Mason747
Topic Author
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:03 pm

JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:36 pm

I am beginning to wonder as to why JetBlue does not fly to chicago at all. Of all the new routes that they're opening, ORD should be one of them. My guess is that ATA, Southwest, and Airtran dominate the lowcost market there. That still shouldnt stop them. It shouldve been one of their first destinations. Any thoughts.
 
Skookum
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:55 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:39 pm

WN doesn't fly to ORD, so I'm assuming you mean the Chicago market as a whole?

I am also curious to hear thoughts on this.
Good flying
 
Mason747
Topic Author
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:03 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:47 pm

I think that JetBlue would be powerful at ORD. I know WN doesnt fly into ORD. Only into MDW.
 
ChicagoOhare
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:28 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:03 pm

With the dominance of UA and AA, slots and gates are tough to find at ORD. WN loves grabbing gates at MDW. Could be a question of availability.

Also, ATA and Airtran are also found only at MDW.
 
sq452
Posts: 993
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:49 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:11 pm

It has to be the competition at ORD. MDW is really the only airport that makes some logical sense if they try Chicago. But, it just seems like a situation that wouldn't bode well for B6 with that market. what if they tried one of the airports in the burbs??? Like Gary (just kidding)...

To some reason, I think the same excuse can be applied to CVG. The majors just have TOO much of a foothold on the market in those towns that they get forced out. If you think about B6, remember how they got clobbered at ATL and pulled out???

They learned their lesson there.
SIN > CVG > BOS
 
EridanMan
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 12:49 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:57 pm

I'd kill to see GYY, even just as a 1 or 2x daily from each coast (not a major hub city)

My Fiancee's family lives in south Chicago, GYY is a much easier drive than either MDW or ORD, AND it seems that we set a new standard of flying hell every year we make the flight... (First AA, then HP).
 
InTheSky74
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:25 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:52 pm

GYY or RFD (or both) would make me very happy as an alternative to ORD or MDW....

Keeping my fingers crossed!

Rob
 
akjetBlue
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 1:59 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:45 pm

From what we know David and Dave have public stated that they would like to go into ORD. The story (that we are hearing at least) is that B6 wants +4 gates to start with and well as you can imagine no one wants to give up 4 gates and sublease them to a competitor.

On top of this the delays into and out of ORD aren't exactly going to help improve the already lower than avg ontime performance.

Will B6 end up in Chicago, most likely. Will it be any time soon? It's anyone's guess.
Save a horse! Ride a Cowboy!
 
jetblueatjfk
Posts: 1556
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:42 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:16 pm

This is discussed many times on here and one of the posts went into GYY and everyone said how it could work since GYY airport officials are out for a new airline and that they can use GYY to start off the Chicago ops and eventually go into ORD when it opens while already having some parts of Chicago covered.

B66jfk airplane 
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:48 pm

I still think they should do RFD.

Not only can the grab people from the western suburbs, but the city of Rockford itself is a large metro area. Bloomington/Normal is only a 2 hour drive from there, Madison is just 2 hours away on 94, and Dubuque is only an hour and a half away from the airport as well.

But, obviously, JBlue wants to get the most out of any investment in the Chicagoland area, and ORD and MDW would probably provide the most passengers and the best returns.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
AAFlyer2006
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:37 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:13 pm

It seems the two Chicago proper airports are full, until 2017 according to an earlier thread. GYY is close to Chicago, but has problems (with the neighborhood, access, and size). RFD is too far away from Chicago or Milwaukee to be viable for either city.

Anyone on this forum have any thoughts on a viable airport in the Chicago area?






Some of the parts of this post may be redundant. I apologize for this.
 
InTheSky74
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:25 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:30 pm

Why not do BOTH RFD and GYY - then you are surrounding the Chicago area and you can try to draw customers to both.

Rob
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:35 pm

I was actually thinking about this, and contrary to what David and Dave are saying publicly, I think that they want MDW. Here's why:

MDW has no non-stop flights to JFK and has only 2 non-stop flights to BOS (FL). These are two JetBlue strongholds along the Northeast Corridor and they have tons of demand for Chicagoland service.

Southwest doesn't fly to JFK. Southwest doesn't fly to BOS.

If JetBlue were to go into ORD, they wouldn't have much competition to JFK, but there would be a lot of competition to BOS - and that just won't fly (insert pun here) when UA/AA have a major hub at ORD.

Further, I hardly see how JetBlue could expand in Chicago if it's not just building a very large presence on the Chi-JFK and Chi-BOS market. Going into ORD and offering flights to FLL and OAK is the best way to get a major reaction out of UA/AA, thereby making it the best way to lose money. In addition, most of JetBlue's markets already have low fare stimulation via WN. However, JFK and BOS still do not have low-fare service.

Am I making sense here? I honestly think that JetBlue is playing "teehee" with the public and is really planning on offering a high-frequency service out of MDW to JFK and BOS. MDW is also located conveniently for those going into downtown Chicago, so this could also target business travelers.

The JFK-BOS Shuttle is working out so well because of high frequency, so I don't see why a JFK-MDW and BOS-MDW Shuttle-type operation wouldn't work as well. Offer JFK service 8x/day and BOS service 7x/day. JFK would be priced at a round number, such as $75-$190 o/w, while BOS would be priced at $85-$205 o/w.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced this could work, and the more I think JetBlue knows it too.

JetBluefan1
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Fri Jul 28, 2006 11:09 pm

Quoting AAFlyer2006 (Reply 10):
GYY is close to Chicago, but has problems (with the neighborhood, access, and size)

What Problems?

Neighborhood? Have you been there? You don't need to travel anywhere near a Gary neighborhood to get to GYY, you only travel through an industrial area. No worse than driving down Cicero trying to get MDW.

Access? GYY is directly accessible off of the I-90/Cline Ave. exit, less than 2 miles from the interchange. Faster than going down Cicero from I-55 to MDW. GYY is also accessible off of I-80/94 down Cline Ave. a little farther. The South Shore Line also has a stop about a mile from the terminal. The South Shore Line NW Indiana to South Bend and downtown Chicago.

Size? With two runways, one longer than anything at MDW and an empty terminal and tarmac, it can accomodate B6 right now better than MDW and ORD combined.

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 9):
I still think they should do RFD.

Not only can the grab people from the western suburbs, but the city of Rockford itself is a large metro area. Bloomington/Normal is only a 2 hour drive from there, Madison is just 2 hours away on 94, and Dubuque is only an hour and a half away from the airport as well.

