New Int'l Cities For Us (what Lcc?)

firstamendment said:
Yeah....yippeee, ALLLLRIGHT. excelllent, soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooexcited, positve news, OH, MY GOD!! WOW WEEEEEE. Two snaps and a bag of pretzels....two thumbs up.....BRAVO....congratulations!! :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:
Is THAT enough? <_<
[post="201793"][/post]​

Wow! That got me excited! :D
 
Adding intl; telle me THIS COMPANY IS NOT ABOUT TO LIQUIDATE>>>>

Their business plan all along??????????

get it down 8-10.00 an hr ...

CAn you guys see what they're doing?..or maybe you can..

THERE ARE BS'ERS>>>>

I DONT BELIEVE A WORD OF WHAT THEY SAY>>>



VOTE NO>>>>>
 
ITRADE said:
Note that the text says "potential" new routes. Doesn't say that they will.

You're right, it does not guarantee a specific city. However, I took

The plan envisions expanding European and Caribbean service, with potential new transatlantic routes from Philadelphia to Star Alliance hubs of Warsaw (LOT Polish Airlines), Vienna (Austrian Airlines), Oslo & Copenhagen (SAS Scandinavian Airlines), and Birmingham (BMI).
to mean the following:

"If the plan is enacted, US is going to expand transatlantic service, and those service expansions will be into Star hubs." If he meant that any major in city in Europe was a potential expansion, he would have said "with potential new transatlantic routes to any major city in Europe."

Maybe I am wrong. People interpret things differently. But I've read his quote over a few times now and can't see myself interpreting it in a different way.

Note that other parts of 320s posts said, "Increased Caribbean, European, and Latin American expansion. The plan envisions expanding European and Caribbean service."

This is true, is it not?
[post="201937"][/post]​
I didn't say that part was wrong. He has been posting for months how US was going to fly into all these Star hubs as part of the transformation plan. I kept trying to engage in meaningful discussions with him on the subject, because I did not (and still do not) believe that US will be adding any transatlantic routes into another Star hub.

Perhaps I got after him too much for being wrong in his predictions. However, everytime something he says comes to fruition, he is on here saying "I told you so." Even blind squirrels find a nut once in a while.

I'm also curious why he refuses to engage in meaningful discussion on US Airways' future business plans. Why is that?
 
Didn't anyone note the quote in the middle of the article:

"Overall US Airways transatlantic frequency for summer 2005 will be unchanged from summer 2004."

So they are pulling the capacity from somewhere else.
 
ITRADE said:
PIT-LGW, PIT-FRA and ???
[post="202006"][/post]​
I dont think the second PHL-CDG flight will be coming back. What a shame though we really need that flight. It was always full. A second PHL-LGW would be nice as well. I always though that US should have like a 10am dep to LGW...get there at a decent hour and your not jet lagged. Crews would love it im sure.
 
TransatlanticFlyGuy said:
I dont think the second PHL-CDG flight will be coming back. What a shame though we really need that flight. It was always full.
[post="202016"][/post]​

Thinking straight from the USair Business Plan. If it runs full, let's pull it and try something else.....geeze...... :down:
 
AA runs ORD, JFK, and BOS morning flights to LHR. First and business are almost always full!! Might be a good idea.
 
true, but the people that sit up there really like nonstop flights and LGW is allright for a London destination with no connection.
 
True. A morning LGW flight would also allow for a good number of early morning east coast connections. UA's morning departure is at 9:30 a.m.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top