Midwest Hub/focus City

[sharonstoneseat]

Again, Bob has something about "homos" in his post, I don't know why. This is the second thread this week he's taken an unrelated topic and turned it into "let's discuss the gays." :blink: Is anyone else over it?

[post="280088"][/post]​

Bob.......again, be careful...as Alanis says, "You oughta know"

 

[Light Years]

What on God's Green Earth...

To review, Light Years

*never said anything about rubies (?) or hicks

*never brought up anything at all to do with gays and lesbians!

*has never posted slurs on this website that need to be censored, only expletives in anger. Never slurs.

*never implied anything about Bob's sexuality, only pointed out his odd habit of bringing sexuality issues into usaviation. Rather Bob likes to make assumptions about other posters identities, usually laughably wrong, as many of you know.

*thinks the idea of "tolerance" is insulting, therefore do not demand it, as discussed at length in the Republic Airlines topic of last week. Tolerance is for noisy landlords and your boss's bad breath, not for people. People are to be respected, not tolerated.

*is beginning to think Bob has had too many adult beverages this holiday weekend.

 

[whlinder]

I don't think there are any foriegn carriers with the breadth of service most of the US majors have. Many are primarily international carriers with limited domestic due to smaller countries. Most have little or no competition. Most importantly, most are subsidized by thier governments. Not like the loans US carriers have gotten, I'm talking about actually subsidized.

And yes, I'll continue to think that way until Southwest offers service to both London and Latrobe and does it profitably. They won't, because they are a domestic LCC and are damm good at that. LCC business models can be successful, and WN is hands down the most successful. I'm more concerned with how to be a profitable network carrier, and the closest to successful these days is America West. US Airways is a victim of corporate greed, and disaterous decisions by mangement teams that know nothing about airlines. Hopefully the HP run US Airways will be onto something in running a successful network carrier. There will always be a need for international and regional serive in the United States, so not everyone can be Southwest.

[post="280082"][/post]​

Breadth of service within one country? Of course not, few countries come close to the geographic diversity of the U.S, with the spread out population centers. Even the European Union as a whole is more compact than the U.S. But check the total revenues of AF/KL and LH. They aren't small companies. Competition hasn't evolved elsewhere in the world to the point it has in the U.S. because the U.S. aviation market was deregulated 25 years ago, but there is competition. Plus they compete with train service.

Aside from Alitalia, I don't think the carriers from the EU are subsidized. There are certainly protections for them, but the Euro aviation market is supposed to be unregulated. Which is why Alitalia keeps getting in trouble with the EU for all the loans they don't pay back to the Italian government.

HP might be a good network carrier, but they are solely a domestic/Mexico/Canada network carrier. They aren't on the same level of even US as a 'network' carrier. And I don't see any carrier offering service to Latrobe profitably, or at least without those government subsidies you frown upon, since Latrobe is an EAS city.

 

[sharonstoneseat]

It's just like your swipe at me above that stereotypes anyone who makes any commnet regarding sexual preferrerences as someone with latent tendencies.


Bob,

When I said "be careful" and "you oughta know" I was agreeing with LY that you were segwaying a topic into discussions of sexual preferences again.

Your reaction that I made an inference that you have latent tendencies is the work of your own mind.

But I do apologize. Perhaps I should have been more........sensitive

 

[ClueByFour]

Aside from Alitalia, I don't think the carriers from the EU are subsidized.

[post="280142"][/post]​

BA and VS, by virtue of Bermuda II, are basically subsidized. If LHR was ever opened, BA would take it in the teeth.

 

[luvn737s]

Quick story about the airline y'all are gettng ready to merge with...my wife was flying back from Sacramento a few years ago, flew AWA thru PHX. She got assigned a seat near the back of the plane, and her "seatmate" was, I'm sure, one of your prized future customers. It was a woman, who got up during the flight to use the lav. She emerged from the room and announced to the entire rear of the aircraft - WOOOOWEEE...I just lost 10 pounds in there.

[post="280059"][/post]​

I heard the same story, but it was on a Southwest flight and it wasn't the lav, it was a seat back pocket.

 

[luvn737s]

I think the new HP/U will build a midwest hub if and when they need it. Their growth will no doubt have an effect on the rest of the industry and the justification and location for a hub, if any, will become clearer then.

 

[markkus757]

Bermuda II protects them on transatlantics only. BMI has much more traffic than VS would ever dream out of LHR. I also think BA would hold their own. They connect a lot through LHr just like others through CDG, AMS, and FRA. They also have a very superior premium product compared to the domestics in this country. You can fill coach. They'll be happy to fill first and business.

 

[whlinder]

BA and VS, by virtue of Bermuda II, are basically subsidized. If LHR was ever opened, BA would take it in the teeth.

[post="280158"][/post]​

Well, like I said in the next sentence, "There are certainly protections for them" (EU carriers). I certainly agree with you, I just don't call them subsidies since they aren't direct payments.

 

[KCFlyer]

I heard the same story, but it was on a Southwest flight and it wasn't the lav, it was a seat back pocket.

[post="280164"][/post]​

That's odd that the story would involve Southwest...because the story I relayed wasn't from "a friend of a friend of my wife's hairdresser"...The story I relayed came directly from MY WIFE's observation - she is not one to embellish stories.

 

[Finish or Ignore]

To a degree foks from different parts of the county are a little different. Who cares. WN and their fans would love for some of you to keep thinking they can't build an international route system. You can bet that there is a large crowd that cant wait to ride that WN aircraft across the big pond. Slowly and methodically they will build their choke hold domestically. Go ahead count them out. Many have. JMO

 

[OTslave]

Only here can a post about a "Midwest hub" turn into the Civil War.

Give it up, Jimmy Carter wanted deregulation, that's why we have
trailer parks in the sky.

Those trailer parks are here to stay. It also proves that "Pigs do Fly"

 

[El Gato]

So I guess that means and Gays & Lesbians from that geography are rubes and hick as well right?

[post="280104"][/post]​

Exhibit A: http://www.campsisterspirit.com

Exhibit B: http://www.turtlecreek.org

Your bigotry will get you nowhere fast. No one even mentioned any select group of people as being "rubes". It was a generalization that applied to all in portion, not everyone. Interesting that the first knife you reach for to defend yourself involves them. Perhaps you hold a bigotry against them?

 

[Light Years]

I'm sorry, but what is a rube?

 

[KCFlyer]

I'm sorry, but what is a rube?

[post="280330"][/post]​

THis

rube Audio pronunciation of "rube" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rb)
n. Slang

An unsophisticated country person.

Actually Gato, you weren't the one who used the "rube" word...I was....in response to your generalization of midwesterners as:

A midwest hub? Gee, real bright thinking folks. Go put a hub somewhere not taken, as in ORD, DFW, or IAH and try to get the money of all those hayseeds who are already loyal to WN. Hehe, real smart. You can call it the "fly over hub" since it is in the middle of the fly over country.