Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Alaska Won't Open A Hub On The East Coast?  
User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1029 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11160 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Is it time for Alaska to set up shop on the East-Coast??

There's a few large-airports on the East capable of sustaining "a Hub". (PIT, CVG, RDU, MCO)

US Airways pulled out of Pittsburgh many years ago, Delta is dialing back Cincinnatti considerably, that's two options right there.

any thoughts?

[Edited 2013-03-31 15:09:40]

43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3173 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11108 times:

Because there is no need. AS serves their role as a niche airline that has an excellent West Coast, Alaskan, and Hawaiian route network. They are making money as it is, and I see opening up a East Coast hub as risky. Not only that, but AS has codeshares with AA and DL that help serve AS passengers on the East cost. Besides, the East Coast is already well-served with existing hubs.

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
US Airways pulled out of Pittsburgh many years ago, Delta is dialing back Cincinnatti considerably, that's two options right there.

US and DL have scaled back PIT and CVG because there were too many hubs in the area. The Midwest is efficiently served today via ORD, DTW, CLE, MSP, and to some extent, CVG.



E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlineboeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 441 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11098 times:

I think the reason why AS won't open a hub on the east coast is because they don't have as stron as a brand recognition on the east coast. Sure people know about Alaska Airlines but they don't know how great of an airline they are.

Also another problem is the name, people are gonna think "Alaska" and not Seattle or Portland



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2364 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11071 times:

AS would get slaughtered. Here on the East Coast they don't have anywhere close to the same brand equity that they have out West.

Better to focus on their strengths than trying to expand just for the sake of expanding.


User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1029 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11045 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Polot (Reply 3):
AS would get slaughtered. Here on the East Coast they don't have anywhere close to the same brand equity that they have out West.

Jetblue didn't get "slaughtered" in long Beach, and I'm cetain Alaska has more brand recongnition than Jetblue


User currently offlinejetbluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3018 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 10981 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 4):
and I'm cetain Alaska has more brand recongnition than Jetblue

Are you inferring Alaska has more brand recognition on the East Coast than JetBlue has on the West? I highly doubt that is the case for the following reasons:

-All West Coast markets that B6 serves has nonstop flights to more than one destination (except BUR, which is a recent development). AS almost exclusively flies to SEA from its East Coast spokes.
-B6 has an LGB focus city. AS does not have an equivalent on the East Coast.
-B6 competes in the high profile JFK/BOS-LAX/SFO markets, whereas AS does not have an equivalent.

AS has incredible brand equity on the West Coast, in Alaska and Hawaii. But it is a virtually unknown carrier for most of the East Coast public.



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1029 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10937 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 5):
Are you inferring Alaska has more brand recognition on the East Coast than JetBlue has on the West?

No I'm inferring that Alaska has more brand recognition than Jetblue as whole... Alaska has been around for a long time. I flew Alaska when I was a kid, and Jetblue wasn't even an idea back then


User currently offlineatxpatriot811 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10855 times:

when I see Alaska Airlines at DCA, I'm thinking of an airline that will take me west, maybe not all the way to Alaska, but certainly something somewhat in that direction. Living near DCA, if I'm going to MIA or JFK, Alaska is probably not the first name that pops up in my head...

User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10816 times:

There are still too many hubs in the US right now--adding another one would be suicidal.

Quoting g500 (Reply 4):
Jetblue didn't get "slaughtered" in long Beach, and I'm cetain Alaska has more brand recongnition than Jetblue

LGB has some of the lowest fares in the country. I wouldn't call it so much a hub as an albatross.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinecloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 855 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10786 times:

I think most people know who Alaska is. They may not have the equity JetBlue does, but that is not a show stopper. In fact they are in a better position because they also don't have as much negativity association with their airline either on the East Coast. I think there is more than just room - at this point a real opportunity - for a 4th full service airline. Frequent flyers especially are going to look for an airline that offers a first class.

Of course I don't see it happening. Number one - Alaska doesn't seem very oriented to substantial growth - they like to play it safe. Number two - they have ties with DL and AA. Both of which want to make sure those ties keep them from becoming a major airline. Airlines see short term - they can't see the potential long term gains of a full national network versus the short term loss of their code shares.



"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31412 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10776 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Alaska's expansion strategy outside of the west coast is to codeshare with a larger carrier (originally NW, CO, DL and AA - now DL and AA) from SEA to their hub and once sufficient Alaska Mileage Plan customers fly the route to fill an AS 737, launch their own non-stop service to capture those MP customers and their revenue.

As such, AS''s west-coat / east-coat traffic is O&D or connecting at SEA. If that MP traffic needs to go somewhere else, they do so via codeshare once they get to their partner's east coast hub.

[Edited 2013-03-31 16:09:31]

User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2364 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 10691 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 6):
No I'm inferring that Alaska has more brand recognition than Jetblue as whole... Alaska has been around for a long time. I flew Alaska when I was a kid, and Jetblue wasn't even an idea back then

That doesn't mean squat. Presence in a market determines brand recognition, not how old the airline is overall. Whether AS is better known on the West Coast versus B6 is completely immaterial to it's brand recognition (or lack thereof) on the East Coast.


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 10477 times:

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Is it time for Alaska to set up shop on the East-Coast??

There's a few large-airports on the East capable of sustaining "a Hub". (PIT, CVG, RDU, MCO)
.



No. I don't think AS will or should set up a hub on the east coast. The cost of building a hub along the east coast will would not be worth it for AS. To establish share, AS would have to offer very attractive fares that will erode their margins.

I believe you used B6 as an example. B6 was able to build up LGB by attracting passengers with very low fares. LGB has the second lowest airfare in the country out of the top 100 airports. However, B6 has a very low cost structure that gives them the ability to offer very low fares to steal share. If AS tried something similar along the east coast, they too would need to offer very low fares, but at their cost structure, this would most likely be an unprofitable venture for them.

AS will need to grow their network over time, but I think they will accomplish this by replicating a focus city approach in other western cities as they did in SAN / SJC / Hawaii or launch more point to point routes within the west.

[Edited 2013-03-31 17:13:18]

User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2951 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 10295 times:

Alaska Airlines is successful because they have a conservative growth strategy focusing on the west coast. This is their strength and they know this and are doing well capitalizing on their core strengths. There is no need for them to open up a significant operation on the east coat (or midwest etc) as they have comprehensive marketing agreements with Delta and American which can provide them the feed much more efficiently.

If anything, expect to see more west coast-Hawaii flying and more Seattle/Portland/San Diego flying.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 10136 times:

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 13):
Alaska Airlines is successful because they have a conservative growth strategy focusing on the west coast.

An east coast hub is a bad bad idea.


User currently offlineKD5MDK From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 408 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 9949 times:

So, I'm going to go out on a limb and wonder about a Horizon hub in PIT. Put a bunch of capacity PIT-SEA, PIT-LAX, PIT-PDX, and then fly very cheap, high quality flights on Q400s from PIT to YYZ, PHL, BDL, PVD, MHT, BWI, EWR, IAD, CLE, etc. AS has very low costs. By putting the long haul not going all the way to the transcend but pilling up feeder flights, I wonder if they would be able to have a cost advantage over the existing transcon incumbents.

It would be aggressive, it would be risky. But if anything were to happen, I can see it being that.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 9790 times:

Quoting boeing773ER (Reply 2):
Sure people know about Alaska Airlines but they don't know how great of an airline they are.

Agree. IMHO AS is the best domestic airline. I don't need Direct TV, just good service and almost always on-time, which they are.

Quoting boeing773ER (Reply 2):
Also another problem is the name, people are gonna think "Alaska" and not Seattle or Portland

I was getting on the rental car shuttle at MIA a few years ago and told the driver, "Alaska Airlines". Everyone on the van assumed I was going to ANC or somewhere in the state of Alaska. Having said that, AS seems to be able to hold their own in the likes of SAN-PVR; LAX-DCA; SJC-GDL, LAX-ZIH and other very non-state-of-Alaska routes. I'm sure if Brad Tilden thought that AS starting more routes within the east was a good business decision, AS could make it work and build the brand loyalty.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9571 times:

Alaska has both DL and AA as partners. Absolutely no reason they need or would want an East Coast Hub.

Alaska is more profitable by focusing on one area and making it a really good product. They don't have to be a national or worldwide carrier. For the same reason they have been so profitable for so many years not being in an alliance they are smaller but leaner and meaner. Alaska does so much right no reason to change or risk profits. What they have works.


User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1572 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9542 times:

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Is it time for Alaska to set up shop on the East-Coast??

Sorry, but if isn't broke, don't fix it! Alaska is one of the most profitable airlines right now and know how to run a smart airline. They don't need to waste money by opening up bases and hubs on the east coast, when their brand and loyalty are mostly on the opposite side of the country. Alaska's focus has always been connecting passengers on the west coast and Alaska and it works great for them!



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1406 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

What advantage does Alaska get from starting an east coast hub. They would be better off starting a new subsidiary (Arkansas Airlines? Horizon?) and building a hub.

They would be better starting off a hub in the west. They have some brand awareness and some route synchronicity.

DEN - buy out F9 (for the gates) and head towards a national brand, PHX - wait for AA to abandon, SLC - if Delta expands in SEA, someplace in the bay area - SJC or OAK, someplace in the LA basin - LAX, BUR, ONT or such.


User currently offlinewoodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 9093 times:

There are zero reasons AS should have an East Coast hub. Why risk your stable and continuous profitability with a dumb expansion to a new hub totally outside your sphere of influence? The legacy carriers struggle to make money and be even a little profitable so obviously having more hubs doesn't have any connection to profitability. AS is lucky that it has been so successful and weathered the disasters that have caused all the legacy carriers in the US to go bankrupt and CLOSE hubs...just saying.

User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1408 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 8355 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ADent (Reply 19):

Wait for American to abandon SLC?? I recently saw an AS airplane here in ORD, Did AMR or UAL abandon ORD??
Is Delta going to pull out of SLC?? What kind of strategy are you espousing? If they want to build a hub??
Then Build it and defend it!


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3455 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 7865 times:

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 15):
It would be aggressive, it would be risky. But if anything were to happen, I can see it being that

Something AS does not do ever, is "be risky" their approach is usually very well thought out and contemplative.

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 15):
So, I'm going to go out on a limb and wonder about a Horizon hub in PIT. Put a bunch of capacity PIT-SEA, PIT-LAX, PIT-PDX, and then fly very cheap, high quality flights on Q400s from PIT to YYZ, PHL, BDL, PVD, MHT, BWI, EWR, IAD, CLE, etc. AS has very low costs. By putting the long haul not going all the way to the transcend but pilling up feeder flights, I wonder if they would be able to have a cost advantage over the existing transcon incumbents.

The only was AS will be operating even a focus city out east, is if they were to merge, which ain't going to happen. PIT is going to have about .01% brand recognition in in PIT. No O & D would work, and PDX/SEA-PIT does not have the numbers to support a trans con from AS.

IMO, AS will continue expanding from the West Coast only, To Hawaii and from SEA/PDX or to a lesser extent SAN or SJC



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinehohd From United States of America, joined May 2008, 454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7263 times:

Instead of having a hub, they should explore an alliance with JetBlue. Jetblue is strong in east and Alaska in west. After the AA/US merger, there could be some changes to the alliance with AA and DL is starting some flights from Seattle, competing with Alaska.

User currently offlineGSPflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7126 times:

They will have a lot of Hubs in the east if they merge with DL.   

Do I think it will happen? No. Would it be a good business move? Not for AS. Will someone say it in this thread? Absolutely.


User currently offlinemsp747 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6763 times:

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 21):
Wait for American to abandon SLC??

Look at the post again. He was saying wait for AA to abandon PHX. I guess that's a good focus city IF AA bails, but I don't see it happening. Even then, a full fledged hub would be unnecessary.

Honestly, when I saw this topic, I thought it was one of the April Fools ones. This is something that gets brought up every couple of months. AS is a great west coast airline, that branches out of that territory to serve the destinations its loyal customers want to go. They are very profitable, and they listen to their customers. Why mess with a good formula? If they ever do develop an east coast hub, it will be because over time they developed a strong local following in a city that originally got service because customers in SEA, PDX or SAN wanted to go there.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 26, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6699 times:

I think there might be an opportunity for AS to grow if the combined AA draws down in PHX. PHX makes sense as a new growth opportunity for AS. It's a strong market for the Northwest, kind of like Florida for the Northeast, and offers a convenient connecting point for flights from the Northwest, Northern California and Mexico and Central America. It's also a nice gateway to the West for East coast travelers.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently onlineItalianFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1099 posts, RR: 2
Reply 27, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6733 times:

As I have said before...the exciting days of hub building in the USA are O V E R. Even G4 has covered every viable vacation destination in the country. Between code shares, alliances and regional feed, the need for establishing new banked operations is moot. The only carrier that would build a new 'hub' is NK; and their growth is places like DFW is dependent on O&D rather than connectivity.

User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5723 posts, RR: 24
Reply 28, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6125 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 18):
Sorry, but if isn't broke, don't fix it! Alaska is one of the most profitable airlines right now and know how to run a smart airline. They don't need to waste money by opening up bases and hubs on the east coast, when their brand and loyalty are mostly on the opposite side of the country. Alaska's focus has always been connecting passengers on the west coast and Alaska and it works great for them!


Kinda like what MarkAir tried way back when, they were of a good size in Alaska and the Western US. Then they tried to build a sort of mini-hub in DEN and that spelled the end for them.

Quoting msp747 (Reply 25):
Honestly, when I saw this topic, I thought it was one of the April Fools ones

Boy where was this forum back in the days of MarkAir and other airlines in the late 80's/early 90's, lol. Y'all wouldve had a field day with the imbeciles running things then (as you are now).



Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
User currently onlineItalianFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1099 posts, RR: 2
Reply 29, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5569 times:

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 28):
Boy where was this forum back in the days of MarkAir and other airlines in the late 80's/early 90's, lol. Y'all wouldve had a field day with the imbeciles running things then (as you are now).

We share the same brain lol....I was thinking the same thing today!! Too bad the drama of MarkAir, KIWI,Air South, PrivateJet/National II etc all pre-dated the interwebz and airliners. Not to mention the logic of organic turn-key hubs in DAY,MCI (2 times), BWI (3 times),GSO,MCO(4 or 5 times),COS,etc.

 


User currently offlinecloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 855 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3956 times:

Why does everyone assume the airline industry is working towards some stable written in stone structure. We already see that the big three pretty much see it as a race to be the biggest. Sooner or later, and I bet sooner rather than later, they are going to start eyeing Alaska's share of the pie. Not much more left to get. Business decisions are not always, in fact rarely, done in the best interest of the industry as a whole or in the interests of the public or the economy. The airline industry is one driven by ego. Sooner or later Alaska is going to be the last one standing and the one they all throw their dodge balls at.


"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13749 posts, RR: 61
Reply 31, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3815 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 15):
So, I'm going to go out on a limb and wonder about a Horizon hub in PIT.

With what lift? QX has extremely limited capacity available these days.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 26):
I think there might be an opportunity for AS to grow if the combined AA draws down in PHX. PHX makes sense as a new growth opportunity for AS.

The argument always goes "PHX has crap yields" etc, and to some extent that's true. However if AA were to significantly draw down PHX, there would be some opportunity there.

It wasn't that long ago that US was providing lousy service and our then-EVP of Marketing and Planning Gregg Saretsky told me off-the-cuff that he almost wished AS was ramping up PHX significantly because we'd steal a ton of disgruntled US customers.

Having said that, AS is all about deploying aircraft in the most profitable manner possible, and when a new 739ER arrives on the property if the forecasts show they can make even one more dollar adding an extra SEA departure - even on an existing route - than adding a new PHX to wherever flight, the extra SEA flight would be the winner.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8656 posts, RR: 10
Reply 32, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3515 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 6):
No I'm inferring that Alaska has more brand recognition than Jetblue as whole... Alaska has been around for a long time. I flew Alaska when I was a kid, and Jetblue wasn't even an idea back then

That's nonsense. That's only relevant for us aviation enthusiasts. Alaska is as niche carrier as you will find in the US. For the general public outside the Pacific Northwest, I doubt very much that Alaska has more brand recognition than Jetblue. More importantly, for anyone younger than 25 years old, B6 has been around for as long as they remember and that is a very significant demographic that will only get larger.

As for the topic at hand, the East Coast has a lot of competition already. I don't see what Alaska would gain by creating a hub here. Every(?) US LCC already has a hub or a focus city on the East Coast. Every legacy carrier has hubs on the East Coast. Alaska will benefit more from improving its non-stop transcon service to the East Coast, for its West Coast customer base.


User currently offlineGentFromAlaska From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3257 posts, RR: 1
Reply 33, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3503 times:

Any Eastern focus city would have to be am multi-tasker. MCI might work if it were combined with Mexico service. I still think SEA-BNA is going to happen sooner rather than later.


Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3806 posts, RR: 29
Reply 34, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3196 times:

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
There's a few large-airports on the East capable of sustaining "a Hub". (PIT, CVG, RDU, MCO)

Really? As I see it, according to the definition of insanity*...it would be insane for Alaska Airlines (or any airline) to attempt a hub at any of the above-mentioned cities.

*repeating the same mistake(s) while expecting a different result... While all of the cities mentioned had marginally to somewhat successful hubs for a number of years, in the long-run they proved to be unsustainable.


User currently offlinemsp747 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3041 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 32):
That's nonsense. That's only relevant for us aviation enthusiasts. Alaska is as niche carrier as you will find in the US. For the general public outside the Pacific Northwest, I doubt very much that Alaska has more brand recognition than Jetblue.

It's more than just the Pacific Northwest. I would say that AS is more recognizable up and down the west coast than B6. However, once you leave the western time zone, B6 holds a big edge. Heck, I have heard television stations here in DC refer to it as ALASKAN Air on more than one occasion, and AS offers several daily flights out of DCA, which is the most popular airport in the region. People around here just assume they only serve Alaska.


User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 814 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3022 times:

Quoting atxpatriot811 (Reply 7):
when I see Alaska Airlines at DCA, I'm thinking of an airline that will take me west, maybe not all the way to Alaska, but certainly something somewhat in that direction. Living near DCA, if I'm going to MIA or JFK, Alaska is probably not the first name that pops up in my head...

While I agree that there's no reason for them to expand into a "presence" in the East, Alaska becoming known for more than "out west" is possible. Certainly WN seems an odd moniker in BWI. NW's "hub" in ATL years ago? EAL in MCI? Granted, but for WN, those were failures, but name alone wouldn't prevent me from booking a ticket on a route that's served by Airline X.



My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlinedabpit From United States of America, joined May 2012, 128 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2990 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 22):
No O & D would work, and PDX/SEA-PIT does not have the numbers to support a trans con from AS.

PIT has enough traffic, that currently makes connections, to fly daily to SEA with a 737-800. This has been discussed in another form. There are rough on avg 250 pax per day going from PIT-SEA as per DOT statistics Q3 2012.



Carpe Diem
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5600 posts, RR: 7
Reply 38, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2956 times:

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 15):
very cheap, high quality flights

This is easier said than done. In fact, you might call it an oxymoron.

The short haul flying you propose has essentially been killed by today's security requirements. For distances up to about 300 miles, it much easier to drive than fly; even if driving takes a little longer, the airport/airline hassle factor isn't worth the time saving.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4616 posts, RR: 23
Reply 39, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2860 times:

Everyone airline does not have to fly to every market. I don't see why this is even being discussed. What's next? "Why doesn't Cape Air fly to Topeka?"

User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5723 posts, RR: 24
Reply 40, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2833 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 39):
Everyone airline does not have to fly to every market. I don't see why this is even being discussed. What's next? "Why doesn't Cape Air fly to Topeka?"

I'm waiting for it...that and when will they install an F Class....



Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
User currently onlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9817 posts, RR: 52
Reply 41, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2762 times:

AS ha the highest profit margins in the US other than allegiant. Why on earth would they want to go head to head in an already saturated market?

Connecting traffic is always lower yield than point to point, so a big feeder hub from any of the OP airports would be disastrous. There is a reason why there are so many dead hubs in the Midwest. Consolidation led to only big hubs with high O/D numbers sticking around. A secondary market hub would be an expensive disaster. All the good hubs are taken. JetBlue has taken much if the northeast an oter markets have entrenched carriers. I think AS is pivoting towards growth in California. There is much better opportunity as markets in California are growing unlike PIT, MCI , etc that are stagnant or shrinking.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineGentFromAlaska From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3257 posts, RR: 1
Reply 42, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2731 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 39):
"Why doesn't Cape Air fly to Topeka?"

Because Topeka rolls up their sidewalks at 6:00 PM most evenings.



Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
User currently offlinebaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 43, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2714 times:

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Is it time for Alaska to set up shop on the East-Coast??

There's a few large-airports on the East capable of sustaining "a Hub". (PIT, CVG, RDU, MCO)

US Airways pulled out of Pittsburgh many years ago, Delta is dialing back Cincinnatti considerably, that's two options right there.

Answer to question: NO.

Alaska has no wish or desire to grow beyond a west coast airline. Yes, they may grow more routes into Seattle from other US markets, but this would be in support of their marketing agreement with DL and the SkyTeam alliance. This alleviates the need for Delta to fly more trips into Seattle and as gate constrained as Delta is in the South satellite, especially during peak international arrivals, AS fills this niche very nicely.

Alaska also has a pretty strong agreement with AA and they will be able to feed them from Alaska south and from Seattle down to AAs connecting points without AA having to put a lot more resources into Seattle. This will be good for AA; however, when USAirways moves over to AA, which has PHX as a hub, there will not be as much reliance on AS by AA as their is now.

Alaska is a niche carrier; they operate that niche very effectively. They own the west coast, Hawaii, Alaska and a good number of the Mexican resort cities. Why do they need to do anything else?

baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Commuter Airline On The East Coast, USA posted Mon Oct 4 2004 05:21:57 by KLM11
Massive Delays On The East Coast posted Tue May 18 2004 22:14:54 by Flairport
Cargo Hub On The West Coast posted Fri Apr 16 2004 22:11:46 by Leneld
Day 2 Of The Mess On The East Coast posted Tue Apr 13 2004 22:18:04 by Flairport
Alaska To The East Coast? posted Thu Mar 8 2001 01:22:06 by UsAirways_757
AA On The West Coast... posted Sat Feb 23 2013 18:32:29 by olddominion727
Why New AA Livery If On The Verge Of A Merge? posted Sat Jan 26 2013 18:32:33 by KochamLOT
More Flight Disruptions For The East Coast posted Wed Nov 7 2012 03:29:28 by Gonzalo
Why No Pin-Up-Girl On The Nose For Virgin America? posted Mon Dec 12 2011 16:35:33 by LGWflyer
Earthquake On US East Coast Stops Air Traffic posted Tue Aug 23 2011 11:03:42 by NBGSkyGod