I feel that CLT will see about 700 flights once the merger is done. I think CLT can connect markets more effectively than AA.

For CLT i also think AS would fly a daily flight from SEA because of there partnership.

Its obvious BA would come in. in the summer they could fly a 747 or a 777 which is probably more likely and in the winter a 763

LH is a different story i feel that they will keep CLT but we defiantly will not see the beautiful A340-600 in the summer.

I dout but maybe AB could come to CLT but it would probably be AA going to BER.

For current European flights

LHR- possibly 2 AA flights and 1 BA
FRA- 2 flights still in the summer because of AB
MAD- 1 daily but on a bigger plane like the A333 or 777
FCO- A333
DUB- I know some people think this will go but i believe it will stay

Could CLT possibly get some 777-200,777-300,737-800



Also CLT is getting a new 25 gate terminal, concourse B is getting extended and concourse E

What is everyone else thoughts?

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): FRA- 2 flights still in the summer because of AB

I think you mean DUS or BER.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): What is everyone else thoughts?

You're living in a fantasy world.

I'm sorry but what you are forecasting has virtually zero chance of happening. I mean all of it.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): I feel that CLT will see about 700 flights once the merger is done. I think CLT can connect markets more effectively than AA.

700 flights is a pipedream in a merger. For an airline to have that many flights and make money at a hub, there needs to be strong O&D as well as strong flow traffic. CLT has great connectivity, but is very lacking on the O&D end.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): For CLT i also think AS would fly a daily flight from SEA because of there partnership.

Doubt it. For starters, AS is having very limited fleet growth, so that 738 would have to come from somewhere else. And there are likely more pressing priorities for AS expansion than a thin route to Charlotte.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Its obvious BA would come in. in the summer they could fly a 747 or a 777 which is probably more likely and in the winter a 763

It's obvious? They might come in with a 777 during the summer, but that's it. CLT-LHR would likely be 2x/day. Wouldn't shock me if the new AA did all the lifting on this route though. 747 is way too much plane for CLT.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): LH is a different story i feel that they will keep CLT but we defiantly will not see the beautiful A340-600 in the summer.

Depends on how the BMW contract goes. A346 is likely gone though. This one will be interesting.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): I dout but maybe AB could come to CLT but it would probably be AA going to BER.

Highly doubtful AB comes to CLT. BER is not as extensive as a flow hub as Heathrow too; I'd expect MAD and LHR to play the role that FRA does right now out of CLT.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): LHR- possibly 2 AA flights and 1 BA

Likely 2 daily flights. Slots are still constrained on the Heathrow end. Most of the traffic that would be going over CLT can also connect in other viable places like PHL, JFK, MIA and ORD.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): FRA- 2 flights still in the summer because of AB

FRA would not keep 2 flights. For starters, AB's hub is not at FRA. Second, they lose the feed at FRA from LH. Third, the second flight is very new. I'd expect FRA to drop to a 767 or 332 once a day.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): MAD- 1 daily but on a bigger plane like the A333 or 777

Actually sounds realistic.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): FCO- A333

As does this one (at least for summer) due to cruise traffic.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): DUB- I know some people think this will go but i believe it will stay

DUB gets boosted solely by the fact that a 757 can fly this route.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Could CLT possibly get some 777-200,777-300,737-800

Possible on the 777-200 (though I wouldn't count on it), absolutely not a chance on the -300 (there's not the demand in CLT for both the seats, nor the International First Class product), absolutely on the 737-800.

I still think AS will come they can help feed and there flights can be feeder aswell

Just like AS in ATL

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 3):

Why do you think that's a lot we have 650 flights already, they'll open more markets in the Midwest

Quoting LOWS (Reply 1):

Yeah that's what I meant

Fantasy world ? Haha

In an eventual AA/US merger, I would see more services threatened from PHL.

For instance, PHL services to ATH, BCN, FCO, LIS, MAD or TLV... (I know some of them are just seasonal now)... I can't see why to keep duplicated services with JFK (only 150 miles away)... NYC is a much larger O&D market to any of those cities, and if US flies from there to PHL it is just because it is the only way they have to access the East Coast. With AA+JFK they don't have that problem anymore.

Quoting milemaster (Reply 2):

So you don't see a BA flight coming. Just read,... You people must have an issue with CLT

I'm sick of hearing how small the city is, US actually added more capacity over the summer and it handle the growth well.

CLT is arguably more strategically positioned for connecting passenger flows than ATL. US already has a huge operation at CLT, and AA does not have a hub that efficiently handles the same ultra-high volume of East Coast traffic. I don't see why any of the OP's plan is unrealistic.

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 8): I'm sick of hearing how small the city is, US actually added more capacity over the summer and it handle the growth well.

The CSA that CLT covers has around 2.5M people, and it's the 17th largest metropolitan area in the US. So it's not huge. But the market is pretty diverse, and I would think that business traffic would be very valuable given the headquarters or very large operations of Nucor, Lowe's, Duke Energy, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Goodrich, Sonic Automotive, Domtar, Chiquita, Dupont, BMW, and loads of furniture and clean energy companies. That's a lot of economic activity when compared to some larger cities which see more service (i.e. DTW, MSP, DFW, ATL).

Combining a diverse and prosperous O&D market with a strategically positioned East Coast connecting point makes the argument for CLT expansion more plausible.

JetBluefan1

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 10): CLT is arguably more strategically positioned for connecting passenger flows than ATL. US already has a huge operation at CLT, and AA does not have a hub that efficiently handles the same ultra-high volume of East Coast traffic. I don't see why any of the OP's plan is unrealistic.

AA had two mid-east US hubs in BNA and RDU. They decided (wisely) that non-stop East Coast traffic was more profitable than connecting flights. This was back when fares were higher and fuel cost less than half as much. I don't think they're dumb enough to do that again. That being said, CLT will remain a hub, it will just be pared down a bit like other post merger secondary hubs.

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 10): Combining a diverse and prosperous O&D market with a strategically positioned East Coast connecting point makes the argument for CLT expansion more plausible.

Except for the fact that CLT is not a prosperous O&D market, as others have stated. CLT has something like 7 seats for every 1 local pax. That's much higher than other major hubs. Connecting traffic just doesn't yield as much $. CLT is quite lucky that US can't really grow PHL, and that its costs are so low.

AA is great at shutting down hubs. Id expect CLT to be cut in half 5 years after the merger. Same goes for PHL.

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 8): I'm sick of hearing how small the city is, US actually added more capacity over the summer and it handle the growth well.

But is also hugely depending on connection traffic, not origin/destination traffic.

Quoting milemaster (Reply 9): Do we (random internet people) have a problem with CLT, or do you have an unhealthy obsession with an airport?

Go easy on him, he's just a kid.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 12):

Your funny dude. Your logic Is foolish I could see PHL getting cut

Quoting LOWS (Reply 13):

Yeah go easy on kids, (young adult)

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 3):

Also the reason I see AS coming is because there getting 739 deliveries and those can operate some 738 routes then they could send a 738 to CLT. Or a 737 if they want too. I just see it helping especially if pax are trying to get the PNW region

Quoting LOWS (Reply 1): You're living in a fantasy world.

  

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 4): I still think AS will come they can help feed and there flights can be feeder aswell

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 3): Doubt it. For starters, AS is having very limited fleet growth, so that 738 would have to come from somewhere else. And there are likely more pressing priorities for AS expansion than a thin route to Charlotte.

DeltAirlines has it correct. The issue isn't whether or not AS can contribute positively to the market, but the fact that they physically don't have enough planes to fly the route without taking something off another (likely more important) route.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Its obvious BA would come in. in the summer they could fly a 747 or a 777 which is probably more likely and in the winter a 763

Way too much plane, especially if you indicate that there would be two additional flights operated on AA metal.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Could CLT possibly get some 777-200,777-300,737-800

777-200 is a possibility, 777-300 is way out of CLT's league. There will likely be an influx of 738s.

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 3): Depends on how the BMW contract goes. A346 is likely gone though. This one will be interesting.

The combination of the region's business ties to Germany (which go beyond BMW and include companies like Freightliner) and the fact that AA is pretty weak in Germany make me think that CLT might keep an LH flight. It's a close call, though.

Quoting rduddji (Reply 10): AA had two mid-east US hubs in BNA and RDU. They decided (wisely) that non-stop East Coast traffic was more profitable than connecting flights.

Well, not really. They decided they wanted to move all of their marbles to MIA, which was wise, but this combined entity is large enough that it probably needs a hub between LGA and MIA.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 11): AA is great at shutting down hubs. Id expect CLT to be cut in half 5 years after the merger. Same goes for PHL.

Can you point to any facts that support your assertion?

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17): Well, not really. They decided they wanted to move all of their marbles to MIA, which was wise, but this combined entity is large enough that it probably needs a hub between LGA and MIA.

Sure, the combined company will need a supporting hub for domestic connections through the southeast. But it wont be as big as it is today. US has a limited hub network, and has to use CLT for non-optimal stuff that MIA will replace after the merge (S. America, Caribbean)

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17): Can you point to any facts that support your assertion?

Nope, you guys are correct. CLT will have 700 flights after this all settles out.

STL
SJU
BNA
RDU
SJC
RNO

Quoting AA94 (Reply 16):

alright its more reasonable to have 1 AA flight to LHR and 1 BA to LHR

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 18): But it wont be as big as it is today.

