US Airways Dividend Miles (Pre-FlightFund Merger) - more PIT -vs- U news

http://washingtontimes.com/business/20030412-55212471.htm

There is a line about the threat of moving the RJ line out of CLT. I find it funny that all of a suddent the facilities at PIT are inadequate when this airport was designed mostly for U.

http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2003/04/07/daily50.html


another article

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by trvlr64:
http://washingtontimes.com/business/20030412-55212471.htm

There is a line about the threat of moving the RJ line out of CLT. I find it funny that all of a suddent the facilities at PIT are inadequate when this airport was designed mostly for U. </font>

"US Airways officials said yesterday their negotiations with Pennsylvania authorities will include the possibility of the airline moving its corporate headquarters from Arlington, Va., to Pittsburgh."

I guess I am running out of opportunities to run in to B. Ben at my local supermarket. This is very ironic given this insipid column in DC's inferior newspaper:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum51/HTML/004758.html

THe Philadelphia Inquirer also had an article about this matter. However, there were two distinct differences it in as compaired to the other articles posted. First they never mentioned that PA was urging US to make their corp HQ in PIT they just said PA.

THe next difference is the paper reports that the airline wants $140 million in rent relief at PIT and $95 million in facilities and runway improvements(much lower than the other papers report). I would think the only thing US would need at PHL is runway improvements. I can't imagine many more renovations that could be done to the facilities after Terminal A west and Terminal F were built, the B/C connector was nicely renovated into a mall, and the airport built a very nice control tower mainly used to handle US ground control. I mean there might be some minor renovations on some concourses or clubs but thats about it. I wonder if US wants any other buildings in PHL...hanger, maintance facility?

I love the recurring theme from US: "We are going to negotiate in private with the county and state." My rear--this is taxypayer money on the line here, the process should be open. If Rendell forks over a quarter of a billion in return for the status quo plus the current contents of Fort Fumble, I'll be seriously peeved.

And one further thing: a new runway at PHL would probably go for somewhere north of a billion dollars. Given was US is currently doing to the last airport that did a billion dollar project on their behalf (PIT), one would have to be insane to go down that road.

------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

There already is some discussions regarding runway addition/expansion at PHL but its an FAA project, nothing specifically to do with USAirways. These projects usually take as long as ten years.


Jay

Moving US HQ (Crystal City) back to PIT (yes, that's where it used to be) is a dream of the PA state officials. They think that this can be used as a "concession" by US in negotiations over PIT and PHL.

US won't move CCY back to PIT. By cutting all of the flights through PIT, US is showing the local PIT officials what the airport will look like without US as a tenant (it's barren of passengers right now. This "Shock and Awe" tactic will assure them of getting the $000M that they're looking for.

Yes, a TRAM to F and back. The diesel is a major putoff to the 'occasional' fliers and a major joke with the trams at Detroit and Atlanta.

I guess the move won't be happening. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/business/5634241.htm


US Airways says it won't move headquarters to Pa.
Gov. Rendell wants the carrier to relocate from Virginia, but "that's not on the table," the new chairman said.
By Marcia Gelbart
Inquirer Staff Writer

US Airways Group Inc. won't be calling Pennsylvania home anytime soon, the airline's new board chairman said yesterday.

With US Airways seeking $390 million in public funding to improve its Pittsburgh and Philadelphia operations, Gov. Rendell said last week that he would ask the airline to move its headquarters to the state from Arlington, Va.

"Everybody has visions," said David Bronner, who was elected board chairman April 4. He is chief executive officer of the Retirement Systems of Alabama, which holds a majority of US Airways' board seats.

"I've already agreed with management to allow it to stay where it's at, so that's not on the table," Bronner said in an interview.

The Alabama pension fund has given the airline, which emerged from bankruptcy protection two weeks ago, $240 million in exchange for a 37 percent ownership stake.

Previously, when the fund loaned millions to a small newspaper owner from Lexington, Ky., Bronner said part of the investment deal was that the newspaper company move its headquarters to Birmingham.

But concerning US Airways, which is managed from a high-rise building across the Potomac River from the nation's capital, Bronner said: "Washington is very important to us... . Plus, because the management team is so new, you don't want to disrupt them from focusing on surviving [financially]."

US Airways, which has nearly half of its workforce based in Pennsylvania, wants $235 million in government aid to cover rent costs, as well as facilities and runway improvements at Philadelphia International airport.

It also wants $155 million in cost savings from Pittsburgh's airport, where the airline wants to base its new regional jet carrier, Mid-Atlantic Airways.

It's not clear where any of that money would come from.

A Rendell spokeswoman offered little comment yesterday on Bronner's ruling out the airline's relocation. The spokeswoman, Kate Philips, also wouldn't say whether the governor would pursue the effort in a meeting he was planning to hold with US Airways officials later this month.

In a related matter, the number of international travelers flying through Philadelphia's airport has dipped for the first time in at least six months. According to the airport, 7.8 percent fewer passengers boarded aircraft this February than in the same month last year.

The drop comes as city airport officials are preparing for the May 2 opening of the new US Airways international terminal.

Last year, in spite of a nationwide decline in overseas travel, a record 3.2 million passengers used Philadelphia's airport.
Contact staff writer Marcia Gelbart at 215-854-2338 or mgelbart@phillynews.com.

If RSA really got a 37% stake in U for $240 million (is this right? wasn't there more money involved?), then I'd be fine with the state of PA taking a 60% share in U for the $390 million in improvements that U wants (or whatever works out to the same price per share).

Of course, then they wouldn't have a choice about where to locate their headquarters http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tw0i:
If RSA really got a 37% stake in U for $240 million (is this right? wasn't there more money involved?), then I'd be fine with the state of PA taking a 60% share in U for the $390 million in improvements that U wants (or whatever works out to the same price per share).

Of course, then they wouldn't have a choice about where to locate their headquarters http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif</font>

That's true! Those Alabamy Hicks bought controlling interest in US for LESS $$ than they're trying to extort out of the state of PA!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
That's true! Those Alabamy Hicks bought controlling interest in US for LESS $$ than they're trying to extort out of the state of PA!</font>

So far those "Alabamy Hicks" as you put it have cleaned our Yankee clocks at the negotiating table. Perhap you might reconsider your remarks considering you are from the part of PA that actually says "y'ins"!

So far those "Alabamy Hicks" as you put it have cleaned our Yankee clocks at the negotiating table. Perhap you might reconsider your remarks considering you are from the part of PA that actually says "y'ins"! [/B][/QUOTE]


Piney....it's YINS or YINZ depending what part of town you're from !! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif No apostrophe, that's only the south that uses it in Y'ALL!! LOL

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
So far those "Alabamy Hicks" as you put it have cleaned our Yankee clocks at the negotiating table. Perhap you might reconsider your remarks considering you are from the part of PA that actually says "y'ins"! </font>

It's "yunz." http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif.

And, it seems like the folks who talk with a bad case of Pittsburghese are usually airline employees. I'll never forget coming to school out this way and asking my new roomate at the time if "yunz" was analagous to "y'all."

And, bear in mind that this end of the state got blindsided with 21 minutes left in bankruptcy. Had PIT objected, US never would have emerged (the judge would not wipe 700 million or so clean).

Dave and Dave can kiss my yunzer behind. Rendell should go after the 9000 jobs from any other source and cheefully flip the Daves the bird. In the end, it will cost US more money (especially if the state does not fund a new runway at PHL).



------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by trvlr64:

So far those "Alabamy Hicks" as you put it have cleaned our Yankee clocks at the negotiating table. Perhap you might reconsider your remarks considering you are from the part of PA that actually says "y'ins"! </font>

[/B][/QUOTE]

Did they clean our "Yinzer" clocks? Or did they buy controlling interest in a money burning business that cannot succeed even with the company restructured?

Let's see if they make a return on their great investment. If buying into USAirways was such a great bargain there would have been many more girls at the dance. RSA got a "great" deal because NOBODY else would take the risk.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:

If buying into USAirways was such a great bargain there would have been many more girls at the dance. RSA got a "great" deal because NOBODY else would take the risk.</font>

They bought the place outta self defense and because they could get it for a song. It has no place to go but up! I bet the bucks RSA paid were about equal to what they would have wrote down has US liquidated. So no risk and all upside for RSA, most likely no one else was in that position.

Renault Vehicles Industriales did the same thing with Mack Trucks in the late '80's, aquiring a 2 billion plus company for 98 million that was losing money in the 200 million dollar range per year prior 3 years. Mack is now a hugely profitable subsidiary of the FRENCH automtive giant Renault. So for all of you "Boycott the French" better cancel your orders with Mack!

I'm on US's side on this one. They gave PIT a sweetheart deal and both parties had a win-win for 15 years. Well guess what? Things changed! They got hoodwinked at the BK proceeding? TOUGH! That isn't US's fault. This is a classic example why Government should stay out of private enterprise. Perhaps next time I go through PIT I wil bring some cheese for Mr. Roddey to go along with his whine! The workers took it in the shorts to save US, now it is Governments turn, BOHICA, Jim, Ed, Arlen and welcome to the real world of people who actually work for a living, instead of suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayers.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
I'm on US's side on this one. They gave PIT a sweetheart deal and both parties had a win-win for 15 years. Well guess what? Things changed! They got hoodwinked at the BK proceeding? TOUGH! That isn't US's fault. This is a classic example why Government should stay out of private enterprise. Perhaps next time I go through PIT I wil bring some cheese for Mr. Roddey to go along with his whine! The workers took it in the shorts to save US, now it is Governments turn, BOHICA, Jim, Ed, Arlen and welcome to the real world of people who actually work for a living, instead of suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayers.</font>

Umm, what do you call demanding $200 million or so plus cost improvements at PHL and PIT? I call it suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayer.

As a Pennsylvania taxpayer, please tell me exactly what I owe to US? There will always be air service to Pittsburgh.....

------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

Been a while since I heard BOHICA. For those not in the know, it satnds for, Bend Over Here It Comes Again. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
They bought the place outta self defense and because they could get it for a song. It has no place to go but up! I bet the bucks RSA paid were about equal to what they would have wrote down has US liquidated. So no risk and all upside for RSA, most likely no one else was in that position.

Renault Vehicles Industriales did the same thing with Mack Trucks in the late '80's, aquiring a 2 billion plus company for 98 million that was losing money in the 200 million dollar range per year prior 3 years. Mack is now a hugely profitable subsidiary of the FRENCH automtive giant Renault. So for all of you "Boycott the French" better cancel your orders with Mack!

I'm on US's side on this one. They gave PIT a sweetheart deal and both parties had a win-win for 15 years. Well guess what? Things changed! They got hoodwinked at the BK proceeding? TOUGH! That isn't US's fault. This is a classic example why Government should stay out of private enterprise. Perhaps next time I go through PIT I wil bring some cheese for Mr. Roddey to go along with his whine! The workers took it in the shorts to save US, now it is Governments turn, BOHICA, Jim, Ed, Arlen and welcome to the real world of people who actually work for a living, instead of suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayers.</font>

The airline business ain't the new truck business. The cost and profit model is still sick and will take a reduction in "supply" (airlines dropping out of the race) for those left to start making money.

As far as PIT getting "hoodwinked", they were directly lied to and deceived by US in this matter. Due to this tactic, I don't believe that PA or Allegheny county can negotiate in good faith with them. There can be no trust because of US's "21 minute hoodwinking".

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
The airline business ain't the new truck business. The cost and profit model is still sick and will take a reduction in "supply"
As far as PIT getting "hoodwinked", they were directly lied to and deceived by US in this matter. Due to this tactic, I don't believe that PA or Allegheny county can negotiate in good faith with them. There can be no trust because of US's "21 minute hoodwinking".</font>

The first defense of a bad negotiator is "The Salesman Lied To Me" Which translates into "I was to lazy to do my due diligence and now that I have been exposed as lazy and not planing ahead I seek to blame others for my failings" PIT gambled, they lost. That's business! Why wasn't PIT proactive? Why didn't they approach US with a deal to help them and avoid this predicament? Why? LAZY is why! Like the old saying "Prior Poor Planning = Pizz Poor Performance" US was completely prudent in preserving their options until 1 minute before. Seems to me they gave PIT a 20 minute courtesy. BK is a desparate time and desparate times call for desparate measures. Siegel had a plan and he worked his plan like any good businessman should!

As for the Mack Truck deal in the late '80's you had 120,000 Class 8 truck capacity chasing 95,000 trucks worth of business so there are plenty of similarities.

Im not from PIT, have no ax to grind in either direction but I think a few things are getting left out of this. First, although not left out, I dont think the job impact is considered enough. PIT cant just go out and get thousands of jobs. It is pretty competitive in the job building market and PIT has some liabilities. One of their major assets is the airport and its flights in and out. There is a huge amuont of business development over the years along that highway from the airport to the city. I would venture that most, in fact virtually all of it, is if not directly, then indirectly due to US Airs flights. US has made PIT easy to get in and out of, that has led to corporate offices being there and people buying and selling getting in their readily. That has been a real benefit to the economy. Take away hub level flight access and I think PIT takes a major economic hit. Fact is they will have to pay for it. People dont just come to cities like PIT (as opposed to SAN for instance) and bring them stuff. They need to compete and spend some money toi develop economically. Thats not to say US is their best deal, I dont know enough of the details on that. But it may be their only deal and if US enters * alliance it will bring PIT a level of access to international business that very fwe other cities their size have. They may be better off just paying up in a way that assures they get the service they need for business.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
The first defense of a bad negotiator is "The Salesman Lied To Me" Which translates into "I was to lazy to do my due diligence and now that I have been exposed as lazy and not planing ahead I seek to blame others for my failings" PIT gambled, they lost. That's business! Why wasn't PIT proactive? Why didn't they approach US with a deal to help them and avoid this predicament? Why? LAZY is why! Like the old saying "Prior Poor Planning = Pizz Poor Performance" US was completely prudent in preserving their options until 1 minute before. Seems to me they gave PIT a 20 minute courtesy. BK is a desparate time and desparate times call for desparate measures. Siegel had a plan and he worked his plan like any good businessman should!</font>

Couple of notes:

If you check the press reports, you will see that the ACAA went to US Airways and specifically asked about the future of the leases and was specifically told they were not going to be abrogated. Your statement that, in effect, "PIT was lazy" is bunk.

Secondly, if I treated my business "partners" like this, I'd broke in a hurry. Don't confuse the art of the deal with abrogating a lease with 21 minutes left in an 8 month bankuptcy. The latter is the sign of a failed business or businessman--eg, somebody who lacked the acumen to get the job done on the up and up. If I did this to a supplier in BK, I'd be screwed. If I did this to a customer in or out of BK I'd be screwed.

Had Siegel thought about it for more than 21 minutes, he'd have made it known 6 months ago that US needed the PIT costs to come down. If a deal was met, great. If not, everybody would still be screwed in the end.

Now he has Roddey pulling a bunch of execs who are much brighter than Seigel (eg, those that have run money making businesses in the past like PNC, Mellon, Alcoa, etc) and Rendell (plus the two US Senators who will probably cease donig anything on US behalf) peeved at him, plus he still needs the US costs to go down. It's not a good sign that
a previously faithful vassel in the form of the ACAA is flying to DAL. Now people are peeved.

I prefer to keep my business partners happy, or at a very minimum _not angry_ with me. YMMV, I guess.

------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
The first defense of a bad negotiator is "The Salesman Lied To Me" ......... </font>

So what do you do if the SALESMAN REALLY DID LIE (which in this case is exactly what happened)? You don't trust that person and try NOT to do business with them again.

Sure, US has PIT by the shorthairs.....but that won't last forever. And US can't just immediatly walk out of PIT if they don't get what they want. The interim period will be difficult for all.

If a low cost carrier gains full access to PIT they'll have access to both the Northeastern and Midwest markets......a major source of US's revenue. This is what US has, and will, lose as a result of their terroristic negotiating tactics.

SWA has already given PIT the polite brush off if you read their comments. As for The Dave's, IMHO this was planned well in advance. It was no accident. US has plans in place no matter which way it falls. The wild card here is the Rendell Administration.

As for the "Salesman Lied" So what! If it's not in writing it doesn't count! Business is in most cases not done on a handshake anymore. If it's not in writing in a memo of understanding or something that Jim Roddey can produce for the media then as far as I am concerned no conversation took place. First of all Dave Bronner calls the shots and Dave siegel may have given a verbal OK on the leases, but if Bronner didn't then it is Roddey's fault for not determining just who the decision maker was.

Besides how do we know exactly what was said. Example: When I was in the copier business and people ask me all the time "Can I get out of this lease?" The answer is YES! When you pay all of the payments you are out of the lease! now the last part doesn't get said. Then mans question gets answered, nothing more! The correct question should be: Is it possible to terminate the lease early?" Now the customer recieves the answer he really wants to know. That answer is NO!. Who's at fault? The salesman answered the question correctly in both cases.

Picture this then
JR: So Dave everything OK with the leases?
DS: Yes Jim, All is according to plan.

Well if it went down like that then Roddey asked the wrong question!

See you don't know how the conversation went because nothing is in writing. That example of a brief exchange may be all that happened, which makes it Roddey's fault for asking the wrong question NOT Dave's for answering the question asked. First rule in Sales, Make sure you understand the customer requirements. Did Jim Roddey ever ask US Airways what their requirements were after BK was filed? Haven't seen anything in print! I see no wrong doing here on US's part! they acted in the best interests of their shareholders and that is their fiduciary obligation. If Roddey got out slicked then he needs to look in the mirror. Modern business is no longer that "clubby" little world. People have "sharp elbows" now. Ask the unions how they feel about the Dave's?

ACCA now needs to do what it feels it needs to do and if US takes it in the nutz then it was Siegel who didn't plan well enough ahead.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
SWA has already given PIT the polite brush off if you read their comments. As for The Dave's, IMHO this was planned well in advance. It was no accident. US has plans in place no matter which way it falls. The wild card here is the Rendell Administration.

As for the "Salesman Lied" So what! If it's not in writing it doesn't count! Business is in most cases not done on a handshake anymore. If it's not in writing in a memo of understanding or something that Jim Roddey can produce for the media then as far as I am concerned no conversation took place. First of all Dave Bronner calls the shots and Dave siegel may have given a verbal OK on the leases, but if Bronner didn't then it is Roddey's fault for not determining just who the decision maker was.

Besides how do we know exactly what was said. Example: When I was in the copier business and people ask me all the time "Can I get out of this lease?" The answer is YES! When you pay all of the payments you are out of the lease! now the last part doesn't get said. Then mans question gets answered, nothing more! The correct question should be: Is it possible to terminate the lease early?" Now the customer recieves the answer he really wants to know. That answer is NO!. Who's at fault? The salesman answered the question correctly in both cases.

Picture this then
JR: So Dave everything OK with the leases?
DS: Yes Jim, All is according to plan.

Well if it went down like that then Roddey asked the wrong question!

See you don't know how the conversation went because nothing is in writing. That example of a brief exchange may be all that happened, which makes it Roddey's fault for asking the wrong question NOT Dave's for answering the question asked. First rule in Sales, Make sure you understand the customer requirements. Did Jim Roddey ever ask US Airways what their requirements were after BK was filed? Haven't seen anything in print! I see no wrong doing here on US's part! they acted in the best interests of their shareholders and that is their fiduciary obligation. If Roddey got out slicked then he needs to look in the mirror. Modern business is no longer that "clubby" little world. People have "sharp elbows" now. Ask the unions how they feel about the Dave's?

ACCA now needs to do what it feels it needs to do and if US takes it in the nutz then it was Siegel who didn't plan well enough ahead.</font>

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03091/170541.stm

Note the part about "US Airways officials had always said they did not intend to reject the airport leases."

I work for a business that did $7.2 Billion in sales and returned about $230 or so million to common last year. Let me reiterate that if this was done to me, the offending party becomes persona non grata.

US Airways lost a couple of billion last year. Only a desperate fool does business like this. Put it to you this way: who, besides CLT (who has to for the same reason PIT is getting reamed) would want to do business with US now? Or, to put it another way, what would your comfort level be dealing with US going down the road? This is not about being shrewd. If either Dave were truly shrewd (or good), US would not be in this situation in the first place.

And it's not about sales. It's like you said, US should stop suckling at the teat of the taxpayer. Ergo, the ACAA should not have to "sell" US anything (let's forget for the moment about the billion dollar terminal, built to suit a mere 10 years ago and less than halfway paid for....).

------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03091/170541.stm

Note the part about "US Airways officials had always said they did not intend to reject the airport leases."
</font>

It's still very one sided -- until someone in authority at US says "yup, I told them that and I lied" I'm with Bob -- they didn't think this through and they're now trying to cast blame on anyone except themselves.

And even if US did say that everything was ok -- it still doesn't have to be a lie. Dave & Dave would have had no choice but to say those things if that was the board's postion. They got a new board. Positions on the matter may have changed. Roddey should have considered that that might happen.

PIT isn't going to get an LCC to put a hub there. It won't happen. But they could get more competetive service by bringing costs down and making the desired improvements. They should do that and stop treating US like they're special -- the city needs competitive fares more than they need a hub. And in the long run US needs to face the music and kick the extortionary fare habit so PIT would be doing them a favor by doing so.

Aside from USAir, the next best hope is to attract additional flights from AirTran, Midwest Express, and perhaps Frontier. Frontier is a decent airline, but has that one flight a day into Washington National and can't offer anything else besides this one flight.

Pit doesn't have incredible local business traffic and isn't a desired tourist destination. It is a decent hub from a congestion issue, but the airline will take Philadephia and Charlotte over Pit. My opinion.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
PIT isn't going to get an LCC to put a hub there. It won't happen. But they could get more competetive service by bringing costs down and making the desired improvements. They should do that and stop treating US like they're special -- the city needs competitive fares more than they need a hub. And in the long run US needs to face the music and kick the extortionary fare habit so PIT would be doing them a favor by doing so.</font>

Exactly.

It's pretty much known that if US bails, the hub goes with them. Should that happen, the bonds are probably toast. OTOH, the bonds might get toasted anyway with the demands that US wants. Why give them the courtesy?

My suggestion is that the ACAA start trying to find the LCC to start whatever level of ops they are going to start now, and reward the US "loyalty" by offering that somebody incentives to do it. Pittsburgh also needs to cut itself off from the habit of hand wringing when a "legacy" employer makes threats, and concentrating on driving new development. With the exception of the current county executive, unfortunately, this would be a mindset that runs completely contrary to the status quo.

Regarding the board theory: Bronner has been running the show at US for 8 months. They could have done the ACAA leases at any time. US execs chose to play dirty pool, and as a PA taxpayer, I hope the state and local government choose to return the favor.


------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
Exactly.

Regarding the board theory: Bronner has been running the show at US for 8 months. They could have done the ACAA leases at any time. US execs chose to play dirty pool, and as a PA taxpayer, I hope the state and local government choose to return the favor.


</font>

"Dirty Pool"????? Business IS Dirty Pool! This is the airline business remember? The same arrogant bunch whose mid level managers felt completely comfortable telling a CP that "we are an industry of fine print".

Given the industry's arrogance and penchant for "fine print" if I were the folks at ACCA I would work from the assumption that everything I was told was a lie and I would record every meeting either with a court reporter or have a secretary take minutes and publish either a narrative or transcript because as a rule airlines have demonstrated that they are not trustworthy businesspeople.

All of us who fly regularly have seen the slick way in which they do business. Their conduct is not breaking news! US Airways has lost money for YEARS, for the ACCA to make the assumption that the status quo would remain is assinine.

ACCA should have been quietly looking for tenants the month after US posted its first annual loss. They should have explored ways to save money for both the authority and US. They chose to do nothing. And now they seek to place blame where it doesn't belong!

Suppose if the Dave's didn't reject the leases and that caused a liquidation and their was NO Airline. Who would then be at fault?

One more point!

"US Airways officials had always said they did not intend to reject the airport leases."

Intend to?? Did they "intend" to lose billions? Did the "intend" to layoff nearly a third of their workforce?

I didn't "intend" to be a cockroach! What does intend mean? And isn't the road to H*ll paved with good intentions?

Now if US had said, "we will not reject the leases on the PIT facility" then you have a strong argument. Otherwise, if I'm Dave, I apologize and say "our lawyers strongly suggested we reject the leases in order to qualify for the ATSB loan otherwise we wouldn't be in business to argue this point" So anyway you slice it ACCA dropped the ball

everyone keeps talking about US leaving PIT but has anybody stopped to think where that leaves US??

They'll end up with a hub in CLT where no one north of the mason dixon will want to connect through nor will it be efficient to have people destined for the midwest connecting through CLT.

On the other hand they'll have PHL and everyone's opinion on PHL seems to be consistent as being the worst of the three current US hubs to connect through.

Unless US has dreams of becoming a purely regional East Coast airline feeding its intl flights at PHL they need a hub other than PHL and CLT. I'm pretty sure the costs of setting up a new one somewhere useful would be quite expensive for a recently emerged from BK airline.

this whole situation is being blown way out of proportion - PIT may not have great O/D traffic , it may not be the cheapest, etc, etc but the fact is that US is already there with all the employees and facilities it needs.

US will stay in PIT but PIT will probably become a RJ hub (+ longhaul domestic flights and a couple of intl flights, maybe - keep in mind that even now a huge number of mainline flights are flown to cities which would really be better off with RJ service - erie, akron, harrisburg, etc, etc.)

with some new MX facilities or something along those lines. ACAA will reduce the lease costs and the state and county will come up with some cash. IMHO the biggest difference will be the presence of more LCC flights (not hubs, just more flights) that will lower the fares and increase the O/D traffic a little.

i guess in short, while the heart says tell US and the Daves to p**s off the reality is something different.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
So anyway you slice it ACCA dropped the ball</font>

What ball? Appeasing US? I think not.


------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
What ball? Appeasing US? I think not.


</font>

Prudence in any business would dictate that if your largest customer is in financial distress, you being a forward thinking professional would inquire if you could be of assistance. When you initiate the negotiation you usually give up LESS in my experience. Did our Government Geniuses do that? NO! Did they at any time over the last 3 years compare their financial structure to that of US's other hubs? NO! Did they evey do anything proactive while US was losing billions to address the potential problems that have landed on their doorstep? NO! When you do nothing, nothing good happens!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by indogulf:
... On the other hand they'll have PHL and everyone's opinion on PHL seems to be consistent as being the worst of the three current US hubs to connect through.
</font>

I for one don't take that position. Right now PHL is IMHO the best US hub to connect through. Why? Options -- PHL has the healthiest schedule these days.

The "problems" with PHL aren't what they used to be. Things have changed. In large measure that's because traffic is way down but there have also been some substantial changes to the way the place is run and to the infrastructure.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
I for one don't take that position. Right now PHL is IMHO the best US hub to connect through. Why? Options -- PHL has the healthiest schedule these days.

The "problems" with PHL aren't what they used to be. Things have changed. In large measure that's because traffic is way down but there have also been some substantial changes to the way the place is run and to the infrastructure.</font>

This is a very weak argument for PHL. Of course PHL has options, US kept it's gates full of departures. It's still a lousy airport to connect through with the additional problem of runway chaos.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PineyBob:
Prudence in any business would dictate that if your largest customer is in financial distress, you being a forward thinking professional would inquire if you could be of assistance. When you initiate the negotiation you usually give up LESS in my experience. Did our Government Geniuses do that? NO! Did they at any time over the last 3 years compare their financial structure to that of US's other hubs? NO! Did they evey do anything proactive while US was losing billions to address the potential problems that have landed on their doorstep? NO! When you do nothing, nothing good happens!
</font>

Earlier in the thread, you said:

"welcome to the real world of people who actually work for a living, instead of suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayers."

If you expect PIT to bend over for US, that sounds a lot to me like "suckling at the hind teet of the taxpayer." What do you call it?

Besides which, PIT may very well have said this to US, and they came back with "of course we are not going to abrogate the leases."

The ACAA built US the terminal they wanted. And floated the bonds. They have (until the latest debacle) coddled US in PIT to the point of all but discouraging others from making moves into PIT. At 1 billion, for the 9,000 remaining jobs in PIT cost the taxpayer around 11,000 dollars/job. If US were to bail on PIT with the current debt level, those 9,000 jobs will only cost about 7200 dollars a job. At those rates, I encourage US to leave town--the money is best spent elsewhere to drive economic development.

The proper response to the Daves is the middle finger.



------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
This is a very weak argument for PHL. Of course PHL has options, US kept it's gates full of departures. It's still a lousy airport to connect through with the additional problem of runway chaos.</font>

I wasn't arguing "for" PHL -- just pointing out that not everyone thinks it's as horrible as was indicated. It is not a "lousy" airport to connect through. In particular the "employees with bad attitudes" thing has long since shifted to PIT. And the delay issues are vastly reduced from the days when PHL was a daily horror show. They've put some real effort into making it better and it shows.

But since you bring it up ;-) a strong argument for PHL is easy. US Airways can make more money at PHL than at any other hub in the system.

I know you PIT based people are hurting and I'm sorry about that. It is a very nice airport and has many very attractive points to it.

I think your ire should be at least equally heaped on the county as on the airline -- they are far from blameless for this. You're taking their word for a lot of things and there really isn't any reason to believe such self-serving balogna.

For the "give US the finger" crowd -- while I understand the feeling that's not a good idea either. You'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Yes, stop treating US like they have some sort of favorite son status and definitely do everything possible to bring in competition. But to do that you're going to need to do the things that US is asking for so don't toss out the baby with the bath water -- just make them earn it. No more free rides.

How can anybody dream about blaming local PIT government officials for the situation with US and PIT? They've bent over backwards for US and for this commitment get the "21 minute" treatment. It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest that "they should have known" what US was going to do.

Obviously US thought that PIT would hold up their emergence from Ch11 if they notified them during the 8 months of BK protection of their intent to renegotiate airport leases. So instead of negotiating in good faith, they shoved it to PIT.

It has been extremely well documented on this board about negative experiences at PHL. It hasn't improved, and cannot improve. This airport cannot ever compare to PIT....also a known fact. Sure, the O/D business is greater at PHL.....it could be alot more if most people in the area didn't drive to BWI or EWR to avoid PHL (and US's high prices).

Any attitude shift at PIT (I haven't experienced this) would surely be justified. I'll bet that PIT's daily departures are even less than Bagdad International right now. The "game" that US is playing with PIT is a slap in the face of taxpayers and employees.

I am confident that our local officials will eventually strike a deal with other carriers to which I can shift my business to. Sure, we won't have a major hub like US was, but after being gouged for fares.....we may be better off.

The only argument that USAirways needs is they can make more money at PHL. If the user experience is bad enough at PHL to drive away more business then it gains, then that wouldn't be true. But obviously that isn't the case, so PHL it is.

Taxpayers are sick and tired of bailing out private industry, and I'll let the market play it out. Take the money USAirways wants, and pay for an advertising campaign for new airlines (That seems to be very effective in Akron and makes the new airlines happy) along with retraining and aid for the laid off.

And it's not just because its USAirways. I'm a big Penguins (hockey) fan and I know there's a good chance they may leave the area w/o local assistance, but I'm against that too. Lest this go down another tangent, I'll end my rant on that here http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

pitflyer - you are preaching to the choir. That's why all these places (penguins, US) are called businesses and not charities. Business should not be paid for by public money unless they give us the game tickets and flights for free. Why would we pay to run and support the company and then pay AGAIN to reap the benefits? crazy talk.

On that side note, good old US is now asking for even MORE money:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/s_129968.html

There was a good contrast in the Trib today because as US works its way towards asking PA for almost 1 Billion dollars, other big employers get nothing (or in the case of Pittsburgh, they actually get an increased payroll tax) because they don't complain loud enough. PPG (a side article in the paper) is a core company for Pittsburgh (3,000+ employees) and receives no local support. Why should all the money go to US?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by indogulf:


They'll end up with a hub in CLT where no one north of the mason dixon will want to connect through nor will it be efficient to have people destined for the midwest connecting through CLT.

On the other hand they'll have PHL and everyone's opinion on PHL seems to be consistent as being the worst of the three current US hubs to connect through.
</font>

I've been wondering for years why people will connect through Atlanta on Delta, but it happens every day, all the time (like, SEA-ATL-EWR, for example). So why would USAir and Charlotte be any different?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by jkzahn:
pitflyer - you are preaching to the choir. That's why all these places (penguins, US) are called businesses and not charities. Business should not be paid for by public money unless they give us the game tickets and flights for free. Why would we pay to run and support the company and then pay AGAIN to reap the benefits? crazy talk.

On that side note, good old US is now asking for even MORE money:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/s_129968.html

There was a good contrast in the Trib today because as US works its way towards asking PA for almost 1 Billion dollars, other big employers get nothing (or in the case of Pittsburgh, they actually get an increased payroll tax) because they don't complain loud enough. PPG (a side article in the paper) is a core company for Pittsburgh (3,000+ employees) and receives no local support. Why should all the money go to US?

</font>

Why should the taxpayers of PA pay for US's restructuring? They run an unprofitable business using antiquated business practices. They're not going to turn this around over night.

Sure, we'll give US a BILLION dollars (slot machines on each plane to raise the $$?). But PIT/PA should have seats on the board and a % stake in the company.

US has proven that their word is not to be trusted.....anybody who shells out $$$ for a vailed commitment from US is nuts.

sure you can fly on DL to EWR through ATL but why would you when you can also do so through CVG? CVG is essentially what PIT can become.

If US drops PIT as a hub then you would HAVE to choose between CLT or PHL - well actually you woulnt haev a choice b/c US doent fly PHL - EWR and they dont have any CLT - SEA flights either. I know the argument will be that US can add these flights - OK so again new costs and efforts.

ask people if they actually prefer flying through ATL to connect - i think the answer is pretty clear. people do so b/c either they have no other choice or ATL offers the most connecting options. with US' weak west coast market it'll be harder for them to convince people to fly through CLT to pick from 3 or 4 flights to LAX a day or something like that vs the 8 from ATL (all on widebody jets btw)

anyways, US may be successful at using CLT as an equivilent to ATL but that doesnt mean it makes sense for them to shut down PIT. if they shut down PIT will they also stop flying to all those small towns in PA, OH, NY, etc where they make considerable money or will they start sending people through CLT on 1.5 hr RJ rides instead of 30 minute hops from PIT? ultimately people will choose the option thats the most convenient to hem and I think thats a big gamble for US to take so soon out of BK.

remember, a transcon flight on Delta (say SFO to EWR) with a connection in Atlanta isnt so bad, when you consider the distances of the entire trip the location of Atlanta being far south is really moot. What you wouldn't do is go from say, IND to EWR connecting in Atlanta. That's what CVG is for.

IF pit were to go bye-bye, what's US gonna do? fly from Fort Wayne to Charlotte? Evansville to Philly? riiiiiight http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

latest article.........

http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/newsflash/get_story.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?d1674_BC_PA--USAirways-Pittsbu&&news&newsflash-pennsylvania

Didn't see this posted here: all can be said that USAirways rejected airport leases at PIT, CLT, and PHL, but they also set the stage to pull out of Pittsburgh by rejecting all the various SUPPORT leases (from ticket offices to garbarge pickup) in Pittsburgh, and not in the other two hubs:

http://www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20030420leases2.asp

Hope Roddey and crew will show some backbone since USAirways has obviously made the call that we are expendable. If we bend over backwards for them now, it's not going to stop and we're going to get it rammed up the rear next time too.

Yes, this is the warning shot that US is giving PIT, and any other supplier that it works with.

It's BS that costs at PIT are that much out of line with CLT and PHL. I can believe CLT being lower in cost, but not PHL.

Don't forget that "figures lie and liars figure". Costs can be shifted around to make anything look good or bad. It's done every day, especially in concession negotiations.

There are many other US operations in PIT that serve ALL of US's system, not just PIT. You can bet that these costs are rolled into the number that US is using as PIT's cost basis.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
It has been extremely well documented on this board about negative experiences at PHL. It hasn't improved, and cannot improve. This airport cannot ever compare to PIT....also a known fact.</font>

Some people only listen to what they want to hear.

I'm not the only person who has said nice things about PHL and noted the bad attitude in PIT. These observations go back to well before chapter 11 too.

Here are a few nice things about PHL:

- The Club is way nicer than PIT.

- The Food Court is better than PIT.

- PHL has the most able, talented and versatile ticket and gate agents in the system.

- That new International terminal is going to kick butt.

- The worlds longest jetway is at C-17 (it's a tourist attraction that PIT lacks...)

Room for feasible improvement includes new runways and reconstruction of the concourses -- done properly this would relieve the congestion in the alleys and go a long ways towards eliminating certain delays. Other capacity improvements can be achieved through the use of a "rolling hub" or "continuous flow" concept -- that isn't needed today but it might be in the future.

Someone brought up all the "local" destinations served from PIT... Flying an RJ from PHL or CLT to those places would be an improvement over the current level of service -- it wouldn't significantly increase travel time and the improved connectivity should increase demand.

US is serious about this -- PIT is not in a position of strength. The improvements and changes that US is asking for will have to be undertaken regardless. Just make a point of not doing them for the exclusive benefit of US -- open the doors and encourage competition. It's the only way to not be beholden to them next time.

tombascom -

you're not seriously suggesting that flying from CLT or PHL to places like Erie, Youngstown, etc would take the same time as from PIT and would be an improvement??

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
Some people only listen to what they want to hear.

I'm not the only person who has said nice things about PHL and noted the bad attitude in PIT. These observations go back to well before chapter 11 too............</font>

Tom....you've obviously developed a tolerance for PHL. Let's hear from OTHERs who believe as you do that PHL is a wonderful facility and PIT is the pits.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by indogulf:
tombascom -

you're not seriously suggesting that flying from CLT or PHL to places like Erie, Youngstown, etc would take the same time as from PIT and would be an improvement??</font>

I'm seriously suggesting that taking an RJ from CLT or PHL would be an improvement over the props that are currently flying those routes from PIT...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
I'm seriously suggesting that taking an RJ from CLT or PHL would be an improvement over the props that are currently flying those routes from PIT...</font>

Sure, flying an Embraer 145 would be an *improvement* comfort wise versus saab 340's and Beech 1900's. That's not the issue.

The majority of the feeder flights into and out of Pittsburgh don't have the loads to fill a Saab let alone an RJ. If A guy wants to go from Lansing to Parkersburg WV, a PIT connection makes sense. A PHL connection does NOT. Just because you plop a 50-seat RJ on a route doesn't mean load factors will magically go up. Thats why props are still around in this industry. Places like Morgantown, Evansville, Lynchburg and Reading can't support RJ's because they are more expensive to operate than props if you dont have butts in the seats.

IF PIT gets the ax, so does most of the pit feeder cities. Don't expect that service to be instantly transferred to RJ flying out of Philly or Charlotte. The RJ's wont cut it and pax will switch to other airlines before they sit on a prop for an extra hour and half. I'm not posting mindless dribble here in defense of the PIT hub...these are just the cold hard fact of airline economics.

At times when going to Florida I would connect from ORF to PHL down to RSW or TPA instead of CLT. The difference is 20 minutes. I realize that, emotionally, there is something 'crazy' about connecting through different hubs that seem 'out of the way' but I wish people would realize that you are going 300mph instead of 55mph.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PurdueFlyer:
The majority of the feeder flights into and out of Pittsburgh don't have the loads to fill a Saab let alone an RJ. </font>


Therein lies the problem. This is exactly why the extreme costs of PIT are not economically justifiable.

As you said:


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PurdueFlyer:
...these are just the cold hard fact of airline economics.</font>



[This message has been edited by geo1005 (edited 04-22-2003).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
Tom....you've obviously developed a tolerance for PHL. Let's hear from OTHERs who believe as you do that PHL is a wonderful facility and PIT is the pits.</font>

You could always do a search http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

BTW -- I'm not trying to say anything about PIT being the pits. I'm just refuting the notion that PHL is He11 on Earth. It was once, it isn't anymore and it hasn't been for quite a while.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
BTW -- I'm not trying to say anything about PIT being the pits. I'm just refuting the notion that PHL is He11 on Earth. It was once, it isn't anymore and it hasn't been for quite a while.</font>

You try to move 250+ flights/day from PIT and run them thru PHL, you will have your he11 on earth again.

------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.

&lt;Deleted&gt;

[This message has been edited by pitflyer (edited 04-22-2003).]

SURLY was the word that was accurately applied to PHL employees in prior posts. This hasn't been fixed because it can't be fixed, it’s a cultural and sociological issue. Sure, there are exceptions, but SURLY is the single word definition of the typical PHL attitude. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Now about those JetWay operators……… http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mad.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
You try to move 250+ flights/day from PIT and run them thru PHL, you will have your he11 on earth again.
</font>

So you admit that the present situation is in conformance with my views http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif We're making progress http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

a) They wouldn't move 250+ flights. Only some (albeit significant) fraction of those would end up in PHL. Some will go to CLT. Some of the customers would be absorbed into existing redundant flights from PHL & CLT with spare capacity.

b) Rolling hubs.

The main point of the above isn't that I'm endorsing it as a "good idea". But I'll bet you that someone in CCY has looked it over and has a contingency plan along those lines. If Allegheny County is taking the "can't be done" view they're setting themselves up.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HPTunco:
SURLY was the word that was accurately applied to PHL employees in prior posts. This hasn't been fixed because it can't be fixed, it’s a cultural and sociological issue. Sure, there are exceptions, but SURLY is the single word definition of the typical PHL attitude. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Now about those JetWay operators……… http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mad.gif</font>

You do realize that if you substituted ethnicity, religious group or sexual preference for "PHL" in the above that your comments would offend an awful lot of people?

There are surly people everywhere. Even US Airways employees who work in other stations. It isn't unique to PHL. In years past it may have been more noticable there. It is not today.

Heck, they even seem to have enough Jetway operators to go around these days. I haven't had to wait for one at PHL for more than a year now.

But at PIT there's a routine forming where equipment seems to be consistently blocking the gates and needing to be moved before we can pull up (while mechanics conspicuously sit in tugs reading the paper at neighboring gates). And PIT is the home of "you're all preferred so we're going to board by row numbers..." PIT may not be the pits but it isn't trouble free either.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
You do realize that if you substituted ethnicity, religious group or sexual preference for "PHL" in the above that your comments would offend an awful lot of people?
........</font>

??? What does this have to do with the notoriously poor collective attitude of PHL airport personnel? If SURLY offends them, then so be it.

The jetway issue is still a problem, and always will be with the congestion between B and C. It didn't miraculously "go away".

What you describe as issues at PIT are a mystery to me. I fly out of PIT several times per week and haven't experienced the "problems" that you describe.

Now now, we all got to admit there could have been a yinzer somewhere that burned his Philly cheesesteak leading to deep emotional damage and a heartfelt hatred of PIT.

hehehe

To each his own, I guess is the answer...

Just so I add something to the discussion:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03113/178249.stm

Will US Airways get what it wants to stay?
Region adding up what hub's worth


[This message has been edited by pitflyer (edited 04-23-2003).]

I fly into or through PIT once a week and definitely have noticed the jetway problem. As recently as two weeks ago, I waited in an RJ for 30 minutes for the plane to park. This seems to happen at PIT about 25% of the time. I haven't had it at PHL in a while.

PHL isn't a bad place, just a good amount of delays to get in and out. They need a new runway and their terminals aren't wide enough. Otherwise, B and C are good. A/D/E terminals aren't very nice. F is nice. I like PIT's terminal better.

Do you think we can stop the airport pissing contest? I have lived in Pittsburgh most of my life and there are problems with PIT. I lived in NJ and flew out of PHL weekly, and there are problems. I lived in Manhattan and flew out of LGA and there are problems. I lived in NC and flew out of GSO all the time and there were problems. I lived in San Diego flew out of SAN when USAirways was the major presence and there were problems.

GET OVER IT ALREADY !!

Every airport has it's pluses and minuses that each one of us can attest to. This posting was started to gain knowledge about the ongoing friction between PIT and USAirways not PIT vs PHL or CLT. Let's face it, PIT service is being reduced and those of us that live in this area are not happy about it. The area is going to suffer no matter what happens. Let's hope the ACAA and USAirways work out this issue and they quit relying on USAirways for it's future. What is irritating the residents of this area is this airport was built for USAirways with the hope that USAirways invested in this area. Unfortunately that is no longer a reality.

The "hometown" airline is coming to an end one way or another. We just need more choices now at PIT. Plan and simple. No more reliance on 1 airline.

latest article....

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03113/178252.stm

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PurdueFlyer:
If A guy wants to go from Lansing to Parkersburg WV, a PIT connection makes sense. A PHL connection does NOT. Just because you plop a 50-seat RJ on a route doesn't mean load factors will magically go up. Thats why props are still around in this industry. Places like Morgantown, Evansville, Lynchburg and Reading can't support RJ's because they are more expensive to operate than props if you dont have butts in the seats.

IF PIT gets the ax, so does most of the pit feeder cities. Don't expect that service to be instantly transferred to RJ flying out of Philly or Charlotte. The RJ's wont cut it and pax will switch to other airlines before they sit on a prop for an extra hour and half. </font>

Switch airline? Cities such as Morgantown, which you listed, don't have any other airline, so people there will have to travel regardless. It doesn't necessarily mean they will leave US, it just means a new airport for them to travel from.

I was told of a guy from Morgantown who flew weekly from MGW-PIT-LGW and back. I guess he know has to go MGW-PIT-PHL-LGW. Imagine his chagrin if he has to drive MGW-PIT and then go PIT-PHL-LGW. Boy, I guess it'll just suck all around when we get downsized!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pitflyer:
I was told of a guy from Morgantown who flew weekly from MGW-PIT-LGW and back. I guess he know has to go MGW-PIT-PHL-LGW. Imagine his chagrin if he has to drive MGW-PIT and then go PIT-PHL-LGW. Boy, I guess it'll just suck all around when we get downsized!</font>

Maybe I'm nuts but I imagine that MGW-XXX-LGW is better served by an MGW-PHL than MGW-PIT-PHL.

I'm also relatively certain that most people flying in/out of small airports aren't heading for another relatively close small airport -- they're going somewhere far away. If they were going from local airport to local airport they'd just drive. Especially at the fares airlines charge for such trips.

So whether they connect in PHL, PIT or CLT isn't much of a concern -- at worst it's an extra hour inflight, and likely not even that, out of an end to end travel time that is likely 6 to 12 hours or more.

I think what you're seeing is that shrinking a hub is a death spiral -- when you lop off service at the top you lose the justification for the feeders too. From the airlines POV it's better to concentrate that effect and sacrifice one weak hub than it is to put them all into a tailspin.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
Maybe I'm nuts but I imagine that MGW-XXX-LGW is better served by an MGW-PHL than MGW-PIT-PHL.
</font>

Yes. Morgantown can't be more than a one-hour drive from PHL. That's a Dash-8 route to PHL waiting to happen.

Actually my point was that if PIT loses hub service I think MGW will lose all service. I do not think they will start flying to PHL. Flying time between MGW and PIT is 25 minutes. Between MGW and PHL would probably be about an hour and a half. Driving time is 1 hr between MGW and PIT and 6 hr between MGW and PHL.

If PHL would be so much better, the question is why haven't they _already_ moved flights from MGW, PKB, CKB to PHL? Those communities ONLY have one airline service to ONE city, so from their POV it would not be a big difference. USAirways must think it makes more sense to fly to PIT rather than PHL from those cities.

I don't say I know why, but that's the way the story goes.

MGW to PHL on a Dash-8 would be less than an hour.

But therein lies the problem -

While US has been the "hometown airline" of PIT and the "dominant carrier" on the USA East coast, it's been paying for crews and planes to fly these short and thin routes (MGW is a perfect example) while leaving well over half the country un-served.

US should care less about the three business travellers who need to get from MGW to LGW several times a year and care MORE about the 1000's of business travellers who fly in and out of places like AUS & PDX on a weekly basis.

Call me crazy, but something tells me AUS-PHL-FCO is a better money route than MGW-PHL-FCO. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

My esteemed geo, backer of losing hockey teams, where do you think US is getting planes to fly to AUS? I doubt those 1000s of business travellers are going to fly on a Dash-8 to CLT!

USAirways is saddled with a lot of excess baggage from its past as a bunch of airlines, which includes a LOT of turboprops and very few RJs. I think we all agree that they should have expanded to AUS/PDX/SAT a long time ago (and we kept hearing plans to the effect, every year) but it just never happened.

If you believe what US will tell you, soon they will have a lot of RJs to do precisely that and magically the turboprops will disappear, but if you believe that I guess you also believe all the Boeings are gone in favor of the Airbus and I guess also in the tooth fairy...

PS MGW can't support Dash-8s either. They are running Beechcraft 1900s which I would just love to see at AUS or any other medium-large city. These puddle jumpers have to go somewhere http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Beechcraft 1900 Cruising Speed is 300 mph, flying distance is 249 miles. So while 1 hr is practical in the real world, this is PHL and I highly doubt you'll get the flight done in an hour, maybe hour 15, hour 20.

So THERE! hehe

PSS -- Dash-8 crusing speed is 308 mph


[This message has been edited by pitflyer (edited 04-24-2003).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by A320 EOW:
Yes. Morgantown can't be more than a one-hour drive from PHL. That's a Dash-8 route to PHL waiting to happen. </font>

I think you mean a drive from Morgantown to PIT not PHL.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by trvlr64:
I think you mean a drive from Morgantown to PIT not PHL.</font>

Exactly, my bad. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pitflyer:
... If PHL would be so much better, the question is why haven't they _already_ moved flights from MGW, PKB, CKB to PHL? Those communities ONLY have one airline service to ONE city, so from their POV it would not be a big difference. USAirways must think it makes more sense to fly to PIT rather than PHL from those cities.
</font>

I think the reason is simple -- PIT does make more sense when PIT is an active and viable HUB that gets you to those places.

But as PIT shrinks and becomes a stop-over on a double connection or a hub with severely limited schedules it makes less and less sense to fly the slightly shorter route than the longer route. Thus PHL (or CLT) become relatively more attractive than they would otherwise be.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
I think the reason is simple -- PIT does make more sense when PIT is an active and viable HUB that gets you to those places.

But as PIT shrinks and becomes a stop-over on a double connection or a hub with severely limited schedules it makes less and less sense to fly the slightly shorter route than the longer route. Thus PHL (or CLT) become relatively more attractive than they would otherwise be.</font>

Right. Also, from a cost perspective, I'm sure US would be happier with longer routes to spread the cost per mile out more.

It's almost like knocking your head on a cement wall.. but anyway...

http://www.post-gazette.com/breaking/20030424airportweb0424p3.asp

[Allegheny] County files claims for $1.46 billion if US Airways leaves

The Allegheny County Airport Authority is seeking $1.46 billion in damages from US Airways should the airline end service from Pittsburgh International Airport if negotiations fail to produce an agreement to reduce the carrier's costs.

Sounds like some more posturing on both sides, but at least it doesn't sound like ACAA and crew is caving in immediately. It'll take time http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pitflyer:
The Allegheny County Airport Authority is seeking $1.46 billion in damages from US Airways should the airline end service from Pittsburgh International Airport...</font>


Just keep one daily B-1900 rountrip from Morganhole, WV. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/tongue.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pitflyer:
It's almost like knocking your head on a cement wall...</font>

...I'd still take the cement wall over a PHL connection http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/tongue.gif

pitflyer: UseLessAir flew to AUS and SAN until the cutbacks in 1997. Also has flown several different times to PDX. Had a quite extensive operation to PDX after purchasing PSA in 1985 or so....

Very little of the fleet is left from the acquisition days, especially the commuters'. That is certainly not the problem.

Allegheny was a cleverly run airline but the management since then has been progressively more clueless about how to MAKE MONEY.

One of the tragedies of modern aviation is that they were allowed to take over their strongest competitor, Piedmont (ditto TWA and Ozark, NW and Republic). Shame, really, but that was the Reagan business-could-do-no-wrong years.

Do we learn nothing?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by LexPassenger:
Do we learn nothing?</font>


The airline industry today has nothing in comparison to the airline industry that exsisted immediately after deregulation. I am always amazed at the number of people who think that airlines like Piedmont, Allegheny, and PSA could survive as stand alones in today's market. It's just not possible.


btw, I flew all of those "old" airlines. Piedmont was a great product but NOT one that would be a viable option today. Does anyone think we would really see the Star Alliance with Lufthansa, Singapore, and Piedmont??? Piedmont is like Jim Morrison - the best thing that ever happened to both was to exit the stage at the top of your game. If nothing else, it's good for your legend.

Even more, this is like a soap opera unveiling in front of our eyes:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03115/179019.stm

[Governor] Rendell lands in tight spot between cities, US Airways

About playing PHL and PIT.. We'll see. I voted for the other guy http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Latest news article.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03145/186722.stm