|Quoting commavia (Reply 73):|
No. You're making the assumption that I'm making that assumption. I don't assume that United "wants," nor "needs" to be #1 in anything. What I'm assuming is that United wants to be sufficiently competitive at LAX to be relevant for passengers and ultimately make a profit. And what I'm suggesting is that if United keeps reducing and/or eliminating route after route at LAX while AA and Delta keep adding, eventually United will reach a point where it cannot even be competitive and relevant for some passengers - let alone #1, by any measure - in the market.
I am saying all of your comments imply that they do need to be in the top of the market to maintain what they have and my point is that they absolutely do not.
I manage another product in another market and I am happy to cede market in one place for another. I will also accept low growth and market share growth but if it allows me to invest in other areas where I can make more profit that is all that matters to me.
Your hypothesis is that unlimited growth by other carriers will be at the expense of UA
, how do you know that?
If they maintain a network from LAX
that their customers want then they will maintain share (and profit). Frankly, their customers may only care about a few markets and as long as they maintain those then will never have a problem. Will they grow substantially? Nope, but maybe that is not the plan for them nor is that required.
To you last sentence: Maybe UA
is targeting a specific customer type in LAX
and that is driving their decisions and they don't care about being relevant for those 'some'.
|Quoting ScottB (Reply 78):|
I think the criticisms are (1) that UA places RJ's in many markets which really ought to be mainline and in which most or all other competitors use mainline equipment and (2) that UA uses 50-seat RJ's on some very long flights and comfort becomes an issue. Both of these are consequences of pmUA's decision to park over a quarter of its domestic narrowbody fleet with no replacement about five years ago combined with pmCO's restrictive pilot scope which limited the carrier to 50-seat equipment at CO Express.
So they end up running about half their IAH-ATL flights on ERJ's, with nothing larger than an E175, while DL is all-mainline right now.
This has been discussed at length and UA
is making changes to address this exact fact by moving all A319 on the EWR
route to address this. It will be a competitive product to DL
(which I have flown many times on 717, which I think is not much better than the RJ
when you are not in Economy Comfort or 1st class, which I will never be).
But these planes have to come from somewhere, they only have so many mainline aircraft. Now that is a criticism that should be added to your list.
So my point is everyone will always be able to say this route 'should' be a mainline and maybe some should but the fleet does not allow it. Then UA
has the choice to run it on a product that people may not like or not run it at all. It now appears UA
is willing to make some of these hard choices and I like it.