Things Are About To Get Ugly

[Light Years]

Fly,

I'd guess that most, not all, but most of the above could be supported by Washington O&D traffic without a hub. Those that couldnt could work well out of ORD, an even bigger UA hub and more suitable gateway to the midwestern and western USA.

Every major airline has its not-so-hot, marginal hub. US Airways in PIT. Northwest in MEM. Delta in DFW. Continental in CLE, etc. United's is Dulles. They have a good transcontinental and transatlantic presence there that they have tried to build into a hub. IAD has never been a significant East Coast hub, its mostly extra feed and the "token" UA operation in the east. Most of the "hub" flights are Express flights, that have been built up over the years only to be stolen away and transformed into a new, competing LCC.

UA is now left to rebuild most of that hub in new, third world facilities that are yet to be complete, using thier army of newly acquired express carriers. Any US employee or customer who's experienced some of these airlines will tell you they will make your head spin at thier general ineptness and unprofessionalism. They will make you long for the timely, friendly service ACA provided!

United might be smart to keep leverage thier strength in Washington- long haul. They have never had a significant short haul easy coast system, and what they did have now has to be rebuilt. UA has the advantage of having ORD to perform most of the same hub tasks. Not to mention having as its partner the largest airline on the east coast, which is the biggest airline at DCA, which is in Washington, a large hub at CLT, and large hub/European gateway at PHL.

 

[737nCH11]

Folks,
Unless something catastrophic happens, IAD isn't going anywhere. I have a letter from IAD management (for what it's worth) that says that UAL isn't going to cut and run from IAD like they did in CLE, PHL, etc.

 

[Light Years]

Folks,
Unless something catastrophic happens, IAD isn't going anywhere. I have a letter from IAD management (for what it's worth) that says that UAL isn't going to cut and run from IAD like they did in CLE, PHL, etc.

Well thats settled then. They'll never pull any of the operations down. IAD management would let everyone know if it was being discussed. 😉

 

[Fly]

for what it's worth: United has been transfering flight attendants into Washington at about 20 a week for the last few months. They obviously aren't running out scared.

 

[ClueByFour]

1. With the exception of the LHR services, United could potentially make a successful go of the TATL operation ex-ORD - ORD would offer significantly more connecting traffic to offset the loss of IAD O&D. Heck, AA has accomplished this - why can't United?

Because AA is not carrying a bunch of quasi-guaranteed US government traffic (a good chunk of which is premium cabin traffic) abroad from ORD. UA is at Dulles.

If UA had a combined express operation (like Eagle), it would make IAD a lot more workable. The patchwork BS does not help.

 

[SVQLBA]

I don't think UA would be investing in new facilities if IAD was under threat. There has been a lot of development around Dulles in the last 10 years so its future looks good. (The planebusiness analysis of Independence air's 1st week showed that it had a pretty ropey operation and lowish l.f.s -- there's no certainty it will survive.)

LAX has been discussed, but I'd have thought DEN is less certain. If a hub has a very high connecting % (say above 60%) that makes the hub vulnerable because there's almost nothing to stop these pax from choosing to go via another hub -- or go direct if it's offered at a competitive price. LAX may not be huge, but OD isn't bad. DEN sucks a lot of pax out of SFO on widebodies (2x 777, 1x767, 2x 757 + 73s and A319s) -- I don't believe those widebodies are for all the SFO-DEN traffic. I think it's no surprise at all that Virgin is targetting SFO initially. Just because there's room to expand, doesn't make it a sustainable hub. As mid-america and other airports have show, you need a strong OD base to support a hub.

If anyone has the DEN cx vs OD mix, and the SFO-DEN seats and OD Den vs beyond, that will show whether I'm blowing smoke or on the money.

 

[ual777fan]

If United dumps LAX... That would be a bad thing. I believe that with the exception of Hawaii and the Pacific most of the LAX operation is O&D. That is tremendous and United pulling out their hub in the 2nd largest city in this nation would raise serious doubts about the airlines future.

I think that it would be smarter to downsize the Dulles hub and focus it on it's strengths, trans-atlantic and transcontinental, with some north-south mainline feed. But the patchwork of Express carriers esp. the ones that United has choosen are going to frustrate the hell of out customers.

It might be best for United to shrink the express capacity and let USAir handle it from Philly or National.

 

[FA Mikey]

I don't think UA would be investing in new facilities if IAD was under threat. There has been a lot of development around Dulles in the last 10 years so its future looks good. (The planebusiness analysis of Independence air's 1st week showed that it had a pretty ropey operation and lowish l.f.s -- there's no certainty it will survive.)

LAX has been discussed, but I'd have thought DEN is less certain. If a hub has a very high connecting % (say above 60%) that makes the hub vulnerable because there's almost nothing to stop these pax from choosing to go via another hub -- or go direct if it's offered at a competitive price. LAX may not be huge, but OD isn't bad. DEN sucks a lot of pax out of SFO on widebodies (2x 777, 1x767, 2x 757 + 73s and A319s) -- I don't believe those widebodies are for all the SFO-DEN traffic. I think it's no surprise at all that Virgin is targetting SFO initially. Just because there's room to expand, doesn't make it a sustainable hub. As mid-america and other airports have show, you need a strong OD base to support a hub.

If anyone has the DEN cx vs OD mix, and the SFO-DEN seats and OD Den vs beyond, that will show whether I'm blowing smoke or on the money.

Seen the new United terminal area under construction in Miami?

 

[JFK777]

LAX for SFO?


I can appreciate the strength of the SFO hub and its multiple daily flights to NRT, LHR, HKG, ICN, TPE, PVG, PEK, CDG, FRA, SYD & others. But how does LAX's sacfrication help what already exists in strength at SFO?

LAX is the countries biggest O&D destination, UA has a major part of that pie. Transcon to JFK, BOS, IAD & so on. LHR, NRT & SYD are its international beauties, but would still exist with local traffic, maybe not for UA, but they will for someone. Hawaii, not a great yield market, could be cut back. I don't buy the line for gving up LAX to strengthen SFO, ORD, or DEN. IF UA sold the Pacific routes then LAX could be toast, not until the sun sets on UA's Pacific will LAX be unimportant to UA.

 

[whatkindoffreshhell]

Hopefully Jake Brace's successor will have the ability to add numbers.

LAX, SFO, ORD and IAD have many numbers.

DEN does not have numbers.

Simple enough. Also the aforementioned add value to UA's strength, the international market.

Where'd you say DEN flies to internationally?

Spin away but DEN is gone.

So much for the wizards who based TED there. Unless they're hoping to spin off a chunk a la CO Express....

 

[Segue]

While you folks are doing the arm-chair planning exercises, the folks at CJ are looking at what kind of salary cuts you will need to take.

 

[casual rat]

I don't care anymore. All I see is a bunch of self-centered idiots trying to validate their own employment survival. This job is only as good/bad as it is...nothing more. If it tanks, we'll get jobs somewhere else. Many (the lame/politically savvy)will suffer, but some may actually prosper since Management treats us like numbers, totally ignoring a person's individual talents. I think it lost touch with some of the talent on the property due what I said in the second sentence. This has the potential to make us stronger personally and perhaps professionally. Thank God I'm not retired....It's just plain cruel picking on the elderly.

 

[UAL_TECH]

As this discussion continues as to the conjecture on the UAL ‘pieces’ being (possibly) disseminated (capitalized?) to the highest entrepreneur, I would like to take this opportunity to share a human expression.

JMHO & PO,
UT

 

[JungleClone]

LAX stinks as a connecting hub. Pull down the marginal flying and all you're basically left with is O & D reliant trans-cons and Hawaii service. United is much better off leveraging their SFO hub. IAD isn't going anywhere because United cannot support that much added capacity at ORD If they were to shutdown IAD. There is no room for growth at ORD. It's virtual lock-down there every day as it is. If one of UA's domestic hubs closes, my money's on LAX. It has been analyzed for the last several years. As much as we all would rather believe otherwise, UA is soon going to be forced to make the kinds of ugly decisions they've thus far avoided. But the game has changed. Being denied a loan guarantee now means we must rely on outside capital investment. And no one in their right mind is going to throw a couple of billion at United without some additional, significant changes.

 

[WorldTraveler]

It's not the LAX hub per se but markets like LAXMSY, LAXBWI, and even LAXMCO that do little to feed anything but are highly exposed to LCCs.

The economics of pulling down IAD simply don't work but if UA can't make money w/ Indy Air there, the creditors will demand that the marginal routes be pulled down. Pulling out some of the feed will affect the international flights but UA can't afford to burn through tens of millions of dollars over the winter waiting to make the domestic part of IAD work.