1 Airline Entry Following Us Deregulation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

1 Airline Entry Following Us Deregulation AIRLINE ENTRY FOLLOWING U.S. DEREGULATION: THE DEFINITIVE LIST OF STARTUP PASSENGER AIRLINES, 1979-2003 by William A. Jordan*© Professor Emeritus of Economics Schulich School of Business York University Toronto, Canada 18331 Verano Place San Diego, CA 92128-1240 [email protected] Paper for presentation at the 2005 Annual Meeting of the TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH FORUM The George Washington University Washington, DC March 6-8, 2005 ABSTRACT During the debate leading to airline deregulation, it was widely predicted that a number of new airlines would enter the scheduled passenger airline industry following the elimination of economic regulation of interstate operations by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). These airlines would join the eleven trunk, eight local service, two Alaskan and two Hawaiian carriers that were authorized by the CAB to operate scheduled passenger service with jet aircraft at the time the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978[92 Stat. 1705] was adopted on October 24, 1978. Over 25 years have passed since 1978 and it is well known that a great deal of entry has occurred. However, there have been incorrect statements regarding the actual number of such airlines. For example, the Economist (July 10, 2004, p. 59) contained the following statement regarding “America’s airlines”: “Of the 34 newcomers created after deregulation, 32 soon went bust.” This paper will show that information is wrong by a factor of almost four; it does so by identifying and listing 129 “startup” airlines that inaugurated interstate scheduled passenger service with jet aircraft. Clearly, it is past time to publish a definitive list of startup airlines that entered the industry following the implementation of deregulation in late 1978, both to promote accurate reporting and to facilitate future research. The purpose of this paper is to provide such a list. Furthermore, it will identify which of those startup airlines emerged from existing airlines that the CAB had prohibited from providing interstate scheduled passenger service with large aircraft prior to 1978 – such as the former supplemental, air cargo, intrastate and commuter carriers – and which were newly organized after deregulation. Finally, it also identifies those startup scheduled passenger airlines that operated independently of all other carriers and those which were affiliated with larger carriers. One requirement for a new carrier to obtain an operating certificate under the much-reduced criteria of the Airline Deregulation Act has been for it to report traffic, financial and operating data on Form 41 or Form 298 schedules. Each carrier’s data were then compiled and published -- initially by the CAB to 1984, and then by the Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information. A few startup airlines may have never actually inaugurated operations, or have been so short-lived that they failed to file any reports before they disappeared. However, the great majority did file for varying periods. The carrier information in this paper is obtained from those filings. This means that not only did the carriers listed actually provide service, but also that consistent traffic and financial data are available to evaluate the performance of each carrier over all or most of its operating life. 1 AIRLINE ENTRY FOLLOWING U.S. DEREGULATION: THE DEFINITIVE LIST OF STARTUP PASSENGER AIRLINES, 1979-2003 INTRODUCTION 2003 marked the end of a quarter century of airline deregulation following the adoption of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 [92 Stat. 1705] on October 24, 1978. The coming and going of many “startup” carriers have been noted by the media and in research reports, but incorrect total numbers of carriers have been noted in many of these sources. One glaring example of misreporting appeared in the Economist (July 10, 2004 p. 59), which contained the following statement regarding “America’s airlines”: “Of the 34 newcomers created after deregulation, 32 soon went bust.” This paper will demonstrate that this number understates by a factor of almost four the total number of U.S. startup carriers that inaugurated interstate scheduled passenger service with jet aircraft. It does so simply by listing the 129 startup carriers that entered the industry following October 1978. Hopefully this will promote accurate reporting as well as facilitate research in the future. ORIGINAL AIRLINES One result of the economic regulation of U.S. airlines by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) between 1938 and 1978 was the severe limitation on the entry of airlines into interstate trunk, international or territorial scheduled passenger services. Twenty-three of these “original” airlines received certificates of public convenience and necessity effective August 22, 1938 under the “grandfather” provisions of the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938 [52 Stat 973] Sec.401 (e)(1).1 From then through 1978 just four other airlines received comparable certificates for long- haul operations, all for international service.2 No certificates for domestic interstate trunk service were issued after 1938 despite the fact that between 1950 and 1974 the CAB received 79 applications for permission to offer such service from firms outside the domestic scheduled passenger industry, most of which were dismissed without hearing.3 As shown in Appendix A, by 1978, only eleven of the original trunk/international carriers remained in service, the others having been merged into the surviving certificated carriers.4 All of these carriers operated only jet/turbojet aircraft by 1978. Even though the CAB authorized only four new international carriers (and no new domestic trunk carriers) during its 40 years of full regulation, between 1942 and 1950 it did authorize entry by a series of small carriers consisting of 21 local service and 9 Intra-Alaska airlines, plus one Intra-Hawaii airline.5 In addition, three more Intra-Alaska carriers were certificated in 1959, 1960 and 1976, bringing the total Intra-Alaska carriers to 12.6 As the names of their categories imply, these carriers were limited to short-haul services between small towns and nearby cities, or within Alaska and Hawaii. Initially, none of these carriers was allowed to provide long-haul, trunk-type interstate service between larger cities. Instead, each carrier was awarded mainly monopoly routes for largely subsidized regional service and was protected by the CAB from entry by new airlines. Two of the Intra-Alaska carriers were authorized to fly to the “Lower 48 States” in 1951,7 and, over time the local service carriers worked to reduce their various operating restrictions and to be allowed to operate larger aircraft.8 By the 1978, eight local service, five Alaskan and the two Hawaiian carriers survived; with all but three small Intra-Alaska carriers operating at least some two-engine jet aircraft. Again, the attrition was via mergers, except for four local service carriers whose initial temporary operating certificates were not renewed.9 At the time the Airline Deregulation Act was adopted, the original certificated scheduled passenger carriers had operated for 40 years within the following regulatory environment with regards to entry: first, they were the only airlines authorized to operate large aircraft in scheduled interstate or international passenger service and; second, the entry of new airlines into each category was nonexistent or very limited after the initial period of entry for each category. This was due to the CAB’s extremely high standards of “public convenience and necessity” and to its procedural practices which prevented many applications from even being heard. Because of these CAB policies and because substantial exit did occur through mergers, by the end of 1978 only 26 of the 61 original certificated carriers remained in existence, 23 of which operated jet aircraft -- eleven trunk/international, eight local service, two Alaskan and two Hawaiian. Appendix A lists these 23 carriers and shows that only five of the eleven trunk/international carriers were still operating in 2003. This included United, which was operating under Chapter 11 bankruptcy at the end of 2003. Of the eight local service carriers, only US Airways remained, but it had recently emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy and was to reenter Chapter 11 2 bankruptcy for a second time in 2004.10 The four Alaskan/Hawaiian carriers did relatively better. One airline (Wien) had gone bankrupt in 1984, leaving three still in business, with Hawaiian operating under Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2003.11 In total, only nine (39 percent) of the 23 original certificated carriers operating jet aircraft in 1978 remained after 25 years of deregulation.12 Fourteen were no longer in business. The above analysis shows that most of the original certificated carriers did not survive under deregulation, but the analysis also shows that their survival wasn’t too good under regulation as well. Twenty-six airlines in 1978 out of the 61 original carriers means that only 43 percent survived after 40 years of regulation (23 jet operators plus the three Intra-Alaska non-jet operators).13 What was different between the two periods was not the relative extent of exit, but how it occurred. Under regulation, so long as a carrier had a CAB operating certificate, exit was via merger.14 In contrast, under deregulation, while ten of the original carriers were merged into or acquired by other original carriers through 2003, the other four original carriers (Braniff, Eastern, Pan Am and Wien) terminated service through bankruptcy.15 This was a first for the industry. Between 1979 and 1984 the CAB continued to be responsible for approving mergers prior to its disappearance on December 31, 1984 under the “sunset” provision of the 1978 Act16 During these years it approved the Pan Am/National, North Central/Southern, Republic/Hughes Air West and Continental/Texas International mergers.17 Obviously, if full economic regulation and mergers had both continued beyond 1984, eventually there would have been very few carriers left in the industry.
Recommended publications
  • CC22 N848AE HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 5 £1 CC203 OK
    CC22 N848AE HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 5 £1 CC203 OK-HFM Tupolev Tu-134 CSA -large OK on fin 91 2 £3 CC211 G-31-962 HP Jetstream 31 American eagle 92 2 £1 CC368 N4213X Douglas DC-6 Northern Air Cargo 88 4 £2 CC373 G-BFPV C-47 ex Spanish AF T3-45/744-45 78 1 £4 CC446 G31-862 HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 3 £1 CC487 CS-TKC Boeing 737-300 Air Columbus 93 3 £2 CC489 PT-OKF DHC8/300 TABA 93 2 £2 CC510 G-BLRT Short SD-360 ex Air Business 87 1 £2 CC567 N400RG Boeing 727 89 1 £2 CC573 G31-813 HP Jetstream 31 white 88 1 £1 CC574 N5073L Boeing 727 84 1 £2 CC595 G-BEKG HS 748 87 2 £2 CC603 N727KS Boeing 727 87 1 £2 CC608 N331QQ HP Jetstream 31 white 88 2 £1 CC610 D-BERT DHC8 Contactair c/s 88 5 £1 CC636 C-FBIP HP Jetstream 31 white 88 3 £1 CC650 HZ-DG1 Boeing 727 87 1 £2 CC732 D-CDIC SAAB SF-340 Delta Air 89 1 £2 CC735 C-FAMK HP Jetstream 31 Canadian partner/Air Toronto 89 1 £2 CC738 TC-VAB Boeing 737 Sultan Air 93 1 £2 CC760 G31-841 HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 3 £1 CC762 C-GDBR HP Jetstream 31 Air Toronto 89 3 £1 CC821 G-DVON DH Devon C.2 RAF c/s VP955 89 1 £1 CC824 G-OOOH Boeing 757 Air 2000 89 3 £1 CC826 VT-EPW Boeing 747-300 Air India 89 3 £1 CC834 G-OOOA Boeing 757 Air 2000 89 4 £1 CC876 G-BHHU Short SD-330 89 3 £1 CC901 9H-ABE Boeing 737 Air Malta 88 2 £1 CC911 EC-ECR Boeing 737-300 Air Europa 89 3 £1 CC922 G-BKTN HP Jetstream 31 Euroflite 84 4 £1 CC924 I-ATSA Cessna 650 Aerotaxisud 89 3 £1 CC936 C-GCPG Douglas DC-10 Canadian 87 3 £1 CC940 G-BSMY HP Jetstream 31 Pan Am Express 90 2 £2 CC945 7T-VHG Lockheed C-130H Air Algerie
    [Show full text]
  • Airline Competition Plan Final Report
    Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 SUMMARY S-1 Summary AIRLINE COMPETITION PLAN Philadelphia International Airport The City of Philadelphia, owner and operator of Philadelphia International Airport, is required to submit annually to the Federal Aviation Administration an airline competition plan. The City’s plan for 2000, as documented in the accompanying report, provides information regarding the availability of passenger terminal facilities, the use of passenger facility charge (PFC) revenues to fund terminal facilities, airline leasing arrangements, patterns of airline service, and average airfares for passengers originating their journeys at the Airport. The plan also sets forth the City’s current and planned initiatives to encourage competitive airline service at the Airport, construct terminal facilities needed to accommodate additional airline service, and ensure that access is provided to airlines wishing to serve the Airport on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. These initiatives are summarized in the following paragraphs. Encourage New Airline Service Airlines that have recently started scheduled domestic service at Philadelphia International Airport include AirTran Airways, America West Airlines, American Trans Air, Midway Airlines, Midwest Express Airlines, and National Airlines. Airlines that have recently started scheduled international service at the Airport include Air France and Lufthansa. The City intends to continue its programs to encourage airlines to begin or increase service at the Airport.
