Welcome to the Carribbean Aviation Thread 2020. Please continue to add you comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411925&start=450

Happy New Year!

Here are my Caribbean Aviation wishes 2020:

CM adds frequencies to BZE, NAS, KIN, MBJ, POS, BGI, PBM
CM adds twice weekly late evening PTY-PUJ, early morning PUJ-PTY.
CM adds GCM
CM adds VRA
CM studies ANU, UVF, FDF

BW studies UA IAH-POS loads (overbooking) to check potential for 4 per week POS-HOU (interline with WN).
BW seasonal POS - TAB - MIA/JFK/YYZ/YUL ??

UA seasonal IAD - POS/BWI, EWR-TAB/GEO

PUJ, MBJ, BGI, POS, GEO and PBM talk to TK
POS talks to LH
POS tries to get KL to return
GEO talks to KL

BW already does year round JFK TAB. Sunwing does winter YYZ TAB. Leisure routes are tough for BW, which is why most of their recent route expansion has been into regional markets.

qf789 wrote:

Welcome to the Carribbean Aviation Thread 2020. Please continue to add you comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411925&start=450

Could we have the title of the thread amended to the correct spelling of Caribbean please?

Brickell305 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Welcome to the Carribbean Aviation Thread 2020. Please continue to add you comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411925&start=450

Could we have the title of the thread amended to the correct spelling of Caribbean please?

Thanks. I thought that a moderator would have noticed this by now, but apparently not.

2travel2know2 wrote:

Happy New Year!

Here are my Caribbean Aviation wishes 2020:

CM adds frequencies to BZE, NAS, KIN, MBJ, POS, BGI, PBM
CM adds twice weekly late evening PTY-PUJ, early morning PUJ-PTY.
CM adds GCM
CM adds VRA
CM studies ANU, UVF, FDF

BW studies UA IAH-POS loads (overbooking) to check potential for 4 per week POS-HOU (interline with WN).
BW seasonal POS - TAB - MIA/JFK/YYZ/YUL ??

UA seasonal IAD - POS/BWI, EWR-TAB/GEO

PUJ, MBJ, BGI, POS, GEO and PBM talk to TK
POS talks to LH
POS tries to get KL to return
GEO talks to KL

GND has a bit of movement to HAV. Though BW has recently captured that market with the POS-HAV, I don’t think a seasonal / once or twice weekly GND - PTY is an impossibility. CM and PTY can become a big of what AA and MIA/CLT is now.

Happy New Years to Everyone

BW600 wrote:
Seems like AA is having some issues on the JFK-GEO route. With full flights southbound, their B738 seems to have difficulty doing the flight non stop. Three flights since launch had to stop at SJU to refuel. BW has no difficulty but its seat counts are only 150 on their B738.

I believe that AA is operating the "Oasis" 738s on the route which have been densified by increasing the number of seats from 160 to 172, and 22 additional passengers with their bags on over water flights compared with BW make a difference. It seems though that AA has solved the problem by restricting the number of passengers on every flight.

CAL also has some restrictions during the winter on these flights to POS and GEO, the difference I guess is because of the cargo logistics they can leave a few bags and get it to customers within 24-48hrs from NYC.

But it's strange that AA's flight planning software simulations did not pick up on this before they started the route. At 172pax the a/c is highly dense for a route that is regularly 2200-2300nm depending on ATC routing. Given the winds also the flight will have to be severely restricted.

I don't believe AA ever scheduled the MAX for this route but I may be wrong.

LimaFoxTango wrote:
I sometimes question B6's profitability into BGI. I've been on one of those 3 daily JFK runs and it was barely half full, and that was an A321. The fares though are sometimes phenomenal, which encourages travel, but how much money are they making. Either the BGI govt is paying B6 some coin, or someone in scheduling really really loves BGI.

I know one route where B6 is not making money and that's the POS-FLL route, but for some reason, the airline keep on flying the route. When B6 started they had daily flights, then it went to 6w,5w,4w last year and now 3w in the off-season this year. They don't have a fare premium over CAL or AA and loads are terrible in the off peak periods. I can also bet FLL-BGI is in the same bucket. JFK-BGI makes money.

2travel2know2 wrote:

Happy New Year!

Here are my Caribbean Aviation wishes 2020:

CM adds frequencies to BZE, NAS, KIN, MBJ, POS, BGI, PBM
CM adds twice weekly late evening PTY-PUJ, early morning PUJ-PTY.
CM adds GCM
CM adds VRA
CM studies ANU, UVF, FDF

BW studies UA IAH-POS loads (overbooking) to check potential for 4 per week POS-HOU (interline with WN).
BW seasonal POS - TAB - MIA/JFK/YYZ/YUL ??

UA seasonal IAD - POS/BWI, EWR-TAB/GEO

PUJ, MBJ, BGI, POS, GEO and PBM talk to TK
POS talks to LH
POS tries to get KL to return
GEO talks to KL

I'm not sure if you know but BW operates TAB-JFK weekly year-round, all other flights can be connected to from POS.
BWIA wanted to start IAH-POS years ago but the downgrade to CAT2 by the ICAO/FAA saw that plan shelved and UA took advantage of the opportunity.
I'm not sure if there is room for another airline. Texas is seeing more Trini ex-pats however it is spread between Dallas and Huston, while UA gets lots of pax transferring from nearby states and the west coast. ATL, DC and Maryland are much larger than Texas for ex-pats.

TK starting POS and GEO, not in this lifetime there are no links unless tourism grows significantly.

CM, however, will be interesting to see their schedule when they get rid of the E190s.

caribbean484 wrote:

Happy New Years to Everyone

BW600 wrote:
Seems like AA is having some issues on the JFK-GEO route. With full flights southbound, their B738 seems to have difficulty doing the flight non stop. Three flights since launch had to stop at SJU to refuel. BW has no difficulty but its seat counts are only 150 on their B738.

I believe that AA is operating the "Oasis" 738s on the route which have been densified by increasing the number of seats from 160 to 172, and 22 additional passengers with their bags on over water flights compared with BW make a difference. It seems though that AA has solved the problem by restricting the number of passengers on every flight.

CAL also has some restrictions during the winter on these flights to POS and GEO, the difference I guess is because of the cargo logistics they can leave a few bags and get it to customers within 24-48hrs from NYC.

But it's strange that AA's flight planning software simulations did not pick up on this before they started the route. At 172pax the a/c is highly dense for a route that is regularly 2200-2300nm depending on ATC routing. Given the winds also the flight will have to be severely restricted.

I don't believe AA ever scheduled the MAX for this route but I may be wrong.

LimaFoxTango wrote:
I sometimes question B6's profitability into BGI. I've been on one of those 3 daily JFK runs and it was barely half full, and that was an A321. The fares though are sometimes phenomenal, which encourages travel, but how much money are they making. Either the BGI govt is paying B6 some coin, or someone in scheduling really really loves BGI.

