Why no US transcons from BOS to LAX and SFO?

 
Old Mar 7, 2007, 11:53 am
  #16  
Marriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MKE
Programs: AA Exec Platinum, SPG Platinum / Ambassador / Lifetime Gold, Avis FIRST
Posts: 3,293
Those were the days when I could fly SFO-NYC for ridiculously low fares, with even sub $200 fares being common. I remember for a while actually, B6 actually lowered OAK-JFK to $79 each way and HP, UA matched. Having such a huge amount of transcon competition destroyed those routes.
Jumpgate is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 12:12 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: PHL/EWR
Programs: UA, AA
Posts: 1,821
Originally Posted by Blumie
Although I posted 30 minutes after grahampros posted the above, this really is the right answer. It's generally more expensive to fly BOS-LGA than it is to fly BOS/JFK-LAX, at least in Y. All of the money is made in the sale of premium fares, and it would be extremely difficult for US to win over those customers, even if it did upgrade its premium product. There is tremendous brand loyalty among those passengers.
US now would at least have something of a headstart in terms of brand loyalty over what AmWest did with Boston having been a focus city for so long.
PSU Mudder is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 12:56 pm
  #18  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
I'm guessing that LCC doesn't fly BOS/JFK transcons anymore for kinda the same reasons that UA and AA don't try to establish large hubs at PHX and LAS. Sometimes you just gotta know your limitations and focus on what you do best. It's about making profits, not about connecting dots on some big wall map.
FWAAA is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 2:32 pm
  #19  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by IceTrojan
So, does your bias cloud the facts, or do you ignore the facts because of your bias?

Yes, AA MD80s fly east. They can't fly west all the time.

No, they don't fly LAX-BOS/JFK. Or even BOS/JFK-LAX.
But they do fly SFO --> BOS. Regularly. As I discovered (to my horror) on a recent trip.

And yes, my bias does cloud my vision -- but the bias is based on past experience.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 2:36 pm
  #20  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by Blumie
Although I posted 30 minutes after grahampros posted the above, this really is the right answer. It's generally more expensive to fly BOS-LGA than it is to fly BOS/JFK-LAX, at least in Y. All of the money is made in the sale of premium fares, and it would be extremely difficult for US to win over those customers, even if it did upgrade its premium product. There is tremendous brand loyalty among those passengers.
I'm not sure the whole "US cannot make money without a big premium product" is necessarily accurate. I work in an employer who is quite common -- they won't pay for domestic first (but will for international business class on long trips).

If US (or Delta) offered nonstop transcons from BOS, that would be a lovely thing.

As for United "kicking US out of the Star Alliance," it would never happen. The whole Star Alliance exists because of the theory of "coopetition" -- that cooperation and competition simultaneously happen. Besides, tossing US out of Star would screw LH (the real king of the alliance) and shut Star flyers out of the East Coast almost entirely. Given United's near-evacuation of JFK and pullbacks from Boston, it would leave the entire eastern US open to AA/OneWorld and Skyteam at Star's expense.

Besides, UAL shouldn't complain about US flying from its focus city of Boston to the UAL hubs in SFO and LAX, when UAL flies from those cities to the US hub in Philadelphia (and erodes US's position as a result).
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 2:50 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: High Point, NC
Programs: None
Posts: 9,171
Originally Posted by FrequentHopper
I'm not sure....
Two things wrong....

1 - you imply that US could compete transcon out of BOS without a competitive F/C product (or whatever a "big premium product" is) but then say that UA is eroding US' transcon business out of PHL. It can't be both.

2 - US leaving the Star Alliance would not "shut Star flyers out of the East Coast almost entirely." UA's IAD hub provides quite a bit of East Coast service, with much better Star Alliance connectivity than either PHL or CLT's single LH flight per day.

Jim
BoeingBoy is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 3:31 pm
  #22  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
1 - you imply that US could compete transcon out of BOS without a competitive F/C product (or whatever a "big premium product" is) but then say that UA is eroding US' transcon business out of PHL. It can't be both.
I'm not implying any erosion of business on either end. My reply about UAL flying to Philadelphia was in response to a prior post that said that UAL would chafe at US competition to Boston of any sort -- I simply noted that US could point out that UAL competes on key routes to US hubs on transcons, so UAL would have a double standard.

Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
2 - US leaving the Star Alliance would not "shut Star flyers out of the East Coast almost entirely." UA's IAD hub provides quite a bit of East Coast service, with much better Star Alliance connectivity than either PHL or CLT's single LH flight per day.
Oh, it almost certainly would shut the Star Alliance out of the East coast almost entirely.

Most eastern business travelers aren't looking for long-haul flights to Europe (although US does offer quite a few of those from Philly). A large number of eastern biz travelers are FrequentHoppers (get it?) from Boston to NYC to Baltimore to Atlanta to Miami to Cincinatti to Philly.

UAL's presence on the east coast is, well, pathetic to put it mildly. The IAD hub is all well and good, but UAL is a no-go choice for a large number of east coasters in Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, Jacksonville and other eastern cities who want quick nonstop or 1-connection trips between those destinations.

In addition, US and Delta own smaller airports UAL doesn't service in fairly major smaller business markets in New England, Pennsylvania, upstate New York, and the southeast.

Both Delta and US have excellent short-hop networks between the major cities. United, in comparison, cannot even get you from Boston to New York. Who would choose a connection in IAD over the US or DL shuttles?

On top of that, if a person in the east is a frequent hopper and also wants long-haul, a Star Alliance without US isn't viable either. After all, if I can do short hops on Delta and Continental for my eastern seaboard travel -- and fly long-haul on NWA, DL and CO around the world -- why bother with United?

US brings Star extensive coverage of eastern cities that UAL from IAD cannot touch. Without US, Star wouldn't be interesting to folks in a large number of cities -- and SkyTeam would increase in interest significantly.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 3:36 pm
  #23  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: QLA
Programs: SBUX Gold
Posts: 14,507
Originally Posted by FrequentHopper
But they do fly SFO --> BOS. Regularly. As I discovered (to my horror) on a recent trip.

And yes, my bias does cloud my vision -- but the bias is based on past experience.
Are you talking about the special MD80 with 3+3 seating and 2 engines on the wings?
IceTrojan is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 3:46 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: High Point, NC
Programs: None
Posts: 9,171
Originally Posted by FrequentHopper
I'm not implying any erosion of business on either end.
No, you just said that UA was eroding US' traffic from PHL to UA's west coast hubs - you didn't imply it.



Originally Posted by FrequentHopper
Oh, it almost certainly would shut the Star Alliance out of the East coast almost entirely.
And then go on to justify that by talking about business travelers flying domesticly - no effect on Star there - or those flying between the half dozen domestic cities where US has the larger presence - no effect on Star there - or or those that don't use Star now - no effect on Star there - or those in small markets that UA doesn't serve - finally a somewhat small effect on Star. Quite different than your statement that losing US would "shut the Star Alliance out of the East coast almost entirely."

Jim
BoeingBoy is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:01 pm
  #25  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
No, you just said that UA was eroding US' traffic from PHL to UA's west coast hubs - you didn't imply it.
I said that if the conditions warranting throwing US out for flying from Boston to SFO existed, they also would exist to PHL. But anyway. . .

And then go on to justify that by talking about business travelers flying domesticly
How do I get from Frankfurt to Altoona without US in Star Alliance?

no effect on Star there - or those flying between the half dozen domestic cities where US has the larger presence - no effect on Star there
Except that people tend to choose a particular program and stay with it in order to rack up miles. If Star doesn't fly short-hops, but SkyTeam does -- and also offers plenty of long-hauls, why fly Star if your travel includes both?

Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
those that don't use Star now
Actually, it does have an effect, since if Star becomes competitively disadvantaged, they lose hope of getting those additional non-Star folks.

Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
those in small markets that UA doesn't serve - finally a somewhat small effect on Star.
Numerous small markets put together are larger than the UAL's diminishing share of its major east coast markets. Looking at the pulldowns in BOS and JFK, that's even more true today. US provides UAL with a vital service in Star.

That's even true for the recent China service to and from IAD. Without US's support (and feed out of DCA), and US DM members seeking to earn EQMs towards status on UAL flights, UAL would have a lot harder time selling seats.

Originally Posted by BoeingBoy
Quite different than your statement that losing US would "shut the Star Alliance out of the East coast almost entirely."
It would indeed shut Star out of most of the east coast's airports entirely (since UAL doesn't serve them), and reduce its presence at most major east coast airports to a shadow of its present stature.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:02 pm
  #26  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by IceTrojan
Are you talking about the special MD80 with 3+3 seating and 2 engines on the wings?
Nope, I'm talking about a standard-issue "Boeing Super 80" from SFO to BOS.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:06 pm
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: QLA
Programs: SBUX Gold
Posts: 14,507
Originally Posted by FrequentHopper
Nope, I'm talking about a standard-issue "Boeing Super 80" from SFO to BOS.
Considering that it would crash into the ground somewhere in Ohio or Pennsylvania, I doubt it...
IceTrojan is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:09 pm
  #28  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by IceTrojan
Considering that it would crash into the ground somewhere in Ohio or Pennsylvania, I doubt it...
It didn't crash into the ground somewhere between Ohio and Pennsylvania. As noted earlier in the thread by another flyer, AA regularly uses Super-80s on eastbound transcons since they don't have range issues flying with tailwinds.

I flew in one a couple of months ago, in fact.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:13 pm
  #29  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
By the by, a quick sweep over to the MD-80 information section of airliners.net shows that the MD-80 has a range of 2920 nautical miles fully loaded, and WebFlyer indicates that the distance between BOS and SFO is about 2700 nautical miles. If it was one of the MD-87s, it has a range of almost 3,000 NMs.

Both could make the eastbound journey without any weight restriction at all and without the aid of tailwinds -- and this plane was far from full.
FrequentHopper is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2007, 4:18 pm
  #30  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Platinum; US Gold; DL Silver
Posts: 941
Finally, another thread from the AA boards discussing AA's other MD-80 transcons -- the ones that are supposedly impossible:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=372737

I guess I might be anti-AA, but I'm not a liar, and look forward to your apology for questioning my honesty. :P
FrequentHopper is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.