No, I mean CDG. Prior to 911, and while the AF codeshare was still in effect, a CAL spokesman in CLE (IIRC) said CDG has the 2nd best transatlantic traffic numbers out of CLE and, including traffic beyond CDG, was just about about break even based on O&D. The loss of the AF codeshare killed any chance of a CLE-CDG flight, but made CLE-AMS look possible. There's a lot of beyond-CDG/AMS traffic in CLE that could support either route.
CAL doesn't start up flights that are "on the edge," however, so I expect the current profit forecast would have to be a lot more positive before CAL acted.
Then, too, I have this theory about CLE - that CAL makes money there, but only a little and has greater possibilities elsewhere; so they add/subtract from CLE sort of as a capacity buffer for EWR/IAH operations. It's as if CAL has a list of profitable opportunities out of CLE that they keep in reserve in case the opitmized EWR/IAH schedules leave some planes on the ground. They're not going to close CLE, but they also won't put any costly effort into developing it.
Did you notice than CLE-SAN disappeared right after CAL announced EWR-ABQ?
CAL doesn't start up flights that are "on the edge," however, so I expect the current profit forecast would have to be a lot more positive before CAL acted.
Then, too, I have this theory about CLE - that CAL makes money there, but only a little and has greater possibilities elsewhere; so they add/subtract from CLE sort of as a capacity buffer for EWR/IAH operations. It's as if CAL has a list of profitable opportunities out of CLE that they keep in reserve in case the opitmized EWR/IAH schedules leave some planes on the ground. They're not going to close CLE, but they also won't put any costly effort into developing it.
Did you notice than CLE-SAN disappeared right after CAL announced EWR-ABQ?
