Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tonyban
Topic Author
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:55 am

British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:25 pm

Not sure if this belongs in another thread. Mods please move or delete if needed.

Does anyone here know how well the London-San Jose route is doing for British Airways ? Its been over a year now and I've heard from three different sets of travelers that they've flown over on virtually empty 787s. Anyone here have any stats ?
Thanks and regards.
 
tonyban
Topic Author
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:55 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:32 pm

Update: I mean San Jose, California.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5121
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:34 pm

6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
tonyban
Topic Author
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:55 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:39 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5121
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:40 pm

2016 DEPARTURES_PERFORMED SEATS PASSENGERS CARRIER_NAME ORIGIN DEST AIRCRAFT_TYPE MONTH SEAT UTILIZATION
27 5832 3855 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 5 66%
30 6480 5421 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 6 83.6%
31 6696 5080 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 7 75.9%
31 6696 4862 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 8 72.6%
31 6696 4264 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 10 63.7%
28 6048 3326 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 11 54.99%
31 6696 3851 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 12 57.5%
30 6480 5177 British Airways Plc SJC LHR 889 9 79.9%

Here are the only numbers I could find from 2016, note* mostly summer so seat utilization would be higher
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5121
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:42 pm

tonyban wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Not great ....
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
tonyban
Topic Author
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:55 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:52 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
tonyban wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Not great ....


So is there any possibility BA scales back or completely cuts this route ?
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:04 pm

Ammad wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Looks like BA is struggling. Why not move the operation to SFO.


They already fly to SFO. Twice a day. One with a 380 and one with a 747
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
Ammad
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:10 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:04 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Looks like BA is struggling. Why not move the operation to SFO.
 
User avatar
atypical
Posts: 797
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:28 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:20 pm

The flight has been operating for more than a year. If it was doing as poorly as these numbers present BA would have cut it. 50% full flights with a lot of premium tickets sales can be much better revenue than 90% full flights primarily filled with discount fares.
 
User avatar
GCT64
Posts: 1826
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:34 pm

I've flown it once (Friday evening following the end of a tradeshow / conference in Santa Clara), it wasn't empty but it wasn't full either. I think the premium end of the plane is doing OK (including high fare economy) but it is missing a lot of low yield vacation / VFR pax. That's not necessarily a bad thing for the airline or the pax who are on the plane.
Flown in: A20N,A21N,A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A359,A388,BA11,BU31,(..56 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
LupineChemist
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:03 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:10 pm

Yeah, we don't know the yields, nor do we know the cargo performance.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:30 pm

LupineChemist wrote:
Yeah, we don't know the yields, nor do we know the cargo performance.

Nor do we know the overall contribution to the network, nor do we know the contracts that BA was able to gain for additional services by companies with interest in this route.

The fact that it's still around, and hasn't undergone any significant capacity/gauge changes, does indicate that they're at least patient with it... if not outright happy.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14425
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:30 pm

Maybe it would be more useful to compare these loads to LH, NH and HU. I assume part of the point of these routes is that some folks will pay a premium to avoid the knife fight that is a trip up the 101 and have a better airport experience. If that's the case for all of these carriers (except arguably HU), absolute loads might not matter as much.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
tonyban
Topic Author
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:55 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:30 pm

GCT64 wrote:
I've flown it once (Friday evening following the end of a tradeshow / conference in Santa Clara), it wasn't empty but it wasn't full either. I think the premium end of the plane is doing OK (including high fare economy) but it is missing a lot of low yield vacation / VFR pax. That's not necessarily a bad thing for the airline or the pax who are on the plane.


I was booked to fly out on a Friday evening back in September 2016 in Premium. They paid me $800 to fly the next day cause it was overbooked. Being a San Jose resident I would hate to see this route axed !
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:38 pm

LupineChemist wrote:
Yeah, we don't know the yields, nor do we know the cargo performance.


Also you might have to factor in any incentives provided by SAN to procure the flight, those will require BA keep up the service and assist in any losses over the first year or two, if BA are doing well on cargo, front of the house and incentives, they are probably happy while a clientele build up happens. If we are in this position this time next year, we might be thinking a little differently
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:25 pm

Do you think it is not doing as well because it is too close to SFO and OAK? Just curious.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2231
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:42 pm

People, don't assume it isn't doing well. This is a mega rich tech area and BA would not have started this route without some companies on board with contracts. Those same folks will pay a premium to fly business out of SJC versus driving up to SFO.

I do agree if the flight was performing poorly, it would be axed. There is no sentimentality in the industry anymore, its driven by yields and contracts. I suspect BA has both on this route.
 
as739x
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:51 pm

It's to early to say the numbers are poor due to OAK, this service was just launched. As posted above, the plain numbers just don't show the back story that only the bean counters know. However, I'd imagine that first it hasn't been dropped to a 788 and second they continued with the OAK launch after a year of these numbers in SJC, I'd say its doing ok for BA.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
peterinlisbon
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:37 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:53 pm

It sounds like a good choice to take this flight in Economy and lie down across 3 seats.
 
User avatar
Rajahdhani
Posts: 565
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:13 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:53 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
Do you think it is not doing as well because it is too close to SFO and OAK? Just curious.


I don't, and based on their decision making, neither apparently does BA. The markets, while close in proximity (and both do share quite a lot of overlap), differ somewhat. Not only does SJC not have such a heavy UA presence, and the nature of the competition to/from this airport is significantly different, it is closer/more accessible to the Tech Valley, and perhaps caters better to a specific crowd/market of passengers (mostly associated with the tech industries themselves). Sure, there is the auxiliary bonus of picking up local, non-affiliated (tech) traffic on the route, as well as perhaps some bleed off of the SFO market. That said, SFO does have advantages of its own, and BA serves that market quite well with her flagship(s). There is perhaps greater wealth within the SFO metro, than that within the SJC area - and so, even with UA there - BA still specializes well and performs well.

BA, while having some issues; aren't truly in the business of glory routing, and considering the other glittering opportunities around the U.S. (especially when considering the limitations at LHR); it speaks some weight that SFO and SJC are differentiated by BA, and more-over, using the 787 no less - demonstrating not only that the two markets exist, but further how different equipment/strategy (and perhaps expectation of profit) are necessary to address each individually.

OAK, impressively - takes on another dimension and style here, with service to LGW. Not necessarily, however - in many cases, the LGW routes are lower-yielding, but also lower-costing operations as well. They too, have their profitability curves. That said, this route competes with Norweigan, and thus I can see the fares being lower, and the average passenger more price conscious. This raises the question of, perhaps, if SJC is not performing well because their yields are being bled by BA's OAK-LGW. The reality here is that if the passenger were so cost conscious as to prefer OAK-LGW (and lesser premium, connection oppurtinties when arriving to London), over SJC, or SFO to LHR, then LGW's assets (aircraft confuguration, crew costs, et al) are much better suited to maximize yields and revenue and essentially 'save' premium demand headed to LHR. Again, an interesting way of dealing with the complexities of, but significant differences in - each individual market's need and demand.
Last edited by Rajahdhani on Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
RobertPhoenix
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:00 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:03 pm

Sounds like premium seats are selling well, but not economy. Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad in comparison to the alternatives from SFO ?

P.S. This is intended as a joke, but as with all jokes, maybe it has a grain of truth. I'd drive up the 101 for an A380
 
User avatar
Rajahdhani
Posts: 565
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:13 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:15 pm

RobertPhoenix wrote:
Sounds like premium seats are selling well, but not economy. Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad in comparison to the alternatives from SFO ?

P.S. This is intended as a joke, but as with all jokes, maybe it has a grain of truth. I'd drive up the 101 for an A380


I found this review very informative, because it demonstrated some of the limitations of the seats themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brzbPmSHpt0

Honestly, the entire product seems outdated.

I mean, it scream of "Heathrow Airways" (Slot Restrictions; Limit our competition, limit your expectations). Their current cost-cutting regimen does not help as well. The service seems so very heavily handed upon the service standards set by the crew. I have almost universally heard and experienced them overcome these limitations to perform very well. I wish that I could say that there weren't issues there, as well - but it seems like fires on all fronts. A lack of innovation (and, let's be honest - with new 787s, A350s, and A380s having been introduced/being introduced/coming online in the future) - and the investment from QR (and QR's high mark hard product, and the new "Super Business"), BA wasted the opportunity to upgrade and innovate. Understandably, with Brexit, lower GDP growth in the U.K., and LHR operations being costly - I can imagine that it places significant pressures on BA to more 'pack' their Business Class cabins - but certainly, there could be a better way to do this, with the almost two decades since they last updates these seats?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14425
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:24 pm

Rajahdhani wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
Do you think it is not doing as well because it is too close to SFO and OAK? Just curious.


I don't, and based on their decision making, neither apparently does BA. The markets, while close in proximity (and both do share quite a lot of overlap), differ somewhat. Not only does SJC not have such a heavy UA presence, and the nature of the competition to/from this airport is significantly different, it is closer/more accessible to the Tech Valley, and perhaps caters better to a specific crowd/market of passengers (mostly associated with the tech industries themselves). Sure, there is the auxiliary bonus of picking up local, non-affiliated (tech) traffic on the route, as well as perhaps some bleed off of the SFO market. That said, SFO does have advantages of its own, and BA serves that market quite well with her flagship(s). There is perhaps greater wealth within the SFO metro, than that within the SJC area - and so, even with UA there - BA still specializes well and performs well.

BA, while having some issues; aren't truly in the business of glory routing, and considering the other glittering opportunities around the U.S. (especially when considering the limitations at LHR); it speaks some weight that SFO and SJC are differentiated by BA, and more-over, using the 787 no less - demonstrating not only that the two markets exist, but further how different equipment/strategy (and perhaps expectation of profit) are necessary to address each individually.


I think SJC changes the dynamic for BA in a different way than places like AUS and MSY. In AUS and MSY, you probably had a few people driving to IAH for TATL flights, but the vast majority of the TATL traffic was connecting over some US hub. SJC sees some people connecting too but has/had a significant driving bleed component not present elsewhere. Moreover, it's not just passengers driving to SFO to fly BA. If I live in Mountain View (can anyone afford that?) and needed to go to Paris pre-SJC TATL, driving to SFO and taking the nonstop was almost certainly the fastest option. With SJC-LHR/FRA-CDG as an option, it's not as clear cut.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:32 pm

RobertPhoenix wrote:
Sounds like premium seats are selling well, but not economy. Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad in comparison to the alternatives from SFO ?

P.S. This is intended as a joke, but as with all jokes, maybe it has a grain of truth. I'd drive up the 101 for an A380


If its intended as a joke, its not very funny. :P

I jest, but you are spot on. The 787 with 9 across is pretty poor. That said, most of the people (non-a.neters) choose based on location and not aircraft type, so that helps boost yield I expect.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
globalcabotage
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:12 pm

Load factor doesn't mean squat. Yields do, and airlines protect that information.

Also, if it hurts DY, that's what open markets are for.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:34 pm

RobertPhoenix wrote:
Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad

BA's EVERY seat is pretty bad..... Club World's hard-product is an absolute JOKE compared to alternatives.

I can't believe AA puts its Elites in that, especially compared to the seats its has on its own 787s and 77Ws. :(
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
sqlblr
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:22 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:23 am

A lot of the South bay tech population is connecting to the subcontinent and beyond. How does this flight do for connections ? I assume if priced smartly those empty y seats can create some Benjamin for. BA.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:21 am

sqlblr wrote:
I assume if priced smartly those empty y seats can create some Benjamin for. BA.

Or they can charge out the ass for some seats, leave the others empty, and save on the fuel from the saved weight.

That seems to be the path they're taking. Same for MSY.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
blink182
Posts: 5370
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 3:09 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:16 am

RobertPhoenix wrote:
Sounds like premium seats are selling well, but not economy. Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad in comparison to the alternatives from SFO ?

P.S. This is intended as a joke, but as with all jokes, maybe it has a grain of truth. I'd drive up the 101 for an A380

I don't know if it's a joke per se, but it is true, and I'm frankly not a fan of BA's Y product on the A380 either. The 787s are tightly packed and there isn't much room to stretch by the lavs or galleys, though this isn't unique to BA at all. Despite mediocre loads indicated on this thread, however, a 787-9 continues to to serve SJC rather than the 787-8. There must be enough local demand for F out of SJC that is willing to pay a premium to not drive to SFO.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:32 am

LAX772LR wrote:
sqlblr wrote:
I assume if priced smartly those empty y seats can create some Benjamin for. BA.

Or they can charge out the ass for some seats, leave the others empty, and save on the fuel from the saved weight.

That seems to be the path they're taking. Same for MSY.


Do not forget about cargo!
BA IB ET JM EA GK PA VS AA SN HP CO W7 WN NW DL UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR WY MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN LO OK OZ UL SQ LA

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 330s 340s 350 380
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:44 am

tonyban wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Winter is low season for London. 48.9 & 50.3% sound decent for London in the winter. Mind you the passenger reports your hearing may be coach class only.As BA I believe boards coach through D2. It would be hard for you to judge the pointy end fill rate. If Business class or First if it's a -9 are always full it will make the route worth it even in winter.
 
msycajun
Posts: 1128
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 4:13 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:52 am

rbavfan wrote:
tonyban wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
6264-seats 3069-pax British Airways Plc SJC LHR JAN 2017 Seat Utilization: 48.9%
5832 2933 British Airways Plc SJC LHR FEB 2017 Seat Utilization: 50.3%


Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Winter is low season for London. 48.9 & 50.3% sound decent for London in the winter. Mind you the passenger reports your hearing may be coach class only.As BA I believe boards coach through D2. It would be hard for you to judge the pointy end fill rate. If Business class or First if it's a -9 are always full it will make the route worth it even in winter.


50% is not decent for anything much less a 10 hour flight. BA is selling $600 roundtrips in Y next Jan and Feb. You have to have an enormous premium in the front of the plane to make up for that. I don't know how it compares to 2017, but it seems like they've already cut a few flights in Jan and Feb 2018.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:09 am

msycajun wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
tonyban wrote:

Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Winter is low season for London. 48.9 & 50.3% sound decent for London in the winter. Mind you the passenger reports your hearing may be coach class only.As BA I believe boards coach through D2. It would be hard for you to judge the pointy end fill rate. If Business class or First if it's a -9 are always full it will make the route worth it even in winter.


50% is not decent for anything much less a 10 hour flight. BA is selling $600 roundtrips in Y next Jan and Feb. You have to have an enormous premium in the front of the plane to make up for that. I don't know how it compares to 2017, but it seems like they've already cut a few flights in Jan and Feb 2018.



They do have a hell of a premium for First. I can also see them cutting a day (or 2) during the coming winter to up the loads. But note he was quoting loads on the flight over it's first winter season. Does not mean they will keep the same number of weekly flights for the 2nd one. They always adjust if needed after their first year. That's how good business should work.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7338
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:09 am

Sounds like BA is selling First Class and Club World very well.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:12 am

msycajun wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
tonyban wrote:

Thank you. I'm assuming these numbers are not favorable for BA ?


Winter is low season for London. 48.9 & 50.3% sound decent for London in the winter. Mind you the passenger reports your hearing may be coach class only.As BA I believe boards coach through D2. It would be hard for you to judge the pointy end fill rate. If Business class or First if it's a -9 are always full it will make the route worth it even in winter.


50% is not decent for anything much less a 10 hour flight. BA is selling $600 roundtrips in Y next Jan and Feb. You have to have an enormous premium in the front of the plane to make up for that. I don't know how it compares to 2017, but it seems like they've already cut a few flights in Jan and Feb 2018.



They do have a hell of a premium for First. I can also see them cutting a day (or 2) during the coming winter to up the loads. But note he was quoting loads on the flight over it's first winter season. Does not mean they will keep the same number of weekly flights for the 2nd one. They always adjust if needed after their first year. BA does routes like this with long term their goal, Not like Frontier and the toss a dart at the board for next weeks flights. That's how good business should work.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5121
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:16 am

jfk777 wrote:
Sounds like BA is selling First Class and Club World very well.


There are no numbers on that from what I'm aware of, so we have no idea whether they are or aren't...

Although you can kind of make the assumption that if they weren't selling the Premium Cabin well, this flight wouldn't still be running because the Y cabin is not being filled at all....
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
whatusaid
Posts: 590
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:26 am

I've flown the route several times and the flights are usually about 50% or so. It's an easy alternative to SFO for certain, but I did find the nearly empty Y on a Friday to be a sign that I'd better enjoy this while I can. On one flight, they could have pretty much filled premium economy and business and walled off coach.
 
User avatar
DLSANMan
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:30 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:19 am

VS4ever wrote:
LupineChemist wrote:
Yeah, we don't know the yields, nor do we know the cargo performance.


Also you might have to factor in any incentives provided by SAN to procure the flight, those will require BA keep up the service and assist in any losses over the first year or two, if BA are doing well on cargo, front of the house and incentives, they are probably happy while a clientele build up happens. If we are in this position this time next year, we might be thinking a little differently



We are talking about SJC not SAN :D SAN IS OBVIOUSLY doing very well. 747 has been extended to January!
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:30 am

DLSANMan wrote:
VS4ever wrote:
LupineChemist wrote:
Yeah, we don't know the yields, nor do we know the cargo performance.


Also you might have to factor in any incentives provided by SAN to procure the flight, those will require BA keep up the service and assist in any losses over the first year or two, if BA are doing well on cargo, front of the house and incentives, they are probably happy while a clientele build up happens. If we are in this position this time next year, we might be thinking a little differently



We are talking about SJC not SAN :D SAN IS OBVIOUSLY doing very well. 747 has been extended to January!


oops, my apologies. My theory still applies just to SJC, meant to type SJC and didn't, which is even worse given i used to live no more than 30 miles from SJC... I will learn one day...
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:14 am

rbavfan wrote:
They do have a hell of a premium for First.

Do they? Based on what?

Granted, I'm aware that spot-checks are anecdotal, but since it's all that we as amateurs would have: just picked 10 completely random dates throughout the rest of the year, and compared SJC, AUS, MSY in J on BA's nonstops. Then did the same with AUS for F.

AUS was higher than SJC 8 out of the 10 times, MSY was higher 9 out of 10 times.
For F, AUS was higher 7 of the 10 times.

Doesn't mean much, except that the Texas and Louisiana routes are 700mi shorter.
If there's a "hell of a premium for First," then the public sure doesn't see it. And corporations are going to pay even less.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
LupineChemist
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:03 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:30 am

LAX772LR wrote:
RobertPhoenix wrote:
Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad

BA's EVERY seat is pretty bad..... Club World's hard-product is an absolute JOKE compared to alternatives.

I can't believe AA puts its Elites in that, especially compared to the seats its has on its own 787s and 77Ws. :(


The Y seat in the BA 380 is probably the best economy seat I've flown on. So there's that.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:38 am

LupineChemist wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
RobertPhoenix wrote:
Didn't I hear someone say that BA's 787 economy seats are pretty bad

BA's EVERY seat is pretty bad..... Club World's hard-product is an absolute JOKE compared to alternatives.

I can't believe AA puts its Elites in that, especially compared to the seats its has on its own 787s and 77Ws. :(

The Y seat in the BA 380 is probably the best economy seat I've flown on. So there's that.

I should clarify that I meant on their 787.

Never ridden their (or sadly, any) A380 yet, so can't really comment there.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
CanadaFair
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:29 am

BA dropped out of Sri Lanka due to o LF average 75% after a year or so of resumption, .772 was used, San Jose looks as bad.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3160
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:32 am

LAXLHR wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
sqlblr wrote:
I assume if priced smartly those empty y seats can create some Benjamin for. BA.

Or they can charge out the ass for some seats, leave the others empty, and save on the fuel from the saved weight.

That seems to be the path they're taking. Same for MSY.


Do not forget about cargo!


The Bay Area exports brains and programmers, not factory made products. If a business was to ship something out of SJC it would go on FedEx or UPS one stop to London.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13216
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:41 am

b747400erf wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
Do not forget about cargo!

The Bay Area exports brains and programmers, not factory made products. If a business was to ship something out of SJC it would go on FedEx or UPS one stop to London.

1) cargo goes two ways, not just one
2) the Bay Area imports a crap-ton of computing/tech products, much of which is by air, and not just on dedicated freighters.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:33 am

LupineChemist wrote:
The Y seat in the BA 380 is probably the best economy seat I've flown on. So there's that.


BA's A388 is one of the worst Y seats in any A380 out there...
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:03 am

Cubsrule wrote:
Maybe it would be more useful to compare these loads to LH, NH and HU. I assume part of the point of these routes is that some folks will pay a premium to avoid the knife fight that is a trip up the 101 and have a better airport experience. If that's the case for all of these carriers (except arguably HU), absolute loads might not matter as much.


As a Peninsula resident, I'll chime in here.

In terms of a better "trip to the airport" experience: if you live in somewhere like Morgan Hill or south San Jose, then yes, 101 to SFO is more of a "knife fight" than to SJC. But starting somewhere around Sunnyvale, that's much less so. The distance from, say, Mountain View to SFO is only marginally longer than Mountain View to SJC as the crow flies.

Plus, on the way to SJC, you have to circle around all the runways and the area where the interstates converge; during rush hour, that creates bottlenecks that are little, if any, better than those around the San Mateo Bridge on the way to SFO.

In terms of a better airport experience, in my view, it's no contest. SFO offers much better dwell time options than SFO, including better dining options and multiple Star Alliance lounges. (I can't say what SJC offers in terms of lounges, but it's got to be less impressive than a big hub.) And you get a bigger plane out of SFO, if you care about such things. As an anecdotal data point, my choice is SFO every time.
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:08 pm

b747400erf wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Or they can charge out the ass for some seats, leave the others empty, and save on the fuel from the saved weight.

That seems to be the path they're taking. Same for MSY.


Do not forget about cargo!


The Bay Area exports brains and programmers, not factory made products. If a business was to ship something out of SJC it would go on FedEx or UPS one stop to London.


I can assure you (having worked at HQ for 2 different airlines in Europe and the US) The cargo hold of commercial jets get used in addition to the MANY freight only operators beyond Fedex and UPS. With regard to BA, this is exactly why they got rid of their large cargo only aircraft...they made more money shipping cargo in the hold of pax flights. (I do believe a cargo operator flies in their colors, limited aircraft).

Cargo ships both ways (as someone else also pointed out).

The weight of the cargo varies depending upon how full the flight is. An empty Y cabin means less weight, a lot less luggage ... fill up the hold. So now BA Cargo can divert cargo away from the A380 (when full) to the 787 - makes no difference whether the goods fly in and out of SJC or SFO for most customers...although I feel that BA accountants prefer it on the 787. The A380 is a very poor cargo hauler for multiple and obvious reasons.

One would suspect that BA KNOWS what it is doing ;-)

Thanks
BA IB ET JM EA GK PA VS AA SN HP CO W7 WN NW DL UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR WY MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN LO OK OZ UL SQ LA

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 330s 340s 350 380
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: British Airways London to San Jose. How well ?

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:10 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
Do not forget about cargo!

The Bay Area exports brains and programmers, not factory made products. If a business was to ship something out of SJC it would go on FedEx or UPS one stop to London.

1) cargo goes two ways, not just one
2) the Bay Area imports a crap-ton of computing/tech products, much of which is by air, and not just on dedicated freighters.


Exactly!!! Thank you :-)
BA IB ET JM EA GK PA VS AA SN HP CO W7 WN NW DL UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR WY MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN LO OK OZ UL SQ LA

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 330s 340s 350 380

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos