Us Airways' True Problem Created By

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com
Weak network hurting US Airways

None of carrier's hubs is among nation's largest 18 airports[/B]

TED REED, Staff Writer

CHARLOTTE (Observer) - As established hub airlines struggle to pull out of a three-year slump, some of the strongest ones say they are relying largely on the traffic generated at powerful hubs to fuel their recoveries.

That's a problem for US Airways, which has long been thought to have the weakest hubs in the airline industry -- even before low-fare king Southwest Airlines said it will begin flying to the Philadelphia hub on May 9.

In the go-go days of droves of business travelers shelling out for high fares, weak hubs in Charlotte and Pittsburgh were a burden that US Airways could overcome.

But with the downturn in business travel and the onslaught of low-fare carriers in many US Airways' markets, the hubs' weakness has become more apparent -- and may be a barrier to the airline's survival.

Among the six major hub airlines, US Airways is the only one without a hub at any of the 18 busiest airports. Philadelphia International is the 19th busiest, Charlotte/Douglas is the 20th and Pittsburgh International ranks 27th.

The hubs are not only small, but also close together. So while US Airways dominates its hubs, it can't rely on them to provide enough passengers to feed large domestic and international networks.

Charlotte and Pittsburgh offer "few of the benefits of a hub," said aviation consultant Mort Beyer. "They don't generate a lot of local traffic. Usually, what airlines do is control their hubs and then charge (higher) fares to their local passengers."

At a hub, dozens of planes arrive and depart during a window of about an hour and a half, when they exchange passengers. In the biggest hubs, many passengers also originate locally, arriving by car or mass transit. They often pay more than passengers from outlying airports, who tend to have a choice of one-stop flights on various carriers.

Most of the major hub airlines have operated their hubs for decades. Before a 1987 merger between Piedmont Airlines and USAir, Charlotte was a hub for Piedmont while Philadelphia and Pittsburgh were hubs for USAir.

In 2000, former US Airways Chairman Stephen Wolf sought to fix US Airways' problems of small hubs and a limited route network through a merger with United Airlines. That would have folded US Airways' small hubs into as global route system. Under the plan, Charlotte would have become the Southeast hub for the world's biggest airline; while still small, it would have been a transit point for even more traffic.

But the U.S. Department of Justice nixed the deal on anti-trust grounds, saying it would have limited the choices available to the flying public.

Cost compensation

US Airways acknowledges its hubs are small, but says it can compensate with lower operating costs.The airline cut costs by $1.3 billion, including $1 billion from employees, during an eight-month stay in bankruptcy that ended in March. Now it is trying to cut costs by another 25 percent, largely through more employee concessions.

"We think US Airways with a competitive cost structure can be very successful," Chris Chiames, senior vice president, said Wednesday.

He said the airline's models are carriers like AirTran and America West, whose low costs have enabled them to overcome the burden of relatively small hub operations. US Airways is betting it can offer more flying from key Northeast cities, bypassing its hubs, while also redefining its hub strategies.

The Charlotte hub can grow as Caribbean service increases. The Pittsburgh hub is shrinking dramatically, as regional jets take over most routes because there is too little traffic to fill bigger jets. And Philadelphia, because of Southwest's arrival, can become the test site for a hub airline that operates with the same fares and costs as low-cost competitors.

Pilots regret that US Airways hubs aren't larger and farther apart, so they could support more long-range and international flying, said Jack Stephan, spokesman for the US Airways chapter of the Air Line Pilots Association. "But we can't change the geography," Stephan said. "We have the cards we've been dealt."

However, US Airways should not rely so much on its hubs, he said. Instead, it should more fully utilize its presence at key airports in Boston, New York and Washington to fly more international and point-to-point flights, which don't rely on stops in hubs.

Advantages of bulk

Despite the hopes of success, some analysts are skeptical that US Airways' small hubs and limited network offer enough bulk. In recent weeks, airlines with bigger, more productive hubs have been touting their advantages and capitalizing on them.

Northwest Airlines, for instance, has hubs in Detroit and Minneapolis, both top 10 airports. At a Goldman Sachs transportation conference in New York last week, Northwest Chief Executive Richard Anderson emphasized to analysts that both are large markets with a lot of business fliers and that Northwest dominates them.

Anderson said Northwest's low-fare competitors have lower labor costs, but they also have far weaker hubs. "Our strength is our network is much stronger," he said.

American Airlines said last month that it will restructure its Miami hub, so that arrivals and takeoffs occur evenly throughout the day, rather than in the less-efficient sudden bursts that often typify hub operations. American has already restructured its hubs in Chicago and Dallas.

In most cases, US Airways doesn't have enough local passengers to do that, Chiames has said. Because its hubs provide so few passengers, planes must wait for all the arriving planes before they can depart.

Under-producing Philly

US Airways has a different set of problems in Philadelphia than in Charlotte and Pittsburgh.Although 61 percent of the Philadelphia airport's traffic is local, compared with only about 28 percent in Charlotte, US Airways has been unable to fully enjoy the benefit of operating in a major urban area.

Philadelphia's airport ranks 19th nationally in passengers, while the metropolitan area ranks seventh nationally in population, said a recent study by Unisys R2A aviation consulting group, a subsidiary of information technology firm Unisys.

Philadelphia "has a history of under-producing airline traffic relative to its population," the study said. That's because fares have historically been high and because area residents can drive to New York or Washington, the biggest local business markets.

It will get worse when Southwest invades. The effort to match Southwest's lower fares will chop $250 million annually off US Airways revenues, the study said. Revenues were $6.8 billion in 2003.

The effect of the Southwest onslaught in Philadelphia and the too-small hubs in Charlotte and Pittsburgh means the outlook for US Airways is not positive, said Dan Kasper, managing director of LECG consultants in Cambridge, Mass. Although the airline is reducing costs, its structure provides little opportunity to boost revenues, he said.

"Assume the best case, that they get concessions and traffic comes back robustly," he said. "That buys breathing room. But at the end of the day, what is their place?"

US Airways' Charlotte Hub

AIRLINE STATS

Total daily departures: 469

Non-stop destinations: 114

Non-stop Caribbean destinations: 18

Non-stop European destinations: London, Frankfurt

Passengers carried: over 90 percent

Employees: 5,782

AIRPORT STATS

Total airport traffic (2003): 23.1 million

Locally arriving and departing: 6.5 million

Average fare: $212, third highest in the United States

Note: Fare information is for fourth quarter, 2002. (While many passengers seek to avoid Charlotte/Douglas due to high fares, airport officials say many others choose the airport due to the high level of flights and destinations.)

SOURCES: US Airways, Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, U.S. Department of Transportation
 
This topic title: Us Airways' True Problem Created By, Ed Colodny is ridiculous and seen through hindsight of 20 20 vision. If it weren't for Colodny, you wouldn't be posting all your secret corporate deals and boasting the very first to announce convoluted transactions that never materialize.

But hey, if this entertains you, no harm done and sometimes you do post some good information along with the palaver.
 
When Mr. Colodny spoke, you knew his word and handshake met something, now compare that to today. He could walk through almost any airport USAir served, and knew employees by first names. While CEO, he usually flew coach to be with the people. He truly was a people person during good times and bad.
 
USA320Pilot said:
The effect of the Southwest onslaught in Philadelphia and the too-small hubs in Charlotte and Pittsburgh means the outlook for US Airways is not positive, said Dan Kasper, managing director of LECG consultants in Cambridge, Mass. Although the airline is reducing costs, its structure provides little opportunity to boost revenues, he said.

"Assume the best case, that they get concessions and traffic comes back robustly," he said. "That buys breathing room. But at the end of the day, what is their place?"
Wouldn't you just love to have a face to face with someof these consultants. Most have a ax to grind and if they don't they just want to stir the pot . maybe he didn't get his upgrade or had to pay his 25 bucks to change fights who knows.

Only time will tell what happens in PHL....I think WN is in over their heads and U will prevail psgrs may go give it a whirl but will come back ....


REMEMBER WN IS BAIT AND SWITCH CAN'T RUN 29 EACH WAY FOR EVERYBODY SOONER OR LATER THE PSGR WAKES UP.
 
Piney My thoughts exactly ! Whats a man s handshake and promise if he cant back it up or it throws them further down the drain. I agree with the article Uncle Ed was a good guy but was way over his head!
 
Bob,

Could it be, Dave is too much into the numbers to save USAirways, that is he has lost touch with the people, who are truly affected? By this, I talking about the passengers and the employees. Each group has endless examples of cost cutting that has had and even more negative effect on revenues.

In addition, creditbility, ex. the pilots' pension, TPA hangar and contracting out maintenance..etc.
 
usfliboi said:
Piney My thoughts exactly ! Whats a man s handshake and promise if he cant back it up or it throws them further down the drain. I agree with the article Uncle Ed was a good guy but was way over his head!
And the man in charge has a firm grip on the handle, knows what needs to be done, has the employees support and is looked upon with great respect. Furthermore, He is not morally twisted, and even has the respect of powerful government officials who throw praises on our leadership for treating the employee so well. No wonder you are behind this team 1000 plus %
 
Just another example of an alleged sycophant of the current regime not addressing or accepting present day responsibility for the foray into bankruptcy and the lackluster behavior upon emergence. No, it is more important to assign ancient historical blame. I'll be sure to tell Uncle Ed you've sent your best.
 
expressedndepressed said:
Bob,

Could it be, Dave is too much into the numbers to save USAirways, that is he has lost touch with the people, who are truly affected? By this, I talking about the passengers and the employees. Each group has endless examples of cost cutting that has had and even more negative effect on revenues.

In addition, creditbility, ex. the pilots' pension, TPA hangar and contracting out maintenance..etc.
THis post perfectly illustrates the INSANITY of this echo chamber. If this attitude truly reflects the attitude of the employees, including frontline managers, I don't know what hope there is.

This article had been posted before. It represents the clearest discussion of U's ROOT problem. But somehow you guys insist that there is no 'numbers' problem if management would just start to be NICE to you?!?! U should be more like WN, but fly between CLT and AVL with 73 five times a day and be nice to employees?!? Oh, and completely disagregating Colodny's hub structure can be done at the drop of a hat?!?! Finally, you guys don't beleive management when they say that changing to value pricing won't result in a DROP in revenue!!!!?!?

You folks that think that everything is about how you FEEL, need to go into the business of family therapy. U is not a family and management is not your parent.

As, Ive stated before, I'm a pro labor dem, who beleives that working people and the middle class are being SHAFTED by our new corporate/wealth economy, but it has NOTHING to do with how MEAN people are. Can't you guys get motivated by a vision of success?
 
PineyBob said:
Those are wonderful qualities for a CEO to possess. However if in the process he created the mess that is US Airways of todaay then what good was it?

Conversely if Dave Siegel saves US Airways and it grows and prospers despite his less than collegial tone towards employees does that still make him Dave Lorenzo as some call him?

Don't ask me I don't work there.
Bob,

U made a lot of money under Colodney, who ran the company for 25 years. He didn't visit USairways, he stayed and we expanded. Not like the "yo-yos" in CCY today who can not "define the product".Chiames sates that we need a lower and more competitive cost structure....what's managements proposal on lowering their personal salary cost structure....or isn't there one? Oh, yea, I forgot, how will we ever be able to retain them.......
 
The topic and sub-topic are truly a non sequitur.

However, Colodny does hold much of the blame for the mess USAirways is in today.

1. When he merged the three airlines, he promised to keep the best of the three operations, then proceeded to make the purchased carriers "mirror images" of USAir. In the demeaning process, he managed to alienate more than half of his employees and run costs through the roof.

2. He upheld the traditional good-ole-boy network at USAir and proceeded to let an incompetent take the helm upon his departure, just because he's been around the longest. In doing so, he pushed one of the most effective managers in the business out the door.

3. He consistently held out against trans Atlantic operations. In fact, if Piedmont had not already had 767s heading for London, I doubt USAir would have ever gone trans Atlantic at all. We would have been toast long ago without that revenue. Many high level politicos went to great lengths to get Piedmont that London authority, and they were ready to crucify Colodny if he shut the route down (which is what most feared.)

4. And we have the perennial classic: "Training is a fixed cost." Tell that to Herb Kelleher, whose pilots attend ONE initial aircraft training program in their entire career. I know of one USAir pilot (not me, of course, since I don't work at USAirways,) who is now attending his 11th inital ground school, and will likely hit 12 before he retires (assuming the company survives that long.) Fixed cost? Maybe for Kelleher, but certainly not for "never met an aircraft type I didn't buy" Colodny.

5. Cool northern efficiency. 'nuff said.


Colodny may be the nicest man on the planet. "Nicest man on the planet" does not equate with effective, knowledgable CEO.

Give me an SOB who knows what the hell is going on, can formulate a viable plan and carry it out effectively over the "nicest man on the planet" any day. For example, Bob Crandall.
 
Colodny’s Blunders:

· Mirror Image, imposing US Air’s business methods upon Piedmont and PSA, instead of looking at each respective airline and adapting their successful practices. Some examples would be dismantling of the Piedmont Shuttle which accounted for 32% of Piedmont’s Gross Revenue.

· Not furthering International Service and canceling the last three 767s on order from Boeing, then realizing how much money was made serving international destinations and paying Boeing a $30 million penalty to reorder the three planes.

Schofield’s Blunders:

· Business select, $50 million on wasted seats that never worked properly and we eventually removed from the 737-200 fleet. Operation Highground.

· The IAM Mechanic and Related Strike of 1992 in which US Air lost $35 million and agreeing to pay all the pilots during our strike regardless if they flew or not.

· The hiring of Joe Gorman from United Airlines. Gorman stayed a few months then went right back to United, then United started taking us on head to head in numerous markets where we did not compete before Gorman’s tenure.

· The alliance with British Airways to infuse quick cash, but not on favorable terms to US Air, BA got more out of the alliance then we did.

Wolf and Gangwal:

· Canceling all the Boeing orders and having to pay a substantial penalty to Boeing to this day the dollar amount is not known as it was a confidential out of court settlement after Boeing sued US Airways, but it is believed to be hundreds of millions of dollars.

· Closing of three maintenance bases and trying to accomplish all the work in just three bases, which caused a backlog of airplanes awaiting “Q†and “C†checks and Mod visits. At one point you could see numerous airplanes parked in Charlotte, Pittsburgh and Tampa awaiting maintenance.

· Buying back over $1.5 billon of US Airways stock instead of using the money as operating capital or paying down debt or just having it around for a downturn.

· Selling the company to United Airlines and then for the next 14 months having no direction and running the company into the ground.

· Overreacting to the September 11th tragedy and shrinking the airline by 23% and increasing costs by putting larger airplanes on shorter routes.

Seigel's Blunders

Lying to employees.
Stealing their work.
Violating all contracts.
Keeping inept management in place.
Closing Tampa hangar
Outsourcing Airbus work
Fighting its greatest assets the employees.
Not getting back the $35 million from Wolf, Gangwal and Nagin
 
Lester,

Very good summation. Now, how do you tap the energy of 28000 employees and positively head them all in the same direction and kick some b...????
 

Latest posts