Originally Posted by
MIDWESTERNFLYER
Finally, there is no where for UA to put a focus city. While AA and DL are usually the
#1 or
#2 of the US3 in large to mid-sized non-hub markets, UA is generally
#2 or
#3 . Plus the most obvious locations are taken:
AUS (DL/WN focus city already)
BNA (DL/WN focus city already)
SJC (AS/WN focus city already)
SAN (AS/WN focus city)
STL (WN focus city)
MCI (WN focus city)
RDU (DL focus city)
CLE, sorry CLE folks, it isn't happening
PDX (AS hub)
Part of the issue is that UA (and AA) have relatively well-positioned hubs in significant business markets, so of your examples above, AUS/SJC/SAN have United hubs with 150 miles; STL/MCI occupy similar traffic flows to DEN/ORD/IAH; and UA already has a focus city of sorts at CLE, at least as close to one as UA is going to get in the next few years.
It's places like BNA or RDU that United needs to be more competitive; meaning more mainline service, better frequencies, United Clubs, etc. If UA builds out service to each of its hubs, it has New York, Chicago, Houston, Denver, Washington DC and San Francisco covered (plus LA, but that's a different story), which are strong, business-oriented O&D markets from pretty much anywhere. Those are markets any "focus city" carrier would probably look to serve, if targeting key local city pairs.
Putting myself in the shoes of a non-hub traveler, I can easily look beyond Delta RJ-driven point-to-point growth at places like BOS, BNA, AUS, RDU or SJC if United's offering in terms of facilities, schedule and onboard product is competitive. But, if the alternative is no lounge, sporadic schedules with large gaps during the day, and a high percentage of small RJs against better equipment, only the most captive UA flyers would be compelled to stay loyal.