DAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 50 Posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 7886 times:
Three new routes for Song announced today. Beginning September 6th, Song will start twice-daily service from BOS to both SFO and LAX. Also, they will launch the only nonstop service on BDL-LAX, operating a single daily flight, starting September 6th as well.
Comment: The two new Boston routes were only a matter of time, however I'm a bit surprised by BDL-LAX. I could have seen that flight sometime down the road, but would have expected SLC service first. Still, great news for BDL.
AS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5819 posts, RR: 23 Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7813 times:
This does come as a surprise. Be nice to see more of the snot covered 757's on the west coast and specially here at SFO where some color is needed. I wonder if United will or is in the position to make any response.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
Eric777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 198 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7793 times:
According to faremeasure.com, 342 people per day travel between BDL and LAX. Obviously not all of them fly DL, but if they can convince 199 of 342 to take the flight, then the flight will work. A nice addition for BDL. Nice pickups for BOS too.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7768 times:
Yes, good for BDL, however, I thought PVD-MCO on Song would be above that on the priority list. AA and UA just got an early morning wake-up call on their beloved BOS-LAX/SFO service. First B6 trims at the edges (LGB & OAK) and now DL Song throws the round-house...
RL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4537 posts, RR: 13 Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7741 times:
Well BDL had announced an incentive package for west coast service so it's obvously ties into that. However with only 342 daily O&D pax and 398 seats both ways (and not everyone flies DL, or at those times) I would expect the flight to perform rather poorly. However, that said, since its a red eye ( not parked overnight) in addition to the incentives may have made it work a try. AA was not sucessful with a 738 when O&D #'s were higher than they are now and AA had connection opportunities unlike DL, so we'll see...
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
Padcrasher From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7722 times:
The BDL flight should do very well. Delta averages 58 passengers a day now connecting. Not only will Delta take some market share from UA/AA, BDL should see some passengers driving to JFK/BOS for non-stops and lower fares start come back.
This is a good sign for Song. I think if JFK-LAX had terrible numbers, they would have held these markets back and gone for more leisure destinations or Delta friendly markets. But they're still taking the fight to Jetblue and AA/UA.
Col From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2040 posts, RR: 22 Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7688 times:
I hope the BDL service works. We did have AA with the 738, and prior we had UA do SFO with the 319, both of which were dropped. With Songs fare structure, they could pick up new cheap ticket pax. Like somebody else said, it keeps a 757 from sitting idle overnight. Now we need jetblue!
Richierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7669 times:
Quoting Padcrasher (Reply 10): Not only will Delta take some market share from UA/AA, BDL should see some passengers driving to JFK/BOS for non-stops and lower fares start come back.
I agree with Padcrasher on this. There are a lot of people who live in New Haven/Waterbury and Worcester areas that routinely drive to New York and Boston areas for longer flights. But at the end of the day, I am not sure if it will work. BDL has had BDL-LAX before (as well as BDL-SFO on UA) but this is the first time with an LCC. Maybe it will be different this time around.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7601 times:
DL will have to more than triple it's market share on this route/market to fill the 757, and with a red-eye return flight, this may prove difficult. Having said that, I think it's good for BDL that they got DL's attention on this route to begin with - somthing we seem to be unable to do here in PVD
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31113 posts, RR: 74 Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 7428 times:
The Hartford-Los Angeles market is actually 576 daily passengers. Remember, DOT does not combine the LA-area airports (nor the SF or Miami-area airports) like they do for Chicago, NYC, Dallas, Houston, and DC.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7412 times:
Good point MAH, but it is clear the bulk of the market is pure BDL-LAX. Opening up an entire region's O & D in many cases clouds the actual service. If I could count BOS's O & D (only 50 miles from PVD), we would have nonstop service to 20 more markets than we do now...
Top O & D markets with at least 125 average one way passengers without any nonstop service (DOT 3Q04 data only - annual average numbers will vary):
1) MCO-SAN 356 avg. daily total pax
2) ORF-SAN 347
3) RDU-DEN 346 (go nuts ERJ170!)
4) SEA-TPA 336
5) PIT-SEA 335 (US drops this 8/22/05)
6) SEA-FLL 334 (long flight!)
7) RDU-LAX 333 (calm down ERJ170!)
8) PVD-SAN 296
9) PVD-LAX 282 (we've been loosing many more pax to B6/BOS)
10) PDX-MCO 282
11) BUF-FLL 275 (anyone from NK reading this???)
12) FLL-SAN 269
13) PVD-LAS 267 (between WN and US/HP, this should become reality soon)
14) ORF-LAX 263
15) PHL-PDX 256 (US/HP merger should knock this one off the list too)
16) PDX-BOS 256 (long term US/HP route?)
17) BDL-SEA 254 (AS future route?)
18) RDU-MCI 248 (too close to the cut to leave off)
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31113 posts, RR: 74 Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7357 times:
Quoting PVD757 (Reply 21): Good point MAH, but it is clear the bulk of the market is pure BDL-LAX. Opening up an entire region's O & D in many cases clouds the actual service. If I could count BOS's O & D (only 50 miles from PVD), we would have nonstop service to 20 more markets than we do now...
Good point, covering market leakage can be difficult, so that's why I just put it by metro area. MIA/FLL/PBI, LAX/ONT/SNA/BUR/SNA, and SFO/OAK/SJC are used as coterminals by most majors. BOS/PVD/MHT are, IIRC, not. Although there is definitley market leakage between BOS/PVD/MHT, and other airport pairs (MOB/PNS/VPS), it is hard to measure the tru effects. Of any two airport pairs, MIA/FLL and SFO/OAK probably have the most market leakage to each other. Also, there are cases where an airline's presence in the market makes the market to a secondary airport simply larger. Look at how big the FLL-LGB market is thanks to jetBlue (276 daily passengers).
In the case of MIA especially, the majority of the domestic traffic has always gone through FLL. Combining the fitures, the RDU-QLA is 616 passengers, MFW-BUF has 527 daily passengers; PVD-QLA has 443, and MFW-SAN has 426.
(also, side note, but I am using older numbers than those recently updated on Faremeausure).
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7263 times:
Huh, I have to thank you MAH, as I had stopped checking faremeasure and was relying on farewatch since faremeasure's data was from 3Q03 or something...thanks! Oh, by the way, BOS/PVD/MHT has a huge amount of leakage. As the networks become more point to point, there will be less relyance on the MSA to MSA routes (since they are mostly already served) and the second tier or "competeing" airports will become more attractive. As a route like BOS-LAX becomes saturated with capacity and the fares come down, there is less incentive to ignore PVD/MHT since the playing field becomes more level. In this case, a carrier can offer the 1x daily service PVD-LAX at the lower fare because the fare premium at BOS has been dilluted, therfore reducing the oppurtunity to make more money at BOS, while at the same time enjoying no competion at PVD driving up demand as the people seeking the nonstop come back to PVD...