Agreed. My guess is 400-450 flights when it all shakes out. But I don't see how it CLT works at 250 or 300 daily flights. At that point, it almost has to be shut altogether, but you agree that AA needs CLT.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 18): US has a limited hub network, and has to use CLT for non-optimal stuff that MIA will replace after the merge (S. America, Caribbean)

True, but it's important to remember that CLT is much better connected domestically than is MIA, is lower cost, and is less out of the way for a lot of US-Caribbean connections. CLT will likely retain service and carry a lot of connecting traffic to bigger destinations like SJU, MBJ and PUJ. The service CLT will lose is to the likes of SKB and ANU, but many of those cities are less than daily and/or seasonal as it is, so it's not like we are talking about the loss of a tremendous number of flights.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 18): STL SJU BNA RDU SJC RNO

Please explain how each of those is analogous to CLT. STL is most similar, but there's not another huge AA hub 220 miles away from CLT.

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 9): The CSA that CLT covers has around 2.5M people, and it's the 17th largest metropolitan area in the US. So it's not huge.

2010 census shows it's 1.75M and 33rd place (about to be passed by Austin)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas

Yet, it is the 4th largest domestic hub in the U.S. in terms of seats (OAG Dec 2012). That's clearly to fill a geographic gap for US Airways that will no longer exist post merger.

Notable cities with a larger MSA and smaller domestic hubs:
(in bold are cities that have already lost their hub in a merger)

Los Angeles
Houston
Denver
Miami
Philadelphia
Boston
San Francisco
Detroit
Phoenix
Seattle
Minneapolis
San Diego
Tampa Bay
St. Louis
Pittsburgh
Portland
San Antonio
Sacramento
Orlando
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Kansas City
Las Vegas
Columbus

Doesn't look good, CLT.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): I feel that CLT will see about 700 flights once the merger is done. I think CLT can connect markets more effectively than AA.

CLT will see some shrinking - probably level off at about 450-500 flights. Mexico / Caribbean / Latin America will take a hit with a lot more traffic routed through MIA. You are correct that AA/BA would add/increase London service, but then you'd also lose some international markets. CLT-MUC would be toast for sure - probably service to FRA as well, considering AA's market share in Germany at the moment...

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20): Agreed. My guess is 400-450 flights when it all shakes out. But I don't see how it CLT works at 250 or 300 daily flights. At that point, it almost has to be shut altogether, but you agree that AA needs CLT.

     

@Southwest737500 - Good thread discussion - keep it up. Don't think it will turn out as well for CLT as you think, but you guys already have a lot of service there that people in other cities don't....

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20): Agreed. My guess is 400-450 flights when it all shakes out. But I don't see how it CLT works at 250 or 300 daily flights. At that point, it almost has to be shut altogether, but you agree that AA needs CLT.

I dont know if I could go so far as to say AA 'needs' CLT. It has a niche use in the future AA network. As miller22 pointed out above, it just isnt a big enough CSA to really bring home the bacon so to speak. Places like PHL/CLT will be useful as lower cost domestic connect hubs, and routing low fare traffic to LHR for further euro connections. Places like JFK/LGA/MIA are more expensive to operate from and will be able to focus more-so on O&D traffic.

Quoting rduddji (Reply 10): AA had two mid-east US hubs in BNA and RDU. They decided (wisely) that non-stop East Coast traffic was more profitable than connecting flights. This was back when fares were higher and fuel cost less than half as much. I don't think they're dumb enough to do that again. That being said, CLT will remain a hub, it will just be pared down a bit like other post merger secondary hubs.

keep in mind, back when RDU/BNA were started AA was competing against DL at ATL at this time, EA at ATL, CO at GSO, PI at CLT and essentially AA was also competing with themselves as well between RDU and BNA. Had they chosen to chose just BNA or RDU they may have fared better. The scenerio now if they gain CLT would probably be successful in mainating a southeast hub there since they basically would only be competing against DL at ATL.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 21): 2010 census shows it's 1.75M and 33rd place (about to be passed by Austin) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas Yet, it is the 4th largest domestic hub in the U.S. in terms of seats (OAG Dec 2012). That's clearly to fill a geographic gap for US Airways that will no longer exist post merger. Notable cities with a larger MSA and smaller domestic hubs: (in bold are cities that have already lost their hub in a merger) Los Angeles Houston Denver Miami Philadelphia Boston San Francisco Detroit Phoenix Seattle Minneapolis San Diego Tampa Bay St. Louis Pittsburgh Portland San Antonio Sacramento Orlando Cincinnati Cleveland Kansas City Las Vegas Columbus Doesn't look good, CLT.

not really comparable, we will be down to 3 legacy airlines, and CLT is the only other city in the southeast outside of ATL that can serve as a viable connecting hub in the region, much like SLC does along with DEN in the mountain west. CLT will be here to stay. AA(US) isnt going to just hand the keys over to the southeast to Delta. If they did I bet UA would be taking over the CLT real estate in a heartbeat.

