Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18009355)

Speaking of being set up to fail, I wouldn't take bets on MCI-AUS and MCI-MSY lasting once the feed from MKE disappears. Hopefully I'm wrong, but the pattern is hardly without precedence. They will be pulled because they don't generate positive revenue, which will be true. But this will happen only after Frontier loses money in the markets for a few months in a very predictable fashion because they are not cutting it on local traffic alone.

On the bright side, the E190 I'm currently on had an oven -- I have not had a warm cookie in ages. :-)

Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18009355)

Speaking of being set up to fail, I wouldn't take bets on MCI-AUS and MCI-MSY lasting once the feed from MKE disappears. Hopefully I'm wrong, but the pattern is hardly without precedence. They will be pulled because they don't generate positive revenue, which will be true. But this will happen only after Frontier loses money in the markets for a few months in a very predictable fashion because they are not cutting it on local traffic alone.

Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18009355)

So how could they have "changed how they look at things yet again?" By divorcing the RJ flying from Frontier to make Frontier more appealing as a ULCC (ultra low cost carrier) airline, but then examining it from the Chautauqua side and determing that three lines of at-risk flying at MKE had a viable shot. It's very clear that Frontier is actively and vocally being promoted as moving toward the ULCC model, and that explains (at least in my mind) why all smaller aircraft must get out from the Frontier wheelhouse, and that the E190 may be facing a diminished role. Perhaps they have decided it's okay to continue to suffer the cost drag of three remaining ERJ's dirtying up the Frontier CASM for a few more quarters, and then it's lights out for the RJ lights. It's what a lot of us assumed. But perhaps it only means getting them off of Frontier's books and onto Chautauqua's.

Originally Posted by FL787 (Post 18011511)

Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18012606)

I noticed that, but wonder if this would apply to E190 and/or E145 and not necessarily just E145.

As there's more daylight between Republic Holdings and Frontier, the relationship needs to be transparently defined. I don't know that I've heard the term "prorate" used for Republic and Chautauqua aircraft operated for Frontier before, but it sounds like that's how the it will be (and may already be) set up.


. The "prorate" term is not one I've noticed in the Republic/Frontier discussion before. The more daylight between Republic and the Frontier entity, the more transparent and defined the relationship needs to be.

Originally Posted by FL787 (Post 18014273)

Hmmm, I hadn't considered that the E90 could be prorate but I just don't see why RAH would do that when it's possible for them to operate under a CPA unlike the ER4. Regional jets only seem to operate under prorate agreements when they are unable to find CPAs.

Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18016652)

True -- perhaps it is about the ERJ and not the E90.

Speaking of the RJ's, anybody else heard that the five 37-seat ER3 which Frontier operated are going back to ExpressJet for service as UA*/CO*?

In the black-and-white world of armchair airline CEO's those little ER3's couldn't make a buck if load actor was 197% and fuel was free* but apparently that's not how somebody else sees it.

*the necessary load factor and fuel price may be a small overstatement on my part of the arguement many make against the ER3

Originally Posted by 8C4IOW (Post 18016815)

Republic is hiring more pilots, which could play into increased ER3 flying. I don't know why they would be hiring when they have plenty of pilots in their pool especially after the recent cuts.

Originally Posted by knope2001 (Post 18017185)

The ER3 are actually leaving Republic...ExpressJet will fly them.