Clt Hub

[Capecod]

Rumors (only) LUV will announce CLT as a new focus city, starting sometime 2006.
It is what it is...

[post="284543"][/post]​

And where are they going to put this focus city in CLT? Last time I checked there were zero gates open in CLT. They may be able to get one gate but that would make for one small focus city. -Cape

 

[SoftLanding]

And where are they going to put this focus city in CLT? Last time I checked there were zero gates open in CLT. They may be able to get one gate but that would make for one small focus city. -Cape

[post="284567"][/post]​

Maybe that's what it is: "Out of Focus-City"...delivered by LUV...LOL

Yeah, would imagine if no gates available, that would surely be a problem...

 

[jimntx]

Just FYI...this has come up in recent Dallas Love Field conversations. LUV controls 14 of the 16 operative gates at Love Field. Seems there is a Federal law that if an airport is gate constrained and an airline wants to begin service there, the airport authority is required to make space available "to improve competition." Seems the law enables an airport authority to take gates away from the majority tenant if that is the only way to make space available. LUV may pull the same thing on U at CLT.

Don't know if there actually is such a law, but that's what I am told.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Jim....

That's probably a bit of an exaggeration. Unless, there is something else going on, airport operators that take a Federal grant after about say.... now.... will promise to report to the DOT when they can't (after 6 months of trying) accomodate a new carrier or a carrier wanting to expand... and give reasons why and a timeframe by which the carrier could be accommodated. I'm not really clear as to what DOT would do to an airport if they didn't like its answer.

 

[SoftLanding]

Just FYI...this has come up in recent Dallas Love Field conversations. LUV controls 14 of the 16 operative gates at Love Field. Seems there is a Federal law that if an airport is gate constrained and an airline wants to begin service there, the airport authority is required to make space available "to improve competition." Seems the law enables an airport authority to take gates away from the majority tenant if that is the only way to make space available. LUV may pull the same thing on U at CLT.

Don't know if there actually is such a law, but that's what I am told.

[post="284570"][/post]​

You might be on to something, Jim, almost compares to airline "xyz" wants to fly into LGA/DCA/JFK/ORD etc. etc. They'll (feds) find the slots and gates...magic, I guess

SoftLanding

 

[eolesen]

Not sure if there's a law, but just about every lease agreement signed since Eastern folded requires carriers to give up space on demand if it isn't being utilized and there's another carrier requesting it. Had CO not been underutilizing their gates at DAL, it's likely that WN would have had to give up space to AMR under the terms of their lease.

 

[SoftLanding]

Not sure if there's a law, but just about every lease agreement signed since Eastern folded requires carriers to give up space on demand if it isn't being utilized and there's another carrier requesting it. Had CO not been underutilizing their gates at DAL, it's likely that WN would have had to give up space to AMR under the terms of their lease.

[post="284626"][/post]​

Good to know, thanks.

In any case, I would not think any city/airport would tell LUV to get lost...Looks like LUV will add more gates soon, DAL & NWAC moving to the old A terminal...

SoftLanding

 

[super80fa]

Basically an airport has to find gates for a carrier if they decide they want to serve the airport. However if an airline is using their gate all day long then that gate is pretty much off limits to the new carrier. The rule does require airlines to share gates if the gate isn't being used full time. Many airports in Europe operate this way.

 

[insp89]

CLT is fighting the PIT problem, city is too small for a major hub, especially if oil stays up around $60. (Higher fares would solve this problem.)

It does not matter what AWA management says, let's look at their actions, this will take several months.

CLT, as a hub for FLA and the Islands, seems logical and runs smoother than PHL. Though no matter what we like to say about PHL, the fact still remains that PHL has a massive population compared to CLT. That is where the money is, no?

Rumors (only) LUV will announce CLT as a new focus city, starting sometime 2006.

It is what it is...

[post="284543"][/post]​

If your [Rumor] is true, So What ? Welcome to CLT. Southwest....

You state that CLT. is fighting the PIT. problem, Does it make sense for Southwest to fly into CLT. that is already over-serviced ? Airtran, Independane Air already fly into CLT. If Southwest wants to come in, So be it...

It's also noteworthy that beginning in 2006, Southwest will be hedging 20% Less fuel at $6.00 dollars More / Barrel due to eroding Hedging Positions...

Southwest will find the same situation in CLT. that it's finding out in PHL. The days when ole Usair "cuts & runs" are over...

Thanks to airlines using {9/11} as an excuse [along with the sleazy bankrupcy laws] , Usair is seeing the playing field leveling with each passing day...It is what it is....

 

[SoftLanding]

If your [Rumor] is true, So What ? Welcome to CLT. Southwest....

You state that CLT. is fighting the PIT. problem, Does it make sense for Southwest to fly into CLT. that is already over-serviced ? Airtran, Independane Air already fly into CLT. If Southwest wants to come in, So be it...

It's also noteworthy that beginning in 2006, Southwest will be hedging 20% Less fuel at $6.00 dollars More / Barrel due to eroding Hedging Positions...

Southwest will find the same situation in CLT. that it's finding out in PHL. The days when ole Usair "cuts & runs" are over...

Thanks to airlines using {9/11} as an excuse [along with the sleazy bankrupcy laws] , Usair is seeing the playing field leveling with each passing day...It is what it is....

[post="284633"][/post]​

I don't know if it makes sense for LUV to fly into CLT, but that rumor has been around for some time, and hopefully it's only a rumor.

Airtran is probably looking for higher yields, so CLT does make sense for them also. Independence is basically a joke, with major cutbacks coming soon in their flying.

Southwest is most likely also looking for higher yields, and getting rid of US Airways to boot would have been a major coup, looks like that is not in the cards.

I wouldn't be surprised to see some fairly sizeable cutbacks in the FLA markets not only from CLT, but also PHL. In other words, why fly all these seats/flights if we're loosing $$$ on them?!

Then again, with all the cutbacks/givebacks, when will we become profitable? Yes, should happen when oil prices fall below $50.

Your comment about Southwest and their hedging cost going up does not hold water if oil stays up around 60...LUV will still be paying 50% (or so) less than their competition. Which again lets them throw cheap seats out there and fill the airways with "free to move about the country".

However, if we're seeing a top in oil prices, and maybe 40-45 by spring, that certainly changes things...Link below is showing a top in the BDI (Dec-04), indicating possible weakening of econemies around the world, less oil demand.

It is what it is...

http://www.investmenttools.com/futures/bdi...c_dry_index.htm