Tphuang: COME BACK!

Agreed, thread just isn’t the same without him. I hope all is well.

Nobody knows tphuang in person?

speedbird2263 wrote:

Agreed, thread just isn’t the same without him. I hope all is well.

Dieuwer wrote:

Nobody knows tphuang in person?

B6FLL954 wrote:

I concur, was looking forward to Tphuang's analysis of todays earnings. He was always one of the most frequent posters on this forum, really hoping all is well.

I don't know him personally, but tphuang has been posting on other sites (even yesterday).

I just read on simple flying that Jetblue may shrink after pandemic.a lot of routes they added may be dropped and were meant to be only temporary.

doulasc wrote:

I just read on simple flying that Jetblue may shrink after pandemic.a lot of routes they added may be dropped and were meant to be only temporary.

It’s a matter of returning the planes to the hubs.

Unlike NK and F9, B6 is purely a hub and spoke airline with a small percentage of non hub flights to places like Florida and Cancun.

Unfortunately, two of their main hubs , Boston and New York, were disproportionately affected by Covid and a drop in air traffic.

Now, with traffic coming back, a mandatory usage of slots in NYC, and usage requirements outlined in the NEA, plus a slow growth in planes, the resources are needed at the hubs

JFK
LGA
EWR
BOS
MCO
FLL
LAX
SJU

Nearly every flight in the system will touch one of those places. HPN, BDL, and SFO deserve honorable mention.

LGA begins split ops tomorrow.

Terminal A: BOS

Terminal B: Everything else

Spring 2022: BOS also moves to Terminal B

Thought it would be nice to just give a update on the Jetblue fleet as it stands now.

E190 60 total, 30 leased and 30 owned. Leased planes are being sent back.
Leased tails;
179JB
183JB
184JB
187JB
190JB
192JB
193JB
197JB
198JB
203JB
206JB
216JB
228JB
229JB
231JB
236JB
238JB
239JB
247JB
249JB
258JB
265JB
266JB
267JB
273JB
274JB
279JB
281JB
283JB
284JB
Owned tails;
178JB
292JB
294JB
296JB
298JB
304JB
306JB
307JB
309JB
316JB
317JB
318JB
323JB
324JB
328JB
329JB
334JB
337JB
339JB
346JB
348JB
351JB
353JB
354JB
355JB
358JB
368JB
373JB
374JB
375JB

A220 7 out of 63
3008J
3023J
3044J
3058J
3062J
3065J
3077J

A320 130 total. 11 tails will not be refurbished as of now. Not aware of any retirements yet.
Non refurbished;
503JB
504JB
505JB
506JB
516JB
517JB
519JB
520JB
521JB
523JB
524JB
Refurbished;
507JT
508JL
509JB
510JB
526JL
527JL
529JB
531JL
534JB
535JB
536JB
537JT
547JB
552JB
554JB
556JB
558JB
559JB
561JB
562JB
563JB
564JB
565JB
566Jb
568JB
569JB
570JB
571JB
579JB
580JB
583JB
584JB
585JB
586JB
587JB
588JB
589JB
590JB
591JB
592JB
593JB
594JB
595JB
597JB
598JB
599JB
603JB
605JB
606JB
607JB
608JB
612JB
613JB
615JB
618JB
621JB
623JB
624JB
625JB
627JB
629JB
630JB
632JB
633JB
634JB
635JB
636JB
637JB
638JB
639JB
640JB
641JB
643JB
644JB
645JB
646JB
648JB
649JB
651JB
652JB
653JB
655JB
656JB
657JB
658JB
659JB
661JB
662JB
663JB
665JB
703JB
705JB
706JB
708JB (WL)
709JB (WL)
712JB
715JB (WL)
729JB
746JB
760JB
763JB
766JB
768JB
775JB
779JB
784JB
789JB
793JB
794JB
796JB
804JB (WL)
806JB (WL)
807JB (WL)
809JB (WL)
821JB (WL)
827JB (WL)
828JB (WL)
834JB (WL)

A321 84 total with 41NEO on order, 10LR and 13XLRs.
CEO Core (321); 27 total
903JB
905JB
907JB
913JB
948JB
949JT
950JT
952JB
954JB
955JB
956JT
957JB
958JB
959JB
965JT
966JT
970JB
971JT
972JT
973JT
974JT
994JL
995JL
996JL
997JL
998JE
999JQ

CEO Mint (32S); 35 total
923JB
929JB
934JB
935JB
937JB
942JB
943JT
944JT
945JT
946JL
947JB
961JT
962JT
964JT
967JT
968JT
969JT
976JT
977JE
978JB
979JT
980JT
981JT
982JB
983JT
984JB
985JT
986JB
987JT
988JT
989JT
990JL
991JT
992JB
993JE

NEO core (3N1); 16 out of 41
2002J
2016J
2017J
2027J
2029J
2038J
2039J
2043J
2044J
2047J
2048J
2059J
2060J
2084J
2086J
2102J

NEO Mint (3NS & Domestic); 2
2105J
2142J

NEO-LR Mint (3NL)
4022J
4048J
4058J

Total: 281

Hopefully my numbers and info is correct, only thing I’m not sure on are the total expected deliveries now for the 220 and 321NEO fleets.

FARmd90 wrote:

…

Hopefully my numbers and info is correct, only thing I’m not sure on are the total expected deliveries now for the 220 and 321NEO fleets.

Thanks for this research. I found this article from a few months ago with some idea of future A220 deliveries:
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/the-airbus-a220-will-be-a-game-changer-for-jetblue-2021-07-06

A220 delivery schedule
2020: 1
2021: +7 = 8
2022: +9 = 17
2023: +18 = 35
2024: +22 = 57

So they are not going to receive any A220s in the next two months. Are they all based at the same airport right now or do they move them around?

Blerg wrote:

So they are not going to receive any A220s in the next two months. Are they all based at the same airport right now or do they move them around?

The list shows 8 until end of 2021 when 7 are in fleet one more this year

FARmd90 wrote:

Thought it would be nice to just give a update on the Jetblue fleet as it stands now.

E190 60 total, 30 leased and 30 owned. Leased planes are being sent back.
Leased tails;
179JB
183JB
184JB
187JB
190JB
192JB
193JB
197JB
198JB
203JB
206JB
216JB
228JB
229JB
231JB
236JB
238JB
239JB
247JB
249JB
258JB
265JB
266JB
267JB
273JB
274JB
279JB
281JB
283JB
284JB
Owned tails;
178JB
292JB
294JB
296JB
298JB
304JB
306JB
307JB
309JB
316JB
317JB
318JB
323JB
324JB
328JB
329JB
334JB
337JB
339JB
346JB
348JB
351JB
353JB
354JB
355JB
358JB
368JB
373JB
374JB
375JB

A220 7 out of 63
3008J
3023J
3044J
3058J
3062J
3065J
3077J

A320 130 total. 11 tails will not be refurbished as of now. Not aware of any retirements yet.
Non refurbished;
503JB
504JB
505JB
506JB
516JB
517JB
519JB
520JB
521JB
523JB
524JB
Refurbished;
507JT
508JL
509JB
510JB
526JL
527JL
529JB
531JL
534JB
535JB
536JB
537JT
547JB
552JB
554JB
556JB
558JB
559JB
561JB
562JB
563JB
564JB
565JB
566Jb
568JB
569JB
570JB
571JB
579JB
580JB
583JB
584JB
585JB
586JB
587JB
588JB
589JB
590JB
591JB
592JB
593JB
594JB
595JB
597JB
598JB
599JB
603JB
605JB
606JB
607JB
608JB
612JB
613JB
615JB
618JB
621JB
623JB
624JB
625JB
627JB
629JB
630JB
632JB
633JB
634JB
635JB
636JB
637JB
638JB
639JB
640JB
641JB
643JB
644JB
645JB
646JB
648JB
649JB
651JB
652JB
653JB
655JB
656JB
657JB
658JB
659JB
661JB
662JB
663JB
665JB
703JB
705JB
706JB
708JB (WL)
709JB (WL)
712JB
715JB (WL)
729JB
746JB
760JB
763JB
766JB
768JB
775JB
779JB
784JB
789JB
793JB
794JB
796JB
804JB (WL)
806JB (WL)
807JB (WL)
809JB (WL)
821JB (WL)
827JB (WL)
828JB (WL)
834JB (WL)

A321 84 total with 41NEO on order, 10LR and 13XLRs.
CEO Core (321); 27 total
903JB
905JB
907JB
913JB
948JB
949JT
950JT
952JB
954JB
955JB
956JT
957JB
958JB
959JB
965JT
966JT
970JB
971JT
972JT
973JT
974JT
994JL
995JL
996JL
997JL
998JE
999JQ

CEO Mint (32S); 35 total
923JB
929JB
934JB
935JB
937JB
942JB
943JT
944JT
945JT
946JL
947JB
961JT
962JT
964JT
967JT
968JT
969JT
976JT
977JE
978JB
979JT
980JT
981JT
982JB
983JT
984JB
985JT
986JB
987JT
988JT
989JT
990JL
991JT
992JB
993JE

NEO core (3N1); 16 out of 41
2002J
2016J
2017J
2027J
2029J
2038J
2039J
2043J
2044J
2047J
2048J
2059J
2060J
2084J
2086J
2102J

NEO Mint (3NS & Domestic); 2
2105J
2142J

NEO-LR Mint (3NL)
4022J
4048J
4058J

Total: 281

Hopefully my numbers and info is correct, only thing I’m not sure on are the total expected deliveries now for the 220 and 321NEO fleets.

Just to clarify, nothing is actively being sent back.

That is the plan. However… stay tuned.

And I’ll leave it at that for now

oldJoe wrote:

Blerg wrote:

So they are not going to receive any A220s in the next two months. Are they all based at the same airport right now or do they move them around?

The list shows 8 until end of 2021 when 7 are in fleet one more this year

God bless you my friend. I missed that one.

Midwestindy wrote:

speedbird2263 wrote:

Agreed, thread just isn’t the same without him. I hope all is well.

Dieuwer wrote:

Nobody knows tphuang in person?

B6FLL954 wrote:

I concur, was looking forward to Tphuang's analysis of todays earnings. He was always one of the most frequent posters on this forum, really hoping all is well.

I don't know him personally, but tphuang has been posting on other sites (even yesterday).

Thanks folks. I'm back here after some times off. The Q2 data just came out. So I will be posting some numbers over the next few days.

Just to clarify, nothing is actively being sent back.

That is the plan. However… stay tuned.

And I’ll leave it at that for now

I think 30 E90s is too small of a subfleet. I think they will return the 30 leased ones and get exchanged with some newer E90/95 (maybe 10?), which should be quite plentiful and cheap.

https://paxex.aero/jetblue-a220-transco ... hfzedIP1OE
Looks like they are finally moving those A220s out of Florida and into more competitive markets. E90s will stick with the short stuff out of BOS/NYC. A220 is the perfect replacement for the 2 to 4 hours flights that they keep switching between E90 and A320. Also, they actually make stuff like BOS-PDX/SJC year round do-able.

tphuang wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

speedbird2263 wrote:

Agreed, thread just isn’t the same without him. I hope all is well.

Dieuwer wrote:

Nobody knows tphuang in person?

B6FLL954 wrote:

I concur, was looking forward to Tphuang's analysis of todays earnings. He was always one of the most frequent posters on this forum, really hoping all is well.

I don't know him personally, but tphuang has been posting on other sites (even yesterday).

Thanks folks. I'm back here after some times off. The Q2 data just came out. So I will be posting some numbers over the next few days.

Just to clarify, nothing is actively being sent back.

That is the plan. However… stay tuned.

And I’ll leave it at that for now

I think 30 E90s is too small of a subfleet. I think they will return the 30 leased ones and get exchanged with some newer E90/95 (maybe 10?), which should be quite plentiful and cheap.

https://paxex.aero/jetblue-a220-transco ... hfzedIP1OE
Looks like they are finally moving those A220s out of Florida and into more competitive markets. E90s will stick with the short stuff out of BOS/NYC. A220 is the perfect replacement for the 2 to 4 hours flights that they keep switching between E90 and A320. Also, they actually make stuff like BOS-PDX/SJC year round do-able.

Glad to have you back!

Good to have you back ol' sport!#carryon

Hi all, I feel like we've seen B6 management say that they will be trimming their network to bolster their main hubs, but we haven't seen the vast majority of the covid adds and thin/leisure tcons dropped yet. Any idea when we'll see these kinds of routes go away, and to which hubs those freed up planes will be going?

PS I'm still very much interested in the prospects of a B6 SFO hub... their product is well suited for premium traffic, yet at LAX, they seem to be picking up the slack at the very bottom of the market, considering adds like JAX/CHS/RIC/LAS/RNO etc... These are all more suited towards A220 flying and I have to wonder whether B6 is continuing to fly these solely to keep the gate space LAWA gave them, because they don't seem eager/bold enough to expand into the key markets that have that premium demand. (Of course, LAS/AUS/SFO are key markets that have been added in 2020 but they aren't exactly premium due to stage length.)

sfojvjets wrote:

Hi all, I feel like we've seen B6 management say that they will be trimming their network to bolster their main hubs, but we haven't seen the vast majority of the covid adds and thin/leisure tcons dropped yet. Any idea when we'll see these kinds of routes go away, and to which hubs those freed up planes will be going?

PS I'm still very much interested in the prospects of a B6 SFO hub... their product is well suited for premium traffic, yet at LAX, they seem to be picking up the slack at the very bottom of the market, considering adds like JAX/CHS/RIC/LAS/RNO etc... These are all more suited towards A220 flying and I have to wonder whether B6 is continuing to fly these solely to keep the gate space LAWA gave them, because they don't seem eager/bold enough to expand into the key markets that have that premium demand. (Of course, LAS/AUS/SFO are key markets that have been added in 2020 but they aren't exactly premium due to stage length.)

what markets have premium demand from LAX that they don't fly to? They are probably one of, if not THE leading carrier in LAX-NYC and LAX-BOS market. They fly LAX-MIA/FLL. The only other market that may have a small premium demand is Hawaii. The juries out on whether they'll serve that. A.net peeps say yes - time will tell. AUS, LAS and SFO aren't premium markets. The problem with LAX is that no one airline dominates it. Every airline is fighting for a piece of the pie. JetBlue is just trying to find their niche there, or trying to see if there's room for them to create a niche. They're in every premium market they can be in right now.

ASFlyer wrote:

sfojvjets wrote:

Hi all, I feel like we've seen B6 management say that they will be trimming their network to bolster their main hubs, but we haven't seen the vast majority of the covid adds and thin/leisure tcons dropped yet. Any idea when we'll see these kinds of routes go away, and to which hubs those freed up planes will be going?

PS I'm still very much interested in the prospects of a B6 SFO hub... their product is well suited for premium traffic, yet at LAX, they seem to be picking up the slack at the very bottom of the market, considering adds like JAX/CHS/RIC/LAS/RNO etc... These are all more suited towards A220 flying and I have to wonder whether B6 is continuing to fly these solely to keep the gate space LAWA gave them, because they don't seem eager/bold enough to expand into the key markets that have that premium demand. (Of course, LAS/AUS/SFO are key markets that have been added in 2020 but they aren't exactly premium due to stage length.)

what markets have premium demand from LAX that they don't fly to? They are probably one of, if not THE leading carrier in LAX-NYC and LAX-BOS market. They fly LAX-MIA/FLL. The only other market that may have a small premium demand is Hawaii. The juries out on whether they'll serve that. A.net peeps say yes - time will tell. AUS, LAS and SFO aren't premium markets. The problem with LAX is that no one airline dominates it. Every airline is fighting for a piece of the pie. JetBlue is just trying to find their niche there, or trying to see if there's room for them to create a niche. They're in every premium market they can be in right now.

I think it's important to realize that B6 is not in every premium market they can be in right now – they're in every premium *transcon* market out of LAX. NYC and BOS are just two of many other important markets there are to serve. By "premium demand," I simply mean business demand - so there are quite frankly a ton of metros that they don't fly to from LAX that they really need to consider if they want to be a relevant option for front-of-the-cabin/business pax. IAH/ORD/DEN/DFW etc are some key cities in the middle of the country that B6 is probably too scared to go into from LAX (and rightfully so, given the amount of blowback they'd receive from the big three). SLC is the only market absent from that list of mid-country hubs that they've gone into from LAX, and that's probably due to Neeleman's deep history with the city itself. I did clarify in my post that ex-LAX, AUS, LAS, and SFO are NOT premium markets, they are simply key markets that they currently serve from LAX, and the problem you talk about at LAX is exactly the reason that I'm saying it's worthwhile for them to consider other markets. LAX is simply too fragmented IMO. It says a lot that the airport's biggest player has barely over 20% of market share (AA).

sfojvjets wrote:

Hi all, I feel like we've seen B6 management say that they will be trimming their network to bolster their main hubs, but we haven't seen the vast majority of the covid adds and thin/leisure tcons dropped yet. Any idea when we'll see these kinds of routes go away, and to which hubs those freed up planes will be going?

PS I'm still very much interested in the prospects of a B6 SFO hub... their product is well suited for premium traffic, yet at LAX, they seem to be picking up the slack at the very bottom of the market, considering adds like JAX/CHS/RIC/LAS/RNO etc... These are all more suited towards A220 flying and I have to wonder whether B6 is continuing to fly these solely to keep the gate space LAWA gave them, because they don't seem eager/bold enough to expand into the key markets that have that premium demand. (Of course, LAS/AUS/SFO are key markets that have been added in 2020 but they aren't exactly premium due to stage length.)

I believe we have seen the vast majority of Covid adds dropped:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-m ... oute-cuts/

As far as what Focus Cities they will be focusing on in 2021/22?

NYC. BOS.

What’s next (2023)? More NYC, BOS plus LAX and a little FLL.

After that (24/25)? Finish LAX and FLL. Maybe a little MCO and SJU love too.

After that? Fleet is key. Do they order more LRs/XLRs, Mint, 321 core, execute the 50 options for 220s? Have they extended leases on the 30 190s or are they dropping them 1-4-1 in 2023-2026 as they come off leases? Are they still keeping the 30 owned ones at this point or are they parking them too?

Fleet announcements 2021-2024 will determine what they can do post 2025 as right now their order book dries up and up to 60 190s and 11 320s could be retired by then too. So order announcements in the coming years will give us a good clue on network plans after the build out of all of the above.

TL:DR. It’s all JFK, EWR, LGA and BOS for now based on the articles I’ve read and every press release, SEC filing or earnings call mentions the NEA as the driver behind everything right now.

Great timng sfojvjets. This is actually a topic I want to talk about. The Q2 data came out and one of the most interesting part is to look at the market share report for local market. So this looks at how much ticket revenue is spent by local resident of each airport on a particular airline. This is a great tool to measure an airline's "point of sale" out of that airport. While, I will go through other airports later, this is a great opportunity to go over LAX and SFO to show what I'm talking about.

Keep in mind that these numbers are just for domestic and includes the full itinerary. So if someone does SFO->DFW->JAN and then back on AA, the whole fare would be counted toward AA' SFO total. You will see that non-hub legacies still do reasonably well in some of these airports despite only hub service, because they do capture a lot of these demand.

Another thing to consider is that different airlines have different ancillary revenues (like baggage fees). As CrankyFlier talked about here https://crankyflier.com/2021/08/03/shou ... -bag-fees/, AS and B6 generate much higher revenue domestically from baggage fees than the Big 3. WN gets almost nothing from baggage fees. ULCCs generate a whole lot of their revenues from ancillary revenues. I think it's generally fair to assume these market share report probably under estimates ULCC influence and overestimates the big 4 (especially WN).

With all that said, here is what LAX looked for 2016 Q4, 2019 Q3 and 2021 Q2. I picked 2016Q4, because it was the last non-winter quarter before VX merged into AS and right at the beginning of DL's buildup in BOS. I picked 2019Q3 because it was the last summer quarter before COVID. And of course, 2021Q2 is the most recent quarter we have data for. It's probably the first COVID era quarter that had some real demand. I'd expect the Q3 data to be even more relevant since domestic demand really came back last quarter.
2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 129986 56090718 392754105 28.30%
DL 90597 37259911 262452935 18.80%
NK 28928 3882912 63522182 1.96%
WN 106716 24642789 181179989 12.43%
AS 20364 4938618 37309047 2.49%
SY 2018 530660 5635674 0.27%
B6 15733 7325522 63500014 3.70%
G4 3929 313388 3489305 0.16%
F9 8806 1327736 21007618 0.67%
VX 42619 15378067 116925927 7.76%
HA 12414 8434901 58798465 4.26%
UA 93722 38085050 291450234 19.21%


2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 143379 59705801 421505389 27.11%
DL 120851 48485539 333705582 22.02%
NK 32501 4840367 78732432 2.20%
WN 100319 23419980 168614323 10.63%
AS 66653 19337721 154153471 8.78%
SY 5556 1372621 16875156 0.62%
B6 22443 10609709 86277089 4.82%
G4 6965 1064121 12524094 0.48%
F9 4417 607525 8381908 0.28%
HA 17328 9517137 81263497 4.32%
UA 102022 41280774 297242469 18.74%


2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 106838 35625064 334812309 27.41%
DL 94215 33301293 267995440 25.63%
NK 25531 3052299 66092943 2.35%
WN 50889 10287122 96479168 7.92%
AS 38245 9147272 76701661 7.04%
SY 2044 440116 5980629 0.34%
B6 28899 10237239 98581731 7.88%
G4 5010 597794 9820371 0.46%
F9 5817 235654 6214809 0.18%
HA 16872 7604196 79760258 5.85%
UA 53909 19426669 166522930 14.95%

I think B6 numbers actually look decent for Q2 despite not having had a major expansion here in LAX. Most of their revenue here comes from transcon stuff. Even with that, they are probably slightly larger than both WN and AS (if we include baggage fees and international flights). It's quite interesting to me that HA captures close to 6% of local market with just HI flights. While UA is down to 15%.

If we look back in 2016Q4 data, B6 right now is basically at where VX was back then. There is still quite a bit of upside for B6 at LAX if they can get enough gates to operate 70+ flights a day. And I will discuss where they should add flights to later. Compared to 2016Q4, UA was at 19% and WN was at over 12% vs just 3% for B6. Things have changed quite a bit in the past couple of years.

And here are the numbers for LA Basin as a whole. You will see B6's number not changing much from 2019 till now, since they moved the LGB stuff over to LAX. WN's numbers were a lot higher across LA Basin as a whole. But it's still only #3 behind AA & DL. It just shows that an airline operating mostly short haul routes will have a hard time dominating local market even if that airline does it really well.

2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 164493 71631269 489000211 25.57%
DL 107196 44494172 306869318 15.88%
NK 28928 3882912 63522182 1.39%
WN 254923 61990443 352134825 22.13%
AS 37938 9720509 66660458 3.47%
SY 2018 530660 5635674 0.19%
B6 46109 13572452 104755370 4.85%
G4 3929 313388 3489305 0.11%
F9 11853 1810574 26015683 0.65%
VX 42619 15378067 116925927 5.49%
HA 12414 8434901 58798465 3.01%
UA 118572 48395633 355669475 17.28%

2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 182809 78439091 531172203 24.30%
DL 148744 60900338 402598127 18.87%
NK 35508 5116689 81145506 1.59%
WN 251580 61093693 338679895 18.93%
AS 99465 28877870 204881119 8.95%
SY 5556 1372621 16875156 0.43%
B6 52767 18116595 140523809 5.61%
G4 6965 1064121 12524094 0.33%
F9 10718 1464972 21880013 0.45%
HA 19724 10845961 92981266 3.36%
UA 134924 55522292 382258847 17.20%


2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 143306 48942552 434101477 26.36%
DL 112610 40304047 311942100 21.71%
NK 27354 3188143 67131559 1.72%
WN 155654 32317691 254406082 17.40%
AS 59042 14244989 112558939 7.67%
SY 2241 473681 6468314 0.26%
B6 29619 10518053 101562533 5.66%
G4 6473 702527 11459087 0.38%
F9 14020 622571 19093003 0.34%
HA 23395 10675428 111775496 5.75%
UA 65084 23697108 197017724 12.76%

The SFO numbers are quite amazing actually.

2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 41445 18526868 140590367 12.34%
DL 34289 15407296 114943951 10.26%
WN 44419 9799062 61411535 6.53%
AS 11580 2888273 14033518 1.92%
SY 1738 583633 4914313 0.39%
B6 16568 5865652 46488386 3.91%
F9 8961 1565788 23014407 1.04%
VX 62378 21129028 143565977 14.07%
HA 6373 4026481 28567468 2.68%
UA 152385 70373105 453047647 46.86%

2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 37782 16000057 120788270 10.35%
DL 45174 18105673 132587953 11.72%
WN 38771 7943271 50113409 5.14%
AS 77436 22203335 166562048 14.37%
SY 4166 941971 11231758 0.61%
B6 15292 6975826 56755767 4.51%
F9 6840 931540 14370808 0.60%
HA 6231 3257133 27340169 2.11%
UA 174581 78198731 493734348 50.60%

2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 29875 12116194 105819184 15.64%
DL 22658 9768644 74281605 12.61%
WN 16513 3281828 23782938 4.24%
AS 35504 9374330 66727647 12.10%
SY 1450 393920 4591498 0.51%
B6 13453 6061123 50197308 7.82%
F9 6776 405885 9033153 0.52%
HA 5847 2572241 25943177 3.32%
UA 74632 33494346 232689669 43.24%

They are already at the same market share in SFO as LAX without doing basically anything at SFO. SFO is a curious market. In most non-hub markets, B6 typically does a lot worse on local market, since they don't have much brand recognition there. In SFO, they do as well with local residents as visitors.

I'm quite bullish toward a future buildup for B6 at SFO, because all the numbers show that they could be successful there. VX reached at close to 15% local market share at its peak. There is no reason B6 could not reach that level if they tried it out. WN has shrunk big time. AS is now #4 and failed to capture much of the ex-VX crowd. There is plenty of gates available. AA & DL does well with just hub service. UA is slowly bringing things back. There are a lot of AA ff in Bay area that would be interested in collecting miles on B6 flights. There is clearly a market for higher end LCC in SFO. It's one of the few markets in the country where B6 actually has real upside.

Now, if we including rest of Bay Area, the full dynamic shows up. You see WN actually increasing their market share across the Bay Area despite really shrinking at SFO. A large part of that is their new HI flights out of OAK/SJC. If WN (and AS to a lesser extent) are going for the strategy of prioritizing the secondary airport over the primary airport in California, then that leaves room for B6 to grow in the primary airport. Again, keep any eye on how large HA is across Bay Area.

2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 57035 25142272 186108760 10.68%
DL 52801 21716454 155639784 9.22%
NK 8236 1037645 11614307 0.44%
WN 231907 57652986 320191103 24.49%
AS 41566 13445390 85103655 5.71%
SY 1738 583633 4914313 0.25%
B6 23843 7781109 62798540 3.31%
G4 2983 197169 1925033 0.08%
F9 8961 1565788 23014407 0.67%
VX 62378 21129028 143565977 8.98%
HA 20940 12637573 96130306 5.37%
UA 157235 72541941 467991729 30.81%

2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 52524 22015309 162753705 8.67%
DL 70386 27575080 192827123 10.86%
NK 12979 1732007 22061159 0.68%
WN 254299 61149912 369073162 24.08%
AS 128189 37919421 279576461 14.93%
SY 4166 941971 11231758 0.37%
B6 22972 9033161 76167055 3.56%
G4 4190 585777 4581081 0.23%
F9 8834 1121623 16564744 0.44%
HA 19136 9951020 85997331 3.92%
UA 182796 81921744 518231794 32.26%

2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 36779 14691246 125567393 11.44%
DL 33298 13435068 98394912 10.46%
NK 5699 590958 7565376 0.46%
WN 147884 33766070 265523894 26.28%
AS 59043 16108458 122580075 12.54%
SY 1450 393920 4591498 0.31%
B6 13886 6259809 52131867 4.87%
G4 1945 163902 1910961 0.13%
F9 9832 572156 12555576 0.45%
HA 17269 7972585 78190334 6.21%
UA 76946 34523601 239784391 26.87%

tphuang wrote:

The SFO numbers are quite amazing actually.

2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 41445 18526868 140590367 12.34%
DL 34289 15407296 114943951 10.26%
WN 44419 9799062 61411535 6.53%
AS 11580 2888273 14033518 1.92%
SY 1738 583633 4914313 0.39%
B6 16568 5865652 46488386 3.91%
F9 8961 1565788 23014407 1.04%
VX 62378 21129028 143565977 14.07%
HA 6373 4026481 28567468 2.68%
UA 152385 70373105 453047647 46.86%

2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 37782 16000057 120788270 10.35%
DL 45174 18105673 132587953 11.72%
WN 38771 7943271 50113409 5.14%
AS 77436 22203335 166562048 14.37%
SY 4166 941971 11231758 0.61%
B6 15292 6975826 56755767 4.51%
F9 6840 931540 14370808 0.60%
HA 6231 3257133 27340169 2.11%
UA 174581 78198731 493734348 50.60%

2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 29875 12116194 105819184 15.64%
DL 22658 9768644 74281605 12.61%
WN 16513 3281828 23782938 4.24%
AS 35504 9374330 66727647 12.10%
SY 1450 393920 4591498 0.51%
B6 13453 6061123 50197308 7.82%
F9 6776 405885 9033153 0.52%
HA 5847 2572241 25943177 3.32%
UA 74632 33494346 232689669 43.24%

They are already at the same market share in SFO as LAX without doing basically anything at SFO. SFO is a curious market. In most non-hub markets, B6 typically does a lot worse on local market, since they don't have much brand recognition there. In SFO, they do as well with local residents as visitors.

I'm quite bullish toward a future buildup for B6 at SFO, because all the numbers show that they could be successful there. VX reached at close to 15% local market share at its peak. There is no reason B6 could not reach that level if they tried it out. WN has shrunk big time. AS is now #4 and failed to capture much of the ex-VX crowd. There is plenty of gates available. AA & DL does well with just hub service. UA is slowly bringing things back. There are a lot of AA ff in Bay area that would be interested in collecting miles on B6 flights. There is clearly a market for higher end LCC in SFO. It's one of the few markets in the country where B6 actually has real upside.

Now, if we including rest of Bay Area, the full dynamic shows up. You see WN actually increasing their market share across the Bay Area despite really shrinking at SFO. A large part of that is their new HI flights out of OAK/SJC. If WN (and AS to a lesser extent) are going for the strategy of prioritizing the secondary airport over the primary airport in California, then that leaves room for B6 to grow in the primary airport. Again, keep any eye on how large HA is across Bay Area.

2016Q4
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 57035 25142272 186108760 10.68%
DL 52801 21716454 155639784 9.22%
NK 8236 1037645 11614307 0.44%
WN 231907 57652986 320191103 24.49%
AS 41566 13445390 85103655 5.71%
SY 1738 583633 4914313 0.25%
B6 23843 7781109 62798540 3.31%
G4 2983 197169 1925033 0.08%
F9 8961 1565788 23014407 0.67%
VX 62378 21129028 143565977 8.98%
HA 20940 12637573 96130306 5.37%
UA 157235 72541941 467991729 30.81%

2019Q3
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 52524 22015309 162753705 8.67%
DL 70386 27575080 192827123 10.86%
NK 12979 1732007 22061159 0.68%
WN 254299 61149912 369073162 24.08%
AS 128189 37919421 279576461 14.93%
SY 4166 941971 11231758 0.37%
B6 22972 9033161 76167055 3.56%
G4 4190 585777 4581081 0.23%
F9 8834 1121623 16564744 0.44%
HA 19136 9951020 85997331 3.92%
UA 182796 81921744 518231794 32.26%

2021Q2
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 36779 14691246 125567393 11.44%
DL 33298 13435068 98394912 10.46%
NK 5699 590958 7565376 0.46%
WN 147884 33766070 265523894 26.28%
AS 59043 16108458 122580075 12.54%
SY 1450 393920 4591498 0.31%
B6 13886 6259809 52131867 4.87%
G4 1945 163902 1910961 0.13%
F9 9832 572156 12555576 0.45%
HA 17269 7972585 78190334 6.21%
UA 76946 34523601 239784391 26.87%

JetBlue had big plans for 2 Duel major Hubs in LAX & SFO along with a major focus city in LAS during its plans for a post Virgin America merger.
While it seemed like a loss at first thankfully AlaskaAir pulled out a page from a old merger playbook with the Virgin America integration. Stop competition from growing then basically flushing all the post merger market gains with bad planning. It reminds me of the UsAir PSA merger when all was set and done it left the door wide open for everyone else.
Hopefully JetBlue will not lose sight on building up a SFO focus city with its NEA and European expansion.
Welcome Back.

Enjoy or Don’t
Flyguy

tphuang wrote:

They are already at the same market share in SFO as LAX without doing basically anything at SFO. SFO is a curious market. In most non-hub markets, B6 typically does a lot worse on local market, since they don't have much brand recognition there. In SFO, they do as well with local residents as visitors.

I'm quite bullish toward a future buildup for B6 at SFO, because all the numbers show that they could be successful there. VX reached at close to 15% local market share at its peak. There is no reason B6 could not reach that level if they tried it out. WN has shrunk big time. AS is now #4 and failed to capture much of the ex-VX crowd. There is plenty of gates available. AA & DL does well with just hub service. UA is slowly bringing things back. There are a lot of AA ff in Bay area that would be interested in collecting miles on B6 flights. There is clearly a market for higher end LCC in SFO. It's one of the few markets in the country where B6 actually has real upside.

I’d be careful reading too much into B6’s market share for now. SFO doesn’t just have Covid demand issues but had one of their runways closed for repaving for most of the summer. As UA adds flights back B6’s market share percentage is naturally going to fall. If you look at the numbers almost ever airline’s market share rose a couple of points except UA- because UA operates the bulk of intercontinental flights to Asia either not running or with little pax demand, and because of hub slashed the most domestically due to demand and runway situation.

When did B6 start painting the 321s in the Bubbles tail on the 3N1s? I was thrown for a loop when I saw N907JB in Bubbles.

As for B6 at LAX and SFO, given how their route structures are, that market share is pretty impressive. The issue is likely gate space.

As for the E190s, they will have to be replaced at some point. I have to wonder if the E290 could still be an option, especially for smaller markets where the A220-300 can’t be used…or if B6 would consider the A220-100.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

When did B6 start painting the 321s in the Bubbles tail on the 3N1s? I was thrown for a loop when I saw N907JB in Bubbles.

As for B6 at LAX and SFO, given how their route structures are, that market share is pretty impressive. The issue is likely gate space.

As for the E190s, they will have to be replaced at some point. I have to wonder if the E290 could still be an option, especially for smaller markets where the A220-300 can’t be used…or if B6 would consider the A220-100.

Looking at flightaware 907 returned from VQQ on 10/24. Tail 905 is also in the balloon scheme. The 321s are starting to approach their repaint point and it just looks like B6 decided to repaint the CEOs to match the core NEOs, so I’d expect more 321 CEOs to come out with the balloon tail.

Just to make things a little clearer on the market share trend out of SFO (2016Q4 -> 2019Q3 -> 2021Q2)

AA 12.34 -> 10.35 -> 15.64
DL 10.26 -> 11.72 -> 12.61
WN 6.53 -> 5.14 -> 4.24
AS+VX 15.99 -> 14.37 -> 12.10
B6 3.91 -> 4.51 -> 7.82
HA 2.68 -> 2.11 -> 3.32
UA 46.86 -> 50.6 -> 43.24

And for LAX
AA 28.3 -> 27.11 -> 27.41
DL 18.8 -> 22.02 -> 25.63
WN 12.43 -> 10.63 -> 7.92
AS+VX 10.25 -> 8.78 -> 7.04
B6 3.70 -> 4.82 -> 7.88
HA 4.26 -> 4.32 -> 5.85
UA 19.21 -> 18.74 -> 14.95

So from what I can see, AA is maintaining its market share out of LAX and also had some COVID related gains out of SFO.

DL gained quite a bit out of LAX and a little bit out of SFO also.

WN lost quite a bit at both LAX and SFO. Probably due to shifting more to secondary airports. Its Bay area gain is mostly due to HI flights from OAK/SJC. It may gain some of that back with its LAX HI flighs this year.

AS lost quite a bit at both LAX and SFO. It also seem to shift more toward secondary airports.

UA lost quite a bit at LAX and quite a bit out of SFO during COVID time. Out of SFO, I don't know how permanent are those shifts. Are those lost due to a longer term reduction in corporate spending in high tech firms (as more people work from home)? Are those lost due to reduction in TPAC demand (resulting in less feed)? Are they lost due to reduction in short haul demand? Is it due to a changing mix of leisure vs corporate? I don't know the answer to that.

I will be posting more data in the coming days. We know that legacy airlines have suffered a larger drop in revenue vs 2019 than B6. So you'd expect B6 to be doing better in local market share than pre-COVID. It's interesting to see where they are growing in.

They have clearly grown in both LAX and SFO. The former could partially be attributed to moving flights over from LGB, but those short haul routes really didn't provide them much revenue. The latter growth is quite mysterious since they operated below 2019 capacity in Q2 out of SFO just like everyone else. Maybe they brought things back faster than other carriers? Maybe NEA allows them to capture more higher yielding customers than pre-COVID. Maybe the Q2 numbers are just lucky. But it does seem like they are able to capture more local revenue by adding premium type of flights. In the coming days, I will be posting RDU, RIC and CHS data also. We will see that B6 made very little gain in local market share even with all the flights they added. It shows me that LAX and SFO are exactly the kind of markets they need to be expanding in.

Frankly, growing in the 2nd and 3rd largest domestic O&D markets seem like a more worthwhile expansion than growing in AUS/BNA/RDU. I'm hoping people in the JetBlue management are noticing the same trends that I am.

tphuang wrote:

WN lost quite a bit at both LAX and SFO. Probably due to shifting more to secondary airports. Its Bay area gain is mostly due to HI flights from OAK/SJC. It may gain some of that back with its LAX HI flighs this year.

WN carried fewer domestic passengers out of Greater Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay Area markets in July 2021 than in July 2019.

Here were the number of passengers, number of seats, and average load factors on WN out of the Greater Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay Area markets in July 2021 vs. July 2019:
Los Angeles (LAX/BUR/LGB/ONT/SNA) - 1837593 passengers in July 2019, 1561976 passengers in July 2021 (85.00% of July 2019 levels)
San Francisco (SFO/OAK/SJC) - 1854907 passengers in July 2019, 1259307 passengers in July 2021 (67.89% of July 2019 levels)

Here were the number of passengers, number of seats, and average load factors on WN out of Greater Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area markets in July 2021 vs. July 2019, broken down by airport:
LAX - 841917 passengers in July 2019, 535664 passengers in July 2021 (63.62% of July 2019 levels)
BUR - 372718 passengers in July 2019, 290218 passengers in July 2021 (77.87% of July 2019 levels)
LGB - 106225 passengers in July 2019, 185585 passengers in July 2021 (174.71% of July 2019 levels)
ONT - 233914 passengers in July 2019, 169857 passengers in July 2021 (72.62% of July 2019 levels)
SNA - 282819 passengers in July 2019, 380562 passengers in July 2021 (134.56% of July 2019 levels)

SFO - 303037 passengers in July 2019, 147478 passengers in July 2021 (48.67% of July 2019 levels)
OAK - 847201 passengers in July 2019, 649964 passengers in July 2021 (76.72% of July 2019 levels)
SJC - 704669 passengers in July 2019, 461865 passengers in July 2021 (65.54% of July 2019 levels)

tphuang wrote:

They have clearly grown in both LAX and SFO. The former could partially be attributed to moving flights over from LGB, but those short haul routes really didn't provide them much revenue. The latter growth is quite mysterious since they operated below 2019 capacity in Q2 out of SFO just like everyone else. Maybe they brought things back faster than other carriers? Maybe NEA allows them to capture more higher yielding customers than pre-COVID. Maybe the Q2 numbers are just lucky. But it does seem like they are able to capture more local revenue by adding premium type of flights. In the coming days, I will be posting RDU, RIC and CHS data also. We will see that B6 made very little gain in local market share even with all the flights they added. It shows me that LAX and SFO are exactly the kind of markets they need to be expanding in.

Frankly, growing in the 2nd and 3rd largest domestic O&D markets seem like a more worthwhile expansion than growing in AUS/BNA/RDU. I'm hoping people in the JetBlue management are noticing the same trends that I am.

One challenge that B6 faces in both the Greater Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area is that WN already has a significant FF base in both markets. WN also has nonstop service out of OAK to some markets that B6, AA, or AS don't currently serve nonstop from the San Francisco Bay Area such as ABQ, DEN, EUG, HOU, MCI, BNA, RNO, and STL.

Most of the top domestic destinations that B6 doesn't currently serve nonstop from SFO already have nonstop service out of the San Francisco Bay Area on UA, WN, AS, AA, or DL. There are also many UA and WN FF's in the San Francisco Bay Area who would still stick with UA or WN if B6 adds nonstop service to additional destinations out of SFO.

tphuang wrote:

Just to make things a little clearer on the market share trend out of SFO (2016Q4 -> 2019Q3 -> 2021Q2)

AA 12.34 -> 10.35 -> 15.64
DL 10.26 -> 11.72 -> 12.61
WN 6.53 -> 5.14 -> 4.24
AS+VX 15.99 -> 14.37 -> 12.10
B6 3.91 -> 4.51 -> 7.82
HA 2.68 -> 2.11 -> 3.32
UA 46.86 -> 50.6 -> 43.24

And for LAX
AA 28.3 -> 27.11 -> 27.41
DL 18.8 -> 22.02 -> 25.63
WN 12.43 -> 10.63 -> 7.92
AS+VX 10.25 -> 8.78 -> 7.04
B6 3.70 -> 4.82 -> 7.88
HA 4.26 -> 4.32 -> 5.85
UA 19.21 -> 18.74 -> 14.95

So from what I can see, AA is maintaining its market share out of LAX and also had some COVID related gains out of SFO.

DL gained quite a bit out of LAX and a little bit out of SFO also.

WN lost quite a bit at both LAX and SFO. Probably due to shifting more to secondary airports. Its Bay area gain is mostly due to HI flights from OAK/SJC. It may gain some of that back with its LAX HI flighs this year.

AS lost quite a bit at both LAX and SFO. It also seem to shift more toward secondary airports.

UA lost quite a bit at LAX and quite a bit out of SFO during COVID time. Out of SFO, I don't know how permanent are those shifts. Are those lost due to a longer term reduction in corporate spending in high tech firms (as more people work from home)? Are those lost due to reduction in TPAC demand (resulting in less feed)? Are they lost due to reduction in short haul demand? Is it due to a changing mix of leisure vs corporate? I don't know the answer to that.

I will be posting more data in the coming days. We know that legacy airlines have suffered a larger drop in revenue vs 2019 than B6. So you'd expect B6 to be doing better in local market share than pre-COVID. It's interesting to see where they are growing in.

They have clearly grown in both LAX and SFO. The former could partially be attributed to moving flights over from LGB, but those short haul routes really didn't provide them much revenue. The latter growth is quite mysterious since they operated below 2019 capacity in Q2 out of SFO just like everyone else. Maybe they brought things back faster than other carriers? Maybe NEA allows them to capture more higher yielding customers than pre-COVID. Maybe the Q2 numbers are just lucky. But it does seem like they are able to capture more local revenue by adding premium type of flights. In the coming days, I will be posting RDU, RIC and CHS data also. We will see that B6 made very little gain in local market share even with all the flights they added. It shows me that LAX and SFO are exactly the kind of markets they need to be expanding in.

Frankly, growing in the 2nd and 3rd largest domestic O&D markets seem like a more worthwhile expansion than growing in AUS/BNA/RDU. I'm hoping people in the JetBlue management are noticing the same trends that I am.

I do wonder if there is a way to mention short-haul growth from LAX and SFO (excluding inter-continental services).

IdlewildJFK wrote:

I believe we have seen the vast majority of Covid adds dropped:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-m ... oute-cuts/

As far as what Focus Cities they will be focusing on in 2021/22?

NYC. BOS.

What’s next (2023)? More NYC, BOS plus LAX and a little FLL.

After that (24/25)? Finish LAX and FLL. Maybe a little MCO and SJU love too.

After that? Fleet is key. Do they order more LRs/XLRs, Mint, 321 core, execute the 50 options for 220s? Have they extended leases on the 30 190s or are they dropping them 1-4-1 in 2023-2026 as they come off leases? Are they still keeping the 30 owned ones at this point or are they parking them too?

Fleet announcements 2021-2024 will determine what they can do post 2025 as right now their order book dries up and up to 60 190s and 11 320s could be retired by then too. So order announcements in the coming years will give us a good clue on network plans after the build out of all of the above.

TL:DR. It’s all JFK, EWR, LGA and BOS for now based on the articles I’ve read and every press release, SEC filing or earnings call mentions the NEA as the driver behind everything right now.

I agree with your projection for 2021-2023. 2024+... MCO will not see any growth. Yields are trash there and there is no indication that will change. ULCC/SWA capacity is too great and B6's more premium offering can earn better yields in other markets.

Leases on the 30 190s are slated to begin expiring in 2023 I believe, accelerating in 2024/2025 and finishing up in 2026. Last I was told they would not be extended, however the 30 owned hulls will be kept for an undetermined amount of time afterward.

Everything is NEA for the time being, with some modest LAX growth coming. More Europe expansion (Paris/Amsterdam perhaps first, slot availability pending) as LRs are delivered. Hawaii is being looked at, but mid-2023 at the earliest for launch and even that might be a bit optimistic. I hope SFO sees a build-up as well, but with the order book as it is there isn't much block hour slack to add there. Hopefully we see an aggressive order coming soon.

They don't have a lot of slack in their fleet for next summer once you account for all the growth on the east coast. Long term, the problem facing them in the west coast is lack of brand awareness and lack of gate space. If we go by the optimistic assumption that they will get the gates LAWA promised them and be able to operate 70 to 75 flights a day at some point, that is still a fraction of what other major airlines will be able to operate. If they end up with less gates than that, they will be even more hamstrung. They do have a little more room for growth at SFO but I think the type of network they can build there will still be very long in stage length.

Without a lot of brand recognition outside of northeast and Florida, it limits what they can do network wise. I think it would be foolish for them to try competing against WN and AS on those smaller west coast market. And frankly, they can grab point of sale in SFO and LAX without really much of a west coast network. VX proved you can do that when they managed to have 14% of local market share at SFO. While that may not sound like a lot, B6 only had 15% market share out of the big 3 airports of NYC in 2019. Getting into the 10 to 15% market share at both LAX and SFO would be a huge for B6.

So, the question is where can they add flights that will allow them to win local market share. The answer is quite obvious when you look at HA's market share in these reports. With probably just 6 flights a day out of LAX to HI, HA only had 1% less market share than AS (who probably operated 60+ flights a day in Q2). I think WN realized that being able to fly to Hawaii is a big deal. People make ff program choices based on large purchases. They make credit card choice based on dream vacations they can redeem their points to. If someone makes 1 trip to Hawaii in lie flat business class and 10 flights to places like LAS/PHX and SFO. They are most likely going to pick their airline of choice based on the airline they spend $2000 on rather than airlines they spend 50 to $100 tickets on. So if JetBlue can pick up a lot of customers with mint to East Coast and Hawaii, those customers are likely to become mosaic member and also fly B6 up to places like LAS and SFO. If they need to go somewhere that B6 doesn't fly to, there is always AA.

So, I took a look at the top markets out of LAX based on revenue in Q2. So, this is where people of LA are spending money to fly to. Out of this list, 18% of domestic revenue goes to JFK/EWR/BOS/MIA/FLL. JetBlue grabs a large chunk of that. Another 16% of revenue goes to HNL/OGG/KOA/LIH. Now, the short haul business revneue is down. But even in 2019Q3, the large west coast markets of SEA & SFO only represented 5% of domestic revenue. For that regular quarter, JFK/EWR/BOS/FLL probably represented 21% of domestic revneue and HI represented another 14%. On top of that, the longer flight revenues are understated due to more ancillary revenues on those flights.

If you were to combine B6 and HA's LAX market share, they are only 1% off UA. I'm not saying B6 can be as large as UA at LAX. I am saying there is still quite a lot of potential for B6 in LAX if they add flights to markets with premium leisure demand. That's where mint does the best. Mint 2.0 would be far and away the best product on LAX-HI. Aside from HA, most airlines don't even have lie flat bed on LAX-HNL.

So, I'm not surprised that JetBlue route planning has been talking about adding HI flights. If they want to grow in LAX, adding more mint flights to Northeast and HI is the best way to go. summer of 2023 is when they really should be aiming to fly to HNL and OGG. Not sure how they get there with the current A321 delivery schedule. I think they need to add 2 A321N deliveries in the next year or 2.

Again, you get higher yielding customers by flying the best premium product to the markets they want to go to. After they get status and credit card, they are more likely to fly your airline on the shorter stuff. And when they accumulate enough miles, they will want to be able to redeem them on those vacation experiences to HI or Central America. People don't need to redeem miles for $50 flights to LAS and PHX.

For 2021Q2
Destination Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
JFK 23101 11704323 89139125 9.08%
HNL 23961 9735107 112419769 7.55%
OGG 14008 5941204 64503069 4.61%
MIA 13426 4641588 53876987 3.60%
BOS 10020 4339847 41746147 3.37%
EWR 9508 4213278 36264527 3.27%
ATL 12458 4176641 40672157 3.24%
ORD 14670 3968913 40700664 3.08%
MCO 13801 3839133 52099162 2.98%
KOA 5783 2872893 26654980 2.23%
DFW 12807 2869981 25850234 2.23%
FLL 10199 2712948 38958688 2.10%
LIH 5175 2562611 25005304 1.99%
LAS 19024 2441690 7543110 1.89%
SEA 12389 2391052 19910747 1.85%
PHL 5847 2230103 23021268 1.73%
DCA 5595 2124279 20286397 1.65%
DTW 6036 2051819 20825273 1.59%
IAH 9957 2006383 22365908 1.56%
SFO 11398 1974823 6372127 1.53%

2019Q3
Destination Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
JFK 38051 21830622 148413588 10.01%
HNL 27122 13518418 125481684 6.20%
OGG 16954 9059088 78814311 4.15%
BOS 19893 8627266 81768574 3.96%
ORD 24030 8311369 68531461 3.81%
EWR 17699 8262740 69644588 3.79%
SEA 23878 5886297 38646649 2.70%
ATL 13424 5522636 43049615 2.53%
SFO 29076 5489064 17292202 2.52%
LIH 9366 4822374 45484813 2.21%
MCO 13195 4551917 48477696 2.09%
LAS 29662 4498786 11985438 2.06%
DFW 16343 4234848 32788154 1.94%
DEN 18877 4230024 27007487 1.94%
PHL 10095 4164093 38551401 1.91%
IAD 8451 3817223 30731055 1.75%
MIA 8081 3802198 31654375 1.74%
DTW 8460 3679346 30034832 1.69%
KOA 7192 3618581 33226327 1.66%
DCA 7211 3540361 27274136 1.62%

Do you foresee more central US service, maybe by way of a hub there, or just focus on the big coastal hubs?

Does anybody know why we haven’t heard a announcement about another plane order in awhile I get there’s factors but like every o their airline is ordering more planes to capitalize on the travel that’s going to be coming or is on the rise now. Maybe they don’t have slots for delivery but someone up thread said so they have options available?

trueblew wrote:

IdlewildJFK wrote:

I believe we have seen the vast majority of Covid adds dropped:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-m ... oute-cuts/

As far as what Focus Cities they will be focusing on in 2021/22?

NYC. BOS.

What’s next (2023)? More NYC, BOS plus LAX and a little FLL.

After that (24/25)? Finish LAX and FLL. Maybe a little MCO and SJU love too.

After that? Fleet is key. Do they order more LRs/XLRs, Mint, 321 core, execute the 50 options for 220s? Have they extended leases on the 30 190s or are they dropping them 1-4-1 in 2023-2026 as they come off leases? Are they still keeping the 30 owned ones at this point or are they parking them too?

Fleet announcements 2021-2024 will determine what they can do post 2025 as right now their order book dries up and up to 60 190s and 11 320s could be retired by then too. So order announcements in the coming years will give us a good clue on network plans after the build out of all of the above.

TL:DR. It’s all JFK, EWR, LGA and BOS for now based on the articles I’ve read and every press release, SEC filing or earnings call mentions the NEA as the driver behind everything right now.

I agree with your projection for 2021-2023. 2024+... MCO will not see any growth. Yields are trash there and there is no indication that will change. ULCC/SWA capacity is too great and B6's more premium offering can earn better yields in other markets.

Leases on the 30 190s are slated to begin expiring in 2023 I believe, accelerating in 2024/2025 and finishing up in 2026. Last I was told they would not be extended, however the 30 owned hulls will be kept for an undetermined amount of time afterward.

Everything is NEA for the time being, with some modest LAX growth coming. More Europe expansion (Paris/Amsterdam perhaps first, slot availability pending) as LRs are delivered. Hawaii is being looked at, but mid-2023 at the earliest for launch and even that might be a bit optimistic. I hope SFO sees a build-up as well, but with the order book as it is there isn't much block hour slack to add there. Hopefully we see an aggressive order coming soon.

Agreed. Yeah regarding MCO that’s why I said maybe a little love. They will have the terminal for expansion so I’d wager on some very small growth over no growth but not anywhere in ballpark of NYC BOS FLL and LAX.

The routes they've dropped are generally stuff that doesn't pass through one of the focus cities or BDL/HPN. There are a few CUN routes they've also kept route. I'm not sure why they are utilizing A220 on BNA/RDU-CUN next year. Seems like a waste of resource.

As for central US service, I think that's going to be really tough the forseeable future. I'm going to post numbers from Atlantic coast in the days ahead. You will see that even along most of southeast, they really haven't made much in road in market shares even with additional services. It takes a lot of sustained investment in these markets which they don't have time to do right now. LAX and SFO stands out because they are huge O&D market that have received mint service with open arms and are large revenue markets from NYC/Boston/South Florida. Using SAT as an example. They can probably add service there from FLL, EWR and LAX if the initial JFK & BOS service go well, but not a lot of reason to go beyond that.

Just breaking things down by destination groups out of LAX

For NYC/Boston/South florida region, I had over 21% as the share of total revenue
For hawaii, I had over 14% as the share of total revenue
For west coastish (including Nevada, Utah and Arizona), I had about 15% as the share of total revenue
For Chicago/DC/PHL, I had 11% as the share of total revenue
For other legacy fotress hubs, I have over 13% as the share of total revenue
For other transcons, I have over 6% as the share of total revenue
For larger midcon stuff, I have 10% as the share of total revenue

There is about 8 to 9% left for markets that I missed or really small markets.

I think a reasonable expansion at LAX would have them probably capture 1/3 of the NYC/Boston/South Florida market (they are probably at close to 30% right now)
If they put real effort into a Hawaii expansion, they can probably capture 15 to 20% of that market.
For west coast stuff, I think they will be at 5 to 10% of that market. Keep in mind, this is just for LAX. They'd have a much smaller part of pie across all of LA Basin.

Assuming they enter 2 out of 3 between Chicago/DC/Philly, they could have 10% of that market.
For other transcons, I'm thinking of stuff like BDL, BUF, MCO and RDU that they already operate + some other markets. Since they might be the only player in the ones that can support daily service. They can probably capture 25% of that market.

For midcon stuff, the only market they serve is AUS. Let's they add a couple of other ones like PIT/CLE/BNA, maybe they can capture 5% of that market.

I'm assuming they will capture nothing out of the fortress hubs + smaller markets that I missed.

This would make them a respectable player out of LAX. Probably a solid #4 in local revenue. It would require them to add flights to probably all 4 HI islands, 2 out of Chicago/DC/PHL airports, have more service to west coast vs now, add a few more transcon and midcon markets

tphuang wrote:

The routes they've dropped are generally stuff that doesn't pass through one of the focus cities or BDL/HPN. There are a few CUN routes they've also kept route. I'm not sure why they are utilizing A220 on BNA/RDU-CUN next year. Seems like a waste of resource.

As for central US service, I think that's going to be really tough the forseeable future. I'm going to post numbers from Atlantic coast in the days ahead. You will see that even along most of southeast, they really haven't made much in road in market shares even with additional services. It takes a lot of sustained investment in these markets which they don't have time to do right now. LAX and SFO stands out because they are huge O&D market that have received mint service with open arms and are large revenue markets from NYC/Boston/South Florida. Using SAT as an example. They can probably add service there from FLL, EWR and LAX if the initial JFK & BOS service go well, but not a lot of reason to go beyond that.

Just breaking things down by destination groups out of LAX

For NYC/Boston/South florida region, I had over 21% as the share of total revenue
For hawaii, I had over 14% as the share of total revenue
For west coastish (including Nevada, Utah and Arizona), I had about 15% as the share of total revenue
For Chicago/DC/PHL, I had 11% as the share of total revenue
For other legacy fotress hubs, I have over 13% as the share of total revenue
For other transcons, I have over 6% as the share of total revenue
For larger midcon stuff, I have 10% as the share of total revenue

There is about 8 to 9% left for markets that I missed or really small markets.

I think a reasonable expansion at LAX would have them probably capture 1/3 of the NYC/Boston/South Florida market (they are probably at close to 30% right now)
If they put real effort into a Hawaii expansion, they can probably capture 15 to 20% of that market.
For west coast stuff, I think they will be at 5 to 10% of that market. Keep in mind, this is just for LAX. They'd have a much smaller part of pie across all of LA Basin.

Assuming they enter 2 out of 3 between Chicago/DC/Philly, they could have 10% of that market.
For other transcons, I'm thinking of stuff like BDL, BUF, MCO and RDU that they already operate + some other markets. Since they might be the only player in the ones that can support daily service. They can probably capture 25% of that market.

For midcon stuff, the only market they serve is AUS. Let's they add a couple of other ones like PIT/CLE/BNA, maybe they can capture 5% of that market.

I'm assuming they will capture nothing out of the fortress hubs + smaller markets that I missed.

This would make them a respectable player out of LAX. Probably a solid #4 in local revenue. It would require them to add flights to probably all 4 HI islands, 2 out of Chicago/DC/PHL airports, have more service to west coast vs now, add a few more transcon and midcon markets

As always your analysis and opinions are appreciated around here.

I can't see them adding Chicago from LAX given the squeeze between legacies and ULCCs on that route and resultant trash yields plus their poor gate situation at ORD. Do you think PHL/IAD (one or both) would launch all-coach at first and maybe transition to Mint?

BNA seems like a natural add from LAX and frankly I'm surprised they haven't already announced it given some of the other markets they've attempted.

All four islands are being looked at in Hawaii but I'm not certain whether they'd be all 321, a mix of 320/321, or which islands would get the Mint product and which wouldn't. This seems like another case of just not enough airframes to make big network moves in the near term.

trueblew wrote:

tphuang wrote:

The routes they've dropped are generally stuff that doesn't pass through one of the focus cities or BDL/HPN. There are a few CUN routes they've also kept route. I'm not sure why they are utilizing A220 on BNA/RDU-CUN next year. Seems like a waste of resource.

As for central US service, I think that's going to be really tough the forseeable future. I'm going to post numbers from Atlantic coast in the days ahead. You will see that even along most of southeast, they really haven't made much in road in market shares even with additional services. It takes a lot of sustained investment in these markets which they don't have time to do right now. LAX and SFO stands out because they are huge O&D market that have received mint service with open arms and are large revenue markets from NYC/Boston/South Florida. Using SAT as an example. They can probably add service there from FLL, EWR and LAX if the initial JFK & BOS service go well, but not a lot of reason to go beyond that.

Just breaking things down by destination groups out of LAX

For NYC/Boston/South florida region, I had over 21% as the share of total revenue
For hawaii, I had over 14% as the share of total revenue
For west coastish (including Nevada, Utah and Arizona), I had about 15% as the share of total revenue
For Chicago/DC/PHL, I had 11% as the share of total revenue
For other legacy fotress hubs, I have over 13% as the share of total revenue
For other transcons, I have over 6% as the share of total revenue
For larger midcon stuff, I have 10% as the share of total revenue

There is about 8 to 9% left for markets that I missed or really small markets.

I think a reasonable expansion at LAX would have them probably capture 1/3 of the NYC/Boston/South Florida market (they are probably at close to 30% right now)
If they put real effort into a Hawaii expansion, they can probably capture 15 to 20% of that market.
For west coast stuff, I think they will be at 5 to 10% of that market. Keep in mind, this is just for LAX. They'd have a much smaller part of pie across all of LA Basin.

Assuming they enter 2 out of 3 between Chicago/DC/Philly, they could have 10% of that market.
For other transcons, I'm thinking of stuff like BDL, BUF, MCO and RDU that they already operate + some other markets. Since they might be the only player in the ones that can support daily service. They can probably capture 25% of that market.

For midcon stuff, the only market they serve is AUS. Let's they add a couple of other ones like PIT/CLE/BNA, maybe they can capture 5% of that market.

I'm assuming they will capture nothing out of the fortress hubs + smaller markets that I missed.

This would make them a respectable player out of LAX. Probably a solid #4 in local revenue. It would require them to add flights to probably all 4 HI islands, 2 out of Chicago/DC/PHL airports, have more service to west coast vs now, add a few more transcon and midcon markets

As always your analysis and opinions are appreciated around here.

I can't see them adding Chicago from LAX given the squeeze between legacies and ULCCs on that route and resultant trash yields plus their poor gate situation at ORD. Do you think PHL/IAD (one or both) would launch all-coach at first and maybe transition to Mint?

BNA seems like a natural add from LAX and frankly I'm surprised they haven't already announced it given some of the other markets they've attempted.

All four islands are being looked at in Hawaii but I'm not certain whether they'd be all 321, a mix of 320/321, or which islands would get the Mint product and which wouldn't. This seems like another case of just not enough airframes to make big network moves in the near term.

IAD seems to me like more of a premium market than PHL. That said, with fleet (particularly Mint fleet) as tight as it is right now, it may be sensible for B6 to wait before launching service to DC and be able to provide Mint service, which would be an excellent product for DC transcons. I do think both IAD/PHL are eventual adds for JetBlue out of LAX, though.

Also agree re: BNA, and I would make a similar case for MSY. Regarding Chicago, I think B6 should have the space now given that most of ORD flying from NEA airports is offered by AA. You do have a point regarding yields though.

As for Hawaii, it could be smart to announce all four islands at once and stagger the start dates like when all those new cities were announced in April. That way from a PR perspective, it looks like JetBlue is making big moves with LAX expansion but still have the frames available. As for which gets Mint, my hunch would be HNL and/or maybe OGG.

jplatts wrote:

tphuang wrote:

They have clearly grown in both LAX and SFO. The former could partially be attributed to moving flights over from LGB, but those short haul routes really didn't provide them much revenue. The latter growth is quite mysterious since they operated below 2019 capacity in Q2 out of SFO just like everyone else. Maybe they brought things back faster than other carriers? Maybe NEA allows them to capture more higher yielding customers than pre-COVID. Maybe the Q2 numbers are just lucky. But it does seem like they are able to capture more local revenue by adding premium type of flights. In the coming days, I will be posting RDU, RIC and CHS data also. We will see that B6 made very little gain in local market share even with all the flights they added. It shows me that LAX and SFO are exactly the kind of markets they need to be expanding in.

Frankly, growing in the 2nd and 3rd largest domestic O&D markets seem like a more worthwhile expansion than growing in AUS/BNA/RDU. I'm hoping people in the JetBlue management are noticing the same trends that I am.

One challenge that B6 faces in both the Greater Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area is that WN already has a significant FF base in both markets. WN also has nonstop service out of OAK to some markets that B6, AA, or AS don't currently serve nonstop from the San Francisco Bay Area such as ABQ, DEN, EUG, HOU, MCI, BNA, RNO, and STL.

Most of the top domestic destinations that B6 doesn't currently serve nonstop from SFO already have nonstop service out of the San Francisco Bay Area on UA, WN, AS, AA, or DL. There are also many UA and WN FF's in the San Francisco Bay Area who would still stick with UA or WN if B6 adds nonstop service to additional destinations out of SFO.

Even when they did it, my guess was that moving into higher competition markets (LAX/SFO) wasn't going to add much or possibly survive. Don't get me wrong, I get why they left LGB. Just an observation, they probably would have been better off doing one of three things: 1) dump the west hub and solely focus on their transcons to JFK/BOS/FLL, 2) build a network in the west that in LAX or SFO that primarily shuffles passengers onto and from their partners (ie HA and AA), Or 3) it seems they are already kinda doing this: go all-in with vacation travel. SMF-CUN and LAS-CUN seemed to have stuck around a while, so why not just do more? Do some adds to avoid WN or UA like SMF-PVR, OAK-CUN, or RNO-SJD etc...

Just some thoughts

trueblew wrote:

As always your analysis and opinions are appreciated around here.

I can't see them adding Chicago from LAX given the squeeze between legacies and ULCCs on that route and resultant trash yields plus their poor gate situation at ORD. Do you think PHL/IAD (one or both) would launch all-coach at first and maybe transition to Mint?

BNA seems like a natural add from LAX and frankly I'm surprised they haven't already announced it given some of the other markets they've attempted.

All four islands are being looked at in Hawaii but I'm not certain whether they'd be all 321, a mix of 320/321, or which islands would get the Mint product and which wouldn't. This seems like another case of just not enough airframes to make big network moves in the near term.

Thanks there. I think ETOPS will be an issue for A320. I'm not sure you want to keep a subfleet of ETOPS A320s. I will be posting LAX to HI numbers for Q2 over the next few days. It seems to me that Y fares to HI have been pretty low yielding since WN entered the market. WN seems to have come to the conclusion that they need to be in HI to be the top dog in California. They are willing to sustain some really dreadfully low yield to keep their ff happy. It's hard for me to expect B6 will do better with all-Y cabin than WN. The only carrier showing acceptable yield out of LAX is HA.

With mint, B6 will have the best product in the market. That's what they have to do if they want to capture high end leisure crowd. A lot of those same people will also chose to fly B6 on transcon if they have good experiences with them on HI trips. if they don't think LIH or KOA can support mint, they probably shouldn't be in those markets. I'm of the opinion that those markets can support mint. It would make more sense for them to add SFO-HNL/OGG ahead of LAX-LIH/KOA if they don't think the latter could support mint.

As you said, a lot of this is dependent on having enough air frames. They have 11 A321s scheduled for delivery in 2023. I'm not sure how many of that is LR vs regular NEOs. To me, they should not take another 200 seaters for a while. With NEA and goal for increasing west coast presence, they need to look to sustain higher yielding customers. That means, they need more mint for NYC/BOS to Cali. It would be nice if they can move up a couple of A321LD orders to 2022/2023. That would allow them to comfortably add a couple of flights into HNL in 2023. And then they can add OGG in 2024 with more A321s coming in.

At some point, they need to bring back IAD. I think they need to add BOS-IAD again to make sure they have all the short haul markets covered out of BOS. I think they will have an easier time to make IAD-LAX work on mint vs anything on PHL-LAX. IAD is a more premium market.

trueblew wrote:

I hope SFO sees a build-up as well, but with the order book as it is there isn't much block hour slack to add there. Hopefully we see an aggressive order coming soon.

Sorry to quote you here, but I just wanted to follow up on your SFO comment. I think the most obvious path for them to take in SFO is to strengthen their existing service first. As an example, I'm seeing them at 5x JFK/BOS, 2x EWR/LAX/FLL right now for next summer. Assuming that demand continues to cover, it's absolute madness to only be operating 5x on BOS/JFK-SFO. They should be at 10x NYC and 8x BOS in a couple of years with NEA. That might require them to redeploy some all core A320/321 there during peak summer times or from under performing mint markets. I will go over which mint markets I think are under performing over the next week.

As with LAX, I also took a the top revenue destination for SFO residents. Keep in mind that HI numbers are a little deflated for SFO due to all of that capacity at SJC/OAK. I could see a path for B6 to get to close to the old VX market share if they just strengthen services to existing focus cities and add Hawaii and several other large leisure markets.

Just using Q2 numbers, they could cover 12 out of top 15 markets just by adding service to Hawaii, LAS and SAN. No need to try legacy dominated ones like IAD/ORD or ATL. The path forward for them would be something like this
1) Over the next 2 years, strengthen service to NYC/BOS, bring back MCO and offer competitive service to LAX
2) From fall 2023 to 2024, strengthen FLL, add MIA, LAS and SAN
3) From fall 2024 to 2025, add HNL/OGG, PSP, SJD/PVR/LIR and maybe a couple of transcons

I think B6 was being a little too cute earlier this year with AUS/RDU-SFO and AUS-RDU. Once they get past focus cities, they can be relevant in SFO with just service to the top leisure markets. I don't think anything I wrote in there would take needed fleets away from other buildups they are doing. Nothing too crazy. Just a 50 flight stations of focus city + leisure. It would be a very high revenue 50 flights.

For Q2 of this year.
Destination Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
JFK 11523 5336883 47195194 6.93%
HNL 11565 5320138 51817101 6.91%
EWR 8236 4177038 34668285 5.43%
BOS 7145 3925888 31129440 5.10%
OGG 8032 3833697 35421794 4.98%
ORD 7082 2758613 21377325 3.58%
KOA 4415 2458653 20071704 3.19%
IAD 3653 2223395 14867536 2.89%
LAX 11385 2083884 6436776 2.71%
LAS 11597 2022664 8378072 2.63%
MIA 4494 1909948 20336336 2.48%
ATL 3603 1768503 13593103 2.30%
SAN 8725 1740081 6865704 2.26%
MCO 4362 1704020 18896303 2.21%
FLL 3071 1399796 13211946 1.82%
DEN 5826 1347520 9581965 1.75%
SEA 6293 1325545 7282795 1.72%
LIH 2313 1254018 10875968 1.63%
IAH 2826 1216050 7991275 1.58%
PHL 2449 1204484 10465391 1.57%

For Q3 of 2019
Destination Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
EWR 22666 12604896 98619543 8.24%
BOS 19373 10079300 85244332 6.59%
JFK 20865 10055460 83137296 6.58%
ORD 16432 7349995 51278641 4.81%
LAX 29787 5594238 17682202 3.66%
HNL 10898 5414113 47024463 3.54%
SEA 19958 5237877 23614089 3.43%
LAS 23809 4653359 16919051 3.04%
IAD 6681 4163213 26938239 2.72%
DEN 14947 4095093 25174078 2.68%
OGG 8063 3837226 35223164 2.51%
SAN 17745 3710298 13922405 2.43%
PHL 6889 2995217 27453308 1.96%
ATL 6168 2950166 23604023 1.93%
MCO 6242 2602074 26197155 1.70%
DTW 4600 2594250 17797134 1.70%
MSP 7868 2583532 22131919 1.69%
DCA 4215 2323842 17424217 1.52%
DFW 6253 2290470 14599107 1.50%
PDX 9775 2245928 9389910 1.47%

Perhaps B6 will move all operations out of AUS to SAT. AUS sure could use the gate space and SAT has plenty. Other airlines would fill any void left by B6 leaving AUS.

Being real here. While a bunch of carriers are getting into the AUS gold rush, it's something that simply doesn't make sense for B6. Even in a real down quarter for SFO, it's total revenue is about AUS and BNA combined. Bay area as a whole is larger than AUS, BNA and RDU combined. Only NYC and LA Basin are markets that are clearly larger than Bay Area. Its larger than Dallas, DC/Baltimore, Atlanta and South Florida. SFO is the highest yielding of the 3 Bay Area airports. There is a lot of premium leisure demand out there. Not often are gates this available at SFO.

I acknowledge that I did spent a lot of time discussing the possibility of a RDU focus city for B6. The reality is that B6 simply could not gain traction at RDU with all the routes they added. I understand why most of the RDU stuff got cut after this past summer.

Here are the market share for Q2 out of AUS and RDU. Not the kind of numbers you want to see out of these markets after adding quite a few routes.
AUS is basically a 2 horse race right now between AA and WN. B6 is just 1/10 the size of AA. Anything more than a large outstation at AUS is a pipe dream for B6.

Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 36711 11555155 81187906 28.74%
DL 20441 6688611 46090528 16.64%
NK 7147 637518 13264402 1.59%
WN 53497 12083967 103253492 30.06%
AS 7936 2245904 22353487 5.59%
SY 63 10044 100448 0.03%
B6 5133 1112833 10544173 2.77%
G4 2690 261536 4423059 0.65%
F9 3416 143209 5309816 0.36%
HA 835 543538 5620663 1.35%
UA 14844 4921710 33852000 12.24%

For RDU, they are stuck at just 6%, a fraction of UA and WN, let alone AA and DL. Probably the biggest disappointment I saw of all the numbers I looked at. At this point, I think bringing back MCO and adding BDL are the only logical moves for them here over the next couple of years.
Carrier Passengers Total Revenue RPM MarketShare
AA 27358 8880109 55038471 28.62%
DL 35506 11185102 67152884 36.05%
NK 2573 165796 3190828 0.53%
WN 20139 4808126 38137854 15.50%
AS 1228 435859 5451935 1.41%
SY 79 10579 124460 0.03%
B6 8380 1794345 13555568 5.78%
G4 484 39551 550255 0.13%
F9 9016 531047 17417522 1.71%
UA 9703 3178883 21518431 10.25%

Agree. I think B6 would be better served re-directing their assets from AUS and placing them on more profitable routes. AUS needs the gate space and several airlines fly the routes offered by B6 out of AUS. I think both would be well served if B6 and AUS parted ways.

trueblew wrote:

tphuang wrote:

The routes they've dropped are generally stuff that doesn't pass through one of the focus cities or BDL/HPN. There are a few CUN routes they've also kept route. I'm not sure why they are utilizing A220 on BNA/RDU-CUN next year. Seems like a waste of resource.

As for central US service, I think that's going to be really tough the forseeable future. I'm going to post numbers from Atlantic coast in the days ahead. You will see that even along most of southeast, they really haven't made much in road in market shares even with additional services. It takes a lot of sustained investment in these markets which they don't have time to do right now. LAX and SFO stands out because they are huge O&D market that have received mint service with open arms and are large revenue markets from NYC/Boston/South Florida. Using SAT as an example. They can probably add service there from FLL, EWR and LAX if the initial JFK & BOS service go well, but not a lot of reason to go beyond that.

Just breaking things down by destination groups out of LAX

For NYC/Boston/South florida region, I had over 21% as the share of total revenue
For hawaii, I had over 14% as the share of total revenue
For west coastish (including Nevada, Utah and Arizona), I had about 15% as the share of total revenue
For Chicago/DC/PHL, I had 11% as the share of total revenue
For other legacy fotress hubs, I have over 13% as the share of total revenue
For other transcons, I have over 6% as the share of total revenue
For larger midcon stuff, I have 10% as the share of total revenue

There is about 8 to 9% left for markets that I missed or really small markets.

I think a reasonable expansion at LAX would have them probably capture 1/3 of the NYC/Boston/South Florida market (they are probably at close to 30% right now)
If they put real effort into a Hawaii expansion, they can probably capture 15 to 20% of that market.
For west coast stuff, I think they will be at 5 to 10% of that market. Keep in mind, this is just for LAX. They'd have a much smaller part of pie across all of LA Basin.

Assuming they enter 2 out of 3 between Chicago/DC/Philly, they could have 10% of that market.
For other transcons, I'm thinking of stuff like BDL, BUF, MCO and RDU that they already operate + some other markets. Since they might be the only player in the ones that can support daily service. They can probably capture 25% of that market.

For midcon stuff, the only market they serve is AUS. Let's they add a couple of other ones like PIT/CLE/BNA, maybe they can capture 5% of that market.

I'm assuming they will capture nothing out of the fortress hubs + smaller markets that I missed.

This would make them a respectable player out of LAX. Probably a solid #4 in local revenue. It would require them to add flights to probably all 4 HI islands, 2 out of Chicago/DC/PHL airports, have more service to west coast vs now, add a few more transcon and midcon markets

As always your analysis and opinions are appreciated around here.

I can't see them adding Chicago from LAX given the squeeze between legacies and ULCCs on that route and resultant trash yields plus their poor gate situation at ORD. Do you think PHL/IAD (one or both) would launch all-coach at first and maybe transition to Mint?

BNA seems like a natural add from LAX and frankly I'm surprised they haven't already announced it given some of the other markets they've attempted.

All four islands are being looked at in Hawaii but I'm not certain whether they'd be all 321, a mix of 320/321, or which islands would get the Mint product and which wouldn't. This seems like another case of just not enough airframes to make big network moves in the near term.

They would have to be 321 for product and ETOPs reasons.

320 isnt equipped with even the most basic ETOPs requirements like dual HF radios.

Also, keep in mind, they dont have Pacific ETOPs yet. I have heard rumblings from up high, but that process hasnt even been announced yet.

There will be no surprise announcement to Hawaii.

It will be something like London, that is announced very far out as it requires Pac Etops…which is just an add on to existing Etops, but a process nonetheless

Why would B6 leave AUS?

That is the dumbest thing I have read in a while. No offense.

They have been consistently flying there for most of their existence and it is a growing city.

Wiki (yes I know) says the take off distance of the A223 is 6200ft, the longest runway at HPN is 6,549ft. Theoretically yes it seems doable. I understand that there might be some other factors for HPN that could require more then the given runway length and those numbers/factors idk what they are. But also would a A223 would be near its full fuel load/MTOW for a T-CON with its range being over 3,000nm.

FARmd90 wrote:

Wiki (yes I know) says the take off distance of the A223 is 6200ft, the longest runway at HPN is 6,549ft. Theoretically yes it seems doable. I understand that there might be some other factors for HPN that could require more then the given runway length and those numbers/factors idk what they are. But also would a A223 would be near its full fuel load/MTOW for a T-CON with its range being over 3,000nm.

BOS-SFO is 2700nm and, for a while, the longest in the network. I think JFK-GYE took the crown for a bit, and now London. Knowing the 223 has an advertised range of 3000+ nm, a 2600nm flight is well within the reach of the aircraft, but you bring up a good point regarding runway length, not to mention real world dynamics such as obstacles, winds and weather on any given Sunday.

What I could see them doing without batting an eye is capping the flight, much like the Key West flights are. Even restricting that flight to 115 seats, the monopoly on that route is probably way too tempting to pass up.

Honestly one of the biggest detractors to HPN is the terminal itself. An absolute zoo even during off-hours.

BlueBaller wrote:

FARmd90 wrote:

Wiki (yes I know) says the take off distance of the A223 is 6200ft, the longest runway at HPN is 6,549ft. Theoretically yes it seems doable. I understand that there might be some other factors for HPN that could require more then the given runway length and those numbers/factors idk what they are. But also would a A223 would be near its full fuel load/MTOW for a T-CON with its range being over 3,000nm.

BOS-SFO is 2700nm and, for a while, the longest in the network. I think JFK-GYE took the crown for a bit, and now London. Knowing the 223 has an advertised range of 3000+ nm, a 2600nm flight is well within the reach of the aircraft, but you bring up a good point regarding runway length, not to mention real world dynamics such as obstacles, winds and weather on any given Sunday.

What I could see them doing without batting an eye is capping the flight, much like the Key West flights are. Even restricting that flight to 115 seats, the monopoly on that route is probably way too tempting to pass up.

Honestly one of the biggest detractors to HPN is the terminal itself. An absolute zoo even during off-hours.

Totally agree on all the points you make. The terminal at HPN is a mess, and now it seems like JetBlue has no problem capping a flight if they want to as long as it performs well. And like you said the monopoly they could have on HPN-LAX might be too tempting pass it up because if a flight cap.

On the topic of HPN transcon. I don't know if A220-300 can reliably make the westbound, but the revenue side shouldn't be a problem. I took a look at some of the BDL transcons that launched this year and compared them to other LAX/SFO transcons they added + JFK-BUR/ONT. Most of these only operated for a short time in Q2.

CityPair Pax LF Depe PerFlight NSFare ConnFare % NS Yield
BURJFK 7806 92.93 42 200.0 247.54 194.18 91.93 226.03
JFKONT 4468 93.08 24 200.0 234.18 158.42 89.45 210.55
BDLLAX 9871 94.01 66 159.1 193.45 150.87 97.88 181.02
BDLSFO 7484 86.38 54 160.4 220.58 184.42 99.74 190.46
LAXMCO 20414 87.58 146 159.6 130.44 137.48 82.83 115.30
BUFLAX 6573 82.55 50 159.2 228.47 141.64 86.97 179.27

Just comparing BDL-LAX/SFO to some of the existing stuff they flew pre-COVID, there were more departures made on there vs all except LAX-MCO. The yields were pretty good for new routes. JFK-BUR/ONT are normally the best performing of the non-mint transcons, Yes, LAX-MCO really is that low yielding of a market.

Given how well 200 seat A321s perform on JFK-BUR/ONT, I think JFK-SNA on A220 would do great.

BDLLAS 13913 81.28 107 160.0 154.39 131.24 93.90 124.33
MCOSFO 2672 93.17 18 159.3 231.91 190.02 75.71 206.58
LAXRIC 6362 91.84 43 161.1 152.08 140.18 95.05 139.13
CHSLAX 9100 69.76 82 159.1 171.49 109.68 89.69 115.19
LAXRDU 11396 82.40 87 159.0 141.15 129.89 90.71 115.45
JAXLAX 12884 89.17 90 160.5 142.42 133.27 90.58 126.23
LASRDU 8834 64.46 86 159.3 148.67 109.19 86.41 92.38
LASRIC 8282 81.99 64 157.8 145.04 111.99 88.41 115.78
RDUSFO 2792 86.82 20 160.8 143.10 116.61 90.88 122.13

The performance of BDL-LAX/SFO is even more impressive when you compare against the other transcons they tried. Aside from MCO-SFO (which I think they should bring back), all those new LAX transcons + LAS transcons were pretty low performing. Hard for those to work out without A220. Most of these show lower fares/yield than northeast to Florida stuff. Maybe that will change once domestic demand normalizes.

Back on the topic of HPN. I'm of the opinion that HPN transcons would do better than BDL ones (based on the comparable Florida route performances). I think a lot of people will pay a premium to fly to west coast out of HPN vs JFK/EWR. They haven't tried stuff outside of Florida, because they are slot constrained. Now that they have at least 2 more slots, they could potentially fly a day to both LAX/SFO from May to October and then have both at 3x weekly during colder climate (move that flight to RSW or something).

Taking a look at BDL-LAS, I wouldn't try HPN-LAS. That seems too low yielding. Aside from that, I think any additional slots they get at HPN should just be deployed to more Florida or ACK flying.