Flflyer83 wrote:

SunsetLimited wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Makes them still look lousy ... if it's even true. Anyone want to play airline BS bingo?

I don’t know, but if I hear one more MX gate agent at MSY announce “flight xxx is now boarding for Arkansas”, I think I’m going to lose it lol. This one person in particular can’t even say Northwest Arkansas or even something simple like XNA... but just Arkansas? Come on, you have to do better.

Which other airport in Arkansas does MX serve? Do you get this irritated when they say New York instead of New York City?

That’s not the point. At least name the city or airport. It comes across as amateurish.

Flflyer83 wrote:

Which other airport in Arkansas does MX serve? Do you get this irritated when they say New York instead of New York City?

The difference is that the city is actually named—you guessed it, New York—and more often than not they will be saying “LaGuardia” or “Kennedy/JFK” with New York sometimes affixed.

What that poster described is the equivalent of boarding a flight to Houston but announcing “United Airlines 1003 with nonstop service to TEXAS is now boarding at……”

The short of it is that Breeze needs to get it together and quickly. Their social media pages are filled with complaints and demands for refunds at this point. That’s the first thing someone sees when attempting to contact customer service.

SunsetLimited wrote:

I don’t know, but if I hear one more MX gate agent at MSY announce “flight xxx is now boarding for Arkansas”, I think I’m going to lose it lol. This one person in particular can’t even say Northwest Arkansas or even something simple like XNA... but just Arkansas? Come on, you have to do better.

I have an even better one. Leaving out of CHS the flight scheduled and posted from A1 was leaving from A2 while the flight scheduled to leave from A2 was leaving from A1. Nevermind that a 3rd MX flight was on the screen “boarding” at A1. Anyway, gate agents at both gates were making announcements for the same flight and seemed to be just as confused as the passengers. One didn’t even know the flight number and was just calling the destination until she paused and read it off from a sticky pad mid announcement.

Anyway, the flight actually left on time (10 min late vs 2 hrs) so I think everyone was too grateful for an on time departure to be concerned with the other shenanigans.

Also the gate agents at MSY seem to have had little to no training at all when it comes to operating a jetway and opening doors at the gate.

Gate agents are not Breeze Employees btw, They are contractors currently.

flightsimer wrote:

Gate agents are not Breeze Employees btw, They are contractors currently.

Yet, they represent Breeze and are what first impressions of the company by most customers will be based on. It’s Breeze’s responsibility to make sure that these people who are wearing their shirts and name badges—whether employees or not—know company operating procedures and essentially know how to do their jobs. The same can be said for any regional cabin/flight/ground crew members or small town airport staff wearing a Big 3 uniform yet we don’t have these issues and customer experience is seamless 99% of the time.

When people are having to sit on planes for 20 minutes while someone struggles to operate a jetway, or when planes are allegedly landing with no bags (according to several customer complaints online) people are looking at what company was contracted out to do XYZ, they are looking at Breeze. When gate agents don’t know what flights they are boarding or ground staff can’t track a checked bag between a single point to point turn it’s Breeze who looks bad and until they get this **** their reputation will sink further and further. At this point you have local news stations interviewing passengers about their “awful” experiences.

Metrocard wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Gate agents are not Breeze Employees btw, They are contractors currently.

Yet, they represent Breeze and are what first impressions of the company by most customers will be based on. It’s Breeze’s responsibility to make sure that these people who are wearing their shirts and name badges—whether employees or not—know company operating procedures and essentially know how to do their jobs. The same can be said for any regional cabin/flight/ground crew members or small town airport staff wearing a Big 3 uniform yet we don’t have these issues and customer experience is seamless 99% of the time.

When people are having to sit on planes for 20 minutes while someone struggles to operate a jetway, or when planes are allegedly landing with no bags (according to several customer complaints online) people are looking at what company was contracted out to do XYZ, they are looking at Breeze. When gate agents don’t know what flights they are boarding or ground staff can’t track a checked bag between a single point to point turn it’s Breeze who looks bad and until they get this **** their reputation will sink further and further. At this point you have local news stations interviewing passengers about their “awful” experiences.

Given that most of Breeze’s stations are handled by GAT and the person responsible for station operations at Breeze is a former GAT VP it makes it all the worse. Hopefully Breeze actually hires staff that know what they are doing compared to hiring based on “who knows who”.

SunsetLimited wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Makes them still look lousy ... if it's even true. Anyone want to play airline BS bingo?

I don’t know, but if I hear one more MX gate agent at MSY announce “flight xxx is now boarding for Arkansas”, I think I’m going to lose it lol. This one person in particular can’t even say Northwest Arkansas or even something simple like XNA... but just Arkansas? Come on, you have to do better.

That is just horrible. I blame management and a lack of training from the persons supervisor. They obviously are tolerating such.

braniff2hav wrote:

SunsetLimited wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Makes them still look lousy ... if it's even true. Anyone want to play airline BS bingo?

I don’t know, but if I hear one more MX gate agent at MSY announce “flight xxx is now boarding for Arkansas”, I think I’m going to lose it lol. This one person in particular can’t even say Northwest Arkansas or even something simple like XNA... but just Arkansas? Come on, you have to do better.

That is just horrible. I blame management and a lack of training from the persons supervisor. They obviously are tolerating such.

As of last week stations were already getting retrained for other issues. Unfortunately, we don’t control how they act but us Crews have been reporting it as we see it.

flightsimer wrote:

That is just horrible. I blame management and a lack of training from the persons supervisor. They obviously are tolerating such.
As of last week stations were already getting retrained for other issues. Unfortunately, we don’t control how they act but us Crews have been reporting it as we see it.

I think in this day and age, folks know the flight they are boarding. It's on the app, the monitor at the airport etc. It's not awesome but its not the end of the world either.

dabpit wrote:

Metrocard wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Gate agents are not Breeze Employees btw, They are contractors currently.

Yet, they represent Breeze and are what first impressions of the company by most customers will be based on. It’s Breeze’s responsibility to make sure that these people who are wearing their shirts and name badges—whether employees or not—know company operating procedures and essentially know how to do their jobs. The same can be said for any regional cabin/flight/ground crew members or small town airport staff wearing a Big 3 uniform yet we don’t have these issues and customer experience is seamless 99% of the time.

When people are having to sit on planes for 20 minutes while someone struggles to operate a jetway, or when planes are allegedly landing with no bags (according to several customer complaints online) people are looking at what company was contracted out to do XYZ, they are looking at Breeze. When gate agents don’t know what flights they are boarding or ground staff can’t track a checked bag between a single point to point turn it’s Breeze who looks bad and until they get this **** their reputation will sink further and further. At this point you have local news stations interviewing passengers about their “awful” experiences.

Given that most of Breeze’s stations are handled by GAT and the person responsible for station operations at Breeze is a former GAT VP it makes it all the worse. Hopefully Breeze actually hires staff that know what they are doing compared to hiring based on “who knows who”.

Only four stations are handled by GAT according to their website - "we are Breeze's partner providing full handling services in CHS, PIT, RIC, and MSY." So, that leaves other companies (good luck finding out who they are) to handle other stations, such as TPA. So, in reality, if there's an issue with a particular flight between two cities, you will have two different companies with contracted employees trying to sort it out.

There are some very good people who have been hired across the Breeze network who who have no clue as to how to perform their job. And, it's not their fault.

SonomaFlyer wrote:

I think in this day and age, folks know the flight they are boarding. It's on the app, the monitor at the airport etc. It's not awesome but its not the end of the world either.

Except in the case of Breeze this hasn’t been the case at all. In my shared experience with others the monitors regularly show incorrect information, information that hasn’t been updated, or nothing at all. Also for an “app based tech company that just happens to fly planes” the app itself provides very little information and the information that it does provide—which hasn’t included a gate assignment for anyone who I know to date—tends to be incongruous with whatever is on the monitors and both probably disagree with what staff is saying.

11725Flyer wrote:

So, in reality, if there's an issue with a particular flight between two cities, you will have two different companies with contracted employees trying to sort it out.

There are some very good people who have been hired across the Breeze network who who have no clue as to how to perform their job. And, it's not their fault.

Yikes and agreed.

Metrocard wrote:

What that poster described is the equivalent of boarding a flight to Houston but announcing “United Airlines 1003 with nonstop service to TEXAS is now boarding at……”
The short of it is that Breeze needs to get it together and quickly. Their social media pages are filled with complaints and demands for refunds at this point. That’s the first thing someone sees when attempting to contact customer service.

Ok, so the other issues like delays and problems operating the jetbridges, fine thats a reasonable complaint. But if I just paid $39 to fly from New Orleans to XNA, I don't care if they say Arkansas when they only operate three destinations and its the only one in Arkansas.

Metrocard wrote:

..

Just be thankful they didn't say "Breeze Airways flight 123 to Walmartville".. jk (my apologies to all from the Bentonville Area, I'm sure its a nice place)

I dunno, if someone said I was flying to Arkansas, I would assume the largest city in the middle of the state that also happens to be the capital...Little Rock. Geography 101.

Not trying to go out of my way to defend Breeze - but these sorts of issues with contracted gate agents are why flying any of the ULCCs is often a mess. It’s the same story everywhere: underpaid third party contractors with no motivation or real connection to the operation often do a subpar job. Heck, SY outsourced their labor at MSP, and then brought it back in house when it turned out to twice be a disaster with different companies.

I find it funny reading through some of the complaints on here. Have you flown through DEN during a busy time for F9 or LAS during a busy time for NK? They obviously can’t help it but when the agent is making airport wide PA’s, I cannot count the number of times I can’t even understand what city they are saying in broken English. This isn’t just something that happens with one gate agent at Breeze

Unless they bring labor in house, these issues will always be a thing. And unfortunately, even the big guys are continuing the route of outsourced labor at outstations, which can be just as much of a mess.

Coronado990 wrote:

I dunno, if someone said I was flying to Arkansas, I would assume the largest city in the middle of the state that also happens to be the capital...Little Rock. Geography 101.

You know what they say when you ASSume. I bet the passengers who were on the XNA flight figured out that they meant Bentonville or let's be accurate Highfill, AR..common sense 101 /situational awareness 101

Coronado990 wrote:

I dunno, if someone said I was flying to Arkansas, I would assume the largest city in the middle of the state that also happens to be the capital...Little Rock. Geography 101.

If you were flying into EWR LGA or JFK and the gate agent said “flight XXX boarding for New York” and left out “City” would you assume they are going to the capital (Albany)? Probably not. I get the imprecise issue with calling XNA Arkansas, but sitting in a terminal with a ticket I bought to XNA, I doubt there’d be much confusion if they called it Arkansas vs northwest Arkansas vs bentonville. Maybe if there was a flight at the next gate over to KLIT or something I could see some confusion. I think this mistake is being overblown. My American flight attendant the other day said welcome aboard flight XXXX to Phoenix’s McCarran airport (never corrected herself). Got a few WTFs from the passengers, but that was it. Don’t think this is any worse. But, that’s just me.

JoseSalazar wrote:

I think this mistake is being overblown. My American flight attendant the other day said welcome aboard flight XXXX to Phoenix’s McCarran airport (never corrected herself). Got a few WTFs from the passengers, but that was it. Don’t think this is any worse. But, that’s just me.

I agree. There seems to be a lot of "crab potting" where the discussion is to pull down Breeze (or other airlines, or A vs. B or A vs. E or...). If Breeze had a broader route map, that would be of concern, but they don't. There route map is so simple, I see no confusion possible:
https://www.flightconnections.com/route ... airways-mx
Or use the Breeze homepage route map: https://www.flybreeze.com/home


If they want to call their one destination in that state Texas or Louisiana, I see little issue. From what I see, their yield is pretty good.

Honestly, the only issue I see is they need the range and economics of the A220 to connect some dots to other dots. That will happen, just really start of next year as they will receive so few A220 in 2021. Actually, their issue seems to be lack of aircraft. A classy type of problem to have.

To others:
I recall (sorry, I couldn't find a link) on the naysayers on JetBlue early threads. Yet they are still here. I like Neelman's concepts on airlines. Perhaps because I am in his target markets. The app seems well done, I just live in greater Los Angeles and Breeze is not yet an option (nor should it be today, in my opinion).

The #1 issue for an airline is cost control and Breeze seems to have that in control. I'm not saying everything is perfect, but their launch has gone better than I hoped from the indicators I see. I don't know about cash flow, but they seem to be building a following quickly a la JetBlue.

I see a lack of Florida destinations relative to stations outside of Florida. Now, I'm not sure Breeze is ready for MCO, FLL, or MIA, but they'll have to next year, in my opinion. But they are constrained by their AOC conditions limiting them to 22 "large" aircraft (airfleets has 7 aircraft, Wikipedia 11, I believe the difference is the time to onboard and register an aircraft). With discount used aircraft, one expects some paperwork issues (possible real issues too).
https://www.iatanews.com/2021/03/10/bre ... s-its-aoc/

https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Bre ... e-e190.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeze_Airways
My opinion is they'll be allowed more aircraft, but after enough time so it looks like for now slow station growth. Neeleman and team know the E19x well. They know the capabilities and limitations. They'll accumulate more aircraft and add more destinations. They seem to have the ability to pull this off.

Lightsaber

"...In October, Breeze plans to begin service from two additional southeastern airports with service primarily to the northeast, see Exhibit T-1 at 7." JAX and ECP perhaps the 2 southeastern airport adds?

Bluegrass60 wrote:

"...In October, Breeze plans to begin service from two additional southeastern airports with service primarily to the northeast, see Exhibit T-1 at 7." JAX and ECP perhaps the 2 southeastern airport adds?

I personally would love to see JAX (Jacksonville) added.

I'm most excited about MX and the A220. Now I assume their prior press was accurate where the E19x crew are back home every night and the A220 crews will hotel living a more typical airline lifestyle. This means a rapid addition of new cities, but also more competitive seat costs allowing some head to head (e.g., PVG to TPA or Hartford to TPA as one example destination I think the E19x isn't competitive enough, but the A220 would be).

