Are the UAX airlines losing money? As in *lots* of money?
Even with a higher CASM then United, I would think the UAX airlines must be making money, otherwise they would not still be in business, much less expanding.
If UAX could not justify a route, then UAX would not be flying it. US' affiliates have ended service to many cities in the Northeast because the passangers are not there, even for little planes like J-41s.
On the UAX flights I am on, unless it is really odd hours (first or last flight of the day), they are usually full or nearly full, so if this is a pattern, I imagine would be getting decent revenue from their load factors.
Or even at a 16 cent CASM, perhaps their revenue versus cost structure is such that they make at least 16+ cents per seat-mile flown.
I am not sure I think that point-to-point travel by UAX is a doable idea. The UAX airlines "prosper" because they offer service from small markets *to* the hubs, where folks can then hook up with mainline flights to larger destinations. Instead of, say, having to drive from Fresno to SFO to catch a plane to NRT, they can now fly to SFO and then on to NRT.
But how many people want to fly between, say, Fresno and Medford, OR? Routing all the Fresno and Medford passangers (whatever their final destination would be) through SFO seem to be able to justify offering service to both of those cities for the handful of folks who do want to travel between Fresno and Medford.
US Air is trying to form a "regional jet airline" for service around their Northeast core. It appears "Star Fish" might be the same for UA from their Midwest (ORD) core - a "Midwest Shuttle".
Instead of trying to compete again on the West Coast with a "Shuttle II" - an area where AS and WN have a hard presence - they seem to want to try replace much of the mainline service to and from ORD with smaller planes. Looking at WN's schedule, it appears their destinations in the midwest are much more limited than what US/UA offer.
[This message has been edited by SEA_Tigger (edited 02-04-2003).]