Hawaiian Airlines Considering 2nd Hub Out Of Hawaii

chrisp390 · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:20 pm

In yesterdays earnings call it looked like management stated they are looking at locations they could replicate a hub similar to their operation in HNL out of Hawaii. More information here http://goo.gl/mjkOnR

LAX772LR · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:25 pm

Quote:
Hawaiian Airlines responded by saying it did not see itself flying within the lower 48 states, however it saw its model of using Hawaii to connect markets as a successful one and would look at possibilities to replicate it elsewhere. A second hub would be a huge development for Hawaiian Airlines and reduce its reliance on the single market of Hawaii.

Well, if they aren't going to use the Contiguous 48 nor Hawaii... then that leaves Alaska, US territories in Asia/Pacific, or Puerto Rico.

The latter being the only realistic one for hub capability, but B6 might have something to say about it.
Unless, of course, they were to cooperate with B6 in some regard.

chrisp390 · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:34 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 1):

I do believe PR would make the most sense, however maybe a partnership or something could be worked out with JetBlue? The two do partner with Hawaiians flight to JFK

azjubilee · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:35 pm

That's not what transpired and it is a poorly written article. The thread title is equally as misleading and should be changed. The management was asked if they'd expand point to point within the lower 48 States and the answer was no. Then they said this:

"I think if we look kind of more into the future there's a question about whether the business model that we have centered on Hawaii which is we think has been very, very successful over the years is one that we could replicate elsewhere. I think that is a different strategic question beyond Hawaii could be examined in a long term strategy analysis."

What was said is a far cry from what this article and now thread, is implying. Another example of completely distorting what was said and applying liberal amounts of opinion, conjecture and crazy ideas.

[Edited 2015-10-20 16:43:44]

airportugal310 · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:45 pm

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 3):
That's not what transpired and it is a poorly written article.

Agreed. If you actually listen to the response, it's almost pretty clear in his voice that it won't happen

chrisp390 · Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:59 pm

Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 4):

I have not heard or read the call myself and therefore cannot comment on that, however I think it is an interesting possibility if there is any merit to it.

coronado · Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:35 am

I could see Hawaiian investors looking to have them set up a hub in Guam and take on United during their periods of weakness.

National757 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:07 am

Quoting Coronado (Reply 6):
I could see Hawaiian investors looking to have them set up a hub in Guam and take on United during their periods of weakness.

Excellent point! I'd like to expand on this further. Why doesn't Hawaiian already have a large presence in Guam? Too small of a market? Lack of 737/A320 sized aircraft?

UA has (inherited from CO Air Mike) a market with little competition. If HA was looking to expand, Guam seems logical. Hawaiian could be the airline of the Pacific, not just Hawai'i.

[Edited 2015-10-20 18:08:28]

mwh787 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:08 am

Just dreaming a moment. How about a hub in ANC could send pax and freight Aisia to Europe, and America's not sure of the freight capabilities of their A330's... of course this could facilitate a merger with AS

coronado · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:14 am

Quoting National757 (Reply 7):
doesn't Hawaiian already have a large presence in Guam? Too small of a market? Lack of 737/A320 sized aircraft?

A321neos' s arriving soon! IIRC starting in 2017. I think the order is for 16 of them. Ideal aircraft for setting up a Guam western Pacific Hub plus on the Guam HNL run I tend to think HA would get first dibs over United which has only been a name in the market for 2-3 years even if the planes look like Continental.

[Edited 2015-10-20 18:24:03]

United1 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:31 am

Quoting National757 (Reply 7):
Excellent point! I'd like to expand on this further. Why doesn't Hawaiian already have a large presence in Guam? Too small of a market? Lack of 737/A320 sized aircraft?

There was another thread about UAs presence in GUM not to long ago...in a nutshell most of the traffic in GUM is O& D heading to and from Japan (and other major cities in Asia.) While you can connect in GUM there isn't a lot of demand for people to.

Quoting Coronado (Reply 6):
take on United during their periods of weakness.

Not sure exactly what "period of weakness" you are referring to...UA is expected to report profits of a bit north of 1.7 Billion this quarter on Thursday. While UA does have a bit of work to do on the customer service and operations side of the house financially UA is running at full steam...

Taking on UA at GUM (outside of maybe GUM-HNL) would be a huge risk for HA and would probably bleed money for years....

Polot · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:42 am

Quoting Coronado (Reply 9):
A321neos' s arriving soon! IIRC starting in 2017. I think the order is for 16 of them. Ideal aircraft for setting up a Guam western Pacific Hub plus on the Guam HNL run I tend to think HA would get first dibs over United which has only been a name in the market for 2-3 years even if the planes look like Continental.

The A321neos are likely going to be used for Hawaii-US service. I'm not sure why you think HA would automatically be the favorite over UA, it would come to price and I doubt the market is big enough for 2 major players at GUM, which leads too...

Quoting United1 (Reply 10):

Not sure exactly what "period of weakness" you are referring to...UA is expected to report profits of a bit north of 1.7 Billion this quarter on Thursday. While UA does have a bit of work to do on the customer service and operations side of the house financially UA is running at full steam...

this. UA, financially, is doing great. Believe it or not just because you are not DL or AA does not mean you are on the verge of going bankrupt

They are not some mortally wounded carrier that would be easy to take down.

United1 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:50 am

Quoting Polot (Reply 11):
I'm not sure why you think HA would automatically be the favorite over UA,

Indeed....it's been a couple of years since I checked the numbers and its possible that UA and HA have switched places but up until a few years ago at least the largest airline to Hawaii was not Hawaiian....

I think a good strategy for HA might be to try and work with some of the South Pacific states like FIJ or PPT...even American Samoa.

bluejuice · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:02 am

Quoting National757 (Reply 7):
Hawaiian could be the airline of the Pacific, not just Hawai'i.

[DonsArmchairAirlineCEOhat]
I have thought about that too. Would there be enough passenger and cargo demand today to sustain destinations such as NAN, PPT, GUM and former destinations such as APA, TBU, and RAR? HNL seems well situated to serve the South Pacific from the north and east the way New Zealand does from the south and west. The new Airbus neos seem well suited for these routes.
[/DonsArmchairAirlineCEOhat]

[Edited 2015-10-20 20:03:11]

TWA772LR · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:40 am

How about American Samoa?

RWA380 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:48 am

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 3):
"I think if we look kind of more into the future there's a question about whether the business model that we have centered on Hawaii which is we think has been very, very successful over the years is one that we could replicate elsewhere. I think that is a different strategic question beyond Hawaii could be examined in a long term strategy analysis."

I can not see one environment where HA would be as successful as they are in their own backyard. Honestly when I opened this thread, I expected to see either a OGG or KOA expansion project.

Quoting Polot (Reply 11):
I doubt the market is big enough for 2 major players at GUM,

Of course, that is why no one else has stayed on the HNL-GUM route longer than CO/UA, there have been at least three other carriers I know of & one more I suspect, but NW, BN & HA have all flown the route & they have all left.

Quoting bluejuice (Reply 13):
I have thought about that too. Would there be enough passenger and cargo demand today to sustain destinations such as NAN, PPT, GUM and former destinations such as APA, TBU, and RAR? HNL seems well situated to serve the South Pacific from the north and east the way New Zealand does from the south and west. The new Airbus neos seem well suited for these routes

IIRC, PPT is going to be a 321neo station & it wouldn't surprise me if HA picked up a dropped Island Nation or two from their past route network, where the DC-8's were too much aircraft, maybe the 321neo will be the bird that will allow these routes to regain profitability.

malaysia · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:17 am

How about ITO? the terminal looks under used

slcdeltarumd11 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:38 am

Would probably be easy to take Uniteds Guam hub if they really went all in. I dont think long term United even wants a hub out of there, they just dont want to deal with the political backlash and promises they made to keep it plus it is probably making good money like everything with oil being pretty low. If Hawaii rolls in that gives them an excuse to leave, and Hawaiian would probably like to operate that hub. I see Guam as the most likely operation and they can operate to some of the same airports! Puerto Rico make no sense at all, totally different area, so far away and no overlap at all.

Max Q · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:48 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
Would probably be easy to take Uniteds Guam hub if they really went all in.

And you base that on what ?

Continental started Air Mike in 1968, that makes it nearly fifty years of operating in that market now.
No one else knows it that well.