It's seems this thread is dominated by two extremes (CLT becoming the next STL vs. CLT sustaining 700 flights a day).

The truth is going to be somewhere in between. I've gone through CLT's O&D stats and kept into consideration it being the only viable alternative for a non ATL hub in the Southeast. Also, lets throw out the talk of MSA data as it doesnt translate to O&D. Going into detail, below is what I see happening.

-400-450 flights a day with little or no domestic destination cuts. We would see frequency cuts across the board.
-The only European flights CLT can be asured of are LHR and FRA as these are the only European markets with any significant O&D to CLT. The second FRA flight is toast. Seasonal flights to CDG and MAD are certainly within the realm of possibility. As a fun little tidbit, the largest North Carolina-Europe market isn't from CLT. It's RDU-LHR. CLT-Europe is larger than RDU-Europe overall.
-Two flights a day to LHR, one from AA and one from BA, is possible.
-LH is done. What people don't realize is that LH isn't after CLT, but rather the connections it offers to various cities in the South. CLT-MUC is only a 30 passenger a day market. Does that mean AA could open it? Maybe, but they would not just serve CLT-MUC it would have to be coupled with another flight to MUC.
-We will see cuts to secondary Caribbean cities. CLT will keep all the majors including but not limited to: SJU, MBJ, STT, AUA, PUJ, CUN, etc. CLT does make a good alternative to MIA for large Caribbean markets.
-I cannot see CLT-GIG remaining. CLT-GRU will be given a better return time slot and kept.

Based on actual O&D data and what role CLT would play in the new AA, I believe this is the most likely scenario.

Interesting responses in this thread....

As an MIA fanboy, I'm a bit biased  

IMO CLT will level off at no more than 500 flights per day, probably around 400 about the same size if not somewhat bigger than MIA. It will mainly be used as an intra-southeast hub doing everything MIA cannot do. Those who say that the airport will become the next STL I think are quite far off. There is just too much money left on the table in that scenario. Now, 700 flights a day at CLT would be just a waste of aircraft. The only reason CLT is almost at that level now is because of the necessary role it plays in US's network. If US/AA merge then the role would still be important albeit smaller once MIA and in a smaller sense DFW are added into the equation.

Internationally I think that SA and the Caribbean will lose a bit of their service to MIA. Europe would see probably a net loss of 1 or 2 destinations but on the other hand, the frequency may go up as destinations like LHR or MAD see more service. FRA has a good chance of staying, it has become a large market and has a chance of a token LH service. FCO has been supported with no alliance on the other side so it may be downgauged because of it can be served through JFK or PHL. DUB like FCO would be downgauged due to the fact that it can be served in an easier way through JFK or PHL.

The debate here seems to be whether SA)">AA actually "needs" CLT. There are many pros and cons to keeping it.Time will tell.

Lastly we must remember US AND SA)">AA HAVE NOT MERGED YET. We don't know what's going on under the table but to everyone here (most likely people who don't have inside information) the only thing that has happened is that they have started to talk. That's it.

Between ORD/DFW/PHL/DCA/CLT there is a heck of a lot of capacity going to smaller Appalachin destinations in this area:

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=IND-STL-LIT-BHM-CLT-PIT-IND

[Edited 2012-12-15 14:27:37]

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 9): That's a lot of economic activity when compared to some larger cities which see more service (i.e. DTW, MSP, DFW, ATL).

While CLT does have a lot of HQs relative to it's size, you can't really say it has more economic activity than say the DFW Metroplex or the Twin Cities.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 25): Also, lets throw out the talk of MSA data as it doesnt translate to O&D. Going into detail, below is what I see happening.

MSA translates directly to O&D traffic in every market except for strong leisure markets (MCO,LAS,HNL, etc). I'd buy your argument if you were comparing cities such as MEX and ORD, but income per household is largely constant across the U.S. CLT is not a strong leisure market, and while it has some strong yields from the banking industry, those are limited largely to the New York area. You just can't squeeze more O&D out of a small MSA. Without a strong geographic argument, CLT will shrink to it's MSA size or about the 30th airport in the country. That's a long way to go when you consider they're currently the 4th largest domestic hub.

While everyone likes to think CLT has such a geographic advantage, in reality it's not that great, especially to American's network. Traffic along the Eastern seaboard can just as easily be split between PHL and MIA, which have much larger O&D bases and international bases. CLT is sitting in no man's land with PHL, JFK, and MIA. Strong performance on the NE/SE corridor from Jetblue and Spirit have proven you don't need to have a Carolinian hub to move people from the NE into Florida. The left-overs are some pretty low-yield stuff.

CLT will lose almost all international service. There will be no reason for it and it will be the imputis for it's reduction as a hub. US is forced to route all of their Latin America connections through CLT due to a lack of anything better. The epitome of "Anything Better" is MIA.

Anything East-bound will be routed through PHL, JFK, ORD, or even MIA for that matter. Anything Latin America-bound will go through MIA, which is a MASSIVE connector south. There is no Latin America airport with more connections to Latin America than MIA, and there's no need for a reliever airport. MIA is AA's one international gem. Inevitably, without any international importance, you lose your high yield reason for connecting some of the smaller cities, and you become a low-yield domestic hub. "Focus City" is just around the corner at that point.

In the near-term, I think LGW shifts to LHR and perhaps sees an upgrade to a 777 for routing purposes. Maybe AA could finally get away from the RDU-LHR subsidied service and add another frequency. If I were BA, I'd only consider throwing a 763 on CLT if I had one sitting around and only had to assign variable costs to the trip. It would be profitable for a while until the hub was reduced to steady-state, but it all comes down to the next best alternative to use an aircraft and a slot. Upgrade the 2nd PHL to a 777 or 747 and call it a day.

MUC and FRA are gonners, but nobody's questioning that. MAD...same thought as another LHR. Only if they have some spare aluminum sitting around. Especially for IB, you don't want to cannibalize MIA traffic.

SLC would be a good example of a future CLT, if it were surrounded by other DL hubs, but it is the furthest Northwest hub for DL, and as such, maintains it's hub status. But even if CLT were to shrink to the level of SLC, it would be about 1/2 the size it is now. I think that's the important point of reference that get's forgotten so often. CLT has grown well beyond it's means strictly because there was no other alternative for Airways.

I postulate it will shrink smaller than SLC over 5 years. About 1/4 to 1/3 of what it does today. 200-300 departures. That's still the larger than CVG, MEM, STL, and MEM. I think the reason CLT will still prove to be the better of the has-been hubs is because there will still be some geographic advantage, just much diminished from today.

I think CLE is your closest bet. Continually shrinking focus city with no significant international service but decent regional connectivity on much smaller aircraft.

Nothing against CLT, although it does tend to get personal for people it seems. I'd much rather see CLT stick around since it offers some diversity to our quickly dwindling options in this country. Then again, I'd love to see the MD-80 and 757 stick around for the same type of diversity, but economics trumps every time.

The good news is that CLT will inevitably be bombarded by LCCs just like STL. Ticket prices will eventually drop and while Charlottons may complain of the reduced non-stop service, they'll love the low fares. All will be good in the end.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 29):

I've seen the O&D figures and no, using CLTs MSA is not a good measure since CLT blows away almost every metro area around its size and some much larger in European O&D. CLT is a smaller metro area than both CLE, CVG, and STL, yet has much more O&D to Europe than any one of those.

LHR and FRA will be served. The O&D is strong enough to support those with connections on one end.

MUC is done. DUB is done. GIG is done. Half of its Caribbean network is done.

I don't see the argument for shutting down the hub other than people who want to keep AA as close to what it would have been. It's positioned well, it has decent O&D given its size, and would be free money to AA for the taking.

Is CLT over served right now? It is very much so, but some right sizing would fix that fast.

[Edited 2012-12-15 16:31:23]

First, everyone go easy on him..he's just a kid and a CLT Fanboy.

As a fellow CLT Fanboy, I'll give my 5 cents on what I believe will happen.

Internationally:

DUB-Gone
LHR-1 daily AA/1 daily BA
FRA-1 daily
CDG-1 daily seasonal
FCO-1 daily seasonal
MAD-Will stay, however it is hard to tell whether it will become year-round
MUC-Again, hard to tell. This route does have O/D, and multiple corporate contracts tied into it. I personally believe LH will attempt to stick it out...without an A346 but with a A333. If LH were to drop it, I'm willing to be AA would pick it up.

In addition, I could see LH switching their MUC flight to a FRA flight with a 2 class A343.

ANU, SKB, UVF, BGI, and STX are all dropped.

Domestically, I don't think we will see many changes, except a large number of mainline flights today will likely shift to all Express. Smaller cities in the Midwest may get axed, as maybe SMF and PDX.

I love how people (mainly in RDU and to a certain extent MIA/ATL) love to trash talk CLT and the City of Charlotte as a whole, when 99% of those people have never visited the QC.

There are a number of reasons for CLT's low O/D, and low metro population numbers. Unfortunately for CLT, CLT is smack dab in the middle of other medium size airports, often with lower fares(GSO, GSP, CAE, RDU). I myself have driven to GSP, and AVL just to get a lower fare. Several other folks from CLT do the same.

Personally, I see an operation of about 500-550 flights per day. I wish the current CLT airport administration would see this, unfortunately they are under the impression that CLT will grow post merger.

Edit: I left out GIG! GIG will be dropped or added as a tag.

