![]() |
Originally Posted by JoePatroni
(Post 3902004)
SK was asked about international flights out of MCO at a meeting and his answer was essentially, “I can make a lot more money with the airplanes elsewhere due to the yield.”
That said, management have alluded to having another hub in a couple of years. In the same convo, they said that the SE is the weakest with regards to our network. They have every other region on lockdown. MIA won’t be it since AA is there, FLL doesn’t offer enough gates nor infrastructure, same for PBI, ATL has DL, so there’s only MCO/TPA. That’s from a network perspective. MCO specifically probably won’t be a hub unless another carrier goes belly up and take their gates. But It also doesn’t make sense to have MCO as a hub right now. We still have a lot of improving to do with the hubs we already have. Call me crazy, but in a few years when the dust settles, planes are on property (or about halfway through the order book), the new hangers are up, and possibly less competition in MCO, it’ll be a hub. Heard it here first lol |
Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
(Post 3902500)
I’m sure that’s the case. NY will almost always have higher yields along with LAX (to name a few), that’s why so many carriers call those cities a hub.
That said, management have alluded to having another hub in a couple of years. In the same convo, they said that the SE is the weakest with regards to our network. They have every other region on lockdown. MIA won’t be it since AA is there, FLL doesn’t offer enough gates nor infrastructure, same for PBI, ATL has DL, so there’s only MCO/TPA. That’s from a network perspective. MCO specifically probably won’t be a hub unless another carrier goes belly up and take their gates. But It also doesn’t make sense to have MCO as a hub right now. We still have a lot of improving to do with the hubs we already have. Call me crazy, but in a few years when the dust settles, planes are on property (or about halfway through the order book), the new hangers are up, and possibly less competition in MCO, it’ll be a hub. Heard it here first lol |
Originally Posted by GPullR
(Post 3902585)
With the economy heading where it is, airlines planning for a recession, way better chance of closing mco then making it a hub.
|
Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
(Post 3902680)
That makes zero sense given the management strategy. Though I disagree with you, I respect your decision to exercise your 1st Amendment right on the matter
|
Originally Posted by GPullR
(Post 3902869)
What strategy is that???
Even if we’re in a a position where we stopped growth altogether and allowed attrition to right size the airline, a base closure would create displacements and thus hundreds of trining events. Closing MCO, or anything other base, wouldn’t make sense |
Originally Posted by GPullR
(Post 3902585)
With the economy heading where it is, airlines planning for a recession, way better chance of closing mco then making it a hub.
|
Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
(Post 3902880)
The United Next Plan? I’m not trying to be crass, GPullR, but our management team is pretty vocal about their intentions and what their plans are. Maybe MCO never becomes a hub, but closing MCO/TPA doesn’t make any sense. One last place to park incoming planes, the displacement would hinder growth, and management wants to be full steam ahead with hiring and taking up market share as competition pulls out during a recession.
Even if we’re in a a position where we stopped growth altogether and allowed attrition to right size the airline, a base closure would create displacements and thus hundreds of trining events. Closing MCO, or anything other base, wouldn’t make sense my point was not mco closing as much as it was about it never being a real hub. It only was opened as a pilot base because of the staggering amount of commuters. It allowed the company to save a fortune on hotels with very minimal expense. Thus why its a better chance to close it then make it a hub. Not that either will probably happen. |
Originally Posted by GPullR
(Post 3903027)
It happens all the time. United next is 100% dependent on economy. If we go into recession for 3 or 4 years its all out the window. It's is a plan when things go well. This whole craziness that has been going on for the last 4 years won't last. It never does. There is always something completely unforseen that happens. Its proven itself over the last 40 years.
my point was not mco closing as much as it was about it never being a real hub. It only was opened as a pilot base because of the staggering amount of commuters. It allowed the company to save a fortune on hotels with very minimal expense. Thus why its a better chance to close it then make it a hub. Not that either will probably happen. |
Originally Posted by GPullR
(Post 3903027)
It happens all the time. United next is 100% dependent on economy. If we go into recession for 3 or 4 years its all out the window. It's is a plan when things go well. This whole craziness that has been going on for the last 4 years won't last. It never does. There is always something completely unforseen that happens. Its proven itself over the last 40 years.
my point was not mco closing as much as it was about it never being a real hub. It only was opened as a pilot base because of the staggering amount of commuters. It allowed the company to save a fortune on hotels with very minimal expense. Thus why its a better chance to close it then make it a hub. Not that either will probably happen. Lastly, and I’ll finish with this, I believe the plan accounts for recessions. I’m 1000% positive that they saw a down swing coming at some point and planned for it.l just like we did (or should have done). Whether it was having billions in the bank (something like $14-$16 billion) to weather the storm or growing in certain markets because competitors pulled out, I think we’re gonna be better than we went into this mess. As always, anything can happen, but I feel like we have one of the most competent management teams out there. Fingers crossed though! |
LAS and MCO weren’t opened for commuters. That’s a secondary benefit for those who live there. Poaching from ULCC’s in their own backyard is the goal, along with obvious network benefits.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:28 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands