Even though this is a Song thread, I feel that I have to argue this ATL
point with a mix for facts and opinions. However, I must first state that I respect your opinion and you also bring up good points.
As for JetBlue, I think pulling out of Atlanta was a good call.. but it wasn't Delta that sealed the deal.
Uh, actually, I think it was. Don't think Airtran sealed the deal. You think Neeleman would be scared away by Airtran making the sudden announcement and throwing on a couple of wet-leased A320's? That wouldn't scare anyone, although it was smart for Airtran to make sure they did not get left out of the party.
It was, indeed, AirTran who "sealed the deal." Had AirTran not entered those markets, 1.) there would have been less capacity; and 2.) there would have been less yield pressure. As long as there was another airline on the route with similar costs, JetBlue didn't want to be on the route. That makes perfect sense. It also makes perfect sense to look to compete with an airline with double the costs on a route where it has a complete monopoly.
No, I think it was Delta's capability of throwing 13 flights on the routes and triple FF miles.
Did you really think that JetBlue thought that DL
wouldn't respond? JetBlue is possibly one of the most down-to-earth airlines in the U.S (just listen to their press calls). As a result, DL
matched the fares dollar for dollar - duh - and lost millions of dollars.
JB thought Delta would be too stunned to react, similar to how they did when JB entered Delta's other market, NY-FL.
No they didn't. JetBlue knew times were changing, and thought, "Hey, let's give ATL
a chance because DL
has a complete monopoly on one of the biggest routes in the U.S and they need some relief from those overpriced fares."
JetBlue didn't see BOS
tooting its horn for another airline at the time (and don't even try bringing up the argument that BOS
didn't want them. Massport was the one that gave them 2 gates.)
First of all, JB's ATL presence was less than stellar.
Three transcon flights at start is stellar for JetBlue. It's the most they've ever started with on a transcon route.
But Delta wasn't about to let their other hometown route be challenged. Within 6 months, B6 was running with its tail between its legs.
Of course DL
wasn't going to have their hometown route challenged. That's why they gave away the boat to maintain it...
However, credit needs to be given to B6
for attempting to make ATL
work out. They reduced the flights on LGB
to 1x and started 1x OAK
. They actually cut down capacity at first before completely abandoning the route, unlike DL
. Is it fair to say that DL
is now running from B6
b/c they are stopping those two routes? Judging by the fact that B6
was "running with its tail between its legs" too, then I guess it is...
The blue Kool-Aid drinkers praised that JB "decided" to utilize its aircraft in other markets because the ATL-LA market was too flooded with competition?
Yes, they decided to move their extremely limited amount of planes to other, more profitable routes, such as LGB
. Also, the ATL
-LA/SF route was then starting to become flooded with competition. You said it yourself. 13 flights on DL
? New service from FL
didn't want to be in this war.
JetBlue pulled the plug on ATL
because of the broader scheme of things - FL
were about to engage in a bigger war. B6
was the airline that triggered FL
to add transcon service so quickly. Why else would they have rushed to get Ryan to fly those flights? Also, it's thanks to B6
that the fares are now so low on this route. If it weren't for JetBlue, then who knows when FL
would have finally launched those routes.
According to Neeleman, JetBlue was making money in ATL
. However, JetBlue goes where they can make the most
money. They could have sustained those flights to just make a point. But JetBlue is the most practical airline that you'll find - if a flight isn't performing up to par with the rest of the network, you pull it. Plain and simple.
JetBlue's about money, not market share.