DL from returning to the market (high probability of success in that regard); though then again, not sure why they'd care about defending a tertiary market to LON to that extent, considering the times.

LAX772LR wrote:

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Not surprising. People are willing to pay more for a non-stop rather than connecting through a congested superhub.

9Patch wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Not surprising. People are willing to pay more for a non-stop rather than connecting through a congested superhub.

it'd be surprising because they've been mum to the extent that they plan to restart far more established secondary (and even tertiary) operations; particularly seeing as the fleet may be more limited for the duration of the summer and early fall.

Heck, they haven't even announced when they plan to restart SAN yet IINM, and that (based on the limited public data available) was their most profitable N.American flight on a yield basis.

LAX772LR wrote:

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Of course there's many more factors than just yield (e.g. available fleet, traffic flows, connections, contracts, tourism strength, etc) that weigh in favor of the large connecting hubs.

That, and until business travel in the post-COVID era can be indemnified against the possibility of infection during travel, we'll likely see int'l business lag far behind int'l leisure and ethnic/VFR traffic; thus no one really knows at this point how and through what means the airlines will respond. Not even the airlines themselves.

Most personal budgets are trimmed and borders are still closed so int'l leisure travel issues won't be resolved for quite some time. Also, some people who travelled pre COVID-19 are now simply fearful of catching the virus so the US case count is likely a factor in dampening int'l VFR travel demand.

MSY, PDX, etc. are easily accessible through the existing OW hubs. It is what it is for now.

9Patch wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Not surprising. People are willing to pay more for a non-stop rather than connecting through a congested superhub.

Hubs aren't congested anymore.

izbtmnhd wrote:

9Patch wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Many of you don't seem to realize that some of the "3rd tier" routes actually performed better on yield basis than many of BA's longstanding routes, including several superhubs.

Not surprising. People are willing to pay more for a non-stop rather than connecting through a congested superhub.

Hubs aren't congested anymore.

That's true. But people are still willing to pay more for a non-stop rather than connecting through a hub.
The problem is finding a non-stop flight.
I fly between PDX and ANC a lot and the last time I looked there were no non-stop flights. You have to make a connection in SEA.

izbtmnhd wrote:

MSY, PDX, etc. are easily accessible through the existing OW hubs. It is what it is for now.

And yet, they just reconfirmed PDX being launched, and MSY has received no notification at this time that their flight will not be returning, so......

Posted in error

LAX772LR wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

MSY, PDX, etc. are easily accessible through the existing OW hubs. It is what it is for now.

And yet, they just reconfirmed PDX being launched, and MSY has received no notification at this time that their flight will not be returning, so......

...BA wants to lose more money?

izbtmnhd wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

MSY, PDX, etc. are easily accessible through the existing OW hubs. It is what it is for now.

And yet, they just reconfirmed PDX being launched, and MSY has received no notification at this time that their flight will not be returning, so......

...BA wants to lose more money?

Perhaps. Or, it could just be that they have a better grasp of what's optimally contributory to their network than do you.

I know which one I'd guess.

hohd wrote:

All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

AUS is a third tier city when it comes to European service. Smaller city and not a hub city. Economic downturn has hit AUS harder than other cities. Very easy to put the limited European traffic to AUS through a hub.

[photoid][/photoid]

LAX772LR wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

And yet, they just reconfirmed PDX being launched, and MSY has received no notification at this time that their flight will not be returning, so......

...BA wants to lose more money?

Perhaps. Or, it could just be that they have a better grasp of what's optimally contributory to their network than do you.

I know which one I'd guess.

Even you admitted this launch looks somewhat dubious.

The idea was to start PDX in June not September. Everyone will be back in (virtual) school and “second wave” talk will probably be in high gear. I’ll be surprised if it actually gets started unless there’s something in the belly driving it. There certainly could be.

Also, I never said MSY or PDX are gone forever but it makes more sense to drive traffic through hubs now.

I do have a feeling CHS is gone for a very, very long time though.

izbtmnhd wrote:

but it makes more sense to drive traffic through hubs now.

To which (again) I'll inform you that that's only an assumption on your part... not a factual statement.

You lack the numerical basis on which to claim that, specific to this (or really any) airline on a specific route.
We simply do not know yet whether and to what extent they will implement their strategy of fragmentation vs. hubbing upon return.

I mean, I get the generalization: I'm sure most airlines will indeed prefer to send the majority of secondary and tertiary TATL traffic through hubs. But no one here has the numbers to say that "XXX will resume nonstop" but "YYY 'makes more sense' through a hub"

I don't think BA has returned to SEA yet...maybe June?

CLT704 wrote:

hohd wrote:

All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

I'm curious, since when did BA start flying to CLT again?

Yes BA does not operate that route, but AA does and they have ATI. And AA will be back very soon operating that flight, if not already.. If for some reason, AA cannot, BA may take over that route as long as they have ATI.

Pi7472000 wrote:

hohd wrote:

All the first tier cities are already operational or soon will be (may be as soon as June) which includes New York, Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, DFW, Houston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

Others are second tier, might take longer to restart. (Aus, Phx, Den, San Diego, Baltimore, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa etc.). Although PHX might come back sooner as it is a hub to hub.

And Charleston, New Orleans and Pittsburgh which may be in the 3rd tier, may not ever return.

AUS is a third tier city when it comes to European service. Smaller city and not a hub city. Economic downturn has hit AUS harder than other cities. Very easy to put the limited European traffic to AUS through a hub.

Actually, the downturn has not affected AUS much as it is a tech center (not much oil and gas) and is the state capitol where so far there have been no cutbacks. AUS had Frankfurt, Amsterdam, and Paris service. BA LHR will come back first, others may be later, not sure about Paris though.

BA London Heathrow routes gone so far:
- Helsinki (HEL)
- Beirut (BEY)
- Leeds/Bradford (LBA)

Summer seasonal gone for S20 (unclear if they will return):
- Podgorica (TGD)
- Charleston (CHS)
- Calgary (YYC)

July 1, the schedules show (2) 777s and one A380 for Boston. For all intents and purposes, that’s about one month away. So if they are selling these flights that close-in, I have to believe they intend to run them.

ChrisNH38 wrote:

July 1, the schedules show (2) 777s and one A380 for Boston. For all intents and purposes, that’s about one month away. So if they are selling these flights that close-in, I have to believe they intend to run them.

Airlines are scheduling only about 2 weeks in advance. Highly unlikely that will be the operation come July.

What about on-board service? It has become a joke, are they going to do anything about it?

ChrisNH38 wrote:

July 1, the schedules show (2) 777s and one A380 for Boston. For all intents and purposes, that’s about one month away. So if they are selling these flights that close-in, I have to believe they intend to run them.

Airlines are being particularly bad at this. Most of them kept selling regular schedules only until a month in advance. In part because they depend on the constant changes in policies for entry in countries. In part cause they need to keep raising money I suspect, even if that means they pretty much know they will have to amend bookings via vouchers.

Opus99 wrote:

In another forum I hear BA intends on reducing their super high H by 20 seats in J Tsing it from 86 to 66. Can someone confirm if they aware of this?

The only high J aircraft with 86 seats are the 747’s, and the only way to remove a 20 J seat block would be from upstairs....

Has there been any news on BA LHR-BNA-LHR? I'm hoping this will stick around.

Curiousflyer wrote:

What about on-board service? It has become a joke, are they going to do anything about it?

What do you propose they "do"...?

Pi7472000 wrote:

AUS is a third tier city when it comes to European service. Smaller city and not a hub city. Economic downturn has hit AUS harder than other cities.

Utter nonsense. Austin is well positioned to weather the current economic headwinds, and will be among the first US communities to come back to full strength.

2.2 million people in the MSA, a horde of major tech firms, prominent HiEd institutions, and a bunch of high-net-worth individuals call Austin home.