User avatar
neomax
Topic Author
Posts: 802
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:26 am

JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:59 pm

I was sure they flew from LAX, but apparently only from LGB.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8428
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:04 pm

Because they would get crushed by AS, AA, DL, UA, and WN and lose a ton of money? LGB is likely a money loser as well.
 
cxb744
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 7:31 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:10 pm

They’ve never served any West Coast city out of LAX. And the LGB-SFO does well.
What is it? It's A 747-400, but that's not important right now.
 
bgboiflyer
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:11 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:50 pm

cxb744 wrote:
They’ve never served any West Coast city out of LAX. And the LGB-SFO does well.


I remember in 2010 JB did serve at LAX, though probably not at profit
 
User avatar
iamjoeym
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:40 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:04 pm

neomax wrote:
I was sure they flew from LAX, but apparently only from LGB.


A majority of the airplanes we fly into LAX are Mint configured A321's, so there's no way to make that profitable. And LGB-SFO is or will be dramatically reduced.

I wish JetBlue could make it work on the west coast, but they're perfectly content being an east coast player, flying east coast residents where they want to go...which means across the country and back home.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 919
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:09 pm

iamjoeym wrote:
neomax wrote:
I was sure they flew from LAX, but apparently only from LGB.


A majority of the airplanes we fly into LAX are Mint configured A321's, so there's no way to make that profitable. And LGB-SFO is or will be dramatically reduced.

I wish JetBlue could make it work on the west coast, but they're perfectly content being an east coast player, flying east coast residents where they want to go...which means across the country and back home.

That makes sense. As a PDX resident, I wish more B6 planes flew to and from the airport, specifically MINT on PDX-JFK/BOS, but I've heard that PDX is one of their worst performing non-hub west coast markets, and these routes aren't doing very well even with just the regularly configured A320 anyway.

Back to the topic, the A321-Mint on LAX-SFO would not make sense, as this type of product is meant for trans-con flights.
Next flights:
PDX-LAX-MIA (American)
MCO-DFW-PDX (American)

PDX-MSP-PDX (Delta)
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:17 pm

Jet blue can't be everything to everyone . They pick their battles.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 5953
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:24 pm

iamjoeym wrote:
neomax wrote:
I was sure they flew from LAX, but apparently only from LGB.


A majority of the airplanes we fly into LAX are Mint configured A321's, so there's no way to make that profitable. And LGB-SFO is or will be dramatically reduced.

I wish JetBlue could make it work on the west coast, but they're perfectly content being an east coast player, flying east coast residents where they want to go...which means across the country and back home.

I think they do want to be bigger out west. They bid pretty aggressively for VX against AS.
You know all is right is the world when the only thing people worry about is if the president had sex with a pornstar.


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:28 pm

iamjoeym wrote:
I wish JetBlue could make it work on the west coast, but they're perfectly content being an east coast player, flying east coast residents where they want to go...which means across the country and back home.


I don't know if it's "content" so much as resigned to the fact that their only West Coast focus city seems to dislike them and that they have no other viable alternatives in the region.
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:41 pm

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
Jet blue can't be everything to everyone . They pick their battles.


Yep, and just like I wish Alaska flew more East Coast flights they already chose that they want to be a West Coast player.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
 
Georgetown
Posts: 378
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:50 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 12:09 am

I wish they would get back to serving IAD from the Bay Area like they used to from OAK. United fares on that route have risen astronomically.
Let's go Hoyas!
 
Ziyulu
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:35 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 12:14 am

bgboiflyer wrote:
cxb744 wrote:
They’ve never served any West Coast city out of LAX. And the LGB-SFO does well.


I remember in 2010 JB did serve at LAX, though probably not at profit


As far as I know, JB never served LAX.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:10 am

TWA772LR wrote:
iamjoeym wrote:
neomax wrote:
I was sure they flew from LAX, but apparently only from LGB.


A majority of the airplanes we fly into LAX are Mint configured A321's, so there's no way to make that profitable. And LGB-SFO is or will be dramatically reduced.

I wish JetBlue could make it work on the west coast, but they're perfectly content being an east coast player, flying east coast residents where they want to go...which means across the country and back home.

I think they do want to be bigger out west. They bid pretty aggressively for VX against AS.


That was back 2 years ago when airline industry was at an all time high. Looking at the current situation, not "winning" the VX bid has really worked out well for them. They got their hands full at BOS with DL moving in. And with the fuel prices going up, I don't see them with much interest in west coast until they can fortify their position at JFK/BOS/FLL. Can you imagine if they had to also deal with a loosing network at SFO given the problems they face right now?

Just looking at SFO right now, they have room to expand if they want to at the international terminal, but they've only cut back. Why, they simply have no stomach trying to be the 6th player in the west coast market. If they really need routes to loose money, it will be to help strengthen their network out of BOS/FLL.

And on the subject of LAX-SFO, I don't think anyone is making money on that route. Everyone else is battling it out there because they have skin in the game. B6 has no skin in the west coast competition.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:07 am

Many of us heard this already but for the new eyes: B6/AS will merge eventually, so why waste time poaching each others respective coasts? Make love not war. $$
 
ucdtim17
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 6:38 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:34 am

cxb744 wrote:
And the LGB-SFO does well.


Not by any account? They’ve already cut it to 2x and are rumored to be cutting it entirely soon.
 
DarthLobster
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 3:40 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:22 am

CobaltScar wrote:
Many of us heard this already but for the new eyes: B6/AS will merge eventually, so why waste time poaching each others respective coasts? Make love not war. $$


Uh huh. And WN buys SY, G4 merges with F9 and NK to create a mega-ULCC, and HA renames itself to Aloha and instantly goes bankrupt. Good thing the airline industry has us armchair industry psychics to steer them right....

But seriously, why does everyone insist that AS and B6 will one day merge? No one, and I mean NO ONE saw AS buying VX until it happened, and even then it was barely approved by regulators. They won't approve an airline merger that large again, not given how much consolidation has already happened. Predictions here are no more accurate than drunken March Madness brackets.
Last edited by DarthLobster on Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
N292UX
Posts: 122
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 7:08 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:25 am

Lot of competition on that route. AA, DL, UA, AS amongst it. It'd be an extremely hard route to compete on.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:46 am

The west coast is much more spread out and lacking condensed areas of major mertropolitan cities than the east coast, where you can find for example a high concentration of large markets (IAD,DCA,BWI, PHL,EWR,JFK,LGA, and BOS) all within a few hours driving radius. With a very un-concentrated area of cities on the west cost, they are very much welll served by DL,UA,NK,AA, and dominated by AS and WN. West coast airports lack space for any substantial operation so running intra state or west coast regional ops for B6 is pretty unrealistic. Soon it will be solely all or portions of BOS,JFK,FLL, and MCO to SEA/PDX/LAS/SFO/SJC/SMF/BUR/LAX//LGB/SAN/SLC/PHX/and DEN.

All intra west coast regional ops will stop in my opinion.
717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 742 748 752 753 762 763 772 773 DC9 MD80/88/90 DC10 319 320 321 332 333 CS100 CRJ200 Q400 E175 E190 ERJ145 EMB120
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5014
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:28 am

DarthLobster wrote:
CobaltScar wrote:
Many of us heard this already but for the new eyes: B6/AS will merge eventually, so why waste time poaching each others respective coasts? Make love not war. $$


Uh huh. And WN buys SY, G4 merges with F9 and NK to create a mega-ULCC, and HA renames itself to Aloha and instantly goes bankrupt. Good thing the airline industry has us armchair industry psychics to steer them right....

But seriously, why does everyone insist that AS and B6 will one day merge? No one, and I mean NO ONE saw AS buying VX until it happened, and even then it was barely approved by regulators. They won't approve an airline merger that large again, not given how much consolidation has already happened. Predictions here are no more accurate than drunken March Madness brackets.


I am cracking up here reading your comments, best thing I've read here in a bit, thanks for that! I keep asking on these merger comments, why everyone wants to merge the carriers that are keeping the big 3 honest? If it were not for B6, AS, WN & F9, NK or G4 we'd be paying even more for airfares & we'd be be crammed in almost tortuous seat dimensions even further.

While I am avoiding politics 100%, I think it's doubtful a responsible administrations DOT would authorize a merger the size of B6 & AS currently, without significant concessions, like JFK slots at peak hours for an example.

AS is committed to JFK, in fact it is one of the reasons that VX was attractive to them, was the instant access at JFK, where many of their current & potentially future partner carriers fly from.

While I still believe SFO was their main focus for real estate, JFK has afforded AS a decent sized station on the East Coast, AS isn't going to get into flying up & down the East Coast, I do think in a decade it'll be hard to look back at the route map of today without wondering why people were so skeptical. No doubt AS is experiencing growing pains, but nothing more than your average merger, IMO.
707, 717, 720, 727-1/2, 737-1/2/3/4/5/7/8/9, 747-1/2/3/4, 757, 767-2/3/4, 777, DC-8-5/6/7, DC-9-1/3/5, MD-80/2/3/7/8, DC-10-10/30/40, MD-11, F-27, F-28, SWM, J31, D38, DH7, DH8, DH4 SD-330, B-146, L-1011-2/500, ATR-42/72, VCV, A-300/310/318/319/320, CR2/7
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 6:56 am

DarthLobster wrote:
No one, and I mean NO ONE saw AS buying VX until it happened, and even then it was barely approved by regulators. They won't approve an airline merger that large again, not given how much consolidation has already happened.

What do you mean the AS/VX tie up was 'barely approved'? Practically all the DOJ demanded was removing the AA codeshare. If you read the judgment, they actually wanted AS/VX to be a stronger competitor to AA/DL/UA which, in my opinion, makes a lot of sense.

RWA380 wrote:
While I am avoiding politics 100%, I think it's doubtful a responsible administrations DOT would authorize a merger the size of B6 & AS currently, without significant concessions, like JFK slots at peak hours for an example.

AS is committed to JFK, in fact it is one of the reasons that VX was attractive to them, was the instant access at JFK, where many of their current & potentially future partner carriers fly from.

While I still believe SFO was their main focus for real estate, JFK has afforded AS a decent sized station on the East Coast, AS isn't going to get into flying up & down the East Coast, I do think in a decade it'll be hard to look back at the route map of today without wondering why people were so skeptical. No doubt AS is experiencing growing pains, but nothing more than your average merger, IMO.

AS/B6 have very few overlapping routes so their merger wouldn't lead to less competition (DOJ's primary concern) and it would build a stronger US3 competitor. An AS and B6 merger would combine the 5th and 6th airline to become...wait for it....still the 5th biggest US airline. Big whoop. After approving AA/US there is zero defense to now say B6/AS can't merge...Sorry guys only the big airlines can merge, you smaller guys can't anymore, sorry! Again, if there was route overlap I would feel differently, there just isn't.

I don't see how JFK slots could become a sticking point in a merger with DL and AA having major presence in NYC already and UA as well if you combine EWR. Its not like a B6/AS merger would suddenly give them commanding NYC market share.

I would love to see AS grow on the East coast and B6 grow out West...that doesn't seem possible organically so the next best thing is for them to merge, eliminate redundant costs to improve economic viability and then take the fight to the US3/4 with a better footing to compete for National corporate contracts. In hindsight it would have been better if the DOJ asked for more from AA/US and WN/FL but they didn't. Given the circumstances I think B6/AS would be better for customers.

tortugamon
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:00 pm

AS/B6 merger would also be phenomenal for shareholders and employees too. Oh, and Hawaiian does not become Aloha, they get swallowed up by the new AS/B6, reducing capacity from west cost to Hawaii (and increasing everyone's fares and profits) while the wide bodies get re-positioned to BOS/JFK/SEA for trans atlantic/pacific.

New scab airlines like Moxy spring up to hire a fresh crop of zero seniority workers at low wages, some survive, some don't. And the process repeats it self all over again, for as long as the global market can take it.

The writing is on the wall.
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1356
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:27 pm

They fly from the LA area to the Bay Area. Why does it have to be specifically these two airports?
A350/CSeries = bae
 
ScottB
Posts: 6104
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:46 pm

tortugamon wrote:
In hindsight it would have been better if the DOJ asked for more from AA/US and WN/FL but they didn't.


What could DOJ have asked for with respect to the WN-FL merger? WN didn't serve ATL or DCA at all and had a very small presence at LGA. They vacated FL's gates at BWI (which has ample open gates anyway). FL didn't serve DAL.

CobaltScar wrote:
Many of us heard this already but for the new eyes: B6/AS will merge eventually, so why waste time poaching each others respective coasts?


Nope, WN will buy B6. The merger concessions will amount to gates at FLL and not much else. Maybe LGB slots but I doubt it by then.

ShinyAndChrome wrote:
resigned to the fact that their only West Coast focus city seems to dislike them


I don't think saying "no" to an FIS qualifies as disliking B6, but I can see how the city might be unhappy with the way B6 has chosen to flout the noise ordinance.
 
evank516
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:47 pm

Every jetBlue thread HAS to be dominated by a myriad of AS/B6 merger posts. It's not happening. B6 will find its fitting on the west coast on its own. Maybe the LA Basin just isn't the place. Either way, they have plenty of other fish to fry. Right now they're trying to optimize their network to make the most money with what they've got. Besides, even if they did by some fat lady singing chance? AS wouldn't be the surviving carrier if they want to be successful on flights up and down the East Coast (bad branding to have an airline named Alaska flying from JFK-PBI), and merging a large Boeing fleet into a large Airbus fleet is going to cause some cost structure issues. It's more than just routes when you have two airlines that up until recently, both had very simple fleets that were total opposites of the other.

Back to the real topic: JetBlue not flying LAX-SFO, no they never have. LAX has been a premium market for them with heavy MINT flying and it has been very successful for them that way. LGB holds on as the focus city for now with more flying out west. I believe all LAX flights on B6 are transcon only.
 
scoping2008
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 6:48 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:07 pm

evank516 wrote:
Every jetBlue thread HAS to be dominated by a myriad of AS/B6 merger posts. It's not happening. B6 will find its fitting on the west coast on its own. Maybe the LA Basin just isn't the place. Either way, they have plenty of other fish to fry. Right now they're trying to optimize their network to make the most money with what they've got. Besides, even if they did by some fat lady singing chance? AS wouldn't be the surviving carrier if they want to be successful on flights up and down the East Coast (bad branding to have an airline named Alaska flying from JFK-PBI), and merging a large Boeing fleet into a large Airbus fleet is going to cause some cost structure issues. It's more than just routes when you have two airlines that up until recently, both had very simple fleets that were total opposites of the other.

Back to the real topic: JetBlue not flying LAX-SFO, no they never have. LAX has been a premium market for them with heavy MINT flying and it has been very successful for them that way. LGB holds on as the focus city for now with more flying out west. I believe all LAX flights on B6 are transcon only.


That's right. An airline's name means everything. Must be why Southwest has been so unsuccessful in places like Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Nashville, Orlando, Tampa, etc.

Moreover, Alaska is digesting the fact that about 1/3 of its mainline fleet is now Airbus. Not sure how a theoretical merger with B6 would cause "some cost structure issues" when AS is already familiar with the aircraft type.
 
evank516
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:05 pm

scoping2008 wrote:
evank516 wrote:
Every jetBlue thread HAS to be dominated by a myriad of AS/B6 merger posts. It's not happening. B6 will find its fitting on the west coast on its own. Maybe the LA Basin just isn't the place. Either way, they have plenty of other fish to fry. Right now they're trying to optimize their network to make the most money with what they've got. Besides, even if they did by some fat lady singing chance? AS wouldn't be the surviving carrier if they want to be successful on flights up and down the East Coast (bad branding to have an airline named Alaska flying from JFK-PBI), and merging a large Boeing fleet into a large Airbus fleet is going to cause some cost structure issues. It's more than just routes when you have two airlines that up until recently, both had very simple fleets that were total opposites of the other.

Back to the real topic: JetBlue not flying LAX-SFO, no they never have. LAX has been a premium market for them with heavy MINT flying and it has been very successful for them that way. LGB holds on as the focus city for now with more flying out west. I believe all LAX flights on B6 are transcon only.


That's right. An airline's name means everything. Must be why Southwest has been so unsuccessful in places like Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Nashville, Orlando, Tampa, etc.

Moreover, Alaska is digesting the fact that about 1/3 of its mainline fleet is now Airbus. Not sure how a theoretical merger with B6 would cause "some cost structure issues" when AS is already familiar with the aircraft type.


JetBlue has a pretty simple fleet that is about to become even more simple when the E190s leave and the A220s come in. And it is about brand recognition whether you want to believe it or not, but it really doesn't matter because the merger won't be happening.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:06 pm

ScottB wrote:
I don't think saying "no" to an FIS qualifies as disliking B6, but I can see how the city might be unhappy with the way B6 has chosen to flout the noise ordinance.


Never said they didn't do anything earn the dislike. The fact of the matter is that B6's ambitions for the West Coast and the prerogatives for it's only base there are incompatible. Hence my point earlier.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:43 am

ScottB wrote:
tortugamon wrote:
In hindsight it would have been better if the DOJ asked for more from AA/US and WN/FL but they didn't.


What could DOJ have asked for with respect to the WN-FL merger? WN didn't serve ATL or DCA at all and had a very small presence at LGA. They vacated FL's gates at BWI (which has ample open gates anyway). FL didn't serve DAL.

Good question. The remnants of US can be seen in the new AA; likewise NW @DL and CO @UA but in comparison FL was essentially dismantled and the low cost capacity taken out of the market to a large degree. Very anti-competitive. I wish regulators had more rules in place that would have prevented it but I am not sure what it would look like and I despise gov't overreach.

tortugamon
 
ScottB
Posts: 6104
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 4:58 pm

tortugamon wrote:
The remnants of US can be seen in the new AA; likewise NW @DL and CO @UA but in comparison FL was essentially dismantled and the low cost capacity taken out of the market to a large degree. Very anti-competitive.


UA closed the former CO hub at CLE while DL closed the NW hub at MEM and reduced its CVG hub to a mere shadow of itself.

WN definitely reduced the number of flights at ATL compared with the FL hub, but they also changed the focus of the ATL operation by orienting it more to stronger O&D traffic. That was bad for the small markets which were almost entirely connecting traffic but good for a lot of larger markets which now see more robust competition to ATL. WN carries fewer passengers at ATL but the local markets they're in are better-off. They've grown on FL's presence at both DCA and LGA, and arguably the handful of former FL-exclusive markets at BWI (i.e. BWI-PWM, BWI-ROC) have benefited greatly from access to the WN network at BWI.

Yes, WN absorbing FL was bad for markets like DAY-MCO or MLI-MSY -- but on the other hand, markets like ATL-PHX and ATL-AUS have grown by over 50% in the first case or more than doubled in the second case. So it seems more the case that low cost/low fare capacity moved into different markets rather than disappeared.

ShinyAndChrome wrote:
The fact of the matter is that B6's ambitions for the West Coast and the prerogatives for it's only base there are incompatible. Hence my point earlier.


You're entitled to your opinion, but B6 went into LGB knowing the limitations of the airport (i.e. slots and no FIS). And if they were trying to curry favor with the local community for the FIS, one would have expected B6 to keep the number of operations during sensitive hours (10 PM to 7 AM) below 384 for the prior calendar year (2016), which was a 45% increase over 2015.

evank516 wrote:
JetBlue has a pretty simple fleet that is about to become even more simple when the E190s leave and the A220s come in.


The fleet will not be any simpler. While marketed as an Airbus product, the A220 was designed entirely by Bombardier and has very little in common with the A320.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:42 pm

ScottB wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion, but B6 went into LGB knowing the limitations of the airport (i.e. slots and no FIS). And if they were trying to curry favor with the local community for the FIS, one would have expected B6 to keep the number of operations during sensitive hours (10 PM to 7 AM) below 384 for the prior calendar year (2016), which was a 45% increase over 2015


We're literally not even disagreeing. B6's ambitions for LGB would've inevitably run up against the wishes of the LGB community given the nature of their network. Until Northeast congestion magically solves itself, there will be transcon flights that drag out into late night. That leads to a loss of goodwill, which stymies growth in other areas B6 wanted to go into. Hence things not working out. We. Are. Not. In. Disagreement.
 
evank516
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:47 pm

ScottB wrote:

evank516 wrote:
JetBlue has a pretty simple fleet that is about to become even more simple when the E190s leave and the A220s come in.


The fleet will not be any simpler. While marketed as an Airbus product, the A220 was designed entirely by Bombardier and has very little in common with the A320.


Pretty sure there was talk about making them similar...they haven't been delivered yet so we have time to see what they do in terms of fleet commonality.

But we keep getting off topic, the thread is about B6 not flying LAX-SFO.
 
ScottB
Posts: 6104
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:56 pm

ShinyAndChrome wrote:
Until Northeast congestion magically solves itself, there will be transcon flights that drag out into late night. That leads to a loss of goodwill, which stymies growth in other areas B6 wanted to go into. Hence things not working out. We. Are. Not. In. Disagreement.


Operational issues due to congestion are absolutely a thing, but they're not unique to B6 and other carriers manage to deal with them far more effectively, even in airports where the noise restrictions are more draconian than LGB.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:07 pm

ScottB wrote:
ShinyAndChrome wrote:
Until Northeast congestion magically solves itself, there will be transcon flights that drag out into late night. That leads to a loss of goodwill, which stymies growth in other areas B6 wanted to go into. Hence things not working out. We. Are. Not. In. Disagreement.


Operational issues due to congestion are absolutely a thing, but they're not unique to B6 and other carriers manage to deal with them far more effectively, even in airports where the noise restrictions are more draconian than LGB.


I'll grant you that. But B6 is fairly unique in that they have so many longer haul flights out of LGB that are specifically affected by delays that end up stretching into late night.

In any case, we essentially agree that B6's ambitions for LGB haven't worked out, there's a lot of bad blood from the community, and much of it is due to their operational struggles and how they've mismanaged their own expectations.

Anyhow, returning to the topic at hand, with the issues they have in LGB, they don't have any particularly attractive options for building a WC customer base. You might see some additional opportunistic adds/utilization flying a la what I imagine their Alaska flying is like, but intra-California won't provide a whole lot of opportunity given all the heat from WN and AS in the market.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:46 pm

ScottB wrote:
ShinyAndChrome wrote:
Until Northeast congestion magically solves itself, there will be transcon flights that drag out into late night. That leads to a loss of goodwill, which stymies growth in other areas B6 wanted to go into. Hence things not working out. We. Are. Not. In. Disagreement.


Operational issues due to congestion are absolutely a thing, but they're not unique to B6 and other carriers manage to deal with them far more effectively, even in airports where the noise restrictions are more draconian than LGB.


Honestly, you need a new hobby than attacking JetBlue for lateness at lgb. This topic has nothing even to do with it and you managed to bring it up and dragging along over and over again. Why do you bring it up when no one else is talking about it? It is not related to topic at hand.

Fact is they were led by to believe before January 2017 that fis was going to happen by the politicians and they were caught completely off guard when politicians bowed down to the wishes of a loud minority. At least that’s why cranky flier has said in numerous blog entries. If this was something not workable and not beneficial for people in the regions, they should have just told JetBlue right from the start rather than leading them on thinking it will be passed. JetBlue was making a lot of plans with that assumption. And what we see now is an airline that has lateness issues everywhere in the country and not making any kind of effort in scheduling to reduce breaking curfews.
 
SurfandSnow
Posts: 1230
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:09 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 7:28 pm

B6 has absolutely no business flying between its network spokes LAX and SFO. This is a hub to hub route for AS and UA, both of whom benefit from tremendous FFer loyalty and connectivity (including their own operations as well as those of international partners) on both ends of the route. SFO's other leading carriers AA, DL and WN frequently ply this route as well, benefiting from their own Southern California FFer loyalty and significant connectivity at LAX in doing so. B6 would clearly be at a huge disadvantage to all 5 of these carriers, though there *might* be an opportunity for F9 to introduce ULCC service on this route. In fact, I believe F9 has flown LAX-SFO before. Currently, the only ULCC service between LAX and the Bay Area is NK's LAX-OAK service. B6 probably does have viable expansion opportunities from LAX (indeed, their recent additions of LAX-BUF/MCO seem to be doing fine), but they would probably be something like LAX-EWR or perhaps even LAX-IAD if AA or AS drops that route...
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
 
ScottB
Posts: 6104
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 7:50 pm

tphuang wrote:
Honestly, you need a new hobby than attacking JetBlue for lateness at lgb. This topic has nothing even to do with it and you managed to bring it up and dragging along over and over again. Why do you bring it up when no one else is talking about it? It is not related to topic at hand.


Because when the argument is made that the city "seems to dislike" them perhaps the noise ordinance violations are part of the reason for dislike.

tphuang wrote:
Fact is they were led by to believe before January 2017 that fis was going to happen by the politicians and they were caught completely off guard when politicians bowed down to the wishes of a loud minority.


To the best of my knowledge, the city manager's office and airport staff supported the project but it doesn't seem like there was ever a commitment from the mayor & council (politicians) to the project. And apparently lots of people showed up to the public meetings about the proposed project which should have been a clue that it was controversial (and most politicians try to avoid controversy).

tphuang wrote:
they should have just told JetBlue right from the start rather than leading them on thinking it will be passed. JetBlue was making a lot of plans with that assumption.


I don't think we know what sort of representations city/airport staff & politicians made to JetBlue. The proposal would never make it to council without support from the airport staff & city manager -- so those folks may have told JetBlue that they were behind the project but I doubt they would have made guarantees about how the council would vote, particularly knowing how controversial the airport is locally.

The Houston Airport System supported the construction of the FIS at HOU, but the decision was still ultimately up to the City Council -- and honestly, I think that if UA had chosen Houston as the merged airline's HQ instead of Chicago, WN wouldn't have gotten their international gates at HOU.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue doesn't fly LAX-SFO?

Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:48 pm

ScottB wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Honestly, you need a new hobby than attacking JetBlue for lateness at lgb. This topic has nothing even to do with it and you managed to bring it up and dragging along over and over again. Why do you bring it up when no one else is talking about it? It is not related to topic at hand.


Because when the argument is made that the city "seems to dislike" them perhaps the noise ordinance violations are part of the reason for dislike.

tphuang wrote:
Fact is they were led by to believe before January 2017 that fis was going to happen by the politicians and they were caught completely off guard when politicians bowed down to the wishes of a loud minority.


To the best of my knowledge, the city manager's office and airport staff supported the project but it doesn't seem like there was ever a commitment from the mayor & council (politicians) to the project. And apparently lots of people showed up to the public meetings about the proposed project which should have been a clue that it was controversial (and most politicians try to avoid controversy).

tphuang wrote:
they should have just told JetBlue right from the start rather than leading them on thinking it will be passed. JetBlue was making a lot of plans with that assumption.


I don't think we know what sort of representations city/airport staff & politicians made to JetBlue. The proposal would never make it to council without support from the airport staff & city manager -- so those folks may have told JetBlue that they were behind the project but I doubt they would have made guarantees about how the council would vote, particularly knowing how controversial the airport is locally.

The Houston Airport System supported the construction of the FIS at HOU, but the decision was still ultimately up to the City Council -- and honestly, I think that if UA had chosen Houston as the merged airline's HQ instead of Chicago, WN wouldn't have gotten their international gates at HOU.


sorry, I was overly harsh, but this really is completely off topic of why doesn't JetBlue fly LAX-SFO.

SurfandSnow wrote:
B6 has absolutely no business flying between its network spokes LAX and SFO. This is a hub to hub route for AS and UA, both of whom benefit from tremendous FFer loyalty and connectivity (including their own operations as well as those of international partners) on both ends of the route. SFO's other leading carriers AA, DL and WN frequently ply this route as well, benefiting from their own Southern California FFer loyalty and significant connectivity at LAX in doing so. B6 would clearly be at a huge disadvantage to all 5 of these carriers, though there *might* be an opportunity for F9 to introduce ULCC service on this route. In fact, I believe F9 has flown LAX-SFO before. Currently, the only ULCC service between LAX and the Bay Area is NK's LAX-OAK service. B6 probably does have viable expansion opportunities from LAX (indeed, their recent additions of LAX-BUF/MCO seem to be doing fine), but they would probably be something like LAX-EWR or perhaps even LAX-IAD if AA or AS drops that route...


Exactly, not only do they not have any FF loyalty in this route, the carriers that do have that are loosing money on this route. It's a huge bloodbath. They are not in a position to loose money on routes that don't help their 3 main hubs. The only way I think B6 gets more into west coast market is if it's position at BOS is solidified and it receives some gates at SFO.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos