CCS/SCL/MXP Applications

[UAL777flyer]

I think US would be crazy to launch service to CCS and SCL right now. The Latin economy is taking a major beating. Combine that with normal route spool-up time and you're not looking at profit potential for awhile.

As for MXP, I'm not sure of US Airways plans for international expansion these days. I'm sure they'll eventually join STAR. However, if US took up, say PHL-MXP, UA could feed traffic to it from SFO, LAX, DEN and ORD quite easily. And it's certainly better than connecting on LH in FRA. It's a thought. But I would be surprised if US went for it at this time.

 

[phllax]

So how long do you think until they file to the DOT for those route authorities. Milan would be an incredible coup, as they have been trying to get that for years and got robbed during the last round of authorizations?

 

[DLFlyer31]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/24/2002 1:22:42 PM phllax wrote:
So how long do you think until they file to the DOT for those route authorities. Milan would be an incredible coup, as they have been trying to get that for years and got robbed during the last round of authorizations?
----------------
[/blockquote]

IIRC, these countries are all open skies, so there's nothing stopping U from starting these routes whenever they want. I don't think SCL would work from any of U's hubs. CCS might work from CLT, but I think it would be pretty iffy. Yields to CCS are pretty poor right now and don't show any signs of improving.

PHL-MXP might work, but you face tough competition from CO (EWR-MXP) and DL (JFK-MXP and ATL-MXP). DL also has the codeshare with AZ making things tougher. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that DL's launch of ATL-MXP (this past spring) was the final nail in the coffin for UA's IAD-MXP flight.

 

[phllax]

MXP has been a high priority on the US wish list since the international expansion began. Italy is probably the 1 country in continental Europe that does not have full open skies. US has applied every time a new frequency to MXP has become available. They'd start tomorrow if they could. It will also be interesting to see if they apply for BOS-LGW now that UA has dropped LHR service and DL has dropped LGW service.

 

[ClueByFour]

Transatlantic non-profitable?

*boggle*

The loads are there. Or they are on the flights I've been on. Maybe cargo is off, and I'm sure that full-ticket Envoy purchases are down.

I guess the loads are really misleading...

 

[USFlyer]

Chaimes was questioned recently at a lecture to MBA students about US Airways' European presence. He indicated the transatlantic service is still a money loser and that further cuts in those markets may be possible. I'm not so sure we'll see further European expansian at this point. Also, I thought US already had BOS-LGW rights, or was that right transferred to another airport?

 

[DLFlyer31]

[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/24/2002 9:00:29 PM phllax wrote:[BR][BR]MXP has been a high priority on the US wish list since the international expansion began.  Italy is probably the 1 country in continental Europe that does not have full open skies.  US has applied every time a new frequency to MXP has become available.  They'd start tomorrow if they could.  It will also be interesting to see if they apply for BOS-LGW now that UA has dropped LHR service and DL has dropped LGW service.[BR][BR]----------------[BR][BR]Italy is Open Skies and US can start flying to MXP whenever they want. However, MXP isn't as profitable of a destination as you might think....which probably explains why AA,UA and NW have all dumped it in the past.[BR][A href=http://www.useu.be/Categories/Transportation/Dec0699SlaterUSItalyOpenSkies.html]http://www.useu.be/Categories/Transportation/Dec0699SlaterUSItalyOpenSkies.html[/A][BR][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style=MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px]
[P]As for BOS-LGW, US can have it. The route is a real dog. In the winter, fares hover around $250-300 R/T. Even in the summer yields aren't great as the higher yield traffic gravitates toward LHR. [BR][/P]
[P]Honestly, I don't see US launching a lot of new int'l routes with the exception of some caribbean flying. Even with the new cost structure, US will remain in a cash conservation mode given the weak revenue environment.[/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]

 

[ITRADE]

[P]US ALMOST got MXP about two years ago. 7 frequencies opened up for Italy service (the first opening in about 3 years). Several offers went in. DL was granted the authority to fly ATL-FCO. US was granted the alternate authority to fly PHL-MXP if DL did not actually wind up operating the route.[/P]
[P]However, IIRC, NW dropped their Italy service (either the MXP or FCO flight) at least a year or so ago. If US really wanted, they could argue dormancy and have the authority transferred to US.[/P]

 

[ITRADE]

[P][BR][BR]Forgot to mention....With AA's reduction in service to CCS, I've heard that US is considering starting the service. [BR][BR]I do agree that US's expansion point has been more Caribbean than Europe. That article I posted a week or so ago about Trinidad & Tobago should enforce the point.[BR][BR][BR][BR][STRONG]****ADDITIONAL NEWS FLASH****[/STRONG][BR][BR][STRONG]Just noticed that last Wednesday, DOT granted US's application to fly daily A-320 service between CLT and SJO (San Jose, CR). The service is purportedly to begin in February 2003.[BR][/STRONG][/P]
[P]Now only if they'd fly to the other San Jose.......