Big question is where are the gates coming from?
For now, they will likely be able to have LAWA evict AA from the low 50 gates. With AA's downsizing and freq reductions, this should not be much of an issue. Eventually, they will probably move to the new Midfield terminal. For similar reasons, there will be space there for the next few years.
Seventy flights in five years is pretty measured growth... LAX both starts early and goes late, and it's not like they'll be using widebodies.
Not only that, but realistically, pre-Covid, there were plenty of three to five hour gaps btw flts at gates 55A, 57, 59 & 58. Those were always great shifts to work, but I expect that will no longer be true as the space becomes more full.
5 airlines a few that will look drastically different by the time the Covid situation levels out. AS has been cutting transcons, AA is shrinking at LAX, UA on the verge of a massive downsizing, DL scratching its head on what to do after investing in ventures that have practically gone BK. The timing And situation couldn’t be better For B6 to grab a large amount of gates at LAX. At this point they can basically have the entire MSC terminal. Well done B6..well done!!!!
Overflow can be directed to BUR and ONT.
B6 did do a good job on this, yes. And it also looks like they really did not have a choice. AA are in bad shape and righteously deserve to fail as a business. That will not happen as further bailouts and BK are utilized. But they are
weak now, giving smaller companies like B6 a chance to move on this. Post BK, airlines like AA & UA are in stronger positions as obligations are shed while B6 would have been where they were before had they just stood still.
For that reason, I would expect this is not the only announcement we will see from the likes of B6, NK, & AS over the next few months.
LAX-HPN couldn't come until they get the CS-300 on property. No way an A320 could get off HPN with a full load and make it to LAX without a stop. It'd be an interesting niche flight if they could pull it off though.
They will never take delivery of the CS-300. But they do have A220-300s on order, yes.
As for the rest, I would not be so sure of that. An A321N can very easily handle that, with a load that makes LAX worth doing. Same again for the A320 w/sharklets & ACTs. Re-dispatch is also an option. The days of B6 taking fuel stops on T-cons are largely in the past as those 320s are largely loop-locked to East Coast & Caribbean routings.
With the operational cost of the 321N, it may very well be just this side of economically viable until the A223s come along. If starting that up sooner develops the market for that route, it does not appear there would be any reason to forgo this. It would be a good guess there are a lot of people who would rather not trek all the way down to JFK or EWR, especially if coming in from Northern Suburbs & CT.
BUR most likely gets another boost in flights as well and SNA added once the 220 comes online.
Both BUR & SNA to HPN/SWF/ISP seem like a virtually Ideal use for the 220s, in addition to usual suspect destinations like EWR/JFK...
I think the pandemic has poked a lot of holes in the competition while B6 has been handling it decently. It's the perfect time for them to try this! I think the LA creatives market will gravitate to B6 rather quickly if they can get the pricing & marketing campaign right. Their biggest threat is without a doubt WN; as it was at LGB.
Well said. I would wager there was considerable internal pressure to make these —and likely more coming— moves, given the timing. This is very good to see.
Would love to know their planned frequency LAX-SFO. They'll need one gate at LAX almost solely dedicated to SFO to offer any kind of competition.
If they are not specifically trying to be number one on that, all they need to do is make money on the flights they operate. What the competition's metrics are will not matter to them. With their fleet and crew costs, this does not seem like a particularly daunting task.
I do guess that it will be more than once daily, however. There is more or less constant demand for that route. And as mentioned, there will be space at both ends, given the retrenchment of the incumbent carriers.
Speaking for myself and my wife, a LOT of the appeal is lost. I love flying B6, and I love flying out of LGB, in approximately equal measure. So now the question is: start flying another airline, or suck it up and deal with LAX?
Without a doubt. LGB is better for PAX than LAX in every way it is possible to be so.
The comparisons between JetBlue and VA start and end with the cool brand and Airbus.
Right. But the appeal is still there even if there is indeed a lot more to B6 than there was to VX.
Why keep token flights out of BUR and ONT but not LGB?
Those flights still make money. They —mainly BUR— also help with B6's ability to continue pulling ent contracts away from AA.
Yes, because adding in more flights to places where there are already plenty of entrenched carriers is a winning recipe for success
If those flights profit B6, how do B6 lose money just because competition is there?
And your hard product and soft product are 10x better too.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."