Stage One – Layoffs in Milwaukee

Milwaukee would be gutted pretty quickly – everything from purchasing to load planning to crew scheduling to payroll to pass bureau to dispatch would leave. Some may be offered the chance to transfer, others out. There’s no reason for MKE to be anything more than a big station.

Reasoning: Cost savings earned through increased operational efficiency is the euphemism for this stage. It’s a given in any merger, and there’s no reason to think that MKE will “win” any of these jobs. To the victor goes the spoils.


Stage Two – Milwaukee Expansion

New flights will be added in the first several months – Seattle, San Francisco and Baltimore if it’s summer, Miami, Sarasota, perhaps West Palm Beach if it’s winter. So far so good.

Reasoning: They promise expansion, and I think these markets are just the type that AirTran will jump into. High volume in peak season.


Stage Three – Midwest Connect/Skyway Phased Out

Yes, in the current too-good-to-be-true offer they speak of keeping Midwest Connect. But down the road shortly the story will change and bye-bye Skyway.

Reasoning: They also emphatically say that if Midwest goes ahead with the M80 replacement OR THE 50-SEAT RJ PARTNERSHIP it will jeopardize the deal. I can see the issue with adding a new non-common type like A320s. But if Midwest Connect is a long-term go, why is it so awful if they contract for some 50-seat flying? To be frank, Midwest Connect is generally marginal (versus being a financial dog) because of the high yield local business traffic it carries. RJ’s are simply not compatible with the rock-bottom fares that AirTran sells. The 12 FRJ's will be disposed of.


Stage Four – Weakening Support in Milwaukee

AirTran’s support in Milwaukee will erode steadily over time compared to what Midwest enjoys now, hurting local traffic and pricing power.

Reasoning: (a) 30” 2x3 seating and no cookies because of no galley will quickly turn off passengers loyal to Midwest for better service today (b) Loss of Skyway markets will send more frequent business travelers to Northwest and United (c) Milwaukee is rather provincial in things like this, and more than a few passengers will spurn AirTran out of resentment, or at very least feel zero loyalty. Witness how US Bank continues to lose market share here after it changed from Firstar to US Bank and moved headquarters to MSP...and locallly-based M&I grows. And Firstar (the old First Wisconsin) was never loved in the way Midwest is.


Stage Five – Increased Competition

Cracks in the local Milwaukee market will open up new opportunities for other airlines now stunted or frozen out by Midwest’s loyalty.

Reasoning: The three issues in Stage Four will open the door in MKE for inroads by others, both new airlines or routes (like US E190s’ to DCA or AA* to LGA) as well as stepped-up competition from incumbents (like more flights or bigger planes on CO to Newark, UA or F9 to Denver, etc).


Stage Six – Overcapacity

AirTran will struggling to fill seats even as they offer more bottom-feeder long-haul connecting fares.

Reasoning: Low fares will stimulate traffic, but not enough to offset three big counterweights. (1) Forementioned loss in local traffic support and increased competition, (2) Loss of feed from places like Omaha, Appleton, Des Moines, Minneapolis (almost certain to go) etc, (3) 33% more seats to fill on every 717 flight – seats that must proportionally be filled to support AirTran’s fare structure.


Stage Seven – Cutbacks

Newark will go, perhaps Philadelphia, and if they have not already gone, Omaha and Minneapolis too. Most 717 markets will see fewer flights than today, and some may be dropped seasonally. This will lead to further inroads by competitors (like AA to DFW).

Reasoning: This has been AirTran’s standard method of operation. AirTran has shown us again and again recently they are only too willing to severely cut or simply dump business markets in low-leisure-traffic season.

Within a couple years, here’s the sort of summer schedule I’d suspect we’ll see out of AirTran if they win Midwest:

LAX 2
SFO 1
SEA 1
LAS 2
PHX 0
DEN 3
DFW 2
MCI 3
OMA 0
MSP 0
BOS 3
LGA 4
EWR 0
PHL 2
BWI 2
DCA 4
ATL 6
MCO 2
TPA 1

That’s 38 flights per day. Same for winter but shift more capacity to Florida and Arizona and away from PHL, BWI, SFO, SEA, etc. For comparison, Midwest is will have 61 weekday departures at MKE this winter, plus 5 MKE departures on AirTran.

The timing of these events could vary a bit, but I really see all seven stages happening with MKE ultimately worse off in multiple ways.

[Edited 2006-12-14 05:33:09]

This is the best analysis that I have seen on what will happen to MKE if this goes through. The question is, will there be an airline equivalent to M&I? Could ZW step up and become a larger player (Buy some 737's or 320's) (I can dream), or will MKE just become another midsized flyover city with mediocre service (reality strikes)?

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Stage One – Layoffs in Milwaukee

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Stage Three – Midwest Connect/Skyway Phased Out

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Stage Four – Weakening Support in Milwaukee

Stage 8. Hub Failure.

You can skip the rest of the gibberish.

Airtran has been looking for a seicnd hub, particularly in the mid-west... MDW has huge competition, and they are trying to grow IND a little. Growing a hub is hard to do and takes time, therefore, just buy one.

I would expect MKE to have an even larger role than it does now should the merger go through.

Knope, I hearby add you to my RR list ... that's a great analysis you just posted.

I have a feeling the FL cheerleaders in the other thread won't touch this one. You pretty much nailed it.

Though I could be wrong, in which case, look for another thread of petty bickering.

The thing I agree with most is the dismantling of regional ops. FL already tried it once and it didn't work out (though I've heard varying reasons other than the cost, including conflicts between FL and UA over the routes ZW was flying and for whom). AirTran would have to alter its operating philosophy in order to successfully integrate a regional product and somehow I don't see it happening.

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 3): Airtran has been looking for a seicnd hub, particularly in the mid-west... MDW has huge competition, and they are trying to grow IND a little. Growing a hub is hard to do and takes time, therefore, just buy one. I would expect MKE to have an even larger role than it does now should the merger go through.

No offense, but you seem unfamiliar with Milwaukee. Milwaukee is notorious for supporting local things, and turning their backs on things that leave town. My dad used to only drink Pabst, after 1996 he wouldn't take it for free. I had many friends with Firstar bank accounts, as soon as they moved to Minneapolis as US Bank, they switched to M&I or Associated Bank. Does it make sense? Not really, but it is how Milwaukee works and without the 50% O&D that YX currently has MKE can't even come close to supporting a hub.

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 3): would expect MKE to have an even larger role than it does now should the merger go through

I am familiar with how MKE is. I would suspect that for this to go through there will be some guarantees issued to the State of Wisconsin in regards to service levels and stakeholder value as well. If i remember MIdwest was given some tax incentives to stay and expand here a few years ago. I can see that happening again.
YX fliers are extremely loyal and would turn their back in a heartbeat if they reneged on any of what is promised.
With any hope if this goes through we will again get UA mainline here.
Regards,
Mark in MKE

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): But if Midwest Connect is a long-term go, why is it so awful if they contract for some 50-seat flying?

Because FL already had a really bad experience with a regional

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Reasoning: (a) 30” 2x3 seating and no cookies because of no galley will quickly turn off passengers loyal to Midwest for better service today

Since when does FL have no galleys?

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 3): Airtran has been looking for a seicnd hub, particularly in the mid-west... MDW has huge competition, and they are trying to grow IND a little. Growing a hub is hard to do and takes time, therefore, just buy one. I would expect MKE to have an even larger role than it does now should the merger go through.

Anyone else see MCI as a big part of this deal?

Quoting MUWarriors (Reply 5): No offense, but you seem unfamiliar with Milwaukee. Milwaukee is notorious for supporting local things, and turning their backs on things that leave town. My dad used to only drink Pabst, after 1996 he wouldn't take it for free. I had many friends with Firstar bank accounts, as soon as they moved to Minneapolis as US Bank, they switched to M&I or Associated Bank. Does it make sense? Not really, but it is how Milwaukee works and without the 50% O&D that YX currently has MKE can't even come close to supporting a hub.

couldn't agree more. Us Wisconsinites are stubborn.

And one more to keep in mind....

Stage X: AirTran is acquired, and all bets for Milwaukee are off. Buying YX alone won't protect AirTran itself from the wolves.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): But if Midwest Connect is a long-term go, why is it so awful if they contract for some 50-seat flying? Because FL already had a really bad experience with a regional

Exactly...and not because Air Wisconsin service levels were crap. In spite of all the spin and face-saving that the AirTran code sharing regional deal was scrapped because customers demanded an aircraft with business class, that AWAC wasn't reliable, that the 717 is as cheap or cheaper to operate than the CRJ (not per ASM but flat-out cheaper as a whole, which some claimed!), that was all just smoke. The fact is that RJ's economics are just not compatable with a low-fare pricing structure, and FL had to learn that the hard way. Talk of keeping Midwest Connect is just verbal window dressing.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Reasoning: (a) 30” 2x3 seating and no cookies because of no galley will quickly turn off passengers loyal to Midwest for better service today Since when does FL have no galleys?

AirTran has pretty much stripped everything they could out of the aircraft in order to cram in 117 seats. That includes stripping down the galley to bare bones. No ovens means no cookies and no hot BOB meals.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): Anyone else see MCI as a big part of this deal?

Except for the once-daily MCI-SFO flght which is Saver (and which relies heavily on thru traffic flying MKE-MCI-SFO) Kansas City only knows Signature and has built up based on that. Kansas City's fate will be a bit different than Milwaukee but ultimately no better. Midwest has 30 flights each weekday now.

SAT, PIT and perhaps BOS die right away. Not enough traffic for the 117-seat 717.

LAX, SAN, Florida suffer from Southwest's increased competition. With no draw of signature service and 33% more seats to try to fill on each 717, AirTran won't stick these out as Midwest does. Dropped, Reduced or seasonal-only flying is very likely.

LGA and DCA will have a slot or two poached by AirTran and moved to offer flights elsewhere like more ATL, meaning fewer MCI nonstops. At the same time US steps up their MCI-DCA offerings and AA returns to MCI-LGA.

Finally, the 8x/day MKE-MCI is cut to about 3x/day. This route today is largely about offering thru and connecting traffice on both ends. With fewer destinations served out of MKE and MCI (just dropping SAT alone eliminates a couple dozen people each day onboard MKE-MCI-MKE) there is far less need for flights between the two cities.

Kansas City probably ends up with roughly 12-15 flights to half a dozen or so cities (plus 3 or 4 to Atlanta).

[Edited 2006-12-14 13:18:25]

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): Anyone else see MCI as a big part of this deal?

I have to disagree with Knope2001 on this one. I can see some of the points about MKE as mentioned in the opening post. However, I believe the market is fragmented enough in MCI that FL is looking at it as a future hub/focus city. Obviously, MKE offers immediate returns, if they stick to the market, but MCI offers a central hub location at the heart of America and can be looked upon as an opportunity for growth and a place to park more of the incoming 737's beyond the ones going to MKE if the deal goes through.

MCI would ultimately see approximately 50-60 flights per day I believe with:

MCI-MKE x 4
MCI-ATL x 6
MCI-BWI x 3
MCI-MCO x 2
MCI-DCA x 2
MCI-DFW x 3
MCI-LAS x 2
MCI-LAX x 3
MCI-SAT x 2
MCI-FLL x 1
MCI-BOS x 2
MCI-LGA x 3
MCI-SFO x 2
MCI-PHL x 3
MCI-MDW x 2
MCI-IND x 3
MCI-DEN x 3
MCI-PHX x 2 (seasonal)

Just my $.02

Quoting Knope2001 (Thread starter): Stage Four � Weakening Support in Milwaukee

they said the same thing about American in St.Louis when they took over TWA.

people there are still flying American and there was not the big huge mass exodous to Southwest or othe carriers, as predicted.

so maybe YX will speed up thier decision and enter a contract with a 50 seat operator to grow Midexpress - that'll sure throw a wrench in FL's plans and based on what FL said in thier offer, pretty much kill the deal whcih is what YX wants...

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): Since when does FL have no galleys?

It is my understanding that only the ex-TW 717s have OVENS, which was probably the intended statement. The remainder of their new-Boeing purchases were ordered without ovens, thus eliminating the possibility for the decent, hot BOB options that YX offers.

Quoting STLGph (Reply 12): they said the same thing about American in St.Louis when they took over TWA. people there are still flying American and there was not the big huge mass exodous to Southwest or othe carriers, as predicted.

A bit different here though. Its going from a well liked and well supported premium product to a low cost sardine product. It'll be completely rejected.

Excellent analysis as always Knope. MKE doesn't offer anything geographically. This is a plane grab. This gives FL the jets they want right away instead of having to wait years for all the deliveries. Sure it isn't the 737's that have become so popular but those 717's are really nice.

For those that don't think that they'd give up that market share and wouldn't cut back just look what TZ did in IND. They completely left and this is their base. Or I guess you could say it was. If one airline can pull out of the home base completely don't think for a moment that another wouldn't cut back at its base.

Quoting Indy (Reply 16): For those that don't think that they'd give up that market share and wouldn't cut back just look what TZ did in IND. They completely left and this is their base. Or I guess you could say it was. If one airline can pull out of the home base completely don't think for a moment that another wouldn't cut back at its base.

TZ was also bankrupt and had the puppet master Southwest telling them when and where to go.

You people are way to worried about the fate of MKE.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 17): You people are way to worried about the fate of MKE.

I don't think anyone outside of maybe people with YX are worrying. This is simply discussing the fate of a base in a merger. No different than discussion of MEM if NW merges with someone.

Quoting DeltaDAWG (Reply 11):

Boy I sure hope you are right DeltaDawg. I am going to have to agree with Knope on this one. I just don't see AirTran offering that many flights out of MCI, with the exception of the big ones DCA, LGA, to name a few.

I just think this merger scenario would be a disaster to those who support the Midwest product. AirTran doesn't hold a candle to Midwest when it comes to customer service and satisfaction. I think ultimatley this merger would rip out vital air service to the communities of MCI and MKE. There is nothing positive out of this merger for those in support of Midwest.

Quoting Blhp68 (Reply 19): AirTran doesn't hold a candle to Midwest when it comes to customer service and satisfaction.

There is the good and bad when it comes to service from both airlines. I can only speak from my own personal experiences. They have been limited but here is what I had from both.

YX: Promised there would be garment boxes at the airport in MKE. None existed. We were promised kids meals on one of the flight. None existed. It isn't even that they ran out. They just don't have them on that route. We booked signature service and got saver service on one of the flights. That is the bad. The good included one of the FAs giving us a bag of cookies to take home for the kids. It also involved an excellent response by a rep to a comment card that was filled out.

FL: The phone reps are very friendly and appreciative. I received top notch service from their agents in IND. I arrived just under 3 hours early for my flight. My IND-ATL (with connection to MCO) flight was going to be late. Without even having to say a word he promptly booked me on the IND-MCO nonstop flight which at that time was a more expensive flight. The FAs were very friendly as well. The bad is their on time record is terrible and that to me is a big issue.

Quoting Indy (Reply 16): This is a plane grab.

      

Knope, great analysis, but as I've said over in the other thread, one (probably the only) thing I think you're missing is who will fill the void left by the eventual cuts, and I would argue that it would be less of a hodgepodge than you propose. I think if the merger goes through, NW comes back with a focus city at least as large as what they had in 2004. Especially as -900s and 175s come on line, NW will have a lot of capacity with which to grow.

NW is not a hometown carrier, but they have consistently been a big player in MKE. Faced with the choice between FL (who has destroyed the beloved YX) or NW, I think a lot of folks in MKE will (unhappily) choose NW, and I think the focus city could thrive.

By the way, what is the status of E-60 and E-61? Are they subleased? If FL were to vacate those gates, that would leave NW with even more room with which to grow (8 gates versus 6; I don't see CO moving).

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 17): You people are way to worried about the fate of MKE.

They are hoping to grab pax out of Chicago, but they are ignoring the fact that ORD will become a wide open airport as a result of modernization that will net a 60% increase in operational capacity - read SUPPLY. This will result in a short term dynamic during modernization where MKE is a viable option for Chicago travelers wilign to drive or ride a train for a low cost alternative. When the new capacity kicks in at ORD that market dynamic goes away. This coupled with an outright rejection of the AirTran product in MKE will end a hub at Milwaukee. People will travel for a better product, but they won't travel for an inferior product. But hey, what do I know.

As for Kansas City, Southwest and Midwest don't actually compete they compliment eachother with a balance of business class service and coach service. Their service produces an equilibrium where those willing to pay a little more use Midwest, and those not so willing use Southwest. Fares on the carriers balance as flights fill up where passengers have the option of either/or if they don't care about a business vs. coach product. If AirTran enters the market with the intent of operating MCI as a hub, Southwest will end them because these are the passengers Southwest depends on. This is not Chicago with a substantially higher level of O&D demand. Kansas City is a medium hub market, not a large hub market. AirTran will get slaughtered.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): that the 717 is as cheap or cheaper to operate than the CRJ (not per ASM but flat-out cheaper as a whole, which some claimed!), that was all just smoke. The fact is that RJ's economics are just not compatable with a low-fare pricing structure, and FL had to learn that the hard way

RJ economics aren't compatible with any sort of rational economic model. Which is part of your whole first statement. For AirTran specifically, the already low costs of the 717, taken together with the fact that they had to subsidize a regional carrier's profit margins meant that the 717 was flat out cheaper to operate.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): Talk of keeping Midwest Connect is just verbal window dressing.

Skyway is an O&O, which changes the economics of the whole thing.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): AirTran has pretty much stripped everything they could out of the aircraft in order to cram in 117 seats. That includes stripping down the galley to bare bones.

But you said no galley, which isn't true.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): Except for the once-daily MCI-SFO flght which is Saver (and which relies heavily on thru traffic flying MKE-MCI-SFO) Kansas City only knows Signature and has built up based on that. Kansas City's fate will be a bit different than Milwaukee but ultimately no better. Midwest has 30 flights each weekday now.

Given the non-existant fare premium that Midwest demands (they are often the absolute cheapest choice on LAX-MCI), it appears that it is the actual service, not service levels that drive them there.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): SAT, PIT and perhaps BOS die right away. Not enough traffic for the 117-seat 717.

Not enough traffic to BOS? FL would have a market on both ends as they have a focus city at BOS.

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 14): It is my understanding that only the ex-TW 717s have OVENS, which was probably the intended statement.

I am not a mind reader, particularly with just text. The OP said no galley.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 15): Its going from a well liked and well supported premium product to a low cost sardine product.

Sardine? I just flew AirTran and they were anything but a sardne product.

Quoting Indy (Reply 20): The bad is their on time record is terrible and that to me is a big issue.

That is what happens when you base in Atlanta.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Sardine? I just flew AirTran and they were anything but a sardne product.

30 inch pitch is certainly sardine compared to what YX offers.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Not enough traffic to BOS? FL would have a market on both ends as they have a focus city at BOS.

I'm not so sure about BOS-originating traffic. Most of the cities served from BOS (with the exception of ROC and PHL) are FL strongholds, and FL is what, the fourth-largest carrier at BOS (AA, B6, and DL are all bigger; not sure about US)?

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 24): 30 inch pitch is certainly sardine compared to what YX offers.

2 inches on the 717. That's it. Beyond the lack of a major leg room difference, you also have XM at every seat on AirTran, which is not offered on YX. You do have Business Class, which takes care of some of the people who actually do fly YX for the bigger seat.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 24): I'm not so sure about BOS-originating traffic. Most of the cities served from BOS (with the exception of ROC and PHL) are FL strongholds, and FL is what, the fourth-largest carrier at BOS (AA, B6, and DL are all bigger; not sure about US)?

There is a lot of inbreeding of FL's scheduling throughout their network, but the fact that BOS gets all that traffic says something. BTW, I think US is actually the largest carrier at BOS (AA, US and DL are constantly jockeying there). The point is that there is a strong awareness of FL in the Boston market.

I think its pretty well known that FL is looking to grow outside of ATL. They have been moderately suciessful with this in BWI and IND. With ATL growth being limited (no more gates available) They need to grow elsewhere and that elsewhere should also be somewhere that provides westcoast connections and also be somewhere where FL hyas a good presence (midwest). If F9 had went with Boeing, rather than airbus i imagine we'd been seeing an FL and F9 marriage rather than with YX.

While I believe MKE and MCI would see better service in terms of flight and passengers, it will not be the service they are used to. perhaps is FL made improvements and expanded their business class it could help a little.

I still like my idea of keeping the YX product but repositioning it to business markets allongside regular FL flights. Keep the signature 717s flying between places like LGA, EWR, BOS, ATL, DCA, MKE and MCI with the regualsr 717s to places like CAK, DAY, ROC, PHF and mixed in with the other big cities, then the 737s (w/ improved/expanded biz) can be for transcons and Florida.

I agree that it wont work out great if YX is turned into the FL product, but if they meet in the middle, it has some potential to be a viable competitor.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 25): You do have Business Class, which takes care of some of the people who actually do fly YX for the bigger seat.

Some vs. 85% of the passengers. Big issue. And yes, 30" pitch with a 17" wide seat on AirTramp vs. 34" pitch and a 21" wide seat is a substantial amount of personal space difference. As is an 18" wide seat in saver with 34" pitch vs. AirTramp.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 27): Some vs. 85% of the passengers. Big issue. And yes, 30" pitch with a 17" wide seat on AirTramp vs. 34" pitch and a 21" wide seat is a substantial amount of personal space difference. As is an 18" wide seat in saver with 34" pitch vs. AirTramp.

You know, if you tried to come across with some maturity, clarity, and lack of childish euphemisms for FL, it would do wonders to add to your questionable credibility.

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 28): You know, if you tried to come across with some maturity, clarity, and lack of childish euphemisms for FL, it would do wonders to add to your questionable credibility.

If your going to base your agreement/disagreement on euphamisms, then you are ignoring fact and focusing on hyperbole. There's nothing questionable about my credibility. I just don't care. If I chose to use terms less acceptable to you with regard to this issue, which is a completely foolish move by AirTran, then I will do so because I don't care. It's no more damaging to my credibility than the proposed merger is to AirTran's credibility, and I don't answer to share holders. So spare the bandwidth... Don't lecture me on how to discuss the issue or what you consider to be essential to credibility in a debate on an open forum where a good percentage of the planet doesn't care what we talk about or how we talk about it.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 25): The point is that there is a strong awareness of FL in the Boston market.

That's what I'm not so sure about. A lot of the college students I know in Boston (not a real good representative sample, I know) talk a lot more about B6 than FL when discussing low cost options, even though many of them are Chicagoans and can fly FL directly home and not B6.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 27): And yes, 30" pitch with a 17" wide seat on AirTramp vs. 34" pitch and a 21" wide seat is a substantial amount of personal space difference

Which you got wrong. On the 717, while YX does have a 21" wide seat, their seat pitch is only 32". Further, AirTran's seats are 18" wide. So other than the alarming number of fat people in our country who will notice a 3" width difference, I don't think it is all that much of an issue for the cost conscious consumer, particularly when 12 business class seats are still available at very reasonable cost.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 27): As is an 18" wide seat in saver with 34" pitch vs. AirTramp.

The Saver pitch is 33" and the width is 1 inch tighter than FL's at 17". Care to play again?

Quoting N1120A (Reply 31): So other than the alarming number of fat people in our country who will notice a 3" width difference,

It's not just the fat people who prefer a wider seat. You get more butt room, but you get more elbow and shoulder room too.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 31): On the 717, while YX does have a 21" wide seat, their seat pitch is only 32".

Quoting N1120A (Reply 31): The Saver pitch is 33" and the width is 1 inch tighter than FL's at 17". Care to play again?

Sure:

Both Saver and Signature flights offer extra legroom for added comfort. Pitch (the distance between seats) averages 33-34", depending on aircraft type – significantly more than the 30" most airlines average in coach class. The interior width of seat cushions on Midwest aircraft is 18" on Saver flights and 21" on Signature flights, compared with coach seating that is 17-18" wide on most airlines.

