Jump to content

Featured Replies

10-15 years their maybe no more airlines unless you are willing to pay 800-2k a ticket.

  • Replies 833
  • Views 43k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think some people are just wondering what the market could be with normal conditions

 

This is correct, but it's also the very point of dispute for MD88. He maintains that the conditions at CVG never were "abnormal". His contention is that "highest fares" does not entail "very high fares", and that "very high fares" never existed at CVG.

 

I found some numbers, which maybe aren't the most informative, but the most obvious reading of them clearly contradicts MD88's claim. So far, I haven't seen the numbers he is using.

Did Delta require the higher pricing to make the CVG hub viable, or were they just doing it because they could?  Lowering prices would have brought CVG more business, but would have lowered per passenger revenue.  The question may be, does the equilibrium point between passenger volume and fare level support a sustainable hub operation?  Hubs must have major fixed costs.

uotopicbolt.jpg

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

^ How is this not on topic? It's directly relevant to all the news that has been going on with CVG and Delta for the past many years, including very recent news.

 

Did Delta require the higher pricing to make the CVG hub viable, or were they just doing it because they could? Lowering prices would have brought CVG more business, but would have lowered per passenger revenue. The question may be, does the equilibrium point between passenger volume and fare level support a sustainable hub operation? Hubs must have major fixed costs.

 

This is the open question. I don't doubt that the level of past service was too much to sustain. Is the current level of service too much? The point is, we don't know, because service and prices were inflated for so long that there's been a shift in the culture, and one that cannot be simply reversed.

 

MD88 and perhaps MTS maintain that there never was anything abnormal going on, so what you see is what you get, in terms of O&D at CVG.

 

Their claim is stronger because they say we know the answer to your questions definitively. The rest of us are saying it's hard/impossible to tell, but the numbers you get for O&D are definitely a bit lower than they would be without the airport's history. We just don't know how much lower.

^ How is this not on topic? It's directly relevant to all the news that has been going on with CVG and Delta for the past many years, including very recent news.

 

Did Delta require the higher pricing to make the CVG hub viable, or were they just doing it because they could?  Lowering prices would have brought CVG more business, but would have lowered per passenger revenue.  The question may be, does the equilibrium point between passenger volume and fare level support a sustainable hub operation?  Hubs must have major fixed costs.

 

This is the open question. I don't doubt that the level of past service was too much to sustain. Is the current level of service too much? The point is, we don't know, because service and prices were inflated for so long that there's been a shift in the culture, and one that cannot be simply reversed.

 

MD88 and perhaps MTS maintain that there never was anything abnormal going on, so what you see is what you get, in terms of O&D at CVG.

 

Their claim is stronger because they say we know the answer to your questions definitively. The rest of us are saying it's hard/impossible to tell, but the numbers you get for O&D are definitely a bit lower than they would be without the airport's history. We just don't know how much lower.

 

I reiterate... we are talking about AVERAGE FARES.  There are many reasons why the average fare at CVG is/was higher.  One reason is certain stage lengths of certain flights.  For instance, back in the day CVG had alot of very short haul flights - some that were flown with mainline equipment.  CVG to LEX, DAY, SDF, CMH, EVV, HSV...  Now believe it or not, there are actually PAX that fly DAY to CVG or LEX to CVG as O&D.  These fares are typically exhorbitantly high.  So when talking about average fares (and CVG's were high), these city pairs will skew the average.  What really needs to addressed to be accurate is weighted averages.  I have some info, some of which is probably proprietary which shows that average fares at CVG fluctuated wildly these past 10-years.  In fact there are some years where the avg. CVG fare is on par with CLE, CLT, EWR and PIT (before it was dehubbed).  Then there were a couple of years where it was stratospheric.  What's also interesting is that CLE has higher average fares than DTW and MSP for the most part.  CAK and DAY do indeed have low avg fares as you migh suspect with CMH and IND somewhere in between. 

 

Now, when delaing with SPECIFIC city pairs, not the average of all pairs, CVG's affordability was on par with other airports.  However, I will admit that the percentage of "cheap" seats on some pairs was relatively low, but then so was the amount of "premium" seats actually purchased.

 

So keep in mind we are talking about averages. 

^ How is this not on topic? It's directly relevant to all the news that has been going on with CVG and Delta for the past many years, including very recent news.

 

Did Delta require the higher pricing to make the CVG hub viable, or were they just doing it because they could? Lowering prices would have brought CVG more business, but would have lowered per passenger revenue. The question may be, does the equilibrium point between passenger volume and fare level support a sustainable hub operation? Hubs must have major fixed costs.

 

A discussion about Cleveland's Airport and why people travel to God knows where vs. where God travels to is relevant to this thread how?

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

^ CLE (and other airports) have been mentioned, but only in comparison to CVG. More specifically, in comparison of prices and O&D traffic, which is exactly what's at issue behind Delta's maneuvering at CVG.

 

MD88, I'm glad you've finally gone a step beyond just flat-out stating "there's never been a significant difference." However, without seeing numbers, all I can do is go on unscientific data based on my own and others' experiences, plus the data I was able to find which considers only per-mile costs.

 

Your explanation of why per-mile cost is not the best indicator of average fares is a priori plausible, which is why never committed myself to the data as "proof" of anything, just the best evidence available. Still, the data does jibe with my personal experience, and that of many other people I know (and many others on this board).

 

It seems pretty weird to me that I don't see anyone on here from Cincinnati saying "ehh, the fares were never that bad." Forgive me for finding it quite implausible that we all arrived at the same statistically inaccurate conclusion, time and again, as we accumulated hours on the road for apparently meager savings.

^ CLE (and other airports) have been mentioned, but only in comparison to CVG. More specifically, in comparison of prices and O&D traffic, which is exactly what's at issue behind Delta's maneuvering at CVG.

 

MD88, I'm glad you've finally gone a step beyond just flat-out stating "there's never been a significant difference." However, without seeing numbers, all I can do is go on unscientific data based on my own and others' experiences, plus the data I was able to find which considers only per-mile costs.

 

Your explanation of why per-mile cost is not the best indicator of average fares is a priori plausible, which is why never committed myself to the data as "proof" of anything, just the best evidence available. Still, the data does jibe with my personal experience, and that of many other people I know (and many others on this board).

 

It seems pretty weird to me that I don't see anyone on here from Cincinnati saying "ehh, the fares were never that bad." Forgive me for finding it quite implausible that we all arrived at the same statistically inaccurate conclusion, time and again, as we accumulated hours on the road for apparently meager savings.

 

O.K., the economist side of me will apologize for implying that your savings was meager.  Obviously if you drive 125 miles to catch a flight the savings is more than likely worth it.  However, the meaning of savings is relative.  This is price elasticity.  For some, $50.00 might justify a drive up to DAY, while for others $300.00 is chump change.  In the end it all comes down to the market that the airline (Delta in this case) is trying to capture.  I do know from the data that I've seen (which I stated above) the avg fares at CVG have been all over the place for the past decade.

^ CLE (and other airports) have been mentioned, but only in comparison to CVG. More specifically, in comparison of prices and O&D traffic, which is exactly what's at issue behind Delta's maneuvering at CVG.

 

That's pushing it (as the relevance of Cleveland instead of other regional airports impacts on CVG isn't really "with topic" about news from CVG) but I'll let it slide and take its course.

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Metro          Daily O&D      total     total O&D    O&D %  # of Airports
New York	 127,801   51,883,694   23,131,981  44.60%  6 airports
Los Angeles      104,723   34,789,171   18,954,863  54.50%  4 airports
Chicago	         86,821    39,281,585   15,714,601  40.00%  2 airports
Miami	         79,636    31,262,044   14,414,116  46.10%  3 airports
Las Vegas        73,138    20,224,090   13,237,978  65.50%	
San Francisco    68,838    22,139,378   12,459,678  56.30%  2 airports
Orlando          68,040    18,211,975   12,315,240  67.60%  2 airports
Dallas/Ft.Worth  59,577    31,149,065   10,783,437  34.60%  2 airports
Atlanta	         56,645    43,008,154	10,252,745  23.80%	
Phoenix	         54,040    18,968,897	 9,781,240  51.60%	
Denver	         53,747    24,337,554	 9,728,207  40.00%	
Washington       52,832    19,915,669	 9,562,592  48.00%  2 airports
Boston	         44,673    12,068,312    8,085,813  67.00%	
Seattle	         43,376    14,787,443	 7,851,056  53.10%	
Philadelphia     41,860    14,878,298    7,576,660  50.90%	
Houston	         39,021    23,606,848    7,062,801  29.90%  2 airports
Tampa	         39,021     9,348,162	 7,062,801  75.60%
Baltimore        38,901    10,001,992	 7,041,081  70.30%	
San Diego        36,242     8,171,820	 6,559,802  80.30%	
Minneapolis      34,399    16,173,119	 6,226,219  38.50%	
Detroit	         33,128    15,715,346    5,996,168  38.20%	
Salt Lake City   22,696     9,988,837	 4,107,976  41.10%	
St. Louis        22,361     6,258,829	 4,047,341  64.70%	
Portland         22,144     6,116,995	 4,008,064  65.50%	
Sacramento       20,175     4,356,274    3,651,675  83.80%	
Kansas City      19,973     4,685,648	 3,615,113  77.20%	
Charlotte        19,562    17,215,648	 3,540,722  20.60%	
Raleigh/Durham   18,585     4,291,234	 3,363,885  78.40%	
San Jose         18,581     4,039,922    3,363,161  83.30%	
New Orleans      18,378     3,977,881	 3,326,418  83.60%	
Austin	         17,189     3,915,683	 3,111,209  79.50%	
Pittsburgh       16,913     3,922,714    3,061,253  78.00%	
San Antonio      16,777     3,830,211	 3,036,637  79.30%	
Nashville	 16,751     4,329,413	 3,031,931  70.00%	
Indianapolis     16,377     4,155,161    2,964,237  71.30%	
Riverside	 14,623     3,302,863    2,646,763  80.10%  2 airports
Columbus	 13,328     3,028,930	 2,412,368  79.60%	
Jacksonville     12,741     2,835,324	 2,306,121  81.30%	
Milwaukee        12,541     3,560,224	 2,269,921  63.80%	
Hartford	 12,099     3,056,490    2,189,919  71.70%	
Cleveland	 11,767     4,719,504    2,129,827  45.10%	
Buffalo	         11,662     2,536,000	 2,110,822  83.20%	
Providence       10,617     2,168,664	 1,921,677  88.60%	
Norfolk	          9,343     2,140,859	 1,691,083  79.00%  2 airports
Cincinnati	  7,976     5,416,171    1,443,656  26.70%	
Memphis	          7,408     4,855,090	 1,340,848  27.60%	
Oklahoma City	  6,763     1,643,426	 1,224,103  74.50%	
Louisville	  6,697     1,593,425	 1,212,157  76.10%	
Richmond	  6,617     1,608,958	 1,197,677  74.40%	
Birmingham	  5,845     1,444,029	 1,057,945  73.30%

 

First 6 months of 2009.

 

http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/X-50%20Role_files/consumerairfarereport.htm

  • 2 months later...

Comair to shrink fleet, staffing

Business Courier of Cincinnati

Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 9:28am EDT  |  Modified: Thursday, September 2, 2010, 5:00am

 

 

With no buyer in sight, Comair Inc. said it will reduce the size of its fleet down to a 44-aircraft operation and cut staff in an effort to lower its cost structure.

 

In a memo sent to employees Wednesday morning, the Northern Kentucky-based airline said it will entirely eliminate its aging 50-seat aircraft between now and 2012. The airline will keep flying its 65-seat CRJ-700s and 76-seat CRJ-900s, bringing its total fleet from nearly 100 planes to just 44 aircraft. Those aircraft will all have two-class cabins, which is something customers prefer, a Comair spokeswoman said.

 

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/08/30/daily24.html

  • 1 year later...

News Release

Comair to Cease Operations

No significant changes to schedules or locations served for Delta customers

Jul 27, 2012

 

ATLANTA, July 27, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Delta Air Lines (NYSE: DAL) today announced its subsidiary, Comair, Inc. will cease operations after Sept. 29, 2012.

 

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20090202/DELTALOGO )

 

In a memo issued today to the Officers and Directors of Delta Air Lines, Don Bornhorst, Senior Vice President of Delta Connection, said:

 

"While regional flying has and will remain a key component of Delta's network, customer expectations and the unit costs of regional flying have evolved.  In response, Delta recently announced its plans to reduce the total number of regional jets in its network while adding more mainline flying.  This includes reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets from nearly 350 aircraft to 125 or fewer in the upcoming years.  As a result of this reduction and changes to its customer-focused business strategy, Delta has made the difficult decision to cease Comair's operations."

 

Ryan Gumm, President of Comair, communicated Delta's decision this morning to Comair employees in a memo, the full text of which is included below.

 

The discontinuation of Comair's operations will not result in any significant changes to Delta's network, which has enough flexibility to accommodate these changes.  Currently, Comair accounts for approximately one percent of Delta's network capacity.  There will be no disruption to customers and no significant adjustments to Delta's flight schedule or locations served.  All customers who travel on the Delta network, whether on Delta Connection flights or mainline aircraft, can continue to make travel plans with Delta as they have in the past.

 

Cincinnati will continue to be an important market in Delta's worldwide network.  Over the past several years, working with community leaders, Delta has right-sized capacity at Cincinnati to better match service to local passenger demand.  Cincinnati is now a profitable market for Delta and the city continues to enjoy over 120 peak daily flights, with non-stop service to 49 destinations.  No reductions in the number of Delta flights are planned at Cincinnati as a result of this decision.

To                            All Comair Employees

From                        Ryan Gumm, President

Subject                    Comair to Cease Operations

Date                        July 27, 2012

 

All,

 

Today, I am writing to let you know that Delta has made the difficult decision to cease Comair's operations after September 29, 2012.

 

Delta recently announced its intent to reduce the overall number of 50-seat regional jets in its network from nearly 350 to 125 or fewer in light of the significant changes in the economic and competitive conditions in the airline industry.  We believed this announcement would have a negative impact on Comair because we operate some of the oldest 50-seat aircraft in the Delta Connection fleet, which also have the highest unit cost per flight hour.  And, in fact, Delta has decided to remove the remaining 16 Comair 50-seaters from the Delta network, leaving Comair with only 28 aircraft in scheduled service.  This further reduction of Comair's active fleet will only create higher unit costs, which equates to a business model that is no longer sustainable in this competitive regional environment.

 

I understand that today's news is very difficult and raises many questions for you and your family.  Human Resources is prepared to directly assist you during this time.  They will post a memo and other documents on the Human Resources Epic page to keep you informed of the assistance available and to help answer many of your questions.  We will also have staff available over the weekend to answer questions if needed.  If after reviewing the information on Epic you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out to your departmental leadership as well.

 

The discontinuation of Comair's operations is in no way a failure or a reflection of your work – it is an unfortunate necessity due to the economic limitations of our aging aircraft, cost structure, the long-term outlook for 50-seat aircraft, and our challenging industry and economy.  The quality of our operations has continued to be outstanding during our lengthy restructuring efforts, and I am honored to have had the opportunity to lead such a committed team.  I am asking that each of you recognize the importance of remaining focused on safety and the job at hand as we continue operations throughout the wind-down period.  Your continued commitment and your dedication to a safe and reliable operation is a testament to the professional team we have built here at Comair.

 

 

How could it not be profitable with the highest fairs in the nation???

  • 4 months later...

Delta will cease nonstop service to Washington/Dulles and Oklahoma City from CVG in March 2013.

Delta will cease nonstop service to Washington/Dulles and Oklahoma City from CVG in March 2013.

 

Omaha as opposed to Oklahoma City --- we lost OKC a couple years back.  I've been kind of surprised OMA hung on this long.

 

A colleague of mine flies CVG-OMA on DL about once a month --- the prices were always about 40% cheaper for him to route CVG-MEM/DTW/MSP-OMA versus direct anyway.

United mainline service is leaving CVG in February next year....Not sure if United Express service will be staying on at this pont...

This has to be the most depressing Ohio-related thread on this site.  At this rate, CVG will be the smallest, most feeble, least accommodating "international" airport in the Western Hemisphere by 2014.

Yep pains me to see.....Worked fo rboth  United and Delta at CVG...Place is a ghosttown of its former self.

United mainline service is leaving CVG in February next year....Not sure if United Express service will be staying on at this pont...

 

Sorry for being ignorant, but what are the "mainline" and "express" services? And together do they make up all of United's flights in & out of CVG?

Mainline is serviced by the larger aircraft out of in case Cincy 737..... Express service is the smaller 50 seat jets....

^ Okay, thanks. I usually ride on the smaller jets, so hopefully they aren't going away.

United's 1 mainline flight here is a A319/320 that comes from Chicago on the last flight in and leaves on the first flight out. My understanding is that this is done primarily because it's cheaper to RON (remain over night) the plane at CVG than at ORD. Also, lots of business travelers on that first flight out in the AM to connect at United megahub at ORD. The Airbus also has first class which appeals to United's frequent flyers. I would not be surprised if this is a seasonal adjustment...that Airbus may be moving onto a route than is ramped up seasonally like CLE-RSW or other snowbird destinations.

 

I don't think there is even a chance that United would leave CVG at all. Way too much lucrative business travel here.

All I know is UAL CVG employees have been told service out of CVG will stop in February....There are United mainline employees at CVG.

To beat a dead horse: What a failure passenger air has become at CVG.  I'm sure it has been said and analyzed what with the departure of Chiquita but it is/will be a huge liability for attracting and retaining our large corporations.

Well, if misery loves company, take comfort in knowing that you're not alone with CVG......

 

http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/Aviation%20Industry%20Performance%5E9-24-12.pdf

 

Of note.....

 

Yet there has also been a significant reduction in service at some hub airports and in short-haul flights (i.e., less than 500 miles), which in turn is limiting the choices of many air travelers.

 

Further details of these changes in business conditions, airline actions, and their impacts are described below. Ultimately, the trends presented in this report suggest that the changes in the number of airlines controlling the industry, fare increases, and capacity reductions that began in 2008 are not a brief phase, but rather are signs of a greater shift in the industry that will remain for years to come.

 

The recent resurgence in prices has pushed fuel expenses to 35 percent of airline operating costs in 2011, near the all-time high of 40 percent experienced in 2008 (see figure 2). In contrast, fuel was only 10 percent of operating costs in 2001. Fuel is now the largest single component of airline costs, exceeding payroll and fringe benefits costs—with U.S. airlines spending $31 billion for fuel in 2011 or triple the expense of 2000.

 

READ MORE AT THE ABOVE LINK

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

^ We kind of are alone. From that report:

 

The most significant decreases were experienced at Cincinnati (-63.1 percent), Pittsburgh (-40.1 percent), and Memphis (-35.5 percent).

 

We had a 57% greater percent decline than Pittsburgh, who came in second place for lost flights (6/07-6/12).

Do you know why United may be leaving CVG? This is contrary to the thought that the hole Delta left could be filled by other airlines.

If I had to hazard a guess I think mainline will pull out and United Express will service CVG....Cutting cosst as Express is cheaper for UAL bottom line to run out of a smaller station.Just a guess but this scenario has been considered  for quite some time and is not a real suprise to UAL CVG employees

 

^ We kind of are alone. From that report:

 

The most significant decreases were experienced at Cincinnati (-63.1 percent), Pittsburgh (-40.1 percent), and Memphis (-35.5 percent).

 

 

You're alone at the top (bottom?) but not alone in when it comes to sharp decline of air traffic. And while CVG finished a $250 million expansion the same month Delta announced its first round of cutbacks, CVG wasn't the loser of the biggest bet made on future expansion. That was St. Louis which demolished 2,000 homes and businesses for a $1 billion expansion.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

^ We kind of are alone. From that report:

 

The most significant decreases were experienced at Cincinnati (-63.1 percent), Pittsburgh (-40.1 percent), and Memphis (-35.5 percent).

 

We had a 57% greater percent decline than Pittsburgh, who came in second place for lost flights (6/07-6/12).

 

That report is from September. I wonder how much the numbers have changed since then with the announced cuts at Memphis?  No matter what the numbers say both cities have lost a lot simply based on geography.

I always hear of people saying CVG has some of the highest landing fees in the country, but honestly I don't think that is the case.  The landing fees this year were $3.981 per thousand pounds and will be $3.975 next year.  Anyone know where this puts us compared to other airports?

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.