Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/1753796/

Topic: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Klwright69
Posted 2004-09-25 16:59:28 and read 7728 times.

The following article says it all:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/business/article/0,1299,DRMN_4_3208477,00.html

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: OPNLguy
Posted 2004-09-25 17:09:54 and read 7609 times.

You know, to look at your topic line you'd think that F9 is ceasing all LAX service...

They're only dropping LAX-STL.... LAX-DEN will continue...

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: InnocuousFox
Posted 2004-09-25 17:18:41 and read 7568 times.

"They're only dropping LAX-STL.... LAX-DEN will continue..."

The whole point is that F9 was running other routes out of LAX rather than just to their hub... I agree that it could have been worded better, though.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: JetBluefan1
Posted 2004-09-25 17:20:44 and read 7558 times.

At least they're keeping their LAX-MCI, DEN, and PHL services...

Too bad for STL and MSP. STL will still have the low fares from WN, but MSP has no LCC for the route.

JetBluefan1

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Noise
Posted 2004-09-25 17:26:41 and read 7530 times.

How is American West doing in LAX these days? I know LAX is a focus city for America West as well...are they suffering from the same problems as Frontier?

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Klwright69
Posted 2004-09-25 17:31:28 and read 7507 times.

Point taken.

Of course F9 is not and will not cease DEN-LAX. That would be proposterous. I just used the catchy wording from the story's headline. After the initial excitement and fanfare, it doesn't look promising for the F9 LAX focus city. Pulling routes here and there, one at a time.

That is all.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Clrd2go
Posted 2004-09-25 18:11:32 and read 7398 times.

America West!! America (no "n") West!

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-25 18:12:16 and read 7401 times.

As usual, there is more to things than a headline.

Frontier had planned to use the smaller A318 on both LAX/STL and LAX/MCI for the slower months.

But the 7th A318 - N807FR - was damaged during a test flight at Finkenwerder and one engine is a write off. Since spare CFM's are not thick on the ground, there is gong to be a delay in delivery - there is a thread about this.

This means that Frontier is short an aircraft for a couple of months, so they bit the bullet on LAX/STL (the 318 will take over LAX/MCI from October 10).

On the other hand, DEN/BNA gos to the A319 (instead of the A318) for about six weeks in November.

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: InnocuousFox
Posted 2004-09-25 18:19:33 and read 7368 times.

One of those 2 LAX-PHL flights is obviously a red-eye/repositioning flight. That's not much of a presence there.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Flaps
Posted 2004-09-25 19:21:50 and read 7214 times.

Bring on DEN-PIT with newly freed a/c.....Pleeeeeeaaaaaasssssseeeee!!!!!!!!

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: AAplatnumflier
Posted 2004-09-25 22:39:28 and read 6649 times.

The problem with Frontier is that they don't advertise. The average flier would not know the difference between them or Joe Shmoe Airline. Also the average traveler would not even know anything about it. I was taxiing for takeoff the other day at LAX and somebody a row across said I wonder what that airline is. The animals are cool on the tail. Just thought I would share my opinion.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-25 22:51:23 and read 6565 times.

"The problem with Frontier is that they don't advertise..."

Well, maybe. But if that's true it would be system wide, and it wouldn't explain why (for example) DEN/ANC or PHL or DCA or BNA do so well, or many others.

Or anything to Cancun, including SLC/CUN.

And there are the tv commercials, which, I think, counts as advertising.

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: AAplatnumflier
Posted 2004-09-25 22:55:22 and read 6525 times.

Their presence in Denver is so big. How could you not know who they are? In L.A. they had a short advertiseing run and that was that. It got me to fly them. I loved it. But i still think they have to somehow make their presnece in L.A. bigger. I dont mean by adding flights I just mean they need their name to be out there to the average flier.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-25 23:14:45 and read 6395 times.

"How could you not know who they are?"

Interesting. The reason they started the tv commercials is because they discovered that, in Denver, a lot of people didn't know why they are (this is about two years ago).

As far as LA is concerned, I think there have to be other reasons. PHL/LAX did well from the git-go, so I guess they got their name to the PHL pax.

The other odd thing is that the concentration has all been on LAX. What they've been doing at CUN has gone almost unnoticed.

CUN is now, effectively, a focus city for them, with more destinations than LAX had.

The Frontier cabin crews even joke about it: "On behalf of your Cancun based crew...."

In their dreams, of course, but the CEO has said that if Cancun continues this way, they will have to consider a crew base there. He might have been joking, too.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: AirplaneBoy
Posted 2004-09-25 23:16:00 and read 6380 times.

Hi everyone...

I agree with AAplatnumflier. We really do need to advertise more in the outstations.

Mariner- I agree with you as well. Some of our new markets are doing quite well. Do you think it's perhaps that select outstations received more advertising or better time slots (t.v.)/better deals on print rates? In L.A., the advertising stopped just after only a few comercials that aired during late evening and on channels that aren't widely watched.

Although I'm sad to see our LAX station get smaller, I can't always say I wish we had LAX- ___ , etc. etc. --- even though I'll keep wishing and crossing my fingers. Big grin

I hope that as our fleet grows, that the tails will find some happy new routes to make money on- especially until we get more gate space in DEN.

I'm sure that we can definitely expect more flights in the coming months however as the holiday season and spring are right around the corner.

Cheers!

Travis/LAX

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: UAMAYBACH1239
Posted 2004-09-25 23:24:13 and read 6338 times.

I would say they dont advertise as much in Los Angeles. In DEN of course their presence is known, but only 2hrs away its the complete opposite.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-25 23:45:39 and read 6232 times.

AirplaneBoy:

I have a problem with the advertising thing. People seem to know about LAX/PHL, and, at least during the summer months, about LAX/STL and LAX/MCI.

I think - I don't know - that LAX was all about LAX/MSP. I suspect that Frontier was ready for retaliation on LAX/MSP, but they weren't expecting NWA to start DEN/LAX, one of the breand and butter routes.

Since DEN/LAX had to be protected, LAX/MSP had to go.

But I was interested that even until yesterday LAX/STL was still in the website booking - as the A318, not the A319. It was to change o October 10, the same day as LAX/MCI goes to the A318.

Clearly, the delay of N807FR is a problem.

Right now, it's a whole other ball game. Frontier first warned about the cost of fuel when oil was at about $35 a barrel. Now it is $49 a barrel.

So I get the impression that Frontier has sensibly battened down the hatches until the present storm passes.

But who knows? The CEO has said "no new routes this year" but the Rockford (Chicago) press seems convinced that Frontier is coming to them.

http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040924/NEWS0107/40924003

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Ltbewr
Posted 2004-09-26 01:18:43 and read 5781 times.

I bet very few people know of them flying into LGA, as they have no ads for them here in the NYC area. Probably they don't as they have only a few flights into LGA, do not serve EWR and don't expect to get much return for the investment in ads to get through the clutter. They don't even have ads (as they did in the past) nationwide on cable/satallite news and entertainment stations. I really only know of them servicing LGA from a DIA-LGA flight in 1999 I bought online via Travelocity.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: MSYtristar
Posted 2004-09-26 01:44:43 and read 5654 times.

Besides the before-mentioned 318, it looks like a new 319 delivery will have to be pushed back as well thanks to another incident in Germany. I don't have many more details than that. Look for some minor (but still unfortunate) frequency reuctions to a couple of major markets in mid December.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-26 02:38:12 and read 5414 times.

MSYtristar:

Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall at the negotiations between Frontier and Airbus over this?

cheers

mariner

ps: I like your choice for President.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: UAL747DEN
Posted 2004-09-26 03:50:29 and read 5133 times.

I think that F9 is showing that they are a great airline by cutting service like they have. Most airlines wouldn't cut service just because of the PR, however F9 is constantly evaluating weather the service is profitable or not, if they see any where else that they could use that aircraft they will pull it. We have seen that some other airlines will not do this, they will actually cut prices and operate full flights that go out without making a dime just to keep some sort of pride.
As for F9 not adding any additional routes this year, that is mostly a computer problem. They are in the process of switching the res. system and adding a new city at this point would be a mess, however if they see a big potential I can assure you they will take it.

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-26 04:35:34 and read 4952 times.

UAL747DEN:

No new routes this year was a policy decision. Frontier has warned at the beginning of the year about the price of oil, and when oil started to go through the roof, together with what they saw as a general over-capacity, they decided to batten down the hatches.

This is all part of your post - the willingness to reduce service, etc.

Now, about two weeks after they said "no new cities this year", they announced LIT - so any policy can change.

But RFD? I don't know. I don't know enough about it.

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: AirplaneBoy
Posted 2004-09-26 04:50:03 and read 4875 times.

Mariner-

I agree. Remember when LIT was announced? Many of us were surprised because Potter usually does what he says he's going to do. As previously discussed, the opportunities for going into LIT at that time outweighed the negatives.

Where is RFD?

After hearing about LIT, I wouldn't be shocked to hear about another new station.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Warm Regards,

Travis/LAX

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: UAL747DEN
Posted 2004-09-26 04:54:21 and read 4849 times.

Mariner,
I got my information on that from the Aug 9th edition of "The Loop". Here is what it says:

Rumor: Frontier's next new destination, to be announced soon, will be. . . Montego Bay, Jamaica

Reality: The latest in a long and prestigious list of rumored "next destinations" we are sad to say that Montego Bay, while certainly an appealing tropical locale, is not in our immediate plans. In fact, not only are we not beginning flights to Jamaica any time soon, but it is unlikely we will add any more cities prior to the completion of the Sabre installation next year, in an effort to create a smooth transition. While its not exactly Jamaica (in fact, it might be the anti-Jamaica), service is still scheduled to begin to Little Rock on Oct. 10, but that will mark the end of new city additions prior to the Sabre transition.


Never thought about this until now but to add to the AA/F9 merger dream! The fact that F9 dropped SHARES, costing them great penalties to go to Sabre in the middle of the purchase would help that argument. (I know this is not likely!)

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Mariner
Posted 2004-09-26 05:10:01 and read 4794 times.

UAL747DEN:

I'm going by what the CEO told the shareholders at the AGM. He said no new cities/no new routes in Fiscal '05.

Mind you, he's hard to keep pace with sometimes.

He started the Jamaica rumors at the December '03 press conference when he said they were in discussions with "a Caribbean island", but probably not for that ('03) winter.

The AA/F9 merger dream? I would say the nightmare. Look what AA has done to every other airline it has acquired.

AirplaneBoy:

RFD is Rockford outside of Chicago. See the link I posted in reply #16.

RFD is a severely under-used airport that sees itself as an alternative to ORD.

They were able to entice Trans-Meridien there last year, and they are now on an all out push to get (a) NWA (b) Frontier and (c) Hooters - I kid you not.

They are offering a guarantee against loss and no landing fees for the first 12 months.

cheers

mariner

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: Ifly2eat
Posted 2004-09-26 05:24:24 and read 4723 times.

"but MSP has no LCC for the route."

So ATA has been forgotten that easy JetBlueFan?

Topic: RE: F9 Throwing In The Towel At LAX
Username: SHUPirate1
Posted 2004-09-26 06:29:16 and read 4451 times.

Worth noting, if this hasn't changed, is that UA has quite a few route authorities from RFD, including to much of Europe, the Middle East, and several countries in Continental Asia...


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/