New schedule...
 

The desktop timetable from frontierairlines.com has a very interesting new schedule. A couple key things:

(a) Most business markets are decreased in frequency but increased in capacity. For example, LGA, BOS and DCA are all shown as 3x/day A319. MKE-PHL is 3x but with E170. MSP is 4x but 3 are E170's.

(b) The only dropped market appears to be...Atlanta.

(c) On the RJ side, GRB, GRR, FNTand BNA each drop a flight. PIT and IND each drop two.

(d) The day shortens some, with the 10:30pm bank of flight moving back to around 9:30pm.

Who knows if this online tool really reflects everythign they're planning, but we shall see. Unfortunately I'm going to mostly be away from the computer to be able to look at all this stuff for the next 10 days. Ugh!!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fronti....html?x=0&.v=1

Here's more detail. Atlanta is indeed going, and the number of banks in MKE is being "seasonally" adjusted from four to three.

"Also effective with the Nov. 19 schedule change, Frontier will readjust its early morning and late evening flights to more convenient, easily accessible times, as well as seasonally reducing the number of connecting banks in Milwaukee from four to three."

also in the press release


" will accelerate the suspension of its seasonal service to San Diego. All passengers booked on those routes after Sept. 7 will be contacted by the airline for re-accommodation on other flights."

Not much time to add a lot of commentary/thoughts on the fall schedule but some of these changes are clearly targeted and in-line with comments Bedford has been making for the last couple of months. Hopefully I'll have some time next week to address these items in more detail.

Some other things to note about the schedule:

1) MKE-TPA is being suspended between 9/7 and 11/17.
2) No immediate word on where the extra LGA/DCA slots go. In the case of DCA, the slots can't simply be transferred to DEN as it is considered out-of-perimeter.
3) The traditional sun markets don't appear to be seeing the traditional capacity increases seen in years past, but peak travel really begins around mid-February so additional flights may still be added.
4) Reducing IND and BNA to 2x daily is a surprise, considering MKE will have three flight banks per day.
5) Seeing ATL go (a route Midwest has flown for 25 years) is disappointing but not too shocking. I've been wondering about this route for a few years now based on some things that have happened in MKE and key feeder markets.

Overall, the new schedule is a mixed bag...some good...some not so good.

Too much capacity with AirTran and Delta in that market.

Midwest at one time carried a significant amount of Kimberly Clark traffic from Appleton to Atlanta via Milwaukee. A lot of those remaining passengers were lost when Delta started ATW-ATL non-stops back in 2003.

Add in capacity saturation and junk yields, I'm shocked Midwest lasted as long as it did on MKE-ATL (especially with Signature Service).

My brief thoughts:

MKE-ATL - This was one of Midwest's original flights more than 25 years ago, so it's one of the more notable nonstop markets abandoned. FL had been increasing fares on this route this year, but the increased yield potential for YX/F9 must not have been enough to save it. Interestingly, YX and F9 had shared counter/gate space at ATL for years before the merger was ever a possibility.

MKE-PIT/MKE-IND - This is a significant capacity reduction for F9/YX. I'm wondering if FL will respond at all with more frequency on OO, or even upgrading some flights to 717 service. Or perhaps, they'll just keep capacity at current levels and hope to raise fares a little.

I agree that the restoration of MKE-BDL is long overdue.

MKE-SAT will be dicey, especially starting in fall, but we'll see how it goes.

MKE-TPA is an important business route, but like MKE-ATL, maybe they are trying to diversify and not focus as heavily on business, but rather a better mix of business/leisure.

MKE-LAX is extremely weak and needs to be fortified with at least daily service. I'm assuming the winter schedule is not fully completed yet. If they can't even make it daily during the winter, AirTran could get the upper hand on that route.

And MKE-SAN...come on, can't either FL or F9 just give this a shot through this winter?

Here are some more thoughts I have on the schedule changes coming at MKE this fall.

Republic is clearly focused on maintaining the momentum from earlier this year and needs to ensure that the branded operation remains profitable. Bedford has articulated that part of the strategy will be to focus on profitable flying rather than simply chasing market share. That in part helps explain the big reductions in the business markets during the off-season when overall demand will be weaker and pressure on yields will be significant.

With that said, I'm not a fan on these reductions at all.

1) Frequency reductions to BOS/LGA/DCA. I find it shocking that they are pulling back in these core markets. As things stand now, AirTran will offer more seats (and in the case of LGA and DCA more frequency as well) this winter than Frontier. It's an amazing turn of events.

2) TPA. When Midwest slashed service in September 2008 TPA was the only Florida station kept year-round. The primary driver of that decision was that TPA had a significant amount of business traffic, yet apparently Frontier can't even justify flying the route with an E170 or even an E190 during the slower fall months.

3) LAX. If the current schedule of 3 xs weekly in correct, this is simply pathetic. I believe it was a couple of weeks ago Bedford stated what a big mistake it was for Midwest to drop the West Coast non-stops. A year ago LAX was one of Midwest's top three markets. And now? They apparently can't even justify operating flight 1x daily.

4) ATL. This route has been on life support for years now and Frontier has finally pulled the plug.

5) SAN. I agree that year-round service should be maintainable year-round with an E190. Once again, Bedford has talked about doing this very thing in the past.

Things definately seem to be trending in the wrong direction for Frontier in MKE. It's been an amazing turn of events.

I'll be taking my last Midwest/Frontier flight this weekend (MKE-SAN) before heading moving to Spain. Hopefully it'll be a good experience.

I assume they will be giving back some slots to the DOT? In the past Midwest fought for those awarded slots and now they will be handed back.

I agree. I will be moving to California in September and would love more competition on the cali runs in the winter. MKE-SAN should be doable in the winter. I don't know why it is not kept year round. I did not know the MKE-LAX was less than daily for Frontier. That is shocking considering Airtran does it twice daily.

Can they switch them to MCI?

I have traveled the MKE>TPA route frequently. I think the end of the DL codeshare played a roll in this, and I wonder what it played in other drops in frequency. Many of us DL elites took the YX non-stop for convienance, but when the codeshare was dropped we stayed with DL and not YX. I am in TPA as I write this and came down Thursday, connecting in ATL. I will go back through ATL Wednesday.

So, I wonder what the real hit has been with the loss of the codeshare? And is the new schedule somewhat a reflection of that to an extent?

If you have travel booked for the end of the year, check your itineraries.

A couple of my flights have been moved up by an hour.

Notifications are being made for travel later in the year, and into 2011.

Most involved departure time changes. Telephone wait times are 10-20 minutes, depending on time of day.

LAX involved nonstop service eliminated on weekends and Tuesday.

I’ve been essentially offline since the new schedule rolled out, and it has been awful not to be able to participate in the discussion. On the other hand it gave me a lot of time to work through schedules and examine what the new schedule holds. Compared to last year’s winter schedule, if you do a full-week analysis (not just weekday) there are (on average) 87 more 319/Ejet seats per day, but 297 fewer RJ seats per day. That’s a net loss of 210 seats, or about four daily ERJ’s.

The winter schedule is about making money in Milwaukee during a season when Midwest hadn’t for many years – winter. Although it may mean that Frontier is edged out by AirTran+Skywest at Milwaukee, at least during winter, making money is a more important goal. In the Frontier/AirTran battle at Milwaukee, it’s important to remember that AirTran posted a significant net loss in last year’s Q1, and it’s highly unlikely that MKE bucked that trend. More likely is that FL’s heavy Florida flying generated profits to mask the weaker performance of their MKE east-west operations. One wonders if AirTran will do any retooling for the dead of winter MKE schedule or not.

Some key points to make about the new schedule:

Business Travel Scheduling
--Except for ATL (which I’ll address later) all business-heavy markets were retained with (at least) both AM and PM flights. That includes some RJ destinations with historically light loads, none of which were dropped.

--Reduction from 4 main banks to 3 means some markets have reduced frequency, which isn’t exactly a plus. However several markets with reduced frequencies are seeing larger average aircraft sizes which at peak times will help. Even in winter, the E170 is too small for peak travel days/times to places like LGA and BOS, the ERJ too small to PHL and MSP, and the ER3 too small to PIT. Although frequency is a good thing, business travelers often can’t adjust their schedules 3-5 hours if the desired flight is full.

Better Flight Times and More Reliable Schedules
--With a few exceptions, most of the exceptionally early and exceptionally late flights are moved to more desirable times. Pre-6:00am flights are moved later, and the 10:35pm bank of MKE departures gets moved up about an hour. Those flights are an easier sell when the days are longer and the overall demand is stronger, but when the nights are long and overall demand is lighter the off-hour flights are hard to sell. Except for the redeye LAX flight (more on that later) the final departure is scheduled at 9:35pm, instead of the current 10:40pm.

--The PM bank of RJ business routes runs about an hour earlier, making them a lot more attractive. After a day of business at a client, waiting for an 8:10pm flight home is a lot better than waiting for an 9:10pm flight home. That should help loads.

--Almost all connections are 30 minutes or more – there are a few 25’s left, and I believe the 20’s are all gone. Many connections are more in the 45+ minute range, which makes for fewer misconnects, holds, and frazzled nerves. That’s especially true in de-icing season.

--The overall reliability of the schedule, especially during de-icing season, is improved by generally less aggressive scheduling. Obviously the trimmed back schedule decreased utilization, but half-flying empty planes 16 hours per day in winter just for the sake of utilization isn’t a winning proposition.

Improved Operating Economics
--Larger planes generally have better costs than smaller ones, and flying larger planes is especially helpful in markets with aggressive price competition.

--Compared to last winter’s schedule (and calculating on a seats-per-week basis, not just a weekday schedule), the average seats per departure increases from 66.3 to 74.0.

Reductions in RJ Flying
--When comparing a full week of winter 2011 schedule versus winter 2010, average daily seats on Airbus/Ejet aircraft is up about 87 per day. RJ seats are down about 297 per day, and they are going from 12 lines of RJ to 11 lines of RJ. Likely way that the RJ’s will rotate out for paint.

--Most of the RJ markets which saw frequency reduction were city pairs than had load factors between about 43% and 63% last winter. But by keeping all business markets with at least a morning outbound and an evening return, business travelers are reasonably well served in these smaller destinations.

Atlanta
--Atlanta was the 5th YX market after the originals MKE, BOS, DFW, and ATW and goes back to May 1, 1985. (Technically #6 because EWR was added…from Appleton…in February 1985.) So ATL indeed goes way back.

--Through much of its life, Atlanta benefitted heavily from high-fare traffic (mostly Kimberly Clark) flying between Appleton and Atlanta. Typically there were around 200-300 passengers per week at an average fare of $230-$260 each way. Not insignificant for a route flown with 60 and 84 seat aircraft a few times per day. Midwest was usually well behind Eastern and then later Delta in local MKE-ATL service.

--When Delta Connection started ATW-ATL nonstop, that high-yield flow dried up for Midwest. Then when AirTran came in to MKE and lowered fares, ATL became a definite drag.

--Of all the business markets, ATL has for years had a lowest ratio of local Milwaukee traffic for YX. Even though Delta and AirTran have usually had an even weaker ratio of local to connecting traffic on MKE-ATL, both DL and FL have far superior connection opportunities at ATL than F9/YX have in Milwaukee. Even so, Milwaukee has often been among the emptiest Atlanta routes for AirTran over the years just as MKE-ATL has been among the emptiest YX routes.

--In some ways it is a jolt to have Frontier leaving one of MKE’s largest markets. But ATL has hemorrhaged for years and may well have done so even before AirTran came. Midwest never owned the business market MKE-ATL, and they can’t carry enough leisure traffic to fill planes which are reasonably economic on leisure fares. So making money – even in winter – means ATL goes.

Long Haul West
--Nonstops west are a big hole in the upcoming dead-of-winter schedule. Both PHX and LAS are each staying at their current 1x/day (as opposed to 2x/day last winter) and LAX goes from 7x/week daytime to 3x/week redeye. Although there is some disappointment in seeing these cuts for winter, there are supporting reasons.

--In spite of protests about LA being a big business destination and the nation’s second-largest city, MKE-LAX simply is not much of a business market. The market is low yield, seasonal, and highly price sensitive. Through the 90’s when Midwest was always profitable, oil was cheap, fares were high and competition was minimal, Midwest stated more than once that they lost money to the west coast.

--Although in theory even anemic loads can be profitable if yields are high enough, west coast flights from MKE likely need to run rather full to break even. That’s tough to do in the dead of winter, especially to LAX.

--MKE-west flights burn tons of aircraft time and have a very high opportunity cost. If they fly MKE-LAX-MKE in the morning it gets back around 3:45pm and can do one more departure at about 4:30pm. That’s undesirable late for most leisure markets, and wherever they send it, it doesn’t get back to MKE in time for connections. Even if the morning LAX round trip breaks even (which may be optimistic in the dead of winter) the PM out-and-back probably runs in the red. An entire aircraft day used up to generate red ink. The aircraft is better used elsewhere.

--By this same token, flying a red-eye MKE-LAX (just on peak days) uses an aircraft which would otherwise sit – no real opportunity cost. Of course there are costs for fuel, for crew, for accrued maintenance per hour flown, etc. But squeezing more revenue out of the asset – on days when there is worthwhile demand – is a very different economic proposition versus using up an asset seven days per week.

--Flying less MKE-west nonstops during winter will help boost the performance of DEN- and MCI- west flights. If they schedule more aggressive MKE-west nonstops during winter, it would mean worse performance for DEN- and MCI- west flights. Plus MKE would compete for long-haul connecting traffic in markets like DCA-LAX against DEN and MCI.

--Frontier will undoubtedly lose some traffic by flying reduced nonstops during winter, but carrying the absolute largest number of possible passengers is not a worthwhile goal. One wonders how soon LAX will have daytime nonstops restored – will it come back when spring traffic comes to life (February-March) or if it won’t come until the Florida season ends.

Concerns
--They will likely have a tough time filling the A319 at DCA, BOS and LGA on the early-morning westbound flights in winter, and to some extent also on the evening eastbound trips.

--Connections to/from the classic feeder markets like ATW, GRR and GRB are in some cases on the long side from the main business markets. That’s especially true on the early morning westbound and the evening eastbound.

-------------------------
Clearly the new schedule for winter has some significant changes, but now that the dust has settled down I understand a lot better what they’re doing. They’re still in all of the business markets (except ATL) and have a presence in all of the traditional leisure markets, even if a reduced one in a few cases. There’s a decent chance that, at least during this schedule period, AirTran+Skywest might catch or pass Frontier at Milwaukee. That’s something which might well happen at a point, but Frontier is going for profits, not market share, with these actions.

I think it is probably a great idea to have some slack in the schedule for winter because of the high chance of delays in poor weather. Even if they fly less people if those people have an enjoyable experience they may be more likely to fly them in the future.

It's good to have our very own analyst back and contributing. Thanks for the very thoughtful and and thorough post.

Perhaps when the economy is stronger and seasonal service ends, frequencies will return to prior higher levels.

I was asked on a different board what changes I'd make to the winter schedule, and thought it was worth posting here too:

(a) Send E190 on the overnight into DCA instead of the 319
(b) Run a daytime DCA-MKE-LAX-MKE-DCA E190
(c) Maintain a 3rd mid-day trip to PIT and IND (these were both cut from 4x to 2x)
(d) Rework the late afternoon MKE-MSP-MKE so that it gets back to MKE in time to hit the 8:00pm bank of departures -- that flight will need to survive on mostly local traffic as it is currently scheduled
(e) Rework some of the MKE-MCI and MCI-MKE schedules to better fit the MKE banks

Unless the E190 economics are so awful on a long haul, it seems like a daytime LAX trip can be justified, plus the aircraft could be used to send a smaller aircraft overnight into DCA or BOS.


I think that in general these adjustments are justified for the dead of winter, although there are some changes I'd definitely make. If the aircraft are available, I'd very much like to see them add a few additional sun flights for the spring break peak (like another PHX and RSW) and think LAX could potentially come back at that point, too. Come spring-into-summer, I think we'll see a lot of restoration.

--------

Back when Republic won the bid for Frontier, I had some mixed feelings to go along with happiness. I figured that adding Frontier to the mix changed some things that would have gone another direction with just Midwest as the branded carrier of Republic:

Adding Frontier to the mix:
(a) Brought a better chance of profitable stability
(b) Meant getting high-capacity/low cost aircraft to Midwest leisure routes ASAP
(c) Meant that the "real airline" functions which Midwest brought new to Republic could be eclipsed by the Frontier people who also had these skills and functions. Republic did not have experience scheduling, marketing, pricing, running a FF program, etc, and I seriously hoped that they were not just going to try their hand at doing all that out of Indy on their own. But when Frontier came into the picture, those functions done by YX now could be taken over by F9 people...and they largely have been.
(d) Meant different access to the west. With Frontier in the picture, there's more opportunity during peak times for nonstop flights to the west, but less need for marginal nonstops during off-peak times.

Point (d) is where this ties into the thread. Something like the seasonal MKE-SAN probably wouldn't have happened if it meant YX had to open up a new station, and we may well see seasonal MKE-PDX or MKE-ABQ in the future. But on the flip side, there isn't the same need for them to fly money-losing flights in order to maintain some access west during offpeak times. When the E190 came it seemed like they finally had a small enough aircraft able to fly nonstop to the west coast in the off-peak season. But at least for this winter schedule they are choosing not to do so. That might be a matter of aircraft availability or economics (or both). This winter schedule has five daily MKE-LAX flights via DEN or MCI (connecting or 1-stop), so there's less need to fly a nonstop when demand is marginal.

Would I prefer them to fly all their west coast markets nonstop year-round? Sure...but they'd probably lose money in slow seasons, and some markets which have too much "slow season" might not be served at all. If it were Midwest alone, I think we'd still see a MKE-LAX nonstop year-round, but maybe never see MKE-SAN and MKE-SEA. With the Frontier system added to the network, the picture changes.

I don't know Knope Airtran kept MKE-SFO, MKE-SEA, MKE-LAX year round. I do not know how well they did in the winter but Airtran has not made any changes to their schedule yet thus one could assume that they are likely to keep the west coast routes year round. Why would Frontier let airtran take that traffic from them? I am not sure I buy the argument that they can feed MCI and DEN. I would buy that argument if they still had a code share with Delta but without that I think that those connecting passengers may be likely to try Delta or Southwest( which has the best west coast connections via PHX and LAS). I think that this is a bad decision. LA is a huge destination for business and travel. LA has great weather in the winter and can attract travelers who are sick of Florida (which is over priced: as you can see I am no Florida fan). The Bay area (my new home!!) has the second largest concentration of fortune 500 companies outside of the New York area. It is a key business destination and is a good leisure destination in the winter. SEA is an important destination as well. I think that frontier needs to grow these markets not shrink them. To me it is not a good idea to let Airtran and Southwest get the upper hand in the battle for Milwaukee

WN and LAX
 

I wonder if WN would add MKE-LAX? They have a "hub" at LAX and could offer connections throughout the west coast (i.e., SFO, SEA, OAK,PDX) That could further weaken Frontier and Airtran.

I think the point that Knope was making is that Airtran has no other option than to fly direct MKE-LAX because MKE-ATL-LAX would not work. But DEN and MCI are almost a straight shot in and they can utilize aircraft better while not stopping people from getting to LAX. If Airtran dropped MKE-LAX in the winter then they might not get the numbers back in the summer, so they'll take a hit over winter to keep the route positive overall.

Okay, but that does not mean that frontier will fortify MCI or DEN. Southwest offers more destinations and greater frequency to west coast destinations via LAS and PHX than Frontier does via DEN or MCI. Delta would also be more attractive for people who also fly overseas. Between direct flights on Airtran, Southwest (greater connections and more destinations), Delta more destinations I do not see where Frontier fits into this equation.

Frontier has the frequest flyer base and can afford to match prices MKE-XXX-LAX and most west coast destinations via DEN/MCI. Granted Airtran and Southwest will probably do fine on those routes too but the point is a non stop MKE-LAX is less important to maintain in the slow season if the route is only marginally profitable and pick it back up when the demand is there. It would be different if they did not have the connection opportunites (like Airtran) because you wouldn't want to drop the LAX destination completely.

Los Angeles is a huge destination for business travel, but not from Milwaukee. There is a significant amount of leisure traffic on MKE-LAX, but it falls off a lot during late fall/dead of winter.

AirTran will have an advantage by offering non-stop flights to SEA/SFO/LAX during the slower travel months but that doesn't mean they'll be making much, if any, money doing so. Last winter AirTran carried significant amounts of connecting traffic on the West Coast runs. This generally leads to weak yields especially when AirTran is competing against carriers that offer non-stop flights in markets like BOS-SFO, NYC-LAX, or ATL-SEA. In fact, AirTran's CFO stated earlier this year that their MKE operations were not profitable during Q1 2010.

Bedford has stated numerous times that Republic's goal is to ensure sustained profitability going forward. They have a lot of data from Midwest to show what works vs. what doesn't during the slower winter months. The re-tooled MKE schedule reflects this.

Could these moves hand AirTran and others a bigger piece of the MKE pie? Absolutely. If they begin to see improved results on the East-West flying it will likely encourage them to add even more flying. This will have an impact on Frontier. I'm less concerned about Delta or Southwest as they've both retrenched somewhat in MKE during the last year.

I drew up a list of points but didn’t get them posted until now. In the mean time some people have already pointed out some of this stuff, so I apologize it it seems like I’m ripping off what other people have posted.

The prevailing notion of some is essentially “If AirTran is doing it, Frontier should be able to as well”. However MKE-west coast flights have different roles for AirTran compared to Frontier.

1. East-West Flow

AirTran’s Milwaukee operation is largely built for east-west traffic, and if they were to discontinue them, it would significantly impact results to BOS/LGA/BWI/DCA.

Frontier’s Milwaukee operation does not serve much long-haul east-west traffic, so trimming west coast flights do not especially impact the rest of the MKE operation.


2. Alternates to Nonstop Flights

AirTran has no good way to serve local traffic from Milwaukee to the west coast without flying nonstop. The winter schedule has a few connections via Atlanta, but ATL is far out of the way – about 50-70% more miles than nonstop MKE-west coast, and flights are generally around 8-10 hours. So if AirTran wants to be in MKE-west coast in any reasonable way, they have to keep the nonstops.

Frontier’s January schedule has several MKE-LAX options through the day, with routings only marginally longer than nonstop flights and coordinated connections. Here’s the January MKE-LAX offering:

6:00am – 10:26am via DEN (daily)
7:07am – 11:32am via MCI (daily)
10:40am – 2:27pm via DEN (daily)
2:25pm – 4:07pm via DEN (except Saturday)
6:59pm – 10:44pm via DEN (daily)
9:50pm – 12:16am nonstop (Thursday / Friday / Sunday only)


3. Flow from Key Markets

AirTran’s best launch point for west coast flights – geographically – is Milwaukee. Flat maps don’t do justice to how relatively “right on the way” Milwaukee is to the west coast for two key AirTran markets, Baltimore and Atlanta. So when the offseason comes and AirTran trims or drops nonstop west coast flights from Atlanta and Baltimore – which they do – they can still serve a lot of that flow west from those two key markets via Milwaukee. MKE is virtually right beneath the direct flight path from BWI to the west coast – BWI-MKE-west coast is less than 3% longer than BWI-west coast nonstop. And even from Atlanta to Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles, stopping in MKE is only 8.3%, 17.5%, and 24.6% longer than nonstop routing to those cities (respectively). The kind of flow that this generates really fortifies the viability of west coast nonstops. In the first quarter, when AirTran did not fly SEA-ATL nonstop but instead flew SEA-MKE-ATL, there were on average around 29 Seattle-Atlanta passengers on the SEA-MKE nonstop each day. That’s huge support.

Frontier has no such key market to the east/southeast of Milwaukee to fortify west coast nonstops. Frontier benefits somewhat the other direction, where MKE-BOS benefits from strong flow flying MCI-MKE-BOS, and increasingly DEN-MKE-BOS too.


One final point. There’s nothing to suggest that AirTran is actually making money on west coast nonstops during winter. They’ve said more than once that Milwaukee has made them money, however that is very different than saying every market in every quarter makes money. This past winter (Q1 2010) AirTran posted a solid net loss. It would seem unlikely that MKE-west coast was a profit center, overshadowed by larger losses in the rest of the AirTran network.

Would I like for Frontier to fly nonstop from Milwaukee to the west coast in the dead of winter? Sure, and I hope in the future they choose to. But it’s a whole lot more complicated than the notion that AirTran can do it but Frontier can’t compete.

One additional note. A 6th DEN-MKE-DEN was added to the winter schedule. This does a couple of things:

(a) The MKE departure is at 8:30am, meaning that the early-morning flights from BOS, LGA, PHL and DCA have a good connection to DEN. That will especially help Boston and Philadelphia.

(b) With the added flight, the MKE average daily capacity is now within 74 daily seats from last winter. Considering that a fair number of comparably empty RJ trips were among the cuts, they might well serve more passengers than last year in spite of fewer seats.

(c) With the added flights, all three banks of feeder flights from places like GRB and FNT have well-timed connections to/from Denver. Prior to this add, only two of three banks each direction were well-timed for Denver connections.

I doubt it WN will eventually to start owned metal nonstop MKE-LAX/SAN will became year-round long. If there is enough more demands. I can have consider that I can see WN is next potential new routes from MKE anytime soon. I believe WN is cutting it back the flights due to slow travel seasons. Hopefully in the wintertime WN will boost more passengers capacity. It will very extremely busiest during Holidays.