The difference here is that GYY sits in the middle of a major population (NW Indiana) that is generally underserved aviationally (I coined that word). It also readily accessible from the South Side of Chicago and South Suburbs who really only have one choice, MDW. I live on the North Side and would use GYY in a heartbeat, especially if an airline like B6 was flying from there.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:29 am

How far is RFD from Chicago?

JetBluefan1
 
AAFlyer2006
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:37 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:25 pm

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 14):
How far is RFD from Chicago?

According to mapquest, 85 miles with a driving time of about an hour and a half.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:03 am

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 14):
How far is RFD from Chicago?

The thing really affecting RFD is that it is 72 miles from ORD, and you have to drive right past ORD to get to Chicago (as in you will be a few hundred yards from the runway as you drive on I-90). Although Chicago is a bit of different market since so many of the companies and wealthy population lives out in the suburbs. Chicagoland is massive and there are plenty of people traveling that don't go to the city itself. Most of Chicago's nonfinancial companies have campuses outside the city. ORD serves the North and West surbubs, MDW serves the South. Rockford is about 30 miles away from the western most surburbs. But eventually those corn fields will probably turn into developments.

Now there has been speculation around about Rockford getting jetBlue. ORD is overcrowded. Getting gates would be very difficult. AA and UA are struggling without enough gates. There is no where for new carriers to go. RFD will do whatever a new airline wants to get service and Rockford has a metro population of 300,000 and is the second largest in Illinois. There is more to Illinois than Chicago (although Chicagoans fully disagree)!
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:44 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 13):
What Problems?

"perception"...the City of Gary Indiana has a very bad perception...of course, having one of the worst murder rates per population recently doesn't help its cause.....

It's "viewed" as an industrial polluted city...

no tourist will want to take B6 out of GYY, and neither will business people who take public transportation (there's no "L"-trains going to GYY).....the expressway (I-90) is the only way of getting there basically.....

those would be majour hurdles to overcome....


Now if B6 targets the northwest Indiana area, yes..they might be successful..but I don't see the market there....certainly not yet...
"Up the Irons!"
 
intermodal64
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:03 am

ORD lies at the center of the metro area, very convenient to large suburban employers such as the world headquarters for Sears, Motorola, and McDonald's. ORD is also the most convenient airport for the most affluent residents of the area, both city and suburbs.

MDW is a bit more out of the way for these folks. For me as a North Side Chicago resident (but obviously not among the affluent captains of industry), a $100 round-trip cab ride to MDW must be offset by pretty low fares relative to ORD. This is usually the case, in fact. Another way to state this: MDW's distance from the bulk of the region's very high-revenue business traffic (originating in CHI) puts downward pressure on the yields relative to ORD.

JetBlue has every reason to fight for gates and slots at ORD if they want to be a credible player in the Chicago market. I understand that about 4 years ago they were offered access to a gate in Terminal 5 (International terminal) next to Apple Vacations charters. The problem was that their peak-hour availability was restricted. Apparently JetBlue is holding out for gates in one of the domestic terminals with unrestricted access. Now, however, slots have again become a constraint.

I wonder what's going on behind the scenes politically. If Chicago's political muscle became convinced that JetBlue at ORD was a good thing, the necessary gates and slots would somehow become available. The Mayor has a way of making things like this happen.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:43 am

Quoting Intermodal64 (Reply 18):
ORD lies at the center of the metro area, very convenient to large suburban employers such as the world headquarters for Sears, Motorola, and McDonald's. ORD is also the most convenient airport for the most affluent residents of the area, both city and suburbs.

MDW is actually closer to downtown Chicago than ORD and most people coming to Chicago go stay downtown since that is where most of the hotels are. However ORD definitely attracts more business clientele. ORD is still a decent distance from downtown, although I agree that the suburbs that are closer to ORD are quite wealthy and have a lot of businesses.

Quoting Intermodal64 (Reply 18):
JetBlue has every reason to fight for gates and slots at ORD if they want to be a credible player in the Chicago market... Now, however, slots have again become a constraint.

ORD does not have slots. Any airline can serve the airport whenever it wants. The airport authority has requested airlines to limit operations in certain hours, but there are no specific slot constraints in the same way that many other large airports like NRT and LHR have.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:36 am

Quoting Mason747 (Reply 2):
I think that JetBlue would be powerful at ORD

 faint   rotfl   rotfl 

Quoting JetBlueAtJFK (Reply 8):
This is discussed many times on here and one of the posts went into GYY and everyone said how it could work since GYY airport officials are out for a new airline and that they can use GYY to start off the Chicago ops and eventually go into ORD when it opens while already having some parts of Chicago covered.

Have you ever heard of a thing in the english language called a period?

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 9):
Not only can the grab people from the western suburbs, but the city of Rockford itself is a large metro area. Bloomington/Normal is only a 2 hour drive from there, Madison is just 2 hours away on 94, and Dubuque is only an hour and a half away from the airport as well.

Point #1 because obviously you dont know Chicago geography very well.

Rockford-Madison is I-90. I-94 runs North from ORD to MKE then cuts across WI to MSN.

Point #2 It is a hell of a long drive to RFD even for me (Schaumburg/NW Suburbs), and even further for people who live in west suburbs such as Batavia, Naperville, Bensenville, Lake Charles etc etc.

Point #3 No way in hell can B6 service in RFD catch traffic from Bloomington/Normal...that is a hell of a waste of gas and time to drive to Rockford.

Quoting United787 (Reply 13):
Neighborhood? Have you been there? You don't need to travel anywhere near a Gary neighborhood to get to GYY, you only travel through an industrial area. No worse than driving down Cicero trying to get MDW.

Access? GYY is directly accessible off of the I-90/Cline Ave. exit, less than 2 miles from the interchange. Faster than going down Cicero from I-55 to MDW. GYY is also accessible off of I-80/94 down Cline Ave. a little farther. The South Shore Line also has a stop about a mile from the terminal. The South Shore Line NW Indiana to South Bend and downtown Chicago.

The hell is the last time you drove from Chicago or the N/NW suburbs to GYY? Perpetual construction on I-94/90/80 make this a horrible ride even if it is a bit closer, that whole situation from Stony Island Road all the way to the Chicago Skyways is damn unnerving, not even going to mention what is happening around that rock quarry. It sucks because furtherly you have to pay even more in tolls if your coming from anywhere but downtown on I-355/I-90/I-94 and I-294.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 14):
How far is RFD from Chicago?

Too far from anyone wanting to drive it even from the NW suburbs when gas is $3.30.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 17):
no tourist will want to take B6 out of GYY, and neither will business people who take public transportation (there's no "L"-trains going to GYY).....the expressway (I-90) is the only way of getting there basically.....

 checkmark 

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 19):
MDW is actually closer to downtown Chicago than ORD and most people coming to Chicago go stay downtown since that is where most of the hotels are. However ORD definitely attracts more business clientele. ORD is still a decent distance from downtown, although I agree that the suburbs that are closer to ORD are quite wealthy and have a lot of businesses.

You bet they are, I live in the middle of these suburbs in Schaumburg I-290/I-90 exchange and the business/catchment area is just as big as downtown. I would venture that more people stay in the N/NW suburbs than downtown. However you have to note that alot of corporate fleets and business goes to PWK airport. (Such as Motorola or Wal-Greens)

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 19):
ORD does not have slots. Any airline can serve the airport whenever it wants. The airport authority has requested airlines to limit operations in certain hours, but there are no specific slot constraints in the same way that many other large airports like NRT and LHR have.

ORD was slot controlled until a few years back, that is why there is now no gate space.

Speaking of T5 and Apple Vacations/USA3000. Spirit had to pull the same scheme here until they moved into T3 right by Delta and AA.
 
DLKAPA
Posts: 7962
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:37 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:38 am

Quoting Mason747 (Thread starter):
My guess is that ATA, Southwest, and Airtran dominate the lowcost market there. That still shouldnt stop them.

Actually it should stop them. Why jump into a market that's already served very thoroughly by your compeditors? What could they possibly gain?
And all at once the crowd begins to sing: Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:11 am

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 21):
Actually it should stop them. Why jump into a market that's already served very thoroughly by your compeditors? What could they possibly gain?

They'd be chewed up and spit out by WN, FL and ATA for sure at Chicago MDW. ORD would not be much better if at all. AA and UA have a very big stronghold there...

Face the music, Chicago is just saturated by already superb service. The market has been well-served since before B6 even took to the skies. WN has been there since 1985 and they operate over 200 flights a day. I think FL has been there a while as well if I am not mistaken.
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
JetBlueAUS
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:15 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:18 am

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 22):
They'd be chewed up and spit out by WN, FL and ATA for sure at Chicago MDW. ORD would not be much better if at all. AA and UA have a very big stronghold there...

Face the music, Chicago is just saturated by already superb service. The market has been well-served since before B6 even took to the skies. WN has been there since 1985 and they operate over 200 flights a day. I think FL has been there a while as well if I am not mistaken.

Well, like JetBluefan1 has already stated. JFK is not operated by any carrier at MDW. FL operates 2 daily BOS flights but JetBlue has a lot of loyal flyers out of BOS and better yet, JFK. I think they could make this service work. However, their expansion at MDW could be limited, but the same scenario would happen at ORD. Chicago will be a tricky market to enter, but I think JetBlue can make it happen.
Not all of us can be heroes, some of us can only stand on the sidewalk and clap as they go by.
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:26 am

Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 23):
Well, like JetBluefan1 has already stated. JFK is not operated by any carrier at MDW

Man, I didn't even pay attention to his post...

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 12):
MDW has no non-stop flights to JFK and has only 2 non-stop flights to BOS (FL).

Ah ok, there it is... NOW I see it...

I didn't even think of that. So if they were to come into Chicago, they'd have little competition flying MDW-BOS against FL, and no competition flying MDW to their home base at JFK... Yeah, I guess they'd be able to make that happen with either the E90 or the A320... I say try out a couple of E90s first, then if demand warants it, upgrade to the A320.
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:55 am

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 24):
Ah ok, there it is... NOW I see it...

I didn't even think of that. So if they were to come into Chicago, they'd have little competition flying MDW-BOS against FL, and no competition flying MDW to their home base at JFK... Yeah, I guess they'd be able to make that happen with either the E90 or the A320... I say try out a couple of E90s first, then if demand warants it, upgrade to the A320



Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 23):
Well, like JetBluefan1 has already stated. JFK is not operated by any carrier at MDW

Too bad the whole Chicago market is to LGA and EWR which brings me to my next point:

Look at the ORD-JFK market and how much demand there is for that. Yea.... Comair, exactly.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:56 am

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 24):
Yeah, I guess they'd be able to make that happen with either the E90 or the A320... I say try out a couple of E90s first, then if demand warants it, upgrade to the A320.

I say have a high-frequency market with the E190's - no A320's. Don't forget that UA and AA run shuttle ops out of LGA (and probably EWR as well), so there's lots of competition for frequency - similar to NYC-BOS. This route would be targetting business travelers, not the leisure crowd - and business travelers want frequency.

JetBluefan1
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:02 am

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 20):
Speaking of T5 and Apple Vacations/USA3000. Spirit had to pull the same scheme here until they moved into T3 right by Delta and AA.

That space was used by VS before they moved out of ORD after 9/11....

Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 23):

Well, like JetBluefan1 has already stated. JFK is not operated by any carrier at MDW. FL operates 2 daily BOS flights but JetBlue has a lot of loyal flyers out of BOS and better yet, JFK. I think they could make this service work. However, their expansion at MDW could be limited, but the same scenario would happen at ORD. Chicago will be a tricky market to enter, but I think JetBlue can make it happen.



Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 24):
I didn't even think of that. So if they were to come into Chicago, they'd have little competition flying MDW-BOS against FL, and no competition flying MDW to their home base at JFK... Yeah, I guess they'd be able to make that happen with either the E90 or the A320... I say try out a couple of E90s first, then if demand warants it, upgrade to the A320.

ORD-JFK is not a big service destination....AA has only recently again added flights via AE's JungleJets....if there was a business case for it, certainly AA would be flying that route....heck, ORD's homeplayer UA doesn't even have flights to JFK...

Both DL and AA have added a flight into LGA...why not JFK..especially DL, given how much of an international presence DL has at JFK now...

ORD-JFK
AA/AE-2 Jungle Jets..

ORD-LGA flights
DL-5
AA-19....
UA-15..of which 7 are 752's..!

ORD-EWR
AA-7
UA-8
CO-9


TZ had MDW-JFK services back in the 1990s and ended it soon after....

Chicago to JFK has never proved to be a viable route....maybe it can with B6, it would be interesting to see.....but I'm not as sanguine as some here are...
"Up the Irons!"
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:03 am

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 25):
Look at the ORD-JFK market and how much demand there is for that. Yea.... Comair, exactly

American Eagle has two flights, Comair has one flight. The Comair flight is almost exclusively for international connections. The fares that Delta offers between ORD and JFK are enormous.

However if jetBlue started flights, I have no doubt that United will start service, and AA will probably increase too. This could be a market that can sustain some mainline jets. Sure LGA is preferable for most people, but there are still a lot of people on Long Island that have JFK as a better airport. Chicago is one of the biggest markets from New York, and there are people that prefer to use JFK. Also jetBlue proved that people will go to JFK for domestic flights.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:15 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 28):
The Comair flight is almost exclusively for international connections. The fares that Delta offers between ORD and JFK are enormous.

hmmm..I didn't find Comair.... scratchchin ...

thanks for the update..that makes its a whopping three RJ's flying ORD-JFK...
"Up the Irons!"
 
AussieItaliano
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:20 am

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 25):
Too bad the whole Chicago market is to LGA and EWR which brings me to my next point:

Look at the ORD-JFK market and how much demand there is for that. Yea.... Comair, exactly.

The exact same thing was said about Boston. People said that nobody would fly B6 from JFK to BOS because travellers to and from BOS would prefer EWR and LGA. However, the JFK-BOS route is doing quite well.

I think that a lot of people on this forum are thinking of a JFK-Chicago route regarding how popular it would be with Chicagoans, but don't forget about New Yorkers who would want to fly it. B6 has become quite popular with New Yorkers, and brand loyalty still counts for something.

One of the biggest mistakes made by B6 critics is the idea that nobody would fly from JFK when there are EWR and LGA to handle domestic traffic.
Third Runway - LHR, Second Runway - LGW, Build Them Both!!!
 
JetBlueAUS
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:15 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:44 am

I wonder if JetBlue would be successful operating IAD-MDW. I know that Southwest will be flying that route when they open up IAD in October. However, JetBlue has a focus city in IAD and probably a lot of loyal customers. Would JetBlue be able to support 3-4 x daily IAD-MDW flights? Or will WN be to much competition? ((Flights possibly flown on E-190's))

If JetBlue were to start these routes they would be competing against:

AA - 3 flights daily on an ER4.
UA - 9 flights on A320 (2), Boeing 737-300 (3), Boeing 757-200 (2), Boeing 767-300 (1), Boeing 777-200 (1).
WN - 7 flights on Boeing 737's.


Okay, maybe this is wishful thinking now that I have everything laid-out. This will be pretty hard to compete with. Any thoughts? Maybe 2 flights in the early, late morning, and two flights late afternoon and late evening.
Not all of us can be heroes, some of us can only stand on the sidewalk and clap as they go by.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:48 am

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 30):
The exact same thing was said about Boston. People said that nobody would fly B6 from JFK to BOS because travellers to and from BOS would prefer EWR and LGA. However, the JFK-BOS route is doing quite well.

I think that a lot of people on this forum are thinking of a JFK-Chicago route regarding how popular it would be with Chicagoans, but don't forget about New Yorkers who would want to fly it. B6 has become quite popular with New Yorkers, and brand loyalty still counts for something.

One of the biggest mistakes made by B6 critics is the idea that nobody would fly from JFK when there are EWR and LGA to handle domestic traffic.

Exactly what I was thinking. JetBlue managed to make JFK-BOS a huge success - they have no problem filling 10 flights a day, and pretty decent yield as well. The thing is that the RJ's flying to ORD are charging exorbitant airfares, while JetBlue would come in and stimulate traffic with the blink of an eye. Not to mention, JetBlue is well-known for its advertising and connections to the media. Like with the launching of JFK-BOS, there wouldn't be a single person in the NYC area who wouldn't know about the Chicago service (ok, so I was exaggerating, but many people would find out).

Not saying it's going to be as easy as JFK-BOS as Chicago is an actual hub, and BOS already had quite a B6 presence before JFK was launched. However, with proper marketing, pricing and scheduling, it could work.

And from what I hear, MDW is the new "hot thing" in Chicago. I have a friend who lives in the "snotty" neighborhood in the city, and she flies out of MDW all the time (As a sidenote, she told me the crowd at MDW is very low-class. Not sure if she just notices these types of people more, or if MDW is infamous for this. Hm). Her daughter goes to school in Manhattan, and she used to take AA from MDW to LGA. Not sure if AA still flies that route...

In any case, she said she'd love JetBlue to come by. Though she drives a BMW and her husband a Porsche, just like most Americans - she'd like to pay as little as possible for a flight.

JetBluefan1
 
ckfred
Posts: 4694
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:47 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 19):
ORD does not have slots. Any airline can serve the airport whenever it wants. The airport authority has requested airlines to limit operations in certain hours, but there are no specific slot constraints in the same way that many other large airports like NRT and LHR have.

ORD no longer has slots that can be bought and sold, but the FAA has limited ORD to 88 arrivals per hour, and UA and AA both decreased the number of operations by 10% or so.

So, it would be difficult for B6 to get into ORD, both because of the lack of gate space, as well as the FAA-operations limit.

From what I've read, David Neeleman isn't interested in MDW, because MDW is mostly LCC-operated flights. Fares there are already low. On the other hand, ORD has only USA3000 and Spirit, flying to mostly Florida and other leisure destinations.

When ATA started selling off gates at MDW, from what I've read, HP and B6 both looked at bidding, but both declined. My guess is that HP wanted more gates that were available, and wound up buying US anyway. As for B6, either it didn't want to get into a bidding war with FL and later WN, or it felt that trying to start up MDW against WN would be problematic.

WN doens't like to lose, and it has deeper pockets than B6. It could be that Mr. Neeleman, who worked for Southwest briefly, thought that for every new route that B6 started, WN would flood the nearest airport that it served and slash fares.

As for ORD, B6 wants 4 and preferable 5 gates, so that it can operate as more than a spoke for JFK. If B6 had 5 gates, I could see service to JFK, BOS, FLL, LGB, and LAS.

I think B6 has been hoping that UA, DL, or NW going out of business. UA would have opened a multitude of gates, but DL has five gates, and NW has 4 or 5 gates. So unless NW or DL do go out of business, I don't see B6 coming to ORD any time soon.
 
Mexicana757
Posts: 2631
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 3:21 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 2:42 pm

Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 23):
FL operates 2 daily BOS flights but JetBlue has a lot of loyal flyers out of BOS and better yet, JFK

Airtran flies MDW-BOS 4X daily, but that will change to 3X daily in September.
 
Flight209
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 8:07 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Sun Jul 30, 2006 11:56 pm

Quoting AkjetBlue (Reply 7):
From what we know David and Dave have public stated that they would like to go into ORD. The story (that we are hearing at least) is that B6 wants +4 gates to start with and well as you can imagine no one wants to give up 4 gates and sublease them to a competitor.



Quoting Ckfred (Reply 33):
From what I've read, David Neeleman isn't interested in MDW, because MDW is mostly LCC-operated flights. Fares there are already low. On the other hand, ORD has only USA3000 and Spirit, flying to mostly Florida and other leisure destinations.

Is it just me, or is B6 getting less consistent about what kind of airport it serves or wants to serve in multi-airport markets? While B6 may rather serve Chicago at larger, farther-out legacy hub ORD than at smaller, closer-in LCC bastion MDW, the opposite seems true in the two largest metro areas in Texas. In Houston, CO's dominance of IAH is supposedly the prime motive for B6's decision to serve HOU instead, while in the Dallas-Fort Worth region, B6 seems determined to out-WN WN with the very public way it is holding out for a Wright Amendment-free DAL, refusing to serve DFW, and opposing the proposed compromise on the Wright issue.
I may question your opinion, but I'll never question your right to it.
 
AAFlyer2006
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:37 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:10 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 13):
Neighborhood? Have you been there? You don't need to travel anywhere near a Gary neighborhood to get to GYY, you only travel through an industrial area. No worse than driving down Cicero trying to get MDW.

You make a good point there. However, what I was hinting at and probably should have mentioned is perception. If the airport is in Gary, people will tend to think of Gary. Unfortunately, the image of Gary, to many people, will be of high crime, poverty, pollution, and of a "murder capital," whether it is a fair assment of the airport neighboorhood or not.

Quoting United787 (Reply 13):
Access? GYY is directly accessible off of the I-90/Cline Ave. exit, less than 2 miles from the interchange. Faster than going down Cicero from I-55 to MDW. GYY is also accessible off of I-80/94 down Cline Ave. a little farther. The South Shore Line also has a stop about a mile from the terminal. The South Shore Line NW Indiana to South Bend and downtown Chicago.

The traffic to the airport is often quite bad and the mass transit access is not that good currently. The South Shhore Line's stops tend to be inconveniant or sevice infrequent. An El train to the airport could help with this, but that shows little sign of becoming a reality any time soon.

Quoting United787 (Reply 13):
Size? With two runways, one longer than anything at MDW and an empty terminal and tarmac, it can accomodate B6 right now better than MDW and ORD combined.

That is true. The availability of several Air Bridges would be good as well. However, more baggage caroseles would likley be needed as well as a larger terminal.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 22):
hey'd be chewed up and spit out by WN, FL and ATA for sure at Chicago MDW.

I agree. Someone made a similar point when rumors of B6 at STL was the common rumor. Like at STL, where most B6 routes would be in direct competition with WN, at MDW, most B6 routes would be in competition with ATA or WN. However, what other Chicagoland airports could B6 serve that would be much better? I can think of four airports that could serve the Chicagoland area, but it seems that each one has some problem or barrier to entry.
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:09 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 17):
"perception"...the City of Gary Indiana has a very bad perception...of course, having one of the worst murder rates per population recently doesn't help its cause.....

It's "viewed" as an industrial polluted city...

People wouldn't be flying into GYY to go to Gary, they would be flying into GYY to go to Chicago. How many airports sit in an area that is desirable for tourism, most of the airport environs look like industrial areas. Besides, I would bet most of the users would be residents of NW Indiana and Southern Chicago who would understand that proximity is more important than perception. In addition, look at the casinos in the area that do just fine despite their location!

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 17):
no tourist will want to take B6 out of GYY, and neither will business people who take public transportation (there's no "L"-trains going to GYY).....the expressway (I-90) is the only way of getting there basically.....



Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 20):
The hell is the last time you drove from Chicago or the N/NW suburbs to GYY? Perpetual construction on I-94/90/80 make this a horrible ride even if it is a bit closer, that whole situation from Stony Island Road all the way to the Chicago Skyways is damn unnerving, not even going to mention what is happening around that rock quarry. It sucks because furtherly you have to pay even more in tolls if your coming from anywhere but downtown on I-355/I-90/I-94 and I-294.



Quoting AAFlyer2006 (Reply 36):
The traffic to the airport is often quite bad and the mass transit access is not that good currently. The South Shhore Line's stops tend to be inconveniant or sevice infrequent. An El train to the airport could help with this, but that shows little sign of becoming a reality any time soon.

Even with the South Shore Line, GYY has what most airports in the US don't have, an existing rail link. For most airports, expressways are the only way to get to an airport. If B6 was going to come to GYY, I would bet the could negiotate and warrant increased service on the existing South Shore Line or even coordinated with B6 flights. Service could be increased to the level of the "L" if warranted.

I agree, traffic going South sucks. But it is not perpetual, the Dan Ryan and Skyway are both being reconstructed and when they are finished, they will be the newest roads in the region. Also, wasn't there a plan to waive the Chicago Skyway tolls for GYY passengers?

In addition, parking is FREE!

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 22):
Face the music, Chicago is just saturated by already superb service. The market has been well-served since before B6 even took to the skies. WN has been there since 1985 and they operate over 200 flights a day. I think FL has been there a while as well if I am not mistaken.

Great point.
 
mark777300
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:30 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:45 am

Considering that there is minimal flights between JFK and ORD and none to MDW, I would be inclined to say that B6 would make an absolute killing on this route. SWA is already capatlizing on this out of ISO to MDW, and I heard that these flights are full indeed. With B6 flying out of JFK to the Chicago area, it would tap into a large market that probaly currently must fly out of LGA, EWR, or even ISP, and this may not be the best for many travelers. I'm sure sooner or later B6 will jump into this, after all, JFK is becoming increasingly popular with people in the NYC area ever since the airport has been greatly improved, (i.e. AirTrain, JetBlue, new terminals). For a while I had been wondering how long it would take B6 to fly to Houston, and now they will start this service, so I'm sure Chicago won't be far behind.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:52 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 37):

People wouldn't be flying into GYY to go to Gary, they would be flying into GYY to go to Chicago. How many airports sit in an area that is desirable for tourism, most of the airport environs look like industrial areas. Besides, I would bet most of the users would be residents of NW Indiana and Southern Chicago who would understand that proximity is more important than perception. In addition, look at the casinos in the area that do just fine despite their location!

as I said, its the "perception" of "Gary"..until that changes, its going to be a hard sell...

Quoting United787 (Reply 37):

Even with the South Shore Line, GYY has what most airports in the US don't have, an existing rail link. For most airports, expressways are the only way to get to an airport. If B6 was going to come to GYY, I would bet the could negiotate and warrant increased service on the existing South Shore Line or even coordinated with B6 flights. Service could be increased to the level of the "L" if warranted.

I agree, traffic going South sucks. But it is not perpetual, the Dan Ryan and Skyway are both being reconstructed and when they are finished, they will be the newest roads in the region. Also, wasn't there a plan to waive the Chicago Skyway tolls for GYY passengers?

In addition, parking is FREE!

dude, no matter how you slice-and-dice it, transportation to GYY sucks, and NO ONE will travel to GYY from the North/Northwest/Near North suburbs..how many will commute from Lincoln Park? Wrigleyville, etc?

I lived in Lincoln Park and went to university there...its still easier to go to ORD/MDW than GYY......

I also lived in downtown Chicago for 10 years....once again, it was easy to jump on the "blue line' or "orange line" to get to ORD/MDW.....how will I get to GYY in less than an hour without a car/taxi?

Critical mass for B6 to target South Chicago suburbs and NW Indiana isn't there yet...
"Up the Irons!"
 
ScottB
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:41 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 37):
Even with the South Shore Line, GYY has what most airports in the US don't have, an existing rail link. For most airports, expressways are the only way to get to an airport.

Except... MDW and ORD both have rail links which are convenient to their respective terminals. The comparison with the rest of the United States is meaningless when the competing airports in Chicago are already better-connected to rail.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 32):
JetBlue managed to make JFK-BOS a huge success - they have no problem filling 10 flights a day, and pretty decent yield as well.

Well, the traffic numbers from DoT for May, June, and July aren't yet in, but the load factor numbers for BOS-JFK-BOS were a bit of a mixed bag for January through April. January was around 74% and April was near 82% (both below system average for those months) while February and March did very well at 91-92%. Yields for the first quarter aren't yet available, but jetBlue's 4th quarter O&D yields on the new BOS-JFK route were 20% lower than on the more mature SYR-JFK route. It's also not clear how much of the BOS-JFK traffic is O&D (typically more profitable) or connecting (usually less profitable).

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 26):
I say have a high-frequency market with the E190's - no A320's. Don't forget that UA and AA run shuttle ops out of LGA (and probably EWR as well), so there's lots of competition for frequency - similar to NYC-BOS. This route would be targetting business travelers, not the leisure crowd - and business travelers want frequency.



Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 12):
The JFK-BOS Shuttle is working out so well because of high frequency, so I don't see why a JFK-MDW and BOS-MDW Shuttle-type operation wouldn't work as well. Offer JFK service 8x/day and BOS service 7x/day. JFK would be priced at a round number, such as $75-$190 o/w, while BOS would be priced at $85-$205 o/w.

But the business travelers want to fly from LGA or EWR, and there's already a low-fare option from LGA in the form of ATA offering six daily round-trips. ATA probably has lower costs than jetBlue does on its A320's, and definitely has lower costs than what the E190 can produce. JetBlue wins on name recognition in New York, but ATA is better-known in Chicago. ATA is already pricing MDW-LGA in the neighborhood of $79-250, and the $250 on ATA is refundable, unlike on B6, which does not offer refundable fares.

Quoting AkjetBlue (Reply 7):
From what we know David and Dave have public stated that they would like to go into ORD. The story (that we are hearing at least) is that B6 wants +4 gates to start with

It's extremely unlikely that jetBlue will ever get 4 gates at ORD to start unless and until either new terminals are built or one of the large network carriers goes out of business or cedes all of its gates as part of a merger.
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:34 pm

I bet JetBlue would have a better perception at DPA than at GYY and get more traffic from the suburbs...

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 39):
as I said, its the "perception" of "Gary"..until that changes, its going to be a hard sell...



Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 39):
dude, no matter how you slice-and-dice it, transportation to GYY sucks, and NO ONE will travel to GYY from the North/Northwest/Near North suburbs..how many will commute from Lincoln Park? Wrigleyville, etc?

 checkmark 

That is why people do not understand that GYY has a 100% turnover rate... Hooters, PanAm, CasinoExpress no one can do it because of GYYs reputation etc etc.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 40):
It's extremely unlikely that jetBlue will ever get 4 gates at ORD to start unless and until either new terminals are built or one of the large network carriers goes out of business or cedes all of its gates as part of a merger.

 checkmark  if the new West terminal and the western access interstate from Irving Park Road gets built.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:03 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 40):
Well, the traffic numbers from DoT for May, June, and July aren't yet in, but the load factor numbers for BOS-JFK-BOS were a bit of a mixed bag for January through April. January was around 74% and April was near 82% (both below system average for those months) while February and March did very well at 91-92%. Yields for the first quarter aren't yet available, but jetBlue's 4th quarter O&D yields on the new BOS-JFK route were 20% lower than on the more mature SYR-JFK route. It's also not clear how much of the BOS-JFK traffic is O&D (typically more profitable) or connecting (usually less profitable).

The reason for the lower LF in January was because JetBlue was substituting 8 flights with A320s, leaving the other 2 with E190s. I cannot really comment about April, but considering that their break-even load factor was under 80%, it could be assumed that the flights were profitable. And there's no surprise in JFK-SYR being higher yielding as it's priced higher due to its longer flying distance.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 40):
But the business travelers want to fly from LGA or EWR, and there's already a low-fare option from LGA in the form of ATA offering six daily round-trips. ATA probably has lower costs than jetBlue does on its A320's, and definitely has lower costs than what the E190 can produce. JetBlue wins on name recognition in New York, but ATA is better-known in Chicago. ATA is already pricing MDW-LGA in the neighborhood of $79-250, and the $250 on ATA is refundable, unlike on B6, which does not offer refundable fares.

Common misconception. Once again, JetBlue has proved that business travelers will also fly out of JFK - take the BOS route example that we just discussed. While you're right about ATA having a name in Chicago but absolutely no recognition in New York (I mean - seriously - 6 flights a day to the world's largest aviation market does nothing for you), as well as JetBlue having a name in NYC and absolutely no recognition in Chicago, I definitely have confidence that JetBlue's Marketing Dept. can get the word out in Chicago. I even heard that they had a huge marketing campaign in CLT - and that was with just 4 flights a day.

I'm not saying this will be easy - absolutely not. But if done correctly, JFK/BOS-MDW could be highly successful.

JetBluefan1
 
ScottB
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:59 am

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
The reason for the lower LF in January was because JetBlue was substituting 8 flights with A320s, leaving the other 2 with E190s.

Actually, I was calculating the January load factors based on 68 weekly E190 round-trips (or approximately 30,000 monthly seats each way) and DoT's figures for segment passengers during that month. In January, B6 carried 22,690 JFK-BOS passengers and 21,656 BOS-JFK passengers for a total of 44,346 passengers. If, as you state, 8 daily round-trips used the A320 (and we'll assume 7 on Sat/Sun), then they offered 54 weekly A320 round-trips and 14 weekly E190 round-trips, or 239 A320 round-trips for the month along with 62 E190 round-trips. That works out to roughly 87,000 seats in the market for the month, and taking out, say 2,000 for cancellations, you actually get an abysmal load factor for January of 52%.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
I cannot really comment about April, but considering that their break-even load factor was under 80%, it could be assumed that the flights were profitable.

The route was above the system break-even load factor, but we don't know what the route's break-even load factor is given the fare mix and how many connecting passengers there might be.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
And there's no surprise in JFK-SYR being higher yielding as it's priced higher due to its longer flying distance.

The "longer flying distance" is a whopping nine miles. 200 miles for BOS-NYC and 209 miles for SYR-NYC. And I compared yields, or fare divided by distance flown, not fares. Would you care to postulate that JFK-Florida is higher-yielding due to the longer distance flown than JFK-SYR?

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
Once again, JetBlue has proved that business travelers will also fly out of JFK - take the BOS route example that we just discussed.

Where is the proof "that business travelers will also fly out of JFK?" From comparing Jan-Apr traffic in 2005 and 2006, traffic on the Delta and US Airways Shuttles between BOS and LGA has been roughly flat, with variations of plus-or-minus ten percent which are more due to Easter shifting months this year. And a "business traveler" would just as soon take the Acela than hike all the way out to JFK -- and the Acela is often lower-priced than a jetBlue walk-up fare, offers power outlets, and cell phones may be used for the entire trip.

The spike in traffic on the BOS-JFK route in February and March is far more indicative of a peak in vacation traffic during those months, when I suspect B6 saw quite a few people from Boston using those flights to connect to Florida.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11368
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:14 am

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
I even heard that they had a huge marketing campaign in CLT - and that was with just 4 flights a day.

DH certainly did more advertising in CLT, and I might even argue that FL advertises more (though they have a larger operation and more destinations).
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:53 am

Quoting ScottB (Reply 43):
Actually, I was calculating the January load factors based on 68 weekly E190 round-trips (or approximately 30,000 monthly seats each way) and DoT's figures for segment passengers during that month. In January, B6 carried 22,690 JFK-BOS passengers and 21,656 BOS-JFK passengers for a total of 44,346 passengers. If, as you state, 8 daily round-trips used the A320 (and we'll assume 7 on Sat/Sun), then they offered 54 weekly A320 round-trips and 14 weekly E190 round-trips, or 239 A320 round-trips for the month along with 62 E190 round-trips. That works out to roughly 87,000 seats in the market for the month, and taking out, say 2,000 for cancellations, you actually get an abysmal load factor for January of 52%.

Nice calculations. JetBlue obviously did poorly on JFK-BOS in January. But what would you expect - it was January, and it was still quite a new route for JetBlue. In any case, as you stated, February and March had absolutely amazing LF's, and April was decent. The route is doing fine, or else they wouldn't keep it at 10x - especially as JetBlue has become more conservative in adding frequencies and more aggressive in cutting them (as well as underperforming routes).

Quoting ScottB (Reply 43):
The route was above the system break-even load factor, but we don't know what the route's break-even load factor is given the fare mix and how many connecting passengers there might be.

True. However, the route also brings more people into the JetBlue system that may have flown another airline. For example, it's better to carry someone BOS-JFK-SMF than not carry them at all. Especially with JetBlue's lower LF's as of lately, there's a higher likeliness that the seat would have gone out empty anyway.

In the 2Q06, Neeleman stated that the E190 is profitable anyway you slice it.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 43):
The "longer flying distance" is a whopping nine miles. 200 miles for BOS-NYC and 209 miles for SYR-NYC. And I compared yields, or fare divided by distance flown, not fares. Would you care to postulate that JFK-Florida is higher-yielding due to the longer distance flown than JFK-SYR?

JFK-SYR: 208 miles
JFK-BOS: 186 miles

http://www.webflyer.com/travel/milemarker/

Obviously not a big difference in mileage, but I do get your point. However, JetBlue prices JFK-BOS lower than JFK-SYR. JFK-BOS is $50-$145 while JFK-SYR is $69-$159. This will most likely lead to higher yields on the SYR segment, which is true.

In any case, the higher fares on JFK-SYR is most likely because of economies of scale. By running JFK-BOS 10x a day, JetBlue gets nice utilization out of its E190s as well as quicker turn-arounds than its A320s. It can also utilize its ground crew more efficiently because of the high amount of frequencies. Unfortunately, JFK-SYR is only operated 3x daily, so the economies of scale are not as favorable on that route.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 43):
Where is the proof "that business travelers will also fly out of JFK?" From comparing Jan-Apr traffic in 2005 and 2006, traffic on the Delta and US Airways Shuttles between BOS and LGA has been roughly flat, with variations of plus-or-minus ten percent which are more due to Easter shifting months this year. And a "business traveler" would just as soon take the Acela than hike all the way out to JFK -- and the Acela is often lower-priced than a jetBlue walk-up fare, offers power outlets, and cell phones may be used for the entire trip.

Been to JFK lately? Trust me - there are a lot of business travelers there. This has been argued many times, but I'll point this out again: many of these business travelers (such as I) live on Long Island. The majority of the people don't go into the city (to work) when they're going on a business trip - they just go to the airport. My company sends me to Boca Raton twice a year. On the days that I go, I have a car service from my home to JFK.

Of course, there is always LGA which is more convenient for those who live in the City, the Bronx, the North Shore, etc. But to assume that JFK is a "hike" for a business traveler is not true. I see that you live in Boston, so I would assume you don't know the Tri-State area as well as others.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 43):
The spike in traffic on the BOS-JFK route in February and March is far more indicative of a peak in vacation traffic during those months, when I suspect B6 saw quite a few people from Boston using those flights to connect to Florida.

Probably not Florida as the state is already well-covered with B6 service from BOS. I would assume it was more due to vacation traffic going between the two cities, which are both very big on colleges on universities (NYC has NYU, Columbia, NYIT, FIT, St. John's, Adelphi, etc.; Boston has Yale, Harvard, BC, BU, etc. - both very big college cities).

Back to the topic of the thread - JetBlue could make this work as they have clearly made BOS service work. While JFK may not be the most convenient airport for some business travelers, others (such as I) find it to be very convenient. If Chicago service were to come about, I have no doubt that it would be successful. The "JFK is not convenient for business travelers" argument doesn't fly (insert pun here) anymore. That's not to say that LGA has become less attractive, but instead that people are now realizing that JFK is convenient as well. And now with the AirTrain going and all...

JetBluefan1
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 6:41 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 37):
Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 22):
Face the music, Chicago is just saturated by already superb service. The market has been well-served since before B6 even took to the skies. WN has been there since 1985 and they operate over 200 flights a day. I think FL has been there a while as well if I am not mistaken.

Great point.

thanks

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 17):
"perception"...the City of Gary Indiana has a very bad perception...of course, having one of the worst murder rates per population recently doesn't help its cause.....

It's "viewed" as an industrial polluted city...



Quoting AAFlyer2006 (Reply 36):
If the airport is in Gary, people will tend to think of Gary. Unfortunately, the image of Gary, to many people, will be of high crime, poverty, pollution, and of a "murder capital," whether it is a fair assment of the airport neighboorhood or not.

Ok, so from this these posts as well as others, it looks like GYY is not an option for B6 let alone any other carrier.


In my above arguments, MDW and ORD would be money holes as well for B6 considering that both airports are very saturated with service. B6 would enter either one of those markets as the underdog and come out defeated when squaring off against AA, UA, DL at ORD and WN, FL at MDW. I am sure that RFD might work, although it is a bit of a haul from Chicago (ORD and MDW). I wonder if there are any airfields large enough to handle an E90 or A320 that are between Chicago and MKE, like half-way...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:10 am

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 42):
Common misconception. Once again, JetBlue has proved that business travelers will also fly out of JFK - take the BOS route example that we just discussed. While you're right about ATA having a name in Chicago but absolutely no recognition in New York (I mean - seriously - 6 flights a day to the world's largest aviation market does nothing for you), as well as JetBlue having a name in NYC and absolutely no recognition in Chicago, I definitely have confidence that JetBlue's Marketing Dept. can get the word out in Chicago. I even heard that they had a huge marketing campaign in CLT - and that was with just 4 flights a day.

You're wrong, and its probably because you dont live in Chicago. If JetBlue flies out of midway, you could give out free T-Shirts and put adds on every billboard in this city and still people would not come from N/NW/Far West suburbs, the hassle is just way to great. If you go to GYY, forget about it. The traffic to JFK is small, everything goes to EWR or CO and an airline like JetBlue if they entered with "hypothetical" 6 flights a day would be meaningless here when you have hundreds of AA and UA departures. Of course, this would be further cut down by people who connect at ORD which is a number that makes JFK look like a RJ outpost.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2852
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:29 am

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 47):
You're wrong, and its probably because you dont live in Chicago. If JetBlue flies out of midway, you could give out free T-Shirts and put adds on every billboard in this city and still people would not come from N/NW/Far West suburbs, the hassle is just way to great. If you go to GYY, forget about it. The traffic to JFK is small, everything goes to EWR or CO and an airline like JetBlue if they entered with "hypothetical" 6 flights a day would be meaningless here when you have hundreds of AA and UA departures. Of course, this would be further cut down by people who connect at ORD which is a number that makes JFK look like a RJ outpost.

So if MDW isn't the preferred airport, how come so many airlines have great success out of there? If it isn't so valuable, then why did WN invest in ATA? Then why is FL expanding there? I don't know the Chicago area and I won't even pretend to, but it seems that MDW gets a fair share of traffic. Granted, it may not be ORD, but I'm sure it's convenient for some travelers.

If WN can make a route like MDW-PHL (big business destination, not nearly as large of a leisure destination as NYC) work 7-8 times a day, then why can't JetBlue make MDW-JFK (big business and leisure destination) work?

From what I hear, Chicago is a very spread out city with large amounts of suburbs. The LCC's in Chicago have managed to get people over to MDW, so I don't think that should be a problem for B6. And B6 has managed to get people over to JFK, so that shouldn't be a problem either...

JetBluefan1
 
ScottB
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: JetBlue And Chicago

Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:23 am

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 45):
In any case, the higher fares on JFK-SYR is most likely because of economies of scale. By running JFK-BOS 10x a day, JetBlue gets nice utilization out of its E190s as well as quicker turn-arounds than its A320s. It can also utilize its ground crew more efficiently because of the high amount of frequencies. Unfortunately, JFK-SYR is only operated 3x daily, so the economies of scale are not as favorable on that route.

Except an A320 moves passengers at a lower CASM than an E190. And BOS presents its own cost issues with respect to congestion, weather, hiring, etc. As a "business" route it should command comparable or better fares than SYR.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 45):
However, the route also brings more people into the JetBlue system that may have flown another airline. For example, it's better to carry someone BOS-JFK-SMF than not carry them at all.

Sometimes it's a better idea to leave unprofitable traffic to your competitors. JetBlue seems to (on occasion) be falling into some of the pricing traps of the network airlines; as an example, it can be less expensive to fly BUF-BOS-MCO than to fly BOS-MCO on the same flights.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 45):
I would assume it was more due to vacation traffic going between the two cities, which are both very big on colleges on universities (NYC has NYU, Columbia, NYIT, FIT, St. John's, Adelphi, etc.; Boston has Yale, Harvard, BC, BU, etc. - both very big college cities).

Except...you won't see college/university-related traffic in February; the February travel to & from Boston is largely related to winter break for elementary & secondary schools. College spring break travel happens in March. And buddy, Yale is in New Haven -- nowhere near Boston.

I decided to be a bit more precise about the February numbers and took a look through BTS's database of tail numbers operating flights (instead of assuming all were operated with the E190). In February, B6 operated 169 BOS-JFK flights with the A320 and 95 with the E190. Assuming that the JFK-BOS schedule was nearly identical, that gives 35,864 seats each way, or a total of 71,728 seats round-trip. JetBlue carried 50,105 passengers between BOS and JFK in February, so the corrected February load factor for BOS-JFK stands at 70%. Doing the same calculation for March (when most days had 4 daily A320 round-trip frequencies for the first half of the month) gives a corrected load factor of 82% for the month.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 45):
Of course, there is always LGA which is more convenient for those who live in the City, the Bronx, the North Shore, etc. But to assume that JFK is a "hike" for a business traveler is not true. I see that you live in Boston, so I would assume you don't know the Tri-State area as well as others.

Not to mention Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, Fairfield County, etc. And actually, I know the Tri-State area very well, having had family in the region all my life. I even drove a family member to LGA (which is a pit IMO) on Saturday. I've driven the Van Wyck enough times to know that I would prefer to avoid it if at all possible. Yes, JFK is convenient for some business travelers. The same is true for ISP or MHT or PVD or even GYY. Who would have thought that a route like PVD-BWI could support 12 daily 737's each way?

Time will tell if JFK-BOS matures into a solid performer, but it's certainly not the runaway success some would make it out to be.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 45):
That's not to say that LGA has become less attractive, but instead that people are now realizing that JFK is convenient as well. And now with the AirTrain going and all...

Business travelers aren't taking the AirTrain to JFK -- just like they don't take the T to Logan (well, most don't). If you're going to get on the AirTrain to JFK to get to Boston, you might as well just take the Acela.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: debonair, jambrain, LA704, PW100, rutankrd and 191 guests