Despite the name change there is no reason UA would give up on such a valuable and unique franchise.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
I dont think long term United even wants a hub out of there, they just dont want to deal with the political backlash and promises they made to keep it plus it is probably making good money like everything with oil being pretty low.

Do you realize how contradictory that statement is ?

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
If Hawaii rolls in that gives them an excuse to leave,

Why would they be looking for an 'excuse to leave ? '

Your comments make no sense.

BigGSFO · Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:51 pm

Guam makes the most sense. I doubt HA would consider a mainland hub.

LGAviation · Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:17 pm

I'd love to see them increase their presence at PPG American Samoa although I feat that given the size of the market that they could serve that this will remain wishful thinking.
I agree that the terminal at ITO is currently underused but I don't see the point in opening a hub there. I don't even see the point in opening any second hub in the state of Hawaii. I also don't see Alaska (because of AS) ad the lower 48. Puerto Rico is well served by B6 but what about STT. Would it be out of question for HA to open up their and build a connecting hub between the mainland, the Caribbean and maybe even further beyond.
Anyways, GUM might also make a lot of sense and could give the quite a good position in the Paciffic

Coronado990 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:48 pm

Is there a better place to put a hub then an island named "Midway". Just spruce the place up a bit.

enilria · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:04 pm

Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 4):
Quoting azjubilee (Reply 3):
That's not what transpired and it is a poorly written article.

Agreed. If you actually listen to the response, it's almost pretty clear in his voice that it won't happen

I listened as well as a result of this thread and he is just musing on possible versions of the future. It was not said in a way that implies this is any more than an uninvestigated dream.

mcg · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:10 pm

Quoting Coronado990 (Reply 21):

Is there a better place to put a hub then an island named "Midway". Just spruce the place up a bit.

Easily the most thoughtful post in this thread.

rbavfan · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:24 pm

Pago Pago with west cost service & then A319/A321 hops to many islands in the south pacific. It would continue the troplical Island base of Hawaiian and Pago Pago is a US territory. They could easily add HNL/OGG-PPG services as well. There are about 20 locations within range of PPG that could support both airframes. Bora Bora, Hamilton Island in the great barrier reef, Hobart, Tasmania & Queenstown, NZ would be good for A319. Christchurch NZ, Noumia NC, Port Vila VU, Wellington NZ could be good A321 services.

Would give them their tourism based services to many islands americans don't get to see.

rbavfan · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:26 pm

Quoting mwh787 (Reply 8):
not sure of the freight capabilities of their A330's... of course this could facilitate a merger with AS

With a stop in Anchorage they could carry lots of freight to UK.

rbavfan · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:33 pm

Quoting Coronado (Reply 6):
I could see Hawaiian investors looking to have them set up a hub in Guam and take on United during their periods of weakness.

Guam could be good with the A321 as well. Opens lots of routes to Japan & even china from Guam. Could see Naha Manila-Guam, Okinawa-Guam & Seoul-Guam with US A332 non stops to HNL & A338 NS to OAK/SAN to connect all the US military bases as well. That could get the Military contracts from UA as UA routes them all through HNL now. No NS to US mainland.

Also opens up Guam to Indonesia, Cebu, Malaysia to A319 or A321's with connections to US mainland.

UA has way underutilized & ignored Guam.

[Edited 2015-10-21 08:36:44]

LGAviation · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:35 pm

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 24):
Pago Pago with west cost service & then A319/A321 hops to many islands in the south pacific. It would continue the troplical Island base of Hawaiian and Pago Pago is a US territory. They could easily add HNL/OGG-PPG services as well. There are about 20 locations within range of PPG that could support both airframes. Bora Bora, Hamilton Island in the great barrier reef, Hobart, Tasmania & Queenstown, NZ would be good for A319. Christchurch NZ, Noumia NC, Port Vila VU, Wellington NZ could be good A321 services.

Thinking about it, it actually starts to make sense and maybe my earlier post was a little bit too pessimistic

[Edited 2015-10-21 08:35:38]

rbavfan · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:44 pm

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 15):
Of course, that is why no one else has stayed on the HNL-GUM route longer than CO/UA, there have been at least three other carriers I know of & one more I suspect, but NW, BN & HA have all flown the route & they have all left.

They also had to do it with 747/DC10/777/767. HA could use 2 daily A321 HNL-GUM and get better results than UA's 777. As the A321neo should have lower CASM than the 777 United uses.

ScottB · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:51 pm

Quoting mcg (Reply 23):
Quoting Coronado990 (Reply 21):

Is there a better place to put a hub then an island named "Midway". Just spruce the place up a bit.

Easily the most thoughtful post in this thread.

Oh, and don't forget convincing the government to revoke Midway's status as a National Wildlife Refuge. The fact that there's no permanent human habitation or infrastructure beyond a 7800' runway is just a minor detail.

And for half the year you can only operate at night due to a very large albatross population which is not especially compatible with turbofan engines.

Quoting LGAviation (Reply 20):
I'd love to see them increase their presence at PPG American Samoa although I feat that given the size of the market that they could serve that this will remain wishful thinking.

PPG is a very small market and also very poor since there's essentially zero industry on the island apart from a single tuna cannery which mostly pays minimum wage. American Samoa has one of the highest rates of military recruitment which allows young people to leave an island which may be beautiful but also has few jobs.

Quoting United1 (Reply 12):
I think a good strategy for HA might be to try and work with some of the South Pacific states like FIJ or PPT...even American Samoa.

Fiji and French Polynesia have their own national carriers and would not be terribly enthusiastic about the prospect of a foreign competitor.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
Would probably be easy to take Uniteds Guam hub if they really went all in. I dont think long term United even wants a hub out of there, they just dont want to deal with the political backlash and promises they made to keep it plus it is probably making good money like everything with oil being pretty low.

At times, GUM was the most profitable part of CO's operation. UA has had no qualms about cutting money-losing intra-Asia flying; do you honestly think they'd maintain the GUM hub at its current size & scope if it didn't make money? Do you think they care about political backlash in a relative backwater like Guam considering they were willing to close the only legacy airline hub located in Ohio, which is far more influential politically?

Quoting National757 (Reply 7):
UA has (inherited from CO Air Mike) a market with little competition. If HA was looking to expand, Guam seems logical. Hawaiian could be the airline of the Pacific, not just Hawai'i.

Um, sure. Not as if the people of Guam haven't figured out that their frequent flyer miles went over to the UA program. And not to mention that the Chamorros and Hawaiians are ethnically and culturally fairly dissimilar.

a380787 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:59 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 29):

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
Would probably be easy to take Uniteds Guam hub if they really went all in. I dont think long term United even wants a hub out of there, they just dont want to deal with the political backlash and promises they made to keep it plus it is probably making good money like everything with oil being pretty low.

At times, GUM was the most profitable part of CO's operation. UA has had no qualms about cutting money-losing intra-Asia flying; do you honestly think they'd maintain the GUM hub at its current size & scope if it didn't make money? Do you think they care about political backlash in a relative backwater like Guam considering they were willing to close the only legacy airline hub located in Ohio, which is far more influential politically?

Plus DL has just as bad a track record on closing Ohio hubs, so it's a pot kettle black situation to talk about CLE.

Now cue those who want to stretch the truth by claiming CVG is actually a Kentucky airport ....

Polot · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:01 pm

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 26):
Guam could be good with the A321 as well. Opens lots of routes to Japan & even china from Guam. Could see Naha Manila-Guam, Okinawa-Guam & Seoul-Guam with US A332 non stops to HNL & A338 NS to OAK/SAN to connect all the US military bases as well. That could get the Military contracts from UA as UA routes them all through HNL now. No NS to US mainland.

You are completely overestimating the size of the GUM market. There is a reason why you see no mainland nonstops...the market for profitable flights is not there. Just because destinations have military bases does not mean there is a lot of consistent traffic, on commercial flights, traveling between the two bases. Also you not really considering distances; GUN-SAN/OAK (which is hilarious btw...any NS to the mainline from GUM would no doubt be to LAX) are about a 1,000 miles further than JFK-HNL for example.

If GUM was such a goldmine that UA is not exploiting then HA would never have dropped their Guam flight.

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 28):
They also had to do it with 747/DC10/777/767. HA could use 2 daily A321 HNL-GUM and get better results than UA's 777. As the A321neo should have lower CASM than the 777 United uses.

HNL-GUM has a ton of cargo hence the widebodies. UA/CO has 757s they could have long placed on the route if they desired.

[Edited 2015-10-21 09:07:23]

santi319 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:02 pm

A GUM hub will certainly canibalize their HNL ops. If anything they can grow a point to point operation and nothing more..

visakow · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:12 pm

Stateside = Allegiant. Realistically never
make it by themselves in US market.

United1 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:26 pm

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 28):
As the A321neo should have lower CASM than the 777 United uses.

What are you basing that off of? Also keep in mind that UA is retrofitting a fleet of 772s with 10 across in Y....that should be a CASM killer...

DLPMMM · Wed Oct 21, 2015 5:02 pm

The one area that makes sense to me is Puerto Rico. There is a lot of similarity to HNL for HA.

1. It has a pretty large local population for O and D.

2. It has a good amount of tourism and cruise ships.

3. It has lots of smaller islands it can connect passengers to.

4. It was a hub in the past, but it now largely bypassed (much like HNL).

There are some differences, like the smaller islands to connect to are mostly non-US, but it is probably the most like HNL as far as fitting the HA model.

csavel · Wed Oct 21, 2015 5:14 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 29):
PPG is a very small market and also very poor since there's essentially zero industry on the island apart from a single tuna cannery which mostly pays minimum wage. American Samoa has one of the highest rates of military recruitment which allows young people to leave an island which may be beautiful but also has few jobs.

Not to mention that I doubt airlines would want to fly to both Samoas and Apia is generally the city to go to, I can't imagine what PPG would connect to and there simply isn't that much O&D traffic. Add to that Samoans are US 'nationals' but not citizens means that a US citizen needs a passport and has to pass through immigration, that is controlled entirely by American Samoa (which is BTW the same deal in Guam) . meaning it is not as simple as popping over from the mainland to Hawaii.

TWA772LR · Wed Oct 21, 2015 5:21 pm

Do A330s have the range to make Asia-Pago Pago-SA work? With Pago Pago as the scissors hub?

azjubilee · Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:49 pm

Quoting enilria (Reply 22):
I listened as well as a result of this thread and he is just musing on possible versions of the future. It was not said in a way that implies this is any more than an uninvestigated dream.

If you listened, then you would have heard what the answer was. Their answer was that they're NOT considering a 2nd hub out of Hawaii. It is something that COULD be considered in a strategic plan analysis. Since they're not considering it, the article title is misleading and so is this thread title. Nothing is wrong with the speculation, but let's do it knowing that what the article and thread title suggest, is actually not the case.

mariner · Wed Oct 21, 2015 7:00 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 37):
Do A330s have the range to make Asia-Pago Pago-SA work? With Pago Pago as the scissors hub?

From North America, PPG is too far south to make it a viable mid-point for Asia.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 29):
PPG is a very small market and also very poor since there's essentially zero industry on the island apart from a single tuna cannery which mostly pays minimum wage. American Samoa has one of the highest rates of military recruitment which allows young people to leave an island which may be beautiful but also has few jobs.

There isn't a huge amount of tourist infrastructure - the old Pan Am Intercontinental hotel is falling apart:

PPG was useful to Pan Am back in the day when they needed a mid-Pacific stop, but those days are gone. Pago Pago doesn't even have service to New Zealand - it's nearest large land mass.

mariner

ScottB · Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:04 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 39):
There isn't a huge amount of tourist infrastructure - the old Pan Am Intercontinental hotel is falling apart:

PPG was useful to Pan Am back in the day when they needed a mid-Pacific stop, but those days are gone. Pago Pago doesn't even have service to New Zealand - it's nearest large land mass.

It's not all that surprising that PPG would lack service to New Zealand given that there are virtually no political ties between American Samoa and New Zealand. Plus NZ does serve APW which is a quick hop over from PPG.

The remoteness of PPG works against its ability to attract tourists without some sort of concerted effort to build infrastructure and market the destination. If you want a tropical/Polynesian vacation coming from the U.S., Hawaii and Tahiti are much easier. Coming from Asia/Australia/N.Z. there are literally dozens of other islands/nations competing as well.

RWA380 · Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:03 pm

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 25):
With a stop in Anchorage they could carry lots of freight to UK.

Honestly an AS / HA partnership on this route could benefit both carriers. If & a big if at that, HA started HNL-ANC-LHR as a joint venture with AS, the cargo in & out of ANC could support the services. We all know Hawaiian & Alaskan goods end up in markets all over Europe & European goods are consumed throughout the US & Canada.

AS would gain a TATL flight & extra cargo & passenger capacity to Hawaii from Alaska & v.v.

The fish trade alone could be worthwhile. HA would gain a connectivity hub in ANC for feed from AS flights from the region & even as far as SEA & PDX for the LHR leg & local connectivity that would compliment the existing AS services to Hawaii, meaning twice as many flight options for both airlines frequent flyer base.

I'm not sure if there is a way to do a route specific joint venture like this legally, so I am just speculating & it may not even be possible. I know back in the day, airlines would have Interchange services, but those were done with each others aircraft flying routes with the others crews, ie ... AA / AS IAH-DFW-SEA-ANC-FAI.

calpsafltskeds · Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:03 pm

I don't see the value of a GUM for HA any more than one for UA. The market is limited and many UA flights out of GUM are just a flight a couple days a week with 73G or 738 equipment. I guess HA could spend a lot of money and push UA out of GUM, but why? Wouldn't they be better to increase service out of HNL - who needs a West Pacific connection point from HNL to Asia?.

PPG and NAN were served a couple time s per week each when CO flew DC10-10s to AKL/SYD. PPG was always a low yield destination.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 35):
The one area that makes sense to me is Puerto Rico. There is a lot of similarity to HNL for HA.

Isn't Puerto Rico almost bankrupts and many are leaving the island due to a poor economy?

mariner · Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:02 am

Quoting ScottB (Reply 40):
It's not all that surprising that PPG would lack service to New Zealand given that there are virtually no political ties between American Samoa and New Zealand. Plus NZ does serve APW which is a quick hop over from PPG.

Each to their own, but I am very slightly surprised.

There are long-established links between NZ and American Samoa and the great Kiwi desire to escape the woes of winter, not that extreme except down south, and flee to the islands suggests to me that there might well be enough traffic for a seasonal, 1 or 2 by weekly service AKL-PPG.

But the point was not specifically NZ, except as the nearest large land mass/population and WLG as the nearest major US mission, but rather the fact that PPG has no international flights, beyond neighbouring APW, to anywhere these days.

mariner

Brewfangrb · Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:28 am

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 42):
Isn't Puerto Rico almost bankrupts and many are leaving the island due to a poor economy?

Exactly the situation an airline could work to their advantage!

Nouflyer · Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:05 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 14):
How about American Samoa?

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 24):
There are about 20 locations within range of PPG that could support both airframes. Bora Bora, Hamilton Island in the great barrier reef, Hobart, Tasmania & Queenstown, NZ would be good for A319. Christchurch NZ, Noumia NC, Port Vila VU, Wellington NZ could be good A321 services.

Let's call it South Pacific Island Airways!

Why hasn't anybody else thought of this?

mariner · Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:31 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 45):
Let's call it South Pacific Island Airways!

Why hasn't anybody else thought of this?

LOL - I'm glad someone remembers:

mariner

b747400erf · Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:34 pm

Quoting Coronado (Reply 6):
I could see Hawaiian investors looking to have them set up a hub in Guam and take on United during their periods of weakness.

The market is small and United isn't cutting service for fun. They're also having to take on more Asian LLC's. Not a smart move.

rbavfan · Thu Oct 22, 2015 8:04 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 29):
Do you think they care about political backlash in a relative backwater like Guam considering they were willing to close the only legacy airline hub located in Ohio, which is far more influential politically?

You forget Delta closed CVG. Which yes is technically in Kentucky but is Cincinnati's airport.

rbavfan · Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:48 pm

Quoting United1 (Reply 34):

777 total fuel burn devided by number of seats vs A321neo fuel burn devided by number of seats. Fuel burn per seat is lower, cost per airframe is lower, cost for crew is lower. Should easily be lower CASM. Cargo is where the 777 kills it if there is a large cargo market.

[Edited 2015-10-22 17:29:06]

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net