Specter, Casey blister US Airways
- Thread starter 700IAM
- Start date
burghlaw1
Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2003
- Messages
- 76
- Reaction score
- 0
ACAA didn't exist when the decision was made to build the midfield terminal. The terminal was the brainchild of Tom Forrester - county commissioner- who wanted a world-class airport for the city, and wanted USAIR to maintain its primary hub here.
The fact of the matter is that 25 years ago when the idea for a new airport was in its infancy- no one-and I mean no one - with the exception of maybe Frank Lorenzo - thought about airline economics in light of deregulation. Labor costs were a holdover from a time when airlines were protected from competition because the government decided who competed with whom and on what routes. Rather than fight labor, which is very difficult for common carriers under the Railway Labor Act, airlines thought they would "grow their way" into profitability by mergers etc. Given the power that airline unions historically held, they had no incentive to look at the long-term picture of the airline industry (for a good example of a union looking at the long-term picture - take a look at UAW and its President Ron Gettelfinger). It didn't work, and everything finally came crashing down after 9/11 (amazing that it took that long). The hub is not coming back. Pittsburgh cannot support a hub for a legacy carrier that cannot be a fortress hub. USAIR's pulldown and the presence of low cost-carriers has put an end to that. IF you take US at face value that it loses money in PIT (which I am not sure I believe), then it means they cannot compete and it will only be a matter of time before it cathces up with the airline yet again.
The moral of the story is this: hindsight is always 20/20. But if you are looking to place blame, there is a lot of it to go around including government, airline management and the unions.
I know that my post will probably stir a lot of controversy, and I am willing to take my lumps. With regard to organized labor, I know there will be lots of posts about how the unions gave concessions here and there - but ask yourself: did the unions do everything they could to ensure that the airline was competitive in the long run? Everything that was done apeared to this outsider to be incremental, dealing with the issue of the day and deferring the hard issues. And for management, ask whether you really did what you could to partner with labor to ensure competitiveness? And for government - why did you put your head in the sand when USAir was being eaten alive by Southwest beginning in the early 1990's? That goes back to the beginning of the midfield terminal! Why didn't you look for ways to cut costs much earlier in the process? Those are just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
Enough said.
With regard to Specter - he's pretty much told Parker not to let the door kick him in the butt on the way out.
The fact of the matter is that 25 years ago when the idea for a new airport was in its infancy- no one-and I mean no one - with the exception of maybe Frank Lorenzo - thought about airline economics in light of deregulation. Labor costs were a holdover from a time when airlines were protected from competition because the government decided who competed with whom and on what routes. Rather than fight labor, which is very difficult for common carriers under the Railway Labor Act, airlines thought they would "grow their way" into profitability by mergers etc. Given the power that airline unions historically held, they had no incentive to look at the long-term picture of the airline industry (for a good example of a union looking at the long-term picture - take a look at UAW and its President Ron Gettelfinger). It didn't work, and everything finally came crashing down after 9/11 (amazing that it took that long). The hub is not coming back. Pittsburgh cannot support a hub for a legacy carrier that cannot be a fortress hub. USAIR's pulldown and the presence of low cost-carriers has put an end to that. IF you take US at face value that it loses money in PIT (which I am not sure I believe), then it means they cannot compete and it will only be a matter of time before it cathces up with the airline yet again.
The moral of the story is this: hindsight is always 20/20. But if you are looking to place blame, there is a lot of it to go around including government, airline management and the unions.
I know that my post will probably stir a lot of controversy, and I am willing to take my lumps. With regard to organized labor, I know there will be lots of posts about how the unions gave concessions here and there - but ask yourself: did the unions do everything they could to ensure that the airline was competitive in the long run? Everything that was done apeared to this outsider to be incremental, dealing with the issue of the day and deferring the hard issues. And for management, ask whether you really did what you could to partner with labor to ensure competitiveness? And for government - why did you put your head in the sand when USAir was being eaten alive by Southwest beginning in the early 1990's? That goes back to the beginning of the midfield terminal! Why didn't you look for ways to cut costs much earlier in the process? Those are just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
Enough said.
With regard to Specter - he's pretty much told Parker not to let the door kick him in the butt on the way out.
N965VJ
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Messages
- 3,255
- Reaction score
- 149
Another “X†shaped airside terminal. To be fair, I believe that airport Master Plans are more of an FAA mandate than something hatched by politicians or businesses.
nycbusdriver
Veteran
I know for a fact that NWA has at times salivated at getting hold of PHL as an international gateway. PHL can stand on its own as far as O&D traffic for domestic and international.
The reason no other hub and spoke carrier has not made PHL a hub is because the poor airport infrastructure and airspace will simply not support another airline's hub. Even airports with great facilities have trouble supporting two carriers' hubs. Like DFW and DEN. The only real successful two carrier hubs are ORD and ATL. All of these airports have facilities that PHL can only wish for, but will never occur due to space constraints.
I didn't say that USAir was a falling star back then. The fact is they became one in short order, and the fact is PHL airport MFWICS hitch their wagon to it.
CynicalResAgent
Veteran
But in PIT's defense, the old terminal was really old and outdated and was in need of being replaced anyway. Maybe the scope of the new terminal was too much with hindsight being 20/20 but they still needed to replace the old terminal anyway.
They should consider it an investment in their future, they've built an airport that should serve their needs for the next 50 years (whenever they need more gates they just knock down the wall and open the rest of the concourse) where as a place like PHL will probably never have facilities adequate to their needs.
IND has a rather ambitious airport plan and it's doubtful it will ever be a hub.
They should consider it an investment in their future, they've built an airport that should serve their needs for the next 50 years (whenever they need more gates they just knock down the wall and open the rest of the concourse) where as a place like PHL will probably never have facilities adequate to their needs.
IND has a rather ambitious airport plan and it's doubtful it will ever be a hub.
You have a tendency to leave out important facts in your continuing bashing of PHL.
1. Other than roadway design/construction, the Majority of AWest was paid for by US Airways - not the city of Philadelphia, very unlike the PIT situation.
2. The PHL administration is obviously much more astute in financial planning than PIT (was), since they did #1 and you can see today how reluctant they are to provide US with any additional physical airport expansion.
3. PIT is just one in a series of fiscal missteps made over the past 10 years by PIttsburgh. They are still in Receivership to the State.
4. DL would very likely move it's JFK operations to PHL in a heartbeat. The A-West facilities are far superior to those at JFK - go up and take a look sometime. JFK is lkely to be in an FAA forced cutback situation very soon and offers NO relief whatsover to PHL congestion/delay problems. Further, DL will be perfectly situated in their new A-East gates for easy international expansion if they decided to do so AND that may be their plan. Further, NW is in need of a Trans-Atlantic/Western Asia hub - DTW is too far west.
5. Refuting your sarcastic statement that "..if PHL was such a gold mine.." is easy. 19M Annual Domestic O&D - 4.3M International O&D. Any airline that can't make that work shouldn't be in business.
6. Any region that invests $1B for a new airport with PIT's relatively low O&D and economic state at the time, on the basis of a single carrier's connecting network, is indeed foolhardy - at best .
PO'ed PHX Ramper
Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 87
- Reaction score
- 0
I call on Doug to explain himself there. Either he's a liar or.... No, he's a liar.
LCC_#1
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 1,771
- Reaction score
- 0
BOO HOO!! Will the whining and complaining EVER end from these BOZOS??
Pick a number and get in line behind the rest of the cities, states, counties, and employees that have ever been screwed over by US Airways or ANY airline for that matter!! :down: :down: :down:
It seems that CLT & PIT handle close to the same O&D...Then how do they make CLT work and they can't make PIT work? I think it all stems from the cost to construct both facilities and the cost to pay back the bonds...
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
It's a sad state of affairs when you can't get the first one right.
Construction of Terminal One [the designation originally given to what became A-West - Jim] was largely financed through the issuance of general Airport revenue bonds by the City in July 1998. (More accurately, the costs of terminal construction were financed through bonds issued by the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development (PAID), which, in turn, were secured by the contemporaneous issuance of general Airport revenue bonds to PAID by the City.) Debt service on the bonds is to be paid from terminal rentals and PFC revenues. PFC revenues are also being used to fund construction costs on a â€pay-as-you-go†basis.
As it states, the debt service was made possible by primarily US' leases - just like PIT. How could the the city of Philadelphia have been so "stupid" that they spent large sums on "the basis of one carrier's connecting network?"
Of course, being wrong on #1 blows #2.
Did they move the airport to Pittsburgh when I wasn't looking?
Speculation.
Which tends to lead back to my original question. With all that money to be made, why did no other airline put a hub in PHL? Why was US the only airline interested?
Additionally, those numbers are great - if US had a fortress hub there. But US only has about half the enplanements and is by far the largest connecting carrier at PHL. That would indicate that US gets well under half the domestic O&D.
I'll mark this one down to your usual PHL = wonderful/ PIT = awful views, since PHL, DTW, CLT, CVG, SLC. etc have all invested significant sums based on "a single carrier's connecting network."
Don't get me wrong - I don't think PIT will be a hub for a big network carrier in the foreseeable future. On the other hand, I don't blame everything on PIT or the county either - unlike some who seem to take delight in bashing everything not PHL......
Jim
dariencc
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,284
- Reaction score
- 1,912
You don't know what you are talking about. The CLT terminal opened in 1982, the PIT terminal in 1992. You can double that 400 million if CLT had been built 10 years later.
9/11 and the fact that U operates a hub in nearby PHL combined to kill PIT. The per pax cost skyrocketed with the downsizing.
If history had been different and DAL had a PIT hub instead of CVG, it would still be in operation. PIT is a much larger metro area than CVG, and slightly larger than CLE.
I stand corrected on the dates....The doubling of the 400 mil is your assumption, not a fact....I still say that there is plenty of blame, not just US..
Be Careful What You Wish For.
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 2,269
- Reaction score
- 571
Everyone is putting out different versions of the PIT v. PHL argument.
If it isn't the O&D ,etc... why did they close PIT?
If it isn't the O&D ,etc... why did they close PIT?
