etops1 From Puerto Rico, joined Nov 2005, 844 posts, RR: 1 Posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 26988 times:
I read where UA will cancel its planned IAH Auckland service due to SW given the right to fly Internationally from HOU . Also , they will reduce flying out IAH 10% which will result in job losses . Not good .
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8739 posts, RR: 52 Reply 1, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 27021 times:
"We will have to reallocate some resources, including the 787 that we had planned to operate from Houston to Auckland, New Zealand. That flight is heavily dependent on connecting traffic and won’t work if this proposal is enacted," Clark said in an email.
Speculation is that the 787 that was going to operate IAH-AKL will fly DEN-NRT.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
kgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 3648 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 26982 times:
drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26907 times:
Quoting etops1 (Thread starter):
I read where UA will cancel its planned IAH Auckland service due to SW given the right to fly Internationally from HOU . Also , they will reduce flying out IAH 10% which will result in job losses . Not good .
There are about 4 threads actively discussing this...and I'm on all of them.
Who here believes these moves are really in response to WN and HOU?
QANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1801 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26868 times:
IAH-AKL is cancelled because WN wants to do HOU-MEX. (According to UA)
[Edited 2012-05-30 18:35:05]
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
seatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 581 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26867 times:
United is looking very silly at this point. No one is buying their argument. Once this blows over and SW is flying out of their huge six gate international terminal at HOU, look for AUK to be re-announced.
OA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4978 posts, RR: 25 Reply 7, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26774 times:
Quoting seatback (Reply 5): Once this blows over and SW is flying out of their huge six gate international terminal at HOU, look for AUK to be re-announced.
I'd be shocked if they ever re-announce this route. It made sense for pre-merger CO since they had no other hub to connect AKL to. Post-merger, they can fly to AKL from either LAX or SFO, both of which are larger markets to New Zealand than IAH.
Quoting LHCVG (Reply 6): I've got a bridge to sell whoever believes that!
They really ought to be embarrassed that they're even making this argument. No one is dumb enough to buy it.
RWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2160 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26598 times:
Quoting seatback (Reply 5): United is looking very silly at this point. No one is buying their argument. Once this blows over and SW is flying out of their huge six gate international terminal at HOU, look for AUK to be re-announced.
Yes UA looks just like a 4 year old who didn't get it's way right now, bad UA, bad! If UA wants to piss off it's local flyer base in Houston, then so be it, what a bunch of maroons. If UA thinks these childish antics are going to get things changed the way they wanted them to be, they are being public fools.
I do disagree that IAH-AKL will happen ever. I also doubt UA will fly SFO-AKL either as others have speculated in the "other threads", their *A partner NZ has that route well covered. I think when CO announced they would operate 787's starting with IAH-AKL it made sense for CO at that time, and had the 787 deliveries been on time, we would have seen the launch of that route years ago, but gas prices have changed and routes are being rescrutinized.
Next Flights: AS PDX-SEA-KOA on DH4/738 in F, HA KOA-OGG on 717 in Y, AS OGG-PDX on 738 in F
drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 10, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26602 times:
Ok I've composed myself from
As a Houstonian and recent loyal United defector, allow me to attempt to assassinate what will assuredly be United's latest public relations debacle.
1. Cancel plans to start IAH-AKL
- as many have said, route was interesting and made sense prior to the merger; and honestly I think it is a viable market in the current scheme - however, many more lucrative routes to be served first. I could see NZ being conned into starting it at some point. This route already was in the works to be moved elsewhere in favor of greener pastures.
2. Layoff 1300 Houston employees
- something that was most likely in the works or desired upon; they think WN will be a convenient scapegoat. How stupid does UA think we are.
3. Trim capacity at IAH by 10%.
- Well, Saab drawdown, accelerated retirement of 735/762, 763 reconfig sending 753s to Hawaii to backfill, route consolidation of pmUA and pmCO aircraft at IAH probably account for the bulk of the capacity trim ANYWAY and the rest was probably already desired and planned upon.
4. The second phase of Terminal B reconstruction "probably will not happen".
- Well, it was not funded or set in stone anyway. That is why they build $hit in phases anyway. If it makes financial sense in 2015 then it will be built.
All this is a response to WN starting service from HOU from 4 gates...beginning in 2015...
If they were smart they would get all their ducks in a row to be a strong competitor to WN by 2015. A tip, get your partner COPA to start HOU service from that 5th international gate so at least you have a piece of a foothold there.
thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 11, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26379 times:
I have always been skeptical about UA intentions for IAH, despite the propaganda and rhetoric coming from Mr FLIBS and company. As many here have far more eloquently stated, UA was looking for a reason to scrap this route and WN and the Houston City Council handed it to them on a silver platter.
Sad, as I was looking forward to try this flight. That said, I fully support WN along with the City Council's move on this. Houston has a history of telling corporate bullies like UA and the likes of Bud Adams (owner of the former Houston Oilers)......."NO, we will not yield to your threats". It may hurt Houston a bit now, but I have no fear that int'l traffic will continue to grow., hell we got another NFL franchise, granted a mediocre one.
AWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1415 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26308 times:
Here's what I read from the entire article and thread:
traindoc From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 308 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 26169 times:
UA really seems determined to drive people away, especially their frequent flyer base. The Wall Street Journal has covered this in depth this month. I don't understand what is going on, except that it seems to be ineptitude on a grand scale. I am a 1K and my wife is Platinum and we are looking elsewhere due to the s*****y service, especially since the March 3rd computer debacle. UA management has done nothing that I can see to make nice to their FF base, especially those of us who have borne the brunt of their arrogance and incompetency.
chepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 5968 posts, RR: 12 Reply 14, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 26029 times:
Big strong UAL feels that threatened by WN, come on NOW. This is them just throwing a little kid tantrum for WN getting their way,
That being said, as usual the employees take the brunt of this, the best of luck to the affected UAL employees in the IAH area.
sydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2375 posts, RR: 18 Reply 15, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25644 times:
Quoting chepos (Reply 14): Big strong UAL feels that threatened by WN, come on NOW. This is them just throwing a little kid tantrum for WN getting their way,
Can I ask the obvious question, so the City of Houston builds an aiport, IAH, to takeover as the primary airport for the region from Hobby. Hobby becomes a general aviation airport until SWA comes in and decides IAH is too expensive and wants to operate from Hobby after Continental has moved up the road and built its hub. In other words it doesn't want to compete with the dominant carrier, at the airport the City built to takeover as the prime gateway for its region due to expense.
Fast Forward and now Southwest wants to operate from Hobby to International destinations because it doesn't want to compete at the more expensive airport that the dominant competitor in the market had to move to in order to operate its International flights? Why is that fair to United who has built an International Hub at IAH in accordance with the Cities wishes over decades only to find that they could have stayed where they were to start with and cut out a whole bunch of expense in the mean time?
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 16, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25464 times:
Oh don't get me wrong, I think United is correct to throw a tantrum for the reasons you mention, Sydscott.
However, believing that is the reason for their change - and not a convenient excuse - isn't going to happen.
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2650 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25436 times:
"Why is that fair to United who has built an International Hub at IAH in accordance with the Cities wishes over decades only to find that they could have stayed where they were to start with and cut out a whole bunch of expense in the mean time?"
United built nothing at IAH...CO did.
Just as WN "decided" to use HOU and DAL instead of the main airports close to 35 years ago.
Times change and so do circumstances.
Nothing is more evidence of that then the new name on the side of the 737s flying into and out of IAH.
Time to get over it and move on. Lots of cities have multiple airports...especially large cities like Houston.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10671 posts, RR: 100 Reply 18, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25310 times:
Quoting drerx7 (Reply 3): Who here believes these moves are really in response to WN and HOU?
Not I. I think its just a re-decision on where to deploy equipment in a high oil price environment. It isn't as if the 787s won't find homes...
Now wouldn't it be ironic if Air New Zealand launched the route to their *A partner's hub?
Quoting drerx7 (Reply 10): 2. Layoff 1300 Houston employees
- something that was most likely in the works or desired upon; they think WN will be a convenient scapegoat.
drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 19, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25209 times:
Quoting sydscott (Reply 15): Can I ask the obvious question, so the City of Houston builds an aiport, IAH, to takeover as the primary airport for the region from Hobby. Hobby becomes a general aviation airport until SWA comes in and decides IAH is too expensive and wants to operate from Hobby after Continental has moved up the road and built its hub. In other words it doesn't want to compete with the dominant carrier, at the airport the City built to takeover as the prime gateway for its region due to expense.
Fast Forward and now Southwest wants to operate from Hobby to International destinations because it doesn't want to compete at the more expensive airport that the dominant competitor in the market had to move to in order to operate its International flights? Why is that fair to United who has built an International Hub at IAH in accordance with the Cities wishes over decades only to find that they could have stayed where they were to start with and cut out a whole bunch of expense in the mean time?
Maybe you are not well versed in the history of things, but your assessment is not historically or chronologically accurate; therefore not very applicable.
Quoting sydscott (Reply 15):
Oh don't get me wrong, I think United is correct to throw a tantrum for the reasons you mention, Sydscott.
Besides his information being factually wrong?
IAH was built in 1969 due to runway constraints at HOU and the need to expand due to infrastructure. This was 3 years or so before the inception of Southwest...also before Continental as we know it today exist. Continental did not move its headquarters to Houston until 1980 or so. BTW, WN began its first Houston services at IAH. CO served HOU on and off many times through the past 3 decades before finally settling on IAH solely, at the same time WN pulled its sole IAH-DAL service. The issue is not necessarily about WN fleeing from IAH a more expensive airport - it is about starting service from an airport they served BEFORE CO HQ and hub was even in Houston! WN has a loooooooooooooong history at HOU and its as ridiculous and not even feasible to move total ops to IAH, anybody that thinks that is a possibility is on something. The idea of a split operation international at IAH and domestic at HOU for 1 airline obviously is foolish. If you believe that UA is right and WN is wrong - fine, at least make that decision based on some historical facts that are somewhat accurate.
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 20, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25211 times:
IrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1727 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 25162 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1): "We will have to reallocate some resources, including the 787 that we had planned to operate from Houston to Auckland, New Zealand. That flight is heavily dependent on connecting traffic and won’t work if this proposal is enacted," Clark said in an email.
Quoting OA412 (Reply 7): I'd be shocked if they ever re-announce this route. It made sense for pre-merger CO since they had no other hub to connect AKL to. Post-merger, they can fly to AKL from either LAX or SFO, both of which are larger markets to New Zealand than IAH.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 18): Not I. I think its just a re-decision on where to deploy equipment in a high oil price environment. It isn't as if the 787s won't find homes...
Quoting drerx7 (Reply 10): 1. Cancel plans to start IAH-AKL
- as many have said, route was interesting and made sense prior to the merger; and honestly I think it is a viable market in the current scheme - however, many more lucrative routes to be served first. I could see NZ being conned into starting it at some point. This route already was in the works to be moved elsewhere in favor of greener pastures.
All of these points basically point to the sign that UA simply just doesn't want to launch IAHAKL anymore, and they're seeing this as the perfect exit strategy. Period.
AAIL86 From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 390 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 25045 times:
Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 21): All of these points basically point to the sign that UA simply just doesn't want to launch IAHAKL anymore, and they're seeing this as the perfect exit strategy. Period.
Yeap, exactly. If anything, the shiny red 747 soon to operate daily to DFW from SYD has a lot more to say about this cancellation then a few WN 737s possibly flying HOU-MBJ/CUN/SJD in five years.
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6172 posts, RR: 9 Reply 23, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24935 times:
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6517 posts, RR: 11 Reply 24, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24892 times:
MGMT team looks like a bunch of wusses...grow up.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
25 FlyingSicilian: Ha, thanks, that was funny "old school" pop up. Funny also, since GHW Bush lives in Houston and "Bush IAH" LOL
26 drerx7: Here is the real question... DEN-NRT is starting next March, a time when there should be more than the original 5 frames online. This leads me to beli
27 Tdan: NZ will pick up IAHAKL once their 789s come online. I would put money on it. Honestly, other than South America, where else will NZ grow with the 78s?
28 drerx7: COSIGN!!! Couldn't have said it better. Houston is ripe for AS to expand its presence here as well as VX and B6.
29 peanuts: Key words: They're I think this will boomerang right in their (UA) face again. Not impressed at all. This saga tells me there is a lot of other negat
30 NZ107: I wouldn't put my money on it. There are a few airports which NZ could choose for a 789 service - another being ORD. But who's to say that they won't
31 jporterfi: I highly doubt that UA suddenly thinks that they will be unprofitable on a IAH-AKL route if WN starts service from HOU to MEX. Two completely differe
32 billreid: I do. There is no need for a customs facility at Hobby to support one low end, welfare claiming airline. Why do they need a free ride from the tax pa
33 FlyingSicilian: So cutting flights three years before WN even flies Mexico from Hobby is smart in your view? UA should just give current traffic to DL, US and AA (wh
34 jporterfi: Precisely. PIT and MEM thrived on connecting traffic: they didn't have a lot of O&D traffic. HOU has a ton of O&D traffic, and also a lot of
35 FlyASAGuy2005: LOL lovely... Like I said in the NRT-DEN thread, if UA is TRULY worried about WN flying a bunch of 737s to to LatAm and the Caribbean then we have ot
36 Max Q: Another Moronic Smisek move. Laying off thousands of employees and cancelling AKL service because SW will, one day have a few flights to Mexico out of
37 Zkpilot: and always a more likely prospect than CO/UA. NZ has previously stated that they want to fly into the center/east of USA. DEN is too high and weather
38 billreid: Why shouldn't UA take this position. They offer about 10X as many city pairs and bring INBOUND traffic. They offer global service. WN doesn't have th
39 RWA380: It may happen, maybe it was already part of the plan with NZ when UA decided to publicly end their intentions to fly the route. Heck, CO even flew DC
40 FlyASAGuy2005: Did you miss the part where they will fund the project at the tune of $100M? Did you miss the fact that WN has been operating out of HOU for, forever
41 COflyerBOS: It's as if UA is trying to ruin every bit of good will CO had created in Houston over the last decade and a half. If that is the goal then they're doi
42 peanuts: LOL. I don't believe WN is a project WN just wants the facility in order to expand, create jobs, increase competition... Even if WN were to pack up a
43 jporterfi: To me, WN seems much more like a highly successful airline than a project... DC-9s!?!? What was the load factor on those flights, and for how long we
44 sydscott: You're exactly right, it was WN's choice to operate at these airports. Under the circumstances CO has to move. Why shouldn't the same rules apply to
45 peanuts: I understand your point of view, but... Times change. Nothing is really permanent, in spite of promises/intent from the past. Seeing how internationa
46 nzrich: I think AKL-IAH was in the vision of NZ so it will happen whether it is NZ or UA is the question !
47 peanuts: Vision is great. But if we have to believe UA's words today and WN's opens up a tiny (short/medium haul) international operation from HOU, they may n
48 sydscott: Exactly, and that's my point. People are jumping up and down because UA, in a silly way, are pointing out the detriment that happens if a well unders
49 sccutler: City: 1970: 1,232,802 2010: 2,099,451 Metro Area: 1970: 2,201,849 2011: 6,086,538 You would have to live there to understand the vastness of the Hous
50 DLD9S: I disagree that WN is a low end, welfare claiming airline. Unlike most other airlines that have had to claim chapter 11 several times, WN has remaine
51 floorrunner: You continue to propose that Southwest do things that will hurt it's business. I have to wonder if you really believe what you have in your signature
52 RyanairGuru: What something like "Due to the high cost of fuel, coupled with ongoing redistribution of assets following the merger of Continental and United, we h
53 floorrunner: No one is saying that UA should not protect their interests. They just should not do it by lying. It makes them look like fools.
54 strfyr51: Nobody At United even believed in that Route!! Fly Houston to Aukland?? For What other than show?? Bolster the routes you Already have internationally
55 mogandoCI: mods, please modify the thread title since its speculation but has the impression of confirmed fact
56 IAHFLYR: Perfect!! I'd hope the UA Board of Directors is bright enough to take some action (get rid of the problem) and see this is simply a childish act of I
57 us330: Even native dallasites like myself recognize that Houston is a major market and will not become another MEM, CVG, or PIT. As long as the world uses o
58 ual777uk: Have I missed something heere, have UA actually stated that the flight is cancelled. If so, can someone please post the source because some people hee
60 nuggetsyl: Sorry but the vast majority of IAH traffic is connecting traffic. About 30% is O&D.
61 LAXdude1023: IAH does not belong in the same sentence as MEM or PIT. IAH is extremely rich in high yielding international O&D. That said, I think were missing
62 drerx7: So you are just ignoring the battle that UA just won in Denver reducing their debt load and forgiving leases that WN and F9 vehemently fought against
63 UA772IAD: Is the UA marketing/public relations department being run by some university PR101 class? Even that is giving them too much credit- a communications s
64 usairways85: Another excuse are the 787 delays, weren't they supposed to have some 787s already? They are getting by with a 772 on IAH-LOS but that is not going t
65 hiflyer: The AKL dream was pre-merger and before solid specs on the early block of 787's in revenue service were known. Early production aircraft are notorious
66 jreuschl: I guess WN had Boeing add fuel tanks to their 738 so that it could fly Houston-AKL and made UA cancel their flight?
67 peanuts: That's exactly why I am a bit concerned for UA. I think this WN/AKL drama may be just the tip of the iceberg. There may be some fundamental issues po
68 SeeTheWorld: Wow, there is some real bitterness against UA from the CO loyalists ... To suggest that UA is in trouble with Houston travelers is absurd. For so many
69 peanuts: So what? Well for one, no one is buying it...that's not good. Houston politics may be a tad different from Chicago politics. Even if it's run by same
70 tommy767: Aside my Dana Carvey post from earlier, I think this news story shows two things: 1. UA is playing hardball with Houston and by doing this glorifying
71 UA772IAD: There could be a market there, but I imagine DL has captured most of the Southeastern US-Asia market (which probably isn't huge compared to other par
72 SeeTheWorld: Oh, please, I'm tired of hearing about Chicago politics, Texas politics, DC politics ... Whatever ... Ultimately, if WN operates 40 to 50 departures
73 drerx7: They are...I don't know if you are in Houston or not - I am and the there is a resounding voice of discontent here. Of course you can't really quanti
74 tommy767: But any different than ORD, DEN, SFO, LAX, IAD, or EWR? I think a lot of people regardless are pissed because upgrades to elites aren't coming throug
76 enilria: IAH-AKL was dumb in the first place. The market is tiny. If it is being cancelled it is because it is a dumb route. Blaming it on WN is a joke.
77 BC77008: He is an embarrassment to UA and I can only hope at this point that he is digging himself a grave with poor financial results and corporate temper ta
78 SeeTheWorld: We've seen this before ... discontent, we'll show them ... it's like boycotts, they rarely work. I'm not saying that UA and CO passengers aren't frus
79 Sulley: CO never did things like this -- especially with Houston. Has anyone checked recently. Is 77 Wacker on fire? It seems like everything is spinning out
80 drerx7: I specifically said they are not leaving in droves. Alot of those are going over to WN because there walk-up fare is lower. This will happen more and
81 airbazar: It is a convenient excuse but not without merit. Let's face it, WN growth next door is likely to shrink demand for UA at IAH. In an age of high fuel
82 tommy767: Well now they are. I'd like to think it's more Smisek than the rest of the staff. However, he's setting the standard for all the ex-CO and UA executi
83 SeeTheWorld: Walk up fares on WN are generally always lower ... everywhere .. BWI, MDW, OAK and HOU not to mention MCO, DEN, PHL, LAX, SFO, SEA, ATL, DTW, MSP ...
84 drerx7: While it was an ego thing...it would be different if UA had not had soooo many P.R. and soft product blunders to go along with it. Coupled with skyro
85 Sulley: I haven't noticed an exodus of elites -- yet. Every flight has 25+ upgradables on the system. The GUI should be done soon but it should have been don
86 drerx7: Yea, I'm not Elite this year and I feel bad for purchasing those deals at the kiosk from those Elites...LOL, seriously though, I agree with you 100%.
87 tommy767: That's because it's common sense -- the system was designed for America West to use back in the 1980s. It had no business being used to run a juggern
88 SeeTheWorld: Again, this is nothing new. This has been happening all over the country. The fact is there are many reasons why people make the purchases they do. M
89 mcdu: If you want to go even deeper, EAL built Houston. CO is the spawn of Frank Lorenzo the charming fellow that pilfered pieces of EAL to the point of in
91 tommy767: All true. It's disturbing to read about what Lorenzo did to EA to prop up CO. The sale of System One, A300s, gates and facilities, international rout
92 Sulley: These people? CO is not full of the Lorenzo mentality -- quit parroting UA ALPA. Everyone at CO hates Lorenzo. I know you guys out in SFO think CO and
93 CODC10: The fact of the matter (take it as you wish) is that this is a deliberate business decision by the company to sell the upgrades out from under elites
94 mcdu: First I am not in SFO and I do not think CO employees are beneath me. I am glad to have new co-workers from CO and have made good acquaintances. The
95 mcdu: Maybe you should be asking your pilots not to strike like they did in 1983.... Wouldn't want repeat of that now would you!, thanks.
96 tommy767: Hmmm, so this was the elite program that CO fan boys have been praising about for years? Seems cheap. However this is exactly how you erode elite loy
97 Sulley: Ok, I apologize for my remarks. I have just seen some very nasty things being said about CO employees from (mostly senior) UA employees at SFO/ORD an
98 CODC10: I certainly never did. It was a better program some years ago, with richer bonuses, better upgrade percentages and nicer inflight services. Since 200
99 drerx7: LOL, no that upselling was never done at CO. That's a UA thing, as a non-Elite I'm not complaining though.
100 mcdu: I think our pilots are glad to have IAH flying. There was a bid for the A320 and B756 base that is opening on the S-UA side in the fall. All position
101 drerx7: Sorry for you. Four of the fastest growing cities in the country are in Texas. How is that different from the favorable treatment UA got in DEN that
102 blueflyer: WN hasn't been going head-to-head everywhere and isn't above using lies and deceits (aka marketing) a la UA to excuse itself from doing so. Their dep
103 96texan: When UA says they're going to cut capacity by 10%, has anyone thought that this is because UA is putting E+ on all their Boeing aircraft? For UA to cu
104 drerx7: No they sure are not, I can tell you that I am not a WN fanboy and believe that they can do no wrong. I will say as a consumer they offer a consistan
105 FlyingSicilian: not to sidetrack, but they had to leave, it was part of the previous law and amendments they agreed to with Wright (please currect me if I am wrong o
106 enilria: Because DOT reports international demand by O&D. :p I'd post the exact demand, but there are legal restrictions on it's distribution.
107 CODC10: How is it "painfully obvious" that SHARES cannot handle the extra volume? Do you have any evidence to back up that claim or is it merely your hypothe
108 drerx7: True, and O&D is small, but how is transfer traffic calculated?
109 totesen: Well that route is quite good for United, they operate almost 8 flights daily with a mix of 738, 73NG, 735 and ERJ145XR plus aeromexico has 3 daily E
110 totesen: I dont belive that HOU will ever have the international capacity of having so many flights. i dont think they will be able to manage more than 2X to
111 drerx7: I think (hope) he was being facetitious. WN won't be offering more than that, not out of only four gates at least.
112 nateDAL: They will actually have five gates, four of which Southwest will have the use of on a "preferential basis so long as Southwest conducts an average of
113 drerx7: Thanks for the clarification - In know it was 5 gates total though...From the more current news about the subject the 4 gates are supposed to be exclu
114 IAHFLYR: I was forced to recently have to be on an A320, kicking and screaming the entire way. When I got on the plane I was VERY SURPRISED, roomy, very nice
115 fxramper: 747 & 787 to EWR next year to Europe and Asia.
116 AADC10: UA is just grasping at straws to get restrictions placed on HOU just as AA got restrictions placed on DAL. It is not going to happen since WN has far
117 mogandoCI: begin sarcasm : SMI/J should grow up and be the adult and say : "We welcome Southwest with open arms to come in town and trash our yields since lower
118 usflyguy: No, but using the WN/HOU 4 gate international expansion as an excuse for something you were going to do either way is the issue. I doubt the 1,300 jo
119 IrishAyes: Yes, because the Southwest effect is still in whopping full-force and they NEVER charge anywhere near the legacies. I'm sure that a mere 5 gates that
120 drerx7: Its looking like they don't want customers...I was reading the comments by people on chron.com after the article - they are really pissing people off.
121 135mech: DEN solved this problem by extending one of their runways to 16K ft to alleviate weight restrictions and truly become an "international" airport. LH
122 Sulley: Hell hath no fury like a Texan that found out their city lost a Fortune 500 HQ. [Edited 2012-05-31 12:58:46]
123 panamair: Actually, that's not true. Currently, UAL has a market cap of $8.4B while LUV is just shy of $7B.
124 T5towbar: IMHO, that is the biggest problem. Getting all of the joint contracts together is a real test of leadership from the top. A lot can happen in three y
125 LHCVG: really! Like him or not, Smisek is a smart guy - he should be able to come up with something better than that.
126 Kaiarahi: If you're just looking at AKL-IAH O&D, the numbers are likely tiny. But: 1. A significant proportion of NZ's pax to the U.S. originate from MEL a
127 SonomaFlyer: The IAH to AKL route isn't dumb when you consider there is connecting traffic at both ends and both being Star Alliance hubs. Part of the problem is t
128 nzrich: Yes but I was talking about Air NZ wanting to operate this route. I think you may find that if NZ gets their 789 before UA start this route NZ will s
129 LH422: What a pity, flying FRA-IAH-AKL on *A would have had the two most interesting IAH flights on the same trip...
130 BAC111: Mindless bluster. Take your ball and go home, UA. You realized you had a better use for the 787 in question and then decided to use this decision to
131 nomorerjs: pmCO is calling the shots. Houston and Chicago are calling each others blufs and adding the multiplier affect, f---ing politics! On the other hand, NZ
132 point2point: DEN-NRT seems to make more sense in terms of connecting people. The DEN catchment can be around 4M, and then Tokyo, well, that has some 30+ million. I
133 RyanairGuru: To over-simplify the issue, will NZ or UA fly AKL-IAH? Yes. The proof is over at DFW (hint: it has a kangaroo on the tail ) As with QF7/8 IAH-AKL is
134 gemuser: Assuming you mean AKL, it's around 1 million people, with another 3-4 million in the rest of the country. Gemuser
135 blueflyer: That is what the Southwest PR would have you believe, but the Wright Amendment Agreement does give Southwest the right to operate in DFW. In exchange
136 mariner: If by AUK you mean AKL, then you would be assuming that the entire population of NZ (4 million) is the catchment? The population of Auckland is a wee
137 drerx7: That's why the route is not aimed at them...Star hub to Star hub with a plane that was designed for missions such as this...long thin routes. Of cour
138 Rising: Not sure why anyone is surprised. They said they would reduce service and layoff employees. So they are. Cynics will point to any other reason for th
139 mariner: If the route isn't aimed at any O&D traffic I wouldn't put money in it. As I said, it can be forced to work through connections, but NZ/US is not
140 LAXdude1023: QF has found success at DFW. AKL and New Zealand is a much smaller market, but a 787 might do the trick. I do think UA got less enthusiastic about it
141 mariner: Whether US flies it or not is irrelevant to me. What worries me is that Air NZ might try it. mariner
142 CODC10: Again, this is due to the lack of a GUI overlay. FastAir automated the keystrokes that are so time consuming in native-mode SHARES. I certainly hope
144 MillwallSean: I heard that this route was a no go over a year ago and wrote so in one or two New Zealand aviation threads. The main reason being that there is not e
145 sydscott: I understand that. That's why airports te size of DFW and IAH have sprung up because of their ability to expand their infrastructure and to allow com
146 mariner: For the reasons I've given above in posts #136 and 138. I would have thought Qantas was already entrenched at DFW. I simply don't see the point of AK
147 peanuts: You still need a healthy dose of O&D traffic for the hub to hub to work. We're not talking flying from FRA-EWR here guys. This is a ULH between AK
148 FlyASAGuy2005: You're answering your own question there buddy...it's been 50 years; let's move on. Times change. Look at the mess that is JFK/LGA all thanks to the
149 IrishAyes: Well, you've stated mostly fixed facts about population sizes and an opinion, but I don't really see how that is tied with your concern that NZ will
150 RyanairGuru: I don't know a single Australian who wants to go to Texas either. But I know a lot who want to go to somewhere in the USA that isn't California. For
151 sydscott: I mean in terms of passenger flows from Australa which NZ will need for their IAH service. There is plenty of evidence around about the number of pax
152 RyanairGuru: I agree. Of the top of my head, I think that in terms of frequent flyers DJ+SQ+NZ in Aus and UA in the US > than QF+AA
153 mariner: I don't get the comparison to Qantas and DFW. Air NZ doesn't carry near the volumes of business traffic that Qantas does. I simply don't understand w
154 gigneil: All I know is that this is lining up as I hoped for in my mind but was afraid would not happen. I really thought the CO executives would cherrypick th
155 RyanairGuru: I know that you've spent a lot of time in the USA, but have you ever tried to fly to a secondary market on the Eastern Seaboard? I have and I can tel
156 mariner: Everything you say may be a good reason for Qantas to fly to DFW (although I know very few people who want to go directly to ORF and only to ORF). I'
157 sydscott: Oil & Gas, that's who NZ would be aiming their service at. Forget the tourists if you like, it's Engineers and Executives coming from BP America,
158 mariner: Most of the high level traffic there would want First Class (hello, Qantas) or company aircraft and while there may be mid-level traffic, I wouldn't
159 RyanairGuru: Let's just agree to disagree on this one
160 airbazar: When CO announced this route they were not in *A so that argument is flawed. It's also flawed because calling AKL a hub in this context is overreachi
161 drerx7: The infrastructure that was limited at HOU was limited by runway length, it could not comfortably handle the larger longer range aircraft with decent
162 CALMSP: correct. The DEN-NRT has been available for internal for quite some time prior to the announcement of WN looking for service at HOU.
163 drerx7: Ah-HAH!!! Now let the speculation begin... I read on a thread here some time ago that IAH-AMS is supposed to be going 787... If its a new route - my
165 NZ107: In today's paper down here in Auckland: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10810133 Love the big picture of the CONT
166 peanuts: Well, if any decision maker at UA in Chicago read this article, I hope their cheeks turn red from embarrassment. You got a poor country down under al
167 ZK-NBT: It does say in that article AKL airport will continue to talk with UA about other routes. Personally I can't see them from LAX or SFO with NZ flying
168 strfyr51: Because we're Not flying IAH-AKL?? Please!!! That's a LOSS leader route. A plan for Sure losses! Let ANZ fly the route if it's guaranteed to be THAT
169 kiwiandrew: Yes, they were. They announced it in May 2010, which was a little over 6 months after they entered *A.
170 gasman: Hmmm. I wonder if UA management realised they would've had a captive audience in the form of disgruntled NZ frequent fiers?
171 gemuser: Very few of whom they would have picked up with an AKL-IAH route. Now AKL-LAX/SFO that would be a different story! Gemuser
172 sydscott: I don't necessarily agree with that. I think a lay flat business product would be perfectly acceptable like what NZ and QF have in the Skybed Mark 2.
173 mariner: I don't think it's a case of being desperate - within my experience, it just goes with the territory. Once when I had to fly SXM-BNE immediately, bec
174 point2point: It's still early here (not on my second cup of coffee yet), but from what I can recall there is about $2M (give or take) on the table as incentive fr
175 hohd: If UA does not expand at IAH, then other country airlines will start adding services, just like EK, QR, SQ etc. I think UA could have reduced the impa
176 strfyr51: IF the Merger HADN'T happened this would all be academic also!! But it ISN'T so they need to find a way around it too Since WHEN does a CEO kowtow to
177 drerx7: True...Gary Kelly did show up to the city hall hearing though to present his case. Well, perhaps...that would have been ideal if there was not alread
178 mariner: That $2 million has been available for about 10/12 years for certain nominated cities, of which NRT was one. Mexicana got $1 million (first year) for
179 thomasphoto60: Their loss. Having spent several years in Aussie myself, I have to concur that for the average Aussie visitor to the US, few venture further east of
180 RyanairGuru: I agree 100%. Having spent a sizable amount of my childhood in VA/NC I think that it is such a shame that international visitors (not just Australian
181 strfyr51: True! But that being said?? I've NEVER EVER seen One thing that would make someone from outside of the USA want to visit HOUSTON.. Few if anybody not
182 FlyingSicilian: Houston gets millions of foreign visitors a year, who shop, go to museums, the theatre, and the Rodeo (the worlds largest( draws big on the foreign c
183 thomasphoto60: WOW........simply........WOW! Think you pretty much missed the point of the last two posts. It was not about Texas or Houston specifically, but how v
184 RyanairGuru: I know, I know. If you look up the thread you will see several Antipodean posters (myself included) saying we don't know anyone who wants to go to Te
185 sccutler: Funny. Was at a wedding this last weekend in the Texas hill country, numerous Aussies in attendance (groom is Australian). Pretty much all f them had
186 mah4546: New York, Miami, Chicago, Orlando, Tampa and D.C.
187 mogandoCI: Can't argue with the rest of the list, but why would NYC bound pax not use QF's through service of SYD/MEL/BNE-LAX-JFK ?
188 RWA380: I doubt we will see UA at AKL anytime soon, NZ is a better airline to NZ, UA is not the preferred carrier against foreign carriers who mostly offer a
189 drerx7: Still no 'official' press release from UA on the IAH-AKL issue...hopefully, they will use the cancellation of the route with the coupling of the route
190 hohd: It is true not just for Aussies that not many want to visit Texas. Internationally, Houston is better known than Dallas (Dallas is better known in US/
191 LAXdude1023: Thats debatable. I would almost argue the opposite. I think it depends on the region. In the end, I think it can be negligible. But I do agree that T
192 thomasphoto60: Again, it's their loss. As for which city in TX has more int'l "cache", well as a Houstonian, it really pains me to say this, but Dallas is probably
193 drerx7: Yea, that is debateable about which is better known, but spot on about visitors and the leverage. I live in Houston, born and raised, and I have trav
194 LAXdude1023: Take it from me, I think thats a good thing. I spent a good chunk of my life in the Los Angeles area and I like being able to go out and not run into
195 toxtethogrady: Actually, the north side of B represents an opportunity for the City; if they can figure out a way to reclaim the gates from Continental (underutiliz
196 kgaiflyer: The only large city in Texas I'd say that's true of is El Paso (which has no large malls, few high-end stores, and is just *beginning* to get casinos
197 IrishAyes: It's really not a vis-a-vis comparison to place DFW/AA and IAH/UA side by side and draw similar conclusions. Although there are indeed similarities b
198 mogandoCI: Conventions are "work". I think he meant few go to Dallas and Houston purely for tourism purposes, which is true relative to SFO, LAX, NYC, CHI, MIA,
199 YoungDon: In my travels, it seems that internationals (particularly from Latin America, Africa, and Asia) know Houston better, but amongst Americans there's no
200 drerx7: Yep, besides the fact that the oil and gas industry is centered around Houston though...Houston is somewhat Hollywood unfriendly, that's an issue I h
201 strfyr51: let's hold on here, UAL is NOT going to, or ABOUT to leave Houston. Aside from the Mexico routes which we ALSO fly from IAD, EWR, ORD Denver and LAX.
202 thomasphoto60: Sure he could have, do a i80 and walk out the door.[Edited 2012-06-05 15:54:41]
203 drerx7: Well, legally, the City of Houston really did not have much recourse to challenge what WN wanted to do. I think that aspect of the whole debacle has
204 sydscott: That may be true of the package market from North Asia but it's not true generally. People get around far more than you would think. I would speculat
205 RyanairGuru: What I (and other posters) said was "I don't know anybody who wants to go to Texas". I don't personally know all 22 million of us Really? As I've all
206 COflyerBOS: I think YoungDon hit it out of the park, especially with regards to Aussies and Texans being similar type of people. In all of my travels, Aussies and
207 RWA380: I have connected hundreds of times at DFW, never once stayed, so this Sept I'm flying NK down to see what it's like. Everyone says we are nuts, 'til
208 toxtethogrady: We'll get back to that when the Houston hub is bigger than Charlotte once again.
209 thomasphoto60: Hmmmmm....Sept visit, might be a tad warm. Get Dallas out of your system, then hit the road and see TEXAS. While the host of this show is a bit goofy
210 LAXdude1023: To me Dallas and Houston arent really Texan. Houston is too international and Dallas is too American thanks to their economies. Both are too diverse
211 toxtethogrady: You sound like the kind of customer Smisek should have been happy to get his hands on. Sadly, he thinks domestic connects (which is what a large prop
212 YoungDon: I could imagine that the more rural areas of SoCal would be very familiar to Australians, and I didn't mean to imply that Australians wouldn't feel c
213 peanuts: Slightly off topic but I didn't want to start a new thread on it... From previous threads (which I can't find) what was the consensus on whether or no
214 gemuser: From*memory* I think it could but would need the auxiliary fuel tanks (that DL has not ordered), which rendered it a questionable economic case. Has
215 mogandoCI: If I were a biz pax coming all the way from Sydney, I'd imagine the luxury and comfort of QF 747 or AA flagship transcon service far outweigh the sli
216 LAXdude1023: Yes, but youll be enjoying those great UA 747's from LAX/SFO-SYD.
217 mogandoCI: ATL-SYD is only barely shorter than EWR-SIN, and is a full 707 miles longer than SYD-DFW ... I'd imagine even the 77L with aux tanks require a very l
218 usflyguy: Truly Texan? Texas has always been a very diverse state and since it was once a part of Mexico and is a border state, it's always had a very large La
219 LAXdude1023: Thats a better way of wording it. Yes, thats what I meant.
220 ikramerica: I can see the argument about Texas and Australia considering the bigness, the outdoors nature of Texas residents (non-city folk), the concentration i
221 mogandoCI: Yes, totally loving those overhead projector screens .... not
222 RyanairGuru: I think you've knocked it on the head... I can see the cultural (and stereotypical) argument about the similarity between Australia and Texas. The who
223 thegeek: That certainly makes it interesting. Although it should be noted that the 744ER doesn't do the QF at all comfortably. Ordering even one of the aux ta
224 strfyr51: Aux fuel tanks are NEVER easily installed or removed. when they're installed it's usually a permaent situation only removed at a heavy maintenence ch
225 RWA380: I chose my days based on what was left from the intro sale fares when NK announced the route, just one night, but two full days. I expect it to be ho
226 thegeek: Yes it is, but where is it going to get them? Buy new and you have an aircraft with no resale and ordinary economics. Would such a small sub fleet be
227 RWA380: I can understand that, with the 777 being a great cargo beast as well as a great passenger transport. I wonder what the exact point of an ULH route i
228 LAXdude1023: Its not too bad of a drive. Hard 8 is very close to DFW. Warwick is in Oak Lawn which is a very nice area. Its our (pardon the expression) "gayborhoo
229 LJ: Doesn't seem to happen anytime soon. W12 will be 762s and 764s (unless they're going to change something). However, you're correct UA did announce th
230 flyingcolors78: This announcement is not surprising. I can see where it may be more prudent to deploy the 787-8 in other markets for the time being. I would actually
231 thegeek: I never understood why CO would want to merge with UA. CO was profitable, but UA couldn't make money in spite of much effort to turn around the busin
232 thomasphoto60: A question a many of Houstonian and CO regulars have been asking since the first rumors first started to surface around '09'.
233 LAXdude1023: At most, they may be able to make ATL-SYD. The others, absolutely not. Even then, I not sure ATL-SYD. Somebody started a rumor on Anet about it, but
234 thegeek: I'm sure you are correct on that point. But why couldn't it make money flying to MEL? Eastern US destinations without direct flights from LAX on AA c
235 strfyr51: Heck that's no mystery! CO "thought" THEY would be doing the taking OVER and THEY thought all of it would be IN HOUSTON. Even Bethune talked of it un
236 SA7700: This thread has run its course and will now be locked for any further contributions. Any posts added after the thread lock will be deleted for houseke
Sponsor Message: 
From Puerto Rico, joined Nov 2005, 844 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8739 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2375 posts, 
From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 390 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
