Originally Posted by
DA201
In my opinion, people who argue that UA needs to eliminate LAX can't see the big picture. There are a lot of loyal UA flies in LA who would easily switch to AA or DL. There would then not be enough people to fill all of the EWR-LAX flights, so they would cut the schedule, which would lead to NYC based fliers who primarily fly EWR-LAX switching as well. Also, loyal UA fliers who fly to small cities from LA (ex. LAX-ORD-MSN) will switch to AA or DL for the same one-stop route. Flights that were struggling to stay above water and are relying on connecting pax may now be cut.
I have been arguing for 5 years that United was really messing up in giving up so much share ex-LAX, and that it would have follow-on impacts (one of which was that I think it cost them enough LAX-fliers to make PS ex-LAX non-competitive, which then caused PS to be less profitable, causing that mistake).
However, I find it hard to believe that running RJs to Medford or Spokane fixes the issue. UA needs access to major business markets. Think LAX-PHL, LAX-BOS (sorry, one flight a day is not enough vs. 4 on AA, and 2 on DL), LAX-ATL (which AA runs x3/day, and UA does not fly).
I do think bringing back 763 TCON service with new aircraft would be a very good move. United really needs to seperate itself in a dramatic way from its poor reputation at this point.