Us Airways Maps A New East Coast Strategy
- Thread starter BoeingBoy
- Start date
First, PIT-SEA has the same basic fares as PHL-SEA (and lately has been cheaper). Second, the fact someone could take a connection thru PHL will drive down fares in other markets. I see it all the time. Third, rolling out a new fare structure all at once could be suicide given US's financial state. Let them roll it out in PHL, tweak it and then deploy it system-wide. Try to keep an open mind. People are already bashing the plan and no one has even heard it.AKA_trvlr64 said:
Thats a lot of flights to add to BOS, since LGA and DCA are slot restricted and operate on the "use it or lose it" principle. (i.e. if US Airways ain't currently using it, they lost it.)USA320Pilot said:
Its not like LGA and DCA have lots of slots that nobody wants.
I would expect that they would reduce frequencies and increase aircraft size... For example, 9 flights/day LGA to BUF on Dash8 and ERJ's can be changed into 5 flights/day on ERJ-170's and 319's, thus freeing 4 slots for something else. I am sure there are lots of other examples like this.
Right sizing the shuttle makes sense too... Look for peak flights to operate on mainline trips, and off-peak trips (like 9pm) to be operated on smaller airplanes. I would expect that shuttle gets looked at in a whole new way. Do they still guarantee a seat, even if it means pulling out another aircraft like EAL did back in the day? If so, this would be the first to go, but maybe it already has, I don't know.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
The “Going Forward Plan†is to increase the utilization of the current 279 fleet by about 20%, from 10.5 to 12.5+ hours per day and to fly the additional time with existing personnel to average down unit costs. Some of the lift will come from current assets and resources dedicated to PIT.
Crew staffing will be obtained from increased productivity due to the new Reserve Time Balancing program and increased pilot and flight attendant pay caps.
Thus, if labor does not participate, the company can not dramatically increase its flying to average down unit costs to compete. You cannot have one without the other.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Crew staffing will be obtained from increased productivity due to the new Reserve Time Balancing program and increased pilot and flight attendant pay caps.
Thus, if labor does not participate, the company can not dramatically increase its flying to average down unit costs to compete. You cannot have one without the other.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
OP
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #36
"Thus, if labor does not participate, the company can not dramatically increase its flying to average down unit costs to compete. You cannot have one without the other."
Well, not quite right. There are all those furloughed crewmembers that might like a chance to come back.
I know that USA320Pilot doesn't agree, but the difference in cost between doing the flying with current active employees or recalled employees is pretty negligible. At least that's what the BTS data, Eclat Consulting, and Aviation Week say.
Jim
Well, not quite right. There are all those furloughed crewmembers that might like a chance to come back.
I know that USA320Pilot doesn't agree, but the difference in cost between doing the flying with current active employees or recalled employees is pretty negligible. At least that's what the BTS data, Eclat Consulting, and Aviation Week say.
Jim
repeet
Veteran
Only the Pilots and Flight Attendants contracts need to be changed in order to institute this "plan". None of the other CBA's would prohibit these or a myriad of other changes.
I can see the Pilots going for this, but the company is going to have to talk real pretty to the Flight Attendants group.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
What prohibits them from doing that now?USA320Pilot said:
the turtle
Advanced
- Mar 7, 2003
- 224
- 0
U uses Mesa owned DCA-LGA slots it purchased from the Midway bankruptcy. How many, I do not know
To some degree, the company has little choice but to reduce fares at PHL; they're going to face competition (non-stop or direct/connecting) from Southwest (or Frontier) on pretty much every single route from PHL to west of the Mississippi (except DAL/DFW) or Florida. Moreover, AirTran's got most of the rest of the East covered from PHL via ATL, and you can bet that Delta smells blood in the water and would love to see their most direct network competitor liquidate.
I do think that building the focus operations at BOS, LGA, and DCA with the Embraer 170's and CRJ-701's, along with increased mainline flying, can be a viable strategy, given some caveats. First of all, the fares have to be rationalized there, as well. WN at BWI and Independence Air at IAD are going to limit how much US can charge from DCA and still fill its planes. jetBlue at JFK, as well as AirTran and ATA at LGA and Song at all three NYC airports will limit prices at LGA. Amtrak's Acela will continue to affect Shuttle loads and yields, and the 170 may well be the right-sized aircraft for some Shuttle frequencies. At BOS, low-fare competition continues to heat up with jetBlue, ATA, Song, AirTran, and America West all offering low-fare service and with Southwest offering close to 60 daily flights from PVD and MHT combined by the end of the summer. You won't be able to effectively compete with jetBlue from NYC by charging twice as much or more for the privilege of flying a turboprop out of LGA. The fares on all this new service must be set at levels that encourage people to fly AND choose US Airways as their travel partner while covering the company's costs (and it's my opinion that a rational fare structure would help accomplish this goal).
It does seem like the writing is on the wall for PIT, and I can see the advantages of leaving -- shedding high airport costs and the fact that a lot of topped-out PIT employees might be unwilling to move to follow jobs to BOS, LGA, or DCA. And yet US faces little competition at PIT and could probably double (or more) its traffic there, helping to bring down per-passenger costs (in combination with the initiatives on the table from the state and county), by fixing the fare structure.
I do think that building the focus operations at BOS, LGA, and DCA with the Embraer 170's and CRJ-701's, along with increased mainline flying, can be a viable strategy, given some caveats. First of all, the fares have to be rationalized there, as well. WN at BWI and Independence Air at IAD are going to limit how much US can charge from DCA and still fill its planes. jetBlue at JFK, as well as AirTran and ATA at LGA and Song at all three NYC airports will limit prices at LGA. Amtrak's Acela will continue to affect Shuttle loads and yields, and the 170 may well be the right-sized aircraft for some Shuttle frequencies. At BOS, low-fare competition continues to heat up with jetBlue, ATA, Song, AirTran, and America West all offering low-fare service and with Southwest offering close to 60 daily flights from PVD and MHT combined by the end of the summer. You won't be able to effectively compete with jetBlue from NYC by charging twice as much or more for the privilege of flying a turboprop out of LGA. The fares on all this new service must be set at levels that encourage people to fly AND choose US Airways as their travel partner while covering the company's costs (and it's my opinion that a rational fare structure would help accomplish this goal).
It does seem like the writing is on the wall for PIT, and I can see the advantages of leaving -- shedding high airport costs and the fact that a lot of topped-out PIT employees might be unwilling to move to follow jobs to BOS, LGA, or DCA. And yet US faces little competition at PIT and could probably double (or more) its traffic there, helping to bring down per-passenger costs (in combination with the initiatives on the table from the state and county), by fixing the fare structure.
I think the point about the slots is this:700UW said:
1. Nobody is creating new slots nor is anybody disposing of large numbers of slots... Therefore, US Airways will not be able to appreciably increase their slot holdings (although the Midway DIP was a creative way to acquire slots)
2. The slots that US Airways currently holds are being under-utilizied. If you have two slots, is your next best opportunity a CRJ to ILM or a 319 to ORD? Historically, US Airways has shied away from competing with AA and UA to ORD, so the answer was the RJ to ILM.
With a rational fare structure, it makes sense for US Airways to use larger airplanes with less frequencies to larger markets. Maybe some smaller markets (i.e. SAV, ILM, TYS) get dropped altogether for nonstop service to LGA (that is why you have a hub in CLT, right?), and then you use these slots to run, presumably more lucrative flights to ORD, MCI, STL, DTW, MSP, Florida, and others).
I think part of the problem is focus. US Airways has for a long time tried to be the hometown airline for BUF, ROC, RDU, ILM, CAE, etc, when they should be aiming to hometown airline for NYC, BOS, and DC. People in CAE need to get to NYC. But people in NYC need to get to ORD.
I think this strategy has merit. The questions now are all a matter of implementation. Can it be done quick enough? How long for customers to respond? Is it too little too late? etc.
the turtle
Advanced
- Mar 7, 2003
- 224
- 0
Mesa Air Group Announces Successful Bid For The Acquisition of Midway Airlines Assets700UW said:
Thursday December 11, 2:21 pm ET
PHOENIX, Dec. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Mesa Air Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: MESA - News) announced today that the court accepted its $9.15 million bid to purchase the assets of Midway Airlines, Inc. ("Midway") through Midway's Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding. The assets include Midway's operating certificate, six leased CRJ aircraft including Midway's right to three additional leased aircraft and two owned CRJ aircraft, all of Midway's CRJ spare parts and support equipment, all aircraft landing and/or takeoff slots at New York LaGuardia and Washington National airports, and all related acquisition materials associated with the operation of Midway's CRJ operations. The deal is subject to a final order to be entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court approving the sale.
"The assets of Midway Airlines will be placed into service under long-term revenue-guarantee contracts with our airline partners, significantly enhancing our growth in 2004. With our competitive, low cost structure and our tremendous employees, these assets will provide excellent service to our airline partners and are anticipated to earn meaningful returns for our shareholders," said Jonathan Ornstein, Mesa's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
