AZ Travels the World

I sincerely hope you are right about the new book. It is a very refreshing way of looking at it.

The reference you seek is right under your nose . It's futher up, in point number five, in the same document you quote and provide the link to.

uastarflyer

"Plan B" only is a real Plan B if Singapore, Thai, Asiana, China Air (or is it Air China, I forget), SAA, SAS, and LH re-align their USA touchpoints to CLT, PIT, PHX, LAS.

In other words, it's not a real Plan B.

UA is simply the best option as they dominate the most important sites (LAX, ORD, SFO, and to a lesser extent IAD) to the * Alliance partners.

I'm unfortunately tied to HP for some corporate west-coast travel, so hope I can accure those flights on UA MP some day soon.

wr_schwab

You are absolute right that UA is currently the best option today, to go into the U.S. from the major international gateways. However if you are doing contingency planning, which no doubt *A does, the best alternative (Plan B) is not always ideal but is better then the other options.

In the event that *A needs plan B, it is much easier to add traffic from these gateways to the new US's hubs then for the old US to quickly build on their own a comprehensive national network or find another NA partner for * that is strong in the western U.S. Both of which would be options if something happens to UA, but compared to the new US remaining in * not very good ones.

NeoOfTheCRS

All great posts wr_schwab. You are very correct in pointing out that UA is very dependent on the US codeshare for revenue. Which is why they will not only support but lobby to retain the new USAirways in the *A. UA is probably licking its chops to have the dominant carrier in wealthy markets like PHX and LAS feeding its International routes.

Remember that UA is quickly shifting capacity internationally. This merger makes perfect sense for UA domestic feed to asia and europe.

Also, when looking at that rather impressive combined route map, you can't help but notice that the midsection of the country is lightly covered. It makes A LOT of sense for the new USAirways to heavily codeshare with UA out of ORD and even DEN. With the reduction in aircraft, the only way US/HP will be able to cover the mid-west is through a code-share with US IMHO.

formeraa

United served "ALL 50 States" back in the 80's with large jet service no less! But look where they are today. I would suggest that the "new" USAirways serve profitable (or at least breakeven) destinations (even if they only included say 47 states)!!!

Maybe they can serve Wilmington, Delaware non-stop from PHX and LAS (with a CRJ of course)!

dukeman

Great idea -- I live in ILG. There is just no reason for airlines to service ILG when PHL is only 20 minutes North. But please don't give HP/US any ideas on substituting a CRJ for the 757 going to LAS!!!

phlwookie

Although I've heard elsewhere that Star members have an absolute veto over members based in their home country, kicking HP/US from Star not only has the effect of losing revenue for UA, but creating a new competitor that's larger than US is. UA and US don't have huge overlap in the East despite IAD, but HP and UA do compete a bit more out in the West.

I'd love to see, say, ILG-CLT/PIT, but that's because I live just over the border in PA and can get to ILG in 10 min versus about 30 without traffic to PHL. I don't see Delaware service happening anytime soon (southern DE has US Express at SBY for that traffic) - it'd make more sense if PHL were located northeast of Center City rather than just south.

HP would not have gotten in this just out of charity - US without major reform and better management is still in trouble. But although this has to be viewed as a high risk merger, I think it can work. Besides, big rewards in business rarely come without big risk.