Originally Posted by
IMHO
Surely, Surely the glaring differences between XJT, ACA, and RAH are extremely noticable even to the most uninformed pilots among us. As it has been said many times before, and I'm sure it will be disregarded even as I say it, because people long for history to repeat itself and for another "branded regional" particularly RAH to fail. Unfortunately for those naysayers among us, history is not being repeated simply because no "regional airline" has done what RAH is attempting to do. They have the brand, they have the name recognition, they have the planes, pilots, ground staff, marketing, and customer base. They have fare structure, route structure, and fuel hedges. They know their landing fees, airport fees, security fees. There are no suprises coming to Republic. What Bedford isnt familiar with, Menke is. What Heller doesnt know, someone in Denver does. What RAH is doing is unprecedented regardless of what you say. Show me a time where a regional airline has ever attempted such an undertaking.
As to United and Delta...most assume that UA is angry and DL is livid. If you were United, what would you rather do...Leave RAH to fend of your biggest threat in DEN (Southwest) or cancel Shuttles contract and automatically have RAH with 36 170's at their immediate disposal to paint in F9 colors and parade out of DEN? Almost effectively doubling Frontiers presence instantaneously? And lets not kidd ourselves, United isnt in a position to leverage a baked potato, not to mention enter a fare war to out price F9 AND Southwest.
Delta on the other hand, is not the suprised spouse either, as it were. I'm sure we would have heard from DL by now if they were all that bothered by RAH actions. After all they tried to do away with Freedom for delayed flights. I'm sure this is a much much more aggregious offense. And yet...silence. Delta's in bed with RAH, no doubt about it.
And just one more thing, Republic has no intentions of branding itself Republic. So all the passengers who are supposedly shying from the tiny carriers will have the opportunity to continue flying "mainline household names" like Midwest and Frontier.
Thought your post was right on. Here's a analysis take on things...
For those of you who don’t remember, ACA flew CRJs for United. ACA didn’t like the deal that United offered them, so they decided to go out on their own and re-brand themselves as Independence Air, with a hub out of Dulles. The airline ended up shutting down in 2006. Is Republic’s situation all that similar? I’m going to say “no.”
Most importantly, ACA was only flying for United, while Republic flies for many carriers, so they will continue to earn revenue from their regional flights. Right now, it appears that Frontier and Midwest will continue operating as separate brands, at least in the short term. (Who knows what Republic’s long-term plan is?) But, assuming Republic uses these purchases to go its own way, it’s still different than Indepdence, and two major differences come to mind.
First, the article seems to suggest that one factor in Independence’s failure is that it was new to the mainline business, but this isn’t the case with Republic’s acquisitions with Frontier and Midwest (assuming that everything goes swimmingly with those purchases, specifically in bankruptcy court in Frontier’s case), Republic is acquiring mainline carriers with experience, not going out on their own with no prior knowledge to work with.
Second, another issue with ACA/Independence was its fleet mix. Initially, the airline was stuck with CRJ-200s, which aren’t exactly the most economical aircraft. Pair that with a fare war with United out of Dulles and you get a pretty bad mix. Meanwhile, Republic just acquired a bunch of Airbus aircraft from Frontier. Independence started using A319s, and from what I remember, those routes were doing pretty well, but it was too late to save the airline once they got going.
So, that’s why I think Republic’s situation is very different.