[Edited 2012-12-15 17:01:45]

Edit 2: I just keep leaving stuff out...

CLT is not STL/CLE/PIT. No offense to the people of those three cities (awesome places to visit BTW), but STL/CLE/PIT aren't exactly happening towns that people are migrating to, which is kind of the case for CLT.

It would be a very unwise decision for AA to give the Southeast region to DL. (I wouldn't really call MIA southeast). If AA were to pull out or drastically reduce CLT service, someone (UA) would move in.

[Edited 2012-12-15 17:06:30]

I'm in Mexico City away from my home computer but tomorrow when I fly home I'll post CLT's international O&D data including PDEW data to the largest international destinations.

That should bring a lot of perspective to this thread (for both the CLT fanboys as well as the CLT haters).

Quoting miller22 (Reply 21): Yet, it is the 4th largest domestic hub in the U.S. in terms of seats (OAG Dec 2012). That's clearly to fill a geographic gap for US Airways that will no longer exist post merger.

How will the geographic gap be filled post merger?

AA has no hub in the southeast and MIA does not work for that. It is perfectly positioned for connecting traffic to South America, Central America, and the Caribean but cannot be a major domestic transfer airport its location is horrible. MIA poses no threat to CLT for domestic service. The whole point of mergers is to be more efficient so it is realistic to assume all airports will see some cuts to increase efficiency but i see no threat to CLT by this merger. I see a little bit leaner CLT possibly but there is no threat that it will loose its hub status. It will probably become more domestic focused but i see no threat of it being dehubbed or anything.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17): ut this combined entity is large enough that it probably needs a hub between LGA and MIA.

Hubs at LGA, MIA and CLT have nothing in common though. They are totally unrelated. CLT is a connect location, a vital asset. Some traffic can be served nonstop; a tiny minority of city pairs (5% of all possible city pairs). Nonstop's fraction of overall traffic is larger... about 50%. The other ~95% of city pairs, and ~50% of the market volume, must be served via connect hubs like ATL, CLT, DFW and the like.

CLT is a jewel... you don't just give things like that up.

[Edited 2012-12-15 18:15:05]

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 30): LHR and FRA will be served. The O&D is strong enough to support those with connections on one end.

An interesting question to me is whether AA would/will fly CLT-FRA. Certainly, AA's track record in FRA is not good, and its other hubs are much stronger local markets to Europe/Germany. I think CLT-FRA could probably support LH if AA does not fly it.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 21): Notable cities with a larger MSA and smaller domestic hubs: (in bold are cities that have already lost their hub in a merger) Los Angeles Houston Denver Miami Philadelphia Boston San Francisco Detroit Phoenix Seattle Minneapolis San Diego Tampa Bay St. Louis Pittsburgh Portland San Antonio Sacramento Orlando Cincinnati Cleveland Kansas City Las Vegas Columbus Doesn't look good, CLT.

Using this logic, shouldn't SLC have been killed off years ago by DL?

Quoting miller22 (Reply 21): Yet, it is the 4th largest domestic hub in the U.S. in terms of seats (OAG Dec 2012). That's clearly to fill a geographic gap for US Airways that will no longer exist post merger.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 29): SLC would be a good example of a future CLT, if it were surrounded by other DL hubs, but it is the furthest Northwest hub for DL, and as such, maintains it's hub status. But even if CLT were to shrink to the level of SLC, it would be about 1/2 the size it is now. I think that's the important point of reference that get's forgotten so often. CLT has grown well beyond it's means strictly because there was no other alternative for Airways.

The biggest difference, though, is that CLT serves a much more populous and fast growing region in its own backyard. That "geographic gap" will still exist post-merger. MIA can't accomplish that as a domestic hub.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 31): I love how people (mainly in RDU and to a certain extent MIA/ATL) love to trash talk CLT and the City of Charlotte as a whole, when 99% of those people have never visited the QC.

And of course the inverse of this is also true... Just because you don't like what others have to say means they're "trash talking" your town.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 31): There are a number of reasons for CLT's low O/D, and low metro population numbers. Unfortunately for CLT, CLT is smack dab in the middle of other medium size airports, often with lower fares(GSO, GSP, CAE, RDU). I myself have driven to GSP, and AVL just to get a lower fare. Several other folks from CLT do the same.

That is also true for nearly every airport in the US (and beyond).

[Edited 2012-12-15 20:27:24]

[Edited 2012-12-15 20:28:32]

I actually renewed my subscription to get into this conversation

Quoting rduddji (Reply 10): That being said, CLT will remain a hub, it will just be pared down a bit like other post merger secondary hubs.

Why should it be paired down? CLT doesnt compete with existing AA's hubs too much. Not DFW, ORD or MIA. MIA perhaps more than other hubs.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 11): AA is great at shutting down hubs. Id expect CLT to be cut in half 5 years after the merger. Same goes for PHL.

The signage will say AA, but it will be US running the show.

CLT is the 3rd largest hub in the USA, and probably highly profitable as it is only only of two hubs in the SE.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 22): CLT will see some shrinking - probably level off at about 450-500 flights. Mexico / Caribbean / Latin America will take a hit with a lot more traffic routed through MIA.

CLT has unique connections that MIA doesnt have and the connecting yields thru CLT will be higher than thru MIA based on the composition of the connecting traffic. For example AA wont be flying OMA or DSM to MIA.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 23): I dont know if I could go so far as to say AA 'needs' CLT. It has a niche use in the future AA network.

Yes, the combined carrier will NEED CLT and CLT will be more than a niche in AA's system. It will be the 2nd largest hub and will remain so.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 30): I've seen the O&D figures and no, using CLTs MSA is not a good measure since CLT blows away almost every metro area around its size and some much larger in European O&D.

Ok. I'll bite.

According to PaxIS for the month of September, 2012, CLT had a total of 387,270 O&D passengers. This is #31 in the U.S. and they are the 33rd largest MSA. Pretty darn close. They fell behind some notable markets such as PHL, MDW, PDX, SAN, and STL. RDU is #36, for what it's worth.

DB1B domestic-only data from Q2 shows CLT at #28 in the U.S.

To put this into perspective, CLT carried 1/3 as many O&D passengers within the domestic U.S. as Denver. St. Louis and Salt Lake City both carried more domestic O&D passengers than CLT.

So this tells us two things:

1. As expected, CLT does much better domestically than internationally
2. Either way, the true economic clout of CLT as an O&D market is behind all other primary and secondary hubs.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33): How will the geographic gap be filled post merger?

There will be a geographic gap, but it will be much smaller than people think. American has been a power house in the Southeast ever since Pan Am's exit and CLT doesn't add much. The only connections CLT will add to a merged carrier are Virginia and the Carolina's to Northern Florida. Anything North of Virginia is PHL territory. South Florida and further South all belong to MIA. Simply put, the catchment area for CLT as a hub will still exist, but instead of it being Boston to the Caribbean and South America, it will be Virginia to North Florida. Everything else will be handled through American's legacy network.

Don't forget, too, that CLT has been Airways' springboard to the West to compensate for their lack of a midwest hub. We haven't talked about that yet, but those connections will go fast, and with it a further hit to the critical mass needed from all the other flights that used to feed those flights. So, we've lost West-Coast, Latin American, and European feed to better suited hubs. That leaves a very small catchment area about the size of CLE, which is entirely regional in nature. I would expect regional flights only, and long-haul connections to all of the major population centers in the country. LAX, SEA, SFO, SAN, LAS, DEN, etc.

But the CLT airport will be fine. O&D traffic may even grow as prices fall from more competition and likewise, revenues will hold steady. I'm not suggesting Armageddon for CLT, but right now it is US's largest hub and the 4th largest hub in the country. It seems clear CLT will fit into the new network behind DFW, ORD, JFK, PHL, MIA, LAX, and probably PHX. A small regional hub, but nowhere near the size it is today.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 38): The signage will say AA, but it will be US running the show.

The costs would be AA's, not US's. How does that factor into your logic?

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): LH is a different story i feel that they will keep CLT but we defiantly will not see the beautiful A340-600 in the summer.

What will the singing lady at the spotting area do if LH leaves????

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Could CLT possibly get some 777-200,777-300,737-800

777-200 maybe from BA, 777-300 NOOOOOPE, sure a lot of 737-800s would come

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 11): AA is great at shutting down hubs. Id expect CLT to be cut in half 5 years after the merger. Same goes for PHL.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 18): Nope, you guys are correct. CLT will have 700 flights after this all settles out. STL SJU BNA RDU SJC RNO

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 23): I dont know if I could go so far as to say AA 'needs' CLT.

Am I missing the boat here? I thought US was trying to purchase AA, not the other way around. If US buys AA, they won't shut down CLT - that is their bread and butter.

I think we'll see the A319s show up in ORD along with a lot of CR9s, E170/75s and E190s. AA desperately needs an aircraft that size in ORD.

Some 738s exit ORD, but not all.

738s replacing A321s in CLT and PHL on transcons

A321s doing MIA-JFK/LGA/BOS/DCA/PHL

Quoting rduddji (Reply 37): And of course the inverse of this is also true... Just because you don't like what others have to say means they're "trash talking" your town.

And I wasn't talking directly about you, sorry if you took offense. I have just met many people from the RDU area who for some reason have to trash talk Charlotte and compare it to the RDU area in every single way.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 39): It seems clear CLT will fit into the new network behind DFW, ORD, JFK, PHL, MIA, LAX, and probably PHX. A small regional hub, but nowhere near the size it is today.

I have a hard time seeing CLT as the smallest hub in the future AA/US. I'd say it would probably be second or third. Equal to MIA, but possibly with more flights.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 41): What will the singing lady at the spotting area do if LH leaves????

  
I've noticed she only comes if its an A34X.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 22): Mexico / Caribbean / Latin America will take a hit with a lot more traffic routed through MIA.

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 26): Internationally I think that SA and the Caribbean will lose a bit of their service to MIA.

On the contrary, those AA Latin/Caribbean bound pax who are currently routed via MIA and live north of CLT would now be able to be routed via CLT instead of MIA. CLT has much better connections and frequencies on the domestic end to points north and west than MIA.

This frees up capacity in MIA to concentrate on more lucrative O&D passengers from MIA to the Caribbean and S. America, which is a huge local market.

I can't count how many times CLT has proven the doubters wrong.

My prediction is a slight drop in flights due to consolidation to around 550-600 flights a day. Then hold steady at 600 - 650 until major construction projects and the proposed fourth parallel runway is completed. Then a dramatic expansion to 800+ flights.

Aircraft will be roughly be the same as today. Hub to hub traffic such as CLT to MIA, DFW, PHL might see a bump up from A320, MD-80, 737-400 sized aircraft to 757 or A321 with the ocasional widebody such as a 767 or A330.

LHR will likely go 777-200. If RDU-LHR remains it might switch to a A330-200. Count on BA coming back to CLT but with the 787.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): What is everyone else thoughts?

After the dust settles I see CLT with between 400-500 flights operating almost solely as a north-south-southeast domestic hub.

I see LHR (1-2x daily), CDG (seasonal-- this merger doesn't change AA's or US's current competitive position at CDG all that much), FRA and MAD in addition to some of the major destination spots in the Caribbean, with the smaller secondary markets being cut.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): I feel that CLT will see about 700 flights once the merger is done.

Highly unrealistic as capacity between AA and US will cut by a good amount, mergers are not about growing, they're about eliminating the competition, lowering capacity and increasing pricing power.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): Its obvious BA would come in.

They very well may or they may very well not, AA and BA have a j/v so it all depends on them both to side the best metal mix for the route.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): LHR- possibly 2 AA flights and 1 BA

Probably 2x daily flights at most between the two carriers, no need to dedicate 3 slots to a route carrying largely connecting traffic when more lucrative O&D traffic in other markets would probably be more profitable.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): FRA- 2 flights still in the summer because of AB

As pointed out above, AB provides no sizable feed at FRA, the loss of Star Alliance connectivity will bring this route to 1x daily for certain.

Quoting southwest737500 (Thread starter): MAD- 1 daily but on a bigger plane like the A333 or 777

Agree.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 30): I don't see the argument for shutting down the hub other than people who want to keep AA as close to what it would have been. It's positioned well, it has decent O&D given its size, and would be free money to AA for the taking.

I agree, it will be right-sized to an extent, but will still play a solid role in the network.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 34): CLT is a jewel... you don't just give things like that up.

First off, I don't believe CLT is in danger of being de-hubbed and I'm sure it's profitable for US, but if it's the case that CLT is somehow this "jewel", why aren't airlines beating down US's door to merge with them instead of the other way around? CLT is an incidentally nice addition for AA, but no more than that. The primary motivation for almost all mergers is elimination of competition, not net expansion and growth.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 38): Why should it be paired down?

Route rationalizations between all the new hubs and net capacity reductions system wide.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 38): but it will be US running the show.

This detail remains to be seen at this point.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 45): A lot of traffic flow that US must force via CLT (especially Southeast/Northeast-West) flows a lot better via DFW.

   Precisely. This is the area most vulnerable to any significant reduction at CLT.

Quoting miller22 (Reply 39): There will be a geographic gap, but it will be much smaller than people think. American has been a power house in the Southeast ever since Pan Am's exit and CLT doesn't add much.

Presumably, you mean a powerhouse in the Southeast to Latin America and the Caribbean because of Pan Am's exit. Otherwise, I don't think AA is particularly strong in the southeastern U.S.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 45): CLT suffer because of DFW, not MIA. A lot of traffic flow that US must force via CLT (especially Southeast/Northeast-West) flows a lot better via DFW.

Now that I agree with. US has never had strong east-west flows out of CLT. They would instantly become much more competitive.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 47): First off, I don't believe CLT is in danger of being de-hubbed and I'm sure it's profitable for US, but if it's the case that CLT is somehow this "jewel", why aren't airlines beating down US's door to merge with them instead of the other way around? CLT is an incidentally nice addition for AA, but no more than that. The primary motivation for almost all mergers is elimination of competition, not net expansion and growth.

at one time UA wanted US and CLT was a big factor. DL wouldnt want it because they have ATL.