HP touted its late night LAS operation as an ingenious way to boost aircraft utilization while capitalizing on Las Vegas's unique 24/7 demand. While redeye services to markets like JFK and ORD were nothing out of the ordinary, the shorter haul flights departing LAS around midnight raised eyebrows due to their extremely unusual arrival times.
HP's LAS night hub was somewhat infamous back in the day of Priceline offering name-your-own-price deals on airline tickets. You could get a screaming deal but you might also end up with a crazy out-of-the-way connection like JFK-LAS-IAH arriving IAH at 4 AM.
It would be pretty interesting if B6 were to set up a sizable operation out of LAS. They could basically parallel the west coast routes they serve out of LGB, add LAX/SAN, and throw some major Midwest routes a la ORD, DTW, MSP, BNA, etc.
It'd be a good way for them to burn money. Pretty much every market west of the Mississippi B6 serves from LGB (apart from seasonal HDN/BZN) has anywhere from three to ten daily WN round-trips -- so they'd be up against a competitor with comparable or better unit costs.
You miss the point. It wasn’t to define SEA or LAX viability - it was to illustrate LAS’ geographic position relative to some of its peers for the purposes of discussing a hub.
The problem with that comparison was the use of ill-suited peers within networks having far more suitable connecting hubs (i.e. DEN/IAH/ORD for UA) in transcon markets. Yes, UA will connect some transcon routes at SFO but that's not really a primary source of traffic for that hub. AA probably carries more SEA-NYC traffic over either of ORD or DFW than PHX. LAS (like PHX) is in a good location for connecting Southern California to most of the rest of the U.S. and that's an appreciable traffic flow, but it's weak for high-yielding local business traffic (conventions tend to allow for long lead times when booking flights) and much of the high-yielding traffic from California will try to go non-stop if possible.