KirillTheThrill

I not saying this with 100% certainty, but “I’ve heard” from what I’d say is a fairly decent source who’s flying the 220 out of SLC for Delta that it’s unfortunately operating at a loss. Same source said he had heard plans were originally in place to push the 220 initial training to AQP and they’ve suddenly decided not to invest in the program. And from peeking at their route structure, delta’s not really using it as a regional replacement, looks like they’re covering the same routes they flew with the the Mad Dog’s minus some west coast tours.

Excargodog

I think the larger question is this one:

Just how dependent is the hub and spoke model on regional flying?

Because it would seem like regional flying is more about frequency and feeding the hub. and that ties into business flying and international flying, both of which are currently in the cr@pper. Especially the latter.

TallFlyer

I was starting to tear into AA system wide schedule files pre-pandemic, and I can tell you that the vast, vast majority of AA flights system wide (I'd wager 99% or greater) have one of our hubs / domiciles on one end of the leg. Some notable outliers were some MCO-EYW flights, and now our operation out of AUS.

I think it would be phenomenal to add more point to point in our network, or at least some more focus cities, and hopefully Planning in DFW looks at all of that.

SnowmanKiller

My pet theory is is the network carriers will eventually die or shrink. Their revenue model is dependent on business/international travelers paying a premium to support the costs of the legacy carriers. That kind of travel depends on ideal circumstances - economy good, no pandemics, wars, recessions etc. Pan Am was looking like it would survive, then the OPEC crisis, Lockerbie Bombing, and the 1st Gulf War all back to back did it in for good. Just because it looks like Covid is subsiding doesn't mean there can't be a recession followed by a war or something. Legacies were barely profitable when times were good, and will be insolvent if times stay bad/get worse.

So besides convincing someone to fly little jets for pennies, I think regionals will also struggle as their "parents" experience problems in the future.

ZeroTT

They have shrunk ... there are 3 now. USAir Northwest TWA Braniff PanAm Eastern all gone. (yes, mergers ... still)

LCC's do a great job connecting Class B to Class B airports in North America. If you want to do Class C to Class B or anywhere transoceanic ... you need a network carrier. There will be a model for that. If it needs to be fed by 737s ... the market will be smaller but it's not going away.

TallFlyer

The most recent figure I can find is about 6 months old, but apparently only 450 of those 321 orders are for XLRs. I would've thought that would be higher....

Excargodog

not everyone has a long distance mission…or wants to give up the baggage space for the extra fuel tank. The 321NEO has damn good range with better short haul CASM for the ever growing fleets of ULCCs.

chrisreedrules

Couple thoughts…

1) Profitability matters to the extent that the legacies remain investable businesses for their shareholders. But it doesn’t equate to survival, as we saw in 2020 with 3 government bailouts. The “big 4” are vital to the nation’s infrastructure and economy.

2) If the legacies seriously felt that their bread and butter business model of hub and spoke was at real risk they could “eat” the competition. The LCCs are very insignificant compared to the legacies and SWA.

3) Comparing 2022 and beyond to the years when PamAm went away is about as apples to oranges a comparison as I’ve ever seen. Completely different circumstances and they had a business model that not a single legacy carrier has today.

4) I think the market is shifting and we are beginning to see what that looks like. I’d expect regionals to dramatically shrink over the next 2-3 years and for codeshare agreements to be the flavor of the week.

pitchattitude

This aged well…