Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And you think they will throw that away to get back at Houston?
Oh no, of course not. United NEEDS Houston very much. But Houston also needs United because as many are pointing out in other posts on this thread, if Continental had been taken over by Delta a huge portion of Continental's service would have been cannibalized by Delta's monster ATL hub and that would have meant a dramatic loss of nonstop service, both domestic and international. And of course the other scenario of American/DFW would have been even more disastrous for IAH and therefor Houston.
See here's my deal, my time to a great extent is divided between Houston and Idaho, but I still have a "presence" in Houston, got a house in the Clear Lake area which if you know the basic metro area you know CL is served by Hobby. So when I'm coming in or going out of Houston I definitely prefer to fly Southwest because of it's superior proximity to CL vs IAH. So personally I'm a beneficiary of Southwest/Hobby airport service.
But the new international service to be offered at Hobby will have atleast a marginal effect upon Uniteds service at IAH, and marginal is something because it will mean that IAH will probably no longer receive preferential treatment among United hubs by management, no longer be an edge for Houston when there's a close call about where to assign new corporate resources, where to introduce and develop and/or expand route service.
Oh no, of course not. United NEEDS Houston very much. But Houston also needs United because as many are pointing out in other posts on this thread, if Continental had been taken over by Delta a huge portion of Continental's service would have been cannibalized by Delta's monster ATL hub and that would have meant a dramatic loss of nonstop service, both domestic and international. And of course the other scenario of American/DFW would have been even more disastrous for IAH and therefor Houston.
See here's my deal, my time to a great extent is divided between Houston and Idaho, but I still have a "presence" in Houston, got a house in the Clear Lake area which if you know the basic metro area you know CL is served by Hobby. So when I'm coming in or going out of Houston I definitely prefer to fly Southwest because of it's superior proximity to CL vs IAH. So personally I'm a beneficiary of Southwest/Hobby airport service.
But the new international service to be offered at Hobby will have atleast a marginal effect upon Uniteds service at IAH, and marginal is something because it will mean that IAH will probably no longer receive preferential treatment among United hubs by management, no longer be an edge for Houston when there's a close call about where to assign new corporate resources, where to introduce and develop and/or expand route service.
This is absolutely correct.
I believe I speak for most people here when I say that most of us aren't actively rooting for UAL to fold or get out of Houston. Most of us are actively rooting for fair competition out of the Houston market though, and its well known that hub carriers tend to hold consumers by the b***s when it comes to pricing out of those hubs, which they can do because they control 80+% of the traffic in nearly all cases.
In pretty much any industry: high prices + low quality of service = unhappy customers. Add in the Southwest debacle, then you see why Houston generally doesn't like United.
However, United management knows this and like you said, they won't pull flights that are making cash, but they surely won't go out of their way to do any favors for IAH that don't directly pull in more revenue.
However, in my opinion, that's more of a sign of United management's arrogance than any perceived faux pas on the part of the City.
What United needs to do to win favor in the city is replace its management team. Its the only way. Smisek and his crew are a cancer to the new UA. I couldn't stand watching the guy's face on the old Continental preflight videos and its even worse now when I fly United. He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Bethune or Kellner. He is much more along the lines of Frank Lorenzo.
I believe I speak for most people here when I say that most of us aren't actively rooting for UAL to fold or get out of Houston. Most of us are actively rooting for fair competition out of the Houston market though, and its well known that hub carriers tend to hold consumers by the b***s when it comes to pricing out of those hubs, which they can do because they control 80+% of the traffic in nearly all cases.
In pretty much any industry: high prices + low quality of service = unhappy customers. Add in the Southwest debacle, then you see why Houston generally doesn't like United.
However, United management knows this and like you said, they won't pull flights that are making cash, but they surely won't go out of their way to do any favors for IAH that don't directly pull in more revenue.
However, in my opinion, that's more of a sign of United management's arrogance than any perceived faux pas on the part of the City.
What United needs to do to win favor in the city is replace its management team. Its the only way. Smisek and his crew are a cancer to the new UA. I couldn't stand watching the guy's face on the old Continental preflight videos and its even worse now when I fly United. He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Bethune or Kellner. He is much more along the lines of Frank Lorenzo.
What favors did United do for IAH though? They jacked up prices after the merger, and moved many important positions to Chicago, not even leaving the operational hq. But we are suppose to believe United would do favors for IAH if city officials didnt allow competition? Nah, no company should be held up like that. I mean, it was cheaper to fly to Latin America via Newark over IAH.
What favors did United do for IAH though? They jacked up prices after the merger, and moved many important positions to Chicago, not even leaving the operational hq. But we are suppose to believe United would do favors for IAH if city officials didnt allow competition? Nah, no company should be held up like that. I mean, it was cheaper to fly to Latin America via Newark over IAH.
Youre not going to have another carrier thats going to put up a hub like UA has at IAH. If UA leaves (which is wont), you might have a hub thats about 40-50% the size of the current hub.
Fliers during the first half of 2012 filed more complaints against United Airlines than any other U.S. carrier - and the numbers got a lot worse in the most recent federal report.
While U.S. airlines as a whole have been more punctual and less likely to lose your bag this year than at any time in more than two decades, United drew the most consumer complaints every month and ranks nearly last in on-time performance, according to the monthly Air Travel Consumer Report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings.
The number of consumer complaints lodged against United more than doubled in March, the month the airline - which became the world's largest carrier after merging with Houston-based Continental Airlines in 2010 - conducted a massive switchover to Continental's reservation system.
The process initially resulted in widespread flight delays, lost frequent-flier mileage and problems including booking glitches that lingered for weeks and resulted in jammed phone lines and hours-long wait times.
The switchover was the primary reason cited by United for a 37 percent drop in profit during the second quarter.
That month, the number of United complaints nearly doubled from the previous month, to 260 from 132. During the next two months, the number of complaints increased slightly, to 289 and 291. The figures for June, released Thursday, show the number of complaints more than doubled again, to 585.
While complaints from earlier this year have been more evenly distributed among the report's 12 complaint categories, the bulk of the complaints in June were in the areas of flight problems and customer service.
A summary in Thursday's report shows United's on-time performance was last among all reporting domestic carriers during the second quarter of the year and better than only ExpressJet and Frontier Airlines during the first.
These and other statistics released this week confirm United's continued struggle with lagging operational and revenue performance, as well as customer satisfaction, since the March switchover.
Operational problems this year have been exacerbated by other activities related to the carrier's ongoing integration with Continental, including its decision to keep fewer spare planes on hand to use in case of maintenance problems.
United CEO Jeff Smisek told analysts during a conference call last month announcing the airline's dismal second-quarter profit that the company is reversing that decision in an effort to reduce the amount of flight cancellations and delays, which have been widespread, as well as improving training for United employees learning the new reservation system.
Last month, a United flight from Shanghai, China, to New Jersey was delayed for three days in part because of maintenance issues with a Boeing 777.
"Our operational performance is not where it should be, and we recognize its impact to our customers and employees," United said in a statement when asked about the most recent statistics.
"We are taking immediate action to improve, including adding spare aircraft and more ground time between flights, and making changes to our technology to give employees and customers more reliability. So far in the month of August, we are seeing improved results."
Although United's performance is lagging, U.S. carriers overall exhibited historically strong operational performance during the first half of this year. On-time performance for January through June was the best it has been since the government started tracking such data in 1988.
Nearly 84 percent of domestic flights arrived within 15 minutes of their scheduled time in the first half of the year. The improvement over the first six months of 2011, when 77 percent of flights were on time, is mostly the result of good weather and fewer planes in the sky because of weak demand.
Airlines are also doing a better job of handling bags. Fewer than three suitcases per 1,000 passengers were reported lost, damaged or delayed from January through June, a record low.
Youre not going to have another carrier thats going to put up a hub like UA has at IAH. If UA leaves (which is wont), you might have a hub thats about 40-50% the size of the current hub.
It is a symbiosis.
Why wouldnt Virgin America see Houston as a great south American, African hub? Or jetblue for southwest US expansion? I'll grant that American and US Air don't need a Houston hub. Delta may see some advantage in it though. It does not behoove Houston to treat United as a golden child though. If they can't compete and serve Houston customers they do not deserve to survive. Houston thrives because it treats businesses fairly and cheaply (although don't get me started about 380 agreements and tax abatements, which is the wrong direction IMO).
Why wouldnt Virgin America see Houston as a great south American, African hub? Or jetblue for southwest US expansion? I'll grant that American and US Air don't need a Houston hub. Delta may see some advantage in it though. It does not behoove Houston to treat United as a golden child though. If they can't compete and serve Houston customers they do not deserve to survive. Houston thrives because it treats businesses fairly and cheaply (although don't get me started about 380 agreements and tax abatements, which is the wrong direction IMO).
Virgin America has neither the fleet nor the interest in launching South American much less African service from anywhere. Even if United disappeared, you might see Virgin flying to 5-7 domestic destinations and that it. Delta has Atlanta and Houston could never fill the role that Atlanta does. Simply put Houston doesnt have the geography Atlanta has to serve the traffic flows. The domestic air market (the local O&D) from Atlanta is much larger than Houston as well.
But its all moot. United isnt going anwhere and will continue to hub in Houston.
The way United's going, I think it's 50/50 they won't survive the decade.
No, United will be here much longer than that. They are turning profits and returning it to the shareholders. They will be in hubbing in Houston for a long, long time.
I know Houston has its feelings hurt, but you have to look at the finances. They dictate that United is in no trouble.
Why wouldnt Virgin America see Houston as a great south American, African hub? Or jetblue for southwest US expansion? I'll grant that American and US Air don't need a Houston hub. Delta may see some advantage in it though. It does not behoove Houston to treat United as a golden child though. If they can't compete and serve Houston customers they do not deserve to survive. Houston thrives because it treats businesses fairly and cheaply (although don't get me started about 380 agreements and tax abatements, which is the wrong direction IMO).
Virgin America is probably going to have to start slowing its aircraft intake. The airline is BLEEDING cash and something needs to change soon for them. In over 5 years of operations, they have had only one profitable quarter. I think they have lost over $600 Million now in 5 years, which is terrible for a small airline. First quarter 2012 they only had revenues of $267 Million, but had an operating loss of $49 Million. They can't make their San Francisco hub work and expansion isn't a good idea for them right now.
Their fleet of A320 only aircraft isn't suitable for long-haul international operations (flights over five hours) or ETOPS. The licenses and regulations for international flying is more expensive as well and increased costs are the last thing Virgin America needs when they are bleeding cash.
If United wasn't serving Houston, American, US Airways, and Delta are the only major airlines that could make Houston an international hub with service to South America, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East.
Hopefully by fall United figures out their operational problems. The Continental reservation system they kept is pretty bad and rolling out all those changes on the United agents at once was too much too soon. It would have been better to do phases like Delta-NWA. United's on time performance was the best in the country in 2011 before merging. Continental offered the blessing of a New York City hub at Newark, but also a curse. Its the most delay prone air space in the country and there are ripple effects from delays at Newark throughout the system. United has identified most of the problems come from planes going through Newark. When a Newark-Chicago bound plane arrives late, then the Chicago to Denver plane is late, and then the Denver to Seattle plane is late. United fleet and routes planners are adding extra ground time and learning how to schedule Newark planes better into the network so any delays due to air space there don't effect their entire network.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
