Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5700772/

Topic: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: MJBATC12
Posted 2013-02-25 17:24:40 and read 5118 times.

I was told by a friend who's a gate agent to expect an announcement on LAX-BDL around late March or so. He told me the BDL airport admin are trying to get the route subsidized, does this increase changes of seeing it happen? He said the flight will most likely start 4th quarter this year also.


Thoughts? Gets me excited!

-MB

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: jetblueguy22
Posted 2013-02-25 17:33:41 and read 5065 times.

Well if they are look for subsidies it can't be too official yet. Makes me kind of nervous on the longevity of the route though if they need some subsidies. Also surprising that they may wait until Q4. I would think they would try to get it in the summer schedule. Maybe it is a little too late for that though. I hope they can make it work, love more service from my home airport on my favorite airline!
Pat

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: flyby519
Posted 2013-02-25 17:55:07 and read 4977 times.

March 11 is the State of the Airline address... FWIW

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: CairnterriAIR
Posted 2013-02-25 19:23:25 and read 4762 times.

I don't quite get why BDL-LAX would need subsidies. I live here and that route has quite a bit of traffic through various connecting points. The airlines that attempt it just have to advertise that the service exists, time it properly, and allow the service to develop. Nearly every other flight out of here goes out packed, should be no different here.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-02-25 19:33:53 and read 4720 times.

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Reply 3):
I don't quite get why BDL-LAX would need subsidies.

You've partially answered the question. It's long, it's thin and there are a ton of connecting options. What good is a single daily nonstop if it's not at the time I need?

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: vin2basketball
Posted 2013-02-25 19:37:49 and read 4705 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):

You've partially answered the question. It's long, it's thin and there are a ton of connecting options. What good is a single daily nonstop if it's not at the time I need?


Moreover, its P2P, meaning its not exactly drawing on customer bases loyal to B6 (in LA that would be more LGB travelers)

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-02-25 19:44:45 and read 4681 times.

This whole topic seems weird -- basis of the information (rumor from a gate agent), timing (announcement 7-8 months ahead and a 4th Quarter start?), economics (subsidies?)

Thanks anyway but I think I'll wait 'til I see the official announcement on this one...

bb

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: Av8tor
Posted 2013-02-25 20:08:32 and read 4578 times.

The reason gate agents don't know information like this, is because they would immediately run out and tell the town crier about it, who would then post it on every website available to them..............

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-25 20:10:14 and read 4573 times.

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 2):
March 11 is the State of the Airline address... FWIW

I thought that was February 11 (B6's birthday)?

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Reply 3):
I don't quite get why BDL-LAX would need subsidies.

I think it's just an incentive for an airline to start it. A few have in the past (DL, also AA?) and weren't able to make it work. B6 should be able to make it work, but it's not easy to do. I'm surprised they are doing flying to LAX and not LGB.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-02-25 21:24:59 and read 4413 times.

AA was the first to try the route, I don't know how well it did, but I think it was a victim of 9/11. DL then made a go of the route via Song, and eventually continued the route over to DL. DL at this point operated a mini-focus city at BDL, with service to ATL, CVG, CUN, FLL, TPA, PBI, MCO, CMH, SLC, LAX, LAS. They eventually canceled SLC and LAS, and suspended LAX. They brought back LAX maybe twice? I can't remember.

UA also operated BDL-SFO and DEN, but again, they fell victim to 9/11.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-26 03:06:30 and read 4233 times.

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Reply 3):
The airlines that attempt it just have to advertise that the service exists, time it properly, and allow the service to develop.

UA had a lot of LAX traffic but a great deal of it was connecting onward from LA to Asia and other smaller soCal cities. I do see UA possibly throwing a 737 on that route if B6 actually launches possibley with the hopes of satisfiying its media clientele out of BDL.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: flyby519
Posted 2013-02-26 04:40:42 and read 4125 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 8):

That was the plan, but it got postponed due to the huge snowstorm.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-26 04:48:18 and read 4107 times.

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Reply 3):
I don't quite get why BDL-LAX would need subsidies. I live here and that route has quite a bit of traffic through various connecting points.



I imagine that much of the business traffic from Connecticut, Stamford, Danbury, New Haven etc., gets siphoned off by JFK.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2013-02-26 05:03:51 and read 4084 times.

JFK is a good ride from CT.

LGA is not an option due to the perimeter.

Maybe BDL can work.

I just dont see it though. It is long and thin...uses a lot of fuel

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: RL757PVD
Posted 2013-02-26 06:09:03 and read 3991 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 12):
I imagine that much of the business traffic from Connecticut, Stamford, Danbury, New Haven etc., gets siphoned off by JFK.

The reason that traffic gets siphoned off is because BDL is more than twice as far as JFK. On top of being closer you also have 10x the frequency, so for any business traveler in the Stamford/Greenwich area, BDL is just not a viable option under most scenarios.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-02-26 06:49:09 and read 3923 times.

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 14):
The reason that traffic gets siphoned off is because BDL is more than twice as far as JFK.

It depends where you are. Bridgeport and Danbury are roughly equidistant, though at most times of day, it'll be quicker to get to BDL. It's probably quicker to drive from Stamford to JFK most of the time, but once you get much north or east of there, things change. Depending on where you are, though, HPN may also be a good option.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2013-02-26 07:10:18 and read 3882 times.

HPN would be a great little airport.

But the terminal is dangerous. I dont know how the Fire Department even allows that many people in one area. Knowing Westchester, it is a payoff.

If HPN had a 10 gate facility with adequate seating areas and dare I say a bus to the various train stations within a 10 minute drive, the airport would do well.

Of course, being NY/CT...and a well to do part of NY/CT, none of this will get done.

So LGA is the default for within perimeter flights, JFK for outside perimeter flights.

BDL, like someone pointed out above, is easier the further north and east you get. Keep in mind that BDL is not in Hartford; it is a good distance north. This is even further from the NY Metro area

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: RL757PVD
Posted 2013-02-26 07:12:01 and read 3882 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 15):
It depends where you are. Bridgeport and Danbury are roughly equidistant, though at most times of day, it'll be quicker to get to BDL.


I tend to get stuck in traffic more in CT between Stamford and New Haven than I do on the Cross Island Parkway and New Rochelle areas.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-26 07:12:49 and read 3880 times.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 13):
LGA is not an option due to the perimeter.

The perimeter rule is not in effect on weekends.

BDL serves non-Fairfield County, CT and Southern Mass. Driving from say Springfield to JFK for an LA flight is pointless.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: ScottB
Posted 2013-02-26 07:45:54 and read 3828 times.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 18):
Driving from say Springfield to JFK for an LA flight is pointless.

Well, of course it is. BOS is closer to Springfield than JFK. That's another challenge for BDL: a BDL-LAX non-stop with inconvenient timing also has to compete with frequent, competitive BOS-LAX service on several carriers for traffic from western Massachusetts & southern Vermont.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 8):
B6 should be able to make it work, but it's not easy to do. I'm surprised they are doing flying to LAX and not LGB.

I don't exactly see why B6 should have any more success than the other carriers who have tried BDL-LAX and ultimately failed. They have near-zero network connectivity (aside from connections in Florida to the Caribbean) from BDL to appeal to business passengers and no connections available at LAX. So the route would have to survive entirely on O&D in a market that's pretty thin to begin with. At least DL & AA were able to offer connections at LAX.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: richierich
Posted 2013-02-26 07:50:24 and read 3816 times.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 13):
I just dont see it though. It is long and thin...uses a lot of fuel

It has been done before. AA used to fly BDL-LAX back in the late '90s and it was quietly dropped in the early 2000s, I believe. I know for sure UA used to fly BDL-SFO as I was on that flight once, an A319 in 1999. BDL is a bit of a challenge on longer routes.

Could B6 make it work? Maybe, maybe not. As jfklganyc wrote, fuel is a lot more expensive than it was a decade or so ago and this will clearly never be a huge moneymaker. I'll also hold off until I see the official announcement.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: richierich
Posted 2013-02-26 08:06:36 and read 3789 times.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 19):
I don't exactly see why B6 should have any more success than the other carriers who have tried BDL-LAX and ultimately failed. They have near-zero network connectivity (aside from connections in Florida to the Caribbean) from BDL to appeal to business passengers and no connections available at LAX. So the route would have to survive entirely on O&D in a market that's pretty thin to begin with. At least DL & AA were able to offer connections at LAX.

100% agree.
Doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see them try it though.

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-02-26 13:59:43 and read 2582 times.

Quoting richierich (Reply 21):
100% agree.
Doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see them try it though.

Sadly I must also agree with ScottB.

This rumor just doesn't seem to 'add up.' I doubt this flight will start.   I wish it would, I just doubt it.

Quoting richierich (Reply 20):
AA used to fly BDL-LAX back in the late '90s and it was quietly dropped in the early 2000s,

I loved that flight.    Well timed for my needs.    But seats were cheap on a usually full flight.


Lightsaber

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: jetblueguy22
Posted 2013-02-26 14:11:34 and read 2543 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 15):
Bridgeport and Danbury are roughly equidistant, though at most times of day, it'll be quicker to get to BDL. It's probably quicker to drive from Stamford to JFK most of the time, but once you get much north or east of there, things change. Depending on where you are, though, HPN may also be a good option.

I live in Waterbury and its about 55 minutes to BDL and probably an hour 15 to JFK. But it seems like many friends and family would rather drive that extra 20 minutes to JFK. I like BDL, very easy airport. But why would I pay 700 dollars for a flight that operates once a day, when I can drive 20 minutes farther and have be able to grab a number of flights that leave every hour or two for half or just above half of that. Just doesn't make sense. My time isn't so valuable that I would pay that much more. I honestly think BDL is in a place now where there aren't many markets more they can serve. They are pretty right sized at the moment. Perhaps I'm wrong though and they can pull this off. B6 seems to be doing pretty well there.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 16):
If HPN had a 10 gate facility with adequate seating areas and dare I say a bus to the various train stations within a 10 minute drive, the airport would do well.

The problem with HPN is the NIMBYs. I think HPN is like the hidden treasure of the tristate area. It is such an easy airport to fly out of and the fares are really decent at times. If you have to connect anyways that is the place to go. I really wish they could expand that airport a little more, but the people in surrounding areas, most notably Greenwich, are not going to go for it IMO.
Pat

Topic: RE: Rumor:B6 LAX-BDL Announcement In Mar.
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-02-26 14:24:27 and read 2475 times.

BDL seems to love to subsidize routes to Los Angeles and Amsterdam. With a whole continent full of hubs to the west coast spend the airports funds in better areas.


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/