I know one route where B6 is not making money and that's the POS-FLL route, but for some reason, the airline keep on flying the route. When B6 started they had daily flights, then it went to 6w,5w,4w last year and now 3w in the off-season this year. They don't have a fare premium over CAL or AA and loads are terrible in the off peak periods. I can also bet FLL-BGI is in the same bucket. JFK-BGI makes money.

I also wonder why B6 continues to operate BGI and POS out of FLL. I don’t view either as particularly vital to their route network and they are both clearly not doing very well. I think BGI is probably doing better as it has one less competitor and they can get some leisure travel as well. To POS, out of So. Fla, the VFR traffic seems to favor BW and AA. The business crowd seems to favor AA. And AA has the best connections ex So. Fla. on the POS end, BW is the hometown airline and will get VFR, leisure, connections from GEO/PBM (BGI and GND to a lesser extent) and a good chunk of business demand. AA has been well entrenched for years and will get its share of business travel, leisure and the onward connection demand it provides. B6 is squeezed from both sides.

Brickell305 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

Happy New Years to Everyone

BW600 wrote:
Seems like AA is having some issues on the JFK-GEO route. With full flights southbound, their B738 seems to have difficulty doing the flight non stop. Three flights since launch had to stop at SJU to refuel. BW has no difficulty but its seat counts are only 150 on their B738.

I believe that AA is operating the "Oasis" 738s on the route which have been densified by increasing the number of seats from 160 to 172, and 22 additional passengers with their bags on over water flights compared with BW make a difference. It seems though that AA has solved the problem by restricting the number of passengers on every flight.

CAL also has some restrictions during the winter on these flights to POS and GEO, the difference I guess is because of the cargo logistics they can leave a few bags and get it to customers within 24-48hrs from NYC.

But it's strange that AA's flight planning software simulations did not pick up on this before they started the route. At 172pax the a/c is highly dense for a route that is regularly 2200-2300nm depending on ATC routing. Given the winds also the flight will have to be severely restricted.

I don't believe AA ever scheduled the MAX for this route but I may be wrong.

LimaFoxTango wrote:
I sometimes question B6's profitability into BGI. I've been on one of those 3 daily JFK runs and it was barely half full, and that was an A321. The fares though are sometimes phenomenal, which encourages travel, but how much money are they making. Either the BGI govt is paying B6 some coin, or someone in scheduling really really loves BGI.

I know one route where B6 is not making money and that's the POS-FLL route, but for some reason, the airline keep on flying the route. When B6 started they had daily flights, then it went to 6w,5w,4w last year and now 3w in the off-season this year. They don't have a fare premium over CAL or AA and loads are terrible in the off peak periods. I can also bet FLL-BGI is in the same bucket. JFK-BGI makes money.

I also wonder why B6 continues to operate BGI and POS out of FLL. I don’t view either as particularly vital to their route network and they are both clearly not doing very well. I think BGI is probably doing better as it has one less competitor and they can get some leisure travel as well. To POS, out of So. Fla, the VFR traffic seems to favor BW and AA. The business crowd seems to favor AA. And AA has the best connections ex So. Fla. on the POS end, BW is the hometown airline and will get VFR, leisure, connections from GEO/PBM (BGI and GND to a lesser extent) and a good chunk of business demand. AA has been well entrenched for years and will get its share of business travel, leisure and the onward connection demand it provides. B6 is squeezed from both sides.

It's because they can. They have a lot lower cost than aa. Their FLL operation as a whole is very profitable despite not getting the best aircraft. Frankly a lot of these routes will turn around the minute they put a220 on there. Their coat is going to be falling off the cliff the next couple of years which will allow them to sustain a lot of bruising battles.

Again, JFK Caribbean operation is the most profitable operation in their system. The idea they are not doing well on JFK bgi where they have monopoly is quite ludicrous.

tphuang wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

Happy New Years to Everyone



CAL also has some restrictions during the winter on these flights to POS and GEO, the difference I guess is because of the cargo logistics they can leave a few bags and get it to customers within 24-48hrs from NYC.

But it's strange that AA's flight planning software simulations did not pick up on this before they started the route. At 172pax the a/c is highly dense for a route that is regularly 2200-2300nm depending on ATC routing. Given the winds also the flight will have to be severely restricted.

I don't believe AA ever scheduled the MAX for this route but I may be wrong.


I know one route where B6 is not making money and that's the POS-FLL route, but for some reason, the airline keep on flying the route. When B6 started they had daily flights, then it went to 6w,5w,4w last year and now 3w in the off-season this year. They don't have a fare premium over CAL or AA and loads are terrible in the off peak periods. I can also bet FLL-BGI is in the same bucket. JFK-BGI makes money.

I also wonder why B6 continues to operate BGI and POS out of FLL. I don’t view either as particularly vital to their route network and they are both clearly not doing very well. I think BGI is probably doing better as it has one less competitor and they can get some leisure travel as well. To POS, out of So. Fla, the VFR traffic seems to favor BW and AA. The business crowd seems to favor AA. And AA has the best connections ex So. Fla. on the POS end, BW is the hometown airline and will get VFR, leisure, connections from GEO/PBM (BGI and GND to a lesser extent) and a good chunk of business demand. AA has been well entrenched for years and will get its share of business travel, leisure and the onward connection demand it provides. B6 is squeezed from both sides.

It's because they can. They have a lot lower cost than aa. Their FLL operation as a whole is very profitable despite not getting the best aircraft. Frankly a lot of these routes will turn around the minute they put a220 on there. Their coat is going to be falling off the cliff the next couple of years which will allow them to sustain a lot of bruising battles.

Again, JFK Caribbean operation is the most profitable operation in their system. The idea they are not doing well on JFK bgi where they have monopoly is quite ludicrous.

Let's see how those FLL flights will work with those tiny amount of onward connections, regardless of CASM. Brickell305 is totally correct recognizing and respecting the fact that both BW and AA are well entrenched in So FL to POS and BGI. MIA is no JFK pushover. B6 3xW FLL to BGI and POS is no match for 21xW AA each to BGI and POS from MIA.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where it is due.

tphuang wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

Happy New Years to Everyone



CAL also has some restrictions during the winter on these flights to POS and GEO, the difference I guess is because of the cargo logistics they can leave a few bags and get it to customers within 24-48hrs from NYC.

But it's strange that AA's flight planning software simulations did not pick up on this before they started the route. At 172pax the a/c is highly dense for a route that is regularly 2200-2300nm depending on ATC routing. Given the winds also the flight will have to be severely restricted.

I don't believe AA ever scheduled the MAX for this route but I may be wrong.


I know one route where B6 is not making money and that's the POS-FLL route, but for some reason, the airline keep on flying the route. When B6 started they had daily flights, then it went to 6w,5w,4w last year and now 3w in the off-season this year. They don't have a fare premium over CAL or AA and loads are terrible in the off peak periods. I can also bet FLL-BGI is in the same bucket. JFK-BGI makes money.

