Low-fare Carriers Call For United Cuts

[Dizel8]

But obviously, the network carriers are not serving the small markets out of goodness of heart and nobody forces them to, so one would imagine, that there is profits to be made. Why yes, there is and that is why they do it.

To now turn around and say that segment tax, which they fully supported, is unfair and favors the LCC's is hypocrisy in its purest form. What they want now, is for it to only appply to the LCC's, since they are skimming the cream and that it is unfair to tax legacies for providing service to smaller cities!

Like someone said, careful what you ask for!

 

[Busdrvr]

"But obviously, the network carriers are not serving the small markets out of goodness of heart and nobody forces them to, so one would imagine, that there is profits to be made. Why yes, there is and that is why they do it."

There is only profit to be made within a hub and spoke network. Look at Airtrans route map. They simply do not serve short haul markets. But then again, if all the legacies go away and the LPC's take over the world, I'm sure politics will dictate LPC service to some of these communities. And then the LPC's will buy smaller equip (or contract it out) and maybe some larger equip for the longer legs, ect, ect. then we'll have lagacy carriers once again, they'll just pay a whole heck of a lot less...


"To now turn around and say that segment tax, which they fully supported, is unfair and favors the LCC's is hypocrisy in its purest form. What they want now, is for it to only appply to the LCC's,"

They did NOT support the cap. WN lobbied for it and got it. Again, THIS IS NOT WHAT THEY SUPPORTED.

Fee for departure, it's the only fair solution.

 

[Dizel8]

Again, Busdriver, no one prevents UA from pulling out of money losing markets. It is a choice made by UAL to serve those markets, they obviously, as you mentioned yourself, are important. Again, it is a business choice.

The legacies loobied for changes that would harm SWA in turn SWA lobbied and got it changed, now again, you wish for changes that you hope will stifle SWA more than you.

Why did UAL have to go through such a huge transformation, no it was not just because of 9/11, many problems were apparent and created prior to then. The failed buyout of U, the summer from Hell, the choking of the golden goose.
AA went througn some painful changes, but prior to those, they were in better shape than UAL. U was in much worse shape, as a matter of fact, it may have been so bad, that s U soon the will reenter ch.11.


In another thread, they are talking about, how Airtran is against the guarantee and how unfair it is, if the hand was on the other foot, you can bet UAL would be against Airtran getting it. I have no doubt UAL was against FRNT getting it and put pressure, behind the scenes on the politicians.

This is a nasty rotten business.