Good on McKinney going ahead with a passenger airport terminal

I thought, after McKinney voters rejected a 2023 bond issue, this would be dead.

But, the city has enough money without going through a bond to start work on a commercial terminal, in part through state budget funding and a TxDOT grant, per this story of the airport's history. It's too bad the 2023 Lege hadn't funded this; it would already be open by now.

I'm not ignoring or dissing questions about environmental impacts.

I am saying that the greater Metromess could use a third airport. Now, what airlines are going out there? I think the FAA should put both American and Southwest at the back of the bus on gate requests. I expect UnitedContinental or whatever the hell it's called would love to fly from here to Houston and Denver, two of its hubs. 

I wrote more about that in the run-up to the 2023 bond election, here. One pullout:

Presumably, given Southwest's near monopoly at Love, and American's at D/FW, the FAA would have Delta and United Continental first in line for gate slots. With that, almost all United flights would go either to its big hub at Houston Bush, and anywhere else from there, or secondarily to its Denver hub, with anywhere in the Western states from there. (A few nonstops would go to Chicago.) Delta, of course, would send all sorts of flights to its massive hub in Atlanta (cue old joke) and probably a few to its secondary hub in Salt Lake City. Starter (in the past decade) airlines might get a gate or two. And McKinney Mayor George Fuller says he can't name names, but, the interest is there. His assistant city manager says the same. 

Big North Texas bond issue with regional impact causing fallout

That BIG issue, and one that I would love to see pass, is NOT a school bond issue. Rather, it's one to fund the expansion of McKinney's airport — and its development of commercial passenger service.

Indeed, I devoted part of a newspaper column to that. I noted how it would address the growth of the Metromess up the North Central Texas/75 corridor, and to a lesser degree, up the I-35 north corridor. (A decade plus ago, residents of Lancaster did low level preliminary tire kicking on expanding its airport to light commercial service, and an airport in Ellis County got occasional mention, but I don't see the former happening at all and the latter for 20 years, if at all.)

Anyway, even if just at three-quarters the gateage of Love Field, a new commercial airport would be big. Presumably, given Southwest's near monopoly at Love, and American's at D/FW, the FAA would have Delta and United Continental first in line for gate slots. With that, almost all United flights would go either to its big hub at Houston Bush, and anywhere else from there, or secondarily to its Denver hub, with anywhere in the Western states from there. (A few nonstops would go to Chicago.) Delta, of course, would send all sorts of flights to its massive hub in Atlanta (cue old joke) and probably a few to its secondary hub in Salt Lake City. Starter (in the past decade) airlines might get a gate or two. And McKinney Mayor George Fuller says he can't name names, but, the interest is there. His assistant city manager says the same.

Anyway, the possible expansion is not popular everywhere. Neighboring small-town mayors are afraid of noise pollution. McKinney's mayor says the concern is overblown. And, besides, their town's voters don't have a vote. Add in that, 40 flights a day, 15 years from now, is not that much noise being generated. THAT said, contra McKinney's Mayor Fuller, IMO, you need that airport running MANY more flights than that if you want real economic development. (Current projections are here.) At that size, it's still not much more than a vanity project. (And, he may know that and isn't talking all the facts.)

Personally, I still fly Southwest out of Love, but last year's Christmas fiasco has made me ever more leery of it.

UPDATE: Unfortunately, from my perspective, the bond failed.

Will Continental try to hook up with United?

Of course, that would mean muscling U.S. Airways aside. Business Week says Continental-United is a better merger, though.

Continental and United belong to the Star Alliance marketing group and have a joint venture with Deutsche Lufthansa AG for trans-Atlantic flights.

So, and especially since the two had exploratory talks in 2008, it would make sense, right? Especially since a larger airline would result:

Together, Houston-based Continental and UAL Corp.’s United would surpass Delta Air Lines Inc. for the top spot in global passenger traffic.

But, maybe that's part of why United went with Airways, as well as the fact that Continental was the one who eventually scrubbed the 2008 talks. Maybe United thinks an airline that big, especially with a new administration, wouldn't pass antitrust scrutiny.

United is determined to piss off business travelers

Checked bag fees and continued price hikes aren’t enough. Starting in October, it’s minimum stay requirements.

Details of the length of the stay required depend on destination, length of trip and ticket price.

Will other legacy airlines follow suit?

Bag-check fee catches on — and $2 a pop for pop!!

No. 2 airline United and No. 7 U.S. Airways have joined No. 1 airline American in charging $15 for fliers’ first checked bag.

I’m betting, still, that Southwest doesn’t join the stampede, and winds up using this to actually increase its profit margin.

And, no more free sodas on U.S. Airways — it’s $2 a pop for pop now.

United joins American in route and job slashing

Almost by the same percentage as American, United says it will cut domestic flights about 20 percent by the end of this year.

Delta has also, previously, announced route cuts.

But, neither United nor Delta is following American on charging for a second checked bag, let alone a first one.

My guess is that some other airlines look at a more token $10 charge for a second bag at some point in the future and that nobody follows American on charging for the first checked bag.

Will the last airline to go broke please turn out the lights?

U.S. airlines are projected to lose $2.3 billion this year, according to International Air Transport Association.

The main reason? Jet fuel costs are expected to rise 30 percent over last year.

But wait, you’re just getting the sunny side.

Throw out perennial money-maker Southwest, and the rest of the Top 10 airlines are expected to lose nearly $5 billion this year.

And, that 30 percent rise in jet fuel? It’s based on a Brent crude oil price of “just” $106/bbl.

