Mesaba to operate saabs for USair out of LGA
12-27-2010 | 10:35 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
[/B]
Actually...Colgan has had contractual rights to certain markets out of LGA for US Airways for years. They occasionally lease out those routes which are currenty covered by Peidmont. Since the master plan of merging Colgan and Mesaba are slowly coming together, the flying is going to Mesaba since they will have plenty of Saabs available to handle the flying.
Regardless, they money made ends up in the same pockets!
Actually...Colgan has had contractual rights to certain markets out of LGA for US Airways for years. They occasionally lease out those routes which are currenty covered by Peidmont. Since the master plan of merging Colgan and Mesaba are slowly coming together, the flying is going to Mesaba since they will have plenty of Saabs available to handle the flying.
Regardless, they money made ends up in the same pockets!
I have no dispute as to whom got the flying for Mesaba but the spirit of my statement was the planes were coming to Mesaba not Colgan. Maybe this guy can get work for all the B+'s and 100 Q's.
02-09-2011 | 05:32 AM
#55
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 919
Likes: 27
The flying is pro-rate/at risk. If the slot seat goes through I doubt there is much need for these aircraft- hence why Colgan no longer serves the markets. We would still be there if the slot swap was not mentioned.
02-09-2011 | 09:47 AM
#56
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 595
Likes: 2
That makes no sense whatsoever. Too risky for Colgan (with cheap a$$ operating costs), so that's why Mesaba is doing it instead. Sure...
02-10-2011 | 09:05 PM
#57
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 919
Likes: 27
When the slot swap was announced Colgan prematurely pulled out of the last 3 markets (ITH, MHT and CHO). They did this in early Jan 10 because historically the revenue declines for those markets in the winter.
Now, unless there is higher connect incentives, yes it is risky. What we should be prepared for is Mesaba pulling out of markets with poor loads. IAD comes to mind and PVD. Pinnacle Corp. has shown time and time again they will not hesitate to pull out of an under performing pro-rate city.
What is so hard to believe Andrew?
02-11-2011 | 02:52 AM
#58
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 595
Likes: 2
Thanks for the background info. It just seems counter-intuitive to have Mesaba instead of colgan perform at risk flying because of 'risk'. The same risk is still there, just now there are higher operating costs.
At least it looks like we are gearing up in good time for the busier travel season though.
At least it looks like we are gearing up in good time for the busier travel season though.
02-11-2011 | 07:07 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Thanks for the background info. It just seems counter-intuitive to have Mesaba instead of colgan perform at risk flying because of 'risk'. The same risk is still there, just now there are higher operating costs.
At least it looks like we are gearing up in good time for the busier travel season though.
At least it looks like we are gearing up in good time for the busier travel season though.
I think with the performance numbers Colgan has, it's better to staff adequately at more per hour cost than just take a contract and then fail because you don't have enough bodies.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
