tysmith95 wrote:

PSM only has one gate. I'd assume that Portsmouth would need a terminal expansion in order to handle the added volume of commercial flights.

Although PVD is by far the better airport, this is for a 737 base so the infrastructure at Pease should be adequate to handle 2 or 3 flights per day. There is no shortage of ramp space either. I'm assuming they also have CBP there since I believe PSM is used as an entry point for a lot of military charters, or are those folks driven up there from another airport?

I'm sure Norwegian pitching PVD and MHT also for potential US base. PVD biggest advantage it has Airport/Rail connection service to BOS and southern New England.

Flyguy

PSM = Free Parking!!!

PSM tactically and strategically might be a good place, but it's NOT a good 'first look' for inbound passengers from Europe as they step off the plane ("THIS is AMERICA?"). But in the airline biz, that probably doesn't count for a whole lot.

PSM barely has domestic flights, how DY expects it to support TA flights is beyond me. Airport is in the middle of no where, an hour from BOS, and has very limited facilities. I guarantee you there's only a handful of people who even know there are commercial flights out of PSM.

aaflyer777 wrote:

PSM barely has domestic flights, how DY expects it to support TA flights is beyond me. Airport is in the middle of no where, an hour from BOS, and has very limited facilities. I guarantee you there's only a handful of people who even know there are commercial flights out of PSM.

Suburban Boston users would love the free parking. Economy parking at Logan costs 25 dollars a day, for anyone in the northern suburbs PSM makes more sense. Yes the route would need some advertising but I believe that a market is there for inexpensive flights from secondary airports. It works well in Europe. Also it takes an hour to get from JFK to Manhattan for much of the day so it isn't too far fetched for Boston bound travelers to choose this airport. I'm very interested to see if this secondary airport model works in America, it seems like Allegiant is the only carrier that has tried and it is one of the most profitable airlines in the country. Terminal E at Logan is overcrowded, that is probably a big reason why Norwegian has taken this route.

Also the US has more sprawl than European cities. The amount of local customers served by outer airports would be higher then that of Europe, i'm surprised the move to secondary airports hasn't caught on in more places inside of this country.

I was looking at some flights to Europe in May and noticed that AA is sending the A330 on the BOS-PHL route 2x daily.
AA1757 BOS1100 – 1233 PHL 332
AA714 BOS1630 – 1802 PHL 332
The upgauge on the 1630 departure makes sense as it is timed well to connect with TATL flights, but I can't think of why they would upgauge the 1100 flight except for operational reasons.

As a side note, I ended up going with a BA/IB combination for my trip. I'll be on the 1920 BA departure from BOS, my first flight on an A380!

aaflyer777 wrote:

PSM barely has domestic flights, how DY expects it to support TA flights is beyond me. Airport is in the middle of no where, an hour from BOS, and has very limited facilities. I guarantee you there's only a handful of people who even know there are commercial flights out of PSM.

You're kidding right? Portsmouth is in the middle of nowhere?
PSM is at the perfect confluence of I-95 and Rt.16, with easy access to Rt.101 and I-495. Meaning. it can be easily reached in less than 1 hour drive from Portland (ME), Concord and Manchester (NH), the entire North Shore of Boston and all the towns between Rt.128 and I-495 East of Lowell. That is a huge catchment area and very wealthy. All of those towns along I-95 are very wealthy towns: Middleton, Boxford, Georgetown, Newburryport, Rowley, North Hampton (NH), etc.

tysmith95 wrote:

Suburban Boston users would love the free parking.

Parking may be free now because there no meaningful commercial airline service. I doubt it would remain free.

Terminal E at Logan is overcrowded, that is probably a big reason why Norwegian has taken this route.

I don't think that is the reason. I think they are doing it to tap into the demand that exists from New England to Europe and complement their operation at Boston. They are trying to be "first to market" in a business model that is likely to become more popular in the near future: Narrowbody TATL LCC service from secondary U.S. cities. I suspect that we will see other airlines jump on this bandwagon soon.

airbazar wrote:

aaflyer777 wrote:

PSM barely has domestic flights, how DY expects it to support TA flights is beyond me. Airport is in the middle of no where, an hour from BOS, and has very limited facilities. I guarantee you there's only a handful of people who even know there are commercial flights out of PSM.

You're kidding right? Portsmouth is in the middle of nowhere?
PSM is at the perfect confluence of I-95 and Rt.16, with easy access to Rt.101 and I-495. Meaning. it can be easily reached in less than 1 hour drive from Portland (ME), Concord and Manchester (NH), the entire North Shore of Boston and all the towns between Rt.128 and I-495 East of Lowell. That is a huge catchment area and very wealthy. All of those towns along I-95 are very wealthy towns: Middleton, Boxford, Georgetown, Newburryport, Rowley, North Hampton (NH), etc.

tysmith95 wrote:

Suburban Boston users would love the free parking.

Parking may be free now because there no meaningful commercial airline service. I doubt it would remain free.

Terminal E at Logan is overcrowded, that is probably a big reason why Norwegian has taken this route.

I don't think that is the reason. I think they are doing it to tap into the demand that exists from New England to Europe and complement their operation at Boston. They are trying to be "first to market" in a business model that is likely to become more popular in the near future: Narrowbody TATL LCC service from secondary U.S. cities. I suspect that we will see other airlines jump on this bandwagon soon.

You really think wealthy people are gonna fly DY? Please, they're gonna be in First Class on UA/AA/DL. PSM and MHT have tried for years to become alternates to BOS and they've had no success, I doubt thats gonna change.

That was going to be my comment. Sure, it may have a big catchment area...but so much of that area is not their demographic.

Not to mention, even with all the alternative options, every vacation period or long weekend...Logan can't fit anymore cars. Those shuttle buses are full too. Clearly there's a demand there.

Speaking specifically to Boston, I don't see the European low cost alternate airport model working. Most major European airports are situated far enough away from the city that a smaller alternate is viable, as the savings might be worth the inconvenience of slightly longer train/taxi/car rides into the city.

Boston though...you could fly into Boston, and 20 minutes after arrival you could be in the middle of the city. 30 minutes after and you could very well have bypassed the city completely.

LHR, CDG etc, 20 minutes after arrival you're possibly still walking to the baggage claim.

We're talking about 737s here, not 747s. And we're not even talking daily. And further still, we're talking SEASONAL. So with a modest amount of promotional effort and outreach, Norwegian ought to make this work at Pease. As I've said elsewhere, Pease doesn't have that good 'first look' for arriving passengers ("Wait...THIS is AMERICA?"), to the extent that even matters to anyone but the people stepping off the plane. Stewart (C-17s) and Pease (KC-46s) seem to have some sort of 'NATO-ish appeal' to Norwegian

I have to say I am a bit at a loss with this Portsmouth and Stewart strategy. What airports are they going to fly to in Europe? How are they going to market Portsmouth and Stewart to Europeans? Portsmouth is a very nice city but I doubt people know it in Europe? These flights seem targeted mostly to the US-originating markets. They might be successful offering $200-$300 TATL return tickets but I don't see Europeans rushing to fly to either Portsmouth or Stewart.

To be fair to 'Europeans,' I think they have been weaned off some of the 'frills' we might consider 'necessary.' For them (although I just theorized differently), landing at a place like Pease or Stewart--both known more for tankers and cargo jets than passenger aircraft--might not be as off-putting as we think. And just getting within driving distance of the bigger cities of Boston and NYC might be OK with them. Now, our own folks might gripe and whine at these supposed 'inconveniences,' but we might evolve to accept these 'lower bars' of acceptance, too. It definitely is a sea change 'a comin.

chrisnh wrote:

And just getting within driving distance of the bigger cities of Boston and NYC might be OK with them. Now, our own folks might gripe and whine at these supposed 'inconveniences,' but we might evolve to accept these 'lower bars' of acceptance, too. It definitely is a sea change 'a comin.

That's the thing. For US-based pax driving to an airport and parking there is perfectly normal and convenient too. Not so much for Europeans (and I grew up in Europe) who are used to very reliable public transit systems. Public transport in the US is pretty deplorable and I frankly do not see anyone from e.g. London landing in Portsmouth, renting a car and driving around. It is probably acceptable if you want to go skiing in NH but not if you are going to a hotel in downtown Boston, having to pay for parking in Boston and deal with traffic and all. It becomes more expensive that way and more time wasting. Also, lots of foreigners would not be too excited to drive in a foreign land after several hours flying across the Atlantic. I just don't see the value for European pax but for US-based ones it could provide value and convenience.

VS11 wrote:

I have to say I am a bit at a loss with this Portsmouth and Stewart strategy. What airports are they going to fly to in Europe? How are they going to market Portsmouth and Stewart to Europeans? Portsmouth is a very nice city but I doubt people know it in Europe? These flights seem targeted mostly to the US-originating markets. They might be successful offering $200-$300 TATL return tickets but I don't see Europeans rushing to fly to either Portsmouth or Stewart.

They will be marketed like Ryanair used to do in Europe I suspect.

Boston - Portsmouth
New York - Stewart

aaflyer777 wrote:

You really think wealthy people are gonna fly DY? Please, they're gonna be in First Class on UA/AA/DL. PSM and MHT have tried for years to become alternates to BOS and they've had no success, I doubt thats gonna change.

You're mistaken. They fly coach just like everyone else does. The vast majority of passenger in J are business fliers, not leisure passengers. I'm not talking about Tom Brady wealthy. I'm talking about white color professionals like myself who fill up the thousands of economy class seats that depart from Boston every single day. The kind of people like my wife and I who clog up I-95 and I-93 every day to commute to our tech and finance jobs in Waltham and Boston. Yes, we live in this area and we have enough spare income to travel to Europe and the Caribbean every year for vacation, and like everyone else we travel coach and we want the cheapest fare possible. FI, WOW, VS, SATA, LH, DL, AA, etc, we've done them all.

VS4ever wrote:

They will be marketed like Ryanair used to do in Europe I suspect.

Boston - Portsmouth
New York - Stewart

That would be pretty misleading in my opinion.

Boston to Portsmouth is 60 miles, close to 100 km
New York City to Stewart is 73 miles, close to 120 km.
They might as well fly to Hyannis and call it Boston - it is 71 miles.

There must be some correlation to reality.

VS11 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

They will be marketed like Ryanair used to do in Europe I suspect.

Boston - Portsmouth
New York - Stewart

That would be pretty misleading in my opinion.

Boston to Portsmouth is 60 miles, close to 100 km
New York City to Stewart is 73 miles, close to 120 km.
They might as well fly to Hyannis and call it Boston - it is 71 miles.

There must be some correlation to reality.

i don't disagree with you, but that's exactly what FR used to do.

DOT released Q2 2016 Table 6 Numbers:
Top 10 unserved Markets from BOS in PDEW - Time for someone to launch BOS-SAT!!!!

SAT - 174
ORF - 166
ABQ - 124
MEM - 123
SDF - 114
OMA - 100
DAY - 90
TUS -85
MSN - 84
GRR - 79

adamh8297 wrote:

DOT released Q2 2016 Table 6 Numbers:
Top 10 unserved Markets from BOS in PDEW - Time for someone to launch BOS-SAT!!!!

SAT - 174
ORF - 166
ABQ - 124
MEM - 123
SDF - 114
OMA - 100
DAY - 90
TUS -85
MSN - 84
GRR - 79

MEM has to be on the radar for DL with a CR9 or E75. With MKE & BNA being launched, surely it can't be far behind 1x daily? Also surprised they don't try ORF.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

MEM has to be on the radar for DL with a CR9 or E75. With MKE & BNA being launched, surely it can't be far behind 1x daily? Also surprised they don't try ORF.

I agree. I think they could also serve SAT 1x daily with an A319

Could WN serve SAT? B6 could be looking at most of these routes.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

MEM has to be on the radar for DL with a CR9 or E75. With MKE & BNA being launched, surely it can't be far behind 1x daily? Also surprised they don't try ORF.

They dropped ORF to enter RIC to mess with B6.


Did the top O+D traffic gains for markets over 100 PDEW again as well since I found a way to do it quicker. All due to increased service except for maybe IAH/HOU. BNA numbers are off-the-charts!!!

CMH - 52.2% (246 to 375 PDEW)
IND - 42.6% (274 to 391 PDEW)
BNA - 41.5% (423 to 599 PDEW) - remember when there were no non-stops!!!!
SLC - 30.4% (248 to 324 PDEW)
AUS - 22.7% (387 to 475 PDEW)
MKE - 19.4% (250 to 300 PDEW)
HOU/IAH - 19.4% (709 to 847 PDEW)
ATL - 16.3% (1222 to 1421 PDEW)
CHS - 13.5% (254 to 288 PDEW)
MSP - 12.5% (686 to 772 PDEW)

VS11 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

They will be marketed like Ryanair used to do in Europe I suspect.

Boston - Portsmouth
New York - Stewart

That would be pretty misleading in my opinion.

You mean, like Manchester-Boston Regional Airport?

airbazar wrote:

VS11 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

They will be marketed like Ryanair used to do in Europe I suspect.

Boston - Portsmouth
New York - Stewart

That would be pretty misleading in my opinion.

You mean, like Manchester-Boston Regional Airport?

Yes, that one too! They might as well start calling Boston (or NY) any airport within 70-mile radius: Boston Logan, Boston Manchester, Boston Portsmouth, Boston Hyannis, Boston Providence, etc.

Every search engine these days has a "nearby airports" option. When you use Kayak, both Manchester and Providence come up by default as alternatives to Boston.

VS11 wrote:

Every search engine these days has a "nearby airports" option. When you use Kayak, both Manchester and Providence come up by default as alternatives to Boston.

As long as the site doesn't try to sell you a connection across 2 of those, like it does for London without even selecting the "nearby airports" option, it's ok
Kayak will bring up flight that connect into LHR and out of another London airport, and vice-versa. It's annoying. I wonder how many unsuspecting people have bought those options.

Anyone want to work at the new Emirates Lounge at BOS?
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/229630984

adamh8297 wrote:

Anyone want to work at the new Emirates Lounge at BOS?
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/229630984

So as soon as this comes, all activity at Terminal C goes?

chrisnh wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Anyone want to work at the new Emirates Lounge at BOS?
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/229630984

So as soon as this comes, all activity at Terminal C goes?

Once the new gates open, presumably Emirates will be moving back to E quickly.

chrisnh wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Anyone want to work at the new Emirates Lounge at BOS?
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/229630984

So as soon as this comes, all activity at Terminal C goes?

With all the new Mint service B6 is adding from BOS to the Caribbean and west coast, I wonder if they would consider making this a Mint lounge once EK moves out?

clrd4t8koff wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Anyone want to work at the new Emirates Lounge at BOS?
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/229630984

So as soon as this comes, all activity at Terminal C goes?

With all the new Mint service B6 is adding from BOS to the Caribbean and west coast, I wonder if they would consider making this a Mint lounge once EK moves out?

From what I have been told by people who have used the lounge, it's nothing all that special and is not on the same level as the DL, AA and UA lounges.

Eventually B6 and Massport need to address the air side of Terminal C.

Does anyone know where WN will move to when they vacate the A gates, and also when this will occur? How many gates will they occupy in their new location?

airplaneboy wrote:

Does anyone know where WN will move to when they vacate the A gates, and also when this will occur? How many gates will they occupy in their new location?

I believe that they are moving to Terminal B. American will vacate some space when they consolidate on the legacy USAIR side of the terminal.

airplaneboy wrote:

Does anyone know where WN will move to when they vacate the A gates, and also when this will occur? How many gates will they occupy in their new location?

As tysmith said they will be moving to B. They have 5 gates in A now, I think some math done a while back on the AA/US consolidation project says there will be 5-6 available once that is complete.
Timing that's an interesting one but Massport's capital plan has the consolidation project finalized in fy18 assuming it's still on schedule. So I give it 12-18 months, which aligns nicely with DL's aim of moving up to 120 daily departures by 2018

Is AV still considering serving BOS-BOG? If not could LA be interested in a LIM-BOS service 3 or 4 per week? It appears that CM loads have improved on their PTY-BOS-PTY route. Would like to see KE return to BOS from ICN, perhaps after they receive enough 787'S. If not KE do you think BR or CI might consider TPE-BOS-TPE?

georgiabill wrote:

Is AV still considering serving BOS-BOG? If not could LA be interested in a LIM-BOS service 3 or 4 per week? It appears that CM loads have improved on their PTY-BOS-PTY route. Would like to see KE return to BOS from ICN, perhaps after they receive enough 787'S. If not KE do you think BR or CI might consider TPE-BOS-TPE?

i saw a post a week or so ago, suggesting they are still interested in that, time will tell, LIM-BOS I have to think is right at the edge of the range of the 320, even the 320neo with LIM being hot and high as well, would have to take a payload hit. A 321LR might do it, but LAN don't have any of those on order, so I am guessing that's not an option, only leaves them with 788/9's and I am not sure they are going to commit one of those to the route.

of the 3 you mention for Asia, I think KE and BR are probably the front runners. ICN would make a great foil with the NRT, PEK, HKG and PVG options that are currently available and i have to believe given the loads for HU/JL and CX up to now that there is room for at least 1 more Asian operator without killing the loads/yields on the others.

I could see B6 picking up the LIM or BOG route. They have a batch of A321LRs on order. I would love to see B6 pick up more international flights and use BOS as more of a connecting hub versus the point to point hub that it currently is. With the A321LR European destinations (especially with DY focusing on satellite airports) and some South American destinations are on the table. Of course they should add SAT first (being the largest unserved domestic market from BOS).

VS4ever wrote:

i saw a post a week or so ago, suggesting they are still interested in that, time will tell, LIM-BOS I have to think is right at the edge of the range of the 320, even the 320neo with LIM being hot and high as well, would have to take a payload hit.

LIM is only at 34 m ASL and the average high in January is only 26ºC (79ºF), so not really the definition of hot and high. That said, the stated range of the 320neo is 6,500 km and BOS-LIM is about 6,000 km. So that doesn't leave much in the way of reserves. You're pretty much looking at a diversion anytime there's snow accumulation or a summer storm to slow down arrivals.

Also, Lima is basically due south of PTY so it's just as out of the way to Brazilian connections, yet it bypasses Colombia (a moderate and growing source of immigrants to Massachusetts). I have a hard time seeing a Lima flight working when PTY is still less-than-daily and has struggled to keep satisfactory loads throughout the year.

tysmith95 wrote:

I could see B6 picking up the LIM or BOG route. They have a batch of A321LRs on order. I would love to see B6 pick up more international flights and use BOS as more of a connecting hub versus the point to point hub that it currently is. With the A321LR European destinations (especially with DY focusing on satellite airports) and some South American destinations are on the table. Of course they should add SAT first (being the largest unserved domestic market from BOS).

B6 does not have A321LR's on order. They have lots of NEO's on order which could probably be converted into LR orders but so far have not announced that they will do it.

A job posting makes it look like Norwegian has chosen PVD over PSM for their new base.

https://osmaviation.com/job/want-to-joi ... rline-pvd/

And thanks for the update Airbazar. The Jetblue Wikipedia page showed a321LR orders so I just assumed that was true.

tysmith95 wrote:

A job posting makes it look like Norwegian has chosen PVD over PSM for their new base.

https://osmaviation.com/job/want-to-joi ... rline-pvd/

And thanks for the update Airbazar. The Jetblue Wikipedia page showed a321LR orders so I just assumed that was true.

That's quite a faux pas by the airline to let a job advert tip their hand. Congratulations to PVD!

airbazar wrote:

tysmith95 wrote:

I could see B6 picking up the LIM or BOG route. They have a batch of A321LRs on order. I would love to see B6 pick up more international flights and use BOS as more of a connecting hub versus the point to point hub that it currently is. With the A321LR European destinations (especially with DY focusing on satellite airports) and some South American destinations are on the table. Of course they should add SAT first (being the largest unserved domestic market from BOS).

B6 does not have A321LR's on order. They have lots of NEO's on order which could probably be converted into LR orders but so far have not announced that they will do it.

Yep, that's pretty much correct

http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/ ... o-lr-plans (from July) B6 can convert from 2019 deliveries onwards

From their last 10-Q filing to the SEC

http://otp.investis.com/generic/sec/sec ... 3&Type=PDF (page 27), gives their current order book although hopefully this link will work too as I cut the info out of the document

http://drive.google.com/file/d/0B61t8Cy ... sp=sharing

they have 57 A321neo's on order between 2019 and 2023, now they have the option to convert all of them, but i doubt that they will because i am sure some will go domestic and for fleet replacement, even though the average age of the fleet at less than 9 years is still pretty young.

From Page 18 of the same document:
Fleet
In conjunction with our intention to expand our Mint experience, we amended our purchase agreement with Airbus during July 2016 to add 30 incremental
Airbus A321 aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2017 and 2023. We believe these incremental aircraft will allow us to continue to grow profitably,
particularly in the transcontinental market.
In support of our long-term transcontinental plans we currently expect 15 of the incremental 30 Airbus A321 aircraft to be delivered with the current engine
option beginning in 2017. Our amendment includes flexibility to take these deliveries in our Mint or all-core configuration. We anticipate the remaining 15 aircraft
to be Airbus A321 new engine option (A321neo), scheduled to be delivered beginning in 2020. Starting after June 2019, we would have the option to take any or
all of our A321neo deliveries with the Long Range configuration, the A321-LR

chrisnh wrote:

tysmith95 wrote:

A job posting makes it look like Norwegian has chosen PVD over PSM for their new base.

https://osmaviation.com/job/want-to-joi ... rline-pvd/

And thanks for the update Airbazar. The Jetblue Wikipedia page showed a321LR orders so I just assumed that was true.

That's quite a faux pas by the airline to let a job advert tip their hand. Congratulations to PVD!

They went for the higher population that's for sure. I'm wondering if they may serve both PSM and PVD at some point. Interesting fact - ORK and SNN are about the same distance away from each other as PVD and PSM are.

How much longer can F9 continue to ignore New England? I was looking at their route map and New England is the only region of the country where they lack service. They fly to every major and mid-major city in the US, except Boston, Providence, Buffalo and Hartford.

B752OS wrote:

How much longer can F9 continue to ignore New England? I was looking at their route map and New England is the only region of the country where they lack service. They fly to every major and mid-major city in the US, except Boston, Providence, Buffalo and Hartford.

F9 used to serve Boston up until about around 2010 (?) but since dropped the city. I think they only flew to DEN (maybe MCI too) and had a very small presence in Terminal B. Not too sure if they entered the market before the acquisition of Midwest, or they just took over the few flights YX had from the airport.
I feel like their natural first route would be BOS - DEN if they started up again, but with WN, UA, and B6 already flying it, that may be something F9 is not willing to get into.

Still, I'd be happy if they restarted service - always looking for new airlines!

T-100 for June 16 is here....loads are as follows: info is only as good as the data in T-100 remember that..

BOS-AMS (DL) - 86.5%
BOS-CDG (AA) - 56.1% (front of house must be doing ok?)
BOS-CDG (AF) - 72.1% (ouch)
BOS-CDG (DL) - 82.0%
BOS-CGN (EW) - 43.8% (well now we know why this got canned in a hurry)
BOS-CPH (DY) - 88.7%
BOS-CPH (SK) - 75.2%
BOS-DOH (QR) - 70.6% (hope this one picks up, although who wants to fly to DOH in June, lol...)
BOS-DUB (EI) - 94.9% (no wonder DL wanted a piece of the pie!)
BOS-DUS (AB) - 72.2%
BOS-DXB (EK) - 70.5% (also ouch)
BOS-FCO (AZ) - 83.9%
BOS-FRA (LH) - 72.7% (ouch)
BOS-HKG (CX) - 91.3% (if CX got incentives for this route, they must be very happy at this point)
BOS-IST (TK) - 81.8% (the wanderer returns to the T-100 with not a bad load factor considering)
BOS-KEF (FI) - 86.4%
BOS-KEF (WW)- 85.7%
BOS-LGW (DY) - 92.9% (yep, the early indicators from the CAA in England were good, this confirms it)
BOS-LHR (BA) - 85.5%
BOS-LHR (DL) - 72.7% (I would say ouch, but we all know the rationale with this one)
BOS-LHR (VS) - 84.7%
BOS-LIS (S4) - 72.9%
BOS-LIS (TP) - 91.0% (Wow just wow, what a start...)
BOS-MAD (IB) - 77.2%
BOS-MAN (MT) - 85.6% (again the initial indicators suggested something good, not a bad effort at all)
BOS-MEX (AM) - 78.2%
BOS-MUC (LH) - 78.4%
BOS-NRT (JL) - 85.9%
BOS-OSL (DY) - 88.8% (i hope DY are making money on these....)
BOS-PEK (HU) - 89.3%
BOS-PTY (CM) - 85.9%
BOS-PVG (HU) - 86.6%
BOS-SNN (EI) - 87.7%
BOS-SNN (X9) - 83.6% (as X9 works for EI, the combined factor here is 85.8%)
BOS-TER (S4) - 59.1%
BOS-TLV (LY) - 83.2%
BOS-YHZ (QK) - 83.7%
BOS-YHZ (WS) - 63.4%
BOS-YOW (QK) - 54.1%
BOS-YTZ (PD) - 73.6%
BOS-YUL (QK) - 70.2%
BOS-YYZ (AC) - 81.3%
BOS-YYZ (RS) - 81.9%
BOS-YYZ (WS) - 64.9%
BOS-ZRH (LX) - 76.3%

ORH-MCO (B6) - 77.2%
ORH-FLL (B6) - 81.7%

Discuss!!!

isn't the SK to CPH at 75 % also an OUCH considering the low density configuration seating on the B737 leased from PrivatAir., I think I read 66 seats in economy?

RJNUT wrote:

isn't the SK to CPH at 75 % also an OUCH considering the low density configuration seating on the B737 leased from PrivatAir., I think I read 66 seats in economy?

It's a pretty premium heavy configured 737, so 75% and with a full J cabin could be pretty good for SK I'd imagine.

VS4ever wrote:

T-100 for June 16 is here....loads are as follows: info is only as good as the data in T-100 remember that..

BOS-AMS (DL) - 86.5%
BOS-CDG (AA) - 56.1% (front of house must be doing ok?)
BOS-CDG (AF) - 72.1% (ouch)
BOS-CDG (DL) - 82.0%
BOS-CGN (EW) - 43.8% (well now we know why this got canned in a hurry)
BOS-CPH (DY) - 88.7%
BOS-CPH (SK) - 75.2%
BOS-DOH (QR) - 70.6% (hope this one picks up, although who wants to fly to DOH in June, lol...)
BOS-DUB (EI) - 94.9% (no wonder DL wanted a piece of the pie!)
BOS-DUS (AB) - 72.2%
BOS-DXB (EK) - 70.5% (also ouch)
BOS-FCO (AZ) - 83.9%
BOS-FRA (LH) - 72.7% (ouch)
BOS-HKG (CX) - 91.3% (if CX got incentives for this route, they must be very happy at this point)
BOS-IST (TK) - 81.8% (the wanderer returns to the T-100 with not a bad load factor considering)
BOS-KEF (FI) - 86.4%
BOS-KEF (WW)- 85.7%
BOS-LGW (DY) - 92.9% (yep, the early indicators from the CAA in England were good, this confirms it)
BOS-LHR (BA) - 85.5%
BOS-LHR (DL) - 72.7% (I would say ouch, but we all know the rationale with this one)
BOS-LHR (VS) - 84.7%
BOS-LIS (S4) - 72.9%
BOS-LIS (TP) - 91.0% (Wow just wow, what a start...)
BOS-MAD (IB) - 77.2%
BOS-MAN (MT) - 85.6% (again the initial indicators suggested something good, not a bad effort at all)
BOS-MEX (AM) - 78.2%
BOS-MUC (LH) - 78.4%
BOS-NRT (JL) - 85.9%
BOS-OSL (DY) - 88.8% (i hope DY are making money on these....)
BOS-PEK (HU) - 89.3%
BOS-PTY (CM) - 85.9%
BOS-PVG (HU) - 86.6%
BOS-SNN (EI) - 87.7%
BOS-SNN (X9) - 83.6% (as X9 works for EI, the combined factor here is 85.8%)
BOS-TER (S4) - 59.1%
BOS-TLV (LY) - 83.2%
BOS-YHZ (QK) - 83.7%
BOS-YHZ (WS) - 63.4%
BOS-YOW (QK) - 54.1%
BOS-YTZ (PD) - 73.6%
BOS-YUL (QK) - 70.2%
BOS-YYZ (AC) - 81.3%
BOS-YYZ (RS) - 81.9%
BOS-YYZ (WS) - 64.9%
BOS-ZRH (LX) - 76.3%

ORH-MCO (B6) - 77.2%
ORH-FLL (B6) - 81.7%

Discuss!!!

Seeing these LH numbers makes me wonder if they're just not pricing themselves competitively. I think I read a post on here that LH are regularly the most expensive fares to Europe. Is that true?

What's good about the TCX MAN figures as it's probably all O&D instead of connections at the origin end.

Then there is the fact it was only 2 weekly, so may not have appealed to the whole market (flexibility of dates etc), so, over 85% is pretty good in my opinion.

Given TCX are increasing to 4 weekly on some dates, and extending the season, they must be happy with the route.

I just wonder what D8 MAN-PVD and VS MAN-BOS next summer could do to the figures?