Does anyone know the current A220 delivery schedule? The links I found were out of date with early 2021 deliveries, while the ones noting the correct October first delivery lack detail of how many in 2021, 2022, and 2023. I do like the fact that Breeze is looking for more A220 range (I am of the opinion Korean Air, JetBlue, and AirBaltic would buy A223s with an ACT, which I believe is enough of a business case for engineering and certifying the addition).
https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/breeze- ... 220-order/

It will be interesting where Breeze expands in the North. I'm curious if they will expand PIT a lot more. My opinion is the post US hub leaves an opportunity at PIT. I also perceive an opportunity in Milwaukee, but due to the greater route lengths I envision, perhaps not until the A220?

Breeze must add new cities for the free advertising but also needs the, in my opinion, easier profit off building off an existing customer base. I really expect the number of new routes vs. connecting the dots to be equal in 2022. It seems reasonable their next step is the two suggested cities in Florida.

Lightsaber

JoseSalazar wrote:

If you were flying into EWR LGA or JFK and the gate agent said “flight XXX boarding for New York” and left out “City” would you assume they are going to the capital (Albany)?

No, because "New York" is the actual name of the city. Now, if that was all the said, I would want to make sure I was on a flight going to the airport I intended to arrive at.

lightsaber wrote:

I agree. There seems to be a lot of "crab potting"...
Lightsaber

...and what appears to be, and can be argued, an equal amount of fanboying

Does referring to XNA as "Arkansas" make or break the trip? No. Did most people at the gate even notice it? Probably not. Will they still get to Bentonville at the end of the day? Considering the way that things have been going at Breeze it'll probably be the next morning or afternoon but they'll get there. If it's some random, isolated event that I'm reading about on a forum then it's probably eye-roll worthy at best and arguably unprofessional. Having experienced the operations first hand at two different stations, hearing it in context would more likely suggest that the gate agent probably didn't know where the plane was going. I think it's easy to jump on and dismiss the state name vs city name complaint —while ignoring many of the others—but ultimately the ground operations are beyond terrible at the moment. I haven't gotten the impression—and I could be wrong—that anyone here wants Breeze to fail or wants to dump on them. The fact of the matter is that they need to get it together in terms of soft product. Personally, I only booked with Breeze to support and out of interest due to a fondness of Neelman's other products (JetBlue, Azul). I could have easily saved money and time (even with a stop in ATL) booking with Delta, but chose Breeze for the experience. It was not as advertised or what one has come to expect from Neelman. I hope they figure it out and win.

I’d still fly MX, in fact I have some credits to use (though I’ll probably wait until they become more reliable operationally), and I want to see the airline thrive. I mentioned the “Arkansas” thing because it honestly made me laugh when I heard it and it gave me a poor impression. Yeah, of course we all know ground handling companies like GAT aren’t exactly known for stellar above wing staff. Perhaps things will improve in time.

At the end of the day, no, it’s not the end of the world, but I would think a brand new carrier would want to make as good of a first impression as possible, especially in highly competitive markets where they are trying to steal market share away from the big guys.

Sort of related to Breeze expansion, but I wonder when the U.S. Census releases city population numbers later this year if airlines such as Breeze and Allegiant will look at more expansion into growing metros.

I got to try them out between OKC-SAT today and it was an average flight. I say the flight had maybe 35-40 people on it.

One issue I did have was the app and the airport screens never showed which gate the flight was going out of it. Does anybody know if that is system wide or if OKC is taking their sweet time to update their screens.

It looks like ATS handles them in OKC and the company formally known as DGS handles them in SAT.

DakotaFlyer wrote:

Sort of related to Breeze expansion, but I wonder when the U.S. Census releases city population numbers later this year if airlines such as Breeze and Allegiant will look at more expansion into growing metros.

Well the suburbs between Austin and San Antonio are among the fastest growing areas in the nation. G4 is expanding Austin and MX (Breeze) has San Antonio. Here's something no one is likely looking at (maybe because its not worth it I don't know) but Round Rock/Georgetown area in the North Austin Suburbs is also expanding greatly. Especially for Georgetown, Killeen (GRK) is just as easy to get to as AUS and if developers start moving north when all the good sites are taken it would be even more convenient. Breeze would do well to see if they can find some city pairs to start there and get into GRK's good graces as the area continues to expand there is more opportunities.

Crankyflier has what I consider a balanced article on Breeze (more than I quote, for copywrite reasons):
https://crankyflier.com/2021/07/27/bree ... -fortunes/

The new schedule has it down from scheduling 11 airplanes down to 10. One aircraft now has canceled the morning roundtrip to Richmond (cxl #1), creating a morning spare in Charleston. It then also canceled the evening roundtrip from Charleston to Columbus (cxl #2) so that it could absorb the Pittsburgh – Hartford roundtrip that used to operate off a Norfolk-based airplane. That Norfolk-based airplane will no longer fly to Pittsburgh (cxl #3), and in fact, it’s no longer in the schedule at all.

There’s a New Orleans-based airplane that used to start the day flying to Tulsa, on to San Antonio, and then back before doing a Norfolk turn. Now it will still go to Tulsa but it now sits around for hours waiting to just come back to New Orleans instead of flying to San Antonio (cxl #4). It also has a longer sit in New Orleans before going to Norfolk.

Finally on Thursday/Sunday, one Charleston-based aircraft will not fly the morning roundtrip to Louisville (cxl #5). It will remain a spare in the morning until it flies in the afternoon.

There are good charts that basically show Breeze realizes they need more spare aircraft (one more, to be specific).
But also:
… it’s also been a challenging summer with weather and delays and, as you recall, we had a very short sales window so while the flights are doing well, they are not full. The decision was made to reduce the 4x frequencies to 2x to have a full time spare aircraft for those occurrences and give the airline more time to build sales.

So it does seem they over-reached commercially. Not a big deal overall, but it looks like demand wasn't quite high enough for 4x/week on some routes and operationally, the E-19x need one more spare aircraft. So this leaves me wondering, is this all late introduction into service of E190 or is Breeze slowing intentionally to get the name out (lack of the window to advertise I hypothesize).

Lightsaber

Jerseyguy wrote:

DakotaFlyer wrote:

Sort of related to Breeze expansion, but I wonder when the U.S. Census releases city population numbers later this year if airlines such as Breeze and Allegiant will look at more expansion into growing metros.

Well the suburbs between Austin and San Antonio are among the fastest growing areas in the nation. G4 is expanding Austin and MX (Breeze) has San Antonio. Here's something no one is likely looking at (maybe because its not worth it I don't know) but Round Rock/Georgetown area in the North Austin Suburbs is also expanding greatly. Especially for Georgetown, Killeen (GRK) is just as easy to get to as AUS and if developers start moving north when all the good sites are taken it would be even more convenient. Breeze would do well to see if they can find some city pairs to start there and get into GRK's good graces as the area continues to expand there is more opportunities.

So is Northwest Arkansas.

If they can hold out, there's a boon for Ark/Texas match ups going forward as well as Texas is going to the SEC
.

lightsaber wrote:

So it does seem they over-reached commercially. Not a big deal overall, but it looks like demand wasn't quite high enough for 4x/week on some routes and operationally, the E-19x need one more spare aircraft. So this leaves me wondering, is this all late introduction into service of E190 or is Breeze slowing intentionally to get the name out (lack of the window to advertise I hypothesize).

Lightsaber

While which routes were pulled back on frequency was likely commercially based, it simply came down to an Aircraft issue. Had the aircraft issue not been there, everything would still be operating as planned

flightsimer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

So it does seem they over-reached commercially. Not a big deal overall, but it looks like demand wasn't quite high enough for 4x/week on some routes and operationally, the E-19x need one more spare aircraft. So this leaves me wondering, is this all late introduction into service of E190 or is Breeze slowing intentionally to get the name out (lack of the window to advertise I hypothesize).

Lightsaber

While which routes were pulled back on frequency was likely commercially based, it simply came down to an Aircraft issue. Had the aircraft issue not been there, everything would still be operating as planned

How do you know this, the spokesman admitted aircraft were not full? You may see the glass half full, I have always thought Breeze was a huge risk. I think they are trying to find a tiny niche in a saturated market. They only reason for the hype is that anything Neeleman does seems to get lots of fawning from the press with very little skepticism and analysis.

Jerseyguy wrote:

DakotaFlyer wrote:

Sort of related to Breeze expansion, but I wonder when the U.S. Census releases city population numbers later this year if airlines such as Breeze and Allegiant will look at more expansion into growing metros.

Well the suburbs between Austin and San Antonio are among the fastest growing areas in the nation. G4 is expanding Austin and MX (Breeze) has San Antonio. Here's something no one is likely looking at (maybe because its not worth it I don't know) but Round Rock/Georgetown area in the North Austin Suburbs is also expanding greatly. Especially for Georgetown, Killeen (GRK) is just as easy to get to as AUS and if developers start moving north when all the good sites are taken it would be even more convenient. Breeze would do well to see if they can find some city pairs to start there and get into GRK's good graces as the area continues to expand there is more opportunities.

Plus Breeze could draw from Fort Hood if they could find out the bases demographics as far as hometowns etc. They could also connect the large army military bases cities such as GRK to FAY or RDU (Fort Bragg) GRK to BNA (Fort Campbell) GRK to SAV (Fort Stewart).

Jetport wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

So it does seem they over-reached commercially. Not a big deal overall, but it looks like demand wasn't quite high enough for 4x/week on some routes and operationally, the E-19x need one more spare aircraft. So this leaves me wondering, is this all late introduction into service of E190 or is Breeze slowing intentionally to get the name out (lack of the window to advertise I hypothesize).

Lightsaber

While which routes were pulled back on frequency was likely commercially based, it simply came down to an Aircraft issue. Had the aircraft issue not been there, everything would still be operating as planned

How do you know this, the spokesman admitted aircraft were not full? You may see the glass half full, I have always thought Breeze was a huge risk. I think they are trying to find a tiny niche in a saturated market. They only reason for the hype is that anything Neeleman does seems to get lots of fawning from the press with very little skepticism and analysis.

In my opinion, the partial weekly frequency market is hugely underserved. No one bats a thousand, Breeze needs to adjust frequency to market demand.

If I could, I personally would invest in Breeze because it has great potential. There is tons of skepticism; Neeleman just has a proven track record of identifying underserved niches; he doesn't repeat priir strategies, he goes after the next niche.

I am sad there is a little stumbling early on, but overall, Breeze is getting established. The first year is the hardest to shake down hiring, training, aircraft acquisition, and initial routes. Growth from positive word of mouth is Neeleman's strategy (saves on advertising). I posted early in this thread the abismal customer satisfaction ratings of the competing airlines in the less than daily frequency range. That leaves a niche wide open if done well.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Jetport wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

While which routes were pulled back on frequency was likely commercially based, it simply came down to an Aircraft issue. Had the aircraft issue not been there, everything would still be operating as planned

How do you know this, the spokesman admitted aircraft were not full? You may see the glass half full, I have always thought Breeze was a huge risk. I think they are trying to find a tiny niche in a saturated market. They only reason for the hype is that anything Neeleman does seems to get lots of fawning from the press with very little skepticism and analysis.

In my opinion, the partial weekly frequency market is hugely underserved. No one bats a thousand, Breeze needs to adjust frequency to market demand.

If I could, I personally would invest in Breeze because it has great potential. There is tons of skepticism; Neeleman just has a proven track record of identifying underserved niches; he doesn't repeat priir strategies, he goes after the next niche.

I am sad there is a little stumbling early on, but overall, Breeze is getting established. The first year is the hardest to shake down hiring, training, aircraft acquisition, and initial routes. Growth from positive word of mouth is Neeleman's strategy (saves on advertising). I posted early in this thread the abismal customer satisfaction ratings of the competing airlines in the less than daily frequency range. That leaves a niche wide open if done well.

Lightsaber

"Agree. Please also note that AA and WN have had their own summer melt downs that impact way more people/perceptions. The Breeze model has huge potential and am confident Breeze will overcome these challenges and be the better for them. "

Jetport wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

So it does seem they over-reached commercially. Not a big deal overall, but it looks like demand wasn't quite high enough for 4x/week on some routes and operationally, the E-19x need one more spare aircraft. So this leaves me wondering, is this all late introduction into service of E190 or is Breeze slowing intentionally to get the name out (lack of the window to advertise I hypothesize).

Lightsaber

While which routes were pulled back on frequency was likely commercially based, it simply came down to an Aircraft issue. Had the aircraft issue not been there, everything would still be operating as planned

How do you know this, the spokesman admitted aircraft were not full? You may see the glass half full, I have always thought Breeze was a huge risk. I think they are trying to find a tiny niche in a saturated market. They only reason for the hype is that anything Neeleman does seems to get lots of fawning from the press with very little skepticism and analysis.

I seem to remember quite a bit of skepticism with B6, especially once Song came into the picture. But then, and as far as I can remember, every time since then, Neeleman has very consistently lived up to the "hype".

Having flown a few flights on Breeze, and having flown NK/FL quite a bit, I would gladly pay a premium to be on Breeze. I would actually pay more to get a nonstop on Breeze vs any other carrier - the crew really are "Nice", very consistently.

FLYKTPA wrote:

DeltaRules wrote:

FLYKTPA wrote:

The supposed Breeze crew bases?
MSY, TPA, CHS and ORF.

https://www.airlinepilotcareers.com/bre ... rAOsxn6vuY

After all the talk about underserved cities, I can't wait for them to launch a bunch of routes to those four from cities which already have service from some combination of G4/NK/F9/WN/maybe one legacy already.

They will probably add a few routes with Frontier/Spirit/Allegiant on it, but overall those cities have loads of unserved opportunities from them.

I think a lot of people took Breeze saying underserved wayyy too seriously. They gotta fill E190s and get revenue flowing in. Can’t be making a bunch of risky gambles. Like flying to Lakeland or Macon for example.

Direct Air already proved the Lakeland market could sustain charter (limited) flights which ran circles around the smaller airports with regular service in terms of ridership back in 2011. All the flights were booked to capacity with flights to Myrtle Beach SC, Hagerstown MD, Springfield IL and Niagara Falls NY. The company had plans to make Lakeland a focus destination and had announced additional flights from Columbus OH, Plattsburgh NY and San Juan before going under. Null and void now, LOL. Lakeland's biggest problem is and will always be proximity to Tampa/Orlando. Unless a carrier sees the untapped potential of the now approaching 1 million Lakeland metro market, Lakeland will continue to be the largest population center in the state without air service.

Closed on 200 million in additional funding… https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... leman/amp/

flightsimer wrote:

Closed on 200 million in additional funding… https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... leman/amp/

From your link:
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.
...
“We’re seeing decent bookings in the fall, too, because when we started selling, people wanted to go in the summer but hotel rooms were either gone or expensive, and rental cars were hard to come by,” he said. “But now in the fall, things are more reasonable, and people are saying ‘let’s do it.'”


It looks like they have found a nice, just that more money is needed to ride out the variants.

From:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/ ... ases-rise/
A day earlier, Utah-based Breeze Airways said it raised $200 million in funding from sources including investment manager BlackRock on top of $135 million in earlier funding.
...
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.

“It depends on the routes, they’re in the 60s and 70s,” Neeleman said, referring to load factors. “Considering we started out late, we’re really happy with it.”


This is an extensive war chest. Investors wouldn't invest unless they see a business case. While 60% to 70% load factors aren't outstanding, they can be explained by the late start. The Breeze business model appeals to me, I just live out in California where it isn't likely I'll get to try them soon.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Closed on 200 million in additional funding… https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... leman/amp/

From your link:
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.
...
“We’re seeing decent bookings in the fall, too, because when we started selling, people wanted to go in the summer but hotel rooms were either gone or expensive, and rental cars were hard to come by,” he said. “But now in the fall, things are more reasonable, and people are saying ‘let’s do it.'”


It looks like they have found a nice, just that more money is needed to ride out the variants.

From:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/ ... ases-rise/
A day earlier, Utah-based Breeze Airways said it raised $200 million in funding from sources including investment manager BlackRock on top of $135 million in earlier funding.
...
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.

“It depends on the routes, they’re in the 60s and 70s,” Neeleman said, referring to load factors. “Considering we started out late, we’re really happy with it.”


This is an extensive war chest. Investors wouldn't invest unless they see a business case. While 60% to 70% load factors aren't outstanding, they can be explained by the late start. The Breeze business model appeals to me, I just live out in California where it isn't likely I'll get to try them soon.

Lightsaber

The investment doesn’t have anything to do with Covid really, it’s mostly earmarked for expansion and other programs.

It will be Sooner than you think!

flightsimer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Closed on 200 million in additional funding… https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... leman/amp/

From your link:
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.
...
“We’re seeing decent bookings in the fall, too, because when we started selling, people wanted to go in the summer but hotel rooms were either gone or expensive, and rental cars were hard to come by,” he said. “But now in the fall, things are more reasonable, and people are saying ‘let’s do it.'”


It looks like they have found a nice, just that more money is needed to ride out the variants.

From:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/ ... ases-rise/
A day earlier, Utah-based Breeze Airways said it raised $200 million in funding from sources including investment manager BlackRock on top of $135 million in earlier funding.
...
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.

“It depends on the routes, they’re in the 60s and 70s,” Neeleman said, referring to load factors. “Considering we started out late, we’re really happy with it.”


This is an extensive war chest. Investors wouldn't invest unless they see a business case. While 60% to 70% load factors aren't outstanding, they can be explained by the late start. The Breeze business model appeals to me, I just live out in California where it isn't likely I'll get to try them soon.

Lightsaber

The investment doesn’t have anything to do with Covid really, it’s mostly earmarked for expansion and other programs.

It will be Sooner than you think!

Are you low-key hinting at an Oklahoma expansion?

KCaviator wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

From your link:
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.
...
“We’re seeing decent bookings in the fall, too, because when we started selling, people wanted to go in the summer but hotel rooms were either gone or expensive, and rental cars were hard to come by,” he said. “But now in the fall, things are more reasonable, and people are saying ‘let’s do it.'”


It looks like they have found a nice, just that more money is needed to ride out the variants.

From:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/ ... ases-rise/
A day earlier, Utah-based Breeze Airways said it raised $200 million in funding from sources including investment manager BlackRock on top of $135 million in earlier funding.
...
Demand for the flights — which Neeleman says Breeze stimulates by bringing nonstops to unserviced routes — should be high enough for the airline to succeed, based on the load factors it’s currently seeing.

“It depends on the routes, they’re in the 60s and 70s,” Neeleman said, referring to load factors. “Considering we started out late, we’re really happy with it.”


This is an extensive war chest. Investors wouldn't invest unless they see a business case. While 60% to 70% load factors aren't outstanding, they can be explained by the late start. The Breeze business model appeals to me, I just live out in California where it isn't likely I'll get to try them soon.

Lightsaber

The investment doesn’t have anything to do with Covid really, it’s mostly earmarked for expansion and other programs.

It will be Sooner than you think!

Are you low-key hinting at an Oklahoma expansion?

Haha well technically they did say that next bases will likely be build ups of cities already served… I guess we will just have to wait to find out

Looking forward to spotting the Breeze livery on the A220 at MSY soon! Curious to see what routes will be added.

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

Bluegrass60 wrote:

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

Where you hear that? That is an incredible amount of downtime before entering service. Makes zero sense especially given the the holiday season they will clearly want to profit off of.

CFWAD wrote:

Bluegrass60 wrote:

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

Where you hear that? That is an incredible amount of downtime before entering service. Makes zero sense especially given the the holiday season they will clearly want to profit off of.

Maybe break them in on charter work?

Bluegrass60 wrote:

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

This is incorrect, at least partly.

First one is to be delivered in second half of October. They likely will be flying sometime in Q1, but no official date is set.

The down time will be because we will have to do a whole new set of proving runs, evacuation trials, manual revisions, Aircraft inspections/conformity, etc before the FAA will add them to the certificate. That takes time and as we saw with Initial certification, the FAA can take longer to do things than were planned for.

flightsimer wrote:

Bluegrass60 wrote:

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

This is incorrect, at least partly.

First one is to be delivered in second half of October. They likely will be flying sometime in Q1, but no official date is set.

The down time will be because we will have to do a whole new set of proving runs, evacuation trials, manual revisions, Aircraft inspections/conformity, etc before the FAA will add them to the certificate. That takes time and as we saw with Initial certification, the FAA can take longer to do things than were planned for.

This timeline and explanation makes a little more sense. Still seems an incredibly long window with the financial backing and technical expertise behind this operation. Not like the A220 is new to the FAA. And the commercial side would love to have it running by December, I am sure.

CFWAD wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Bluegrass60 wrote:

A220s arrive beginners big October. MX says will be Q2 22 before they are scheduled.

This is incorrect, at least partly.

First one is to be delivered in second half of October. They likely will be flying sometime in Q1, but no official date is set.

The down time will be because we will have to do a whole new set of proving runs, evacuation trials, manual revisions, Aircraft inspections/conformity, etc before the FAA will add them to the certificate. That takes time and as we saw with Initial certification, the FAA can take longer to do things than were planned for.

This timeline and explanation makes a little more sense. Still seems an incredibly long window with the financial backing and technical expertise behind this operation. Not like the A220 is new to the FAA. And the commercial side would love to have it running by December, I am sure.

Look at the delay Breeze has experienced just getting the E190 in service- and that is just a shortened version of the aircraft they were already operating. Financial backing has little to do with it, and Breeze while having a lot of technical experts is still a new airline with people still new with working with each other, and working internally and externally with the FAA.

Things can run slow with the FAA, and covid has made things run slower. And to add to that the planes are being first delivered at a bad time of the year. Starting in late November we are entering the holiday season where things always slow down because more people are taking off to enjoy holidays and burn excess PTO that they might lose.

Look at JetBlue. They received their first A220 on Dec 31 but it did not enter service until April 26. Delta received their first A220 in late October 2018 and the plane did not entered service until February 2019.

There are a lot of hurdles to operating a new aircraft type. One is that at least one of the pilots needs to have at least 100 hours in the type, so when an airline receives a new airplane, captains will fly the plane together with no passengers until there are enough pilots with 100 hours on property. This is to avoid a”green on green” situation.

BBDFlyer wrote:

There are a lot of hurdles to operating a new aircraft type. One is that at least one of the pilots needs to have at least 100 hours in the type, so when an airline receives a new airplane, captains will fly the plane together with no passengers until there are enough pilots with 100 hours on property. This is to avoid a”green on green” situation.

That not exactly true…
In general Green on Green is to be avoided, but a Airline can apply for deviations from the regs to allow it and if the first people are Check pilots it doesn’t matter anyways. Breeze did not fly any empty legs for people to build hours.

flightsimer wrote:

BBDFlyer wrote:

There are a lot of hurdles to operating a new aircraft type. One is that at least one of the pilots needs to have at least 100 hours in the type, so when an airline receives a new airplane, captains will fly the plane together with no passengers until there are enough pilots with 100 hours on property. This is to avoid a”green on green” situation.

That not exactly true…
In general Green on Green is to be avoided, but a Airline can apply for deviations from the regs to allow it and if the first people are Check pilots it doesn’t matter anyways. Breeze did not fly any empty legs for people to build hours.

Breeze hired quite a few pilots with time on type already.