🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟
Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁
Pit-lgw Back For 04 Summer
- Thread starter AM49AAA
- Start date
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
I See London...
ARLINGTON (theHub.com) - US Airways announced today that it will reinstate nonstop seasonal service between Pittsburgh and London’s Gatwick Airport beginning May 1, 2004. The flights will operate daily through Oct. 29, 2004, using Boeing 767 aircraft. Customers will be able to begin purchasing tickets for these flights on Dec. 10.
In a meeting last week, Allegheny County Chief Executive-elect Dan Onorato asked US Airways to evaluate the viability of resuming the route for next year. “We had looked at utilizing the aircraft for other seasonal flying, but have concluded that in conjunction with the commitment to fly our existing schedule at Pittsburgh through next October, Pittsburgh-London Gatwick service is a viable alternative. We know that the service is used by business and leisure travelers alike, and hope this is good news for the local community,†said Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs Chris Chiames. "Meanwhile, we look forward to working with Mr. Onorato to explore alternatives for a long-term solution that reduces costs at Pittsburgh International Airport, following our productive meeting with him last week."
Chip comments: During the past couple of years US Airways has pulled down the Pittsburgh - Gatwick flight during the winter, therefore, this news should not be a surprise. However, US Airways' specific reference to Onorato's request to resume the flight was not required, therefore, I believe the Company is making it sound as if this flight addition is an "olive branch" or an act of good faith.
In my opinion, US Airways does not have a short-term alternative to transfer Pittsburgh flying because United's bankuptcy proceeding continues to be delayed. If the companies have moved away from the UCT because it does not lower unit costs and are now more interested in an AF-KLM type of deal or a true merger, then no deal can be done until the Chicago-based carrier emerges without creditor's committee and bankruptcy court approval.
United's efforts to emerge in the first half of 2004 received a set back today when the Senate adjourned until late January with no action taken on pension relief for the airline industry.
This move could delay United's emergence, thus Siegel does not have any leverage to leave Pittsburgh until more is known on whether or not the company can address the pension problem and obtain the loan guarantee.
Tonight the New York Times posted this story regarding United's ATSB loan guarantee application. The Times said at least two of United's unions said, however, that they had not been briefed on the company's plans by last night. One union official expressed skepticism about its chances. "It's wishful thinking," he said. ''There's no way they can get $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees without getting that pension plan fixed."
Mike Boyd's comments to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last Friday are correct and like I have said during the past couple of months, US Airways is interested in obtaining some of United's gates in Denver and Chicago and could move the Pittsburgh assets west, but this may not occur to some point in the future because I understand Bronner is not interested in financing any deal until US Airways can lower its unit costs to reflect the new revenue environment and United can prove it can emerge.
However, as I have recently said the Pittsburgh hub negotiations are being held hostage to United's exit financing and there is now reason to believe the corporate combination plan could shift from the UCT to a AF-KLM type of deal or a true merger to obtain "economies of scale" to lower unit costs.
Meanwhile, it is my understanding the US Airways Board including ALPA MEC Chairman Bill Pollock will meet next week to update David Bronner on the transformation plan.
Regards,
Chip
ARLINGTON (theHub.com) - US Airways announced today that it will reinstate nonstop seasonal service between Pittsburgh and London’s Gatwick Airport beginning May 1, 2004. The flights will operate daily through Oct. 29, 2004, using Boeing 767 aircraft. Customers will be able to begin purchasing tickets for these flights on Dec. 10.
In a meeting last week, Allegheny County Chief Executive-elect Dan Onorato asked US Airways to evaluate the viability of resuming the route for next year. “We had looked at utilizing the aircraft for other seasonal flying, but have concluded that in conjunction with the commitment to fly our existing schedule at Pittsburgh through next October, Pittsburgh-London Gatwick service is a viable alternative. We know that the service is used by business and leisure travelers alike, and hope this is good news for the local community,†said Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs Chris Chiames. "Meanwhile, we look forward to working with Mr. Onorato to explore alternatives for a long-term solution that reduces costs at Pittsburgh International Airport, following our productive meeting with him last week."
Chip comments: During the past couple of years US Airways has pulled down the Pittsburgh - Gatwick flight during the winter, therefore, this news should not be a surprise. However, US Airways' specific reference to Onorato's request to resume the flight was not required, therefore, I believe the Company is making it sound as if this flight addition is an "olive branch" or an act of good faith.
In my opinion, US Airways does not have a short-term alternative to transfer Pittsburgh flying because United's bankuptcy proceeding continues to be delayed. If the companies have moved away from the UCT because it does not lower unit costs and are now more interested in an AF-KLM type of deal or a true merger, then no deal can be done until the Chicago-based carrier emerges without creditor's committee and bankruptcy court approval.
United's efforts to emerge in the first half of 2004 received a set back today when the Senate adjourned until late January with no action taken on pension relief for the airline industry.
This move could delay United's emergence, thus Siegel does not have any leverage to leave Pittsburgh until more is known on whether or not the company can address the pension problem and obtain the loan guarantee.
Tonight the New York Times posted this story regarding United's ATSB loan guarantee application. The Times said at least two of United's unions said, however, that they had not been briefed on the company's plans by last night. One union official expressed skepticism about its chances. "It's wishful thinking," he said. ''There's no way they can get $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees without getting that pension plan fixed."
Mike Boyd's comments to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last Friday are correct and like I have said during the past couple of months, US Airways is interested in obtaining some of United's gates in Denver and Chicago and could move the Pittsburgh assets west, but this may not occur to some point in the future because I understand Bronner is not interested in financing any deal until US Airways can lower its unit costs to reflect the new revenue environment and United can prove it can emerge.
However, as I have recently said the Pittsburgh hub negotiations are being held hostage to United's exit financing and there is now reason to believe the corporate combination plan could shift from the UCT to a AF-KLM type of deal or a true merger to obtain "economies of scale" to lower unit costs.
Meanwhile, it is my understanding the US Airways Board including ALPA MEC Chairman Bill Pollock will meet next week to update David Bronner on the transformation plan.
Regards,
Chip
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
Yeah, but what is in the front and the belly?Rob said:
I'm suggesting that it would not suprise me if the paid Envoy and cargo revenues make these things worth it.
If it could make it, I'd bet US would run PIT-LGW on a 757 ETOPS, if they had any--even in the winter.
Similar threads
