Orange wrote:
There are tons of cities they could've added... St. Louis, Seattle, Las Vegas, Atlanta, Charlotte. I'm sure they did some kind of feasibility survey/study that told them Oakland would work.
May I add Dallas
| www.CostaRicaTicas.com https://forum.costaricaticas.com/ |
|
| Taca's newest city (Oakland, CA) https://forum.costaricaticas.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19474 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Orange [ Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Taca's newest city (Oakland, CA) |
I don't know if this helps anybody, but starting Nov 17th, they will fly Oakland to El Salvador where you can connect to San Jose. http://www.taca.com/gnss/app/eng/promwp.asp?id=1207 |
|
| Author: | MrLasVegas [ Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
They definately must be depending on outside of the area customers to make this work. I think of Oakland as a more Greyhound bus type of market. Unless Taca is taking welfare checks and weed as payment, hopefully the surrounding area will support it. |
|
| Author: | Irish Drifter [ Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
MrLasVegas wrote: They definately must be depending on outside of the area customers to make this work. I think of Oakland as a more Greyhound bus type of market. Unless Taca is taking welfare checks and weed as payment, hopefully the surrounding area will support it.
Airlines will sometimes offer service from an airport that has lower fees than an airport close by that has high costs. Perhaps by bypassing SFO and using Oakland they can attract bay area passengers while being able to offer lower fares or offer the same fare they would charge using SFO but make more money. While not exactly the same situation, because Fort Lauderdale is more affluent than Miami, many low cost carriers (Jet Blue, Spirit, etc.) use FLL rather than MIA because of the lower costs associated with using FLL. |
|
| Author: | Orange [ Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Irish Drifter wrote: Airlines will sometimes offer service from an airport that has lower fees than an airport close by that has high costs. Perhaps by bypassing SFO and using Oakland they can attract bay area passengers while being able to offer lower fares or offer the same fare they would charge using SFO but make more money.
I was thinking that too, but then I realized that they DO fly out of SFO, so the bay area is covered. I don't understand this move. There are tons of cities they could've added... St. Louis, Seattle, Las Vegas, Atlanta, Charlotte. I'm sure they did some kind of feasibility survey/study that told them Oakland would work. |
|
| Author: | HolaB [ Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Orange wrote: There are tons of cities they could've added... St. Louis, Seattle, Las Vegas, Atlanta, Charlotte. I'm sure they did some kind of feasibility survey/study that told them Oakland would work.
May I add Dallas
|
|
| Author: | Florida [ Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Even a tonta gringa republican knows Halloween is oct.31!!!! |
HolaB wrote: Orange wrote: There are tons of cities they could've added... St. Louis, Seattle, Las Vegas, Atlanta, Charlotte. I'm sure they did some kind of feasibility survey/study that told them Oakland would work. May I add Dallas  No you may not  now go make some cookies
|
|
| Author: | Mendobrew [ Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Adding Oakland expands service to the east bay and into the central valley…actually a good move. Not having to cross the bay bridge and get down to SFO will be a lot easier for about half of the potential fliers in Nor Cal…and as pointed out by ID, Oakland has cheaper landing fees and better parking. The only flight out of SFO is at the same time and is always packed, so this should free up a few seats for those of us coming up from South Bay and Central Coast…more seats, possible lower prices…now if we could just get them into San Jose for a SJC-SJO flight, that would work even better. OBTW…downtown O-town may a ghetto…but the berbs of Walnut Creek, Pleasanton ect. are very upscale and most 3/2’s start over a million…and the Hispanic base of Taca fliers are based out in the central valley. A good move on TACA’s part to create more seats in a better location for a good part of their base. Mendo |
|
| Author: | Ciaociao32001 [ Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mendo I fly into the bay area at least twice a year and like the convenience of the Oakland airport. I almost always stay in San Francisco and it is easy to hop on Bart and there is a quick shuttle to the airport. So I would say that in addition to the East Bay and Central Valley, people who live in the City might even find Oak convenient. Ciaociao |
|
| Author: | Mendobrew [ Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hola B wrote: Quote: May I add Dallas
With the strangle hold AA has on DFW the chances of another airline getting permision to fly the same routes to central America from DFW is slim and none …
Cracking into that AA hub is a near impossibility… Mendo |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|