JetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1764 times:
Quoting BigGSFO (Thread starter): Interesting note mentions a planned cut in transcontinental flying by fall.
There are already some for the posted Sept 7-Oct 31 schedule:
IAD-LGB 3x (usually 4x in the fall)
IAD-OAK 2x (usually 3x in the fall)
JFK-LGB 5x (usually 7x in the fall)
I don't think we'll see much more than that. Perhaps routes like BOS-LAS/SEA will not be flown on slow days, such as Tuesday and Saturday.
As far as what the analysts say, I think they make some good points. However, I disagree with their analysis on 17 of the last 20 routes being unprofitable. Those routes were rated for the 4Q05, which is arguably the slowest quarter of the year (at least for B6). In addition, it takes quite awhile to gain awareness of a route and to also absorb start-up costs. I think that over half of these supposed unprofitable routes will be profitable by the end of this summer...
Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
JetBlueAUS From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 1145 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 21 hours ago) and read 1566 times:
JetBlue is fixing the mistakes that they have made in the past. Yes, they are cutting back on trans-cons which, hopefully, will help their profitability. Like the article said JetBlue is adding flights east of the Mississippi. A.) This will help keep their planes in the air, keeping planes in the air = not losing as much money. B.) They already have a strong presence in the east, but adding more flights to the east will only increase B6's presence. Then they can start moving forward.
Even though I am a JetBlue loyalist, I agree B6 is not a perfect airline and has made some mistakes that have effected their profitability. Neeleman is doing what is right for the company and I think that his ideas will work.
Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 1): However, I disagree with their analysis on 17 of the last 20 routes being unprofitable.
I second this. It takes awhile to attract PAX to the route. When I flew out of AUS a few weeks ago, B6 had a few ads to attract loads and I am not going to ever forget the run by the restrooms, 'Blue for another Airline?' Corny, but hey it gets your attention. I agree with JetBluefan1, I expect over half of these routes profitable by the end of the summer.
Not all of us can be heroes, some of us can only stand on the sidewalk and clap as they go by.
ASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1175 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 21 hours ago) and read 1553 times:
Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 1): it takes quite awhile to gain awareness of a route and to also absorb start-up costs
I'll give you the awareness thing, though Jet Blue already maintained a presence in many of their new markets, albeit from other cities. This learning curve should be fairly minimal. If Jet Blue is already flying to the cities they are inaugurating new flights to/from, their start up costs are minimal as well. They already have gate space/staff to handle the flights - the costs are mainly operating costs relative to the actual flight itself.