I also wonder why B6 continues to operate BGI and POS out of FLL. I don’t view either as particularly vital to their route network and they are both clearly not doing very well. I think BGI is probably doing better as it has one less competitor and they can get some leisure travel as well. To POS, out of So. Fla, the VFR traffic seems to favor BW and AA. The business crowd seems to favor AA. And AA has the best connections ex So. Fla. on the POS end, BW is the hometown airline and will get VFR, leisure, connections from GEO/PBM (BGI and GND to a lesser extent) and a good chunk of business demand. AA has been well entrenched for years and will get its share of business travel, leisure and the onward connection demand it provides. B6 is squeezed from both sides.

It's because they can. They have a lot lower cost than aa. Their FLL operation as a whole is very profitable despite not getting the best aircraft. Frankly a lot of these routes will turn around the minute they put a220 on there. Their coat is going to be falling off the cliff the next couple of years which will allow them to sustain a lot of bruising battles.

Again, JFK Caribbean operation is the most profitable operation in their system. The idea they are not doing well on JFK bgi where they have monopoly is quite ludicrous.

Of course they can, however they don't have any premium to compete with, you don't go from 7w to 3w and say they can. They have a problem competing on the route.

AA and CAL have the premium markets to Miami as business seats to that sector has high loads and significantly higher fares for a short route. On the low end they are being squeezed out as we see their loads are low despite the fares. The A220 cannot solve that problem when the customers are clearly choosing the alternatives.

ryby92 wrote:

Let's see how those FLL flights will work with those tiny amount of onward connections, regardless of CASM. Brickell305 is totally correct recognizing and respecting the fact that both BW and AA are well entrenched in So FL to POS and BGI. MIA is no JFK pushover. B6 3xW FLL to BGI and POS is no match for 21xW AA each to BGI and POS from MIA.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where it is due.

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.

caribbean484 wrote:

Of course they can, however they don't have any premium to compete with, you don't go from 7w to 3w and say they can. They have a problem competing on the route.

AA and CAL have the premium markets to Miami as business seats to that sector has high loads and significantly higher fares for a short route. On the low end they are being squeezed out as we see their loads are low despite the fares. The A220 cannot solve that problem when the customers are clearly choosing the alternatives.

A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

tphuang wrote:

ryby92 wrote:

Let's see how those FLL flights will work with those tiny amount of onward connections, regardless of CASM. Brickell305 is totally correct recognizing and respecting the fact that both BW and AA are well entrenched in So FL to POS and BGI. MIA is no JFK pushover. B6 3xW FLL to BGI and POS is no match for 21xW AA each to BGI and POS from MIA.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where it is due.

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.

caribbean484 wrote:

Of course they can, however they don't have any premium to compete with, you don't go from 7w to 3w and say they can. They have a problem competing on the route.

AA and CAL have the premium markets to Miami as business seats to that sector has high loads and significantly higher fares for a short route. On the low end they are being squeezed out as we see their loads are low despite the fares. The A220 cannot solve that problem when the customers are clearly choosing the alternatives.

A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

caribbean484 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

ryby92 wrote:

Let's see how those FLL flights will work with those tiny amount of onward connections, regardless of CASM. Brickell305 is totally correct recognizing and respecting the fact that both BW and AA are well entrenched in So FL to POS and BGI. MIA is no JFK pushover. B6 3xW FLL to BGI and POS is no match for 21xW AA each to BGI and POS from MIA.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where it is due.

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.

caribbean484 wrote:

Of course they can, however they don't have any premium to compete with, you don't go from 7w to 3w and say they can. They have a problem competing on the route.

AA and CAL have the premium markets to Miami as business seats to that sector has high loads and significantly higher fares for a short route. On the low end they are being squeezed out as we see their loads are low despite the fares. The A220 cannot solve that problem when the customers are clearly choosing the alternatives.

A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

As I said they don't need to be the fare leader. Their unit cost are more than 20% lower than AA and the gap is even larger with A220-300. In fact, most LCCs are not fare leaders on a route. They stick around due to lower cost.

As for your comment about 5 years ago vs now, the issue is they are not putting any effort into FLL at the moment. Underperforming routes are just getting cut to subdaily until they can turn their attention around again. So when I see questions about why they are sticking around at subdaily, the answer is they are kept around until attention can be placed on FLL again.

AA getting MAX changes nothing as far as B6 is concerned on this route. Unless you think MAX is some kind of premium yield generator. A220 would allow them to go daily due to having to fill fewer seats. Putting attention at FLL again would allow them to add more feeds to support certain routes that are less O&D heavy. Again, I would suggest you look up on what kind of economics A220-300 bring to the table.

tphuang wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.


A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

As I said they don't need to be the fare leader. Their unit cost are more than 20% lower than AA and the gap is even larger with A220-300. In fact, most LCCs are not fare leaders on a route. They stick around due to lower cost.

As for your comment about 5 years ago vs now, the issue is they are not putting any effort into FLL at the moment. Underperforming routes are just getting cut to subdaily until they can turn their attention around again. So when I see questions about why they are sticking around at subdaily, the answer is they are kept around until attention can be placed on FLL again.

AA getting MAX changes nothing as far as B6 is concerned on this route. Unless you think MAX is some kind of premium yield generator. A220 would allow them to go daily due to having to fill fewer seats. Putting attention at FLL again would allow them to add more feeds to support certain routes that are less O&D heavy. Again, I would suggest you look up on what kind of economics A220-300 bring to the table.

What you are saying makes no sense. BW is primarily O&D on POS-FLL and is able to fill a 737 daily in peak and 5x weekly at its lowest frequency and that's with it having a larger operation on POS-MIA. The reason B6 cut back on POS from FLL isn't because they decided to neglect FLL, it's because they weren't doing well on the route. They aren't able to compete with both BW and AA serving So. Fla to POS. They can try with A220s in 18-24 months as you say they will (if they are even still serving the route then) but the lower cost there will only allow them to try to undercut on fares. That's exactly what they do now and it's still not working.

caribbean484 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

ryby92 wrote:

Let's see how those FLL flights will work with those tiny amount of onward connections, regardless of CASM. Brickell305 is totally correct recognizing and respecting the fact that both BW and AA are well entrenched in So FL to POS and BGI. MIA is no JFK pushover. B6 3xW FLL to BGI and POS is no match for 21xW AA each to BGI and POS from MIA.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where it is due.

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.

caribbean484 wrote:

Of course they can, however they don't have any premium to compete with, you don't go from 7w to 3w and say they can. They have a problem competing on the route.

AA and CAL have the premium markets to Miami as business seats to that sector has high loads and significantly higher fares for a short route. On the low end they are being squeezed out as we see their loads are low despite the fares. The A220 cannot solve that problem when the customers are clearly choosing the alternatives.

A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

Caribbean 484 - it's useless trying to use reason and logic as clearly only the blue lens is working. It is obvious the FLL has underperformed for B6 whether some will admit it or not. If B6 has such a cost advantage why then is it that they have performed so poorly in FLL to the extent that they have to cut back. A handful of people going to shop is hardly enough to fill up the plane. and unlike NY the population of Barbadians and Trinis in So FL is too tiny to rely on O&D traffic. I give them full credit wrt NY.

But let's wait for the A220 to show up.

tphuang wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.


A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

As I said they don't need to be the fare leader. Their unit cost are more than 20% lower than AA and the gap is even larger with A220-300. In fact, most LCCs are not fare leaders on a route. They stick around due to lower cost.

As for your comment about 5 years ago vs now, the issue is they are not putting any effort into FLL at the moment. Underperforming routes are just getting cut to subdaily until they can turn their attention around again. So when I see questions about why they are sticking around at subdaily, the answer is they are kept around until attention can be placed on FLL again.

AA getting MAX changes nothing as far as B6 is concerned on this route. Unless you think MAX is some kind of premium yield generator. A220 would allow them to go daily due to having to fill fewer seats. Putting attention at FLL again would allow them to add more feeds to support certain routes that are less O&D heavy. Again, I would suggest you look up on what kind of economics A220-300 bring to the table.

Maybe some other forum posters can help me understand what you are saying because I'm a little bit confused. You are saying the A223 B6 is getting will help them better compete on a route they went from Daily to 3w now? And that is because they are not focusing on FLL? Last month B6 went from 3 daily on FLL-KIN to 4d when they have to drop Cuba flights due to new restrictions.
Noticed they did not add service to POS or BGI. They even operate these flights either as red eyes or during the daylight in the peak season, meaning that they are just using the a/c to get better utilization in the soft periods.

But I am still struggling to understand what you are saying about the A223. So you are saying that the MAX will not do AA any favors then why did they order the a/c in the first place? That is a huge investment to make for "won't do anything". AA has it's own strategy, so does CAL and B6. I can say the same thing in that B6 getting A223 changes nothing for AA and CAL where their fleet is concerned or their strategy in South Florida.

B6 still operates the 150 seat A320 into POS, assuming the A223 takes over the route they have 10 seats less based on their reporting. What difference will it make? To lower fares even lower than they currently are? You can't go lower than what is already being advertised on the route.

ryby92 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I have no idea what you are saying. The question is how they are maintaining these routes. And the answer is that at 3x weekly, it's sustainable for them. There is plenty of routes in their network that went down to 3x weekly and then back up to daily. A lot of these routes are just waiting for A220-300, which will turn around the performance overnight.


A220 solves many problems. There are 22 fewer seats to fill than A320 and it has much lower CASM than A320. I suggest you look at the economics of A220-300 first. It can survive while getting 20 to 30% lower yield than AA. Many routes in B6 network have been turned around through downgauging with the most recent FLL one being MSY. And once they get A220 on these routes, they can go daily, which will allow them to capture more higher yielding traffic.

What people on this thread don't seem to understand about B6 at FLL is that it's in the backburners at the moment. There is very little growth going on at FLL while BOS is getting 75% of their growth and NYC getting another 20%. This is a radical change from 3 years ago when FLL was growing on steroid. But give another 18 months, the attention will come back to Florida. They are still 30 flights away from the stated goal of 140 daily flights and I think it will go beyond that. A lot of these routes are getting cut to subdaily because FLL is getting treated like a mature station that's maximizing profit rather than a growth station. In reality, it has a lot of growth left to go, but the growth has just been put on a 4 year pause.

Once the attention turns back to FLL in 18 months to 2 years, you will see a lot of A321NEOs and A220 deployed here along with much greater willingness to lose money for network building reasons. There is no reason to exit all these markets when they intend to grow them again. On the other hand, MIA is an below average margined hub for AA (I posted a breakdown of estimated profitability of AA hubs a while back in the AA network thread). What B6 has going on at FLL is a lot more sustainable.

Wait what does this have to do with POS-FLL going from daily 5 years ago to 3w this year? Also what does this have to do with the fact that they are comepting with 2 airlines offering 5 daily between POS-MIA/FLL while maintaining 3w? Also what do this have to do with the fact they are not the fare leader on the market?

The assumption is being made that the competition will stay still and that is never a concept to be taken lightly. Considering that both AA and CAL will be getting the MAX when Boeing resolves its issues with the FAA certification, that is a big stretch to take. The comeptition will not stand still, even if they decided to place an A222 on the route.

Caribbean 484 - it's useless trying to use reason and logic as clearly only the blue lens is working. It is obvious the FLL has underperformed for B6 whether some will admit it or not. If B6 has such a cost advantage why then is it that they have performed so poorly in FLL to the extent that they have to cut back. A handful of people going to shop is hardly enough to fill up the plane. and unlike NY the population of Barbadians and Trinis in So FL is too tiny to rely on O&D traffic. I give them full credit wrt NY.

But let's wait for the A220 to show up.

I like B6, its a good airline and very innovative, but I am also realistic in whats happening. It's obvious B6 is making money on JFK-BGI as there is no way they will have 2 daily in off season and 3 daily in peak times with the weekend EWR flight. That is unless the Government is paying them to operate empty seats, and I don't believe that is the case.

Out of POS-FLL there is clearly no more demand to be had, because B6 is 3w and fares are astronimically low with 60-70% load factor, so I am not sure how the poster is implying the A223 is going to fix that given there is 5 daily flights between BW and AA with B6 running 3w, it makes no sense.

South Florida for Trinidad ex-pat is small compared to NYC and even smaller for Barbadian population, so unless B6 adds more connecting flights to feed FLL and compete with AA for that traffic I think the poster is unrealistic at this time.

B6 routes the Fll flight to BGI to and from JFK I always thought the flight would probably work better with an E190 FLL BGI turn.

Brickell305 wrote:

What you are saying makes no sense. BW is primarily O&D on POS-FLL and is able to fill a 737 daily in peak and 5x weekly at its lowest frequency and that's with it having a larger operation on POS-MIA. The reason B6 cut back on POS from FLL isn't because they decided to neglect FLL, it's because they weren't doing well on the route. They aren't able to compete with both BW and AA serving So. Fla to POS. They can try with A220s in 18-24 months as you say they will (if they are even still serving the route then) but the lower cost there will only allow them to try to undercut on fares. That's exactly what they do now and it's still not working.

I think you completely ignored what I said there about A220. I pointed out 3 things out there which you pointedly ignored:
1) A220 offers much better economics than A320 - 22 fewer seats will allow them to either have a higher load factor at same fare level or similar load factor at a higher fare level. So yield will be higher. Does this make sense to you?
2) CASM on A220-300 is a lot lower than A320, so a yield level that may not be break even on A320 would be break even on A220-300. Does this make sense to you?
3) B6's attention is not on FLL right now, so they have lower tolerance for under performing routes. That's why this is cut to subdaily. This is far from the only route they cut off peak flying from and a lot of them returned to daily later on. Once BOS is more built up, their attention will shift back to Florida and a lot of these routes will go back to daily or even more. No sense to cut them if you intend to bring them back eventually. Does this make sense to you?

There are 3 points here. why don't you tell me which part makes no sense to you and why?

ryby92 wrote:

Caribbean 484 - it's useless trying to use reason and logic as clearly only the blue lens is working. It is obvious the FLL has underperformed for B6 whether some will admit it or not. If B6 has such a cost advantage why then is it that they have performed so poorly in FLL to the extent that they have to cut back. A handful of people going to shop is hardly enough to fill up the plane. and unlike NY the population of Barbadians and Trinis in So FL is too tiny to rely on O&D traffic. I give them full credit wrt NY.

But let's wait for the A220 to show up.

Why don't you look at the 3 points I summarized above and say which makes no reason/logic. Feel free to respond without personal attacks.

We know that MIA is a below average hub for AA and FLL is an above average station for B6. We also know B6 margin is quite a bit higher than AA. So to say that FLL has underperformed vs what AA has at MIA is simply not true.

On the question of whether certain routes have underperformed, the answer is obviously yes. Some routes do underperform vs others. Any responsible airline will adjust capacity based on performance. What's also true is that an aircraft with the right capacity and cost can make turn around underperforming route.

There was question on why B6 keep these around. And I explained it's because A220 will be available later and B6 will also tolerate more under performing routes at FLL in a couple of years once BOS is over.

caribbean484 wrote:

Maybe some other forum posters can help me understand what you are saying because I'm a little bit confused. You are saying the A223 B6 is getting will help them better compete on a route they went from Daily to 3w now? And that is because they are not focusing on FLL? Last month B6 went from 3 daily on FLL-KIN to 4d when they have to drop Cuba flights due to new restrictions.
Noticed they did not add service to POS or BGI. They even operate these flights either as red eyes or during the daylight in the peak season, meaning that they are just using the a/c to get better utilization in the soft periods.

But I am still struggling to understand what you are saying about the A223. So you are saying that the MAX will not do AA any favors then why did they order the a/c in the first place? That is a huge investment to make for "won't do anything". AA has it's own strategy, so does CAL and B6. I can say the same thing in that B6 getting A223 changes nothing for AA and CAL where their fleet is concerned or their strategy in South Florida.

B6 still operates the 150 seat A320 into POS, assuming the A223 takes over the route they have 10 seats less based on their reporting. What difference will it make? To lower fares even lower than they currently are? You can't go lower than what is already being advertised on the route.

People are asking here why B6 keep these routes around in subdaily basis. So I explained. Check the first 3 points that I summarized for Brickell305. Do tell me which prt is confusing there.

to all the questions you have here.
- FLL is more or less flat YoY from S19 to S20 in terms of the number of flights. That means they are currently in the mode of maximizing profits at FLL rather than station building. And the reason is because they have existential threat in BOS at the moment, so all the resources go there. Is that clear?
- For A220 vs A320. A220 vs 162 seat A320 - 22 fewer seat to fill and about 7 to 8% lower CASM. A220 vs 150 seat A320 - 10 fewer seat to fill and 14 to 15% lower CASM. Regardless of which one it's compared to, it will have fewer seat to fill and large CASM advantage. Outside of E90, the 150 seat A320 is the least economical aircraft with B6 right now. A220 once it joins service, will be the most economical aircraft they have in terms of margins.
- Use 150 seat A320 for example. Let's say they currently get run at -20% in margins. If the cost goes down by 15% and yield goes up 7% from having to 7% fewer seat to fill. Now you have a route that breaks even. I can break this down further if you would like.
- As for MAX, the number of seat won't change with MAX vs NG, so I don't see why B6 would be affected by it. It may lower the operating cost for AA on that route by 5 or 6%, but if AA doesn't add capacity here, I don't see why it would affect B6.

caribbean484 wrote:

2travel2know2 wrote:

Happy New Year!

Here are my Caribbean Aviation wishes 2020:

CM adds frequencies to BZE, NAS, KIN, MBJ, POS, BGI, PBM
CM adds twice weekly late evening PTY-PUJ, early morning PUJ-PTY.
CM adds GCM
CM adds VRA
CM studies ANU, UVF, FDF

BW studies UA IAH-POS loads (overbooking) to check potential for 4 per week POS-HOU (interline with WN).
BW seasonal POS - TAB - MIA/JFK/YYZ/YUL ??

UA seasonal IAD - POS/BWI, EWR-TAB/GEO

PUJ, MBJ, BGI, POS, GEO and PBM talk to TK
POS talks to LH
POS tries to get KL to return
GEO talks to KL

I'm not sure if you know but BW operates TAB-JFK weekly year-round, all other flights can be connected to from POS.
BWIA wanted to start IAH-POS years ago but the downgrade to CAT2 by the ICAO/FAA saw that plan shelved and UA took advantage of the opportunity.
I'm not sure if there is room for another airline. Texas is seeing more Trini ex-pats however it is spread between Dallas and Huston, while UA gets lots of pax transferring from nearby states and the west coast. ATL, DC and Maryland are much larger than Texas for ex-pats.

TK starting POS and GEO, not in this lifetime there are no links unless tourism grows significantly.

CM, however, will be interesting to see their schedule when they get rid of the E190s.

Is TAB-JFK weekly the only TAB international route attractive for BW?
Isn’t there any (seasonal) demand for twice weekly TAB-MIA/FLL?
Is TAB popular in Montreal?

While the traffic between POS and IAH (O/D + hub) might be on the rise, if BW can’t get any feed on the Texas side for a POS-Houston adventure, then better leave the route to UA. I just can imagine BW taking to WN to do some kind of interline @ FLL (and @ HOU, if BW wishes to fly to Houston).

If TK shows some interest in POS and/or GEO, it will be because mainly of oil and gas related traffic and as an stop to or from somewhere-else; not because leisure traffic or T&T/Guyana/Suriname Indian connections generations ago.
Recently TK inflight magazine featured an article about T&T, surely, that’s neither hint TK will talk (or fly) to POS nor that someone @ POS had had contact with TK, but IMHO, rumour is that TK wants to fly IST-LIM in the near future and that TK must (tech) stop that flight somewhere in- and out-bound. If so is the case, I’d promote POS.
Look at how TK has expanded, where it flies, plus its strategy’s very out-of-the-box, TK @ POS someday shouldn’t be so far fetched as one may believe.

What’s going to happen to CM POS frequencies when the E190 are gone?
Excellent question...

Brickell305 wrote:

I also wonder why B6 continues to operate BGI and POS out of FLL. I don’t view either as particularly vital to their route network and they are both clearly not doing very well. I think BGI is probably doing better as it has one less competitor and they can get some leisure travel as well. To POS, out of So. Fla, the VFR traffic seems to favor BW and AA. The business crowd seems to favor AA. And AA has the best connections ex So. Fla. on the POS end, BW is the hometown airline and will get VFR, leisure, connections from GEO/PBM (BGI and GND to a lesser extent) and a good chunk of business demand. AA has been well entrenched for years and will get its share of business travel, leisure and the onward connection demand it provides. B6 is squeezed from both sides.

I think that BW has improved connectivity between FLL and GEO via POS. That provides additional passengers for those who dont want to use MIA. AA must be taking away business from someone on the MIA GEO. PY has increased service on that route so I dont think that its them. Granted that there is increased travel on the MIA GEO thanks to the new oil industry.

duplicate

2travel2know2 wrote:

W?

Recently TK inflight magazine featured an article about T&T, surely, that’s neither hint TK will talk (or fly) to POS nor that someone @ POS had had contact with TK, but IMHO, rumour is that TK wants to fly IST-LIM in the near future and that TK must (tech) stop that flight somewhere in- and out-bound. If so is the case, I’d promote POS.
Look at how TK has expanded, where it flies, plus its strategy’s very out-of-the-box, TK @ POS someday shouldn’t be so far fetched as one may believe.

What’s going to happen to CM POS frequencies when the E190 are gone?
Excellent question...

Dont know that either POS or GEO will ever be on the TK radar. While T&T and Guyana both have large populations of Indian descent these aren't integrated into India aside for a love for Bollywood. BW already has some interline arrangement with some carrier (cannot remember which) to route people via JFK. The volumes are too narrow to do more than this. Its the same reason why West Africa Caribbean connections will not occur, despite frequent fantasies of it. Note that thousands of Nigerians live in the Anglo Caribbean..

Maybe TK routes POS bound passengers over its CM arrangements at PTY.

TAB struggles in the North American travel markets. There are long debates as to why, but needless to say that GND does well despite being almost as far. There was a chance of B6 adding a JFK TAB route when plans were for Sandals to operate a property on that island. Since that deal fell through I dont think that TAB will be more than BW ex JFK year round, with much of this being VFR and with Sunwing's winter.

YUL will not work as the package tour nature of Canadian leisure travel makes it tough and too low yielding for BW. The Anglo Caribbean is out of YYZ and BW is clearly a factor on that.

Anyone know why KX can’t seem to run an ontime schedule lately? Delays are out of control... last few weeks they’ve been using Xtra and World Atlantic to try to maintain some semblance of a daily timetable.

flyaa757 wrote:

Anyone know why KX can’t seem to run an ontime schedule lately? Delays are out of control... last few weeks they’ve been using Xtra and World Atlantic to try to maintain some semblance of a daily timetable.

A severe MAX ailment. They have some grounded and others on audited. Because of this they must use their ageing fleet which they had planned to ground.

BW has this to a lesser degree. They had planned to begin a phase out by now, but instead are left with ageing planes. I think their JFK MBJ was ripped to shreds this Xmas season.

caribny wrote:

2travel2know2 wrote:

W?

Recently TK inflight magazine featured an article about T&T, surely, that’s neither hint TK will talk (or fly) to POS nor that someone @ POS had had contact with TK, but IMHO, rumour is that TK wants to fly IST-LIM in the near future and that TK must (tech) stop that flight somewhere in- and out-bound. If so is the case, I’d promote POS.
Look at how TK has expanded, where it flies, plus its strategy’s very out-of-the-box, TK @ POS someday shouldn’t be so far fetched as one may believe.

What’s going to happen to CM POS frequencies when the E190 are gone?
Excellent question...

Dont know that either POS or GEO will ever be on the TK radar. While T&T and Guyana both have large populations of Indian descent these aren't integrated into India aside for a love for Bollywood. BW already has some interline arrangement with some carrier (cannot remember which) to route people via JFK. The volumes are too narrow to do more than this. Its the same reason why West Africa Caribbean connections will not occur, despite frequent fantasies of it. Note that thousands of Nigerians live in the Anglo Caribbean..

Maybe TK routes POS bound passengers over its CM arrangements at PTY.

TAB struggles in the North American travel markets. There are long debates as to why, but needless to say that GND does well despite being almost as far. There was a chance of B6 adding a JFK TAB route when plans were for Sandals to operate a property on that island. Since that deal fell through I dont think that TAB will be more than BW ex JFK year round, with much of this being VFR and with Sunwing's winter.

YUL will not work as the package tour nature of Canadian leisure travel makes it tough and too low yielding for BW. The Anglo Caribbean is out of YYZ and BW is clearly a factor on that.

I think the POS-TAB airbridge also negatively affects the potential for direct US nonstops into TAB. If you’re BW, why take the risk of losing money on nonstop TAB-US flights when you can just route people via POS? If you’re AA, why spend the resources and take the risk to fly an additional flight into TAB when you can essentially serve the TAB market demand by flying to POS (a destination that already works well for you). And the other main issue out of the US is how do you price TAB flights? Caribbean markets that are lower volume like TAB tend to make up for it through higher margins e.g. ANU, SKB, GND. It’s difficult to price TAB in the same way because if fares get too high, people will just fly via POS as that’s a market with relatively high volume and consequently lower fares. Even from a convenience standpoint, POS will always have significantly more service than TAB. Why not just hop on one of several flights into POS on that day and then connect cheaply into TAB instead of waiting on a once or twice weekly flight that goes directly to TAB? As long as the airbridge is an option, nonstop US flights into TAB will be difficult to pull off.

flyaa757 wrote:

Anyone know why KX can’t seem to run an ontime schedule lately? Delays are out of control... last few weeks they’ve been using Xtra and World Atlantic to try to maintain some semblance of a daily timetable.

I imagine that they are struggling with their current fleet. They should be operating a fully 737MAX fleet at this point, 4 of them. Instead they have 3(?) 737-300's that lack the capacity and capability they need and should all have been sent to the scrap yard by now. Reliability must be poor already.... and JFK ramp staff seem to truly enjoy colliding with their planes.

Brickell305 wrote:

I think the POS-TAB airbridge also negatively affects the potential for direct US nonstops into TAB. If you’re BW, why take the risk of losing money on nonstop TAB-US flights when you can just route people via POS? If you’re AA, why spend the resources and take the risk to fly an additional flight into TAB when you can essentially serve the TAB market demand by flying to POS (a destination that already works well for you). And the other main issue out of the US is how do you price TAB flights? Caribbean markets that are lower volume like TAB tend to make up for it through higher margins e.g. ANU, SKB, GND. It’s difficult to price TAB in the same way because if fares get too high, people will just fly via POS as that’s a market with relatively high volume and consequently lower fares. Even from a convenience standpoint, POS will always have significantly more service than TAB. Why not just hop on one of several flights into POS on that day and then connect cheaply into TAB instead of waiting on a once or twice weekly flight that goes directly to TAB? As long as the airbridge is an option, nonstop US flights into TAB will be difficult to pull off.

IMO, after what I red, the best way for TAB to get AA from MIA or B6 from FLL might be thru a tour operator selling holiday programmes to the island with a contact for X amount of seats per flight.
That'd probably mean weekly flights (every Saturday or Sunday) or twice weekly flights (Monday and Friday or Wednesday and Sundays).
Now the question is, does B6 or AA Embraer have the range for FLL/MIA-TAB?

Caymanair wrote:

flyaa757 wrote:

Anyone know why KX can’t seem to run an ontime schedule lately? Delays are out of control... last few weeks they’ve been using Xtra and World Atlantic to try to maintain some semblance of a daily timetable.

I imagine that they are struggling with their current fleet. They should be operating a fully 737MAX fleet at this point, 4 of them. Instead they have 3(?) 737-300's that lack the capacity and capability they need and should all have been sent to the scrap yard by now. Reliability must be poor already.... and JFK ramp staff seem to truly enjoy colliding with their planes.

Yep seems to be having less a/c than expected.

caribny wrote:

flyaa757 wrote:

Anyone know why KX can’t seem to run an ontime schedule lately? Delays are out of control... last few weeks they’ve been using Xtra and World Atlantic to try to maintain some semblance of a daily timetable.

A severe MAX ailment. They have some grounded and others on audited. Because of this they must use their ageing fleet which they had planned to ground.

BW has this to a lesser degree. They had planned to begin a phase out by now, but instead are left with ageing planes. I think their JFK MBJ was ripped to shreds this Xmas season.

Yep the pickle fork issue, plus the unintended situation of not getting new a/c on time shredded the schedule for some of the Christmas flights to MBJ.

Perhaps TAB should be downsized and have its international traffic move to POS. Excluding the air bridge, I don't see much need for an airfield of this scale that is so under utilised. Leisure demand to TAB could then help sustain the air bridge.

Zidane wrote:

Perhaps TAB should be downsized and have its international traffic move to POS. Excluding the air bridge, I don't see much need for an airfield of this scale that is so under utilised. Leisure demand to TAB could then help sustain the air bridge.

Not going to happen. TAB's entire economy is based on tourism. Most of its international visitors are from Europe so unlikely to want to arrive in POS, go through customs/immigration and then wait for a plane to TAB. As much as you might think that this will be less of an issue for US visitors it is. The further southeast the island is from the USA the longer the flight, therefore the less inclined US visitors are to fly there. US visitors prefer islands to the north or to the west. Jamaica, Grand Cayman, and the Bahamas being the sweet spot. Aruba located well too.

Even GND receives fewer visitors from the USA than one would expect. SKB/NEV's relative success in the US market is because it lies far north, so can even attract DFW service in the summer. TABs location has been a huge challenge in attracting larger numbers of US visitors.

There is absolutely no way that TAB can build its international tourism based on the air bridge. TAB will sooner completely secede from T&T than to agree to that. No political party will risk this as those 2 seats in TAB are vital if there is a close election in Trinidad.

In any case many people access LGW from POS by hopping on the air bridge to connect to VS, or BA at TAB as the fares are lower than on the direct POS LGW BA service.

TAB will remain a niche market, unless a major brand comes in and an MRG provided to support a direct service. US visitors who really want to go there will access via POS, or will use BWs weekly JFK service (likely a political route).

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

Maybe to replace a Euro ATR which is now in use on the TAB airbridge. I suspect further expansion, say to SDQ, might have to wait for a solution to their MAX problem.

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

That is good news for BW. The question is, what is the latest status of 9Y-TTA? Have repairs been planned or implemented for it?

Trintocan.

B6 is dropping FLL-BGI , FLL-STI, MCO-HAV and MCO-PAP.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-o ... e-shakeup/

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

caribny wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

Maybe to replace a Euro ATR which is now in use on the TAB airbridge. I suspect further expansion, say to SDQ, might have to wait for a solution to their MAX problem.

No these are for expansion, they plan compete in the Eastern Caribbean and have 3 more ATRs coming.

trintocan wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

That is good news for BW. The question is, what is the latest status of 9Y-TTA? Have repairs been planned or implemented for it?

Trintocan.

Should be back in service by month's end, was recently painted and repaired, should be doing engine run-up and test flights soon.

Brickell305 wrote:

B6 is dropping FLL-BGI , FLL-STI, MCO-HAV and MCO-PAP.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-o ... e-shakeup/

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

caribbean484 wrote:

caribny wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

Maybe to replace a Euro ATR which is now in use on the TAB airbridge. I suspect further expansion, say to SDQ, might have to wait for a solution to their MAX problem.

No these are for expansion, they plan compete in the Eastern Caribbean and have 3 more ATRs coming.

trintocan wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

That is good news for BW. The question is, what is the latest status of 9Y-TTA? Have repairs been planned or implemented for it?

Trintocan.

Should be back in service by month's end, was recently painted and repaired, should be doing engine run-up and test flights soon.

Brickell305 wrote:

B6 is dropping FLL-BGI , FLL-STI, MCO-HAV and MCO-PAP.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-o ... e-shakeup/

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

I’m actually surprised BGI went before POS despite POS being a larger market. There’s more competition to POS and B6 is a distant third in that market. I thought with the ability to get tourists and as the only nonstop alternative to AA, they’d be able to last longer in BGI. I guess not. I also suspect that POS won’t last much longer either but I guess we’ll see.

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

If they get -TTA back in the air and with 4 more ATRs on their way, 9 ATRs will require some new routes/ expansion of existing routes.
Here are my predictions:
CUR to go to ATR with higher frequency.
OGL to be started with ATR.
ANU to get regular ATR service

Any rumours about positioning one or two ATRs in KIN to cover GCM and maybe HAV?

Cheers,
AA1818

Brickell305 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

caribny wrote:

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

I’m actually surprised BGI went before POS despite POS being a larger market. There’s more competition to POS and B6 is a distant third in that market. I thought with the ability to get tourists and as the only nonstop alternative to AA, they’d be able to last longer in BGI. I guess not. I also suspect that POS won’t last much longer either but I guess we’ll see.

I'm not truly surprised, years ago when this was mentioned, we were saying that if the FLL-BGI route lasted past 5 years we will be surprised. That was off the failure of Air Jamaica running the route and dropping it after 1 year. Of course, the B6 fanboys laughed at us claiming that it would be a resounding success since they will have to same marketing reach in FLL as AA did in MIA.
The reality is FLL is no MIA for B6 because they don't have the infrastructure there to replicate AA's at MIA. There is also little O/D between BGI/SF market. At least to POS the O/D is much larger, the difference is they are going up against 4/5 flights in the between BW and AA to South Florida. CAL controls the O/D between the markets and AA has the connecting traffic with some O/D, there is no room of B6 there but to only trash yields.

aa1818 wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

If they get -TTA back in the air and with 4 more ATRs on their way, 9 ATRs will require some new routes/ expansion of existing routes.
Here are my predictions:
CUR to go to ATR with higher frequency.
OGL to be started with ATR.
ANU to get regular ATR service

Any rumours about positioning one or two ATRs in KIN to cover GCM and maybe HAV?

Cheers,
AA1818

I guess we will have to wait and see how it plays out, but rumours are swirling around that there should be 1 in KIN to run some regional flights from the northern Caribbean. Basically, they are going with the strat plan developed in 2010 to develop a regional hub in POS and KIN with 9 ATRs.
The other aspect that remains to be seen is how the jet fleet develops; will there be more MAXs? The 2010 strat plan called for 15 737s in fleet and an expanded North and South America network.

caribbean484 wrote:

I guess we will have to wait and see how it plays out, but rumours are swirling around that there should be 1 in KIN to run some regional flights from the northern Caribbean. Basically, they are going with the strat plan developed in 2010 to develop a regional hub in POS and KIN with 9 ATRs.
The other aspect that remains to be seen is how the jet fleet develops; will there be more MAXs? The 2010 strat plan called for 15 737s in fleet and an expanded North and South America network.

Interesting. Even one in KIN would be good but the sector lengths in the northern Caribbean may preclude an 'extensive' network. Is HAV doable from KIN on ATR? GCM for sure would make sense. Maybe PAP, SDQ?

15 737s seems overkill without significant route expansion no?
If more ATRs free up some 737s like KIN-HAV, reduced POS-GEO (if OGL is run with ATRs) and POS-CUR.
What North/ South American routes could be on the cards?
The only routes I can see as viable for CAL are PTY (lots of yield and CM has reduced capacity so I think there's a golden opportunity to become established), and IAD (I remember chatting to a very senior guy at AA-MIA who is now retired and he said the number one connecting destination is Washington DC for POS-MIA).

Interesting point to note:
With the addition of these 4 ATRs, CAL's fleet of 9 compared to LIAT's fleet of 10 could make for an interesting regional showdown.

Cheers,
AA1818

I am not sure about CAL and expanding regionally in the EC we have all seen how that has (not) worked for other players. However,the Jamaica expansion may hold some opportunities.

Interesting developments at Caribbean Airlines with those 4 ATR72 additions. First of all, I hope they will get a complete livery and not just airline titles and no tail logo. I am hoping to see them get the new livery but I understand will be introduced later this year.

Time will tell if I'm gonna see their ATR's in CUR too.

A388

It is rumored that CAL is postponing deploying the ATR in KIN and would instead go head to head with LIAT in the Eastern Caribbean.

caribbean484 wrote:

caribny wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

Maybe to replace a Euro ATR which is now in use on the TAB airbridge. I suspect further expansion, say to SDQ, might have to wait for a solution to their MAX problem.

No these are for expansion, they plan compete in the Eastern Caribbean and have 3 more ATRs coming.

trintocan wrote:

BW600 wrote:

9Y-TTI is on its delivery flight to POS. Would be interesting to see what BW’s plans are for its increased regional fleet.

That is good news for BW. The question is, what is the latest status of 9Y-TTA? Have repairs been planned or implemented for it?

Trintocan.

Should be back in service by month's end, was recently painted and repaired, should be doing engine run-up and test flights soon.

Brickell305 wrote:

B6 is dropping FLL-BGI , FLL-STI, MCO-HAV and MCO-PAP.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-o ... e-shakeup/

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

Colour me blue. I wonder how those A220 CASM king jets would have worked out!

ryby92 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

caribny wrote:

Maybe to replace a Euro ATR which is now in use on the TAB airbridge. I suspect further expansion, say to SDQ, might have to wait for a solution to their MAX problem.

No these are for expansion, they plan compete in the Eastern Caribbean and have 3 more ATRs coming.

trintocan wrote:

That is good news for BW. The question is, what is the latest status of 9Y-TTA? Have repairs been planned or implemented for it?

Trintocan.

Should be back in service by month's end, was recently painted and repaired, should be doing engine run-up and test flights soon.

Brickell305 wrote:

B6 is dropping FLL-BGI , FLL-STI, MCO-HAV and MCO-PAP.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-o ... e-shakeup/

I'm not remotely surprised on any of these. I await the day of reckoning for FLL-POS as well.

Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

Colour me blue. I wonder how those A220 CASM king jets would have worked out!

As I said before, you people asked why B6 is keeping some of these routes around. I said they want to keep these routes along for a time when A220 becomes available and attention shifts away from Boston. Obviously, some markets are underperforming to the piont they don't even want to wait for 2 or 3 more years.

In another 2 or 3 years, they will shift their focus back to FLL and have A220s around. We will see what they add. B6 is far from done with its FLL station.

And B6's biggest competition in South Florida is NK, not AA. AA has plenty to worry on its own hand with DL/Latam partnership.

tphuang wrote:

ryby92 wrote:

caribbean484 wrote:

No these are for expansion, they plan compete in the Eastern Caribbean and have 3 more ATRs coming.



Should be back in service by month's end, was recently painted and repaired, should be doing engine run-up and test flights soon.



Color me surprised, FLL-Caribbean is a disaster for B6, competing with AA's Latin American's Hub down the road is very difficult. I would not be surprised to see FLL-POS also dropped in the future, but with the slightly larger O/D there they may try to hang on for a while.

Colour me blue. I wonder how those A220 CASM king jets would have worked out!

As I said before, you people asked why B6 is keeping some of these routes around. I said they want to keep these routes along for a time when A220 becomes available and attention shifts away from Boston. Obviously, some markets are underperforming to the piont they don't even want to wait for 2 or 3 more years.

In another 2 or 3 years, they will shift their focus back to FLL and have A220s around. We will see what they add. B6 is far from done with its FLL station.

And B6's biggest competition in South Florida is NK, not AA. AA has plenty to worry on its own hand with DL/Latam partnership.

So, B6 is dropping flights to BGI and reducing to POS because of an airline that serves neither destination? Anyway, this decision to drop BGI and reduce POS significantly came after AA increased frequencies on both but NK I guess.

Brickell305 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

ryby92 wrote:

Colour me blue. I wonder how those A220 CASM king jets would have worked out!

As I said before, you people asked why B6 is keeping some of these routes around. I said they want to keep these routes along for a time when A220 becomes available and attention shifts away from Boston. Obviously, some markets are underperforming to the piont they don't even want to wait for 2 or 3 more years.

In another 2 or 3 years, they will shift their focus back to FLL and have A220s around. We will see what they add. B6 is far from done with its FLL station.

And B6's biggest competition in South Florida is NK, not AA. AA has plenty to worry on its own hand with DL/Latam partnership.

So, B6 is dropping flights to BGI and reducing to POS because of an airline that serves neither destination? Anyway, this decision to drop BGI and reduce POS significantly came after AA increased frequencies on both but NK I guess.

I mean according to some, B6 is supposedly eating AA’s lunch out of MIA (which is why B6 is dropping some routes?), and the A220 is the magic touch which will soon turn underperforming routes around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk