Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
HNLSLCPDX
Topic Author
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:40 pm

JetBlue potential at SFO

Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:22 pm

Was wondering if B6 could fill that niche market that Virgin America offered at SFO and expand there. Adding LAS, SAN, AUS (again), DFW might be a start and could grow their market share.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8310
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:25 pm

Over how many years of its life did Virgin America report a profit? I don't think anybody needs to follow VX's route strategy. Being number five or six in a U.S. domestic market is seldom winning.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:31 pm

Alaska Airlines?
 
as739x
Posts: 5224
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:36 pm

What niche are we looking at? VX is AS and they cover just about every market VX filled. The profitable ones at least. UA is hubbed at SFO, WN has a huge Bay Area presence. Not really sure where B6 would tap thats a so called niche. The Bay Area isn't the LA market so there are not as many markets that can handle 3 carriers. JetBlue also only has 2 gates at SFO, so expansion would be challenging without more gates or moving, which the latter currently would be feasible.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 12:14 am

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Was wondering if B6 could fill that niche market that Virgin America offered at SFO and expand there.


With most of B6 operations in BOS, JFK, LGA, (soon to be) EWR and possibly SFO the overall on-time and operational reliability of a schedule would be comical . You could not pick a worse combination of airports to operate a majority of your flights through and still get most passengers to their destinations on time with any degree of certainty. COVID scheduling at these metro airports won't last forever.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1216
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 12:38 pm

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Was wondering if B6 could fill that niche market that Virgin America offered at SFO and expand there. Adding LAS, SAN, AUS (again), DFW might be a start and could grow their market share.


I agree and believe this is still something B6 wants. AS is a fine airline, but I believe the Bay Area would have a strong affinity with B6 than AS. I’m sure the gate space will be available soon.
 
halrudy
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 6:36 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 1:39 pm

Unless its due to B6's new partnership with AA. Does AA give up flying their metal on JFK-SFO and allow B6 to fly, Aadvantage members would still get their points...
 
HIA350
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:01 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
Alaska Airlines?

Both Alaska and JetBlue are excellent alternatives to the big US three, each offering distinct product differentiators compared to their bigger cousins and even between the two of them. On these longer flights, I prefer JetBlue purely for the seat comfort and free Wi-Fi, though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device. There is no real clear winner between these two airlines, as they each bring different qualities to the table. To each their own.
I prefer and only fly jetblue, and thanks god they gonna fly to the west coast from EWR so i don't have to drive to JFK when traveling for work, and 2 times to DR every year
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:33 pm

HIA350 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Alaska Airlines?

though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device.


How is this the case when jetBlue has large screens at eye level you don't have to hold with dozens of movies (new releases and old favorites) and live TV?

By catering do you mean perishable food for sale in coach? Otherwise I would think jetBlue wins here too since they have self serve snack bars on the long flights in addition to drink/snack service two or three times on the transcon.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 907
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:32 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
How is this the case when jetBlue has large screens at eye level you don't have to hold with dozens of movies (new releases and old favorites) and live TV?

Personal preference. I'm 6'10" tall. When I sit in a coach seat I can see three rows of seat-back screens. It's a visually very chaotic and stressful situation for me, and I actively avoid JetBlue because of it.

I'm not normal, and no airline should design IFE around me, but in matters of personal preference, personal preference is the answer whenever the question is "how is that the case?"
 
MKIAZ
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 5:24 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:38 pm

Intra-west coast flying is a shit show. It's a huge slug-fest between WN/AS/UA and to a lesser extent DL/AA.

Jetblue is doing really well on premium transcon flying. Their only reason for adding some west coast flights would be to make their network more attractive for business contracts.
 
Chasensfo
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:07 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:40 pm

If jetBlue wants to compete on SFO-LAX, they'll have to have more than the 2 frequencies they were down to on SFO-LGB pre-pandemic. IIRC, jetBlue had 5x LGB at it's peak with E190s, and 4x with A320s or something close to that. In the next 5 years, I could see a return of SFO-LAS, as the previous flights routed LGB-SFO-LAS-SFO-LGB same crew. But other than that, I wouldn't expect much in the way of new cities from SFO, just maybe more frequencies and connections onto AA who now uses the same terminal as them at SFO.

MIflyer12 wrote:
Over how many years of its life did Virgin America report a profit? I don't think anybody needs to follow VX's route strategy. Being number five or six in a U.S. domestic market is seldom winning.

How many years was VX constantly expanding, adding planes, cities, and flights? IIRC, when they were rather stagnant near the last few years, they posted profits.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 4:33 pm

JetBlue needs about 4 gates at SFO. It has 2 gates + another 1 shared with WN. Given that they just moved to their new location, I'm not sure how hard would it be to get that additional gate at this point. 4 gates would give them enough space to do transcon to JFK/EWR/BOS/FLL/MCO + 6-8 flights to LAX and 2 flights to LAS. Maybe they can add another transcon destination, but can't see more than that. They have identified LAX as their primary west coast station. They don't have resources to also build up SFO.
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 4:52 pm

Not sure why this keeps getting pushed. Sure, could see some more transcons where B6 is strong and offers an advantage. But setting up a focus city or something won’t happen. UA is huge, WN gobbles up intra-California at other airports, and AS takes the rest of CA and West Coast at both SFO and SJC. The latter two stage lengths don’t need IFE.

The VX customer base seems overstated on here and their rather lackluster growth and financial returns seems to go with that theory. I didn’t know anyone that flew them regularly in LA. Sure, anecdotal.
 
bluecrew
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 5:09 pm

It does not matter.

Years ago Barger made it quite clear that "we are a New York airline. We fly New Yorkers to places they want to go," and thus the point-to-point strategy and the west coast competition was essentially doomed. Once LAX opened and the 190's left LGB the writing was on the wall. LGB will be closed as soon as possible, SFO will continue to get service with the Mint product, but B6 will never compete in that market.

The west strategy was entirely a Neeleman thing. I suspect he wanted to replicate the success of Morris Air, and try to beef up a SoCal presence where he saw no LCC presence. Nobody would ever do that today... Spirit/Frontier serve all the markets, SWA has a stranglehold on SNA, a significant presence at LAX, growing routes out of LGB, and is easily the biggest operation at SAN and ONT.

NorCal looks pretty similar today. SWA dominates Oakland... 3/4 of the gates have a SWA plane at them at any given time. Their only competition is... a handful of DL and AA flights from hubs in the west? And don't underestimate the brand loyalty there: they've spent a pretty penny convincing anyone in the East Bay, which is a lot of people, that SWA is just the only option. SJC is a lock for SWA, SFO more and more flights each year. JBU has nowhere to compete, and with their (and SWA's) costs right up there with United/Delta/American, they would spend, easily, millions just trying to develop a market that would never be viable.

Just not gonna happen. JBU will retain their corner in BOS/JFK, try to continue to compete in FLL, close LGB and abandon the West Coast, and hope Mint wins business away from AA/DL in the transcon market. And they'll also waste a few million chasing the London market (lol)
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2077
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 5:10 pm

Very unlikely B6 would build out a significant presence at SFO beyond what it has. AS may prune the network from SFO here and there but it is not going downsize its footprint at SFO substantially and then there is UA, which even with massive COVID19 induced cuts to the network (and staffing) will remain SFO's largest tenant and offer a still relevant network from the airport. I can see B6 and AA potentially co-locate, but both airlines are really P2P not connection based networks on their own respective routes at SFO (meaning little interline opportunity). AA has that or will have that with AS. I also doubt AA will cede JFK-SFO to B6 entirely. While MINT is a very competitive product, AA carries a lot of business traffic on its 4-5 daily flights with 100 seat configured A321Ts that have a traditional, but compelling product. If anything, I see AA adding another frequency if AS pulls out of SFO-JFK. B6 has long wanted to be more relevant on the West Coast, but it really isn't, when it comes to intra-West Coast flying, The market belongs to (in no particular order), WN, AS, UA primarily. B6 is very much an East Coast airline just as AS is a West Coast one. Down the road, a combination of the two, potentially with AA, seems increasingly likely.
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 6:48 pm

HIA350 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Alaska Airlines?

though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device. There is no real clear winner between these two airlines


JetBlue has free WiFi, lay flat seats, unlimited snacks and drinks in Core and award winning food in Mint, free directTV, plus the significant content on the FlyFi hub. Not sure AS compares to that...
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 6:51 pm

bluecrew wrote:
It does not matter.

Years ago Barger made it quite clear that "we are a New York airline. We fly New Yorkers to places they want to go," and thus the point-to-point strategy and the west coast competition was essentially doomed. Once LAX opened and the 190's left LGB the writing was on the wall. LGB will be closed as soon as possible, SFO will continue to get service with the Mint product, but B6 will never compete in that market.
Just not gonna happen. JBU will retain their corner in BOS/JFK, try to continue to compete in FLL, close LGB and abandon the West Coast, and hope Mint wins business away from AA/DL in the transcon market. And they'll also waste a few million chasing the London market (lol)


Dave Barger is long gone and the strategy has changed. B6 has laid out a massive expansion in LAX with the gates from LAWA to support it including alluding overtly to specific new routes and cities internally, plus the Northeast expansion, plus more you don’t even know about.
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 7:13 pm

catiii wrote:
HIA350 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Alaska Airlines?

though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device. There is no real clear winner between these two airlines


JetBlue has free WiFi, lay flat seats, unlimited snacks and drinks in Core and award winning food in Mint, free directTV, plus the significant content on the FlyFi hub. Not sure AS compares to that...


A lot of people are being gracious to both AS and B6 and you show up and just bash AS. Frankly, your posts are bizarrely offensive. Did AS fire you or something?

And stop talking about all the things “we don’t know”. No one knows anything right now. You go on about Alaska’s “weak” response yet there are no firm details except moving from one airport to another and hopes to further expand. Give it a rest.
 
ucdtim17
Posts: 621
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 6:38 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 7:43 pm

How many unrefurbished A320s does B6 still have flying? Those certainly don't have an entertainment advantage over AS planes.
 
Ziyulu
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:35 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 8:08 pm

B6 is a better airline than AS. You get a lot more snacks.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 8:20 pm

ucdtim17 wrote:
How many unrefurbished A320s does B6 still have flying? Those certainly don't have an entertainment advantage over AS planes.


Most of them. But even those have TVs and wifi. At only 150 seats the cabin feels more spacious and the bathrooms are NOT IN THE GALLEYS like in the abomination configuration on the referbs.

You'd be more comfortable on a old 320 with 150 seats than a Alaska 737 in coach.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 8:28 pm

bluecrew wrote:
It does not matter.

Years ago Barger made it quite clear that "we are a New York airline. We fly New Yorkers to places they want to go," and thus the point-to-point strategy and the west coast competition was essentially doomed. Once LAX opened and the 190's left LGB the writing was on the wall. LGB will be closed as soon as possible, SFO will continue to get service with the Mint product, but B6 will never compete in that market.

The west strategy was entirely a Neeleman thing. I suspect he wanted to replicate the success of Morris Air, and try to beef up a SoCal presence where he saw no LCC presence. Nobody would ever do that today... Spirit/Frontier serve all the markets, SWA has a stranglehold on SNA, a significant presence at LAX, growing routes out of LGB, and is easily the biggest operation at SAN and ONT.

NorCal looks pretty similar today. SWA dominates Oakland... 3/4 of the gates have a SWA plane at them at any given time. Their only competition is... a handful of DL and AA flights from hubs in the west? And don't underestimate the brand loyalty there: they've spent a pretty penny convincing anyone in the East Bay, which is a lot of people, that SWA is just the only option. SJC is a lock for SWA, SFO more and more flights each year. JBU has nowhere to compete, and with their (and SWA's) costs right up there with United/Delta/American, they would spend, easily, millions just trying to develop a market that would never be viable.

Just not gonna happen. JBU will retain their corner in BOS/JFK, try to continue to compete in FLL, close LGB and abandon the West Coast, and hope Mint wins business away from AA/DL in the transcon market. And they'll also waste a few million chasing the London market (lol)


This does not seem to reflect reality based on what has happened the past few weeks. It seems like JetBlue does actually want a west coast presence based on their recent moves. If anything, JetBlue is always looking for more gates at LAX/SFO. And they can finally get them.
 
Bradin
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:12 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:42 pm

I think VX would have done a lot better if their hub was not at SFO. B6 would be wise to learn from the mistakes of VX.
 
HNLSLCPDX
Topic Author
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:40 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:52 pm

Bradin wrote:
I think VX would have done a lot better if their hub was not at SFO. B6 would be wise to learn from the mistakes of VX.


IIRC, when VX was starting up, on social media and their website they did a poll of where the man in hub should be. I believe the choices were Washington DC, New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. SFO got the most votes and I think that’s one of the reasons it became the main hub.
 
2eng2efficient
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2020 5:30 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:10 pm

Ziyulu wrote:
B6 is a better airline than AS. You get a lot more snacks.


Honestly, I have nothing against either airline, and have genuinely enjoyed my interactions with frontline employees at AS. That being said, as a consumer, if I have a choice, and *especially* if I’m traveling with my family, I’m going to pick the product with PTVs and superior snacks, every time.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1729
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:18 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
catiii wrote:
HIA350 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Alaska Airlines?

though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device. There is no real clear winner between these two airlines


JetBlue has free WiFi, lay flat seats, unlimited snacks and drinks in Core and award winning food in Mint, free directTV, plus the significant content on the FlyFi hub. Not sure AS compares to that...


JetBlue has lie flat seats on a handful of routes and no first class at all on most. Alaska has first class on all jet flights and a premium section in economy that includes free alcohol and greater leg room. Paid first class includes Alaska Lounge access at hub airports. Alaska offers free soft drinks in all cabins, free beverage snack and wide selection of snacks and light meals to purchase in coach and complimentary snacks and meals in first class on most flights. All jet flights have over 700 free movies and free texting and messaging. Wi-Fi is for purchase. JetBlue is nice but I think Alaska easily and favorably compares.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1729
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:22 pm

tphuang wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
It does not matter.

Years ago Barger made it quite clear that "we are a New York airline. We fly New Yorkers to places they want to go," and thus the point-to-point strategy and the west coast competition was essentially doomed. Once LAX opened and the 190's left LGB the writing was on the wall. LGB will be closed as soon as possible, SFO will continue to get service with the Mint product, but B6 will never compete in that market.

The west strategy was entirely a Neeleman thing. I suspect he wanted to replicate the success of Morris Air, and try to beef up a SoCal presence where he saw no LCC presence. Nobody would ever do that today... Spirit/Frontier serve all the markets, SWA has a stranglehold on SNA, a significant presence at LAX, growing routes out of LGB, and is easily the biggest operation at SAN and ONT.

NorCal looks pretty similar today. SWA dominates Oakland... 3/4 of the gates have a SWA plane at them at any given time. Their only competition is... a handful of DL and AA flights from hubs in the west? And don't underestimate the brand loyalty there: they've spent a pretty penny convincing anyone in the East Bay, which is a lot of people, that SWA is just the only option. SJC is a lock for SWA, SFO more and more flights each year. JBU has nowhere to compete, and with their (and SWA's) costs right up there with United/Delta/American, they would spend, easily, millions just trying to develop a market that would never be viable.

Just not gonna happen. JBU will retain their corner in BOS/JFK, try to continue to compete in FLL, close LGB and abandon the West Coast, and hope Mint wins business away from AA/DL in the transcon market. And they'll also waste a few million chasing the London market (lol)


This does not seem to reflect reality based on what has happened the past few weeks. It seems like JetBlue does actually want a west coast presence based on their recent moves. If anything, JetBlue is always looking for more gates at LAX/SFO. And they can finally get them.


They literally closed one airport and moved those flights to a nearby airport. No net gain. Their plan to be up to 70+ flights is a plan, but just that at this point. First they have to get out of this Covid mess alive like the rest of the airlines. Let’s see where all airlines are at by next summer. It seems like there’s so much more yet to come.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1729
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:25 pm

Ziyulu wrote:
B6 is a better airline than AS. You get a lot more snacks.


:roll: more snacks seals the deal
 
Bradin
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:12 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:36 pm

HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Bradin wrote:
I think VX would have done a lot better if their hub was not at SFO. B6 would be wise to learn from the mistakes of VX.


IIRC, when VX was starting up, on social media and their website they did a poll of where the man in hub should be. I believe the choices were Washington DC, New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. SFO got the most votes and I think that’s one of the reasons it became the main hub.


Social media has its whims, but putting that aside - from a pure business perspective, i think LAX would have been a must stronger strategic move.
 
bfitzflyer
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:38 pm

AS has drawn down SFO a lot since virgin acquisition. Now throw in COVID, JetBlue has been opportunistic thus far, but honestly probably enough on their plate right now, Even though clearly a better product than AS.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 1:12 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Was wondering if B6 could fill that niche market that Virgin America offered at SFO and expand there. Adding LAS, SAN, AUS (again), DFW might be a start and could grow their market share.


I agree and believe this is still something B6 wants. AS is a fine airline, but I believe the Bay Area would have a strong affinity with B6 than AS. I’m sure the gate space will be available soon.

So? Being Bay area centric with a strong knowledge of SFO in particular. What exactly is Jet Blue going to do to cut into AS or UA's hustle at SFO? What I see? B6 will need to source parts from Both UA and AS at SFO, If they need a hangar? then they'll be coming to UA or American for use of theirs. They offer no beyond connections,
There are 5 major airports in the southland and 4 up north of which AS and UA fly to damn near all of them, Not to even mention WN. . B6 is a pea in a Very full Pod in the California market. And we're not even mentioning American or Delta. You act as if they're going to make a "Splash in the Pool"! It won't even be a ripple in the water.
They won't be the lead horse coming out of the Far Turn. But? they'll be an "Also Ran" in the Race. All the other carriers? Are also going on to HNL or the Far East. B6 is going Where? and When? So? They're not the next Big Deal.. They're just Next TO the party.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1216
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 6:21 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
HNLSLCPDX wrote:
Was wondering if B6 could fill that niche market that Virgin America offered at SFO and expand there. Adding LAS, SAN, AUS (again), DFW might be a start and could grow their market share.


I agree and believe this is still something B6 wants. AS is a fine airline, but I believe the Bay Area would have a strong affinity with B6 than AS. I’m sure the gate space will be available soon.

So? Being Bay area centric with a strong knowledge of SFO in particular. What exactly is Jet Blue going to do to cut into AS or UA's hustle at SFO? What I see? B6 will need to source parts from Both UA and AS at SFO, If they need a hangar? then they'll be coming to UA or American for use of theirs. They offer no beyond connections,
There are 5 major airports in the southland and 4 up north of which AS and UA fly to damn near all of them, Not to even mention WN. . B6 is a pea in a Very full Pod in the California market. And we're not even mentioning American or Delta. You act as if they're going to make a "Splash in the Pool"! It won't even be a ripple in the water.
They won't be the lead horse coming out of the Far Turn. But? they'll be an "Also Ran" in the Race. All the other carriers? Are also going on to HNL or the Far East. B6 is going Where? and When? So? They're not the next Big Deal.. They're just Next TO the party.


Much better transcon product than anyone else and a great economy product for shorter flights. They have a solid brand as a customer friendly airline. It’s a great combination of attributes to battle UA and AS. I don’t think they’d struggle to get the gates and they’re not going to have the kinds of startup cost issues that VX had.
 
bfitzflyer
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 6:53 pm

Thinking out loud, would have been better off making SFO the focus city. LAX everyone has a hub. At SFO only United and more money in the bay area
 
User avatar
Boeing757100
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 10:09 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 7:18 pm

They literally started almost ten new destinations out of LAX, so I don't think so.
The 757-MAX is happening tomorrow.
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:04 pm

Semi related to SFO, interesting that the exec AS hired to be their boots on the ground executive presence as VP-Bay Area is departing the airline with no backfill.
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:06 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
catiii wrote:
HIA350 wrote:
though Alaska clearly has the edge in onboard catering and entertainment, so long as you bring your own device. There is no real clear winner between these two airlines


JetBlue has free WiFi, lay flat seats, unlimited snacks and drinks in Core and award winning food in Mint, free directTV, plus the significant content on the FlyFi hub. Not sure AS compares to that...


A lot of people are being gracious to both AS and B6 and you show up and just bash AS. Frankly, your posts are bizarrely offensive. Did AS fire you or something?



And stop talking about all the things “we don’t know”. No one knows anything right now. You go on about Alaska’s “weak” response yet there are no firm details except moving from one airport to another and hopes to further expand. Give it a rest.


I’m just pointing out facts. No one can objectively state the AS onboard product edges out B6. Sorry if that hurts your butt.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:07 pm

catiii wrote:
Semi related to SFO, interesting that the exec AS hired to be their boots on the ground executive presence as VP-Bay Area is departing the airline with no backfill.


It isn't that odd - a lot of Director/MD/VP level positions that were over specific areas/cities aren't being backfilled - instead some of their counterparts are just taking on additional cities.

More on-topic - what does B6 gain out of adding more Bay Area flights (whether that be SFO or SJC)? They don't need to be everywhere for everyone - particularly with only a finite number of resources.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:16 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
ucdtim17 wrote:
How many unrefurbished A320s does B6 still have flying? Those certainly don't have an entertainment advantage over AS planes.


Most of them. But even those have TVs and wifi. At only 150 seats the cabin feels more spacious and the bathrooms are NOT IN THE GALLEYS like in the abomination configuration on the referbs.

You'd be more comfortable on a old 320 with 150 seats than a Alaska 737 in coach.


I think the last count was 69 of 149. Plus all the 321s have the restyled product. So roughly half the overall fleet (including the Embraers) are restyled.
 
catiii
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:19 pm

alasizon wrote:
catiii wrote:
Semi related to SFO, interesting that the exec AS hired to be their boots on the ground executive presence as VP-Bay Area is departing the airline with no backfill.


It isn't that odd - a lot of Director/MD/VP level positions that were over specific areas/cities aren't being backfilled - instead some of their counterparts are just taking on additional cities.

More on-topic - what does B6 gain out of adding more Bay Area flights (whether that be SFO or SJC)? They don't need to be everywhere for everyone - particularly with only a finite number of resources.


I didn’t say it was “odd.” Pointing out that the exec solely dedicated to the Bay Area is leaving.

Why is everyone so sensitive about AS and SFO?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20346
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:56 pm

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
A.net is obsessed with mergers. In no way would a merger be possible or even make sense right now. The airlines can't handle that right now , its survival and trying to see when travel will be back and what it will look like. Fall bookings look terrible.

I 100% agree if anything we see more more codes shares or partnering.

I agree, no mergers. Too costly. The game will be to slowly (as in years) take enough revenue.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4301
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 12:39 am

Please try to avoid personal conflicts and just discuss the topic.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
bfitzflyer
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 12:51 am

catiii wrote:
alasizon wrote:
catiii wrote:
Semi related to SFO, interesting that the exec AS hired to be their boots on the ground executive presence as VP-Bay Area is departing the airline with no backfill.


It isn't that odd - a lot of Director/MD/VP level positions that were over specific areas/cities aren't being backfilled - instead some of their counterparts are just taking on additional cities.

More on-topic - what does B6 gain out of adding more Bay Area flights (whether that be SFO or SJC)? They don't need to be everywhere for everyone - particularly with only a finite number of resources.


I didn’t say it was “odd.” Pointing out that the exec solely dedicated to the Bay Area is leaving.

Why is everyone so sensitive about AS and SFO?


AS came in took over a Bay Area Airline and has done nothing for SFO since and replaced what was a far superior product with blah. I think that about sums it up.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2077
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 12:50 pm

ASFlyer wrote:
tphuang wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
It does not matter.

Years ago Barger made it quite clear that "we are a New York airline. We fly New Yorkers to places they want to go," and thus the point-to-point strategy and the west coast competition was essentially doomed. Once LAX opened and the 190's left LGB the writing was on the wall. LGB will be closed as soon as possible, SFO will continue to get service with the Mint product, but B6 will never compete in that market.

The west strategy was entirely a Neeleman thing. I suspect he wanted to replicate the success of Morris Air, and try to beef up a SoCal presence where he saw no LCC presence. Nobody would ever do that today... Spirit/Frontier serve all the markets, SWA has a stranglehold on SNA, a significant presence at LAX, growing routes out of LGB, and is easily the biggest operation at SAN and ONT.

NorCal looks pretty similar today. SWA dominates Oakland... 3/4 of the gates have a SWA plane at them at any given time. Their only competition is... a handful of DL and AA flights from hubs in the west? And don't underestimate the brand loyalty there: they've spent a pretty penny convincing anyone in the East Bay, which is a lot of people, that SWA is just the only option. SJC is a lock for SWA, SFO more and more flights each year. JBU has nowhere to compete, and with their (and SWA's) costs right up there with United/Delta/American, they would spend, easily, millions just trying to develop a market that would never be viable.

Just not gonna happen. JBU will retain their corner in BOS/JFK, try to continue to compete in FLL, close LGB and abandon the West Coast, and hope Mint wins business away from AA/DL in the transcon market. And they'll also waste a few million chasing the London market (lol)


This does not seem to reflect reality based on what has happened the past few weeks. It seems like JetBlue does actually want a west coast presence based on their recent moves. If anything, JetBlue is always looking for more gates at LAX/SFO. And they can finally get them.


They literally closed one airport and moved those flights to a nearby airport. No net gain. Their plan to be up to 70+ flights is a plan, but just that at this point. First they have to get out of this Covid mess alive like the rest of the airlines. Let’s see where all airlines are at by next summer. It seems like there’s so much more yet to come.


Spot on. B6 is certainly being enterprising and looking for (and finding) opportunities to grow amid an unprecedented crisis and the worst that global aviation has seen since 9/11. As some carriers retrench in key markets, B6 sees opportunity to build up assets and routes, and that's smart. The problem though is if there is little to no demand, this build up can sustain losses for only so long. B6 has a compelling product, specifically the transcontinental premium cabin known as Mint and several other service innovations that keep up the appearance of a customer-focused and customer-friendly operation, though at its core, it is an airline like all others. The moves at EWR make some sense, as UA has retreated a bit. The jockeying with AA at JFK and LGA benefits them mutually and is a cheap way for AA to become more relevant in the overall NY market, but B6 at SFO, I don't know. The LAX news a few weeks ago wasn't at all surprising, and it really is just one airport in Southern California growing for B6 at the expense of almost all the others. LAX is a five way race and while a rich and big market, has thin margins. It's one of those markets you have to be in with scale to be relevant, but it is a lousy place to hub and an expensive one too. As for B6 at SFO, I just don't see much expansion opportunity there. AS might not have had much interest in preserving VX's legacy as a customer friendly, corporate friendly carrier (but remember, VX was marginally profitable at best and more often than not, losing money). AS still has a significant footprint at SFO and UA at SFO is a powerhouse and will likely not downsize to such a scale at SFO that it becomes irrelevant. That is just not in the cards. UA will close LAX, IAD, and downsize DEN before it gives up on SFO. B6 is an East Coast airline and a niche carrier. It will not have the corporate contracts originating in the Bay Area to be relevant enough and there is no advantage to build connectivity at SFO on its own. FLL and MCO are leisure and convention driven markets, and in the COVID19 world, traffic won't return to meaningful levels to make these routes much of a profit for some time. I can see B6 add some frequency to JFK and BOS (plus EWR) but that's about it. Why B6 would enter SFO-LAS is beyond comprehension. Again, a leisure and convention market first and foremost, battered by COVID19 and full of competition and scale. There seems to be a wild fantasy on this forum that B6 is destined to become a global carrier. That will only happen if and when it is absorbed into a much bigger airline. Mergers are likely off the table for now, given the cash crunch the industry faces, but down the road, the industry will consolidate further. There is way too much capacity chasing too few seats in the upside down world we're in now. B6, AS, WN, Spirit, and Frontier are likely to be consumed into the US3 eventually and the entire industry in the US, with generous bankruptcy laws, will be allowed to file again if needed, restructure, destroy their employee goodwill. The cycle has played itself out for decades.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 2:49 pm

Let me help people here since it seems to be unclear how much JetBlue already flies out of SFO pre-COVID
BOS - 7x daily
JFK - 7x daily
EWR - 2x daily (newly added)
FLL - 3x daily
MCO - 1x daily (newly added)
LAX/LGB - 2x daily

And they ran LAS at 2x daily all the way up to start of 2018. Pulled it when AS/VX quit on JFK-FLL. Their performance was not bad, but it was originally added as retaliation against VX for adding JFK-FLL.

So given what we've known already Partnership with AA at NYC/BOS + LAX expansion. Even a conservative case would mean they need to run at least the following by 2024 to 2025
BOS - 8x
JFK - 7x
EWR - 4x
FLL - 3x
MCO - 1x
LAX - 6x
That's 29 flights. Again AA ff flying on BOS/EWR-SFO would be more likely to pick AA codeshare on a Jetblue rather than a connection. They would need at least 3 and half gate for this type of schedule.

Now, let's go for a less conservative schedule accounting for transcon strength and AA partnership + desire to add a couple of leisure flights for bay area ff.
BOS - 9x
JFK - 8x
EWR - 5x
FLL - 4x
MCO - 1x
BDL - 1x
LAX - 8x
LAS - 2x
PSP - 2x
That's 40 flights. They would need 5 gates for this type of schedule.

Again, it's all dependent on how many gates they can get. Opportunities like this where everyone is smaller and airport is expanding don't come around everyday. There is minimal ULCC presence at SFO and WN is not looking to expand here. So they have less competition here than at LAX for additional gate space. Also, UA and AS are unlikely to return to pre-COVID size anytime soon. So, I think SFO will not be gate constrained for a while. Gives JetBlue time to figure out and negotiate with SFO on how many gates they will access.

They have an opportunity here to get as many gates at SFO/LAX as they would've gotten if they had merged with VX.
 
User avatar
sjones1975
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:23 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:02 pm

strfyr51 wrote:

B6 is a pea in a Very full Pod in the California market. And we're not even mentioning American or Delta. You act as if they're going to make a "Splash in the Pool"! It won't even be a ripple in the water. They won't be the lead horse coming out of the Far Turn. But? they'll be an "Also Ran" in the Race. All the other carriers? Are also going on to HNL or the Far East. B6 is going Where? and When? So? They're not the next Big Deal.. They're just Next TO the party.


Never seen so many metaphors packed into a single paragraph!
my longest flight in a 757: FRU-ADA-SNN-BWI
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 907
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:21 pm

catiii wrote:
I’m just pointing out facts. No one can objectively state the AS onboard product edges out B6.

This is a jewel of a statement right here. It's true on a technicality

No one can objectively state that a subjective comparison is true. That goes both ways, and that is what makes excellent customer service such a magical and moving target.

JetBlue is a great airline. I wish them well. I also avoid flying them because all the seat-back video screens create an overly stressful and chaotic environment for me. Their product is significantly worse, for me. That's not a statement that can be objectively made overall.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:47 pm

bfitzflyer wrote:
Thinking out loud, would have been better off making SFO the focus city. LAX everyone has a hub. At SFO only United and more money in the bay area


Could you even get the gates at SFO to make something material work?

Part of the reason B6 moved to LAX was to take advantage of the pull back by a lot of carriers at LAX right now. The margins for most airlines there were probably average at best, and negative for some. Therefore, the decision to pull back LAX for carriers was a clear decision.

Given what SFO means to UA, probably a much more difficult battle to win.
 
UALifer
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:35 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:52 pm

tphuang wrote:
Again, it's all dependent on how many gates they can get. Opportunities like this where everyone is smaller and airport is expanding don't come around everyday. There is minimal ULCC presence at SFO and WN is not looking to expand here. So they have less competition here than at LAX for additional gate space. Also, UA and AS are unlikely to return to pre-COVID size anytime soon. So, I think SFO will not be gate constrained for a while. Gives JetBlue time to figure out and negotiate with SFO on how many gates they will access.

They have an opportunity here to get as many gates at SFO/LAX as they would've gotten if they had merged with VX.


SFO has already frozen its gate allocation to airlines for the next year, and they’re currently negotiating another 2 year freeze on the gate allocation due to COVID.

The only thing currently allowing B6 to expand is that virtually all the CUTE gates are in the new Terminal 1, preventing access for Alaska and United, which are not connected airside to those gates. Once the T2-T3 airside connector is complete next year, expect the airport to move some of the CUTE gates to T2 to appease United, who hasn’t had access to common use gates for years since T3 is all preferential.

3 years from now, when the freeze on the current allocation is lifted, I’d expect to be much closer to pre-COVID levels of traffic, and both Alaska and United will be looking for additional gate access again.
 
bfitzflyer
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:56 pm

MrPeanut wrote:
bfitzflyer wrote:
Thinking out loud, would have been better off making SFO the focus city. LAX everyone has a hub. At SFO only United and more money in the bay area


Could you even get the gates at SFO to make something material work?

Part of the reason B6 moved to LAX was to take advantage of the pull back by a lot of carriers at LAX right now. The margins for most airlines there were probably average at best, and negative for some. Therefore, the decision to pull back LAX for carriers was a clear decision.

Given what SFO means to UA, probably a much more difficult battle to win.


There is slack at all airports right now. Do you want to take on UA and a retrenching AS at SFO or everyone who has a hub at LAX. I would opt for SFO in this scenario.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos