UA ends LAX to New Orleans daily flight [effective August, 2016]
 

Sad to see this route drop by UA in August. Glad that AA will add the route in June, and DL, SW, Spirit all has direct flight. Wait, why UA drop it? Back to Old UA afraid of competition again?

I think this is part of AA's strategy at LAX. To go after UA since it seems to be shrinking there. And this probably why they are not only starting LAX-MSY in a couple of weeks. But also LAX-MSP. Is UA still flying LAX-PIT?

Why does it have to be that AA is going after UA.

UA does not see the value in LAX and hasn't for close to a decade. They have been shrinking and moving everything up to SFO. International and domestic flights. Which I can remember more times then not missing connections in SFO because of fog and ATC limiting the number of flights going to SFO.

UA doesn't know how to compete nor has been able to compete with other airlines to keep business. DL and AA have both expanded at LAX then after UA cuts back.

I may be wrong but I don't see UA cutting before other airlines adding. I see it the other way around. Maybe that would be a hint for them to think about the service they provide and once an airline starts advertising a new route they start losing business to look deeper at why they are losing the business.

At some point, you have to decide whether you can compete and if it makes sense to reallocate resources to an area where you have a better opportunity to succeed.

AA and DL are not currently rational competitors in LAX. They are adding flights and trying to buy market share. You also have Spirit, which has much lower costs. If you're United, and you have 3 competitors that can or will take much lower yields, why would you loose your shirt when you can shift that airplane to another market that's more profitable. It's not like United is eliminating the capacity from LAX-MSY and parking an airplane, it's simply shifting it to another more profitable market.

Just like DL did in CVG, DTW, MEM, and Florida which have all shrunk. Or AA/US in BNA, LAS, LGA, PIT, RDU, SJC and STL.

Cancelled shortly after AA started flying the route.
LAX will be the next CLE, though it might take a decade until that happens. AA, DL, and WN want it much more than UA does.

I think LAX should remain a hub, however it should have only O/D traffic. Before (and a bit right now) they were trying to mak LAX a connection hub. LAX needs to be an O/D hub and that's it. All connections can be funneled through SFO,DEN especially TPAC. These are place where they have market dominance. And, Why compete when you don't have to?

A hub with O/D traffic only is called CLE. Decent service to the other hubs and nonstops to a dozen other cities as needed with routes retreating in the face of competition and some added just to keep things interesting.
That's better known as a focus city. A hub by definition needs connecting traffic.

You can't compare LAX and CLE as O/D markets. Depending on how you measure, LA has 5-10x the population of Cleveland.

Yes, UA has been losing the battle for LAX for years. This was all foreshadowed when they gave T6 to AA.

This is the mentality that got UA into its revenue problem today.

At some point, the airline needs to decide whether they want the city or not, and have reasonable service to major markets. If not, they risk losing high-volume customers and businesses to competitors.

Using your logic, Safeway could decide that it doesn't make enough margin selling eggs, and they'd rather reallocate that shelf space to some other, more lucrative product that is more profitable. Sound great on paper. Problem is, people who shop at Safeway need eggs. If Safeway were to stop selling eggs, people would stop shopping at Safeway.

United needs a critical mass of flights out of a hub in order to be a competitive entity to attract corporate and high-volume business, and those flights need to go where people want. Sure there will be flights that perform better or worse than others, but the overall value proposition has to be strong enough to be successful.

A while back I said UA will eventually just be a focus airport with flights to hubs and a few outstations, but people said it wouldn't happen, now you are saying that UA should use it's resources for different flights. How long before the few international flights out of LAX are gone?

I'm not saying it's a bad move, I've been saying for a while that UA will just not compete in LAX as they have SFO up the road. AA, DL, WN and Alaska are going for blood at LAX, and UA will eventually just become a city with flights to Hubs and Hawaii.

UA faces the most competition among the big 4. They know how to compete and do it well.

^

They're willing to lose their shirts because they have no other choice in California. UA does have a choice. And UA is planning some frequency additions at LAX.

Walking away from CVG, DTW, MEM, BNA, PIT, RDU or SJC isn't close to being the same as surrendering at LAX.

Actually, history has inexplicably proven that trying to be everything to everyone is a failed strategy for an airline.

That sounds like a great concept. What if every major market has an aggressive competitor and you're going to loose money on many or most of those routes? Does it make sense to serve them anyways in order to get high-volume customers that may or may not contribute to the bottom line?

Specifically to this thread, I really don't think MSY is the straw that would break the camel's back. It isn't in the top 10 destinations from LAX and its a fraction of the size of other top destinations where United holds the largest share. It's also well served at high frequency via Houston.

For LAX, eggs is probably SFO, NYC, ORD, or LAS (depending on whether eggs are number 1-4 on your list). Maybe MSY is eggs if you're occasional vegan.

I think you're taking a general statement and attempting to justify your past statements.

The international flights at LAX are not in particular danger unless there are competitors that come in with irrational pricing.

Why because LAX is a big city and you think it's more important?

My apologies. I didn't realize that serving the second largest metropolitan area in the country wasn't worth UA's time or effort. I stand corrected. :rolleyes:

I didn't realize United was ending all service to Los Angeles.