Deal Completed By Next Week?

[USA320Pilot]

Just one more point...I believe you will see a "shake up" of affiliate carriers with Mesa and TSA most likely removed from the US Airways Express network, unless something changes.

Regards,

USA320pilot

 

[hharotz]

Just one more point...I believe you will see a "shake up" of affiliate carriers with Mesa and TSA most likely removed from the US Airways Express network, unless something changes.

Regards,

USA320pilot

[post="269138"][/post]​

What about Mesa's role in the America West Expree network? Will Mesa head out west or are they expected to be completely out of the picture?

 

[BoeingBoy]

As I said before, there are multiple investors willing to provide equity and you will be stunned by the formal announcement.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="269131"][/post]​

I guess it depends on what it take to "stun" someone. Personally, $1-2 billion would be impressive, maybe even "stunning" at the upper end if it was a single investor. That would show that someone had a lot of confidence in "the plan".

$100 million here, $200 million there, is not "stunning" in my book - I intrepret that as no single investor willing to risk very much.

Jim

 

[USA320Pilot]

USA320Pilot said: "Just one more point...I believe you will see a "shake up" of affiliate carriers with Mesa and TSA most likely removed from the US Airways Express network, unless something changes."

Mesa Air Group, Inc. Announces Agreement With United Airlines to Expand - Codeshare Agreement by an Additional 30 Fifty Seat Regional Jets

See Story

See second story

USA320Pilot comments: Last night I indicated it would not surprise me if Mesa left the US Airways Express network. This morning the Phoenix-based airline announced its second agreement in eight days to fly 30 RJs for another airline, which is slightly more than the total number they operate for US Airways Express.

It appears that with the pending removal of 15 Chautauqua 50-seat RJs and the likely elimination of Mesa flying for US Airways Express, this flying will be replaced by Air Wisconsin's 70-RJs. An official announcement should come in the not-to-distant future.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[whlinder]

A320, do you believe the Air Midwest portion of Mesa will be removed from the US Express network as well?

 

[USA320Pilot]

Whlinder, that's a good question and I do not kow the answer, however, it would not surprise me if that happens too. In fact, the more I think of it based on an earlier comment that probably will happen, but I am not sure.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[mwereplanes]

Look at me! Look at me! See how important I am.
I told you so! Look at me!

Wacked. Completely Wacked. I love this guy. This board is better than watching South Park. In fact, Eric Cartman and this wack may be one in the same.

mr

 

[us0004us]

Look at me! Look at me! See how important I am.
I told you so! Look at me!

Wacked. Completely Wacked. I love this guy. This board is better than watching South Park. In fact, Eric Cartman and this wack may be one in the same.

mr

[post="269196"][/post]​

easy there !

many readers enjoy these posts.....unlike the posts similar to above..

relax, .....

now back on topic....


guess no announcement today for the consolidation.....

 

[CapnCockroach]

easy there !

many readers enjoy these posts.....unlike the posts similar to above..

relax, .....

now back on topic....
guess no announcement today for the consolidation.....

[post="269200"][/post]​

He's just jealous.

 

[whlinder]

Air Midwest is not fee for departure, they split revenue, correct? Are there any US coded Air Midwest flights that aren't EAS? Would the DOT allow US to yank their code from Air Midwest EAS flights? (I am assuming the ability to sell tickets from EAS cities as US Airways flights was a condition of Air Midwest winning EAS contracts) Just wondering how that works, seems like it could get pretty complicated.

 

[FM2436]

A320, do you believe the Air Midwest portion of Mesa will be removed from the US Express network as well?

[post="269193"][/post]​

I've heard that within 6-months all 19-seater will be out of CLT. Air Midwest gave PKB, CKB, and MGW their 90 day notice which will make those cities EAS eligible. Very soon all 19-seaters will be flying only into PIT. And apparently, the choice to continue service into 19 seat markets will be left to the US Airways Express affiliate carrier (Air Midwest).

 

[whlinder]

They still fly the 1900 out of MCI to little towns in Kansas.

 

[USA320Pilot]

We are pleased to have reached this agreement with Mesa, a move that supports United Express's goal to maintain reliable operations in each of the markets we currently serve," said Sean Donohue, United's vice president for United Express and Ted. "These replacement aircraft will generate significant savings and will largely complete the selection of carriers to replace Air Wisconsin."

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[us0004us]

guess no announcement today for the consolidation.....

[post="269200"][/post]​

forgot...its friday the 13th....no announcement today...

 

[sfb]

No, they don't have high-rasm traffic because they operate out of low-casm hubs, regardless of WN. Air Tran and Frontier have higher RASM because of their hubs, primarily. There will be many routes where HPU won't overlap with WN, but even where they do, the CASM gap with WN will diminish.

Well, CLT is a "low-casm hub" according to some -- how does US manage to get high RASM there? AirTran's RASM was 1.2% higher than WN's in the first quarter (8.32 cents vs. 8.22 cents) and their revenue yield was actually 2% lower (11.80 cents vs. 12.03 cents). Frontier's RASM (according to their March traffic report) was 7.87 cents while yield was 10.66 cents -- these are both lower than Southwest or AirTran. Conclusion: the hubs don't mean higher RASM.

How do you think you get a fuel hedge without credit?

Fuel isn't US Airways' (or America West's) only problem. And they need cash, not credit, to enter into fuel hedges.

Oh, really? To accomodate WN. As it has done, where else??

As when they took two underused gates in the D Terminal away from US Airways last year. And arguably it makes sense for two reasons: (1) More WN service means more revenue from landing fees, PFC's, parking, etc. for the airport, not to mention lower fares in more markets and (2) WN already has significantly higher utilization of its gates at PHL.

I think you would be surprised by HP's yield management.

Surprised by what? A profit? They generally don't achieve a RASM premium of more than about 10% over WN in markets where they compete head-to-head, and this is only achieved by being willing to accept WN taking 70-90% of the market in most routes under 750 miles.

HP's trans-con yields are dismal. WN has better yields on BWI-OAK and BWI-LAX than HP does on BOS-SFO or BOS-LAX.

Nor should it be. WN doesn't go there (although they claim they do) so why dilute yield.

Short-term this strategy sort-of makes sense; that's why US continues to keep fares at nose-bleed levels in many markets. Long-term, fare gouging attracts LCC's to your markets. Delta's SimpliFares are an attempt to make their own key markets look less attractive to LCC's.

Delta still has higher labor costs, structural inefficiencies and far lower fleet utilization, so aside from the unrestricted fares, I don't see any comparison between HP and DL.

Agreed -- so unless they manage to stay out of bankruptcy, they'll be bringing labor costs down just like US did in about a year. And WN's employees will still be paid more and have higher productivity.