User avatar
intotheair
Topic Author
Posts: 1711
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:54 am

This is one of those hypothetical, stream-of-consciousness threads that never go out of style on here...

I think it's interesting to think back how UA was more or less the default major carrier at SEA up until the late 2000s. Yes, AS is the hometown airline and has been the primary carrier at SEA for decades. But for a while, UA had a decent amount of destinations from SEA (mostly on UAX/Skywest) and some international. UA kept flying SEA-NRT even up until early 2014.

Do you think UA could have propped up its presence enough at SEA post-merger in order to keep DL from building an international gateway and hub there? On one hand, perhaps it would have duplicated SFO, but on the other, maybe it would have kept a nice reliever option in the UA network.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
rph99
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 3:27 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:01 am

Considering delta pulls it off with SLC, I can’t imagine SFO would have been a big issue for UA.

The demand was there. I think UA had poor management at the time and missed out on a big opportunity.
 
dcajet
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:07 am

Coulda, woulda, shoulda... Water under the bridge. Also, lets not forget PM UA was in no shape to open new hubs with their lengthy Chapter 11 stay; after the merger one could argue it was a missed opportunity but then, the merger was not an easy pill to swallow as we've all seen.
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
crescent
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:09 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:12 am

No, any attempt to do Pacific flights at SEA (except for the longtime NRT flight (UA 875/876) given NRT was its own hub) would have cannibalized SFO & LAX. The idea that UA was the "default major carrier" is a farce given the existence of AS. Where did UA ever fly from SEA that was not a hub anyway? Does SMF or SAN or ABQ have a default major carrier? The only way SEA would ever become a hub for UA is if UAL bought ALK.
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2323
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:37 am

intotheair wrote:
I think it's interesting to think back how UA was more or less the default major carrier at SEA up until the late 2000s.


This chart from the late 2000's doesn't look like the market share of a default major carrier:

Image
Source: https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/01/alask ... southwest/

Any expansion by UA at SEA would have cannibalized their dominant positions at SFO (for TPAC flights) and to a lesser extent, DEN. UA is much better off maintaining their dominant position in SFO and letting DL be a distant #2 in SEA.
 
N649DL
Posts: 515
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:52 am

dcajet wrote:
Coulda, woulda, shoulda... Water under the bridge. Also, lets not forget PM UA was in no shape to open new hubs with their lengthy Chapter 11 stay; after the merger one could argue it was a missed opportunity but then, the merger was not an easy pill to swallow as we've all seen.


Depends on when. During the Dot Com boom, UAL IIRC believed the future of the airline's Business Traffic was largely going to be based on the West Coast ("Shuttle by UA," heavy LAX dominance, plus a large hub at SFO, and Focus City at SEA.) That all changed within years when the bubble did burst and SFO traffic got affected heavily.

Although both LAX and SFO got downsized in Chapter 11, they never got to the point of being completely de-hubbed or lose Focus City status. Initially those that were affected were MIA, JFK and EWR. SEA came much later after the merger because of cost cutting measures and it's very senior SEA base. Essentially whatever dominance UA had at SEA was killed off by Smisek around 2012-2013 in trying to cut costs and DL swooped in.

UA had a nice focus city at SEA for years and essentially trashed it on a few years back. They even had a feeder network out of there on UAEX, same deal with LAS as well.
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:17 am

Interesting thread! I recall well when UA was strong (though not a "default hub") in SEA. I worked for UA in the summer of '96, and I lived in the area for 20 years, so I have knowledge of the SEA market.

UA used to completely "own" the north satellite...DC-10, 747 service on domestic routes to its hubs. Service to destinations like LHR, JFK, BOS (I think), and NRT. At one point in the early-mid-1980s, they served HKG with 747SP/DC-10-30. LHR was served nonstop for a short time with a 763. Flight 928/929 was a 747-200 in Summer '96. Flight 333 (ORD-SEA) was a 744.

From what I witnessed, AS expanded very quickly in SEA, and along with WN, that was a 1-2 punch against UA in the rapidly growing west coast market. UA simply couldn't compete with either carrier on cost, despite their attempt with "Shuttle by United" to SFO and LAX.

UA is a shell of its former self, and short of a departure from a major airline at SEA, I wouldn't expect them to try to restore their former glory, especially with the congestion and construction at SEA now. Interestingly enough, UA is expanding its presence in the SEA area by adding service to SFO and DEN from PAE. Further east in Washington state, UA is adding a nonstop from PSC-LAX in March, which will be flown with E175.

I also think it will be interesting to see where DL stands in the SEA market in 10 years. They are trying to make SEA a hub, and have expanded rapidly, but are now constrained by both gate space and the limits of the existing FIS facility. They're facing increasing competition internationally, both on the NRT flight and to Europe. They are up gauging NRT to an A359, but will be competing against both Japanese airlines on the route, whereas UA used to compete against NW and AA in SEA. HKG was cut, but they are adding back KIX. SQ is starting a nonstop to SIN later this year, putting pressure on the 763 add-on from NRT. And it remains to be seen what happens with the NRT route i.e. will it be moved to HND
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:37 am

N649DL wrote:
Although both LAX and SFO got downsized in Chapter 11, they never got to the point of being completely de-hubbed or lose Focus City status. Initially those that were affected were MIA, JFK and EWR. SEA came much later after the merger because of cost cutting measures and it's very senior SEA base. Essentially whatever dominance UA had at SEA was killed off by Smisek around 2012-2013 in trying to cut costs and DL swooped in.


From what I recall, EWR and JFK were termed as "International Gateways" by UA, they were really never termed as "hubs" of the sort. This was despite UA owning some of the gates (and at one point was the major tenant/occupied the larger pier of the old T9 at JFK before moving out for BA's T7 in the early 90s).

JFK/EWR was most a O&D Focus City with a crew base at those 2 NY area airports at the peak of the operations at both airports.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Topic Author
Posts: 1711
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 6:53 am

IPFreely wrote:
intotheair wrote:
I think it's interesting to think back how UA was more or less the default major carrier at SEA up until the late 2000s.


This chart from the late 2000's doesn't look like the market share of a default major carrier:


I suppose I should have clarified that anything special from UA at SEA was pretty much gone by the late 2000s (aside from the NRT flight and maybe some UAX flights,) but it would be interesting to see a similar chart for the early to mid 2000s.

N174UA wrote:
Interesting thread! I recall well when UA was strong (though not a "default hub") in SEA. I worked for UA in the summer of '96, and I lived in the area for 20 years, so I have knowledge of the SEA market.

UA used to completely "own" the north satellite...DC-10, 747 service on domestic routes to its hubs. Service to destinations like LHR, JFK, BOS (I think), and NRT. At one point in the early-mid-1980s, they served HKG with 747SP/DC-10-30. LHR was served nonstop for a short time with a 763. Flight 928/929 was a 747-200 in Summer '96. Flight 333 (ORD-SEA) was a 744.

From what I witnessed, AS expanded very quickly in SEA, and along with WN, that was a 1-2 punch against UA in the rapidly growing west coast market. UA simply couldn't compete with either carrier on cost, despite their attempt with "Shuttle by United" to SFO and LAX.

UA is a shell of its former self, and short of a departure from a major airline at SEA, I wouldn't expect them to try to restore their former glory, especially with the congestion and construction at SEA now. Interestingly enough, UA is expanding its presence in the SEA area by adding service to SFO and DEN from PAE. Further east in Washington state, UA is adding a nonstop from PSC-LAX in March, which will be flown with E175.


Thanks for sharing! I think it's interesting how a lot of whatever UA had at SEA at its peak is really just forgotten. Plenty of people on here remember when UA was trying to make something happen at JFK or the pieces of Pan AM that it inherited at MIA, but UA's once-larger presence at SEA seems like a footnote now.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 2:42 pm

Mid-80’s to perhaps early 90’s there was a much larger presence. I flew or was scheduled on SEARNO, SEAOAK, SEASMF, SEALAX, etc. AS/WN usurped that role pretty good.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13826
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 2:54 pm

Well things worked out, UA retrenched their West Coast position to SFO where they are doing some amazing things. From SFO UA is flying to places like Chengdu, Melbourne, Papeete, Singapore, Sydney, Tel Aviv, Delhi, Zurich etc.. None of which exist from SEA on any carrier, although SQ will start SEA in September.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
blockski
Posts: 490
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:05 pm

rph99 wrote:
Considering delta pulls it off with SLC, I can’t imagine SFO would have been a big issue for UA.

The demand was there. I think UA had poor management at the time and missed out on a big opportunity.


SLC and SFO play completely different roles. SLC is a domestic hub, SFO is an international gateway.

For Delta, they're using SEA as their gateway and SLC as their western hub, much like how UA uses SFO and DEN. The longer-term case for UA to have SFO and SEA as gateways is a lot tougher to make.

In an ideal world, UA wouldn't have shrank so much after the merger (and thus wouldn't be trying to claw back market share now), but the decisions they made re: SEA seem completely defensible to me.
 
kavok
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:11 pm

It was probably just a matter of time before AA or DL would have decided to try make SEA a hub. Obviously DL beat AA to it.

But in either scenario, the battle would not have been worth it to UA to duke if out with AS and DL or AA... especially with the SFO hub being the primary TPAC gateway.

Don’t forget also there is a major star alliance hub just to the north at YVR.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5462
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:15 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
Mid-80’s to perhaps early 90’s there was a much larger presence. I flew or was scheduled on SEARNO, SEAOAK, SEASMF, SEALAX, etc. AS/WN usurped that role pretty good.



Maybe even a bit earlier in the 80’s, but you remember that both SEA & PDX were both UA dominated cites. Most people forget AS didn’t even fly to Portland until the late 70’s.

IAD, BOI, SLC, MCI, JFK, SFO, OAK, SJC, RNO, SMF, SAN, LAX, IAD, DEN, ORD, HNL, YVR & PDX were all non-stop in 1979.

IAD, ANC, ORD, DFW, DEN, HNL, OGG, JFK, LAX, PDX, SFO, SAN & YVR were non-stop in 1985.

ANC, ORD, DEN, HNL, LAX, JFK, OAK, SNA, PDX, SMF, SAN, SFO, GEG, YVR & IAD IN 1989.

By 1991 UA had added the express flights on J31’s & Brasilias BLI, EUG, PSC & YKM were added & PDX & GEG had switched from mainline service, BOI was re-added after a several year absence.
707, 717, 720, 727-1/2, 737-1/2/3/4/5/7/8/9, 747-1/2/3, 757, 767-2/3/4, 777-2/3, DC8, DC9, MD80/2/7/8, D10-1/3/4, M11, L10-2/5, A300/310/319/320
AA AC AQ BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WN WP YS 8M
 
drdisque
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:46 pm

Remember that all the UA Skywest flights at SEA were at-risk by Skywest and operated by E-120's. They would have been gone one way or the other as the E-120's were retired.
 
olddominion727
Posts: 465
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:08 pm

the also flew SEASJC. they tried for about 6mos. AS buried them, so did Continental West
 
N649DL
Posts: 515
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:36 pm

SCFlyer wrote:
N649DL wrote:
Although both LAX and SFO got downsized in Chapter 11, they never got to the point of being completely de-hubbed or lose Focus City status. Initially those that were affected were MIA, JFK and EWR. SEA came much later after the merger because of cost cutting measures and it's very senior SEA base. Essentially whatever dominance UA had at SEA was killed off by Smisek around 2012-2013 in trying to cut costs and DL swooped in.


From what I recall, EWR and JFK were termed as "International Gateways" by UA, they were really never termed as "hubs" of the sort. This was despite UA owning some of the gates (and at one point was the major tenant/occupied the larger pier of the old T9 at JFK before moving out for BA's T7 in the early 90s).

JFK/EWR was most a O&D Focus City with a crew base at those 2 NY area airports at the peak of the operations at both airports.


Yeah you're correct. EWR and JFK were bases with some on and off UAEX flying, JFK more than EWR with some random Upstate NY routes around 1999-2000. JFK and MIA had more International flying as well whereas EWR it was just the LHR flight by the Early 2000s. At EWR they operated solely out of all of the Satellite A-1 concourse until the base closure in 2006.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3812
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:30 am

intotheair wrote:
This is one of those hypothetical, stream-of-consciousness threads that never go out of style on here...

I think it's interesting to think back how UA was more or less the default major carrier at SEA up until the late 2000s. Yes, AS is the hometown airline and has been the primary carrier at SEA for decades. But for a while, UA had a decent amount of destinations from SEA (mostly on UAX/Skywest) and some international. UA kept flying SEA-NRT even up until early 2014.

Do you think UA could have propped up its presence enough at SEA post-merger in order to keep DL from building an international gateway and hub there? On one hand, perhaps it would have duplicated SFO, but on the other, maybe it would have kept a nice reliever option in the UA network.

United had SEA NRT and SEA HKG before the Pan Am Pacific division purchase. And. SEA was a growing station and could have become a Gateway Hub. Once the pacific division was acquired? I guess the DOT decided that the SEA hub was overkill and took the Route Authorities out of SEA away. They were awarded to American, Then Continental. Neither of them did much with them. But SEA was going to be built into a Hub had we kept the SEA-NRT and SEA-HKG flights We had leased 2 CP Air DC10-30's for those flights.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: Could UA have built up SEA into a hub?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:59 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
intotheair wrote:
This is one of those hypothetical, stream-of-consciousness threads that never go out of style on here...

I think it's interesting to think back how UA was more or less the default major carrier at SEA up until the late 2000s. Yes, AS is the hometown airline and has been the primary carrier at SEA for decades. But for a while, UA had a decent amount of destinations from SEA (mostly on UAX/Skywest) and some international. UA kept flying SEA-NRT even up until early 2014.

Do you think UA could have propped up its presence enough at SEA post-merger in order to keep DL from building an international gateway and hub there? On one hand, perhaps it would have duplicated SFO, but on the other, maybe it would have kept a nice reliever option in the UA network.

United had SEA NRT and SEA HKG before the Pan Am Pacific division purchase. And. SEA was a growing station and could have become a Gateway Hub. Once the pacific division was acquired? I guess the DOT decided that the SEA hub was overkill and took the Route Authorities out of SEA away. They were awarded to American, Then Continental. Neither of them did much with them. But SEA was going to be built into a Hub had we kept the SEA-NRT and SEA-HKG flights We had leased 2 CP Air DC10-30's for those flights.

Where did the 747-SP go out of SEA? It was a short time frame that is was here and a long time ago so memory is hazy on my part. I want to say it was HKG but could be wrong

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FlyRow, timh4000, WAC and 12 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos