June 17, 200816 yr I don't see how any business can stay open if they continue to lose money. I know if i didn't make $1 or even 20k i wouldn't stay in business. Airlines are on borrowed time. Same with the auto industry.
June 18, 200816 yr Can you imagine if several metro airports suddenly...CLOSED? I'm not sure what you are trying to infer, but if it's that we will see several metro airports close in the next few years, that seems very unlikely. Cleveland, Covington, Columbus, Akron-Canton, Dayton and even Youngstown's operations aren't going anywhere soon. They may be reduced in certain areas, but there will be commercial flights in and out of these airports for the forseeable future. The only airport that is getting close to losing all of its commercial air service is Toledo, which may be the worst run airport in the Midwest. Toledo is too large of a market to be applying for Essential Air Service, yet it has done so in the past in order to survive even when oil was less the $50/barrel. Even if (and its still a big if) Toledo were to lose all commercial airservice, the airport wouldn't close. Toledo has a fairly decent sized cargo operation that would still operate along with general aviation aircraft that are based at Express. For example, when Youngstown-Warren lacked commercial air service for a decade, the airport remained open because it still served GA. Modified: I took out the last sentence for civility.
June 18, 200816 yr Don't be an ass, buddy. I've already contributed to this topic before. Based on the responses, I don't believe I scared anyone. I'd prefer not to have further discussion about your weak assessment of my participation. It was just a hypothetical, as many airlines will be merging with others to stay afloat. Others will put out of certain regions. Airports will have to consolidate their operations. There are other options for cargo transport too. Airports are expensive operations. In twenty to thirty years, some airports might be better left for dead.
June 18, 200816 yr Don't be an ass, buddy. I've already contributed to this topic before. Based on the responses, I don't believe I scared anyone. I'd prefer not to have further discussion about your weak assessment of my participation. It was just a hypothetical, as many airlines will be merging with others to stay afloat. Others will put out of certain regions. Airports will have to consolidate their operations. There are other options for cargo transport too. Airports are expensive operations. In twenty to thirty years, some airports might be better left for dead. You didn't say 20 or 30 years originally. You said, imagine if several metro airports suddenly CLOSED. I apologize if I took you the wrong way, but I don't think my interpretation was that for off base from what you initially posted. Modified: Again, toning it down
June 18, 200816 yr Don't be an ass, buddy. I've already contributed to this topic before. Based on the responses, I don't believe I scared anyone. I'd prefer not to have further discussion about your weak assessment of my participation. It was just a hypothetical, as many airlines will be merging with others to stay afloat. Others will put out of certain regions. Airports will have to consolidate their operations. There are other options for cargo transport too. Airports are expensive operations. In twenty to thirty years, some airports might be better left for dead. You didn't say 20 or 30 years originally. You said, imagine if several metro airports suddenly CLOSED. I apologize if I took you the wrong way, but I don't think my interpretation was that for off base from what you initially posted. Modified: Again, toning it down Point taken. Handshakes and safetybelts. I do believe that many airports will age so much, and there won't be much incentive to keep some of them functional. If they're primarily used for freight, and regions begin to work in cooperation with each other, what would be the advantage to having two or three large airports with 100 miles or less of each other? Ground transportation would make up for that.
June 18, 200816 yr Don't be an ass, buddy. I've already contributed to this topic before. Based on the responses, I don't believe I scared anyone. I'd prefer not to have further discussion about your weak assessment of my participation. It was just a hypothetical, as many airlines will be merging with others to stay afloat. Others will put out of certain regions. Airports will have to consolidate their operations. There are other options for cargo transport too. Airports are expensive operations. In twenty to thirty years, some airports might be better left for dead. You didn't say 20 or 30 years originally. You said, imagine if several metro airports suddenly CLOSED. I apologize if I took you the wrong way, but I don't think my interpretation was that for off base from what you initially posted. Modified: Again, toning it down Point taken. Handshakes and safetybelts. I do believe that many airports will age so much, and there won't be much incentive to keep some of them functional. If they're primarily used for freight, and regions begin to work in cooperation with each other, what would be the advantage to having two or three large airports with 100 miles or less of each other? Ground transportation would make up for that. Japan has cities right on top of each other in terms of American standards, has the best rail and transit systems in the world and they still keep a viable cargo/passenger commercial aircraft operation going...even at oil at $100+/barrel. So I haven't seen the low-end of viability yet, even if the American airline analyists for the most part are crying about the end of the industry. The problem I have (and continue to have with this thread) is that we are using the American standard to base the health of a worldwide system. Yet, the healtiest parts of the worldwide system, even before the rise in oil prices, aren't in the US. There are ways to adapt and survive, but most of the legacy carriers in North America would rather get another round of government help which means crying that the end is near and the ensuing media headlines posting as much.
June 18, 200816 yr Well, I'd say you're comparing apples and oranges here, if you're using Japan as an example. Are foreign air carriers going under like ours are? It seems that we're having a tougher time than Europe and China or Japan are. Their airlines aren't as subject to our economic problems as ours are, and we haven't seen many European carriers merging lately. The reason for crying that the end is near domestically is that it's hitting within a very short period of time. Other countries are weathering the rise in cost for effectively because they haven't had such low prices as we have over decades. I'd say that's reason enough for the domestic carriers to worry. I'd also disagree that "legacy carriers in North America *would rather* get another round of government help." While they reporting losses of several billion dollars annually, frankly, I don't think they *have* a choice. Some do, most don't.
June 18, 200816 yr Correct me if i'm wrong but don't all the other countries pay for the barrel of Oil @$139 USD? With that said Didn't they also pay it at $69 a barrel 2 years ago? I heard they have much higher taxes on their oil compared to what we have here in the US.
June 18, 200816 yr They pay for West Texas Intermediate crude at $139 or whatever the market price is that day. Although all oil is traded in dollars, if you're a EU country, in the UK or in some other nation where your currency has a better conversion rate with U.S. dollars, then you're trading your fewer units of your currency for more of our U.S. dollars to make the oil purchase. And not all oil is the same -- WTI is a sweet grade of high quality crude that requires less processing, so it's more valuable. A more sour grade of crude is Brent Crude, which is found in the North Sea oil fields. And there are a myriad other crudes you can buy on various mercantile exchanges that have varying prices. And in Europe, Japan and some other nations do have higher taxes on fuel, but not on crude. They tax refined gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, jet fuel, kerosene, natural gas, etc. etc. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 18, 200816 yr http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2008/06/16/daily18.html Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 9:54 AM CDT Fuel costs gobble 73 cents on every airline dollar Wichita Business Journal - from the Phoenix Business Journal Fuel costs eat up as much as 73 cents of every airline dollar, the head of the Air Transport Association said Monday. ATA CEO James May said fuel costs amount to $139 of the current U.S. average air fare of $191. That leaves airlines $52 to cover the rest of their costs. May made his comments before a U.S. Senate committee, adding the airline industry will lose $10 billion this year and its fuel costs will total $60 billion, up $20 billion from 2007. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 19, 200816 yr To finish off the Toledo discussion, if airports are to be closed it will be places where a serious hub/focus city exists close enough that makes a two bit airport not worth the continued investment for passenger traffic. This obviously happened as rail travel declined.
June 24, 200816 yr http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chicago-united-pilot-layoffs-uaua-jun23,0,554576.story United to lay off nearly 1,000 pilots this summer By Julie Johnsson | Tribune staff reporter 6:31 PM CDT, June 23, 2008 United Airlines told its pilots Monday that it intends to eliminate about 950 pilot jobs, starting at summer's end, when the Chicago-based carrier will begin grounding aircraft in large numbers. United, the nation's second-largest carrier, intends to send furlough notices to about 1,450 pilots with the least seniority, including those already on military or personal leaves of absence. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 26, 200816 yr I say let the airlines suffer. We cannot continue to bail them out. Let the strong survive.
June 26, 200816 yr www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-airline-passengersjun25,0,4120051.story chicagotribune.com You are now free to take a flying leap Air travel experts warn friendly skies are thing of the past By Jon Hilkevitch Tribune reporter June 25, 2008 Did you hear the one about the passenger who was charged an extra $15 by the airline to lose his first checked bag? And another $25 for a second bag mistakenly loaded onto an airliner to Calcutta instead of Cincinnati? That might sound like a Jay Leno monologue, but a disgruntled frequent flier delivered it at a forum Tuesday in Chicago sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation for consumers to air their gripes. More at link above:
June 26, 200816 yr bad news for Cincy and Cleveland coming out of the Airports Council International-North America marketing conference in Pittsburgh this week: In September, Cincy will lose 703 flights per week and Cleveland will lose 1,119 flights per week. The cuts are a result of dramatic fuel increases and are affecting airports across the country. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08178/892770-455.stm
June 26, 200816 yr Those numbers look like Delta and Continental are shutting down their 'Ohio' hubs.
June 26, 200816 yr something is wrong with the math. I can't put my finger on it. Yes, were aware we losing previously announced routes and Continental closed certain stations
June 27, 200816 yr Get used to the "new math". The US airline industry is headed for a volatile and frightening future. Every airline (even Southwest!) is going through a system-wide downsizing. There will be significant cuts everywhere. Tertiary hubs like Cincy and Cleveland will probably suffer more than most (besides small cities that lose air service altogether).
June 27, 200816 yr Get used to the "new math". The US airline industry is headed for a volatile and frightening future. Every airline (even Southwest!) is going through a system-wide downsizing. There will be significant cuts everywhere. Tertiary hubs like Cincy and Cleveland will probably suffer more than most (besides small cities that lose air service altogether). Where is Southwest downsizing? If anything they are moving planes to USAir and United hubs and attacking those two carriers on both coast. SW has ramped up in Denver (UA and Frontier hubs) and Philly (United and USAir hubs). Those numbers you posted do not make sense. The Gazzette has done some sloppy reporting While the impact of the cuts is still to be determined, Pittsburgh International is not losing as many flights as some comparable airports. Cleveland Hopkins, which has slightly more flights than Pittsburgh, will lose 1,119 flights per week and Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky will lose 703 flights per week. First of all Cleveland is a hub, Pittsburgh is barely a focus city. So to say "Cleveland which has slightly more flights" is BS. Even if this reporter meant "seats" instead of "flights" the number still would not make sense!
June 27, 200816 yr ^ Indeed, that's 50% of CLE's 2200 weekly flights. Upon further investigation this number is for non-stop flights only. It is possible that the number quoted by the Post-Gazette is correct.
June 27, 200816 yr ^ Indeed, that's 50% of CLE's 2200 weekly flights. Upon further investigation this number is for non-stop flights only. It is possible that the number quoted by the Post-Gazette is correct. All flights to and from cleveland are NON STOPS. that number is way to high.
June 28, 200816 yr I wonder what the implications are for business travel in the future. If it is too expensive, difficult to send people all over the country, how does this affect how companies staff, locate their offices and facilities? The amazing this about America is how inadequately prepared we are for paradigm shifts.
June 28, 200816 yr I wonder what the implications are for business travel in the future. If it is too expensive, difficult to send people all over the country, how does this affect how companies staff, locate their offices and facilities? The amazing this about America is how inadequately prepared we are for paradigm shifts. Just look at 9-11. Telecoms and video company's and alternative meeting company's prospered. There will be less travel to conventions that's for sure. Hell at one of our divisions, the CEO sent a memo stating that nobody is to purchase a first or business class ticket - period.
June 28, 200816 yr Yes, webinars are the rage now, but I would miss the hors d'oeuvres. Actually, I am lucky I got my conference in two weeks ago.
June 29, 200816 yr Also, Look at that what the cutback in Airlines is doing to Leisure destinations such as – Hawaii – South Florida – Vegas (who plans to increase ads) – Orlando As well as such (leisure) cities as San Diego Tampa Mexico City Los Angeles New Orleans It's only going to get worse.
June 29, 200816 yr I think more airlines will buy that new 700+ seater jet and fly less frequently between cities.
June 29, 200816 yr Actually I imagine conventions will go in two directions, big national one's in expensive cities will shrink while regional one's in a day's drive or less will begin to regain prominence. With video conferencing and the like, you could have 5 regional conventions for the price of bringing everyone to one city. Boeing's new Dreamliner will point the way to higher mileage jets as well.
June 29, 200816 yr Actually I imagine conventions will go in two directions, big national one's in expensive cities will shrink while regional one's in a day's drive or less will begin to regain prominence. With video conferencing and the like, you could have 5 regional conventions for the price of bringing everyone to one city. Boeing's new Dreamliner will point the way to higher mileage jets as well. I disagree. Boeings dreamliner is replacing some 767/747s, but it's delayed and with the airline industry shrinking, the plane will only replace planes on current routes.
June 29, 200816 yr I've found it is easier just to drive on some business trips. When I was traveling to Canada, round trip door to door was 6-7 hours. I could drive it in 9, traveling at my leisure. I like to drive and find it very relaxing. Company pays the going mileage rate up to the cheapest (non-advanced purchase) air fare for use of personal car. I also could get a rental. I could always get there cheaper than flying, without the stress of security or luggage restrictions. Only once all winter was driving difficult, but only a slight delay. Trip to Albany, Ga last week took me 8 hours connecting in Atlanta. Probably could drive it in 10-12? Might do that next time.
June 29, 200816 yr >well travelers have gotten spoiled with $99 fares. A lot of Libertarians pointed toward deregulation of the airlines as being soley responsible for how cheap flying became, but clearly the cheap price of oil in the 1990's was at least as big a reason for cheap tickets and expansion of the industry. Famously the airplanes involved in the terrorist attacks were less than half full.
June 29, 200816 yr Note that the preceding was written by a NYT reporter in Toledo. That was a Page One article in Saturday's NYT complete with a forlorn picture of Toledo Express Airport. A consultant friend of mine who does a lot of flying around the world made the following comment when he sent the above article to me: High-speed trains are the salvation of Ohio and the Midwest and will help keep business travelers connected to the world and Ohio competitive for high paying jobs. Use the high-speed train network to connect smaller cities to larger cities and use trains as feeder "flights" to trans-continental and trans-oceanic flights at Chicago, Cleveland and Detroit airports. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 29, 200816 yr How long have we known this?! Infrastructure and mobility w/in the USA is no different than designing the Chicago Spire with one elevator and stairwell. A couple setbacks and everyone is screwed.
June 29, 200816 yr Believe it or not, the airline industry's problems are affecting Amtrak. When there is a derailment or event that causes a significant trip interruption or train cancellation, Amtrak had special deals with various airlines and would provide some passengers with airline tickets. My brother was booked on the California Zephyr to go to Denver this week. The train was canceled because of the flooding. When he contacted Amtrak to ask about an airline ticket, he was told that all of the airlines that had special pricing agreements with Amtrak have backed out of the agreements. Now, the price Amtrak has to pay is too much for them to afford, so they had to do away with the program.
June 29, 200816 yr How long have we known this?! Infrastructure and mobility w/in the USA is no different than designing the Chicago Spire with one elevator and stairwell. A couple setbacks and everyone is screwed. WE have known this for decades, but those in charge of this country (the highway lobby, Big Oil and aviation interests) like the stranglehold they have on us. It's much more profitable than doing the right thing and developing a diversified transportation system, no matter that it would be in the national interest to do so. Having choices is unprofitable. A monopoly is much better. Now we will be forced to change and it will be a painful process, since we have few alternatives, but to continue to drive or fly. Only 20% of the US population has ready access to transit and fewer than that have access to any decent level of intercity rail passenger service. It will take years to gear up to produce new passenger cars and years more to put back the infrastructure we so foolishly squandered.
June 30, 200816 yr Amazingly, some "conservatives" still rant against taxpayer money for passenger rail while ignoring the massive assistance that continues to pour into the collapsing commercial aviation industry. Airports are virtually all municipal entities that don't pay property tax on their buildings, runways, etc., thrusting additional tax burden onto homeowners and private businesses. Municipalities build and maintain airports with local tax revenues and federal assistance, and charge the airlines far less than cost-recovery rates to use them. The federal government spends billions of dollars annually from general fund revenues (your taxes and mine) to provide air traffic control for commercial and civil aviation, and pays for security. Most Amtrak trains travel over freight railroads that pay property tax on the land and improvements in their infrastructure. A portion of the property tax they pay is reflected in the fees they charge Amtrak. Railroads pay for their own traffic control systems (dispatching and signaling), and again, part of those costs gets passed along to Amtrak. Commercial aviation benefits much more from subsidy money than does passenger rail, and airlines' cost-cutting, failures and financial crises, often bailed out by taxpayers, are rampant. The combination of deregulation and taxpayer-funded infrastructure has led to this current situation. Municipalities provide terminal facilities at below cost to airlines who are free to add and cancel flights willy-nilly to cherry-pick the market, and undercapitalized startup carriers jump in and survive just long enough to keep ticket prices below levels necessary to sustain the industry. If airline deregulation is to continue, the industry should be privatized. An airline should have to buy into the capital costs of an airport it wants to serve and pay an allocation of the airport's operating costs on a monthly basis. If it decides to discontinue service at a particular airport, its only option for recovering its investment should be to sell its share, preferably to another carrier. Failing that, it should have to recognize the loss on its shareholders' report. Reimbursement by airlines for FAA costs like air traffic control should be phased in over a period of time. If we're going invoke a free market and privatization for one transport mode, let's privatize them all and give