Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
ASFlyer wrote:with all respect then, it's just people talking? I mean, Belize and Costa Rica had been coming up at Alaska town halls since the early 2000's. In fact, when Alaska started flying to BOS, everyone started saying that AS was looking at BOS-LHR. It was ridiculous, but that's what crews do - we talk a lot of crap and spread it around like it's the gospel truth. When management says they're looking at Hawaii on the long term then I'll believe it. Right now, I just don't get it. There are currently 7 carriers flying to Hawaii from LAX (UA, AA, DL, WN, HA, AS, SY). Does JetBlue just want to light money on fire?
seatown1 wrote:tphuang wrote:Also, they may want to order a widebody aircraft by 2025 if the A321LR/XLR flying is going well. For example, it'd be hard for them to try JFK-NRT or JFK-TLV with XLR. I can see VFR flying to sub-sahara Africa to be a goldmine out of JFK, since there really is not many strong domestic carriers there.
DL covers DKR, ACC, and LOS. What other market within range of the XLR would be worth serving with a mint-heavy aircraft?
ASFlyer wrote:with all respect then, it's just people talking? I mean, Belize and Costa Rica had been coming up at Alaska town halls since the early 2000's. In fact, when Alaska started flying to BOS, everyone started saying that AS was looking at BOS-LHR. It was ridiculous, but that's what crews do - we talk a lot of crap and spread it around like it's the gospel truth. When management says they're looking at Hawaii on the long term then I'll believe it. Right now, I just don't get it. There are currently 7 carriers flying to Hawaii from LAX (UA, AA, DL, WN, HA, AS, SY). Does JetBlue just want to light money on fire?
sfojvjets wrote:And even HI might be quite some time away, I think. Of course, the earlier the better, but can/will they certify the classic a321ceos (with mint) for etops 180? That would be the best way to start HI service without having to use a much lower-CASM LD or LR. And even better, the 2-2 config in J would be appreciated by couples.
MKIAZ wrote:I also wonder if they could use their A220's to do SNA-HNL/OGG That's a niche market for sure, but lots of $$$ in orange county and definitely some demand from people willing to pay more to avoid the drive to LAX
hbernal1 wrote:MKIAZ wrote:I also wonder if they could use their A220's to do SNA-HNL/OGG That's a niche market for sure, but lots of $$$ in orange county and definitely some demand from people willing to pay more to avoid the drive to LAX
I’m not too sure B6 would get a lot of slots when/if they enter SNA. New entrants usually get 3 slot pairs so I’d rather see 3x daily SNA-SFO (only 1 A220 would be needed to do all of the rotations) and then SNA pax can connect onwards on SFO-HNL/OGG.
Once there are more A220s available (and if B6 get more than 3 slots) it would be nice to maybe see SNA-JFK/BOS or SNA-FLL.
Here’s a question though: would a more premium-heavy config like an A321LD be able to land/take off from SNA’s short runway? I believe NK uses A320NEOs from SNA. I could be wrong.
tphuang wrote:seatown1 wrote:tphuang wrote:Also, they may want to order a widebody aircraft by 2025 if the A321LR/XLR flying is going well. For example, it'd be hard for them to try JFK-NRT or JFK-TLV with XLR. I can see VFR flying to sub-sahara Africa to be a goldmine out of JFK, since there really is not many strong domestic carriers there.
DL covers DKR, ACC, and LOS. What other market within range of the XLR would be worth serving with a mint-heavy aircraft?
I don't have O&D numbers from NYC to these places, but I would imagine there are probably a couple of more markets that can be served with both VFR and some business demand. ABV would be one. Something like BOS-RAI could work for both VFR and leisure. DL serves DSS/ACC/LOS with 767 and A330s. And from what I've seen and heard, they make a bunch of money on them. Even the Y fares are quite high. It should be a lot easier to serve these markets year round with daily service on A321XLR vs A330. JetBlue makes a lot of VFR markets work that DL cannot.ASFlyer wrote:with all respect then, it's just people talking? I mean, Belize and Costa Rica had been coming up at Alaska town halls since the early 2000's. In fact, when Alaska started flying to BOS, everyone started saying that AS was looking at BOS-LHR. It was ridiculous, but that's what crews do - we talk a lot of crap and spread it around like it's the gospel truth. When management says they're looking at Hawaii on the long term then I'll believe it. Right now, I just don't get it. There are currently 7 carriers flying to Hawaii from LAX (UA, AA, DL, WN, HA, AS, SY). Does JetBlue just want to light money on fire?
I don't know why it's so hard to believe. It really isn't a tougher market than some of the other ones they compete in. I think you are thinking about this from the view of AS.
You have to put yourself in the shoes of a JetBlue route planner. Unlike AS and WN, flying a lot of intra-west coast stuff for B6 is lighting money on fire. There is no way that LAX-HNL can be harder for them than LAX-SEA/PDX. So, they only want to serve the largest west coast markets from LAX with somewhat competitive schedule. They don't have a lot of ff or corporate contract in LA area. The best way for them to win local market share is to serve the popular leisure destinations. They look around and see that mint prints money everywhere and is very popular with high end leisure travelers. In fact, LAX-HNL/OGG is exactly the type of market mint should do well in. They'd easily have the best J product in the market. Just take a look at what the competition is providing.
On top of that, HNL/OGG is a very popular vacation destinations for people across the country, so it would also allow them to connect more passengers through LAX. B6 cannot rely on only O&D to make stuff like RIC/CHS/JAX-LAX work. They need to also connect some passengers to Hawaii and SJD/PVR.sfojvjets wrote:And even HI might be quite some time away, I think. Of course, the earlier the better, but can/will they certify the classic a321ceos (with mint) for etops 180? That would be the best way to start HI service without having to use a much lower-CASM LD or LR. And even better, the 2-2 config in J would be appreciated by couples.
I don't think they will certify A321CEO mint for ETOPS. Keep in mind, A321CEO mint already has pretty good CASM (only 6% higher than A320). A321LD probably has 5 to 10% lower CASM than A321CEO mint(1 more passenger + 15% less fuel burn). So, it will have very competitive CASM vs competition and also be a huge revenue driver. Of course, the next year will be very NEA focused. They've said that 2023 is when they start building up LAX. There really aren't that many destinations out of LAX that make more sense than HNL at this point.
I think it'd be interesting to see what happens to their LAX gate situation. To me, LAX is just a more competitive market than SFO. If LAWA dumps them in an unappealing location like MSC, you might see them shifting west coast resources to SFO.
nine4nine wrote:What is the fascination with LAX-HNL??? There’s already 7 carriers on the route and the yields suck. B6 should really focus on niche markets that will actually make them money, not just jump onto a route because basically almost every other major US airline is on it with high frequencies, plus a lot of seats being reward redemptions too. Hence why I brought up PPT and RAR as alternative niche markets that carry high premium demand and have little competition. Hawaii especially HNL isn’t the only market in the Pacific.
tphuang wrote:seatown1 wrote:I don't have O&D numbers from NYC to these places, but I would imagine there are probably a couple of more markets that can be served with both VFR and some business demand. ABV would be one. Something like BOS-RAI could work for both VFR and leisure. DL serves DSS/ACC/LOS with 767 and A330s. And from what I've seen and heard, they make a bunch of money on them. Even the Y fares are quite high. It should be a lot easier to serve these markets year round with daily service on A321XLR vs A330. JetBlue makes a lot of VFR markets work that DL cannot..
trueblew wrote:nine4nine wrote:What is the fascination with LAX-HNL??? There’s already 7 carriers on the route and the yields suck. B6 should really focus on niche markets that will actually make them money, not just jump onto a route because basically almost every other major US airline is on it with high frequencies, plus a lot of seats being reward redemptions too. Hence why I brought up PPT and RAR as alternative niche markets that carry high premium demand and have little competition. Hawaii especially HNL isn’t the only market in the Pacific.
The reason a lot of seats are reward redemptions is because of the existence of loyal pax. That is the whole point. Not every route is a zero sum equation. You need a network that people want to redeem their points on, and if you are trying to build a large customer base in SoCal or the Bay Area you need Hawaii on the map. How is this so unbelievable to you?
hbernal1 wrote:Now that you mention LAX gates, how many gates are JetBlue using at LAX? Today they’re operating 35 flights and yesterday was 37 so they need to be using 4 gates at least. If they want to double in size to 75 flights they’ll probably need 4 more.
nine4nine wrote:Maybe because the route is extremely low yielding, 7 carriers already on it and WN is going all in on Hawaii. Is it really worth throwing 1 or 2 aircraft on a whole day routing, make little $$ when you can just have your loyal flyers codeshare on AA. Now it would be a different story if B6 served the islands from a secondary market outside of the LAX-HNL horde. Sorry but given B6 lackluster presence out west I don’t think it makes sense for them to join the Hawaii party from LA when they need to connect more dots out west and build more presence and a loyal pax base in CA. And if it’s about connections from the east coast, B6 pax have the opportunity to codeshare on HA from BOS,JFK,AUS, and MCO.
tphuang wrote:hbernal1 wrote:Now that you mention LAX gates, how many gates are JetBlue using at LAX? Today they’re operating 35 flights and yesterday was 37 so they need to be using 4 gates at least. If they want to double in size to 75 flights they’ll probably need 4 more.
They had 19 departures out of SFO yesterday. They used B4/5/6/7/8 out of Harvey Milk terminal + 2 flights out of internal terminal. Nobody else used those gates. Plenty of gate availability there.
Out of LAX, they used 50,51B,55A,56,57,78,59 yesterday. I think 50, 55A and 59 are their gates. 56 gates are generally NK gates. 51A/51B/57/58 are CUTE gates. 57/58 are widebody gates mostly used by HA. They will be gone soon. 53A/B + 54A/B are the AA gates. 52 are the eagles nest gates
you can take a look at the current T-5 layout
https://www.flylax.com/-/media/flylax/t ... es/t5.ashx
vs 2017
https://i2.wp.com/moorewithmiles.com/wp ... .png?w=541
I think gate 57/58 are supposed to be reconfigured into narrowbody gates once HA moves out. Maybe that could add 2 gates. Where gate 50 is right now might be configurable into 2. IIRC from reading other threads, AA is suppose to have preferential access to 10 gates once their T-4 work is done. There could be as many as 8 other gates in T-5 after LAX does all the work. That would be enough for B6 to run their target operation. Ideally, B6 is just trying to avoid getting moved to MSC or have a split operation. SFO looks really appealing if they get exiled to MSC.nine4nine wrote:Maybe because the route is extremely low yielding, 7 carriers already on it and WN is going all in on Hawaii. Is it really worth throwing 1 or 2 aircraft on a whole day routing, make little $$ when you can just have your loyal flyers codeshare on AA. Now it would be a different story if B6 served the islands from a secondary market outside of the LAX-HNL horde. Sorry but given B6 lackluster presence out west I don’t think it makes sense for them to join the Hawaii party from LA when they need to connect more dots out west and build more presence and a loyal pax base in CA. And if it’s about connections from the east coast, B6 pax have the opportunity to codeshare on HA from BOS,JFK,AUS, and MCO.
HNL-LAX is not that low yielding. I see the cheapest O/W Y fare right now at $189 on most days in July and J fare to be over $600 for HA (the only carrier consistently offering lie flat).
If you look at BOS-LAX, the cheapest O/W fare is about $149 in most days in July and J fare to be $599. The flight time between the two routes are about the same. They make decent money on those BOS-LAX fare levels. I think they'd be happy with where HNL-LAX is yielding. 7 carriers may sound intimidating, but only a couple of them offer lie flat product. That's where mint makes a killing in. It's also the type of stuff that can win loyal customers.
I can't imagine B6 being more profitable than that on LAX-SEA/SMF/PHX. All routes they probably have to eventually operate if they want to have a presence in the west coast.
nine4nine wrote:tphuang wrote:hbernal1 wrote:Now that you mention LAX gates, how many gates are JetBlue using at LAX? Today they’re operating 35 flights and yesterday was 37 so they need to be using 4 gates at least. If they want to double in size to 75 flights they’ll probably need 4 more.
They had 19 departures out of SFO yesterday. They used B4/5/6/7/8 out of Harvey Milk terminal + 2 flights out of internal terminal. Nobody else used those gates. Plenty of gate availability there.
Out of LAX, they used 50,51B,55A,56,57,78,59 yesterday. I think 50, 55A and 59 are their gates. 56 gates are generally NK gates. 51A/51B/57/58 are CUTE gates. 57/58 are widebody gates mostly used by HA. They will be gone soon. 53A/B + 54A/B are the AA gates. 52 are the eagles nest gates
you can take a look at the current T-5 layout
https://www.flylax.com/-/media/flylax/t ... es/t5.ashx
vs 2017
https://i2.wp.com/moorewithmiles.com/wp ... .png?w=541
I think gate 57/58 are supposed to be reconfigured into narrowbody gates once HA moves out. Maybe that could add 2 gates. Where gate 50 is right now might be configurable into 2. IIRC from reading other threads, AA is suppose to have preferential access to 10 gates once their T-4 work is done. There could be as many as 8 other gates in T-5 after LAX does all the work. That would be enough for B6 to run their target operation. Ideally, B6 is just trying to avoid getting moved to MSC or have a split operation. SFO looks really appealing if they get exiled to MSC.nine4nine wrote:Maybe because the route is extremely low yielding, 7 carriers already on it and WN is going all in on Hawaii. Is it really worth throwing 1 or 2 aircraft on a whole day routing, make little $$ when you can just have your loyal flyers codeshare on AA. Now it would be a different story if B6 served the islands from a secondary market outside of the LAX-HNL horde. Sorry but given B6 lackluster presence out west I don’t think it makes sense for them to join the Hawaii party from LA when they need to connect more dots out west and build more presence and a loyal pax base in CA. And if it’s about connections from the east coast, B6 pax have the opportunity to codeshare on HA from BOS,JFK,AUS, and MCO.
HNL-LAX is not that low yielding. I see the cheapest O/W Y fare right now at $189 on most days in July and J fare to be over $600 for HA (the only carrier consistently offering lie flat).
If you look at BOS-LAX, the cheapest O/W fare is about $149 in most days in July and J fare to be $599. The flight time between the two routes are about the same. They make decent money on those BOS-LAX fare levels. I think they'd be happy with where HNL-LAX is yielding. 7 carriers may sound intimidating, but only a couple of them offer lie flat product. That's where mint makes a killing in. It's also the type of stuff that can win loyal customers.
I can't imagine B6 being more profitable than that on LAX-SEA/SMF/PHX. All routes they probably have to eventually operate if they want to have a presence in the west coast.
I get the point you’re trying to make, however it’s known that premium cabin to Hawaii just isn’t where it’s at. Most west coast tourists going to Hawaii aren’t premium travelers, they are your budget travelers or award redemption pax. Every time in the past I’ve flown to Hawaii from LA be it on DL, AA, UA and especially mostly HA I’ve never had a problem upgrading to first day of travel on the app, at the ticket counter or gate. The space was almost always available. If a lie flat premium from the west coast was so sought after, I’m sure HA would have outfitted their 321 fleet with such to keep in common with the long haul 330 fleet, and they didn’t.
krsw757 wrote:I noticed LAX-JAX has changed to a red eye now. Anyone know how it’s been doing so far? Not sure if those type of changes are good sign or bad.
tphuang wrote:nine4nine wrote:tphuang wrote:They had 19 departures out of SFO yesterday. They used B4/5/6/7/8 out of Harvey Milk terminal + 2 flights out of internal terminal. Nobody else used those gates. Plenty of gate availability there.
Out of LAX, they used 50,51B,55A,56,57,78,59 yesterday. I think 50, 55A and 59 are their gates. 56 gates are generally NK gates. 51A/51B/57/58 are CUTE gates. 57/58 are widebody gates mostly used by HA. They will be gone soon. 53A/B + 54A/B are the AA gates. 52 are the eagles nest gates
you can take a look at the current T-5 layout
https://www.flylax.com/-/media/flylax/t ... es/t5.ashx
vs 2017
https://i2.wp.com/moorewithmiles.com/wp ... .png?w=541
I think gate 57/58 are supposed to be reconfigured into narrowbody gates once HA moves out. Maybe that could add 2 gates. Where gate 50 is right now might be configurable into 2. IIRC from reading other threads, AA is suppose to have preferential access to 10 gates once their T-4 work is done. There could be as many as 8 other gates in T-5 after LAX does all the work. That would be enough for B6 to run their target operation. Ideally, B6 is just trying to avoid getting moved to MSC or have a split operation. SFO looks really appealing if they get exiled to MSC.
HNL-LAX is not that low yielding. I see the cheapest O/W Y fare right now at $189 on most days in July and J fare to be over $600 for HA (the only carrier consistently offering lie flat).
If you look at BOS-LAX, the cheapest O/W fare is about $149 in most days in July and J fare to be $599. The flight time between the two routes are about the same. They make decent money on those BOS-LAX fare levels. I think they'd be happy with where HNL-LAX is yielding. 7 carriers may sound intimidating, but only a couple of them offer lie flat product. That's where mint makes a killing in. It's also the type of stuff that can win loyal customers.
I can't imagine B6 being more profitable than that on LAX-SEA/SMF/PHX. All routes they probably have to eventually operate if they want to have a presence in the west coast.
I get the point you’re trying to make, however it’s known that premium cabin to Hawaii just isn’t where it’s at. Most west coast tourists going to Hawaii aren’t premium travelers, they are your budget travelers or award redemption pax. Every time in the past I’ve flown to Hawaii from LA be it on DL, AA, UA and especially mostly HA I’ve never had a problem upgrading to first day of travel on the app, at the ticket counter or gate. The space was almost always available. If a lie flat premium from the west coast was so sought after, I’m sure HA would have outfitted their 321 fleet with such to keep in common with the long haul 330 fleet, and they didn’t.
HA does use A330s on all 3 of its LAX-HNL flights. That's why it needs those widebody gates in T-5. Mint is just a really cost effective product. If JetBlue can't sell out mint at $599, it will just lower it to $399. Or connect a bunch of people from JFK/BOS in mint. I'm sure if the legacies actually had lie flat on this route, upgrade will be a lot harder to get.
I don't see how LAX-HNL can be less premium than BOS-SEA/LAS or LAX-PBI.
B6 has to put its best product on routes that people want to go to win LAX local point of sale.
nine4nine wrote:What is the fascination with LAX-HNL??? There’s already 7 carriers on the route and the yields suck. B6 should really focus on niche markets that will actually make them money, not just jump onto a route because basically almost every other major US airline is on it with high frequencies, plus a lot of seats being reward redemptions too. Hence why I brought up PPT and RAR as alternative niche markets that carry high premium demand and have little competition. Hawaii especially HNL isn’t the only market in the Pacific.
sfojvjets wrote:Wanted to post an anecdote. I was on B6 2735 (SFO-LAX) yesterday morning and then B6 636 (LAX-SFO) yesterday evening. I expected both flights to be moderately full based on the seat maps a couple days before the flights. However, what I found very interesting is that both flights were, in the words of the FAs who crewed each flight, "100% full." They were asking volunteers to gate check bags. Good on B6 for at the very least making a splash and getting their name out there with low fares. As someone who flew B6 for the first time yesterday, I wouldn't hesitate to fly them again (legroom, free wifi, IFE, snacks, etc) and I would love to see a further expansion at SFO. As my seatmates were saying on the inbound to SFO last night, "Why did we always fly NK when we could've had this?!"
Evidenced by this quote, they're doing a great job capturing the bottom half of the market since essentially, no LCCs other than WN serve the route out of the primary airports... and B6 is much more accessible to book on Google and has around the same number of frequencies as WN (don't quote me on the last claim). I just hope their success continues when they stop selling tickets at unsustainable prices.
hbernal1 wrote:sfojvjets wrote:Wanted to post an anecdote. I was on B6 2735 (SFO-LAX) yesterday morning and then B6 636 (LAX-SFO) yesterday evening. I expected both flights to be moderately full based on the seat maps a couple days before the flights. However, what I found very interesting is that both flights were, in the words of the FAs who crewed each flight, "100% full." They were asking volunteers to gate check bags. Good on B6 for at the very least making a splash and getting their name out there with low fares. As someone who flew B6 for the first time yesterday, I wouldn't hesitate to fly them again (legroom, free wifi, IFE, snacks, etc) and I would love to see a further expansion at SFO. As my seatmates were saying on the inbound to SFO last night, "Why did we always fly NK when we could've had this?!"
Evidenced by this quote, they're doing a great job capturing the bottom half of the market since essentially, no LCCs other than WN serve the route out of the primary airports... and B6 is much more accessible to book on Google and has around the same number of frequencies as WN (don't quote me on the last claim). I just hope their success continues when they stop selling tickets at unsustainable prices.
Were any of the flights on a retrofitted A320?
jfklganyc wrote:So interesting email...
B6 returning to its hub strategy come fall
Fat lady is singing for a lot of these routes if they don’t touch New York/ Newark Boston LA Orlando San Juan or Lauderdale/Miami
As I love to point out… They simply don’t have the aircraft for the large scale expansion they launched...If they want keep their hub structure. And unlike spirit and frontier...they seem to like a hub structure
Nicknuzzii wrote:jfklganyc wrote:So interesting email...
B6 returning to its hub strategy come fall
Fat lady is singing for a lot of these routes if they don’t touch New York/ Newark Boston LA Orlando San Juan or Lauderdale/Miami
As I love to point out… They simply don’t have the aircraft for the large scale expansion they launched...If they want keep their hub structure. And unlike spirit and frontier...they seem to like a hub structure
RDU completely gutted besides hubs.
Same for PHL and AUS.
tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
tphuang wrote:Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places?
Midwestindy wrote:tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
By no other NYC cuts, I assume you are referring to no other EWR cuts, considering they barely fly anywhere from LGA, and they legally aren’t allowed to cut anything from JFK per the NEA.
Runway28L wrote:tphuang wrote:Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places?
Too many seats on PIT-South Florida and B6 is the odd man out once again. There were rumors that this was likely going to be a permanent cut dating back to April when it was made “seasonal”.
JetBlue just doesn’t have the right economical aircraft to make this route work.
tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
BOS-BUR/SJC are gone. I'm surprised by SJC. BWI/BDA/PDX gone for the winter. Surprised by PDX. I thought this is a route they'd finally try to run year round.
RDU-AUS/RSW/JAX/LAS/MBJ/MCO/SFO/TPA are cut. so it's down to BOS/CUN/FLL/LAX/EWR/JFK/SJU. I'm a little surprised that MCO/TPA are cut. Those seemed to do well enough to last. TPA might have too much capacity once AA added it. The other stuff really isn't too surprising. RSW consistently under performed. AUS/JAX made no sense once other carriers added. MBJ never seemed to have flown more than once a week. SFO would've been nice to keep around, but it had really low LF. Maybe it will come back sometimes down the round. I guess they need a lot of those E90s back out of NYC.
SFO lost RDU/AUS/MCO. i'm not surprised of the first 2, but MCO is surprising. I think MCO-SFO will make a comeback next summer once the NYC buildup is finished.
MCO is gutted. Gone are ATL/AUS/BOG that I had predicted before. So are the new routes PHL/SFO/RDU. Orlando will be small for a long time.
Gone is pretty much all of the PHL stuff. Basically, they've only kept SJU of the ones they added. This will make AA happy.
LAX-SEA - it will be interesting to see when they return here. It's obviously a tough market for them to stick around in.
Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places? Also, what's their plan of utilization DCA slots?
Iggy500 wrote:tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
BOS-BUR/SJC are gone. I'm surprised by SJC. BWI/BDA/PDX gone for the winter. Surprised by PDX. I thought this is a route they'd finally try to run year round.
RDU-AUS/RSW/JAX/LAS/MBJ/MCO/SFO/TPA are cut. so it's down to BOS/CUN/FLL/LAX/EWR/JFK/SJU. I'm a little surprised that MCO/TPA are cut. Those seemed to do well enough to last. TPA might have too much capacity once AA added it. The other stuff really isn't too surprising. RSW consistently under performed. AUS/JAX made no sense once other carriers added. MBJ never seemed to have flown more than once a week. SFO would've been nice to keep around, but it had really low LF. Maybe it will come back sometimes down the round. I guess they need a lot of those E90s back out of NYC.
SFO lost RDU/AUS/MCO. i'm not surprised of the first 2, but MCO is surprising. I think MCO-SFO will make a comeback next summer once the NYC buildup is finished.
MCO is gutted. Gone are ATL/AUS/BOG that I had predicted before. So are the new routes PHL/SFO/RDU. Orlando will be small for a long time.
Gone is pretty much all of the PHL stuff. Basically, they've only kept SJU of the ones they added. This will make AA happy.
LAX-SEA - it will be interesting to see when they return here. It's obviously a tough market for them to stick around in.
Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places? Also, what's their plan of utilization DCA slots?
Quite a lot of cuts if you ask me. Not too surprised about ATL, however. B6 has been cutting its operations there for a while now, even to the point where they are only flying E190s to ATL, even from FLL. It could be that DL is way too dominant on those routes, or B6 is using their E190 fleet as a temporary substitution until the A320 refurbishment program is completed and more A220s become available. Either way, if the cutting continues, B6 may suffer the same fate in ATL that they met in 2003.
Nicknuzzii wrote:jfklganyc wrote:So interesting email...
B6 returning to its hub strategy come fall
Fat lady is singing for a lot of these routes if they don’t touch New York/ Newark Boston LA Orlando San Juan or Lauderdale/Miami
As I love to point out… They simply don’t have the aircraft for the large scale expansion they launched...If they want keep their hub structure. And unlike spirit and frontier...they seem to like a hub structure
RDU completely gutted besides hubs.
Same for PHL and AUS.
tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
BOS-BUR/SJC are gone. I'm surprised by SJC. BWI/BDA/PDX gone for the winter. Surprised by PDX. I thought this is a route they'd finally try to run year round.
RDU-AUS/RSW/JAX/LAS/MBJ/MCO/SFO/TPA are cut. so it's down to BOS/CUN/FLL/LAX/EWR/JFK/SJU. I'm a little surprised that MCO/TPA are cut. Those seemed to do well enough to last. TPA might have too much capacity once AA added it. The other stuff really isn't too surprising. RSW consistently under performed. AUS/JAX made no sense once other carriers added. MBJ never seemed to have flown more than once a week. SFO would've been nice to keep around, but it had really low LF. Maybe it will come back sometimes down the round. I guess they need a lot of those E90s back out of NYC.
SFO lost RDU/AUS/MCO. i'm not surprised of the first 2, but MCO is surprising. I think MCO-SFO will make a comeback next summer once the NYC buildup is finished.
MCO is gutted. Gone are ATL/AUS/BOG that I had predicted before. So are the new routes PHL/SFO/RDU. Orlando will be small for a long time.
Gone is pretty much all of the PHL stuff. Basically, they've only kept SJU of the ones they added. This will make AA happy.
LAX-SEA - it will be interesting to see when they return here. It's obviously a tough market for them to stick around in.
Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places? Also, what's their plan of utilization DCA slots?
tphuang wrote:Midwestindy wrote:tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
By no other NYC cuts, I assume you are referring to no other EWR cuts, considering they barely fly anywhere from LGA, and they legally aren’t allowed to cut anything from JFK per the NEA.
They added a whole bunch of routes out of JFK since 2019 that they could've ended early (BOG/DFW/DTW/GEO/GUA/EYW/MSP/STT/SJD/HDN/BZN/BOI/FCA/MTJ). Maybe a couple of those seasonal ones will have limited run. We don't know yet.
The interesting part for me is to see what kind of network they will eventually have out of JFK. I'm assuming we will get another NEA announcement before the end of this month. At minimum with starting date on some of those announced markets, but probably with some new route announcements also.
maximairways wrote:Looks like all the BDL adds stuck around (LAX, LAS, SFO, CUN). Seems like they may be strong to do well looking at current fares on those routes.
Midwestindy wrote:
Except they can’t really cut any of these routes either, since they need to hit the growth level requirements that are coming up that where set out by the NEA.
Iggy500 wrote:Quite a lot of cuts if you ask me. Not too surprised about ATL, however. B6 has been cutting its operations there for a while now, even to the point where they are only flying E190s to ATL, even from FLL. It could be that DL is way too dominant on those routes, or B6 is using their E190 fleet as a temporary substitution until the A320 refurbishment program is completed and more A220s become available. Either way, if the cutting continues, B6 may suffer the same fate in ATL that they met in 2003.
ContinentalEWR wrote:
Say it ain't so.....RDU was a pipe dream.
tphuang wrote:BWI/BDA/PDX gone for the winter. Surprised by PDX. I thought this is a route they'd finally try to run year round.
usairways85 wrote:Cutting PHL-TPA, RSW, & PBI does not surprise me. MCO is not a priority for B6 so I questioned PHL-MCO. I thought SJU would stick given that seemed to be the best out of all these markets
tphuang wrote:There is a couple of interesting decisions in there https://crankyflier.com/2021/06/14/jetb ... p-its-own/
Well, aside from EWR-SEA becoming seasonal, there is no other cuts out of NYC.
BOS-BUR/SJC are gone. I'm surprised by SJC. BWI/BDA/PDX gone for the winter. Surprised by PDX. I thought this is a route they'd finally try to run year round.
RDU-AUS/RSW/JAX/LAS/MBJ/MCO/SFO/TPA are cut. so it's down to BOS/CUN/FLL/LAX/EWR/JFK/SJU. I'm a little surprised that MCO/TPA are cut. Those seemed to do well enough to last. TPA might have too much capacity once AA added it. The other stuff really isn't too surprising. RSW consistently under performed. AUS/JAX made no sense once other carriers added. MBJ never seemed to have flown more than once a week. SFO would've been nice to keep around, but it had really low LF. Maybe it will come back sometimes down the round. I guess they need a lot of those E90s back out of NYC.
SFO lost RDU/AUS/MCO. i'm not surprised of the first 2, but MCO is surprising. I think MCO-SFO will make a comeback next summer once the NYC buildup is finished.
MCO is gutted. Gone are ATL/AUS/BOG that I had predicted before. So are the new routes PHL/SFO/RDU. Orlando will be small for a long time.
Gone is pretty much all of the PHL stuff. Basically, they've only kept SJU of the ones they added. This will make AA happy.
LAX-SEA - it will be interesting to see when they return here. It's obviously a tough market for them to stick around in.
Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places? Also, what's their plan of utilization DCA slots?
jfklganyc wrote:MCO BOG holy cow!
Havent they flown that for a decade plus?
What I dont understand about MCO: the growth is there, the crew bases are there,the new terminal is there, the HQ may move there, the post pandemic momentum is there...what the hell are you doing if you are Bluejet??
This should be a 100 flight a day operation yesterday and growing tomorrow. How long is the catch and release game going to go on in MCO? It is bizzare
Abeam79 wrote:As far as Orlando it makes sense for them not to focus on it right now. They have a rare opportunity to build up and network in the Northeast where they were limited and now they have available resources with the NEA. Orlando is never a premium high-yielding market, and there will always be demand there whenever they decide to build it up again. Which they have said many times they will refocus on Orlando at a later point. ULCC expansion you see the tells you allot about Orlando yields. It also tells you based on previous data that customers flying on a ULCC are not the customers that usually have a loyalty program or loyalty to a brand. So when JetBlue eventually decides to expand their in the future it’s not like they have to fight for loyalty consumers. Which is usually a challenge when you’re building up a market with a dominance by the legacy guys. That’s why Orlando can wait. Unlike the Northeast you have to lock down that market to garner FF programs and marketshare. That’s not as much of a case in Orlando
Abeam79 wrote:jfklganyc wrote:MCO BOG holy cow!
Havent they flown that for a decade plus?
What I dont understand about MCO: the growth is there, the crew bases are there,the new terminal is there, the HQ may move there, the post pandemic momentum is there...what the hell are you doing if you are Bluejet??
This should be a 100 flight a day operation yesterday and growing tomorrow. How long is the catch and release game going to go on in MCO? It is bizzare
They've added JFK-BOG now which i think is much more important. I also think MCO-BOG will be one of the first they restore over time..
Runway28L wrote:tphuang wrote:Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places?
Too many seats on PIT-South Florida and B6 is the odd man out once again. There were rumors that this was likely going to be a permanent cut dating back to April when it was made “seasonal”.
JetBlue just doesn’t have the right economical aircraft to make this route work.
jplatts wrote:Abeam79 wrote:As far as Orlando it makes sense for them not to focus on it right now. They have a rare opportunity to build up and network in the Northeast where they were limited and now they have available resources with the NEA. Orlando is never a premium high-yielding market, and there will always be demand there whenever they decide to build it up again. Which they have said many times they will refocus on Orlando at a later point. ULCC expansion you see the tells you allot about Orlando yields. It also tells you based on previous data that customers flying on a ULCC are not the customers that usually have a loyalty program or loyalty to a brand. So when JetBlue eventually decides to expand their in the future it’s not like they have to fight for loyalty consumers. Which is usually a challenge when you’re building up a market with a dominance by the legacy guys. That’s why Orlando can wait. Unlike the Northeast you have to lock down that market to garner FF programs and marketshare. That’s not as much of a case in Orlando
WN has a much bigger presence at MCO than B6, and WN has nonstop service to MCO from some markets not served by B6 (including BHM, CVG, CMH, GRR, IND, MCI, SDF, MEM, MKE, ORF, OKC, OMA, STL, and SAT). WN also offers connections to MCO from some markets that currently don't have have any nonstop service to the MCO/SFB market on any airline.
In addition to the significantly larger WN presence in MCO and the WN network being much bigger than B6, WN also has a significant FF base in Greater Orlando and MCO-originating VFR traffic to support WN nonstop service out of MCO to destinations that might not be able to support nonstop service out of MCO on B6.
acavpics wrote:Even before COVID, I noticed that MCO rarely got new routes as compared to their other hubs. In Florida, it always seemed that FLL was B6's main priority. And the MCO "hub" was more of an after-thought.
Does anyone know why that is the case? Is there more competition out of Orlando? Higher operation costs? Lower demand? Just wondering.
flyPIT wrote:Runway28L wrote:tphuang wrote:Also gone are PIT-FLL/PBI, CLE-RSW, ORD-PBI, DCA-TPA, RIC-LAX/LAS. Of that list, I'm really just surprised by PIT-FLL. If they are going to keep around all of the other FLL adds, why are they cutting PIT of all places?
Too many seats on PIT-South Florida and B6 is the odd man out once again. There were rumors that this was likely going to be a permanent cut dating back to April when it was made “seasonal”.
JetBlue just doesn’t have the right economical aircraft to make this route work.
How are there too many seats on PIT-S FL?!? WN, NK, and F9 have all announced or begun large scale expansion at MIA and PIT didn’t get a piece of any of that other than a few flights around the holidays. PITs economy is in the tank, unemployment a good bit higher than peer cities.
B6s fleet is very economical actually, the A220 being perfect for these routes. That is not the problem.