UA cuts PDX- SEA/RDM/EUG/LAX

Kev3188

Kev3188

Veteran
Oct 5, 2003
18,548
9,406
Right in the middle.
http://airlineroute.net/2014/05/24/ua-pdx-sep14/


Lots of cuts up in the Pacific NW. Sad to see UA's presence there withering away.

PDXLAX has been run since???

FWIW, SEA/EUG/RDM were flow by WestAir in the mid '90's using J31's. Then YV (OE's parent) swapped them out & used B1900D's.

Currently, OO is using EMB-120's...

YV lost the contract in the spring of '96, and was replaced by OO (and their own employees). Currently, Eagle/Envoy does the ground handling.
 
with the exception of LAX, the rest was all on 30 seat turboprops, right? That kind of flying is not viable with the pilot shortage.

LAX is exactly the result of the west coast becoming much more competitive with DL's buildup of both LAX and SEA.

PDX-LAX for DL is a large RJ market. UA couldn't compete with the 2 flights/day it had, only one of which was on a large RJ. They don't have enough large RJs to try to defend as many markets.

Given that UA mgmt. is saying they can turn the company around without closing any more hubs, they will be very hard-pressed to retain the amount of flying they do as the number of small RJs and turboprops that will have to leave the fleet far surpasses the number of Ejets coming into UA's fleet.

UA's strength in the PNW was because no other network carrier had an interest in it beyond DL/NW's fairly limited int'l ops.

UA will hunker down in SFO and defend it, pull what it has to that is non essential from LAX, and get rid of much of the rest.

the chances are real high that UA's overall revenue premiums on the west coast will suffer as DL and AA become viable network alternatives to UA and will increase in size relative to UA in the western US as a whole.

In terms of total seats on the west coast, WN will still be the largest with about 21% of the seats followed by UA with 19%, then AS with 16%, and DL followed by AA/US with about 12%.
 
let me know in a year what other markets are sustaining 30 passenger turboprops

elsewhere in the PNW, DL is adding SEA-OGG plus BZN and Mexico service.


UA's loss at PDX is DL's gain at SEA. many times over.
 
you do realize that DL's gain in SEA is multiple's larger than AS'?

It is clear by now that DL is all about creating a duplicate hub in SEA on top of AS.

UA just happens to realize it isn't worth getting in the middle of DL and AS' grudge match and is taking their toys elsewhere.

ON this regard, UA is making the absolute right call.

In the long term and further down the coast, the impact on UA might be much more long-lasting.
 
and DL's gain in traffic on PDX-LAX is larger than what UA carried in all of the markets it is discontinuing.

DL's gain in PDX-LAX was more than 6X larger than what AS gained.
 
well, duh.

DL at SEA, just like at LAX, isn't going to use its scarce gates and aircraft to serve tiny little markets. They are putting their resources into the highest profile and biggest markets.

RDM might be a nice place to live - but it just doesn't have the impact that a route like PDX-LAX has and which can be served very competitively with two large RJs plying the route.
 
good on 'em.


And it is equally true that DL and every other carrier has core markets around its strongest hubs at which it either is the only or largest carrier.


in the competitive markets that really matter to the bottom line, AS' share of the market will shrink.

UA's decision to leave intra-PNW flying will have little effect on UA's revenue but lead to a whole lot of improvement to its finances or perhaps moreso to the operators.
Given the small amount of traffic that UA carried, AS won't be gaining much and it comes nowhere close to the offsetting the increased competition in much larger markets.

If AS mgmt. talks about the great gains they are getting because of UA's decision to leave the intra-PNW markets, I'll send you a coupon for the best veggie burger you could imagine.

I am not holding my breath that I will need to though.

They will be talking about all of the new capacity in their largest markets. By DL.
 
When you look at what UA was in the Shuttle days and where they are today aside from SFO, it's fairly shocking how much they've cut back. The gate giveaway in LAX is another sign of this shrinkage. It wouldn't surprise me to see them pull back further at LAX, and dropping LAX-PDX is just one symptom of the larger problem.

I find it hard to call this as being due to DL's buildup as much as it is UA realizing they can't beat AS and QX in PDX. Pilot hiring at the regionals and retiring the E120's simply forced the issue.
 
if there is any single factor that is most responsible for UA's cuts it is the shrinking of the regional carrier industry and the pilot shortage.

I have written here frequently about it and DL has indeed been the most aggressive in seeing it and positioning itself to gain as a result of it.

regional airline service that primarily serves to connect passengers beyond an airport are the most vulnerable to being cut - and that principle will become increasingly evident in other markets on the west coast. Markets that have a decent local market presence stand a better chance of surviving but these markets are too short to have a long market component.

small turboprops and small RJs are more vulnerable than larger RJs and mainline because more seats means a larger base over which the costs can be spread.



As Kev notes, there is a long history of shorthaul turboprop service within the PNW. UA did feed passengers to/from these flights and their overall size to/from the PNW will be hurt by not having connections within the PNW.

But it is also true that DL's network redesign has been built on using only large RJs from LAX and SEA, the two markets where DL has focused its west coast attention and on building its service in markets that have high local market components.

UA has used small RJs and has markets that have a high percentage of connecting traffic - and the cuts they have announced here are directly tied to either their lack of understanding of the shift in regional carrier markets or their lack of resources to do anything about it.

DL and UA are moving in opposite directions on the west coast while AS is on the defensive against DL which is at least aware of the trends that are taking place if not themselves actually driving many of them.

UA isn't the only carrier that will have to sort out its west coast network and DL will be standing by ready to pick up revenue in markets which DL is able to profitably serve based on properly applying the principles that underline the changes that are taking place.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #15
eolesen said:
When you look at what UA was in the Shuttle days and where they are today aside from SFO, it's fairly shocking how much they've cut back. The gate giveaway in LAX is another sign of this shrinkage. It wouldn't surprise me to see them pull back further at LAX, and dropping LAX-PDX is just one symptom of the larger problem.

I find it hard to call this as being due to DL's buildup as much as it is UA realizing they can't beat AS and QX in PDX. Pilot hiring at the regionals and retiring the E120's simply forced the issue.
Click to expand...
Agreed. You're never late for a PDXSEA flight on QX, just early for the next one. UAX could never touch that level of freq.

Same (to an extent) with the other PNW cities noted. The comparitive volume connecting traffic for AS in PDX obviously adds to it, and local brand affinity is the icing on the cake...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
State of the airline webcast 2Quarter2007
Replies
3
Views
1K
Prince of PAWOBs
Prince of PAWOBs

Latest posts

Back
Top