    [Show full text]
  • My Personal Callsign List This List Was Not Designed for Publication However Due to Several Requests I Have Decided to Make It Downloadable
    - www.egxwinfogroup.co.uk - The EGXWinfo Group of Twitter Accounts - @EGXWinfoGroup on Twitter - My Personal Callsign List This list was not designed for publication however due to several requests I have decided to make it downloadable. It is a mixture of listed callsigns and logged callsigns so some have numbers after the callsign as they were heard. Use CTL+F in Adobe Reader to search for your callsign Callsign ICAO/PRI IATA Unit Type Based Country Type ABG AAB W9 Abelag Aviation Belgium Civil ARMYAIR AAC Army Air Corps United Kingdom Civil AgustaWestland Lynx AH.9A/AW159 Wildcat ARMYAIR 200# AAC 2Regt | AAC AH.1 AAC Middle Wallop United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 300# AAC 3Regt | AAC AgustaWestland AH-64 Apache AH.1 RAF Wattisham United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 400# AAC 4Regt | AAC AgustaWestland AH-64 Apache AH.1 RAF Wattisham United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 500# AAC 5Regt AAC/RAF Britten-Norman Islander/Defender JHCFS Aldergrove United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 600# AAC 657Sqn | JSFAW | AAC Various RAF Odiham United Kingdom Military Ambassador AAD Mann Air Ltd United Kingdom Civil AIGLE AZUR AAF ZI Aigle Azur France Civil ATLANTIC AAG KI Air Atlantique United Kingdom Civil ATLANTIC AAG Atlantic Flight Training United Kingdom Civil ALOHA AAH KH Aloha Air Cargo United States Civil BOREALIS AAI Air Aurora United States Civil ALFA SUDAN AAJ Alfa Airlines Sudan Civil ALASKA ISLAND AAK Alaska Island Air United States Civil AMERICAN AAL AA American Airlines United States Civil AM CORP AAM Aviation Management Corporation United States Civil
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 25 Box 31/3 Airline Codes
    March 2021 APPENDIX 25 BOX 31/3 AIRLINE CODES The information in this document is provided as a guide only and is not professional advice, including legal advice. It should not be assumed that the guidance is comprehensive or that it provides a definitive answer in every case. Appendix 25 - SAD Box 31/3 Airline Codes March 2021 Airline code Code description 000 ANTONOV DESIGN BUREAU 001 AMERICAN AIRLINES 005 CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 006 DELTA AIR LINES 012 NORTHWEST AIRLINES 014 AIR CANADA 015 TRANS WORLD AIRLINES 016 UNITED AIRLINES 018 CANADIAN AIRLINES INT 020 LUFTHANSA 023 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. (CARGO) 027 ALASKA AIRLINES 029 LINEAS AER DEL CARIBE (CARGO) 034 MILLON AIR (CARGO) 037 USAIR 042 VARIG BRAZILIAN AIRLINES 043 DRAGONAIR 044 AEROLINEAS ARGENTINAS 045 LAN-CHILE 046 LAV LINEA AERO VENEZOLANA 047 TAP AIR PORTUGAL 048 CYPRUS AIRWAYS 049 CRUZEIRO DO SUL 050 OLYMPIC AIRWAYS 051 LLOYD AEREO BOLIVIANO 053 AER LINGUS 055 ALITALIA 056 CYPRUS TURKISH AIRLINES 057 AIR FRANCE 058 INDIAN AIRLINES 060 FLIGHT WEST AIRLINES 061 AIR SEYCHELLES 062 DAN-AIR SERVICES 063 AIR CALEDONIE INTERNATIONAL 064 CSA CZECHOSLOVAK AIRLINES 065 SAUDI ARABIAN 066 NORONTAIR 067 AIR MOOREA 068 LAM-LINHAS AEREAS MOCAMBIQUE Page 2 of 19 Appendix 25 - SAD Box 31/3 Airline Codes March 2021 Airline code Code description 069 LAPA 070 SYRIAN ARAB AIRLINES 071 ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES 072 GULF AIR 073 IRAQI AIRWAYS 074 KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES 075 IBERIA 076 MIDDLE EAST AIRLINES 077 EGYPTAIR 078 AERO CALIFORNIA 079 PHILIPPINE AIRLINES 080 LOT POLISH AIRLINES 081 QANTAS AIRWAYS
    [Show full text]
  • Airline Schedules
    Airline Schedules This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on January 08, 2019. English (eng) Describing Archives: A Content Standard Special Collections and Archives Division, History of Aviation Archives. 3020 Waterview Pkwy SP2 Suite 11.206 Richardson, Texas 75080 [email protected]. URL: https://www.utdallas.edu/library/special-collections-and-archives/ Airline Schedules Table of Contents Summary Information .................................................................................................................................... 3 Scope and Content ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Series Description .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information ............................................................................................................................ 4 Related Materials ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Controlled Access Headings .......................................................................................................................... 5 Collection Inventory ....................................................................................................................................... 6 - Page 2 - Airline Schedules Summary Information Repository:
    [Show full text]
  • Pages 91-120
    Relocation of U.S. Navy’s Keehi Beach facilities was necessary to clear the site for the runway construction. The marina was to be relocated to Rainbow Bay in Pearl Harbor and the swimming and sunbathing activities were moved to Barbers Point. The State reimbursed the federal government for the cost of replacing these facilities in their new loca- tions. The total estimated cost was $1,598,000 and payment was made as work progressed. As of June 30,1973, the work was about 10 percent completed under the Navy contract. Although the Reef Runway was designed to improve the environment as well as provide for traffic gains into the 1990s, it was opposed on environmental grounds, including its possible effects on bird life and fishing grounds. The project’s effectiveness in reducing noise was also questioned. The bid opening was originally set for November 9, 1972. On November 8, Federal Judge Martin Pence signed a temporary restraining order which forbade the DOT to open the bids. The restraining order was granted on a complaint filed on behalf of four groups and four individuals. The groups were Life of the Land, the Hawaii Audubon Society, the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth. The four individuals were men who lived and worked in the area which would be affected by the Reef Runway. The order remained in effect until after hearings before Federal Judge Samuel P. King were completed, and his decision announced. On December 22, 1972, Judge King ruled that the environmental impact statement on the proposed Reef Runway was adequate and that construction could begin.
    [Show full text]
  • Hooters Air: Hot Wings Don't
    Journal of Business Cases and Applications Volume 15, December, 2015 Hooters Air: Hot wings don’t fly Dennis Kimerer The University of Tampa Hauimu Xing The University of Tampa Steven Lewis The University of Tampa Erika Matulich The University of Tampa Melissa Walters The University of Tampa Phil Michaels The University of Tampa ABSTRACT This instructional case is designed to develop students’ understanding of growth strategies, segment focusing, target market buying behavior, and brand expansion. The case explores a failed attempt at brand expansion by Hooters, a popular American restaurant chain that attempted to diversify into the airline industry. Hooters entered a highly competitive yet stagnant growth airline industry in 2003 as Hooters Air, targeting itself toward vacationers and golfers. Hooters Air sought to differentiate itself from other carriers with specialized flight destinations, a distinctive style of in-flight service, and first-class seating at an affordable price. After facing numerous challenges, including sky-rocketing fuel costs and general brand confusion, Hooters Air folded its wings in early 2006. The failure of Hooters Air is considered an ill-fated example of brand expansion. Keywords: Hooters Air, brand extension, marketing segmentation/positioning, diversification, marketing growth strategy Copyright statement: Authors retain the copyright to the manuscripts published in AABRI journals. Please see the AABRI Copyright Policy at http://www.aabri.com/copyright.html Hooters Air, Page 1 Journal of Business Cases and Applications Volume 15, December, 2015 TARGETED COURSES AND LEARNING OBJECTIVES This case is suitable for both undergraduate and graduate courses in marketing, management or entrepreneurship, as well as courses in which students are studying business strategies and marketing planning topics such as marketing growth strategy, branding strategy/brand expansion, new product introduction, market segmentation/positioning, and entrepreneurship.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembrance of Airlines Past: Cameron on Transportation
    Darienite News for Darien https://darienite.com Remembrance of Airlines Past: Cameron on Transportation Author : David Gurliacci Categories : Opinion, Transportation Tagged as : Cameron on Air Travel 2019, Cameron on Transportation, Cameron on Transportation 2019, Cameron on Transportation History 2019, Jim Cameron's Transportation Column, Jim Cameron's Transportation Column 2019 Date : July 12, 2019 Rail fans call them “fallen flags.” They are railroads that no longer exist, like the original New Haven and New York Central railroads. But before I start getting all misty eyed, let’s also pay homage to airlines that have flown away into history. 1 / 3 Darienite There’s PEOPLExpress, the domestic discount airline that flew out of Newark’s grungy old North Terminal startingNews infor 1981. Darien Fares were dirt cheap, collected on-board during the flight and checked bags cost $3. You https://darienite.comeven had to pay for sodas and snacks. The airline expanded too fast, even adding a 747 to its fleet for $99 flights to Brussels, and was eventually merged with Continental under its rapacious Chairman Frank Lorenzo, later banished from the industry by the Department of Transportation. There were any number of smaller, regional airlines that merged or just folded their wings, including Mohawk, Northeast, Southeast, Midway, L’Express, Independence Air, Air California, PSA and a personal favorite, Midwest Express, started by the Kimberly Clark paper company to shuttle employees between its mills and headquarters in Milwaukee. Midwest flew DC-9s, usually fitted with coach seats in a 2-and-3 configuration, but equipped instead with business-class 2-and-2 leather seats.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview and Trends
    9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 15 1 M Overview and Trends The Transportation Research Board (TRB) study committee that pro- duced Winds of Change held its final meeting in the spring of 1991. The committee had reviewed the general experience of the U.S. airline in- dustry during the more than a dozen years since legislation ended gov- ernment economic regulation of entry, pricing, and ticket distribution in the domestic market.1 The committee examined issues ranging from passenger fares and service in small communities to aviation safety and the federal government’s performance in accommodating the escalating demands on air traffic control. At the time, it was still being debated whether airline deregulation was favorable to consumers. Once viewed as contrary to the public interest,2 the vigorous airline competition 1 The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was preceded by market-oriented administra- tive reforms adopted by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) beginning in 1975. 2 Congress adopted the public utility form of regulation for the airline industry when it created CAB, partly out of concern that the small scale of the industry and number of willing entrants would lead to excessive competition and capacity, ultimately having neg- ative effects on service and perhaps leading to monopolies and having adverse effects on consumers in the end (Levine 1965; Meyer et al. 1959). 15 9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 16 16 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY spurred by deregulation now is commonly credited with generating large and lasting public benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999
    9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 171 Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999 UNFAIR PRICING AND CAPACITY RESPONSES 1. Date Raised: May 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Northwest Airlines Description: AccessAir, a new airline headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa, began service in the New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles to Mo- line/Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois, markets. Northwest offers connecting service in these markets. AccessAir alleged that Northwest was offering fares in these markets that were substantially below Northwest’s costs. 171 9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 172 172 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY 2. Date Raised: March 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Delta, Northwest, and TWA Description: AccessAir was a new entrant air carrier, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa. In February 1999, AccessAir began service to New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles from Des Moines, Iowa, and Moline/ Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois. AccessAir offered direct service (nonstop or single-plane) between these points, while competitors generally offered connecting service. In the Des Moines/Moline–Los Angeles market, Ac- cessAir offered an introductory roundtrip fare of $198 during the first month of operation and then planned to raise the fare to $298 after March 5, 1999. AccessAir pointed out that its lowest fare of $298 was substantially below the major airlines’ normal 14- to 21-day advance pur- chase fares of $380 to $480 per roundtrip and was less than half of the major airlines’ normal 7-day advance purchase fare of $680.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbus Regional Airport Authority
    COLUMBUS REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY - PORT COLUMBUS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TRAFFIC REPORT June 2014 7/22/2014 Airline Enplaned Passengers Deplaned Passengers Enplaned Air Mail Deplaned Air Mail Enplaned Air Freight Deplaned Air Freight Landings Landed Weight Air Canada Express - Regional 2,377 2,278 - - - - 81 2,745,900 Air Canada Express Totals 2,377 2,278 - - - - 81 2,745,900 AirTran 5,506 4,759 - - - - 59 6,136,000 AirTran Totals 5,506 4,759 - - - - 59 6,136,000 American 21,754 22,200 - - - 306 174 22,210,000 Envoy Air** 22,559 22,530 - - 2 ,027 2 ,873 527 27,043,010 American Totals 44,313 44,730 - - 2,027 3,179 701 49,253,010 Delta 38,216 36,970 29,594 34,196 25,984 36,845 278 38,899,500 Delta Connection - ExpressJet 2,888 2,292 - - - - 55 3,709,300 Delta Connection - Chautauqua 15,614 14,959 - - 640 - 374 15,913,326 Delta Connection - Endeavor 4 ,777 4,943 - - - - 96 5,776,500 Delta Connection - GoJet 874 748 - - 33 - 21 1,407,000 Delta Connection - Shuttle America 6,440 7,877 - - 367 - 143 10,536,277 Delta Connection - SkyWest 198 142 - - - - 4 188,000 Delta Totals 69,007 67,931 29,594 34,196 27,024 36,845 971 76,429,903 Southwest 97,554 96,784 218,777 315,938 830 103,146,000 Southwest Totals 97,554 96,784 - - 218,777 315,938 830 103,146,000 United 3 ,411 3,370 13,718 6 ,423 1 ,294 8 ,738 30 3,990,274 United Express - ExpressJet 13,185 13,319 - - - - 303 13,256,765 United Express - Mesa 27 32 - - - - 1 67,000 United Express - Republic 4,790 5,133 - - - - 88 5,456,000 United Express - Shuttle America 9,825 9,076 - - - - 151 10,919,112
    [Show full text]
  • Columbus Regional Airport Authority
    COLUMBUS REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY - PORT COLUMBUS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TRAFFIC REPORT October, 2009 11/24/2009 Airline Enplaned Passengers Deplaned Passengers Enplaned Air Mail Deplaned Air Mail Enplaned Air Freight Deplaned Air Freight Landings Landed Weight Air Canada Jazz - Regional 1,385 1,432 0 0 0 0 75 2,548,600 Air Canada Jazz Totals 1,385 1,432 0 0 0 0 75 2,548,600 AirTran 16,896 16,563 0 0 0 0 186 20,832,000 AirTran Totals 16,896 16,563 0 0 0 0 186 20,832,000 American 13,482 13,047 10,256 13,744 0 75 120 14,950,000 American Connection - Chautauqua 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Eagle 22,258 22,818 0 0 2,497 3,373 550 24,434,872 American Totals 35,740 35,865 10,256 13,744 2,497 3,448 670 39,384,872 Continental 5,584 5,527 24,724 17,058 6,085 12,750 57 6,292,000 Continental Express - Chautauqua 4,469 4,675 0 0 477 0 110 4,679,500 Continental Express - Colgan 2,684 3,157 0 0 0 0 69 4,278,000 Continental Express - CommutAir 1,689 1,630 0 0 0 0 64 2,208,000 Continental Express - ExpressJet 3,821 3,334 0 0 459 1,550 100 4,122,600 Continental Totals 18,247 18,323 24,724 17,058 7,021 14,300 400 21,580,100 Delta 14,640 13,970 0 0 9,692 38,742 119 17,896,000 Delta Connection - Atlantic SE 2,088 2,557 0 1 369 2 37 2,685,800 Delta Connection - Chautauqua 13,857 13,820 0 0 0 0 359 15,275,091 Delta Connection - Comair 1,890 1,802 0 0 0 0 52 2,444,000 Delta Connection - Mesa/Freedom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delta Connection - Pinnacle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delta Connection - Shuttle America 4,267 4,013 0 0 0 0 73 5,471,861 Delta Connection - SkyWest 0 0 0 0
    [Show full text]