B6 adding CLT-LAX nonstop service might be a possibility with CLT being the largest U.S. metropolitan area that has nonstop service to the West Coast on only one airline and with B6 recently adding service to LAX from other East Coast destinations.

There are also some other East Coast markets that B6 could add nonstop service to LAX from such as ALB, ROC, and SYR.

Moosefire wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

lostsound wrote:

B6 & millennials go together like two peas in a pod & LAX draws a lot of them.

Millennials fly the cheapest option.

You realize a massive chunk of millennials are in their 30s right?

I shop 1) loyalty program 2) schedule 3) price in that order. Pre and post covid.

I don't want to be pedantic or judgemental or anything but remember that you are posting on an aviation forum. Thus your relationship with aviation is extremely different to that of a normal millennial.

jplatts wrote:

B6 adding CLT-LAX nonstop service might be a possibility with CLT being the largest U.S. metropolitan area that has nonstop service to the West Coast on only one airline and with B6 recently adding service to LAX from other East Coast destinations.

There are also some other East Coast markets that B6 could add nonstop service to LAX from such as ALB, ROC, and SYR.

B6 and AA are working on a partnership and B6 isn't about to launch an AA hub2hub route in direct competition at this time, especially from a weaker O&D market like CLT.. As for LAX-Upstate NY in the current environment NOTHING would surprise me with B6/LAX right now.

OzarkD9S wrote:

jplatts wrote:

B6 adding CLT-LAX nonstop service might be a possibility with CLT being the largest U.S. metropolitan area that has nonstop service to the West Coast on only one airline and with B6 recently adding service to LAX from other East Coast destinations.

There are also some other East Coast markets that B6 could add nonstop service to LAX from such as ALB, ROC, and SYR.

B6 and AA are working on a partnership and B6 isn't about to launch an AA hub2hub route in direct competition at this time, especially from a weaker O&D market like CLT.. As for LAX-Upstate NY in the current environment NOTHING would surprise me with B6/LAX right now.

JetBlue is not going to add LAX-ALB/ROC/SYR. The next LAX transcon it could try are stuff like BDL, HPN, JAX, PVD. It could even try a near transcon with no legacy presence like PIT.

Moosefire wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

lostsound wrote:

B6 & millennials go together like two peas in a pod & LAX draws a lot of them.

Millennials fly the cheapest option.

You realize a massive chunk of millennials are in their 30s right?

I shop 1) loyalty program 2) schedule 3) price in that order. Pre and post covid.

I think you may have missed my point. Millennials are no longer budget conscious college students... rather they (we) are a large chunk of the business travel market.

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Moosefire wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

Millennials fly the cheapest option.

You realize a massive chunk of millennials are in their 30s right?

I shop 1) loyalty program 2) schedule 3) price in that order. Pre and post covid.

I don't want to be pedantic or judgemental or anything but remember that you are posting on an aviation forum. Thus your relationship with aviation is extremely different to that of a normal millennial.

More like his relationship with aviation is rooted in the data that most airlines show about millennial business...

OzarkD9S wrote:

B6 and AA are working on a partnership and B6 isn't about to launch an AA hub2hub route in direct competition at this time, especially from a weaker O&D market like CLT.. As for LAX-Upstate NY in the current environment NOTHING would surprise me with B6/LAX right now.

LAX-CLT had higher PDEW's in Q3 2019 than a few routes out of LAX that were served nonstop by more than 1 airline such as LAX-CMH or LAX-ELP, and CLT is also located in a bigger metropolitan area than CMH or ELP.

There are also some banking industry ties between Los Angeles and Charlotte to possibly support LAX-CLT nonstop service on an airline other than AA with both Los Angeles and Charlotte being major financial centers, but AA has hubs at both LAX and CLT.

While there is currently no nonstop competition on the LAX-CLT route, DL offers connections to CLT from LAX through its main ATL hub, UA offers connections to CLT from LAX through its DEN hub, and WN offers connections to CLT from LAX through DAL, DEN, or BNA.

jplatts wrote:

LAX-CLT had higher PDEW's in Q3 2019 than a few routes out of LAX that were served nonstop by more than 1 airline such as LAX-CMH or LAX-ELP, and CLT is also located in a bigger metropolitan area than CMH or ELP.

There are also some banking industry ties between Los Angeles and Charlotte to possibly support LAX-CLT nonstop service on an airline other than AA with both Los Angeles and Charlotte being major financial centers, but AA has hubs at both LAX and CLT.

While there is currently no nonstop competition on the LAX-CLT route, DL offers connections to CLT from LAX through its main ATL hub, UA offers connections to CLT from LAX through its DEN hub, and WN offers connections to CLT from LAX through DAL, DEN, or BNA.

Yeah, I know all this but.....thanks? I guess.

Updated guidance from JetBlue land
http://otp.investis.com/generic/sec/sec ... 3&Type=PDF

Q3 capacity down 55% vs 45% that was previous planned. Not a surprise to us who have seen them chop down Aug/Sep after originally beefing up those question.
Cash burn for the entire quarter down in the lower end of $7 to $9 million guidance range due to improved booking. Not a surprise given what other carriers have reported and also the slightly increased bookings out of NY/Boston. Even if it's $7 million, that's still a little high compared to what some of the competitors have brought it down to. Really underscores how bad bookings out of NY/Boston have been. Also said bookings have been improving since early August.

It is rumored that JetBlue will be announcing BDL - LAX, SFO, LAS and CUN today at 10am EST

ajsljet45 wrote:

It is rumored that JetBlue will be announcing BDL - LAX, SFO, LAS and CUN today at 10am EST

BDL-SFO is a surprise to me, but all of those are bookable.

ajsljet45 wrote:

It is rumored that JetBlue will be announcing BDL - LAX, SFO, LAS and CUN today at 10am EST

Random date in April shows LAX, SFO, LAS and CUN all bookable as non-stops.

I was surprised BDL-LAX was not part of the 24 route announcement. I guess they wanted to save it for this. I long expected them to expand at BDL. Out of the 4, only SFO really surprises me. I've been saying for a while they will be trying to get more gate space at SFO. Looks like they are trying some odd routes there.

Wonder if they would try Mint out of BDL?

http://blueir.investproductions.com/inv ... -150057529

"With Los Angeles, Las Vegas, San Francisco and Cancún, Mexico Added to Its Schedule, JetBlue Sets Up to Be the Largest Carrier in Connecticut by 2021"

B6 just added BDL-CUN/LAS/LAX/SFO. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... 005224/en/

I wonder if this will push AA off BDL-LAX. I know UA was doing BDL-SFO on a seasonal basis for some time, so I wouldn't be surprised if this pushed them off as well.

tphuang wrote:

JetBlue is not going to add LAX-ALB

Whats the PDEW for LAX-ALB versus say RIC or CHS?

tphuang wrote:

I'm not sure how long the PHL stuff will last. I think SJU will last, but the a couple of Florida stuff might get dropped as soon as the AA partnership concludes.

I think the Florida PHL stuff lasts as long as COVID travel patters favor warm weather destinations, which may very well align with the AA partnership concluding. I agree that SJU is the most likely to survive past that.

PDEW from Q3 last year
BDL-LA Basin 278, avg fare $346
BDL-Bay Area 177, avg fare $339
BDL-LAS 116, avg fare $300

ALB-La basin, 127, avg fare $358

Keep in mind while numbers for BDL-LAS/SFO don't look that high, a lot of that is due to non-stop options at JFK and BOS. There is a lot of demand in the region for transcon if there is actual non-stop service at lower fares.

ALB to LA demand looks higher than I expected. Although, I still doubt they will try it.

I'm curious about the part where they are set up to be the larget carrier in CT by 2021. What else are they adding? Are they just adding more Florida frequencies? Maybe they will add BDL-MBJ?

tphuang wrote:

I'm curious about the part where they are set up to be the larget carrier in CT by 2021. What else are they adding? Are they just adding more Florida frequencies? Maybe they will add BDL-MBJ?

Yeah, I don't see the "largest in CT" happening unless they are just talking about number of destinations.

USAirALB wrote:

I wonder if this will push AA off BDL-LAX. I know UA was doing BDL-SFO on a seasonal basis for some time, so I wouldn't be surprised if this pushed them off as well.

I think we're going to see airlines fight pretty aggressively for any routes which are generating appreciable leisure traffic -- so don't necessarily agree that AA or UA would abandon these markets due to B6 adding them.

Really interesting moves by JetBlue with today's announcements.

BDL - I've suggested for a while that they should add more into BDL and really develop their point of sale in the area from NY/NJ to MA. It just seems to me BDL captures not only demand in CT, but also part of upstate New York, maybe northern part of westchester and even part of MA. With airlines cutting back service to HVN, SWF and HPN due to the pandemic, I could see BDL picking some of that up if JetBlue offers robust service there. And people that fly out of BDL for shorthaul might be willing to trek to JFK/BOS to fly JetBlue on TATL stuff or other longer ranged stuff not available at BDL.

I like their plan of becoming CT's largest carrier, but am not really sure how they get there since WN/AA were both quite a bit larger in 2019. I think the Florida stuff will get more capacity this year, especially TPA/RSW. I think it's possible they will add more island stuff like SDQ/STI/MBJ. Maybe they will bring back DCA? They could also try RDU. I guess there will be more announcement to come. it's certainly a good goal to have since CT is very wealthy.

LAX - I was a little surprised BDL wasn't part of the big 24 route announcement. I think they will push AA off this route. Even if they don't, there is enough demand here for 2 daily flights during much of the year. I'm curious if they will add HPN or PVD still. I could even see them going up to 2x daily here if they don't add HPN or PVD.

SFO - This was probably the biggest surprise of the 4, since I can see UA retaliating here. It is interesting they have added 2 non-hub/focus city SFO recently and also MCO (which has otherwise been really quiet). I think they are making a play for additional gate space at SFO. I don't think they are looking to be as large there as LAX, but I could see a 30 to 40 flight station in a few years. Interesting how they got a west coast strategy now without having to spend all that money on VX.

LAS/CUN - These seem to be 2 leisure destinations that are doing really well right now. I think BDL should be able to support these routes long term.

East Coast - Aside from their focus cities, they seem to be working on a bunch of small project along the east coast like BDL, PVD, RIC, RDU, CHS and TPA. All places they've had some presence before, but they are able to expand on their presence just by connecting a few more dots. I think it's certainly a more rewarding/less costly strategy than trying to build focus city in the middle of the country that people have suggested. Before they become a national carrier, maybe they can try to have presence all along the east coast first.

Oh and as posted in the LR thread, we have a picture of LR's tail-fin pattern
https://www.instagram.com/p/CFckkShFJWW ... _copy_link
I think that confirms the A321NEO mint we saw last week is a regular non-LR NEO.

ScottB wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I'm curious about the part where they are set up to be the larget carrier in CT by 2021. What else are they adding? Are they just adding more Florida frequencies? Maybe they will add BDL-MBJ?

Yeah, I don't see the "largest in CT" happening unless they are just talking about number of destinations.

USAirALB wrote:

I wonder if this will push AA off BDL-LAX. I know UA was doing BDL-SFO on a seasonal basis for some time, so I wouldn't be surprised if this pushed them off as well.

I think we're going to see airlines fight pretty aggressively for any routes which are generating appreciable leisure traffic -- so don't necessarily agree that AA or UA would abandon these markets due to B6 adding them.

AA has been on and off with BDL-LAX for the past year or so with MAX issues and then COVID. UA hasn't run BDL-SFO seasonally since summer of 2018 I believe.

juan885 wrote:

Wonder if they would try Mint out of BDL?

I believe its possible Mint will be offered on BDL-LAX/SFO at some point. More than half of BDL's passengers are business related, once business travel demand picks up on top of the wealthy metro area I could see Mint working out.

[quote="USAirALB"]I wonder if this will push AA off BDL-LAX. I know UA was doing BDL-SFO on a seasonal basis for some time, so I wouldn't be surprised if this pushed them off as well.
[quote="tphuang"]

With AA and JetBlue in that new relationship, it wouldn't surprise me if AA ended the LAX route and put their passengers on the JetBlue flight. As far as UA, I thought that the BDL-SFO route was still going on a seasonal basis.

uconn99 wrote:

AA has been on and off with BDL-LAX for the past year or so with MAX issues and then COVID. UA hasn't run BDL-SFO seasonally since summer of 2018 I believe.

That makes more sense. I was wondering how UA only captured 30% of a 150 PDEW market if they had daily service. Well, if UA doesn't try BDL-SFO again and WN doesn't try BDL-LAS for a while, I think JetBlue's announcement has a good chance of working out.

So far, JetBlue has mostly stuck with leisure market out of BDL. This seems more of a play for business market. I definitely see them bringing back DCA if they are going that route.

Is it me or is LAX getting a lot of love from JetBlue? cause after the announcement that JetBlue is shifting its SoCal focus from LGB to LAX we've been seeing nearly monthly additions to LAX from JetBlue.

Emirates is expanding codeshare network with Jet Blue out of Newark:

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... poct-2020/

What I'm surprised is that all these BDL flights are not late or red eye flights.

Both LAX/SFO-BDL are a morning departure from LAX/SFO and evening departure from BDL.
The LAS flight is a bit different with a morning BDL departure to LAS, and a noon departure from LAS to BDL.

Carfield

Carfield wrote:

What I'm surprised is that all these BDL flights are not late or red eye flights.

Carfield

Same thing with LAX-PBI, RDU, CUN, CHS. My guess is that it is due to catering available for Mint and the buy on board when it comes back only available for provisioning in LAX on a round trip basis and not the outstations.

Carfield wrote:

What I'm surprised is that all these BDL flights are not late or red eye flights.

Both LAX/SFO-BDL are a morning departure from LAX/SFO and evening departure from BDL.
The LAS flight is a bit different with a morning BDL departure to LAS, and a noon departure from LAS to BDL.

Carfield

keep in mind that they have plenty of aircraft sitting around right now and not enough places to fly them. So, they are flying what they believe to be optimal flight times for these markets. Once schedules pick up a lot more, I think you will see more red eyes.

portola2727 wrote:

Is it me or is LAX getting a lot of love from JetBlue? cause after the announcement that JetBlue is shifting its SoCal focus from LGB to LAX we've been seeing nearly monthly additions to LAX from JetBlue.

Yes, LAX and EWR are their 2 major growth area right now.

tphuang wrote:

Carfield wrote:

What I'm surprised is that all these BDL flights are not late or red eye flights.

Both LAX/SFO-BDL are a morning departure from LAX/SFO and evening departure from BDL.
The LAS flight is a bit different with a morning BDL departure to LAS, and a noon departure from LAS to BDL.

Carfield

keep in mind that they have plenty of aircraft sitting around right now and not enough places to fly them. So, they are flying what they believe to be optimal flight times for these markets. Once schedules pick up a lot more, I think you will see more red eyes.

As well as an atypically high number of available gates to build schedules around. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Airlines are still barely at 1/3 of what they were flying a year ago.

I know this is unlikely, but they've added EWR, MCO, CUN and BDL out of SFO (also technically LAX) over the past few months. With SFO in the middle of an airport expansion project that will open up 7 additional gate in T-1 next year, I've wondered if JetBlue is getting close to secure additional gates out there for future growth. As we saw with the VX bid, they have certainly been interested in having a west coast strategy of focus cities in LAX and SFO. Let's say they can secure enough gate access at SFO to open up a focus city, what would it look like? Since we've already seen JetBlue management try some pretty aggressive stuff since pandemic started, I don't think this is out of the realm of possibility.

So, let's say they can get 6 or 7 gates in total, what could a focus city out of SFO look like in 3 or 4 years. Let's say they have an ongoing partnership with AA and can rely on some AA ff on their NYC/BOS flights. I could see the following out of the existing airport they serve
JFK - 7 (already scheduled this much pre-COVID)
EWR - 4 (I see this as minimum they need to be viable next to UA)
BOS - 8 (were already at 7 pre-COVID)
LAX - 8 (If both LAX and SFO are focus cities, I don't think this is crazy)
FLL- 4 (already at 3 pre-COVID)
MCO - 1 (would be the weak airline here)
BDL - 1 (I see this sticking around if they wan to be largest in CT)
CUN - 1 (not crazy if they build a focus city here)

Looking at what they might add on top of this, the largest destination they don't already serve out of Bay Area are SEA, SAN, LAS, Chicago, Denver, Portland, DC, Dallas, Phoenix, Austin, Atlanta, SLC, MSP, Houston, PHL, Detroit, RDU, BNA. It'd be suicidal for them to try most of these routes.

The attraction of having a larger operation in LAX/SFO is to having a national or at least bi-costal presence so that they can gain a larger portion of corporate pie of large companies with major offices in NYC/Boston. Along the way, they can also pick up some ff that do a lot of transcon travel and some west coastal and leisure travel. So I think they will need to serve the leisure markets and also places with business links to NYC Boston. They can add something like:
SEA - 2 (need token presence between 2 of largest tech markets in the country)
SAN - 2 (another token presence on a huge market)
LAS - 3 (need at least this much service to largest leisure market out of Bay Area)
HNL/OGG - 2 (the next largest leisure market out of Bay Area)
PVR/SJD - 2 (more leisure is needed)
IAD - 2 (only if they intend to re-open IAD, almost as big market as BOS that can be served with mint)
AUS - 2 (Bay Area to Austin nerd bird seems to be a must serve if you are trying to attract tech dollar)
RDU - 1 (more tech and NYC/Boston link here)
PSP - seasonal 1 to 2x
BZN - seasonal 2 to 3x weekly

That would be around 50 flight operation and allow them to possibly be even larger than AA in ASM. A 75 flight operation at LAX and another 50 flight operation at SFO would give them the west coast presence they wanted when they pursued VX merger. Of course, they have a lot of priorities right now. They'd need to slowdown growth somewhere else if they wanted to pursue this.

Not sure if this has been discussed here, but what is their goal in building EWR? They want to cement themselves as a/the dominant airline in the NYC region?

B752OS wrote:

Not sure if this has been discussed here, but what is their goal in building EWR? They want to cement themselves as a/the dominant airline in the NYC region?

I imagine they are going to grab gates while they can and run a dual “hub” to leisure /VFR destinations from JFK and EWR.

Imagine JFK around 200 flights and EWR around 100. Throw in LGA and HPN and they are a force to be reckoned with

B6 extends its service suspension at BUR, BWI, ONT, SJC until April 1st, while SWF and ORH service suspended indefinitely.

I'm actually surprised they are suspending BUR that long. It did pretty well pre-pandemic. BWI I think is just due to total lack of demand in the BOS business market right now.

As for EWR, I think it's both a play in NY and NJ. If we accept the hypothesis that a good number of rich New Yorkers are moving to Hamptons, CT and NJ due to WFH policies, then demand out of LGA will shrink and demand out of EWR/JFK will improve. Even if that's not the case, this is their opportunity to grow relevance in the part of the country where they are most loved (which is from central NJ all the way to MA). That's why you see them also making a play for CT and adding routes out of PVD. Back to NY, this is the first time in more than a decade where the big 3 airports have space to grow. You can't pass up an opportunity like that. I'm waiting for a 230 flight JFK, 90 flight EWR, 50 flight LGA and 15 flight HPN. That will allow them to finally compete with DL/UA in NY market.

Robin Hayes had an interview today on Bloomberg. Things definitely sound a lot better. He said they went from getting 3 to 4% of daily revenue back in April to getting 30 to 35% of their normal daily revenues right now. That's definitely better than the 10% they averaged in Q2 and the 20% they projected for Q3. Based on the US booking thread for domestic stuff, NY has been at best 25% of normal booking in the recent weeks and BOS has been at best 35% of normal booking. Florida stuff track around 60%. In terms of revenues, I'd say revenues are probably down even more. So I think JetBlue is probably getting greater % of their usual revenue than their competitors in NY/Boston due to leisure focus. My guess is that their new routes may have opened up some additional revenue streams. If they can get to 40 to 45% of their regular daily revenue for Q4, they can probably get burn rate down to $2 to 4 million a day.

tphuang wrote:

I know this is unlikely, but they've added EWR, MCO, CUN and BDL out of SFO (also technically LAX) over the past few months. With SFO in the middle of an airport expansion project that will open up 7 additional gate in T-1 next year, I've wondered if JetBlue is getting close to secure additional gates out there for future growth. As we saw with the VX bid, they have certainly been interested in having a west coast strategy of focus cities in LAX and SFO. Let's say they can secure enough gate access at SFO to open up a focus city, what would it look like? Since we've already seen JetBlue management try some pretty aggressive stuff since pandemic started, I don't think this is out of the realm of possibility.

So, let's say they can get 6 or 7 gates in total, what could a focus city out of SFO look like in 3 or 4 years. Let's say they have an ongoing partnership with AA and can rely on some AA ff on their NYC/BOS flights. I could see the following out of the existing airport they serve
JFK - 7 (already scheduled this much pre-COVID)
EWR - 4 (I see this as minimum they need to be viable next to UA)
BOS - 8 (were already at 7 pre-COVID)
LAX - 8 (If both LAX and SFO are focus cities, I don't think this is crazy)
FLL- 4 (already at 3 pre-COVID)
MCO - 1 (would be the weak airline here)
BDL - 1 (I see this sticking around if they wan to be largest in CT)
CUN - 1 (not crazy if they build a focus city here)

Looking at what they might add on top of this, the largest destination they don't already serve out of Bay Area are SEA, SAN, LAS, Chicago, Denver, Portland, DC, Dallas, Phoenix, Austin, Atlanta, SLC, MSP, Houston, PHL, Detroit, RDU, BNA. It'd be suicidal for them to try most of these routes.

The attraction of having a larger operation in LAX/SFO is to having a national or at least bi-costal presence so that they can gain a larger portion of corporate pie of large companies with major offices in NYC/Boston. Along the way, they can also pick up some ff that do a lot of transcon travel and some west coastal and leisure travel. So I think they will need to serve the leisure markets and also places with business links to NYC Boston. They can add something like:
SEA - 2 (need token presence between 2 of largest tech markets in the country)
SAN - 2 (another token presence on a huge market)
LAS - 3 (need at least this much service to largest leisure market out of Bay Area)
HNL/OGG - 2 (the next largest leisure market out of Bay Area)
PVR/SJD - 2 (more leisure is needed)
IAD - 2 (only if they intend to re-open IAD, almost as big market as BOS that can be served with mint)
AUS - 2 (Bay Area to Austin nerd bird seems to be a must serve if you are trying to attract tech dollar)
RDU - 1 (more tech and NYC/Boston link here)
PSP - seasonal 1 to 2x
BZN - seasonal 2 to 3x weekly

That would be around 50 flight operation and allow them to possibly be even larger than AA in ASM. A 75 flight operation at LAX and another 50 flight operation at SFO would give them the west coast presence they wanted when they pursued VX merger. Of course, they have a lot of priorities right now. They'd need to slowdown growth somewhere else if they wanted to pursue this.

I don't think a SFO focus city is all that crazy, although doing this could mean risking an ugly fight vs UA at 2 focus cities. The flip side to this is that they'd get back a Bay Area focus city, which B6 had at OAK back in the early days. Now with Mint, they'd figure it makes more sense to have their focus cities at LAX and SFO instead of LGB and OAK. (I'm not saying they should go right ahead and start an SFO focus, but I think that would be their rationale for doing so).

Does the quarrentine orders have any effect from nyc/bos to certain markets

tphuang wrote:

I'm actually surprised they are suspending BUR that long. It did pretty well pre-pandemic. BWI I think is just due to total lack of demand in the BOS business market right now.

As for EWR, I think it's both a play in NY and NJ. If we accept the hypothesis that a good number of rich New Yorkers are moving to Hamptons, CT and NJ due to WFH policies, then demand out of LGA will shrink and demand out of EWR/JFK will improve. Even if that's not the case, this is their opportunity to grow relevance in the part of the country where they are most loved (which is from central NJ all the way to MA). That's why you see them also making a play for CT and adding routes out of PVD. Back to NY, this is the first time in more than a decade where the big 3 airports have space to grow. You can't pass up an opportunity like that. I'm waiting for a 230 flight JFK, 90 flight EWR, 50 flight LGA and 15 flight HPN. That will allow them to finally compete with DL/UA in NY market.

Robin Hayes had an interview today on Bloomberg. Things definitely sound a lot better. He said they went from getting 3 to 4% of daily revenue back in April to getting 30 to 35% of their normal daily revenues right now. That's definitely better than the 10% they averaged in Q2 and the 20% they projected for Q3. Based on the US booking thread for domestic stuff, NY has been at best 25% of normal booking in the recent weeks and BOS has been at best 35% of normal booking. Florida stuff track around 60%. In terms of revenues, I'd say revenues are probably down even more. So I think JetBlue is probably getting greater % of their usual revenue than their competitors in NY/Boston due to leisure focus. My guess is that their new routes may have opened up some additional revenue streams. If they can get to 40 to 45% of their regular daily revenue for Q4, they can probably get burn rate down to $2 to 4 million a day.

Good Analysis

I am also surprised by Burbank… But I think it really has to do with the fact that all hands are on deck to make LAX work.

SWF and ORH were money losers. They were flown for political reasons and that political need isn’t there anymore. If you told me they never came back... I wouldn’t be surprised

Nicknuzzii wrote:

While I 100% believe B6 intended to grow at EWR prior to the pandemic (all the signs were there), I also believe that a lot of the growth at EWR is being put forward because of how much it is outperforming JFK right now. The NY quarantine is killing both JFK and LGA. In July alone EWR handled 100k more pax than JFK. They are hurting so much between there and BOS that EWR probably shows a little bit of hope for the Northeast.

Down the line I could easily see EWR growing to 80+ flights a day. Now my question is whether they will stick with the leisure approach (doesn’t seem like BOS-EWR 7x a day is coming back) or is they venture out to add markets like EWR-ORD/DFW/IAH/SEA.

Living in Northern NJ, I don't get the sense that lockdown/quarantine situation here is any better than across the Hudson.

Keep in mind that JetBlue is doing all it can to grab as much of the bookings in Northeast as it can. Out of JFK, they've added pretty much every market left in their network that has any kind of demand. The only station they don't fly to out of JFK right now are nearby airports like DCA/CLT/CLE/RIC/PIT, because they currently have minimal demand.

Jetblue's EWR network was quite undeveloped prior to COVID. They clearly have the reputation in this area to do well. So once the gate space and air space opened up, they've added pretty much anywhere that has a good amount of leisure demand and not dominated by legacy airlines. I'm sure that has allowed them to capture a good portion of the booking revenues out of EWR. There is just so much stuff they can still add at EWR that can still make money. Their main limitation is what to sacrifice in their network to enable growth in places like EWR/LAX. I can guarantee you that will not be JFK. There is no way they get into that partnership with AA without intention to fully utilize AA's slots.

tphuang wrote:

I'm actually surprised they are suspending BUR that long. It did pretty well pre-pandemic. BWI I think is just due to total lack of demand in the BOS business market right now.

As for EWR, I think it's both a play in NY and NJ. If we accept the hypothesis that a good number of rich New Yorkers are moving to Hamptons, CT and NJ due to WFH policies, then demand out of LGA will shrink and demand out of EWR/JFK will improve. Even if that's not the case, this is their opportunity to grow relevance in the part of the country where they are most loved (which is from central NJ all the way to MA). That's why you see them also making a play for CT and adding routes out of PVD. Back to NY, this is the first time in more than a decade where the big 3 airports have space to grow. You can't pass up an opportunity like that. I'm waiting for a 230 flight JFK, 90 flight EWR, 50 flight LGA and 15 flight HPN. That will allow them to finally compete with DL/UA in NY market.

Robin Hayes had an interview today on Bloomberg. Things definitely sound a lot better. He said they went from getting 3 to 4% of daily revenue back in April to getting 30 to 35% of their normal daily revenues right now. That's definitely better than the 10% they averaged in Q2 and the 20% they projected for Q3. Based on the US booking thread for domestic stuff, NY has been at best 25% of normal booking in the recent weeks and BOS has been at best 35% of normal booking. Florida stuff track around 60%. In terms of revenues, I'd say revenues are probably down even more. So I think JetBlue is probably getting greater % of their usual revenue than their competitors in NY/Boston due to leisure focus. My guess is that their new routes may have opened up some additional revenue streams. If they can get to 40 to 45% of their regular daily revenue for Q4, they can probably get burn rate down to $2 to 4 million a day.

I agree with the Hamptons comment but with that being said why not try Islip? Do you see that in the future? I believe AA is done at ISP and WN is down to BWI and 1 to MCO only.

Burbank is still bookable from November 6.

not sure how credible this is, but
https://ukaviation.news/jetblue-is-comi ... w-in-2021/
if it's indeed they picked LHR, will be interesting to see where they are getting the slots.

On ISP, I think it will be a while before Jetblue tries there. With JFK opening up, I think they will concentrate on using as many slots as possible. It is curious that while ISP and HPN are both located in areas with wealthy surrounding, HPN slots are valued and ISP is ignored.

tphuang wrote:

not sure how credible this is, but
https://ukaviation.news/jetblue-is-comi ... w-in-2021/
if it's indeed they picked LHR, will be interesting to see where they are getting the slots.

On ISP, I think it will be a while before Jetblue tries there. With JFK opening up, I think they will concentrate on using as many slots as possible. It is curious that while ISP and HPN are both located in areas with wealthy surrounding, HPN slots are valued and ISP is ignored.

Yes, JetBlue is intending to serve Heathrow

Posted this in the last page:

Ishrion wrote:

Not sure if this was previously known, but in JetBlue's response to Aer Lingus joining the IAG/AA/AY joint venture, JetBlue states it's requesting at least four daily LHR slot pairs to "meaningfully serve the U.S.-LHR market and provide a desperately-needed competitive alternative to the oneworld and SkyTeam immunized JVs"

https://beta.regulations.gov/document/D ... -0252-3445

[url][/url]

Ishrion wrote:

tphuang wrote:

not sure how credible this is, but
https://ukaviation.news/jetblue-is-comi ... w-in-2021/
if it's indeed they picked LHR, will be interesting to see where they are getting the slots.

On ISP, I think it will be a while before Jetblue tries there. With JFK opening up, I think they will concentrate on using as many slots as possible. It is curious that while ISP and HPN are both located in areas with wealthy surrounding, HPN slots are valued and ISP is ignored.

Yes, JetBlue is intending to serve Heathrow

Posted this in the last page:

Ishrion wrote:

Not sure if this was previously known, but in JetBlue's response to Aer Lingus joining the IAG/AA/AY joint venture, JetBlue states it's requesting at least four daily LHR slot pairs to "meaningfully serve the U.S.-LHR market and provide a desperately-needed competitive alternative to the oneworld and SkyTeam immunized JVs"

https://beta.regulations.gov/document/D ... -0252-3445

Everyone knows B6 is intending (or at least trying) to serve LHR. The article he posted saying they are going to serve LHR and the slot allocations are done is big news.

tphuang wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

While I 100% believe B6 intended to grow at EWR prior to the pandemic (all the signs were there), I also believe that a lot of the growth at EWR is being put forward because of how much it is outperforming JFK right now. The NY quarantine is killing both JFK and LGA. In July alone EWR handled 100k more pax than JFK. They are hurting so much between there and BOS that EWR probably shows a little bit of hope for the Northeast.

Down the line I could easily see EWR growing to 80+ flights a day. Now my question is whether they will stick with the leisure approach (doesn’t seem like BOS-EWR 7x a day is coming back) or is they venture out to add markets like EWR-ORD/DFW/IAH/SEA.

Living in Northern NJ, I don't get the sense that lockdown/quarantine situation here is any better than across the Hudson.

Keep in mind that JetBlue is doing all it can to grab as much of the bookings in Northeast as it can. Out of JFK, they've added pretty much every market left in their network that has any kind of demand. The only station they don't fly to out of JFK right now are nearby airports like DCA/CLT/CLE/RIC/PIT, because they currently have minimal demand.

Jetblue's EWR network was quite undeveloped prior to COVID. They clearly have the reputation in this area to do well. So once the gate space and air space opened up, they've added pretty much anywhere that has a good amount of leisure demand and not dominated by legacy airlines. I'm sure that has allowed them to capture a good portion of the booking revenues out of EWR. There is just so much stuff they can still add at EWR that can still make money. Their main limitation is what to sacrifice in their network to enable growth in places like EWR/LAX. I can guarantee you that will not be JFK. There is no way they get into that partnership with AA without intention to fully utilize AA's slots.

They dont meet you at the plane in NJ.

That is a HUGE barrier.

No one wants to be met at the gate by someone saying “show me your papers.”

jfklganyc wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

While I 100% believe B6 intended to grow at EWR prior to the pandemic (all the signs were there), I also believe that a lot of the growth at EWR is being put forward because of how much it is outperforming JFK right now. The NY quarantine is killing both JFK and LGA. In July alone EWR handled 100k more pax than JFK. They are hurting so much between there and BOS that EWR probably shows a little bit of hope for the Northeast.

Down the line I could easily see EWR growing to 80+ flights a day. Now my question is whether they will stick with the leisure approach (doesn’t seem like BOS-EWR 7x a day is coming back) or is they venture out to add markets like EWR-ORD/DFW/IAH/SEA.

Living in Northern NJ, I don't get the sense that lockdown/quarantine situation here is any better than across the Hudson.

Keep in mind that JetBlue is doing all it can to grab as much of the bookings in Northeast as it can. Out of JFK, they've added pretty much every market left in their network that has any kind of demand. The only station they don't fly to out of JFK right now are nearby airports like DCA/CLT/CLE/RIC/PIT, because they currently have minimal demand.

Jetblue's EWR network was quite undeveloped prior to COVID. They clearly have the reputation in this area to do well. So once the gate space and air space opened up, they've added pretty much anywhere that has a good amount of leisure demand and not dominated by legacy airlines. I'm sure that has allowed them to capture a good portion of the booking revenues out of EWR. There is just so much stuff they can still add at EWR that can still make money. Their main limitation is what to sacrifice in their network to enable growth in places like EWR/LAX. I can guarantee you that will not be JFK. There is no way they get into that partnership with AA without intention to fully utilize AA's slots.

They dont meet you at the plane in NJ.

That is a HUGE barrier.

No one wants to be met at the gate by someone saying “show me your papers.”

Not only that, but the NJ quarantine is technically voluntary.

Florida has moved to Phase 3 of its reopening, no more govt. restrictions on restaurants or parks and fines for not wearing masks are nullified state wide. This might help FL traffic.