Archive for the 'Continental' CategoryPage 2 of 7

Houston – Aspen: A Very Interesting Addition from United

Published
by
Dan Webb
on September 10, 2010
in Continental, SkyWest and United
. 1 Comment

Some interesting route news came out this week – beginning on January 4, United will launch once-daily service from Houston to Aspen, operated with SkyWest CRJ-700s. The seasonal service will run through April 2.

Photo Credit: SkyWest.

The new flights complement United’s existing service to Denver (the busiest route), Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.

OK – enough with the facts – time for speculation! (Because that’s more fun!)

I think it’s a fair argument hat this route wouldn’t be happening if United was not merging with Continental (or, at the very least, codesharing).

The timing of this announcement is also very interesting. It would make me think that Aspen-Houston service has been on Continental’s radar for awhile, but just could not do it on their own.

I saw that because Aspen is a funny little airport. Local ordinances prohibit aircraft with a wingspan over 96 feet from operating there. Plus, takeoff runs are longer at high altitude, futher restricting the type of aircraft that can fly and/or payload. (A recently-approved runway extension project should help with this.)

So if we look at Continental’s regional fleet, I just don’t think they had the aircraft to do it, at least without serious weight restrictions. The ERJ-145 and CRJ-200 are probably a no-no, and same goes for the Saab 340. Dash-8 aircarft have been used out of Aspen – Mesa used to fly them for US Airways and United, and Frontier uses the Q400.

But the longest route I can find is Aspen to Phoenix – and a flight to Houston is 86% longer, so it might not work out as well. Plus that means Continental would have to move Colgan and/or Commutair aircraft over to Houston.

So it would appear that the SkyWest CRJ-700 is the best aircraft for the route – and it has the legs for it – as it was used by Delta to fly to Atlanta.

And I think this is a smart move from a network perspective – Houston opens up a bunch of connection opportunities.

But the big question this opens up – how will a merged United adjust its regional network? This is something Delta has done. For example, one can now find CRJ-700s flying out of Detroit.

And realigning regional networks also makes me think of scope. Since Houston is a Continental hub, the regional flying that can happen there is limited. The only allowed 70-seaters are props. So it would be interesting to see if any other CRJ-700 flights pop up in Houston.

Scope is a big issue for all pilots – but especially so at United and Continental, as the former’s scope clause with its pilots is much less restrictive. And the merger presents a big opportunity for the two pilot groups to make a big change about outsourcing – something that they are already taking very seriously.

Guest Post: The Family Trees of United and Continental

Published
by
Dan Webb
on July 30, 2010
in Continental and United
. 6 Comments

Thankfully, my good friend Court sent me a guest post last night. Which is awesome, since I didn’t have to write anything. Especially considering my travel this week, including a diversion that yielded a rare IAD-DCA flight on United.

Anyway – here it is:

Soon, we’ll be seeing more airline history bite the dust with the exit of the Continental name. I figured it was time to go back and trace the history of the two airlines. As cool as it is, I wish I could say I came up with the idea, but Delta managed to do this on their blog a while back. So as I get ready to say good bye to yet another historic airline brand, I salute Continental.

To Continental/Eastern/Texas International/People Express/Frontier/New York Air, whoever you are: We hardly knew ye.

United Airlines and Continental Airlines Family Tree

(Click image for a larger size you can actually read)

Continental Announces Second 787 Route

Published
by
Dan Webb
on June 15, 2010
in Continental
. 4 Comments

Just on the heels of its first 787 route announcement, Houston to Auckland, Continental announced yesterday its second route with the new aircraft – Houston to Lagos, Nigeria. Sounds like an oil route to me! :D

My cynical side makes me look at this one from a political perspective. Like the Houston – Auckland route announcement, this one is well-timed for some government hearings. Tomorrow, the U.S. House Aviation Subcommittee will have a hearing on the proposed merger between United and Continental. So Continental probably thinks that displaying a commitment to international route growth and the Houston hub will make the merger look better to the politicians.

I also feel this announcement is pretty aggressive from a fleet perspective. Continental is currently slated to receive three 787s in 2011, and they will need all of them, with the Lagos route starting on November 10, and nonstop service coming to Auckland only a few days later. From my quick analysis, Continental can do it with three aircraft, but with very high utilization. And it’s also contingent on Boeing delivering all three 787s on time. And while the manufacturer has worked out many issues with the 787, the fact that the aircraft has been delayed a few times doesn’t make me feel 100% confident the company will adhere to its current delivery schedule. I’m not saying that’s going to happen, but it’s something to consider.

Edit: So Continental is actually getting six 787s in 2011, four of which are coming in the third quarter. So Continental shouldn’t have any major issues running the routes if everything is on time. Of course, as I have written earlier, let’s hope they get those birds on time. Also, we’ll have to see if Continental announces any more 787 routes. for a late 2011 launch.

But for the Lagos flying, it seems that Continental has some insurance here if there are issues, at least in my view. Based on the slightly-longer Tokyo nonstop, I would be willing to wager that Continental could fly nonstop to Lagos from Houston with a 777-200ER with no major issues, if something came up with the 787 fleet. And plus since these route announcements are so far out, there is still ample time to play with the schedule if need be.

Speaking of Lagos flying – let’s talk abut United for a second.The airline had announced in November that it would launch service to Accra, Ghana, that would continue on to Lagos on May 2. The launch of Accra service has since been pushed back to June 20, and the flight won’t be continuing to Lagos has been delayed due to some unspecified regulatory issues with the Nigerian government. It’s not the first time that an American carrier and the powers that be in the African country have conflicted.

It will be interesting to see what Nigerian officials think of Continental’s new flight. Meanwhile, Nigerian long-haul carrier Arik Air still has plans to fly to Houston, though no specific details have been announced.

Those are my thoughts, at least. Please leave yours in the comments!

“Continited” Announces First 787 Route

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 27, 2010
in Continental
. 6 Comments

Yesterday, Continental announced its first 787 route - Houston to Auckland starting on November 16, 2011. Service will vary between daily and five-times weekly. This is a Continental announcement, but I think it’s important to look at this from a Continental-United perspective. In the case of both airlines, it is a return to Auckland – just check out these old Continental and United route maps.

It is  pretty early to announce a new route that starts in about a year and a half, but as Adrian Schofield at Aviation Week wrote , there are some good political reasons to do that. But that doesn’t mean I think the route can’t stand on its own.

This route is one the 787 was built for – thinner markets that are further away. Could Air New Zealand do this route with one of its shiny new 777-300ERs? Sure, but there’s probably not enough demand for it. A Continental 787-8 will have about 110 less seats than that aircraft. Continental could also toss one of its 777-200ERs on the route, but that too is bigger. Plus the lower costs on the 787-8 help.

IAH-AKL certainly looks good from an alliance perspective, as it connects two Star hubs, and it really does give a boost to options to getting to/from New Zealand. Of course LAX offers plenty of connections but Continental’s Houston hub opens up a bunch of connections to the East. And, as you can see on this Airliners.net thread, some connections are actually shorter. And here’s a nice perk for travelers going to Washington or New York – since Houston is within those perimeters, passengers can connect to DCA or LGA easily, where LAX would require flights to IAD or JFK. (Unless if one switched to Alaska at LAX.) Plus it offers good connecting service down to Latin America. Continental also says this can work for Europe, too, but I’m not sure how popular that’ll be.

Meanwhile – I think we can see this as a preview of coming attractions when it comes to the 787 route. If you take a look at this slide (pictured below) from this investor presentation – the 787 does offer some nice cost performance relative to the 777. Granted, the chart is based on a 4,000nm haul, but it probably still looks good on the longer routes, too. So the 787 can replace 777s in under-performing markets, but also open up new ones. It’ll certainly be fun to see what they do with the rest of them.

Airlines Complain About Haneda Slots

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 21, 2010
in Continental, Delta, Hawaiian and United
. 1 Comment

A short while back the DOT issued a tentative decision about the four slots allocated to American carrier’s at Tokyo’s Haneda airport, which will be opening for international flights this fall. To review – Hawaiian got one slot for Honolulu, American got one for JFK, and Delta got two for Los Angeles and Detroit. The DOT opened up a ten-day comment period, and now that that’s ended let’s take a look at what the airlines had to say.

Unless I’m using Regulations.gov wrong (quite possible!), American didn’t file anything. My guess, they’re happy with their JFK slot. The airline also applied for LAX service, but considering that Delta’s 747 will have 63% more seats than American’s 777, I don’t think they have much of a case there.

Delta’s filing is nothing special. All they said was that they were disappointed that Seattle wasn’t selected, but they are very happy that they received two slots.

So let’s get to the complaints – from Hawaiian, United, and Continental.

Hawaiian

Hawaiian wants a second slot pair, saying that two will “allow it…to compete as a significant player in the U.S.-Tokyo market instead of having to compete from a position of relative weakness against entrenched incumbents.”

The airline also writes that the DOT did not properly consider the size of the Hawaiian market, and also the fact that JAL is trimming capacity there. I think this is an incredibly dumb argument for Hawaiian to be making. I highly doubt that the DOT will take a slot pair away from another carrier and award it to Hawaiian. If anything, talking about how large the market is only makes a good case for Delta’s HNL service, which would provide more capacity with a 747 while only using one slot pair.

United

United was completely shut out of Haneda, with its application for San Francisco service denied. The filing has some interesting arguments, but I’m not sure if they will help since they are essentially variations of the same arguments that the DOT has already seen.

First, the airline writes that while it does not object to one slot going to New  York service, it didn’t like the DOT’s ruling that giving American a slot would stimulate inter-alliance competition, since American and partner JAL already fly to Tokyo from New York, along with airlines in the other major alliances. OK, granted.

But United specifically objected to the awards to Hawaiian and Delta, and says that one of those three slots should be given to them for SFO service.

For Hawaiian, United says that “it is not even clear that Hawaiian’s proposal will generate any significant benefits for Japan-originating passengers, let alone for U.S.-originating traffic.” The airline also says that the focus for Haneda should be on “time-sensitive business travelers.” United also claims that for Hawaiian to introduce new competition, all they need to do is to fly to NRT, which they will be able to do easier than before thanks to the Open Skies agreement.

As for Delta, United says that the Detroit market for O&D is very small, but does offer plenty of connection opportunities. And for Los Angeles, United says that while the O&D market is huge, Delta offers very few connections. So United’s argument here is that San Franciso is a nice blend of these benefits – a strong local market with a hub to support connections nationwide.

Like I said, these are good arguments. But they’re nothing new, so I’m not really expecting to see the DOT change its mind.

Continental

The airline gets bonus points for being the only carrier to have something creative here. The airline (along with subsidiary Continental Mirconesia) applied for Newark and Guam service, and were denied. But the two airlines write that “they are not contesting the basic awards.” Yay, something different! :D They are instead asking for backup authority in case some carriers do not start service.

In its initial ruling, the DOT said they would not do this, writing that “should any of the selected carriers not begin its proposed services, we tentatively find that the public interest would be best served by allowing us to award any unused rights on the basis of a fresh record.should any of the selected carriers notbegin its proposed services, we tentatively find that the public interest would be best served by allowing us to award any unused rights on the basis of a fresh record.”

But Continental has some interesting points here. Like United, they’re doubting Delta’s Detroit route, saying its a small market, and having 747s to each Narita and Haneda might not work. So they’re saying that if Delta doesn’t start or terminate the route, they should be able to fly to Newark, since its the only other service that provides an Eastern hub.

The airline also thinks it should be awarded backup authority for Newark flying if American doesn’t get going on its JFK service, which makes sense.

Finally, Continentla Micronesia believes it should be allowed to fly to Guam if Hawaiian doesn’t start Honolulu flying. I’m not sure if that argument has a lot of merit.

Anyway, we’ll see if the DOT changes its mind at all. United does make a good case for SFO, but with the same arguments as last time I’m not sure if DOT will  be convinced. But I like Continental’s creativity here. Let’s see what the DOT thinks of that.

Continental Recalling Pilots

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 19, 2010
in Continental
. 1 Comment

The labor market for pilots has been messy for the past few years. It’s certainly been awhile since we’ve seen any big hiring happen on that front from the major carriers. And there are a couple of factors at play here. Of course one huge one is the economic environment – when you’re cutting capacity you don’t need more labor. And I think another factor at play here is the government raising the mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65.

But we’ve seen some good news on this front over the past couple of weeks. As I wrote a few days ago, Delta is hiring 240 pilots. We saw some more good news yesterday when Continental said it was recalling 15 pilots who were furloughed in 2008. Now, that’s only about 10% of the pilots on furlough, and right now they’re only slated to be flying for the second half of this year and early 2011, but this is progress. In addition, 111 pilots who voluntarily took leave will be coming back to work. Also good news.

So why the need? Well, Continental is expanding its fleet, with two new 777s coming soon. And some of this is coming through attrition – which will be an important factor industry-wide over the next few years (granted, I’m no labor expert but that’s what I think). Many airlines have older workforces now (no hiring sends up average ages), and replacements will be needed to fill the void. Actually, that could be a good thing for the carrier’s bottom lines, at least temporarily, as the new hires will be replacing workers at the top of the pay scale.

Anyway, let’s hope that the labor market can return to something that resembles normalcy.

DOT Splits Up Haneda Slots

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 11, 2010
in American, Continental, Delta, Hawaiian and United
. 1 Comment

Haneda airport has been closed off for long-haul flying for a long time, but that will change later this year when a new runway opens. As part of the new open skies agreement between the US and Japan, American carriers will access to the airport for the first time since 1978. This is big, as Haneda is closer to downtown Tokyo, and as such is viewed as more convenient. The best comparison I can think of (at least in part of the world) is if LaGuardia in New York or Reagan National in Washington were opened for transoceanic flying, if that were possible.

Four slots at the airport were allocated to American carriers, and the DOT was charged with the task of choosing who would get service. Naturally, this is a big deal for the airlines – the prospect of getting access to an attractive  new market where they are shielded from competition is very exciting. But this is also a big decision for the DOT, and I have to think it was a tough choice dealing with such a small number of slots. Plus, the DOT says it had to put its blinders on – the agency said it did not consider the outcomes of the anti-trust immunity applications from American/JAL and United/Continental/ANA.

We had five carriers propose routes – Hawaiian, Delta, American, Continental, and United. I tried to write this carrier-by-carrier, but it just didn’t work out. So here’s a breakdown by city. Karl Swartz over at the Great Circle Mapper made an interesting featured map that shows what was approved (in blue) and what was denied (red):

Honolulu

Two carriers proposed service here. Delta applied for one 747 flight, Hawaiian proposed flying two daily flights from Honolulu, and they received rights for one flight with a 767-300. The airline says they’re going to appeal for the second, but I doubt they’ll get it.

You might be surprised that the DOT selected Honolulu, but it’s actually the largest United States – Japan market. Some airlines argued that Honolulu shouldn’t get any service because it’s a leisure-dominated market, but the DOT argued that the service would provide a boost to Hawaii’s tourism economy.

So why go with Hawaiian, who will inject less capacity? Well, the DOT likes competition. A lot. Hawaiian would be a new entrant into the Hawaii-Japan market, so that seems to be the major motivation for selecting Honolulu and Hawaiian. On a side note, JAL will be starting flights to Honolulu from Haneda later this year as well.

Guam

This one might seem a bit odd, too, but it’s the second-largest Japan-US market. Continental Micronesia applied for one with with a 767-400, and was denied. The DOT acknowledged that there would be economic benefits if the service was approved, but didn’t find it worthwhile. Unlike Hawaiian’s proposal, this would not add any new competition. DOT also believes that using the other slots for mainland service is a better use of them.

Los Angeles/San Francisco/Seattle

From the way I read the filing, it looks like DOT looked at the West Coast as a whole here, so I’ll do the same. Delta applied for a flight from Seattle (A330-300) and Los Angeles (747-400). American applied for Los Angeles (777-200), and not surprisingly, United applied for service from San Francisco. Seattle was denied, and I’m not really shocked. It’s one of the smaller markets that were up for consideration, and with only three slots left to work with DOT was looking for other options, and it ended up going with Delta out of Los Angeles, and that one makes sense – it’s the largest mainland-Japan market. DOT also went with Delta because the flights would be using 747s, introducing most capacity. From a connecting standpoint I think San Francisco opens up more opportunities but I can see DOT’s reasoning here.

Also worth noting is that JAL is cutting SFO-Narita service and moving it over to Haneda later this year.

Detroit

Yep, this was yet another Delta application. The carrier applied for all four slots and wanted to see what would stick. Despite this being the smallest market that DOT was looking at, they gave it to Delta because of connecting opportunities, which makes sense. Even if San Francisco were approved, that wouldn’t be very convenient for passengers in the Eastern half of the country who were flying United, while Delta has an expansive domestic network out of Detroit. (Now that I think of it, why didn’t United try for Chicago service here? I feel if they had they would’ve beat Delta if they had.) Plus Delta using a 747 probably helps, too.

New York

DOT saved New York, the second-largest mainland-Tokyo market, for last. Continental applied for flights out of Newark, and American applied for JFK. Both flights would be flown with 777-200s. The DOT ended up going with American, saying that “should enhance alliance competition by improving the competitive posture of American and oneworld in the U.S.-Asia market as compared to the Skyteam and Star alliances”. (Which is very true – take a look at this graph.) I can see that argument, but I still would have gone with Continental instead. The DOT was looking at connecting opportunities for other cities, and in that department, Continental wins by a long shot.

So when does this all start? Uhm, later this year. The DOT says service will start within 90 days of October 31, but the service is also contingent on the US and Japan signing the final agreement, and the completion of the runway at Haneda. Plus, there’s now a few days left to object to the tentative ruling, though I don’t see much changing at this point.

United and Continental Stop Resisiting Urge to Merge

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 3, 2010
in Continental and United
. 9 Comments

“Airlines merge when they have run out of alternatives…We don’t believe in mergers.”
- Jeff Smisek, April 2007

That’s a quote that started floating around on Twitter last evening, and I think it shows how quickly times change. This morning Continental and United confirmed what has been rumored for a few weeks – that the two airlines plan to combine. The airline will keep United’s name, but use Continental’s font and logo. The airline will be headquartered in Chicago, though Houston will be the biggest hub, and Jeff Smisek, CEO of the new company, will have offices in both cities. The deal is currently slated to close by the end of this year.

So I’m going to share a few of my initial thoughts here. Honestly, I haven’t thought a whole lot about this deal yet, just because everything was just pure speculation. This post is more of a “brain dump” than anything. As more details are announced, you can be sure I’ll be writing more about it.

What’s changed since Mr. Smisek said mergers were such a bad idea? Well, I think one answer is Delta. That merger has gone pretty well, and the airline has also performed pretty well financially. They also have increased power in the marketplace. United/Continental would eclipse Delta in size. Smisek also mentioned in this morning’s media call that the improving economic environment also presents a good time to merge.

Why keep the United name? My guess is that management’s thought is that the United brand name is better-known worldwide. Which is probably true. But for what? Poor customer service? United definitely has made progress over the past year or so, but just among many of my friends, Continental is the better-respected brand.

Also, I’m not sure if I really like the new look of the airline. For one reason or another, I just dislike the United name using Continental’s font. Not having UNITED in all capital letters just looks wrong! The livery doesn’t look fantastic, either. Granted, it looks like it was just slapped together in Photoshop, so I’ll reserve final  judgment until I see it on a plane. But Continental and United should look to US Airways for a good merger livery. The new US Airways colors had functional reasons (dark planes in Phoenix don’t work too well), but the livery combined both US Airways and America West elements.

What about labor? Labor is a big issue in any merger. US Airways is still dealing with separate contracts for some workgroups (most notably the pilots). Delta’s merger has been lauded for a lack of labor issues – the two pilot groups worked out a seniority integration before the deal closed. The fact that Delta wasn’t very unionized helped, too.

Of course, like any deal, seniority is always an issue. But I’m most interested in scope. Continental has one of the most restrictive scope clauses out their right now. There’s a reason they fly ERJ-145XRs all over the country – they’re not allowed to have larger regional jets. That’s also why the only larger regional aircraft are prop-powered Q400s. United’s scope clause has a lot more leeway – the airline abundantly uses larger regional jets like the CRJ-700 and E-170. So we’ll have to see how that goes.

What will the government think? During this morning’s conference call, it was mentioned that anti-trust shouldn’t be a huge issue thanks to the lack of of overlap. And that’s true – this deal faces a lot less issues than United and US Airways would (especially in the DC area). But I remember reading when Delta-Northwest happened that there was a push to get the deal done while the more pro-business Bush administration was in the White House. So, what will DOT/DOJ say?

What fleet moves will we see? We have seen some interesting things happen with mergers lately. Delta and Continental have been pure-Boeing customers, and have merged with airlines that have decided to order Airbus aircraft. In fact, United is a very important customer for Airbus, opening up the American market to the European airframer. So what does the future fleet look like? One benefit is that United will now have 787s years earlier than expected thanks to Continental’s orders. And the A350 is still on the books as well. Also, last week United said during its earnings call that we can expect a narrowbody order at the end of the year. What happens now? Embraer, Mitsubishi, Bombardier, Boeing, and Airbus are probably thinking what this all means for them.

How will a combined product look? Let’s look at the international product here – Continental has two classes of service, and we’ll day United has three and a half, if we toss in Economy Plus. Both airlines have been reconfiguring their long-haul fleets with new products. Will first class on international fleets remain? What about Economy Plus?

What’s good for the customer here? I’m still trying to figure this out. I’m not seeing much in the short-term – if the two airlines weren’t codeshare partners already, there would be more. I think we’ll have to see what happens product-wise first.

What about hubs? There’s been some speculation already that Cleveland is the next Pittsburgh/St. Louis/Cincinnati. That could be the case. We’ll see. I’m thinkin’ about Denver’s future, too, just because of all the competition going on there, though I’d argue that United’s Denver operation is different than Frontier’s or Southwest’s.

And what about other airlines? This merger has started up US Airways – American talk all over again. I’m not sure how likely it is, but we’ll see. Never say never.

Anyway, those are my quick, initial thoughts. I’d love to hear your comments, and will be sure to write more as we get more information.

Some New Hawaii Flights Already Getting Cut

Published
by
Dan Webb
on April 15, 2010
in Continental, Delta and US Airways
. 2 Comments

The Hawaiian market has certainly been fun to watch, as we’ve seen so many carriers announce new flights there over the past few months.  I think it’s fair to say that Alaska has been the most aggressive here by starting flights out of its Seattle base but also taking advantage of routes that were cut after ATA and Aloha’s passenger operations went bust. But other airlines have been trying to get in on the action as well, and it appears that some of the flights that have been announced are already getting cut.

First, let’s take a look at US Airways. The airline decided to experiment a bit and use a 767-200 for Charlotte-Honolulu service instead of sending it to Europe. It appears that the flight now goes away on September 8 (that’s the last redeye arrival from HNL), though that same article mentions that a seasonal service might be possible, depending on the flight works out over the summer. I’m not exactly holding my breath on that one. US Airways does tell me that they’re adding a second flight from Phoenix, though. According to their timetable, it will start on September 9. Like the current single nonstop, a 757 will be used.

Meanwhile, Continental has decided to start increasing its Hawaii capacity as well. One of the more interesting moves was launching service from Orange County, a city that has lacked nonstops since Aloha left. Continetal’s flights to Honolulu and Maui will be suspended on September 12, but will come back on November 20 and December 16, respectively. So it appears the airport will hold on to the flights, albeit seasonally.

Finally, Delta is making some moves as well. Its originally announced service between San Diego and Honoulu, a route that has been tried and dropped by a few carriers over the years, is ending earlier than originally planned. The airline will begin flying the route as scheduled on June 3. Once Delta stops flying the route, Hawaiian will be the only carrier with a nonstop between the two cities.

Meanwhile, Portland-Honolulu, an old Northwest route, will be cut on August 30. The carrier tells me that the route just wasn’t profitable during off-peak times and says that that they are “are hopeful that we can serve the Portland-Honolulu route seasonally in future years.” But a competitor has already decided to hop on the route – Alaska Airlines (a partner of Delta’s) announced yesterday that it would launch daily service starting September 20, complementing existing Maui service.  Finally, Delta’s still planning to run thrice-weekly service to Honolulu from Detroit as originally announced.

So the Hawaiian market continues to be an interesting one to observe. And it will become only more interesting with Allegiant begins its service there with 757s later this year.

The Slot Swap: Other Airlines Share Their Thoughts

Published
by
Dan Webb
on March 25, 2010
in American, Continental, Southwest, United and Virgin America
. 0 Comments

Yesterday, I wrote about the latest moves in the slot swap and the additional four airlines that have now become players in the deal. But other airlines submitted comments to the FAA/DOT about the issue, and I found some of them interesting. While they might not be directly involved in the deal, they do have other interests that could be potentially affected by it. So let’s review.

Virgin America

One might wonder why Virgin might be commenting here. They’re a West Coast airline, and due to the perimeter rules at LaGuardia and National they could not fly there anyway. Currently, the airline flies to New York’s JFK and Washington’s Dulles form its Los Angeles and San Francisco bases. Well, Virgin is more concerned about other slot-controlled airports in general. From its comments:

…the US Airways—Delta transaction should, however, only be the first step in addressing the serious competitive problems at each of the slot-controlled airports in the United States. In this regard, the DOT/FAA’s stated concerns and policies outlined in the proposed decision for LGA and DCA should also be made to apply equally at Newark’s Liberty International Airport (“EWR”), where one airline—Continental—has been awarded the overwhelming majority of slots, 73 Fed. Reg. 29550 (May 21, 2008), and controls nearly 65% of all domestic passenger enplanements 3 as well as at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport (“JFK”), where Delta and one other airline have been awarded the majority of all slots at that airport.

(Emphasis mine.)

And then:

…Virgin America further requests that the DOT/FAA quickly move forward to create a permanent mechanism by which new entrants and limited incumbents may gain entry to these or any other slot-controlled airports…

So Virgin basically wants it easier for them to get more slots, and of course they would qualify since they would be a “limited incumbent” at JFK. Looking for ways to get new slots is nothing new for them.

American/Continental/United

I’m grouping these guys together because they all had the same basic message here – that the FAA is not authorized to require these slot divestitures. A big reason for submitting these comments is because they have interests at other slot-controlled airports. But while all the airlines had the same general point, but I did find some interesting nuggets in each: Continue reading ‘The Slot Swap: Other Airlines Share Their Thoughts’