the much-vaunted market forces a chance to shape a balanced national transportation system. </ :speech:> http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2008/06/airlines_desperate_to_raise_re.html Here's a chart of various fees for different "extras" on different airlines: http://blog.cleveland.com/pdgraphics/2008/06/30FGFEES.pdf ... But others see more to come -- even charging passengers based on what they weigh ... That sounds fair to me. If they're going to base fares and fees on the cost of service, why should I, at under 150 pounds, pay the same fare as someone who weighs upwards of 300, and then pay the same extras for baggage? I think they should weigh each passenger and his/her baggage together, and then allocate fuel costs to each passenger based on the aggregate weight of all the passengers and baggage. And for snacks they can put vending machines in the gate area so that passengers can buy their snacks before boarding. Then they can ditch the heavy cart and possibly one flight attendant, and have room for one or two more paying passengers. I didn't spend 16 years as a manufacturing cost analyst for nothin' :-D
June 30, 200816 yr >Amazingly, some "conservatives" still rant against taxpayer money for passenger rail while ignoring the massive assistance that continues to pour into the collapsing commercial aviation industry. I was at an event about 6 weeks ago where a Republican office holder talked about (I'm sure I have the details wrong, but the general theme is correct) how he had lived for a year or two with his wife in some country in Eastern Europe in the mid 90's with streetcars and intercity trains and how terrible the service was. Now, I can believe during that time period that many of the former Soviet cities were running lousy transit and intercity service on poorly-maintained equipment. But there he totally played to his people -- associating rail with Communism AND shoddy service. It was disgusting to witness! I think anyone who is against intercity rail and against urban rail transit should be told to shut up if they haven't ridden any of the great trains and transit systems around the world. For some reason people like to pretend that the Washington Metro doesn't exist, and few have ridden Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor, where the trains are very comfortable and frequent (yes, even the regular non-Acella trains). I have been on some slow ugly trains in Europe but also on the TGV, you have to take the good with the bad.
July 1, 200816 yr Citing High Fuel Costs and Decreased Demand, Northwest Airlines Announces Suspension or Cancellation of Three International Flights EAGAN, Minn. – (June 26, 2008) – Northwest Airlines (NYSE: NWA), with its trans-Atlantic joint venture partner KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, today announced a seasonal suspension of flights between Minneapolis/St. Paul-Paris and cancellation of flights between Detroit-Dusseldorf and Hartford-Amsterdam – effective October 1, 2008. http://www.nwa.com/corpinfo/newsc/2008/pr062620082019.html
July 2, 200816 yr If you get a chance check the Travel Channel's show Unfriendly Skies, it was on last night, not sure if/when it repeats. You know it is a bad sign when a channel that is basically one big commercial starts running an hour show on the crisis in air travel. It was strong until the end when they blamed the FAA for many problems and put forth algae as the solution to America's oil crisis.
July 9, 200816 yr USAirways has one foot in the grave! In-flight movies fade to black this fall US Airways cuts back. By Linda Loyd Inquirer Staff Writer In yet another attempt to offset rising fuel costs, US Airways will yank in-flight movie and music systems from all domestic flights in November - a move the airline says will save about $10 million a year. What's a beleaguered passenger to do? First airlines slapped on fees for checked bags. They took away free snacks, added extra charges for telephone and airport ticketing. Next month US Airways will begin charging for sodas and coffee. And now, good-bye movies. http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20080709_US_Airways_cuts_back_.html
July 14, 200816 yr ^I don't understand that. They will have to put more fuel in there for the next flight. I can see this scenario on that show on the discovery channel called Mega Disasters.
July 14, 200816 yr the state of our airlines is beyond pathetic... is there even a word to describe it?
July 14, 200816 yr I'ts not that serious. I've been on flights from Europe that have landed in Goose Bay or Ganther (I think thats how it's spelled) for refueling. The pilot came on to say that headwinds during winter can cause the plane to use more fuel and the waiting patterns along the eastern seaboard can also cause isuees, which make the planes burn fuel need to reach a destination.
July 14, 200816 yr the state of our airlines is beyond pathetic... is there even a word to describe it? And there are still people who doubt the power of 'Big Oil'. Although decent management at airlines is still something to be desired!
July 15, 200816 yr "We're not panicking," he said" Yeah right Why would you doubt that? We weren't cut as badly as other airports and our main tenant is in better financial shape than its competitors. Our flight options remained flat because the flights cut were the expansion flights.
Create an account or sign in to comment