Jamie Baker of JP Morgan expects the legacy airlines to drop a $7.2 billion dime.

Hey, Gerard Arpey, a $15 bag check fee ain’t gonna cover that at American.

And United, you can talk all you want about not being interested in mergers, but you’d better get interested in doing something different.

Southwest bullish in the face of high fuel costs

Southwest Airlines is expanding Denver service, with flights to San Francisco and Omaha, among other things, at a time when other airlines are cutting flights in order to force up costs, rather than adding more and more surcharges to flights.

To do so, Southwest will be keeping two airplanes that it had planned to retire. In all, it now plans to expand its fleet by a net of 13 airplanes this year, compared to the seven that it projected on April 17.

In all, Denver service will grow from 79 to 95 daily departures.

As often is the case, Southwest is playing against type. Since it continues to turn profits, it has the leverage to do this. Given that Frontier has filed for bankruptcy, Southwest has room to do this, and that can’t help Frontier’s reorganization plans.

This will also put pressure on United’s Denver hub, just as we all wonder whether it’s merger talks with Continental are still off, or about to turn on again.

Hmm — is a Continental/Frontier, or United/Frontier, marriage a possibility?

Funny, just a few years ago, Southwest was acting like somebody had put a gun to its head to force it to return to Denver. (It had refused to fly DIA for several years.)

That said, I’m still surprised that Southwest hasn’t cast an eye on Colorado Springs. The Springs has two problems; the airport is just accessed by a boulevard and not a freeway, and winter weather. But, the weather isn’t that cloudy, and if the Springs’ city government said it would provide freeway access as an economic development incentive, I think Southwest would have to jump; at the least, it would beat DIA over the head for lower landing fees, a Southwest specialty tactic.

Delta-Northwest merger – overall bad for consumers from where I sit

Between the Federal Aviation Administration crackdown on safety, airlines in general packing planes even tighter due to fuel costs, and the likelihood of a Continental-United Merger to follow on its heels, I’m pretty skeptical about the consumer value of the Delta-Northwest merger.

For example, in this deal, Delta claims it won’t close any hubs of either airline, but that’s doubtful. I have to think the Cincinnati hub will be downgraded to a semi-hub, if not written off. Ditto for Salt Lake City. Northwest has hubs in Minneapolis, Detroit Metro and Memphis.

Sorry, Delta-Plus, but ain’t no effing way you’re keeping hubs in both Memphis and Cincy. Just ain’t happening. One’s being eliminated entirely and the other’s being downgraded. My money is on Memphis getting the ax and Cincy being downgraded.

Detroit will also be downgraded, I think. Given that Toyota now makes more cars in the U.S. than Ford or Chrysler, and may catch GM within a decade, not to mention Nissan and Honda’s U.S. operations, the combined airlines have fewer reasons to have a hub in the former Motor City, not to mention it continuing to lose population like a sieve. BFD if the airport itself built a new terminal wing just a few years ago; that was stupid.

Atlanta is obviously safe. So, too, is JFK. If Detroit Metro is downgraded, than Minneapolis-St. Paul is safe. A western presence will keep Salt Lake City safe, too.

Of course, this may not get past government antitrust regulators, especially in the aforementioned safety environment. And, given already-expressed disgruntlement, you may see a Northwest pilots’ strike if there is a merger.

The Northwest pilots union said in a statement: “This agreement clearly disadvantages NWA pilots both with respect to economic issues and seniority list integration.

“The NWA MEC will use all resources available to aggressively oppose the merger.”

Beyond that, this page points out Delta’s lousy past history of developing hubs. Surrendering LAX to United? Surrendering D/FW (where I live, and I know the history), to American? Not smart.

Assume that a United-Continental merger also closes a hub or two. Why an unmerged United has hubs in both Los Angeles and San Francisco, especially with a third western hub in Denver, is nonsensical. David Grossman of USA Today recommends it look at scaling back at LAX and Denver, as well as Washington Dulles.

As for Continental, Houston would stay as a hub, given the airline’s strong Mexico, and Latin American, routes. Newark isn’t ideal, but I don’t think a combined United-Continental would give that up, especially if Dulles were killed as a hub.

Cleveland? For the same reasons as Detroit, it doesn’t make sense as a hub. Especially in a merged airline with a hub at O’Hare, it would get killed.

So, if the government approves both mergers, you’re going to have a lot fewer options flying out the Rust Belt or Mid-South, in all likelihood.

Oil prices hit Delta hard

The financially struggling airline is grounding planes as its response to oil prices hitting $110/bbl. It’s also offering voluntary severances to more than 30,000 of its employees, or the majority of its workforce.

I am guessing that this also may have ramifications for on-again, off-again merger talks with Northwest. The main hangup there is pilot seniority; certainly, if enough pilots take a severance offer, that would be open to new discussion. Delta, as the larger airline, said it won’t go ahead with talks unless a seniority deal is in place.

The No. 3 airline is joined in the plane groundings by No. 4 United (mistakenly identified as No. 2 in the linked story). United is grounding older 737s. Delta expects to ground about 5 percent of its fleet capacity and United about 4 percent

Southwest, which flies nothing but 737s, has so far indicated is it going to try to hang on and wait for an even later generation of aircraft rather than replace its oldest 737-300s. However, the United and Delta moves could get it to reconsider, especially if Southwest also spun this as a PR move to address recent questions about Southwest’s airplane inspections and maintenance.

I’ll think twice about flying the more pricey ‘friendly skies’

United is going to start charging $25 for a second checked bag. Hell, they could probably make a lot more money, the way airline service is getting these days, selling baggage insurance for $25 a pop