usdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 824 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4322 times:
Does not seem bad for such a young carrier, but I would hope CASM would improve by year end. Curious to know if the new routes prove to be as profitable as the "mature" ones they discuss in the article.
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2879 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3936 times:
Yes virgin america has alot of planes soon. Lets see if that helps or hurts them. They are filling seats and getting a fan base so i think in LAX and SFO they will be able to add new markets. DEN or EGE seem like great markets for them IMHO
anyone know how DFW is doing? AA has an all out attack out on them now
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2879 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3644 times:
Virgin America has an amazing product. I wondering if they would be better off putting in an extra row of first class seats though?
I bet almost everyone on here is interested to know where they add these planes to? SFO was suppose to be the main focus but LAX has just been so good to them we saw them keep adding to there as well. Will they focus on the joint effort or focus on LAX or SFO next? JFK really could use a SAN flight and another LAS in peak season if they can pull it off.
Anyone think their gonna be crazy and try a ski destination?
ssublyme From United States of America, joined exactly 5 years ago today! , 511 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2788 times:
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 6): SFO was suppose to be the main focus but LAX has just been so good to them we saw them keep adding to there as well.
I don't know if SFO was supposed to be main focus, if I remember correctly there was a heated battle between LA & SFO to headquater the airline. SFO won, but I think deep down VX always knew LA would be a major player in their route network.
EGE is highly unlikely. In addition to being a very seasonal destination, I do not think the A319 can actually operate into EGE without some limits. There is a reason all the major carriers flying up there use 757's, and it isn't for capacity.
I am not sure if the Burlingame HQ is a benefit or a deterrent. For one thing the cost of living in SFO is among the highest in the nation, which will make it tough long term for VX to attract good talent to HQ. Secondly the CA tax burden is among the highest in the nation, and with Brown in office it isn't going to get lower. Yes it is near a major city and a city known as high yielding, but you have to give employees incentives to want to move there, and for what VX would have to pay to attract good people there in HQ, I am not sure its enough. When you look at the following list and see where everyone else is HQ, you see what VX is up against.
Dallas/Ft. Worth - American and Southwest
Chicago - United
Phoenix - Usairways (SOC is in Pittsburgh though, still not that high)
Atlanta - Delta
Seattle - Alaska
Ft. Lauderdale - Spirit
New York - JetBlue
WIth the exception of JetBlue, every one of those companies is in a city where the cost of living is significantly lower tha VX, plus there are still lingering questions about their long term viability. Yes tax incentives are great, but they don't mean anything if by taking advantage of them you have a hard time attracting people to work for your company because you can't pay enough for where you are based. JetBlue is having this very same issue on the other side of the country in New York, and I know people who tried to make it work but couldn't because the cost of living is so darn high there. (Dispatchers actually have crash pads and commute because its so high). As I said, I know the tax incentives and closeness to big financial districts are very attractive to these guys, but there are so many other things the beancounters can't account for, which nullifies a lot of these other benefits that seem attractive at first glance.
I'm not sure if cities such as Atlanta still attract the major talent these days. With its major crime, poverty and generally crappy infrastructure, I find the place pretty gross, although it is much cheaper to live in than SFO. If I were a graduate of a major business school, I'd pick SFO any day of the week over places like ATL or DFW.
That said, I know that US had a generally dissatisfied employee base in headquarters at DCA. The city is wonderful and many people working in Crystal City were young and smart, but the fact that the company never paid enough to live there did not encourage one to stay too long (although the airline did have many longtime employees who loved the benefits). I still think that having a headquarters in SFO may be a catalyst that will help VX succeed. Even if its staff does not stay long, it will still attract those looking to live in a liberal, interesting city full of smart people. My guess is that those that try will be young risk-takers that will strive to make it work and enjoy themselves along the way. That may be a better pool of candidates to attract than the usual bunch of suburbanites.
Atlwest1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1046 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2390 times:
Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 13): I'm not sure if cities such as Atlanta still attract the major talent these days. With its major crime, poverty and generally crappy infrastructure, I find the place pretty gross, although it is much cheaper to live in than SFO. If I were a graduate of a major business school, I'd pick SFO any day of the week over places like ATL or DFW
Atlanta's crime isnt near as bad as some other places and the poverty level in ATlanta once again isnt near as bad as some places. Apparently you havent been to the same city I have lived in since 91 if thats your conclusion. Id rather live in a up and coming city where for the cost of a home in SFO I can have something 5 times larger and cheaper to maintain. Gross isnt the best adjective.
In this economy most cities are having a harder time attracting talent because companies are seldom hiring from the outside. Rather they are combining positions and pulling from inside. But if your a graduate from a top school and shunned a city with regional hq and hq's for some of the most well know companies in the world then perhaps work isnt seriously what that person is looking for.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co. or Airt
Flyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1772 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2372 times:
Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 13): I'm not sure if cities such as Atlanta still attract the major talent these days.
It's really disingenuous and slightly offensive to make that kind of generalization. It's cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Charlotte, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Kansas City, San Antonio...etc that ARE attracting the major talent for one simple reason...they're some of the few places in the country that are experiencing growth. Most business graduates go wherever there's opportunity for them, and living in a liberal interesting city full of smart people will do them no good when all those smart people don't have jobs considering both California and San Francisco's staggering unemployment rates and high cost of living. Speaking from the view-point of an impending business college grad, sure it would be cool if I got a decent paying job in LA or San Francisco, but they aren't particularly rife with opportunity for me and my fellow experience-hungry grads, and have infamously high tax-burdens and high costs of living. All of the Midwestern and sunbelt cities I mentioned above are both growing, dynamic, and interesting cities in their own right...oh and those cities are full of smart people too
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16500 posts, RR: 48 Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2212 times:
This HQ location discussion really has nothing to do with nothing
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11): It true however that SF & LA flight activity has grown pretty much hand in hand, with VX occupying nice chunk of real estate at LAX which would allow significant further growth.
Significant growth in LAX is not going to help VX on the yield side
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2879 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2076 times:
For EWR it would probably make more sense to offer 2 or 3x a day just to one city for frequency and business when competing head to head against United if they could get some slots. The merger made Southwest the "lucky" winner of quite a few EWR slots and all of them!