Search

Notices

MCO Base Timelines

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-08-2025 | 10:04 PM
  #111  
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
5 Years
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 163
Default

Originally Posted by JoePatroni
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.”
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
Reply
Old 04-09-2025 | 06:08 AM
  #112  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 741
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
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
With the economy heading where it is, airlines planning for a recession, way better chance of closing mco then making it a hub.
Reply
Old 04-09-2025 | 08:28 AM
  #113  
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
5 Years
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 163
Default

Originally Posted by GPullR
With the economy heading where it is, airlines planning for a recession, way better chance of closing mco then making it a hub.
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
Reply
Old 04-09-2025 | 03:04 PM
  #114  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 741
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
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
What strategy is that???
Reply
Old 04-09-2025 | 03:37 PM
  #115  
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
5 Years
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 163
Default

Originally Posted by GPullR
What strategy is that???
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
Reply
Old 04-10-2025 | 03:31 AM
  #116  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by GPullR
With the economy heading where it is, airlines planning for a recession, way better chance of closing mco then making it a hub.
Smart people buy low, not sell low... IF the economy tanks there are some really good deals to be made.
Reply
Old 04-10-2025 | 05:47 AM
  #117  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 741
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
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
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.
Reply
Old 04-10-2025 | 09:11 AM
  #118  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 670
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by GPullR
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.
zero chance MCO closes. If you havent checked we are hiring all we can from Spirit and Frontier. We have resources to weather a storm, and the strategy of crippling the competition is in full swings with routes, bases, and hiring their pilots. MCO/LAS was only about securing pilots and forcing higher costs on low cost competitors. Its a smart strategy because training costs cant really be reduced, and in fact Kirbys strategy is forcing more costs on airlines whose business plans are based on spending as little as possible. Take away MCO and swa/frontier/spirit pilots will have an argument to decline the UA interview and stay in FL.
Reply
Old 04-10-2025 | 10:58 AM
  #119  
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
5 Years
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 163
Default

Originally Posted by GPullR
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.
Totally fair assessment. I’d argue that this last statement contradicts itself… maybe? If the company saves more than it spends by having MCO as a base, it’ll stay. By the looks of things, it won’t be going anywhere.

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!
Reply
Old 04-10-2025 | 10:59 AM
  #120  
ReadOnly7's Avatar
Slam-Clicka
 
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,570
Likes: 85
Default

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.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Longhornmaniac8
Republic Airways
378
12-23-2024 04:57 PM
btodd77
Southwest
80
08-31-2018 08:26 AM
flyingfarmer
United
32
03-01-2012 05:04 AM
djrogs03
Regional
338
09-01-2011 05:04 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices