Old Sep 21, 2017, 4:08 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Print Wikipost

The future of the LAX hub?

Old Nov 5, 2017, 4:56 pm
  #331  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Seoul
Programs: None anymore
Posts: 983
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
The LAX O/D market is just too important to marginalize by shrinking. I do question using slot/gate space for a something like Medford. Makes me think T8’s RJ gates are limiting mainline expansion, and instead are stuck w/ expanding to a market like Medford. Southwest’s future expansion to Hawai‘i makes UA’s planned LAX-Hawai‘i expansion potentially a loser. I’d be directing mainline expansion towards business markets, not leisure.

Edit - Looks like only LAX-MFR non-stop is AA right now. Maybe UA is thinking of dropping one of 3 SFO-MFR flights to add one LAX-MFR? That would almost make sense.
As someone who has to connect to one of those smaller California cities, I'm happy that UA flies to them. California is just too big and has so little public transportation that driving to either SFO or LAX to get anywhere would just... It would really suck. The turnaround times for the UAX flights is usually pretty quick too.

In case of limited ATC operations these flights are the first to get delayed or canceled. Just a few weeks ago I got stuck in SFO because the incoming aircraft was coming from SAN which is considered close enough to be one of the flights that's flow limited when ATC is backed up, so I got stuck with a 3 hour delay.

I will say though, only one flight out of countless flights in the past 4 years hasn't gone out full from FAT to either SFO or LAX. Yes I travel during peak travel times (TH-F afternoon / M morning for example) but there's definitely a market there.
warrenw is offline  
Old Nov 5, 2017, 6:50 pm
  #332  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Originally Posted by PsiFighter37
If they go down this route, I hope they go with the Polaris seats from the get-go. No more B/E Diamond seats, please. It would also mean that they would actually have arguably an industry-leading product flying TCON - all-aisle access, which isn't something that any other airline can boast of upfront.
I can see Kirby thinking how it would make AA 3 cabin transcon first almost obsolete - which is currently the only all aisle access option.

And trump the Thompson Vantage / Diamond combo on DL, while keeping the same density / CASM.

Beauty of the Polaris setup is it's the same seat count upfront as the old Diamond, so no CASM / density reason to put the older product in.
cerealmarketer is offline  
Old Nov 6, 2017, 12:35 am
  #333  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 11,419
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
Beauty of the Polaris setup is it's the same seat count upfront as the old Diamond, so no CASM / density reason to put the older product in.
Intersting overservation. Maybe there is some hidden treasure in the Polaris configuration, as seems to evolve in the 763 now.
cesco.g is offline  
Old Nov 6, 2017, 1:26 am
  #334  
dll
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: AA Gold (prev. Ex Plat for 10 years); DL Plat; UA Gold; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,337
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
I can see Kirby thinking how it would make AA 3 cabin transcon first almost obsolete - which is currently the only all aisle access option.

And trump the Thompson Vantage / Diamond combo on DL, while keeping the same density / CASM.
He'd be right. Right now my transcon preference is AA>UA>DL, and B6 sometimes depending on price.

I strongly dislike the DL Vantage seats. They're so narrow. I prefer AA and UA (and DL depending on aircraft) Diamond seats. DL also do some A330 runs to JFK depending on season, and those are super nice.

B6 I'm hot and cold on at the moment; I actually don't like the seat, for many of the same reasons I don't like DL Vantage. But the service on B6 is great, food is too, and free wifi. Compelling package.

If UA gets serious about LAX I'll gladly give them more of my business.
dll is offline  
Old Nov 6, 2017, 6:29 pm
  #335  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: United Global Services, Amtrak Select Executive
Posts: 4,068
Seems like that Motley Fool article is ignoring that LA is the second largest city in the US, and not just a connecting hub in a network.
physioprof is offline  
Old Nov 6, 2017, 10:56 pm
  #336  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 11,419
Originally Posted by physioprof
Seems like that Motley Fool article is ignoring that LA is the second largest city in the US, and not just a connecting hub in a network.
Also of note: disclosure that author is holding DL shares.
cesco.g is offline  
Old Nov 6, 2017, 11:24 pm
  #337  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Originally Posted by DA201
In my opinion, people who argue that UA needs to eliminate LAX can't see the big picture. There are a lot of loyal UA flies in LA who would easily switch to AA or DL. There would then not be enough people to fill all of the EWR-LAX flights, so they would cut the schedule, which would lead to NYC based fliers who primarily fly EWR-LAX switching as well. Also, loyal UA fliers who fly to small cities from LA (ex. LAX-ORD-MSN) will switch to AA or DL for the same one-stop route. Flights that were struggling to stay above water and are relying on connecting pax may now be cut.
I have been arguing for 5 years that United was really messing up in giving up so much share ex-LAX, and that it would have follow-on impacts (one of which was that I think it cost them enough LAX-fliers to make PS ex-LAX non-competitive, which then caused PS to be less profitable, causing that mistake).

However, I find it hard to believe that running RJs to Medford or Spokane fixes the issue. UA needs access to major business markets. Think LAX-PHL, LAX-BOS (sorry, one flight a day is not enough vs. 4 on AA, and 2 on DL), LAX-ATL (which AA runs x3/day, and UA does not fly).

I do think bringing back 763 TCON service with new aircraft would be a very good move. United really needs to seperate itself in a dramatic way from its poor reputation at this point.
tuolumne and fryguy89 like this.
spin88 is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 1:08 am
  #338  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: PMD
Programs: UA*G, NW, AA-G. WR-P, HH-G, IHG-S, ALL. TT-GE.
Posts: 2,897
SFO hub is simply not competitive due to unreliability caused by weather restrictions, especially for L.A.-based passengers. However, the availability of certain fare classes on certain flights may just attract Bay Area passengers to connect through a more reliable LAX, but current routes and frequencies from LAX do not provide any advantages to just flying UA from SFO.
DJ_Iceman likes this.
HkCaGu is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 1:24 am
  #339  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
Originally Posted by HkCaGu
SFO hub is simply not competitive due to unreliability caused by weather restrictions, especially for L.A.-based passengers. However, the availability of certain fare classes on certain flights may just attract Bay Area passengers to connect through a more reliable LAX, but current routes and frequencies from LAX do not provide any advantages to just flying UA from SFO.
Thise 2h delays due to runway construction and 40min waiting for a gate to open made LAX really attractive and reliable.
JVPhoto is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 6:26 am
  #340  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Programs: UA 1K; *G, AA Plat
Posts: 1,700
Originally Posted by JVPhoto
Thise 2h delays due to runway construction and 40min waiting for a gate to open made LAX really attractive and reliable.
Just my experience, but I haven't been held at LAX waiting for a gate to open in the past 3-4 months.

Before that, it was 75%-85% of my flights being held waiting for a gate at LAX.

The contrast is there. Maybe it's just my flights, but I've seen less and less of this and have been happier flying into LAX than dealing with ATC delays with SFO.
laxmillenial is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 6:58 am
  #341  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Originally Posted by laxmillenial
Just my experience, but I haven't been held at LAX waiting for a gate to open in the past 3-4 months.

Before that, it was 75%-85% of my flights being held waiting for a gate at LAX.

The contrast is there. Maybe it's just my flights, but I've seen less and less of this and have been happier flying into LAX than dealing with ATC delays with SFO.
I read somewhere Delta's move to T2/3 was supposed to help with that.
cerealmarketer is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 8:40 am
  #342  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Programs: UA-1k, 1mm, Marriott-LT Platinum, Hertz-Presidents Circle
Posts: 6,355
I really like UA expanding any service to so cal and think they can and should increase international capacity out of there. They have EWR/IAD which are even closer than SFO/LAX and have even more population to draw from.

I'd like to see Ontario expand as that is a nice alternative domestically as well. You are not fighting traffic if you fly into and out of Ontario. You can get to Orange County and into downtown LA easier than from LAX depending on hours. Put in some Ontario - Hub traffic (ORD/IAH/SFO/DEN, which exists now) and then increase the LAX international traffic by going to Central/South America and Asia/Australia more frequently. You would have to increase frequency to IAD/ORD and ensure PS schedules feed LAX from EWR and even BOS which is in SFO now.
schley is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 9:11 am
  #343  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: SoCal to the rest of the world...
Programs: AA EXP with lots of BA. UA 2MM Lifetime Plat - No longer chase hotel loyalty
Posts: 6,697
Originally Posted by schley
I'd like to see Ontario expand as that is a nice alternative domestically as well. You are not fighting traffic if you fly into and out of Ontario. You can get to Orange County and into downtown LA easier than from LAX depending on hours. Put in some Ontario - Hub traffic (ORD/IAH/SFO/DEN, which exists now) and then increase the LAX international traffic by going to Central/South America and Asia/Australia more frequently. You would have to increase frequency to IAD/ORD and ensure PS schedules feed LAX from EWR and even BOS which is in SFO now.
I'm closer to SNA but use ONT a lot for early AM flights (e.g. day trip to bay area) - where out of SNA I arrive too late for meeting starts due to curfew. Never takes me more than 45 min to/from ONT (using the Toll Roads). Suffice to say I now have a new threshold for LAX. If it means flying out of SNA and connecting somewhere, I'd rather fly to LAX and deal with the 1hr 50 min traffic. Still faster than a connection into SNA that requires sometimes an hour longer flight time and 2 hours to make a safe connection. Intl out of LAX is a no brainer, but now I'm doing it for flights like AUS, RDU and even SLC (I'm AA so won't fly DL). LA traffic if you know it is less unpredictable than connecting through another hub.
NickP 1K is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 9:25 am
  #344  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Programs: UA-1k, 1mm, Marriott-LT Platinum, Hertz-Presidents Circle
Posts: 6,355
Originally Posted by NickP 1K
I'm closer to SNA but use ONT a lot for early AM flights (e.g. day trip to bay area) - where out of SNA I arrive too late for meeting starts due to curfew. Never takes me more than 45 min to/from ONT (using the Toll Roads). Suffice to say I now have a new threshold for LAX. If it means flying out of SNA and connecting somewhere, I'd rather fly to LAX and deal with the 1hr 50 min traffic. Still faster than a connection into SNA that requires sometimes an hour longer flight time and 2 hours to make a safe connection. Intl out of LAX is a no brainer, but now I'm doing it for flights like AUS, RDU and even SLC (I'm AA so won't fly DL). LA traffic if you know it is less unpredictable than connecting through another hub.
The SNA curfew is what kills that capacity and making it viable for more flights. I like John Wayne, but they just don't have enough flights. I really think ONT is a good alternative and if they did more direct flights would take so So Cal residents due to traffic concerns. I know of some friends who stay at an LAX hotel the night before morning flights due to the threat of traffic jams/accidents. I don't care how much they expand the 405 (which it is better than when I lived there in the late nighties and early 2000's) it will still be a parking lot.

Selfishly I'd love to see UA expand their capacity there as So Cal is unique in the sprawl. UA usually likes to use one airport per city, which makes sense (EWR for New York, ORD for Chicago, SFO for San Francisco, IAH for Houston, IAD for Washington DC) but LA is a unique beast in that the sprawl is so large you are talking 50 miles by 50 miles and not even hit SD. This is so dense that having a presence in ONT which is some 56 miles fits that bill IMO as it can save someone 2 hours in traffic upon landing easy.

Some friends of mine used to fly into Palm Springs and then head into Corona area in the mornings because the traffic was nil and predicable as opposed to LAX. Extreme certainly but people have their own routines and most are involving traffic avoidance. I know ONT recently attracted Air China for a couple times a week in the near future.

Take a look UA and if you build it they will come.
schley is offline  
Old Nov 7, 2017, 10:11 am
  #345  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Programs: AA, WN, UA, Bonvoy, Hertz
Posts: 2,491
Originally Posted by schley
I really think ONT is a good alternative and if they did more direct flights would take so So Cal residents due to traffic concerns.

I know ONT recently attracted Air China for a couple times a week in the near future.

Take a look UA and if you build it they will come.
I felt UA has gone backwards at ONT. Sure, maybe the ONT-LAX flight wasn't really a viable route (but very cool). However, too many non-jet to hubs is just no fun.

ONT has no curfew and seeing AA put in a late-night to DFW on certain days and ORD is very interesting. Frankly, AA would do nothing at ONT unless it shows demand so UA needs to really take a look at its surrounding LAX operations.

Rasheed
rasheed is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.