Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:42 pm

NameOmitted wrote:
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.


This person is just beating a dead horse. They’re frequently using mint as JetBlue’s silver bullet when they actually don’t compete on much except some transcon. Mint is better than AS First. Duh. JetBlue doesn’t even have mint on all routes, even some transcon. A lot of the transcon and Hawaii routes Alaska has added are competing against US3 First where Alaska offers a competitive and perhaps better product in First and Coach.

This person can state their “facts”. But the. actual fact is both Alaska and JetBlue are top notch airlines.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:46 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
NameOmitted wrote:
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.


This person is just beating a dead horse. They’re frequently using mint as JetBlue’s silver bullet when they actually don’t compete on much except some transcon. Mint is better than AS First. Duh. JetBlue doesn’t even have mint on all routes, even some transcon. A lot of the transcon and Hawaii routes Alaska has added are competing against US3 First where Alaska offers a competitive and perhaps better product in First and Coach.

This person can state their “facts”. But the. actual fact is both Alaska and JetBlue are top notch airlines.


You can be sure that as time goes on , all transcons will have MINT, and all the flights to Hawaii and Europe will too. Less than trancon, who cares. No one is paying Alaska (or anyone else) for those seats upfront on 1 2 or 3 hour hops, they are all non revs or free upgrades. The short hops make their money in coach and MOST prefer PTV and free Wifi to whatever Alaska is doing in coach.

SFO is a very worthy airport for jetBlue to focus on. All those hipsters will gravitate to jetBlue because thats what hipsters do.

MrPeanut wrote:
bfitzflyer wrote:
Given what SFO means to UA, probably a much more difficult battle to win.


If B6 is not afraid of UA at EWR, they won't be at SFO. I've been in the back of many a UA 737. Awful experience. No thank you.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2629
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:59 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
No one is paying Alaska (or anyone else) for those seats upfront on 1 2 or 3 hour hops, they are all non revs or free upgrades. The short hops make their money in coach and MOST prefer PTV and free Wifi to whatever Alaska is doing in coach.

Not speaking to AS specifically but there are plenty of 1-3 hour routes that have purchased J on a regular basis. Sure there may be 1-2 upgrades processed but there are plenty of routes that see full or almost full purchased J.

bfitzflyer wrote:
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.


The LAX move right now is simply them moving the operation from LGB - they were already taking on the LAX hubs from an inferior airport; now they have better leveled the playing field and better satisfied their corporate clientele.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:01 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
LAXBUR wrote:
NameOmitted wrote:
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.


This person is just beating a dead horse. They’re frequently using mint as JetBlue’s silver bullet when they actually don’t compete on much except some transcon. Mint is better than AS First. Duh. JetBlue doesn’t even have mint on all routes, even some transcon. A lot of the transcon and Hawaii routes Alaska has added are competing against US3 First where Alaska offers a competitive and perhaps better product in First and Coach.

This person can state their “facts”. But the. actual fact is both Alaska and JetBlue are top notch airlines.


You can be sure that as time goes on , all transcons will have MINT, and all the flights to Hawaii and Europe will too. Less than trancon, who cares. No one is paying Alaska (or anyone else) for those seats upfront on 1 2 or 3 hour hops, they are all non revs or free upgrades. The short hops make their money in coach and MOST prefer PTV and free Wifi to whatever Alaska is doing in coach.

SFO is a very worthy airport for jetBlue to focus on. All those hipsters will gravitate to jetBlue because thats what hipsters do.

MrPeanut wrote:
bfitzflyer wrote:
Given what SFO means to UA, probably a much more difficult battle to win.


If B6 is not afraid of UA at EWR, they won't be at SFO. I've been in the back of many a UA 737. Awful experience. No thank you.


You actually think airlines have kept First to fill non-rev seats? This is one of the most laughable things I’ve seen on here. All credibility lost. And duh Alaska uses First as an upgrade experience for their frequent flyers. They smartly decided to stay out of the premium business class business. Glad you aren’t running an airline.

Also, I don’t think you know any “hipsters”. You think 20-somethings - especially now - have money to pay for a premium transcon experience? And the handful of “rich” hipsters in the Bay Area? They’re leaving and even if they all stay an airline can’t count on them. How many times do people have to be reminded of VX?
 
tphuang
Posts: 5463
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:42 pm

LAXBUR wrote:

You actually think airlines have kept First to fill non-rev seats? This is one of the most laughable things I’ve seen on here. All credibility lost. And duh Alaska uses First as an upgrade experience for their frequent flyers. They smartly decided to stay out of the premium business class business. Glad you aren’t running an airline.

Also, I don’t think you know any “hipsters”. You think 20-somethings - especially now - have money to pay for a premium transcon experience? And the handful of “rich” hipsters in the Bay Area? They’re leaving and even if they all stay an airline can’t count on them. How many times do people have to be reminded of VX?


What you are saying is that AS provides better experience and value to its ff. Which I would not disagree with. There is a lot JetBlue could do to improve their product for their elite status members. I hope they take this next couple of years to figure that out while corporate travel is slowly coming back.

However, there is a difference in product for non-status members. On JetBlue, you are guaranteed to have at least 32 inch pitch and 18.25 inch width seat. On AS, you are simply not getting that on a 737. And if you look at the IFE on A320 phase 2 reconfig (which is also on A220 and A321NEO) https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-r ... a320-tour/, it's as good as any one else's product out there. And they also have among the fastest wifi out there https://thepointsguy.com/news/who-has-t ... -airlines/ and offer it for free https://www.highspeedinternet.com/resou ... light-wifi.

None of this is a shot against AS. JetBlue has the best short haul economy product in the world. They offer the most real estate in Y. They currently offer the best value proposition in terms of wifi. Their new IFE has fixed up one of the biggest complaint people had, which is lack of on demand movie selection. The biggest remaining complaint is the worn out seats on A320/E90 and the old IFE. That is going away now that E90 is getting replaced by A220s and A320 refurbishment.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2147
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:23 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXBUR wrote:

You actually think airlines have kept First to fill non-rev seats? This is one of the most laughable things I’ve seen on here. All credibility lost. And duh Alaska uses First as an upgrade experience for their frequent flyers. They smartly decided to stay out of the premium business class business. Glad you aren’t running an airline.

Also, I don’t think you know any “hipsters”. You think 20-somethings - especially now - have money to pay for a premium transcon experience? And the handful of “rich” hipsters in the Bay Area? They’re leaving and even if they all stay an airline can’t count on them. How many times do people have to be reminded of VX?


What you are saying is that AS provides better experience and value to its ff. Which I would not disagree with. There is a lot JetBlue could do to improve their product for their elite status members. I hope they take this next couple of years to figure that out while corporate travel is slowly coming back.

However, there is a difference in product for non-status members. On JetBlue, you are guaranteed to have at least 32 inch pitch and 18.25 inch width seat. On AS, you are simply not getting that on a 737. And if you look at the IFE on A320 phase 2 reconfig (which is also on A220 and A321NEO) https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-r ... a320-tour/, it's as good as any one else's product out there. And they also have among the fastest wifi out there https://thepointsguy.com/news/who-has-t ... -airlines/ and offer it for free https://www.highspeedinternet.com/resou ... light-wifi.

None of this is a shot against AS. JetBlue has the best short haul economy product in the world. They offer the most real estate in Y. They currently offer the best value proposition in terms of wifi. Their new IFE has fixed up one of the biggest complaint people had, which is lack of on demand movie selection. The biggest remaining complaint is the worn out seats on A320/E90 and the old IFE. That is going away now that E90 is getting replaced by A220s and A320 refurbishment.


Best short haul economy product in the world? I don't think so. In the US, maybe. Even probably. Globally, absolutely not. Such accolades belong to a number of Asia based airlines and some European ones as well.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5090
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:41 pm

Boeing757100 wrote:
They literally started almost ten new destinations out of LAX, so I don't think so.

the started a TON of new destinations? With How many flights a day? ONE? No. B6 will need to bring a damn sight more to the party than they've got now. And exactly? What did you thing the OTHER LAX-SFO incumbent airlines were going to do while B6 is calling themselves Ramping up?? I think you B6ers overestimate your game. I don't see it as all that good. Not even at EWR!! I see a lot of lip flapping and a LOT of smoke! But no Fire!
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5090
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:57 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXBUR wrote:

You actually think airlines have kept First to fill non-rev seats? This is one of the most laughable things I’ve seen on here. All credibility lost. And duh Alaska uses First as an upgrade experience for their frequent flyers. They smartly decided to stay out of the premium business class business. Glad you aren’t running an airline.

Also, I don’t think you know any “hipsters”. You think 20-somethings - especially now - have money to pay for a premium transcon experience? And the handful of “rich” hipsters in the Bay Area? They’re leaving and even if they all stay an airline can’t count on them. How many times do people have to be reminded of VX?


What you are saying is that AS provides better experience and value to its ff. Which I would not disagree with. There is a lot JetBlue could do to improve their product for their elite status members. I hope they take this next couple of years to figure that out while corporate travel is slowly coming back.

However, there is a difference in product for non-status members. On JetBlue, you are guaranteed to have at least 32 inch pitch and 18.25 inch width seat. On AS, you are simply not getting that on a 737. And if you look at the IFE on A320 phase 2 reconfig (which is also on A220 and A321NEO) https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-r ... a320-tour/, it's as good as any one else's product out there. And they also have among the fastest wifi out there https://thepointsguy.com/news/who-has-t ... -airlines/ and offer it for free https://www.highspeedinternet.com/resou ... light-wifi.

None of this is a shot against AS. JetBlue has the best short haul economy product in the world. They offer the most real estate in Y. They currently offer the best value proposition in terms of wifi. Their new IFE has fixed up one of the biggest complaint people had, which is lack of on demand movie selection. The biggest remaining complaint is the worn out seats on A320/E90 and the old IFE. That is going away now that E90 is getting replaced by A220s and A320 refurbishment.


B6 can have Gold PLATES and AS wouldn't give the first Hoot! Flying the west coast is all about connections and frequency. If you can't cover the southland from the Bay Area? Then you're going Nowhere! B6 can't do that right now so all this hot gas blowing isn't going to impress anybody. When they get past 20 flights per day from the LA BASIN (ONT, SNA, SAN, LAX and BUR) to Northern California? and that's SFO SJC SMF and OAK? Then we have something to talk about! Right now? B6 isn't in the conversation except to say they're "intending" to fly to and In California
 
tphuang
Posts: 5463
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:33 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:

Best short haul economy product in the world? I don't think so. In the US, maybe. Even probably. Globally, absolutely not. Such accolades belong to a number of Asia based airlines and some European ones as well.


I get the sense you have not flown short haul in Asia.

strfyr51 wrote:
B6 can have Gold PLATES and AS wouldn't give the first Hoot! Flying the west coast is all about connections and frequency. If you can't cover the southland from the Bay Area? Then you're going Nowhere! B6 can't do that right now so all this hot gas blowing isn't going to impress anybody. When they get past 20 flights per day from the LA BASIN (ONT, SNA, SAN, LAX and BUR) to Northern California? and that's SFO SJC SMF and OAK? Then we have something to talk about! Right now? B6 isn't in the conversation except to say they're "intending" to fly to and In California

JetBlue is not looking to capture the population that does mostly west coast travel. They are looking to capture the people that do a lot of transcon travel and take the occasional trips to leisure spots like Vegas, Reno, Bozeman and Hawaii. Their focus is in East coast. Having west coast presence is mainly to help them gain contract from firms that have large offices in East coast that do regular transcon flights between the coasts. They need to add some leisure stuff on top of this so people that travel on them for business will have places to burn their miles.

Again, their west coast presence is to help their performance on the east coast.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2147
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:35 pm

tphuang wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

Best short haul economy product in the world? I don't think so. In the US, maybe. Even probably. Globally, absolutely not. Such accolades belong to a number of Asia based airlines and some European ones as well.


I get the sense you have not flown short haul in Asia.

strfyr51 wrote:
B6 can have Gold PLATES and AS wouldn't give the first Hoot! Flying the west coast is all about connections and frequency. If you can't cover the southland from the Bay Area? Then you're going Nowhere! B6 can't do that right now so all this hot gas blowing isn't going to impress anybody. When they get past 20 flights per day from the LA BASIN (ONT, SNA, SAN, LAX and BUR) to Northern California? and that's SFO SJC SMF and OAK? Then we have something to talk about! Right now? B6 isn't in the conversation except to say they're "intending" to fly to and In California

JetBlue is not looking to capture the population that does mostly west coast travel. They are looking to capture the people that do a lot of transcon travel and take the occasional trips to leisure spots like Vegas, Reno, Bozeman and Hawaii. Their focus is in East coast. Having west coast presence is mainly to help them gain contract from firms that have large offices in East coast that do regular transcon flights between the coasts. They need to add some leisure stuff on top of this so people that travel on them for business will have places to burn their miles.

Well you're wrong. I've flown all over Asia short- and medium-haul on CX, Dragonair, Singapore Airlines, Qantas, Air New Zealand, ANA, and Thai. You really don't know what you're talking about.

Again, their west coast presence is to help their performance on the east coast.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5463
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:46 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
Well you're wrong. I've flown all over Asia short- and medium-haul on CX, Dragonair, Singapore Airlines, Qantas, Air New Zealand, ANA, and Thai. You really don't know what you're talking about.

What's on CX, SQ, QF, ANZ, ANA and TG are not short haul product. They are medium/long haul products that happen to sometimes fly short haul. So a SQ flight from SIN to KUL on a 777 isn't a shorthaul product. Something on Silkair would be a short haul product. And even then, there is no way 10 per row on 777 with CX is better than what's on JetBlue. Find an airline whose short haul product offers 32 to 34 inch pitch and 18.25 to 19 inch width seat that provide fast wifi for free and have 100 live TV channels. And please do prove they have that these things. What you get on some Asian short haul service is free meals that you don't get in US. But when it comes to free high speed wifi with live TV channels, and wide seats. They just don't have that.
 
bfitzflyer
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:38 pm

tphuang wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
Well you're wrong. I've flown all over Asia short- and medium-haul on CX, Dragonair, Singapore Airlines, Qantas, Air New Zealand, ANA, and Thai. You really don't know what you're talking about.

What's on CX, SQ, QF, ANZ, ANA and TG are not short haul product. They are medium/long haul products that happen to sometimes fly short haul. So a SQ flight from SIN to KUL on a 777 isn't a shorthaul product. Something on Silkair would be a short haul product. And even then, there is no way 10 per row on 777 with CX is better than what's on JetBlue. Find an airline whose short haul product offers 32 to 34 inch pitch and 18.25 to 19 inch width seat that provide fast wifi for free and have 100 live TV channels. And please do prove they have that these things. What you get on some Asian short haul service is free meals that you don't get in US. But when it comes to free high speed wifi with live TV channels, and wide seats. They just don't have that.


Bad example Singapore rolled SilkAir into Singapore so no longer a valid comment.
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:44 pm

I think the service level argument has gotten out of hand as it isn’t really pertinent to why or why not JetBlue would make SFO a focus city. Sure they can add some transcon service and be a pain to UA and AS. But at the end of the day anything beyond that would be a waste of time for B6. LAX is fragmented so they can maybe make better headway. SFO and the Bay are not. UA has a fortress hub with int’l flights for business and other FFers. WN has strength with intra-CA routes and some West Coast at all airports. AS has a strong but still small compared to UA operation at SFO and another strong operation at SJC with lots of FF partners. No matter how great B6 is that just doesn’t make for a great business case.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at S

Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:10 pm

bfitzflyer wrote:
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.


Neither but picking the lesser of 2 evils, LAX. SFO is hampered by weather delays, gates are difficult to obtain, and an entrenched legacy carrier with close to 50% of the market share. Those things make SFO a bigger challenge than LAX.

Since no one carrier has a dominant share at LAX, brand loyalty will be lower, thus making it easier to steal passengers. The opening of the mid field concourse means there will be plenty of gates in the near term. International travel will not be coming back any time soon, so I would assume LAX would welcome B6 by offering them the gates they need to expand.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:17 pm

AS will do the west coast flying, B6 will do the transcons and AA will do the INT out of SFO.

Bam, overnight the challenger to UA in SFO has arisen.
 
UALifer
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:35 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:13 am

tphuang wrote:
JetBlue is not looking to capture the population that does mostly west coast travel. They are looking to capture the people that do a lot of transcon travel and take the occasional trips to leisure spots like Vegas, Reno, Bozeman and Hawaii. Their focus is in East coast. Having west coast presence is mainly to help them gain contract from firms that have large offices in East coast that do regular transcon flights between the coasts. They need to add some leisure stuff on top of this so people that travel on them for business will have places to burn their miles.

Again, their west coast presence is to help their performance on the east coast.


I don’t think you understand west coast travelers. Service up and down the coast is a MUST if you want to be successful in attracting business travel. The business travelers that you speak of that only fly transcon and don’t fly intra-west simply don’t exist, or if they do, they are in very small numbers. There’s a reason the Bay Area to the LA Basin is the biggest air travel market in the world.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5463
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:03 pm

UALifer wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JetBlue is not looking to capture the population that does mostly west coast travel. They are looking to capture the people that do a lot of transcon travel and take the occasional trips to leisure spots like Vegas, Reno, Bozeman and Hawaii. Their focus is in East coast. Having west coast presence is mainly to help them gain contract from firms that have large offices in East coast that do regular transcon flights between the coasts. They need to add some leisure stuff on top of this so people that travel on them for business will have places to burn their miles.

Again, their west coast presence is to help their performance on the east coast.


I don’t think you understand west coast travelers. Service up and down the coast is a MUST if you want to be successful in attracting business travel. The business travelers that you speak of that only fly transcon and don’t fly intra-west simply don’t exist, or if they do, they are in very small numbers. There’s a reason the Bay Area to the LA Basin is the biggest air travel market in the world.


Again, they will fly between LAX and SFO at frequency at least 6 to 8x daily when they start building up LAX operation. I think they should will also fly between LAX and SMF. They will also fly to LAS and Hawaii. They will have minimum level of flights within west coast. A 75 flight operation in LAX will allow them to do that. But they are not going to be AS/WN that flies to all different smaller airports. They are not looking to attract that type of ff. They are looking first and foremost to grab a chunk of transcon businesses for firms with offices in eat and west coast. The additional west coast stuff is just to help them keep these customers that do a lot of transcon service.

And there are definitely people like this or I won't find bay area mosaic members on flyertalk.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2147
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:06 pm

bfitzflyer wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
Well you're wrong. I've flown all over Asia short- and medium-haul on CX, Dragonair, Singapore Airlines, Qantas, Air New Zealand, ANA, and Thai. You really don't know what you're talking about.

What's on CX, SQ, QF, ANZ, ANA and TG are not short haul product. They are medium/long haul products that happen to sometimes fly short haul. So a SQ flight from SIN to KUL on a 777 isn't a shorthaul product. Something on Silkair would be a short haul product. And even then, there is no way 10 per row on 777 with CX is better than what's on JetBlue. Find an airline whose short haul product offers 32 to 34 inch pitch and 18.25 to 19 inch width seat that provide fast wifi for free and have 100 live TV channels. And please do prove they have that these things. What you get on some Asian short haul service is free meals that you don't get in US. But when it comes to free high speed wifi with live TV channels, and wide seats. They just don't have that.


Bad example Singapore rolled SilkAir into Singapore so no longer a valid comment.


So glad you're the authority on what constitutes a valid comment. My short haul experiences have been on Singapore Air not Silk and they have been wonderful.
 
hohd
Posts: 942
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:24 pm

It is time for UA to think outside the box and may be have a selected partnership with B6 in LAX and FLL. B6 code share with AA is only for Boston and New York area, so other areas are still open. Air travel will be brutal the next few years and UA and B6 need all the help they can get. Compete where necessary, but code share where possible. UA needs to do some creative deals, otherwise DL will, and leave UA holding the bag.
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5733
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:57 pm

hohd wrote:

It is time for UA to think outside the box and may be have a selected partnership with B6 in LAX and FLL. B6 code share with AA is only for Boston and New York area, so other areas are still open. Air travel will be brutal the next few years and UA and B6 need all the help they can get. Compete where necessary, but code share where possible. UA needs to do some creative deals, otherwise DL will, and leave UA holding the bag.


You may be on to something. Back in the 90's there several tie-ups: NW/CO, UA/DL, AA/US. NW/CO lasted the longest, CO/HP also had a code-share agreement for a while.

Now here's an idea:

DL/UA shore up their geographic weaknesses with a deal similar to AA/B6. UA codeshares with DL in ATL, DL codeshares with UA in IAH. Limited arrangement that would benefit both airlines on a roughly equal basis. UA's "Southeast Hub" problem solved, same with DL's "Texas Hub" problem. Leave the ULCC's out of it.
Next up: STL DEN PSP DEN STL
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2147
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:57 pm

hohd wrote:
It is time for UA to think outside the box and may be have a selected partnership with B6 in LAX and FLL. B6 code share with AA is only for Boston and New York area, so other areas are still open. Air travel will be brutal the next few years and UA and B6 need all the help they can get. Compete where necessary, but code share where possible. UA needs to do some creative deals, otherwise DL will, and leave UA holding the bag.


Very good point. Complicated to navigate with so many players in the mix, but a way to think out of the box. The ULCC's need to be left out of the discussion and engagement.

I would not count DL out in terms of coming up with something radical that no one else thought of in the industry.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1734
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:54 pm

tphuang wrote:
UALifer wrote:
tphuang wrote:
JetBlue is not looking to capture the population that does mostly west coast travel. They are looking to capture the people that do a lot of transcon travel and take the occasional trips to leisure spots like Vegas, Reno, Bozeman and Hawaii. Their focus is in East coast. Having west coast presence is mainly to help them gain contract from firms that have large offices in East coast that do regular transcon flights between the coasts. They need to add some leisure stuff on top of this so people that travel on them for business will have places to burn their miles.

Again, their west coast presence is to help their performance on the east coast.


I don’t think you understand west coast travelers. Service up and down the coast is a MUST if you want to be successful in attracting business travel. The business travelers that you speak of that only fly transcon and don’t fly intra-west simply don’t exist, or if they do, they are in very small numbers. There’s a reason the Bay Area to the LA Basin is the biggest air travel market in the world.


Again, they will fly between LAX and SFO at frequency at least 6 to 8x daily when they start building up LAX operation. I think they should will also fly between LAX and SMF. They will also fly to LAS and Hawaii. They will have minimum level of flights within west coast. A 75 flight operation in LAX will allow them to do that. But they are not going to be AS/WN that flies to all different smaller airports. They are not looking to attract that type of ff. They are looking first and foremost to grab a chunk of transcon businesses for firms with offices in eat and west coast. The additional west coast stuff is just to help them keep these customers that do a lot of transcon service.

And there are definitely people like this or I won't find bay area mosaic members on flyertalk.


I didn't see anything by JetBlue that said where they were going to fly from LAX beyond the flights they currently have, and those moving over from LGB. Did they announce intention to add flights in these markets (SFO, SMF, LAS and Hawaii)?
 
tphuang
Posts: 5463
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue potential at SFO

Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:09 pm

ASFlyer wrote:
tphuang wrote:
UALifer wrote:

I don’t think you understand west coast travelers. Service up and down the coast is a MUST if you want to be successful in attracting business travel. The business travelers that you speak of that only fly transcon and don’t fly intra-west simply don’t exist, or if they do, they are in very small numbers. There’s a reason the Bay Area to the LA Basin is the biggest air travel market in the world.


Again, they will fly between LAX and SFO at frequency at least 6 to 8x daily when they start building up LAX operation. I think they should will also fly between LAX and SMF. They will also fly to LAS and Hawaii. They will have minimum level of flights within west coast. A 75 flight operation in LAX will allow them to do that. But they are not going to be AS/WN that flies to all different smaller airports. They are not looking to attract that type of ff. They are looking first and foremost to grab a chunk of transcon businesses for firms with offices in eat and west coast. The additional west coast stuff is just to help them keep these customers that do a lot of transcon service.

And there are definitely people like this or I won't find bay area mosaic members on flyertalk.


I didn't see anything by JetBlue that said where they were going to fly from LAX beyond the flights they currently have, and those moving over from LGB. Did they announce intention to add flights in these markets (SFO, SMF, LAS and Hawaii)?


They mentioned some thin transcon routes (BDL, CHS), VFR stuff (GUA, SAL) and HI internally. Aside from that, it's anyone's guess. For them to build a network of 75 flight a day, they'd need to operate about 25 flights along west coast. I couldn't find any route network that would work without that many west coast flights. If you want to dismiss my comments, that's fine. But my predictions on stuff that JetBlue will add have been pretty on point in the past year.

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