UA Applies For Daily DCA-LAX Service

If United is successful in acquiring the rights for such flights from DOT, will that simply result in dropping one of its IAD-LAX (or possibly BWI-LAX) flights to compensate?
 
I doubt it. Remember the US Codeshare. With their large operation in DCA and UA's large operation in LAX, you'd have ample conneciton opportunities on both ends.
 
I would be surprised to see a response prior to the ruling on U/UA code share.

Also HP is interested in obtaining the rights from National to use on DCA-LAS. HP already has the waiver for DCA-PHX and a couple hundred million of our tax dollars!!!
 
AA191, HP has considerably fewer of your tax dollars than AA or UA or the other carriers, thanks to the grants from Air Transportation Stabilization Act.

I assume you are referring to the LOAN GUARANTEE that HP got from the ATSB, but the fact is that the government is ahead on that deal. HP paid a couple million in fees to get the LOAN GUARANTEE, and the government pays not one red cent unless HP goes out of business. And the way things are looking, HP is the least likely of the major hub-spoke carriers to go otu of business.

Additionally, if you want to erroneously include the LOAN GUARANTEE with the ATSA grants, then the total government compensation for AWA was about $480 million. Which is, by the way, still less than AA, UA, DL and maybe NW.

As for UA getting one of the DCA slot exemptions, it will only happen out of sympathy, and the odds are only slightly better than Janet Reno being the next governor of Florida.

The Air 21 legislation favors new entrant carriers -- meaning those who have little or no access to DCA -- and those who can serve the West. That gives HP, AS and F9 a HUGE advantage over the cartel airlines.
 
Well, I'd have to say that among all the applicants, United and Frontier are the only real contenders. TWA flew the route and it didn't quite materialize like they thought it would, then it was yanked away when AA/TWA happened.

United has a sizeable presence in both markets, which would naturally be a major convenience factor for UA's frequent flyers. Granted most of UA's flyers would probably prefer a 777 out of IAD, I think that they'd definitely make a case for serving LAX/DCA daily with a 757.

Frontier, on the other hand, would find the slot a heck of a lot more useful than UA, as it would then give Jeff's airline 2 flights to DEN offering better connections... which would benefit the F9 network as well as partner Great Lakes.

Cactus doesn't have a chance at it. They already fly daily to/from LAS. Doesn't make sense to fly twice a day.

While National Airlines had its reasons for not going back on the market, I think it was a smart move. National's biggest threat to their competitors is frequency of their service, and DCA with one flight a day and 2 into IAD won't really give them the yield they deserve, whereas UA and F9 both will benefit from getting the 2 slots.

-n
 
People also keep forgetting that US Airways has a sizeable presence in DCA that could provide much-needed connections to a potential DCA-LAX route. Add that to UA's presence in LAX and you have great potential for success on this route.
 
UAL777flyer:

Why would US' large DCA presence have any material impact on a potential DCA-LAX operation by UA? Wouldn't both US and UA have a financial incentive to route such passengers through online connections at their respective hubs rather than making an interline connection at DCA? Even with the proposed codeshare, those passengers would still be changing airlines at DCA. So while the codeshare might encourage US frequent flyers who live close to DCA to choose UA's nonstop service to LAX, I just don't see the benefit of a DCA stop to either US, UA or any connecting passengers traveling to LAX.

Having said that, I still think the DCA-LAX route would be a winner for UA. It would be the only nonstop flight in the market, which should enable UA to get something of a yield premium (I know, that's not saying much these days but every little bit helps). The route would also benefit from connections at the LAX end, mainly to smaller California cities, Hawaii and Australia/New Zealand. And of course, there are those travelers that absolutely HAVE to fly into DCA!

So IMHO I think that UA would do well flying a DCA-LAX nonstop. I just don't think US' DCA operation will contribute much, if anything, to it.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/23/2002 11:31:48 AM UAL777flyer wrote:

Cosmo,

I disagree about the US codeshare not helping the route. By your logic, much of the codeshare would be meaningless because passengers would not care to change airlines. US has a good sized network in/out of DCA. UA has good sized network in/out of LAX. Bridge the two networks with a nonstop DCA-LAX and you would get some connecting feed. I admit it wouldn't be much. But it would be better than strictly relying on local traffic. Remember that the proposed codeshare is for connecting traffic only, not O & D.
----------------
[/blockquote]


I would guess that a vast majority of U's business into and out of DCA is O&D so I would think that connecting traffic would be better served to just go through DEN, CLT, IAD, PHL, ORD or PIT
 
Cosmo,

I disagree about the US codeshare not helping the route. By your logic, much of the codeshare would be meaningless because passengers would not care to change airlines. US has a good sized network in/out of DCA. UA has good sized network in/out of LAX. Bridge the two networks with a nonstop DCA-LAX and you would get some connecting feed. I admit it wouldn't be much. But it would be better than strictly relying on local traffic. Remember that the proposed codeshare is for connecting traffic only, not O & D.
 
But if you're a US passenger connecting in DCA to go on a proposed UA DCA-LAX nonstop, why would you make a double connection when you could get there via a single connect? That would be the point of linking US' DCA network with UA's LAX network.
 
The proposed UA/US codeshare does NOT include any revenue sharing. Each airline pockets the revenue from the passengers they carry.
 
UAL777flyer:

I'm not saying that there wouldn't be ANY US/UA connections at DCA over the course of a year, but it would almost certainly be a very small number. I just checked the OAG and every city with nonstop US service to DCA also has nonstop service to one or more of US' hubs where passengers could connect to nonstop US flights to LAX. Most of those cities also have nonstop UA service to one or more of UA's hubs where passengers could likewise connect to nonstop UA flights to LAX. So there is no issue of eliminating a double connection if a traveler flew via DCA.

Plus, as I mentioned in my previous post, isn't it true that both US and UA have a financial incentive to route such passengers through their own respective hubs? In other words, why would either airline share the passenger revenue by having the passenger travel via DCA when either airline could keep ALL of the revenue by flowing the passenger over one of its own hubs? This is especially true in the current airline revenue environment.

As I said, there would likely be a few passengers during the year that would fly to LAX via DCA for various reasons, but IMHO it would undoubtedly be a very small number.