https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... 6-percent/

Alaska Air Group, parent company of Alaska Airlines and regional carrier Horizon Air, posted a net profit of $262 million, or $2.11 per share, in the second quarter, up 36% from the same quarter last year.

“Our revenue initiatives and cost-management efforts are paying off,” CEO Brad Tilden said as Alaska announced its results Thursday. “We set an ambitious plan and are executing it.”

It seems that the merger related activities are wrapping up, and AS is doing well.

Great to see our hometown airline recovering from the merger. And it's also good to see AS concentrating on existing routes and not trying to conquer the US with a plethora of new destinations.

It looks like Net income will be up this quarter for every single airline in the country
$262 $193 Alaska
$179 $(121) JBLU
$114.5 $11.3 Spirit
$70.5 $50.0 Allegiant
$741 $733 Southwest - modest increase
$1443 $1036 Delta
$1052 $683 United
$662 $556 American

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Interesting piece in their full details is that their Regional yield & RASM is among the highest of all the carriers. Not something I would have seen coming.

Very nice job Alaska! Kudos to everyone in the Company and their hard work getting through the major pieces of the VX takeover.

With growth expected to be 3-4% in 2020, I am anxiously awaiting the first new-route announcements and expected capacity growth in some existing markets. I do note with mild interest that the article mentions expected growth to be concentrated in the usual places (containing AAG's hubs) -- WA, OR, AS, and CA (well, SFO and LAX anyway.)

bb

One month does not a year make, but CMH-SEA, which started in March, pulled an impressive 97% LF for June and has seen A321s a few times in the last couple weeks (normally runs on the 320).

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

Alaska could probably have a lot of capacity growth just connecting more of the dots that they already have on their route system.

[twoid][/twoid]

Dreamflight767 wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

It would be nice if they added DEN and made some of their seasonals year round like KOA, LIH, PVR, and SJD.

Growth is somewhat dependant on 737MAX deliveries...all NG aircraft orders have been completed so from here out it's the 7M9 with 37 on order.

Dreamflight767 wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

I get the feeling that they did not anticipate SY to be a threat at first and are now beginning to think twice on that judgement. SY is starting to put up some good number that indicate further expansion could be possible. AS won't want to give up a lucrative market to a new player, especially, with the fare bloodbath that is taking place down in California right now.

hiflyeras wrote:

Growth is somewhat dependant on 737MAX deliveries...all NG aircraft orders have been completed so from here out it's the 7M9 with 37 on order.

How many more jungle jets are left to be delivered to QX to help growth?

Didn't they inherit the NEO orders from Virgin America? Perhaps with the MAX issues, they will still continue to take them?

Once Alaska is back with the 737MAX, could they enter high yield Latin American and Canadian markets!? Like YYZ, YUL in Canada, PTY in Panama, SJU in Puerto Rico, PUJ in Dominican Republic, BOG in Columbia, LIM in Peru, etc. JetBlue/Spirit is doing it successfully!

SANFan wrote:

Very nice job Alaska! Kudos to everyone in the Company and their hard work getting through the major pieces of the VX takeover.

With growth expected to be 3-4% in 2020, I am anxiously awaiting the first new-route announcements and expected capacity growth in some existing markets. I do note with mild interest that the article mentions expected growth to be concentrated in the usual places (containing AAG's hubs) -- WA, OR, AS, and CA (well, SFO and LAX anyway.)

bb

I wonder if “Expanding service in California out of San Francisco and Los Angeles will also be a focus.” means SFO and LAX specifically, or those markets which include other airports? They haven’t been going crazy at SFO, don’t know about LAX. But no word on SAN for our SANfan, sadly.

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

I'm just happy to see Oregon is also included in AS growth plans for 2020!!

kabq737 wrote:

Dreamflight767 wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

I get the feeling that they did not anticipate SY to be a threat at first and are now beginning to think twice on that judgement. SY is starting to put up some good number that indicate further expansion could be possible. AS won't want to give up a lucrative market to a new player, especially, with the fare bloodbath that is taking place down in California right now.

Please don't lambaste me for this question... But does anyone think it would be in Alaska's interest to one day acquire SY? Common fleet and allows them a new 'hub' of sorts in MSP to compete with DL. I've always wondered about this but haven't found the appropriate timing to ask until now.

How many dedicated gates do they have in SFO? 5?

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:

kabq737 wrote:

Dreamflight767 wrote:

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

I get the feeling that they did not anticipate SY to be a threat at first and are now beginning to think twice on that judgement. SY is starting to put up some good number that indicate further expansion could be possible. AS won't want to give up a lucrative market to a new player, especially, with the fare bloodbath that is taking place down in California right now.

Please don't lambaste me for this question... But does anyone think it would be in Alaska's interest to one day acquire SY? Common fleet and allows them a new 'hub' of sorts in MSP to compete with DL. I've always wondered about this but haven't found the appropriate timing to ask until now.

I don't see it as being likely but I suppose nothing is impossible.

Common fleet type is not near as important as it used to be, especially because AS now operates both major narrow body aircraft types. On top of that I don't think that AS has much interest in another merger for the time being. I think that they are likely very happy with what they have going right now and would probably like to let things stabilize for awhile.

On top of all of that I believe that SY management and ownership is beginning to see some of the true potential of SY as an airline. I genuinely believe that if they play their cards carefully and correctly they will have a cash cow of an airline on their hands. It is likely that they see that too and won't want to give that up.

x1234 wrote:

Once Alaska is back with the 737MAX, could they enter high yield Latin American and Canadian markets!? Like YYZ, YUL in Canada, PTY in Panama, SJU in Puerto Rico, PUJ in Dominican Republic, BOG in Columbia, LIM in Peru, etc. JetBlue/Spirit is doing it successfully!

B6 and NK do it successfully from Florida and the East Coast.
B6 and NK do not do Hawaii where as AS does because they are a West Coast airline.
Big difference.

It’s astounding that AS has now paid back 1.2B from the 2B they borrowed for the merger already. That is impressive and kudos to the management team for their financial prudence.

phxa340 wrote:

It’s astounding that AS has now paid back 1.2B from the 2B they borrowed for the merger already. That is impressive and kudos to the management team for their financial prudence.

By this point next year, the merger will be completely paid off, not bad for an ABL deal.

With the constant rumors of a AS acquisition of B6 wouldn't it be a hoot if instead they bought SY? Too bad they have so many 319's and 320's though...might not be a good fit for AS's all Boeing and A321's

I'll also throw-in (w/ out trying to go too far off topic), I feel OR has taken a back seat to AS overall growth plan; they've been "distracted" by activities in SEA and CA. So now with DL and SY growing at PDX and I believe UA and AA have grown very strong in other OR markets, AS is maybe watching once loyal customers "cheat".

Dreamflight767 wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

Interesting comment is they’re going to vigorously defend Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. I wonder if they’re going to add more flights from Portland again.

Maybe they are worried about SY. At first I didn't think they were going to take much action.

SY began their incursion into AS markets once Ben Brookman left AS and became VP of revenue management at SY.

But he’s not there anymore. He’s left SY to work for Amazon.

Not touched on in the 2Q call but I am curious how much will the pending tear down of terminal A and the temporary relocation of QX flights to the end of C affect ASs ability to add flights.

kunta67 wrote:

phxa340 wrote:

It’s astounding that AS has now paid back 1.2B from the 2B they borrowed for the merger already. That is impressive and kudos to the management team for their financial prudence.

By this point next year, the merger will be completely paid off, not bad for an ABL deal.

It could be completely paid off using just half of the $1.6B in cash on hand that AS has; they're choosing to "re-de-leverage" the balance sheet conservatively instead.

EA CO AS wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

phxa340 wrote:

It’s astounding that AS has now paid back 1.2B from the 2B they borrowed for the merger already. That is impressive and kudos to the management team for their financial prudence.

By this point next year, the merger will be completely paid off, not bad for an ABL deal.

It could be completely paid off using just half of the $1.6B in cash on hand that AS has; they're choosing to "re-de-leverage" the balance sheet conservatively instead.

I always tell my clients liquidity is king. Once the BS is de-levered it gives them tremendous flexibility if or when the next acquisition happens.

Does anyone have an idea how the A320 and A319 are performing for AS now that they're being taken care of? I know they have a high lease cost, but beyond that, I would imagine that they perform relatively well compared to the 737s. I did a Google search for the future plan, but keep coming up with articles from Motley Fool, which we all know, is ran by a bunch of fools.


I would venture a guess that AS may be in talks with Airbus and whoever the lessor is, to negotiate a better deal to keep Alaska from cancelling the order outright. Although, I bet that progress payments have already been made?

gmcc wrote:

Not touched on in the 2Q call but I am curious how much will the pending tear down of terminal A and the temporary relocation of QX flights to the end of C affect ASs ability to add flights.

AS has invested extensively in GSE (and custom GSE through KCI for that matter) to be able to support the Q & E-Jet operation in any sort of ground boarding or jetway setup. There is already slack in the PDX gate situation during the day to be able to add more flights.

Planeboy17 wrote:

x1234 wrote:

Once Alaska is back with the 737MAX, could they enter high yield Latin American and Canadian markets!? Like YYZ, YUL in Canada, PTY in Panama, SJU in Puerto Rico, PUJ in Dominican Republic, BOG in Columbia, LIM in Peru, etc. JetBlue/Spirit is doing it successfully!

B6 and NK do it successfully from Florida and the East Coast.
B6 and NK do not do Hawaii where as AS does because they are a West Coast airline.
Big difference.

B6, NK, and AS aren't in YYZ or YUL...

alasizon wrote:

gmcc wrote:

Not touched on in the 2Q call but I am curious how much will the pending tear down of terminal A and the temporary relocation of QX flights to the end of C affect ASs ability to add flights.

AS has invested extensively in GSE (and custom GSE through KCI for that matter) to be able to support the Q & E-Jet operation in any sort of ground boarding or jetway setup. There is already slack in the PDX gate situation during the day to be able to add more flights.

Simple. Cut two Q-400 flights from PDX-SEA and replace with one flight to BWI or PHL or FLL. Repeat for additional routes.

jbpdx wrote:

alasizon wrote:

gmcc wrote:

Not touched on in the 2Q call but I am curious how much will the pending tear down of terminal A and the temporary relocation of QX flights to the end of C affect ASs ability to add flights.

AS has invested extensively in GSE (and custom GSE through KCI for that matter) to be able to support the Q & E-Jet operation in any sort of ground boarding or jetway setup. There is already slack in the PDX gate situation during the day to be able to add more flights.

Simple. Cut two Q-400 flights from PDX-SEA and replace with one flight to BWI or PHL or FLL. Repeat for additional routes.

Highly doubt AS is going to cut the very profitable PDX-SEA shuttle. Anything below 17-19x daily starts to be lost revenue opportunities. Not to mention; cutting a Q400 doesn't get you anywhere close to BWI, PHL or FLL.

Sancho99504 wrote:

Does anyone have an idea how the A320 and A319 are performing for AS now that they're being taken care of? I know they have a high lease cost, but beyond that, I would imagine that they perform relatively well compared to the 737s. I did a Google search for the future plan, but keep coming up with articles from Motley Fool, which we all know, is ran by a bunch of fools.


I would venture a guess that AS may be in talks with Airbus and whoever the lessor is, to negotiate a better deal to keep Alaska from cancelling the order outright. Although, I bet that progress payments have already been made?

I keep inquiring with the team doing the analysis and the final decision on fleet strategy is being pushed more toward year end or even 1Q20 depending on what happens with the MAX. Regardless, AS is committed to the MAX and I'd bet the A320NEO order either gets converted to A321NEOs or cancelled outright, with MAX9 and MAX10s ordered instead. AS doesn't want the A320s since they can be replaced with higher capacity, lower CASM Boeing MAX products.

alasizon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

alasizon wrote:

AS has invested extensively in GSE (and custom GSE through KCI for that matter) to be able to support the Q & E-Jet operation in any sort of ground boarding or jetway setup. There is already slack in the PDX gate situation during the day to be able to add more flights.

Simple. Cut two Q-400 flights from PDX-SEA and replace with one flight to BWI or PHL or FLL. Repeat for additional routes.

Highly doubt AS is going to cut the very profitable PDX-SEA shuttle. Anything below 17-19x daily starts to be lost revenue opportunities. Not to mention; cutting a Q400 doesn't get you anywhere close to BWI, PHL or FLL.

I’m talking about opening up gate space at PDX. But while they're at it, stop shuttling Portland passengers to and from Seattle whose destination is not Seattle and wasting their time.

I believe that Alaska was able to renegotiate the leases to be more in line with Alaska's credit rating. Regarding the Airbus, I'm starting to think there's going to be a long term home for them with the A319s and A321neos. Alaska has been using NEO on some interesting runs lately, where the performance of the airplane is better than the -900 (FLL/SEA right now, due to runway construction).

jbpdx wrote:

alasizon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

Simple. Cut two Q-400 flights from PDX-SEA and replace with one flight to BWI or PHL or FLL. Repeat for additional routes.

Highly doubt AS is going to cut the very profitable PDX-SEA shuttle. Anything below 17-19x daily starts to be lost revenue opportunities. Not to mention; cutting a Q400 doesn't get you anywhere close to BWI, PHL or FLL.

I’m talking about opening up gate space at PDX. But while they're at it, stop shuttling Portland passengers to and from Seattle whose destination is not Seattle and wasting their time.

How is giving up Q400 flights free up gate space at PDX? The Q400's board through the A-concourse. Mainline AS boards through B and C concourses. Gate space at PDX isn't at a premium as they are at SEA.

Even if PDX got BWI, PHL and FLL, there will still be tons of people connecting through SEA to the same destinations.

wedgetail737 wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

alasizon wrote:

Highly doubt AS is going to cut the very profitable PDX-SEA shuttle. Anything below 17-19x daily starts to be lost revenue opportunities. Not to mention; cutting a Q400 doesn't get you anywhere close to BWI, PHL or FLL.

I’m talking about opening up gate space at PDX. But while they're at it, stop shuttling Portland passengers to and from Seattle whose destination is not Seattle and wasting their time.

How is giving up Q400 flights free up gate space at PDX? The Q400's board through the A-concourse. Mainline AS boards through B and C concourses. Gate space at PDX isn't at a premium as they are at SEA.

Even if PDX got BWI, PHL and FLL, there will still be tons of people connecting through SEA to the same destinations.

Excuse me. Concourse A is being demolished.

Would Alaska consider replacing the 737-700’s and the A319’s with a single fleet type?

What has better operating costs for Alaska’s fleet needs at the smaller end of mainline? Boeing is not building the MAX 7.... but the MAX 7.5. A320 is kind of approaching the MAX 8 in size, so why bother compared with simple single fleet type commonality with the other MAX’s. All the same though, they would still be too large of a MAX with too much range when looking for a pure 737-700 replacement? Would Alaska go with an Embraer E2, A220, or A319 NEO at mainline?

Kind of interesting when looking at this end of AS’s fleet.

KlimaBXsst wrote:

Would Alaska consider replacing the 737-700’s and the A319’s with a single fleet type?

What has better operating costs for Alaska’s fleet needs at the smaller end of mainline? Boeing is not building the MAX 7.... but the MAX 7.5. A320 is kind of approaching the MAX 8 in size, so why bother compared with simple single fleet type commonality with the other MAX’s. All the same though, they would still be too large of a MAX with too much range when looking for a pure 737-700 replacement? Would Alaska go with an Embraer E2, A220, or A319 NEO at mainline?

Kind of interesting when looking at this end of AS’s fleet.

Sadly, the A319NEO has almost identical trip costs compared to A320NEO. Unless AS were to start TGU, UIO, GYE or some other places where the hot rod performance is needed, the A320NEO is a better replacement with 150 seats

Seems like AS has gotten the hard part out of the way. Paine Field opened up some interesting 1-time opportunities.

Wonder where the next focus will be?

Have to imagine they continue their tech sector milk run.

Sancho99504 wrote:

Sadly, the A319NEO has almost identical trip costs compared to A320NEO. Unless AS were to start TGU, UIO, GYE or some other places where the hot rod performance is needed, the A320NEO is a better replacement with 150 seats

See this is getting intriguing then! For fleet commonalities sake with Horizon’s Ejets, could we see Alaska as the first US mainline to go with the E2?

We all know Alaska would not leave Boeing to go with any Airbus NEO over a 737-7.5 MAX or potential 737-8.5 MAX. Additionally therefore once you start hitting the 737-7.5, 8, 8.5 size... you start getting a replacement which is too big, over ranged, and costly of an aircraft to replace Alaska’s, smallest Boeing’s and Airbus’.

THINK of the training costs savings the E2 could offer!!!!

jbpdx wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

I’m talking about opening up gate space at PDX. But while they're at it, stop shuttling Portland passengers to and from Seattle whose destination is not Seattle and wasting their time.

How is giving up Q400 flights free up gate space at PDX? The Q400's board through the A-concourse. Mainline AS boards through B and C concourses. Gate space at PDX isn't at a premium as they are at SEA.

Even if PDX got BWI, PHL and FLL, there will still be tons of people connecting through SEA to the same destinations.

Excuse me. Concourse A is being demolished.

Is it? I wasn’t aware of that. Are they going to replace the old concourse with something more current? Thank you for the information.

wedgetail737 wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

Excuse me. Concourse A is being demolished.

Is it? I wasn’t aware of that. Are they going to replace the old concourse with something more current? Thank you for the information.

As part of PDXNext, Concourse B will be extended and house new gates. It isn't clear though if B will hold Mainline once done and C will be converted to handle the Q & E-Jets or if it'll be the other way around.

jbpdx wrote:

alasizon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

Simple. Cut two Q-400 flights from PDX-SEA and replace with one flight to BWI or PHL or FLL. Repeat for additional routes.

Highly doubt AS is going to cut the very profitable PDX-SEA shuttle. Anything below 17-19x daily starts to be lost revenue opportunities. Not to mention; cutting a Q400 doesn't get you anywhere close to BWI, PHL or FLL.

I’m talking about opening up gate space at PDX. But while they're at it, stop shuttling Portland passengers to and from Seattle whose destination is not Seattle and wasting their time.

Gate space isn't really much of an issue at PDX, outside of a few peaks (where cutting the PDX-SEA shuttle would be a loss of revenue). There is plenty of room to add flights assuming there is fleet slack to do so. I'd expect most of the PDX adds to be mid-cons as opposed to full transcons so as to use less fleet time.

KlimaBXsst wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Sadly, the A319NEO has almost identical trip costs compared to A320NEO. Unless AS were to start TGU, UIO, GYE or some other places where the hot rod performance is needed, the A320NEO is a better replacement with 150 seats

See this is getting intriguing then! For fleet commonalities sake with Horizon’s Ejets, could we see Alaska as the first US mainline to go with the E2?

We all know Alaska would not leave Boeing to go with any Airbus NEO over a 737-7.5 MAX or potential 737-8.5 MAX. Additionally therefore once you start hitting the 737-7.5, 8, 8.5 size... you start getting a replacement which is too big, over ranged, and costly of an aircraft to replace Alaska’s, smallest Boeing’s and Airbus’.

THINK of the training costs savings the E2 could offer!!!!

AS has 2 fleet types on their type. The E2 , I'm guessing either E190 or 195, would add a third. There will be no cost savings

Alaska Air Group will do what is best for Alaska Air Group even if that means ordering from Airbus.

EA CO AS wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Does anyone have an idea how the A320 and A319 are performing for AS now that they're being taken care of? I know they have a high lease cost, but beyond that, I would imagine that they perform relatively well compared to the 737s. I did a Google search for the future plan, but keep coming up with articles from Motley Fool, which we all know, is ran by a bunch of fools.


I would venture a guess that AS may be in talks with Airbus and whoever the lessor is, to negotiate a better deal to keep Alaska from cancelling the order outright. Although, I bet that progress payments have already been made?

I keep inquiring with the team doing the analysis and the final decision on fleet strategy is being pushed more toward year end or even 1Q20 depending on what happens with the MAX. Regardless, AS is committed to the MAX and I'd bet the A320NEO order either gets converted to A321NEOs or cancelled outright, with MAX9 and MAX10s ordered instead. AS doesn't want the A320s since they can be replaced with higher capacity, lower CASM Boeing MAX products.

Could we see them switch to A321NEO, order more and change the Max 9 to Max 8?

The A320 burns less fuel, but the 737-800/Max 8 make that irrelevant by having at least 16 more pax while the A321 outperforms the 900/Max 9 every step of the way.

Sancho99504 wrote:

KlimaBXsst wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Sadly, the A319NEO has almost identical trip costs compared to A320NEO. Unless AS were to start TGU, UIO, GYE or some other places where the hot rod performance is needed, the A320NEO is a better replacement with 150 seats

See this is getting intriguing then! For fleet commonalities sake with Horizon’s Ejets, could we see Alaska as the first US mainline to go with the E2?

We all know Alaska would not leave Boeing to go with any Airbus NEO over a 737-7.5 MAX or potential 737-8.5 MAX. Additionally therefore once you start hitting the 737-7.5, 8, 8.5 size... you start getting a replacement which is too big, over ranged, and costly of an aircraft to replace Alaska’s, smallest Boeing’s and Airbus’.

THINK of the training costs savings the E2 could offer (ALASKA AIR GROUP)!!!!

AS has 2 fleet types on their type. The E2 , I'm guessing either E190 or 195, would add a third. There will be no cost savings

Alaska Air Group will do what is best for Alaska Air Group even if that means ordering from Airbus.

Or EMBRAER.

EA CO AS wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Does anyone have an idea how the A320 and A319 are performing for AS now that they're being taken care of? I know they have a high lease cost, but beyond that, I would imagine that they perform relatively well compared to the 737s. I did a Google search for the future plan, but keep coming up with articles from Motley Fool, which we all know, is ran by a bunch of fools.


I would venture a guess that AS may be in talks with Airbus and whoever the lessor is, to negotiate a better deal to keep Alaska from cancelling the order outright. Although, I bet that progress payments have already been made?

I keep inquiring with the team doing the analysis and the final decision on fleet strategy is being pushed more toward year end or even 1Q20 depending on what happens with the MAX. Regardless, AS is committed to the MAX and I'd bet the A320NEO order either gets converted to A321NEOs or cancelled outright, with MAX9 and MAX10s ordered instead. AS doesn't want the A320s since they can be replaced with higher capacity, lower CASM Boeing MAX products.

Seems like the E17x’s have played their part in cracking new markets. How are they viewed In the mix?

vadodara wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Does anyone have an idea how the A320 and A319 are performing for AS now that they're being taken care of? I know they have a high lease cost, but beyond that, I would imagine that they perform relatively well compared to the 737s. I did a Google search for the future plan, but keep coming up with articles from Motley Fool, which we all know, is ran by a bunch of fools.


I would venture a guess that AS may be in talks with Airbus and whoever the lessor is, to negotiate a better deal to keep Alaska from cancelling the order outright. Although, I bet that progress payments have already been made?

I keep inquiring with the team doing the analysis and the final decision on fleet strategy is being pushed more toward year end or even 1Q20 depending on what happens with the MAX. Regardless, AS is committed to the MAX and I'd bet the A320NEO order either gets converted to A321NEOs or cancelled outright, with MAX9 and MAX10s ordered instead. AS doesn't want the A320s since they can be replaced with higher capacity, lower CASM Boeing MAX products.

Seems like the E17x’s have played their part in cracking new markets. How are they viewed In the mix?

Management has said that they like the E175's because they are able to move in to new markets that they may not have otherwise. Once they've had a chance to mature and grow they will move them to mainline if they're able. Some perfect examples are SEA-OMA/MKE/SBA SAN-AUS/MSP/SJC/SMF. There are a number of markets that started on the Ejets and moved over to Boeing/Airbus when they became established. Passengers really seem to like them. I keep waiting for them to move SEA-OKC/ICT over to mainline as they seem to do pretty well on the Embraer - but possibly Boeing/Airbus are too much airplane for those markets?