Originally Posted by
EWR764
I hate seeing routes cut from the network, especially 'cool' ones like the legacy UA PNW operation, but these cuts are a different story. Of course, it might not neatly fit into the anti-UA(CO) narrative on FT, but the truth is the truth.
All of the SkyWest PNW E120 flying is conducted 'at-risk' by OO under a marketing relationship with United. United is not dictating schedules, capacity, or anything else about these services besides slapping a UA code and flight number on these trips. In 2008-2010, United terminated most of the non-SFO UAX contract flying in the PNW, which included the SEA turboprop operation and most of the same at PDX. OO stepped in and elected to continue to offer the service on an at-risk (non-contract) basis, which meant that OO assumed responsibility for the P&L of the service and UA collected only the revenue it contributed to the system once pax were online.
For UA, most of the service was extraneous because virtually all of the connections (aside from the shortest ones) made possible by the OO flying were duplicated via SFO with contracted UAX operations. However, OO stayed in the PDX markets predominantly because there was a small, high-RASM local market which provided incremental feed to UA and PDX/SEA and the E120 was the right airplane. SEA, on the other hand, was more competitive and likely constrained by OO's own contractual relationship with AS.
Now, SkyWest has disclosed the fact that it has a pilot shortage, much like many of the other SJPs. It is also progressively trying to retire the Brasilia fleet. At the same time, it has contractual obligations to AS, DL, UA and AA on the West Coast that it must meet with its existing fleet and pilot roster. The at-risk services are not SkyWest's core business, and if resources need to be devoted to contract ops at the expense of at-risk flying, then that's what will happen.
As for PDX-LAX, at least 15 of UA's SkyWest CR2 ops are pro-rate, so I wouldn't be shocked if that one is at-risk too and has been cut by OO. Still, it's a market UA probably should have a presence in and I am surprised to see it cut.
For those yearning for the days of UA dominance up and down the West Coast, that ship sailed circa 2000 (and had been slowly pulling out of port for about 15 years before that) and has nothing to do with the drawdown of a handful of OO at-risk turboprop routes ex-PDX.
I agree that this likely has to do with the UA-OO relationship, and in particular the pilot shortage. Its also probably something that Jeff would not like to have happen. BUT, the impact that this will have on UA can't be ignored. UAL in 1Q 2014 had 305K passengers at PDX (mainline; skywest is reported separately and I can't break out as its both DAL and UAL express flights), with SW having 525K, AA having 128K, DL having 346K, and AS having 1.4M. Skywest (much of which is UAL at PDX) is at 244K. The Portland Metro area has about 2.8M people
For corporate accounts and High Value fliers in PDX (and there are many high value ones, the area as you indicate is wealthy with substantial business with international operations) taking away SEA and LAX flights basically takes United out of the running as a usable airline. I personally know one GS and 1K flier at PDX which have held on with UAL (others have already switched to DAL/AS), I e-mailed both, both said they are bailing. They both need access to west coast cities, and with UAL not providing that (and not doing it well before...) they will move to DAL (taking their international paid J traffic from UAL to DAL) and AS.
Just guessing from the size of the 1K/GS ranks we have heard discussed (most recent number was 65K 1Ks) and that UAL was at one time the leading airline in Portland, I am guessing that UAL probably still has at least 3-500 1ks/GS that fly via PDX, and that most of them will leave with no real west coast service. That will have impacts system wide, and there is nothing that UAL can really do about it. It does not have the mainline planes to add LAX-PDX, and a single once a day is not going to do the trick anyway. Just another reason for more HVFers to leave...
p.s. AAL may be content to just let AS fly for them, but only AS and DL flying LAX-PDX, I would not be surprised to see either SW or AAL add the route.