Rumors Rumors Rumors....
- Thread starter airmechus
- Start date
UAL777flyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 0
Are you sure that rumor isn't for MDA gates? 10 mainline gates is basically walking away from your hub operation. I have a hard time believing U is ready to do that. But I suppose anything is possible these days.
W:EXCH:INVOL
Advanced
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 171
- Reaction score
- 0
But you're forgetting-it won't be a mainline hub. The rumor I heard absolutely sucks. A PIT cs agent (just furloughed with 1984 seniority, in a hub at that) told me they are expecting the next round to go back to early 70's. Will the last one out please turn out the lights? Shrinking, shrinking, shrinking...
INVOL
INVOL
UAL777flyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 0
But if they give up PIT as a hub, where are their East/West traffic flows going to come from? Aren't they now rearranging CLT banks into a more omni-directional structure? And with PHL concentrating on strong O & D markets, if they give up PIT, they'll lose a ton of East/West flying. Doesn't make sense. I can see them cutting it a bit. But going down to 10 gates is a LARGE degree of cutting.
15 PM UAL777flyer wrote: 
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,566
- Reaction score
- 37
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3
47 PM TomBascom wrote:
Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3
47 PM TomBascom wrote: Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3:39:31 PM ClueByFour wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 347 PM TomBascom wrote:
Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
----------------
[/blockquote]
Interesting comment Tom! CLT suffers from exactly the same problem. Many times I have encountered people in CLT while out in public...and when they find out that I work for USAirways , They always ask What are you people smoking? in terms of pricing out of CLT.
I of course have to say that I don't have anything to do with our prices , but I understand what they are saying.
If I had a dollar for everytime someone said to me...I saved $200 to $400 by driving from CLT to RDU or GSO to board a flight to my intended destination...and often it's on another carrier, I would be a very rich man by now.
The business and liesure market are both very price conscious these days. And driving 90 minutes to save $200 to $400 is very advantagious to a business person...and especially to a vacationing person or family.
Then we still have those that wonder why CLT and PIT remain lean on O&D traffic? It's simple...You have taken away the incentive..and eliminated the aspect of convienience to be part of the O&D market from our hubs.
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3:39:31 PM ClueByFour wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3
47 PM TomBascom wrote: Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
----------------
[/blockquote]
Interesting comment Tom! CLT suffers from exactly the same problem. Many times I have encountered people in CLT while out in public...and when they find out that I work for USAirways , They always ask What are you people smoking? in terms of pricing out of CLT.
I of course have to say that I don't have anything to do with our prices , but I understand what they are saying.
If I had a dollar for everytime someone said to me...I saved $200 to $400 by driving from CLT to RDU or GSO to board a flight to my intended destination...and often it's on another carrier, I would be a very rich man by now.
The business and liesure market are both very price conscious these days. And driving 90 minutes to save $200 to $400 is very advantagious to a business person...and especially to a vacationing person or family.
Then we still have those that wonder why CLT and PIT remain lean on O&D traffic? It's simple...You have taken away the incentive..and eliminated the aspect of convienience to be part of the O&D market from our hubs.
UAL777flyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 0
Pacemaker,
I don't see how the UA codeshare factors into US giving up PIT as a hub. The agreement calls for each airline to pocket the revenue THEY carry on THEIR flights. There is no revenue sharing. So if UA is going to be flying all the former US traffic that went through PIT, US won't see dime 1 of that revenue. How exactly would that help your company? So if you shutdown PIT, your East/West traffic flows are going to have to come from someplace else.
I don't see how the UA codeshare factors into US giving up PIT as a hub. The agreement calls for each airline to pocket the revenue THEY carry on THEIR flights. There is no revenue sharing. So if UA is going to be flying all the former US traffic that went through PIT, US won't see dime 1 of that revenue. How exactly would that help your company? So if you shutdown PIT, your East/West traffic flows are going to have to come from someplace else.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 347 PM TomBascom wrote:
Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
And then Cluebyfour commented:
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
[/blockquote]
It's not that bad. Especially with traffic as light as it has been. The reduced contention surely gets a lot of credit but there have been other changes that help too. Personally I'd much rather connect through a busy PHL than the wasteland that is PIT (even though it's a much nicer airport.) If something goes wrong in PHL there are alternatives. I'm sorry but to my eyes PIT is redundant and cannot be justified as an equal to PHL or CLT.
[blockquote]
----------------
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
----------------
[/blockquote]
They should just dump that model. As AOG-N-IT points out it's counter-productive and consumers are on to it. Eliminate it like America West has and maybe they'll see an increase in traffic like America West has. What a concept... (to say nothing of the productivity gains that simplifying the fares would produce.)
----------------
On 11/13/2002 3
47 PM TomBascom wrote: Sacrificing PIT to keep (or improve) frequency of service from PHL & CLT would seem to make a lot of sense.
----------------
And then Cluebyfour commented:
Sure, because PHL is a _great_ connecting hub.
[/blockquote]
It's not that bad. Especially with traffic as light as it has been. The reduced contention surely gets a lot of credit but there have been other changes that help too. Personally I'd much rather connect through a busy PHL than the wasteland that is PIT (even though it's a much nicer airport.) If something goes wrong in PHL there are alternatives. I'm sorry but to my eyes PIT is redundant and cannot be justified as an equal to PHL or CLT.
[blockquote]
----------------
OTOH, maybe it would allow PIT to crawl out from under the fortress hub and fortress pricing model....
----------------
[/blockquote]
They should just dump that model. As AOG-N-IT points out it's counter-productive and consumers are on to it. Eliminate it like America West has and maybe they'll see an increase in traffic like America West has. What a concept... (to say nothing of the productivity gains that simplifying the fares would produce.)
wings396
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,672
- Reaction score
- 1,122
I still think that the downsizing of the PIT hub has to do with the BIG picture..that being an eventual merger between UA & US..we all know if the merge went thru before PIT would go before ORD..what we are seeing here is the same type of deal that ruined the DAY hub after the PI merger..only this is being done in advance.
I think the downsizing of the PIT Hub..creates an enviroment for Long Range options.
My theory is this. PIT is way too close to our O&D prize in PHL...so it becomes slightly redundant.
In the long term... CLT is centralized in our market area ..and is not sitting side beside with our O&D prize in PHL.
Should a Unique Corporate Transaction ever take place? Two hubs within the state of Pennsylvania would never work any better for a gaining buyer. Then CLT comes into the picture...It's an established Southern Hub..with good year around operating capabilities and existing facilities. U would be crazy to part from that advantage...and using UA as the example of a prospective merge partner...They are also without any ultra strong presence in the regions that CLT's Hub can easily support to thier benefit.
My observations are not to knock the good folks..or the operation in PIT at all...it's about location vs. cost to maintain two such operations in such close proximity to one another.
Regarding west coast operations from our hubs. Such operations could be handled via regional feeds from PIT , to either CLT or PHL...it's no different than any feed we would gain from locations south of CLT...or north of PIT or PHL currently.
My theory is this. PIT is way too close to our O&D prize in PHL...so it becomes slightly redundant.
In the long term... CLT is centralized in our market area ..and is not sitting side beside with our O&D prize in PHL.
Should a Unique Corporate Transaction ever take place? Two hubs within the state of Pennsylvania would never work any better for a gaining buyer. Then CLT comes into the picture...It's an established Southern Hub..with good year around operating capabilities and existing facilities. U would be crazy to part from that advantage...and using UA as the example of a prospective merge partner...They are also without any ultra strong presence in the regions that CLT's Hub can easily support to thier benefit.
My observations are not to knock the good folks..or the operation in PIT at all...it's about location vs. cost to maintain two such operations in such close proximity to one another.
Regarding west coast operations from our hubs. Such operations could be handled via regional feeds from PIT , to either CLT or PHL...it's no different than any feed we would gain from locations south of CLT...or north of PIT or PHL currently.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/13/2002 5
47 PM UAL777flyer wrote:
So if you shutdown PIT, your East/West traffic flows are going to have to come from someplace else.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Maybe it's just me but...
what does PIT have to do with East/West traffic flows? (Other than some statements from management that don't seem to have much meat to them...)
It seems to me that any time I want to get to the west 2/3 to 3/4 of the offered connections are through PHL and then there are 1 or 2 through PIT and 1 or 2 through CLT. And the PIT & CLT connections often have cute features like 3 hour layovers. So why not shut down PIT and improve frequency though PHL & CLT?
Bite the bullet and get it over with. Make the rest of the system productive.
(PIT does make sense if traffic justified it -- but that doesn't seem to be the case now.)
----------------
On 11/13/2002 5
47 PM UAL777flyer wrote: So if you shutdown PIT, your East/West traffic flows are going to have to come from someplace else.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Maybe it's just me but...
what does PIT have to do with East/West traffic flows? (Other than some statements from management that don't seem to have much meat to them...)
It seems to me that any time I want to get to the west 2/3 to 3/4 of the offered connections are through PHL and then there are 1 or 2 through PIT and 1 or 2 through CLT. And the PIT & CLT connections often have cute features like 3 hour layovers. So why not shut down PIT and improve frequency though PHL & CLT?
Bite the bullet and get it over with. Make the rest of the system productive.
(PIT does make sense if traffic justified it -- but that doesn't seem to be the case now.)
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,566
- Reaction score
- 37
I guess the point that I'm making is this: for traffic from the Northeast whose eventual destination is anywhere _except_ PHL, it makes very little sense to connect that traffic in PHL. Operationally, it's nuts. PHL, both from a traffic and terminal sense, sucks as a hub.
Unlike a bunch of folks in PIT, I'm not hung up on direct flights to everywhere and all the other stuff that comes with a hub. I also realize that the weak O&D of the market does not, by itself, support the level of flights (particuarly of the direct mainline variety) that currently cycle thru here. What I'd really hate to see is to turn into the RJ capital of the world, and still have all the bad stuff that comes with a hub (high fares, notably). This would screw both the consumer--in the sense that we'd not have direct flights to anywhere meaningful and get to keep the hub pricing, as well as the employees of US--as a large portion of the local workforce would suddenly be working for RJ wages.
OTOH, we could hope for a BNA situation--close half the hub and have somebody like LUV decide that the rest looks good. Who knows?
Unlike a bunch of folks in PIT, I'm not hung up on direct flights to everywhere and all the other stuff that comes with a hub. I also realize that the weak O&D of the market does not, by itself, support the level of flights (particuarly of the direct mainline variety) that currently cycle thru here. What I'd really hate to see is to turn into the RJ capital of the world, and still have all the bad stuff that comes with a hub (high fares, notably). This would screw both the consumer--in the sense that we'd not have direct flights to anywhere meaningful and get to keep the hub pricing, as well as the employees of US--as a large portion of the local workforce would suddenly be working for RJ wages.
OTOH, we could hope for a BNA situation--close half the hub and have somebody like LUV decide that the rest looks good. Who knows?
[blockquote]
Maybe it's just me but...
what does PIT have to do with East/West traffic flows? (Other than some statements from management that don't seem to have much meat to them...)
It seems to me that any time I want to get to the west 2/3 to 3/4 of the offered connections are through PHL and then there are 1 or 2 through PIT and 1 or 2 through CLT. And the PIT & CLT connections often have cute [/blockquote]
Where are you originating? I originate from DCA and I rarely see connections out west thru PHL or CLT -- a large portion are routed through PIT.
Maybe it's just me but...
what does PIT have to do with East/West traffic flows? (Other than some statements from management that don't seem to have much meat to them...)
It seems to me that any time I want to get to the west 2/3 to 3/4 of the offered connections are through PHL and then there are 1 or 2 through PIT and 1 or 2 through CLT. And the PIT & CLT connections often have cute [/blockquote]
Where are you originating? I originate from DCA and I rarely see connections out west thru PHL or CLT -- a large portion are routed through PIT.
