Re: destination versus routing pricing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



In a message dated 9/21/2003 9:55:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mmontano@xxxxxxxxx writes:

<< There's no question that long range narrow-body jets (737-700/800s,
 A319/320s) have been great, and 2,000+ nm range RJs are changing the
 landscape.

I think that trends are showing that the former are the better bet for
airlines.  I think a smart "full service" airline would use 737/A320 family aircraft
for feeders and P2P then use 1 kind of big craft from the same people for
long haul.  777 or A340 would fit here, and so would 747 if used correctly

 But I sense that airlines, and their currently artificially distorted
 labour costs which provide a per-seat-mile cost on RJs that are
 unsustainable, are going to swing the pendulum to far the other way.

 Can someone name an airline that uses a balance of hub-n-spoke,
 point-to-point and RJ flying and does it successfully & profitably?

 Lufthansa? >>

I think LH is probably the only one that does it well, AF maybe.  The key to
LH is that they have a very diverse, very big airline that is not just the
core ops.  They also have the world's biggest cargo airline in LH Cargo (Trades
off for that honor with FedEx), a very well known and respected maintainance
division (Lufthansa Technik) and an extremely efficient workforce that makes
them profitable.  I think their approach of having all kinds of planes is one
that actually works because they can fine tune what flys on what route when

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]