BA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59 Posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
We all have heard the JetBlue story from there start-up in JFK, to the recent start up of operations in LGB.
We all know about the 27 slots that JetBlue originally had, now down to 23 slots.
We all have heard about several routes they are considering. JetBlue has remained very quiet about expansion in LGB and since the OAK, LAS, and SLC announcements, we haven't heard much. Today they just announced JFK-LAS service which has been speculated for a while. However other routes such as FLL-LGB have yet to materialize. Most of us I'm sure expected this route to be announced right after JFK-LGB and before any other routes. But that hasn't been the case.
While it's too early to determine this, perhaps JetBlue has found LGB disappointing. Note that this just speculation. It's too early to find out anything and only Jetblue knows how well the LGB operations are. I am in no way saying JetBlue is doing unsatisfactory in LGB and is unhappy with the performance of there operations. It's just speculation. I really hope JetBlue is doing well in LGB.
Lets not forget that there are many ways to get to the massive Los Angeles area. It's one of the largest air travel markets in the world, served by 4 major airports other than LGB. That's tough to compete, especially since LGB hasn't really been known for having lots of air service lately.
Los Angeles Int'l (LAX) - The main airport of the entire Southern California region and currently the 4th busiest in the world in terms of aircraft movement, and 5th busiest in the world in terms of passenger movement. LAX is served by dozens of airlines, and has lots of international carrier presence all the way from Asia, Oceania, Central America, South America, Europe, and the Middle East. It's also a hub for United Airlines, and a slightly smaller hub for American Airlines. However, all the major carriers have a large presence in LAX offering a wide area of routes. LAX is the premier airport for this region. Let's not forget that it's airport code is probably the most recognized in the entire world. Almost everyone you ask, will know what LAX is. It's become a symbol. However, due to it's congestion, delays, and other problems, it's disliked greatly by the average passenger and many try to avoid it at all costs. That's when the Los Angeles' area's 3 other airports (excluding LGB) come in.
Ontario Int'l (ONT) - An excellent alternative located in the suburb of Ontario. ONT is a good facility with a lot of airlines serving it and a lot of routes possible. It even has flights to Mexico. For those living near or in Ontario, it is the best alternative to LAX.
Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena (BUR) - Another great alternative, although it has more limited service than the others. It's also not an international airport so it has no international service. However, the greatest strength with BUR is the fact that it's the closest commercial airport to Downtown LA, Hollywood, Disney Land, Warner Bros, and much more.
Orange Country John Wayne (SNA) - The 2nd most popular airport in the Los Angeles area. This tiny airport with a small terminal, and a short 5700ft. runway, and an even smaller 2887ft. runway (used only by small general aviation aircraft) is the 30th busiest airport in the world. While it's not an international airport and has no international service, airlines fight to gain slots and make extremely high profits out of here. It's my favorite airport in the Los Angeles area, as it's very convenient, and located very close to my relatives.
It's tough for LGB to compete, especially since it hasn't been known for much air service lately. I really hope JetBlue does well in LGB and continues to expand as much as they can.
However, we must remember that all 4 of these airports (excluding LGB) are served by Southwest among other low-fare carriers. So it's tough to compete. The market is heavily saturated.
If I were JetBlue, I would have entered a potential market that hasn't been overwhelmingly swarmed by low-fare carriers like Southwest.
Just expressing my thoughts. I'm not saying JetBlue isn't doing well in LGB, and I really hope they're doing great.
Just something to think about.
Thanks for reading.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
Kwbl From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 442 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2068 times:
Just a correction. Burbank is not the closest to DisneyLand, in fact it is the farthest (however it is close to the Disney Studios in Burbank). I too hope Jet Blue does will in LGB which has a pretty good location save for the nimbys.
ScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1934 times:
Yeah, I think bet that you are right about the LGB-JFK were always full by 5 flights of the days, too. That's why they were always made more flight out of LGB, right? I need with the your answer about LGB-FLL anytime soon?!? And please let us know after that announces for JFK-LAS flight, too. Catch ya later!
ONT 737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1904 times:
I would not necessarily say that the market is heavily saturated with low fare service. (well not enough for jetBlue to stay away from it) Even when Southwest has a system wide fare sales you will see a little * in the fine print saying that SNA is not included due to limited seats available. Aside from the coup in getting the unprecedented slots from JFK, getting settled in LGB was one of their best moves. That market was ripe for some new low fare service. Remember that Orange County is not building El Toro and SNA not expandable beyond just a couple more gates. OC is not picking up their share of the travel demand in So Cal (they produce around 25% of the passengers in So Cal, but only service about half that) Even if they did expand the gates at SNA remember the runway is only 5700'. I know CO flies to EWR with 73Gs, but that's a pretty short runway to be flying transcons (without weight restrictions) from. Anyway, around half of the passengers from Orange Country are not flying from SNA and this number will only increase over time. These passengers either have to drive 45 miles up the 405 to LAX (which may passengers avoid like a plague) or drive an hour to ONT. An the other hand you have LGB just less than 20 minutes away with low fares and PTV waiting.
LGB Photos From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1780 times:
Well I have to say that jetBlue is VERY HAPPY with LGB. They are not dissapointed at all nor will they be moving any service to any of the othe other airports that BA talked about. Most of their flights both in and out of LGB are full or near capacity. Money is definetely being made there by them.
Spark From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1626 times:
I think LGB is a very good airport for Jet Blue to fly into. It has a lot more convenience than LAX, and is extremely close to both LAX and SNA. It is not the largest airport, but if you build it they will come, and in the case of LGB, people will fly with Jet Blue.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1594 times:
"SNA...is the 30th busiest airport in the world."
Not quite sure where you received such information, but according to the ACI, SNA has never come close to being the 30th busiest airport in the world.... that position has been volleying back and forth between NRT, YYZ, and BOS for the past half decade.
LoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3811 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1583 times:
He may have been referring to 30th busiest airport in the world in terms of movements (takeoffs and landings) rather than passengers. Although SNA is not currently in the top 30, I seem to recall seeing them that high either in 2000 or 2001 due to all the general aviation traffic there.