Luv Into Phl

[USA320Pilot]

Batman:

Thanks for posting the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette column on the Southwest expansion into Philadelphia. The article echoes what I have been saying throughout this thread.

I disagree with your comments regarding posts on US Airways and United. In regard to the UCT, the information about the proposal discussed between the parties came from sources with direct knowledge of the proposed deal.

In my opinion, with the continued LCC expansion and United's inability to attract exit financing, a deal between the two companies where Bronner finances a transaction are greater.

Why? United needs money and US Airways needs to expand its international breath.

Regards,

Chip

 

[USA320Pilot]

Today Aviation Daily reported US Airways CEO Dave Siegel said he plans to fight (Southwest in Philadelphia), and notes that the airline already faces low-fare competition at its largest hub from AirTran, ATA and America West.

JP Morgan analyst Jamie Baker notes that when Southwest started service to BWI in 1993, the airport accounted for less than 8% of US Airways revenue, compared with 25% at Philadelphia. "US Airways is not expected to go out without a fight," he said.

Southwest chairman Herb Kelleher said adding Philadelphia will only siphon a few passengers from its BWI operation. About 100,000 passengers travel annually from the Philadelphia area to BWI, so he believes "we are not cannibalizing ourselves" by serving Philadelphia. Most BWI passengers come from southern Pennsylvania.

Regards,

Chip

 

[USA320Pilot]

US Air Still Restructuring; Predicts Links With LCCs

WASHINGTON (Aviation Daily) - As the U.S. network and low-cost carriers (LCC) intensify their current battles, US Airways CEO David Siegel yesterday predicted that the two airline business models will likely converge rather than lead to the "extinction" of any one of the models.

Siegel told the Aero Club of Washington that in some ways, the LCCs are starting to look more like the big airlines. He noted that JetBlue, AirTran and other LCCs are touting frills such as live television and leather seats, and several LCCs are flying long-haul transcontinental routes. At the same time, legacy carriers are dropping meal service on many routes, eliminating first-class cabins and simplifying fares.

Siegel believes low-cost carriers and network carriers will likely form partnerships. For example, "why shouldn't the major U.S. international airlines cooperate with LCCs to feed their international services?" He also thought it would be a good idea to bring LCCs into the major carrier frequent-flyer programs.

One low-cost airline quickly ruled out that possibility yesterday. Southwest Chairman Herb Kelleher, in a conference call with reporters about his carrier's Philadelphia plans, said he has looked at linking with network carriers over the years but found it difficult as Southwest's operations are "completely different" from the other hub-and-spoke carriers "in every respect." In return for an alliance, Kelleher said the network carriers "wanted us to operate the way they do."

Ultimately, however, Siegel said, "Old guard airlines" like US Airways are going to "have to completely change the way we do business. While the carrier's Chapter 11 reorganization gave the airline a "second chance at life...we are certainly not done restructuring."

In response to a question, Siegel said the carrier "has no plans to file" for another round of Chapter 11 protection, but said more changes and cost cuts are needed before the carrier reaches "sustained profitability."

Siegel said the legacy carriers can learn a lot from the LCCs, including their "simple set of customer expectations." Network carriers, "in trying to be all things to all people, have done just the opposite." The airlines have created a "set of schizophrenic expectations, many in conflict with one other."

Siegel believes that some airlines are still looking for the "quick fix" to their problems, citing development of an airline-within-an airline or "less room-in-coach" or the new "elite-for-a-day" marketing program. "These just aren't panaceas," he said. "Not close."

He believes legacy carriers need to find a way to "better exploit the great strengths and structural advantages that made them the world's aviation leaders."

 

[Fly]

Chip Munn Posted on Oct 30 2003, 02:08 AM

Fly:

As a United Flight Attendant, I find your input into the US Airways forum interesting. How come you do not post very much on the United board and seem to only chase me around?

I find that complimentary.

That's it. You found me out. You are the man for me.

By the way, did you see where United said pension issues and the Atlantic Coast contract are among the remaining tasks before United can file an amended application with the Air Transportation Stabilization Board for backing of a private sector loan.

Fly, I was just wondering how can that be? Moreover, who first reported about this on the USaviation.com message boards?

Yes, I saw that.......and the news there is.......? Well, gee, because those issues need to be cleared up before United can file an amended application (and you went to college for that?)

Fly, what happens if those issues remain unresolved? Furthermore, when will United settle the municipal bond litigation and begin paying its debt at the UCT hubs, and since the ATSB loan guarantee must repay up to $1.5 billion in DIP financing, where will United's reamining exit financing come from?

Then United waits to emerge from BK. I guess they begin to settle those issues when they get some MONEY. Exit financing: (Hey, can you ask your bestest buddy if he has some extra cash?)

Fly, those who live in glass houses may not want to fire "cheap shots".

"CHEAP SHOTS" Where? Can I have one. This BK deal stinks and I could really use a drink!

 

[TomBascom]

Siegel said the legacy carriers can learn a lot from the LCCs, including their "simple set of customer expectations." Network carriers, "in trying to be all things to all people, have done just the opposite." The airlines have created a "set of schizophrenic expectations, many in conflict with one other."

Siegel believes that some airlines are still looking for the "quick fix" to their problems, citing development of an airline-within-an airline or "less room-in-coach" or the new "elite-for-a-day" marketing program. "These just aren't panaceas," he said. "Not close."

He believes legacy carriers need to find a way to "better exploit the great strengths and structural advantages that made them the world's aviation leaders."

This is interesting. In the first paragraph he starts to sound like he "gets it" and that there might be something good coming (keep in mind that one of his summer Attache columns was all about the fare structure and said that changes are coming...)

But then in the second paragraph he forgot to mention his own program of quick fixes -- plastic wine cups, filthy lavs, etc, etc...

 

[FlyingHippie]

Network carriers, "in trying to be all things to all people, have done just the opposite."

In US Airways' case the airline of least resort. Dave Siegel should be working for Wal-Mart. He'd be in hog heaven with cheap illegal immigrant labor.

---------
"I don't want to sell anything, buy anything or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed… or buy anything sold or processed… or process anything sold, bought or processed… or repair anything sold, bought or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that." - Lloyd Dobler

 

[FlyingHippie]

I can't keep having the same rant with Chip. It's not healthy for me. Some people wish to live in dreamland, I don't.

Fly, Chip posted 27 notes last night. Each with that ground hog day theme. I don't know how he does it. Was there a full moon?

---------
"I don't want to sell anything, buy anything or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed… or buy anything sold or processed… or process anything sold, bought or processed… or repair anything sold, bought or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that." - Lloyd Dobler

 

[robbedagain]

I really dont see how a 70 seater EMB-170 is going to compete head to head with SWA's B-737s. How would the 70 seat EMB-170 compete against a 130 plus seat Boeing 737?

 

[whlinder]

I really dont see how a 70 seater EMB-170 is going to compete head to head with SWA's B-737s. How would the 70 seat EMB-170 compete against a 130 plus seat Boeing 737?

The same way MetroJoke competed at BWI...


I'm curious as to why all you U employees are worried about how WN will handle rain snow sleet wind clouds ATC ground stops whatever... How do you expect to successfully compete and protect your turf when all you are doing is worrying about how they will fair operationally? Why not spend some time figuring out how to improve YOUR operation? How is US going to provide superior service, keep costs competitive and be competitive on price and be PROFITABLE? You've just lost a significant amount of business traveller revenue, between more passengers flying WN or spending less to fly on US. Worrying about the PHL weather does nothing to solve that problem.

 

[tadjr]

Why not spend some time figuring out how to improve YOUR operation? How is US going to provide superior service, keep costs competitive and be competitive on price and be PROFITABLE?

Have you not been reading the board man? I'm pretty much all out of "new" ideas to help. Every one I've submitted so far has been rejected for some reason. Guess I dont know nothin bout running an airline.
The employees have given management many ideas and most seem to fall on deaf ears since we're just the grunts. Maybe you should be addressing your question to the CCY types here. Notice they havent had too much to say since the court rejected their last great plan for the company.

 

[High Iron]

Have you not been reading the board man? I'm pretty much all out of "new" ideas to help. Every one I've submitted so far has been rejected for some reason. Guess I dont know nothin bout running an airline.
The employees have given management many ideas and most seem to fall on deaf ears since we're just the grunts. Maybe you should be addressing your question to the CCY types here. Notice they havent had too much to say since the court rejected their last great plan for the company.

Exactly. Sounds like someone just parachuted into this place and opined as if this subject were never discussed before today. This place is getting more and more like 'Airliners.nuts' every day.

 

[7.5victim]

I never said unit costs need to be a low as AirTran's. They do not because the company will have a revenue premium in international markets and through its alliances. This is free money that the LCC's cannot obtain, without an alliance of their own.

Hey Chip,

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but why do the current crop of LCC's need an alliance in order to gain a revenue premium? If you look at the % of customers who purchase full Y tickets on WN, vs the legacy carriers, you'll find that WN enjoys a revenue premium, especially in competetive markets.

As for additional revenue from Int'l services, whats stopping a LCC from using the open skies agreements to start Int'l service? I could very easily see FL leasing a few used 767-200's and running them out of BWI to Europe. BWI-AMS, anyone? Max. walkup fare of say, $499 each way, a business class cabin for $699 each way, unsold J seats available for $150 fee from any fare on day of travel (similar to FL's current domestic upgrade program). In some form, the legacy carrers will face an Int'l LCC, sooner rather than later, mark my words!

 

[diogenes]

Very cunning of WN. Wait until U has thoroughly pissed off PIT and PA, and then swoops into U's last castle.

Make no mistake, WN intends to deliver the knockout blow.

"You can run, but you can't hide."

I've always contended WN is finishing what PI started.

 

[wnfan37]

Yea, well I for one will not be riding the "Greyhound Bus with wings"

hmmm, ok. we'll just be happy with the other 1million or so passengers we take onboard.

good lessons on battles there... but SWA hasn't lost a fare war yet, and far be it from US Airways to put up a fight. just don't think US has enough "I owe U's" to write.

 

[Colby]

Hey guys....

I have only been scanning through everyones opinion on this WN issue.....Well, I don't know if anyone read the Editorial Page from the Philly Inquirer.... PLEASE.... All I have to say is...Give me a Break..... Do you REALLY think that WN is going to hurt us that bad.... Look at the markets they fly out of already. They haven't hurt AA or UA or NW or Even CO. From experience as a Travel Agent. It won't take long for PAX to realize that they are going to have to make 3 stops to get to their final destination and here we go....Would you rather stop 3 times or get to your destination..... Plus, Did anyone read the US TODAY yesterday. We go to the Caribbean and Europe... Southwest is strickly Domestic. So, they like Airtran WN will compete for those Domestic markets but US will still strive for their Caribbean and European flights. GOD what a shame that some airline that offers "Wacky" (per Philly Inquirer) service go up against an airline like US AIR.... At least OUR Business Travelers won't have to deal with Obnoxious PA's and "Peanut Races" to which a business traveler that I had on a flight found unacceptable !! You like a business traveler try to work on a flight that has a lot of interuptions to keep the Passengers Entertained... We don't need to Entertain...We just need to get them from point A to B with GOOD SERVICE !!!!!