|
Well, this MVPG is now officially THRILLED with the schedule changes. AS 697/696 are now officially loaded to replace their QX counterparts for latter August and early September. That means GEG-SEA 6 AM and SEA-GEG 9 PM are finally back to AS from QX! Hopefully the extra seats will bring capacity a bit more in line with demand out of here in the mornings :D
|
Originally Posted by formeraa
(Post 14168031)
Then again, we can blow things way out of proportion like we often do around here! Not enough of you up in Northern Arizona used the service. Thus, QX made the correct business decision to withdraw the service. I guess you can always fly...gasp...US Airways.
I heard that the LAX-FLG-PRC-LAX route was not doing horribly but not a huge money maker either and hence with the lack of aircraft was axed. Horizon had been in talks with the city/airport to look at possible expansion out of Northern Arizona and I can only hope if they pick up more 400's that they'll return. FLG is looking to find another carrier to fill the void left by the unexpected departure - so hopefully we'll not be stuck with only US Airways (Mesa) for too long. |
Arizona Daily Sun Articles RE: loss of FLG service
|
Don't hold your breath in PRC/FLG unless, of course, the cities are willing to pay indefinitely. If the service had been profitable, QX wouldn't have gone back asking for more money in guarantees. I'm sure that RASMGuy will tell you that, had the route been profitable, QX would have stayed. The passenger counts in the off-season were not very good.
As for US, it seems like your beef is with Mesa. My experiences with US mainline over the past two years have been excellent (almost as good as AS). Note that I fly mainly in the West and I do avoid Mesa whenever possible. |
Originally Posted by WheresDG
(Post 14176845)
http://www.azdailysun.com/news/local...cc4c03286.html
http://www.azdailysun.com/news/local...e11ee14bd.html Sad to see that QX was thinking of linking DEN and/or LAS and instead cut FLG... w/o notice (well 2 months)... |
Looking at all the cuts QX has done since the decision was made to go all Q400, I am not sure the Northwest and West Coast ended up for the better. We just lost air service from ACV and RDD to the northwest. When I moved here, UA and QX competed on the ACV-PDX market and now there is nothing.
In the past few years critical air service was lost at CLM, MWH, OTH, LMT, IDA, PDT, FLG, PRC, ___, ___ because the Q400 was too big an aircraft. I wish QX didn't give up the Q200's. We either need UA to come to the plate with the EMB-120 like they did with LMT and OTH or find another airline with connectivity and aircraft larger than SeaPort to serve our region while AS/QX abandons us in order to compete in a limited number of over-served markets. I hope that the newly formed California Pacific Airlines takes a serious look at all the underserved West Coast markets and grows into something larger than we expect. They need to consider an aircraft smaller than the E Jet they propose to operate. |
|
I agree that it may well be that QX's planes are too large to serve some of the smaller, thinner markets. However, the key here at the end of the day is economics. Years ago, the federal government heavily subsidized small markets -- hence, DC-9/737 service to Flagstaff (don't know if PRC got any service then) and many other smaller markets throughout the country. I guess if we want to continue to fund subsidies, then we can get small airport plane service.
To the poster who talked about the California Pacific Airlines startup, a new carrier is unlikely to be successful in the small markets UNLESS they have agreements with larger carriers in place (like DL, UA, AA, etc.). |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:56 pm. |
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.