Midwest Connect's fleet of regional jets, Fairchild 328JETs, features 32 reclining leather seats with a 31" pitch, and the widest and tallest passenger cabins in their class.

http://www.midwestairlines.com/MAWeb...Experience/customerExperience.aspx

[Edited 2006-12-14 21:25:14]

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 29): So spare the bandwidth... Don't lecture me on how to discuss the issue or what you consider to be essential to credibility in a debate on an open forum where a good percentage of the planet doesn't care what we talk about or how we talk about it.

Naah, it's just great to see how you get more and more agitated, the more people tune you out. Name-calling, childish behavior just underscores my point.

I've been here almost seven years, and trolls like yourself come and go.

And, BTW, I'll lecture you all I wish.

XM radio?? Who cares!! Bring your Ipod!!!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): RJ economics aren't compatible with any sort of rational economic model. Which is part of your whole first statement. For AirTran specifically, the already low costs of the 717, taken together with the fact that they had to subsidize a regional carrier's profit margins meant that the 717 was flat out cheaper to operate. Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): Talk of keeping Midwest Connect is just verbal window dressing. Skyway is an O&O, which changes the economics of the whole thing

Make up your mind...first you say that RJ's economics are not compatable with any sort of rational economic model. Then you say that Skyway (the Midwest Connect RJ fleet) are O&D which changes the economics of the whole thing. Which is it?

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): Except for the once-daily MCI-SFO flght which is Saver (and which relies heavily on thru traffic flying MKE-MCI-SFO) Kansas City only knows Signature and has built up based on that. Kansas City's fate will be a bit different than Milwaukee but ultimately no better. Midwest has 30 flights each weekday now. Given the non-existant fare premium that Midwest demands (they are often the absolute cheapest choice on LAX-MCI), it appears that it is the actual service, not service levels that drive them there.

Most recent DoT data for MCI-LAX
$164.31 average fare Midwest
$149.19 average fare Southwest

Looks like a fare premium to me, but don't let facts get in your way.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 10): SAT, PIT and perhaps BOS die right away. Not enough traffic for the 117-seat 717. Not enough traffic to BOS? FL would have a market on both ends as they have a focus city at BOS.

MCI-BOS is gangbusters in summer and largely dries up in winter. Sounds to me like, say, DFW-BWI where AirTran should have have "a market on both ends" too. AirTran doesn't even have enough pull in winter to justify a single nonstop in the market. The fact is AirTran turns tail in markets just like this every winter.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 15): Its going from a well liked and well supported premium product to a low cost sardine product. Sardine? I just flew AirTran and they were anything but a sardne product.

Now that's amusing. AirTran 717's are by objection measure the tighest coach seats on a mainline aircraft in the US. AirTran will rip out Midwest's seats and cram in about 33% more passengers than Midwest does to the same plane. And that's *with* a few rows of 2x2 business class on FL.

If anyone just saw WTMJ's local newscast tonight, they know what kind of problems Airtran is going to have if the takeover happens. The reporter and anchors continually referred to Midwest as "our" airline, and used a number of other endearing terms not typically used when describing a corporation. Besides Miller and Harley, Midwest is the hometown business.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 36): The fact is AirTran turns tail in markets just like this every winter.

If FL discontinues MDW routes for the winter to run more planes to Florida, there's no way they'd keep routes to much smaller markets like MCI or MKE...

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 34): I've been here almost seven years, and trolls like yourself come and go.

All those years, and still a lack of knowledge about such matters? You'd think by now you'd have learned a thing or two about air transportation. Plenty of debate about it.

Troll? That's funny. Let me know when you need to be led to slaughter on an aviation issue again.

[Edited 2006-12-15 06:43:11]

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 34): Naah, it's just great to see how you get more and more agitated

try telling him that airlines build terminals - pretty sure I can still see the dust cloud left over from that explosion

Oh BTW, not that I'm picking sides, but he's no troll - I've been reading his diatribes, I mean posts steadily for a while now - I think he's been hiding behind the new SAN airport issues lately though...

JK 7E7...