LiveInAHotel
Veteran
- Nov 5, 2003
- 645
- 0
First BWI was taken over by SWA, then it was PHL (in the process) by SWA and now PIT is being taken over by AirTran. US better hope nobody overtakes CLT or US will be history.
Airtran Taking Over Us In Pit?
- Thread starter skyguy25
- Start date
I disagree on both counts. Looking at the O&D numbers tells little about what they would look like with a significant LCC presence.USA320Pilot said:
In order to move in, you have to do a lot of planning. This requires either ordering new aircraft or deciding where to pull them from, negotiating rates and space, and ramping up service. There wasn't much point in doing that until now, since there weren't that many gates free (I counted two) at PIT.
With the drawdown, there will be enough gates to make it useful to move in.
If the ACAA had acted sooner to pay down the airport debt then US Airways may have kept the hub and created an operation similar in scope to Delta Air Lines in CVG.
Moreover, if US Airways has a competitive cost structure with a CASM of about 7.5 cents, the company will not care if a LCC invades PIT because the Arlington-based carrier can the match the LCC on cost and prive.
Good idea...plenty of room there for additional flights.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #33
"Moreover, if US Airways has a competitive cost structure with a CASM of about 7.5 cents, the company will not care if a LCC invades PIT because the Arlington-based carrier can the match the LCC on cost and price."
The problem here is that the company's own words indicate that we won't be anywhere close to this cost anytime soon. They project a 2.1 cent reduction in current unit costs by the 2006-2007 timeframe IF they get the full $800 million in concessions. That puts us well above being competitive with the LCC's.
"In order to move in, you have to do a lot of planning. This requires either ordering new aircraft or deciding where to pull them from, negotiating rates and space, and ramping up service."
To sum up:
1) No competitive cost structure until sometime after the 2006-2007 timeframe,
2) Airtran, Southwest, and JetBlue receiving new airplanes as we "speak", and
3) Gates presumably becoming available sometime after September,
What will keep the LCC's at bay in PIT?
Jim
The problem here is that the company's own words indicate that we won't be anywhere close to this cost anytime soon. They project a 2.1 cent reduction in current unit costs by the 2006-2007 timeframe IF they get the full $800 million in concessions. That puts us well above being competitive with the LCC's.
"In order to move in, you have to do a lot of planning. This requires either ordering new aircraft or deciding where to pull them from, negotiating rates and space, and ramping up service."
To sum up:
1) No competitive cost structure until sometime after the 2006-2007 timeframe,
2) Airtran, Southwest, and JetBlue receiving new airplanes as we "speak", and
3) Gates presumably becoming available sometime after September,
What will keep the LCC's at bay in PIT?
Jim
AirplaneFan
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 174
- 0
Below are the top 75 airports cities in the lower 48. Also shown is then number of O&D daily passengers and the average one-way fare and average stage length.
Source US DOT, 3Q, 2003
This answers quite a few questions that have been raised
1. Why is Delta losing money? They can't get a premium in Atlanta like they had in the past.
2. Why can't Pittsburgh be a successful hub like Cincinnati? Cincinnati, Memphis and Charlotte are small hubs. Pittsburgh ranks 34th on the list of O&D passengers, Charlotte ranks 47th, Cincinnati ranks 52nd, Memphis ranks 57th. The airlines have so extorted those cities that cities such as Reno and Manchester have more O&D passengers than the latter 2 hub cities.
3. Cities such as Washington DC, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Memphis, Richmond, Portland ME, Charleston have avg. fares of over $200 and are ripe for the picking for LCC's.
CityST DailyPsg AvgFare AvgLength
New York, NY 124,254.92 $184.74 1,223.37
Chicago, IL 89,687.45 $159.63 921.92
Las Vegas, NV 68,349.71 $131.98 1,178.90
Los Angeles, CA 65,741.86 $179.73 1,448.92
Atlanta, GA 62,257.76 $157.80 834.97
Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX 52,670.27 $185.93 851.82
Orlando, FL 50,118.77 $129.21 1,068.83
Seattle, WA 46,895.39 $170.62 1,375.17
Phoenix, AZ 44,169.04 $134.55 1,056.56
Denver, CO 43,942.25 $183.64 1,052.97
Baltimore, MD 42,933.51 $138.00 1,000.27
Washington, DC 42,095.27 $214.47 1,066.78
Houston, TX 40,083.91 $176.08 906.16
Boston, MA 40,050.54 $193.32 1,181.93
San Diego, CA 35,579.48 $154.71 1,218.83
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 35,164.82 $126.84 1,148.41
Oakland/Berkeley, CA 33,112.46 $122.36 961.22
Tampa/St. Petersburg, FL 32,810.12 $129.32 1,024.23
San Francisco, CA 32,555.97 $230.72 1,680.31
Minneapolis/St.Paul, MN 30,984.00 $217.61 975.59
Philadelphia, PA 30,851.43 $201.56 1,096.22
Detroit, MI 30,503.43 $179.32 941.28
Portland, OR 25,748.91 $158.26 1,205.56
San Jose/Palo Alto, CA 24,095.12 $146.06 1,080.75
St. Louis, MO 22,781.78 $164.24 808.55
Kansas City, MO 21,981.63 $142.11 867.19
Sacramento, CA 21,100.85 $134.74 982.90
Santa Ana, CA 21,027.07 $155.42 1,087.26
Salt Lake City, UT 18,893.76 $156.34 999.84
New Orleans, LA 18,095.98 $141.76 904.61
Raleigh/Durham, NC 17,335.64 $155.92 895.88
Miami, FL 16,124.57 $167.68 1,186.67
Indianapolis, IN 16,101.99 $154.58 986.85
Pittsburgh, PA 15,722.93 $181.35 997.59
Nashville, TN 15,599.00 $150.38 809.91
Cleveland, OH 15,596.49 $182.28 887.64
Ontario, CA 14,915.95 $132.48 973.52
Hartford, Ct/Springfield, MA 14,057.16 $175.42 1,203.46
Austin, TX 13,321.86 $171.42 954.63
San Antonio, TX 13,055.90 $167.72 931.62
Providence, RI 12,801.96 $155.60 1,163.10
Milwaukee, WI 12,669.25 $152.91 932.03
Columbus, OH 12,651.74 $162.76 961.39
Albuquerque, NM 12,296.11 $153.54 937.03
Glendale/Burbank, CA 11,841.33 $108.29 548.33
West Palm Beach, FL 11,543.39 $130.75 1,063.68
Charlotte, NC 11,324.42 $244.58 861.26
Jacksonville, FL 10,396.80 $146.31 880.40
Reno, NV 10,341.37 $128.34 922.33
Buffalo, NY 10,280.68 $136.25 925.78
Manchester, NH 9,209.28 $152.68 1,155.07
Cincinnati, OH 9,205.09 $236.09 778.87
Ft. Myers, FL 8,940.86 $134.33 1,113.31
Norfolk, VA 8,123.88 $165.24 1,015.64
Omaha, NE 8,123.67 $153.15 907.38
Long Beach, CA 7,757.25 $143.52 1,631.52
Memphis, TN 7,497.89 $203.80 789.67
Louisville, KY 7,039.20 $157.63 777.47
Oklahoma City, OK 6,687.19 $163.12 853.22
Dayton, OH 6,320.51 $154.78 846.19
El Paso, TX 6,213.77 $150.54 868.34
Spokane, WA 6,193.72 $138.92 862.92
Albany, NY 6,187.56 $170.13 1,164.14
Tucson, AZ 6,049.97 $154.95 1,030.45
Birmingham, AL 5,851.17 $165.83 803.79
Greensboro/High Point, NC 5,675.08 $164.97 734.66
Boise, ID 5,539.89 $135.35 798.96
Rochester, NY 5,538.89 $151.99 856.67
Tulsa, OK 5,393.17 $158.36 772.92
Islip/Long Island, NY 5,032.52 $120.03 990.16
Little Rock, AR 4,641.29 $160.55 754.50
Richmond, VA 4,596.67 $224.41 863.75
Grand Rapids, MI 4,232.12 $174.27 998.77
Colorado Springs, CO 4,136.87 $196.71 1,044.75
Syracuse, NY 3,717.71 $191.26 1,050.70
Source US DOT, 3Q, 2003
This answers quite a few questions that have been raised
1. Why is Delta losing money? They can't get a premium in Atlanta like they had in the past.
2. Why can't Pittsburgh be a successful hub like Cincinnati? Cincinnati, Memphis and Charlotte are small hubs. Pittsburgh ranks 34th on the list of O&D passengers, Charlotte ranks 47th, Cincinnati ranks 52nd, Memphis ranks 57th. The airlines have so extorted those cities that cities such as Reno and Manchester have more O&D passengers than the latter 2 hub cities.
3. Cities such as Washington DC, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Memphis, Richmond, Portland ME, Charleston have avg. fares of over $200 and are ripe for the picking for LCC's.
CityST DailyPsg AvgFare AvgLength
New York, NY 124,254.92 $184.74 1,223.37
Chicago, IL 89,687.45 $159.63 921.92
Las Vegas, NV 68,349.71 $131.98 1,178.90
Los Angeles, CA 65,741.86 $179.73 1,448.92
Atlanta, GA 62,257.76 $157.80 834.97
Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX 52,670.27 $185.93 851.82
Orlando, FL 50,118.77 $129.21 1,068.83
Seattle, WA 46,895.39 $170.62 1,375.17
Phoenix, AZ 44,169.04 $134.55 1,056.56
Denver, CO 43,942.25 $183.64 1,052.97
Baltimore, MD 42,933.51 $138.00 1,000.27
Washington, DC 42,095.27 $214.47 1,066.78
Houston, TX 40,083.91 $176.08 906.16
Boston, MA 40,050.54 $193.32 1,181.93
San Diego, CA 35,579.48 $154.71 1,218.83
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 35,164.82 $126.84 1,148.41
Oakland/Berkeley, CA 33,112.46 $122.36 961.22
Tampa/St. Petersburg, FL 32,810.12 $129.32 1,024.23
San Francisco, CA 32,555.97 $230.72 1,680.31
Minneapolis/St.Paul, MN 30,984.00 $217.61 975.59
Philadelphia, PA 30,851.43 $201.56 1,096.22
Detroit, MI 30,503.43 $179.32 941.28
Portland, OR 25,748.91 $158.26 1,205.56
San Jose/Palo Alto, CA 24,095.12 $146.06 1,080.75
St. Louis, MO 22,781.78 $164.24 808.55
Kansas City, MO 21,981.63 $142.11 867.19
Sacramento, CA 21,100.85 $134.74 982.90
Santa Ana, CA 21,027.07 $155.42 1,087.26
Salt Lake City, UT 18,893.76 $156.34 999.84
New Orleans, LA 18,095.98 $141.76 904.61
Raleigh/Durham, NC 17,335.64 $155.92 895.88
Miami, FL 16,124.57 $167.68 1,186.67
Indianapolis, IN 16,101.99 $154.58 986.85
Pittsburgh, PA 15,722.93 $181.35 997.59
Nashville, TN 15,599.00 $150.38 809.91
Cleveland, OH 15,596.49 $182.28 887.64
Ontario, CA 14,915.95 $132.48 973.52
Hartford, Ct/Springfield, MA 14,057.16 $175.42 1,203.46
Austin, TX 13,321.86 $171.42 954.63
San Antonio, TX 13,055.90 $167.72 931.62
Providence, RI 12,801.96 $155.60 1,163.10
Milwaukee, WI 12,669.25 $152.91 932.03
Columbus, OH 12,651.74 $162.76 961.39
Albuquerque, NM 12,296.11 $153.54 937.03
Glendale/Burbank, CA 11,841.33 $108.29 548.33
West Palm Beach, FL 11,543.39 $130.75 1,063.68
Charlotte, NC 11,324.42 $244.58 861.26
Jacksonville, FL 10,396.80 $146.31 880.40
Reno, NV 10,341.37 $128.34 922.33
Buffalo, NY 10,280.68 $136.25 925.78
Manchester, NH 9,209.28 $152.68 1,155.07
Cincinnati, OH 9,205.09 $236.09 778.87
Ft. Myers, FL 8,940.86 $134.33 1,113.31
Norfolk, VA 8,123.88 $165.24 1,015.64
Omaha, NE 8,123.67 $153.15 907.38
Long Beach, CA 7,757.25 $143.52 1,631.52
Memphis, TN 7,497.89 $203.80 789.67
Louisville, KY 7,039.20 $157.63 777.47
Oklahoma City, OK 6,687.19 $163.12 853.22
Dayton, OH 6,320.51 $154.78 846.19
El Paso, TX 6,213.77 $150.54 868.34
Spokane, WA 6,193.72 $138.92 862.92
Albany, NY 6,187.56 $170.13 1,164.14
Tucson, AZ 6,049.97 $154.95 1,030.45
Birmingham, AL 5,851.17 $165.83 803.79
Greensboro/High Point, NC 5,675.08 $164.97 734.66
Boise, ID 5,539.89 $135.35 798.96
Rochester, NY 5,538.89 $151.99 856.67
Tulsa, OK 5,393.17 $158.36 772.92
Islip/Long Island, NY 5,032.52 $120.03 990.16
Little Rock, AR 4,641.29 $160.55 754.50
Richmond, VA 4,596.67 $224.41 863.75
Grand Rapids, MI 4,232.12 $174.27 998.77
Colorado Springs, CO 4,136.87 $196.71 1,044.75
Syracuse, NY 3,717.71 $191.26 1,050.70
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
BieingBoy:
BoeingBoy said: "What will keep the LCC's at bay in PIT?"
USA320Pilot comments: A passenger processing cost of about $10. 00 per passenger in Pittsburgh, which is more than 7 times that of Charlotte. The two single most important points to reduce US Airways' CASM is aircraft and personnel utilization. One cannot happen without the other. Unitl new labor accords are reached to put the aircraft into the sky at more than 11.5 hours per day, which will require new labor accords to do, then there is not conversation on this subject.
Southwest thrives on productivity, but with US Airways' current scheduling system and work rules the airline is barely manned to fly aircraft at 10.0 hours per day. Look at how many teims we run out of crews with the present schedule.
It's a 'catch 22".
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
BoeingBoy said: "What will keep the LCC's at bay in PIT?"
USA320Pilot comments: A passenger processing cost of about $10. 00 per passenger in Pittsburgh, which is more than 7 times that of Charlotte. The two single most important points to reduce US Airways' CASM is aircraft and personnel utilization. One cannot happen without the other. Unitl new labor accords are reached to put the aircraft into the sky at more than 11.5 hours per day, which will require new labor accords to do, then there is not conversation on this subject.
Southwest thrives on productivity, but with US Airways' current scheduling system and work rules the airline is barely manned to fly aircraft at 10.0 hours per day. Look at how many teims we run out of crews with the present schedule.
It's a 'catch 22".
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
JavaBoy, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE get your facts straight. You said, CAL had over 70% in EWR when PE started...........Now that is Funny. When PE started, CO had very LITTLE of the EWR market. When PE started, CO had TWO DC-9's to IAH and THREE flight to DEN, a DC10 ( Pub Flight )and two 727's for a total of FIVE flights per day. When PE was at its Peak, its Largest Competitor was.........PIEDMONT, with over 100 Jets Departures and an additional 75 PI Commuter flights. The CAL you see today, is actually the CAL of old, PE, Fontier and New York Air. And a question Java Boy, we know it as Jet Express today, but what carrier was it that started all this CAL Express service in EWR?
As far as a LCC going into a Hub, what about WN going into STL?
As far as a LCC going into a Hub, what about WN going into STL?
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #37
USA320Pilot,
"Unitl new labor accords are reached to put the aircraft into the sky at more than 11.5 hours per day, which will require new labor accords to do, then there is not conversation on this subject."
Ok, I've asked before and I'll ask again. Name one thing in the pilot's contract keeping the company from flying the airplanes more. And notice that I said "flying the airplanes more", not "flying the airplanes more with staffing that continues to shrink with attrition."
The company can fly the airplanes all they want, any time they want. All they have to do is recall the people to do it. As simple as that, and the effect on our overall CASM would be basically the same as flying the "new" time with the current people. I even did the math in one of the threads so you don't have to.
And to my question of what would keep the LCC's at bay in PIT, you said:
"A passenger processing cost of about $10. 00 per passenger in Pittsburgh, which is more than 7 times that of Charlotte."
Well, if any LCC was dumb enough to lease 50 mainline gates then use half of them for express flights and the other half for 4 or 5 flights a day each (at most), and ensure maximum staffing levels by having the flights arrive and depart in banks, and last but not least, lease most of them month to month so they could pay extra, that $10 per head cost in PIT could be a problem. But since any of the LCC's would never operate that way, our cost per passenger is completely and totally beside the point.
In other words, you saying it over and over doesn't make it true.
Jim
"Unitl new labor accords are reached to put the aircraft into the sky at more than 11.5 hours per day, which will require new labor accords to do, then there is not conversation on this subject."
Ok, I've asked before and I'll ask again. Name one thing in the pilot's contract keeping the company from flying the airplanes more. And notice that I said "flying the airplanes more", not "flying the airplanes more with staffing that continues to shrink with attrition."
The company can fly the airplanes all they want, any time they want. All they have to do is recall the people to do it. As simple as that, and the effect on our overall CASM would be basically the same as flying the "new" time with the current people. I even did the math in one of the threads so you don't have to.
And to my question of what would keep the LCC's at bay in PIT, you said:
"A passenger processing cost of about $10. 00 per passenger in Pittsburgh, which is more than 7 times that of Charlotte."
Well, if any LCC was dumb enough to lease 50 mainline gates then use half of them for express flights and the other half for 4 or 5 flights a day each (at most), and ensure maximum staffing levels by having the flights arrive and depart in banks, and last but not least, lease most of them month to month so they could pay extra, that $10 per head cost in PIT could be a problem. But since any of the LCC's would never operate that way, our cost per passenger is completely and totally beside the point.
In other words, you saying it over and over doesn't make it true.
Jim
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
BoeingBoy:
BoeingBoy asked: "Ok, I've asked before and I'll ask again. Name one thing in the pilot's contract keeping the company from flying the airplanes more."
USA320Pilt answers: A simple crew scheduling system, a point-to-point business model, and more productivity. The company is working on the transformation plan and much of it has not been implemented, but they are working as fast as they can.
BoeingBoy, you know full well the company can barely man the current schedule with flight crews, never mind more flying. With increased productivity such as increasing the maximum pay cap to 96 hours, then I believe the company can fly more.
America West pilots get about 90 pay hours per month with a 99 hour pay cap and JetBlue gets about 100 pay hours per month. Do you believe US Airways management could fly more block hours per month if they had those work rules at a lower unit cost?
Finally, when US Airways pulls down Pittsburgh flying, without any changes to the airport's debt structure, the passenger processing fee will go up to a level much higher than $10 per passenger.
New York, Boston, and Washington have much higher revenue O&D and will make money versus Pittsburgh that loses money.
UsPerfEngr said, "Myself and my group are working as hard and as fast as we can to give marketing range payload and other aircraft operating characteristics for some very interesting point to point destinations. (None of which I can share here). What is unfortunate, especially for employees, is that so far the details of the transformation flying (point to point) are being kept in the dark. It would do wonders for morale if CCY would share their point to point wish list with the union leaders. It's tough knowing that management IS trying to transform this airline, but not seeing any action," he/she said.
BoeingBoy, the new business plan will take a long time to implement and management is peddling as fast as they can. I believe Bruce Lakefield is honest and sincere, but it will take time to overhaul the entire company.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
BoeingBoy asked: "Ok, I've asked before and I'll ask again. Name one thing in the pilot's contract keeping the company from flying the airplanes more."
USA320Pilt answers: A simple crew scheduling system, a point-to-point business model, and more productivity. The company is working on the transformation plan and much of it has not been implemented, but they are working as fast as they can.
BoeingBoy, you know full well the company can barely man the current schedule with flight crews, never mind more flying. With increased productivity such as increasing the maximum pay cap to 96 hours, then I believe the company can fly more.
America West pilots get about 90 pay hours per month with a 99 hour pay cap and JetBlue gets about 100 pay hours per month. Do you believe US Airways management could fly more block hours per month if they had those work rules at a lower unit cost?
Finally, when US Airways pulls down Pittsburgh flying, without any changes to the airport's debt structure, the passenger processing fee will go up to a level much higher than $10 per passenger.
New York, Boston, and Washington have much higher revenue O&D and will make money versus Pittsburgh that loses money.
UsPerfEngr said, "Myself and my group are working as hard and as fast as we can to give marketing range payload and other aircraft operating characteristics for some very interesting point to point destinations. (None of which I can share here). What is unfortunate, especially for employees, is that so far the details of the transformation flying (point to point) are being kept in the dark. It would do wonders for morale if CCY would share their point to point wish list with the union leaders. It's tough knowing that management IS trying to transform this airline, but not seeing any action," he/she said.
BoeingBoy, the new business plan will take a long time to implement and management is peddling as fast as they can. I believe Bruce Lakefield is honest and sincere, but it will take time to overhaul the entire company.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Did they have a choice? The airlines (US at the forefront) would have screamed if they tried to do it through additional fees; everybody's accountants probably would have agreed that it didn't make sense to accelerate the payoff faster than the real estate was deteriorating. Our accounting rules do not see paying off debt as a virtue.mweiss said:
Nobody saw what happened (not just 9/11, but also the yield decay earlier that year) soon enough to do anything about it.
I believe ACAA acted reasonably based on what everybody knew at the time. It was my understanding (if anybody knows different, speak up) that the only way ACAA could radically reduce their debt was by filing bankruptcy for the ACAA; but they couldn't take that path (screw the bondholders) without pulling down the whole Allegheny County operation, which was politically unacceptable.
Good data -- I especially agree with points 2 and 3. Just because CVG is "bigger" than PIT, doesn't mean it's anymore profitable. Just as AWA closed CMH, I think all the secondary hubs that rely on connecting flow are on the block: CLE (Bethune is always complaining about the low fare competition in CAK), CVG, SLC, and DFW (DL), MEM (though NW has been helped by a much improved regional). Although CLT has a low O&D, it maj just have sufficient scale and low enough costs .... but it's weakness is that it's main connecting flows (to FL and the Carribean) could easily be bypassed by, say, jetBlue and served direct with the right gauge/range aircraft. I believe DL is building up its P2p from FL.AirplaneFan said:
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
How far is CAK from PIT? AirTran already has a great operation at CAK. Another LCC may enter PIT but not in a big-way (i.e. hub) cause the Steeler knuckleheads bet the farm on US and now you expect new money (i.e. LCC) to pay off old debts (i.e. bond payments)??
Ain't gonna happen.
For the same reason new money will not appear to satisfy UA's old pension obligations.
Find another sugardaddy.
Also PIT will be an interesting test-case: a legacy carrier abandoning a high-cost, labor-unfriendly hub and now we're going to see what the real world market thinks of that city.
Ain't gonna happen.
For the same reason new money will not appear to satisfy UA's old pension obligations.
Find another sugardaddy.
Also PIT will be an interesting test-case: a legacy carrier abandoning a high-cost, labor-unfriendly hub and now we're going to see what the real world market thinks of that city.
