Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9890
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 3:12 pm

tphuang wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
It's no secret that AS is handy with an axe & anything performing poorly must go or warrant a solid reason to its own existence. AAG never said they'd fly JFK-LAX/SFO, because VX was losing money doing it.


This part is simply not true. VX was doing quite well in all the JFK/EWR-LAX/SFO routes. They were definitely still making money on them all the way up until the quarter VX went away. The moment it switched over to AS, the fare numbers just crashed. I posted all the fare numbers on mint routes on a.net. You can see for it yourself.

Care to share your source(s) for profitability by route for U.S. carriers? Profits, not fares.

Among other difficulties in route profitability was VX being brought up to AS wage scales.
 
AC4500
Posts: 693
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 4:24 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
They’re adding an additional EWR-LAX/SEA to compensate.

That puts AS at 4x daily on EWR-SEA. That's just insane.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 4:43 pm

AC4500 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
They’re adding an additional EWR-LAX/SEA to compensate.

That puts AS at 4x daily on EWR-SEA. That's just insane.

What they schedule in right now vs what they will actually fly is a different story. I wouldn't read too much into it.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 6:09 pm

tphuang wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
They’re adding an additional EWR-LAX/SEA to compensate.

That puts AS at 4x daily on EWR-SEA. That's just insane.

What they schedule in right now vs what they will actually fly is a different story. I wouldn't read too much into it.


4X daily SEA-EWR shouldn't that much of a stretch considering SEA is Alaska's largest connection hub. It's not like AS is depending on O&D traffic on the route.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22726
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 7:49 pm

Please post links when asserting facts
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 8:38 pm

Idk if it was mentioned but delta opened a lounge at ANC. Pretty big move for a “spoke” in an AS hub
 
QXorVX
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 5:45 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 8:50 pm

32andBelow wrote:
Idk if it was mentioned but delta opened a lounge at ANC. Pretty big move for a “spoke” in an AS hub


Looks like a temporary pop-up, coincides with the seasonal service they added to DTW, JFK, and LAX. It occupies an abandoned bar at the beginning of the concourse.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5903
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Sun Jun 27, 2021 10:52 pm

tphuang wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
It's no secret that AS is handy with an axe & anything performing poorly must go or warrant a solid reason to its own existence. AAG never said they'd fly JFK-LAX/SFO, because VX was losing money doing it.


This part is simply not true. VX was doing quite well in all the JFK/EWR-LAX/SFO routes. They were definitely still making money on them all the way up until the quarter VX went away. The moment it switched over to AS, the fare numbers just crashed. I posted all the fare numbers on mint routes on a.net. You can see for it yourself.


This IS true. VX wasn't able to fill those gorgeous recliner seats up front, but to a select few. Anyone who travels enough, flies AA, UA or DL trans-con. I booked celebrity & fashion industry big wigs all over the world for years. They are extremely loyal & unless the person was SF based, there was little to no reason to fly them.

Look, I'm not bashing VX, I flew one of their A-320's right after AS took them over, in the big fancy white seat & it was like AA J/C seats Internationally in the 90's. Very comfy, but big heavy things, that took up far too much real estate to warrant the fares & loads they got.

VX did alright in the Y cabin, because they had decent rates & the cool vibe with messaging between seats & purple lights, while most airlines were flying 757's T-con which to most, is just another narrow-body & the A-320 almost made all their West bound flights, except in the winter & unscheduled stops cost VX a lot of money, just like it did B6 at first.

Plus, VX had SF crews, which VX was labor heavy, even though they paid lower at first. I lived in SF when VX launched & honestly, none of my industry fliers ever flew them F or Y. VX would never have survived long term going the direction they were going.

As they were new & tried to lease 100 A-319's & A-320's, they were given unfavorable terms on the aircraft leases, even though they were well backed financially, but with no hedged fuel, the market & suppliers didn't provide as much credit & for awhile, it had them paying more for their goods, period. This changed over time after they got more established.

Against those odds the made a name for themselves (or at least leased it) & VX had a small plucky fan base, cool vibe & flight attendants you never see, unless they were called to a seat, by the onboard ordering app. It was that style of flying that AAG had to beat out of them. Today an AS trained in cabin crew member, can easily tell if their F/A counterparts were from VX or not, by whom stays in the gallies & who walks the aisles.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 12:45 am

RWA380 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
It's no secret that AS is handy with an axe & anything performing poorly must go or warrant a solid reason to its own existence. AAG never said they'd fly JFK-LAX/SFO, because VX was losing money doing it.


This part is simply not true. VX was doing quite well in all the JFK/EWR-LAX/SFO routes. They were definitely still making money on them all the way up until the quarter VX went away. The moment it switched over to AS, the fare numbers just crashed. I posted all the fare numbers on mint routes on a.net. You can see for it yourself.


This IS true. VX wasn't able to fill those gorgeous recliner seats up front, but to a select few. Anyone who travels enough, flies AA, UA or DL trans-con. I booked celebrity & fashion industry big wigs all over the world for years. They are extremely loyal & unless the person was SF based, there was little to no reason to fly them.

Look, I'm not bashing VX, I flew one of their A-320's right after AS took them over, in the big fancy white seat & it was like AA J/C seats Internationally in the 90's. Very comfy, but big heavy things, that took up far too much real estate to warrant the fares & loads they got.

VX did alright in the Y cabin, because they had decent rates & the cool vibe with messaging between seats & purple lights, while most airlines were flying 757's T-con which to most, is just another narrow-body & the A-320 almost made all their West bound flights, except in the winter & unscheduled stops cost VX a lot of money, just like it did B6 at first.

Plus, VX had SF crews, which VX was labor heavy, even though they paid lower at first. I lived in SF when VX launched & honestly, none of my industry fliers ever flew them F or Y. VX would never have survived long term going the direction they were going.

As they were new & tried to lease 100 A-319's & A-320's, they were given unfavorable terms on the aircraft leases, even though they were well backed financially, but with no hedged fuel, the market & suppliers didn't provide as much credit & for awhile, it had them paying more for their goods, period. This changed over time after they got more established.

Against those odds the made a name for themselves (or at least leased it) & VX had a small plucky fan base, cool vibe & flight attendants you never see, unless they were called to a seat, by the onboard ordering app. It was that style of flying that AAG had to beat out of them. Today an AS trained in cabin crew member, can easily tell if their F/A counterparts were from VX or not, by whom stays in the gallies & who walks the aisles.


You are simply wrong, with no data to back it up.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/396933 ... transcript
This is from 2016 Q1 earnings call
" But we are excited to say we are very happy with the quarter. our pretax income was up about a 170% and out operating income was up a 150% and our margin nearly doubled basically it did double from 4.0 last year to about 9.1 this year operating margin so we are happy with the way things came out."

Their CASM ex-fuel that quarter was $7.96, which is lower than JetBlue at 2019Q4 at $8.31
"Our CASM excluding fuel specialized in profit sharing for the quarter increased just 1.8% year over year to $7.96"
VX had a very long haul happy route network. The average stage length was over 1400 miles. So, adjusted for stage length, it probably would've been a little higher than what JetBlue had.

I know for sure the yield that VX got on JFK-LAX/SFO in 2016 would've been profitable at JetBlue's cost level and quite profitable (definitely above system average). More important, the yield they had on JFK-LAX/SFO were higher than what they got on other transcon routes. So if their system wide average margin was 9.1%, JFK-LAX/SFO would've been higher than that. Again, I tracked transcon yield numbers very closely from 2016 to 2019.

Please show some data to back up your views.
 
onwFan
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 1:27 am

QXorVX wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

This is a bit dramatic. VX was also going to (and I believe already was) struggling on those markets because they lacked a comparable product.

There was no reason to buy them. What did they even get? A couple gates at SFO? And some a320s that they are returning.


AS, from the onset, said they were not going to offer a competitive premium product on the JFK transcons and were instead going to focus on the standard offering. LAX-JFK is a huge deal to the legacies, some have special fleets just for the market, for AS it was just another market. I think a little too much is being read into this getting cut. JFK is still a decent sized station from the main hubs, 4x from SEA this winter.

The VX purchase did secure them gates in two major airports, and despite the fact the Airbus are going away at some point, most are still flying today. They provided an instantaneous boost to the fleet when the general market was great and growth was needed. Boeing would not have been able to provide that many planes that fast and I have a hard time imagining AS could recruit and train that fast.

Take a look at the ASM growth here:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/530 ... laska-air/

It seems some interpret the gains of acquiring VX have just evaporated due to some network changes, clearly not the case. They gained a quick fleet, the pilots and flight attendants required to operate the fleet, gates at constrained airports, and potentially kept a competitor limited in their main market- the west coast. Imagine how the thread would be going today had they not purchased VX.

Moreover, AS’ purchase of VX effectively blocked B6 from instant access to West Coast point of sale. And it does seem to have been effective, as it still shows in B6’s difficulties with routes like LAX-SEA, SFO-RDU/AUS/MCO, etc. AS will figureout the missing points where OW flyers in the Bay area and LA want to fly to, and where they can make more money; and we can expect them to adjust the route map accordingly.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5903
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 1:29 am

tphuang wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
tphuang wrote:

This part is simply not true. VX was doing quite well in all the JFK/EWR-LAX/SFO routes. They were definitely still making money on them all the way up until the quarter VX went away. The moment it switched over to AS, the fare numbers just crashed. I posted all the fare numbers on mint routes on a.net. You can see for it yourself.


This IS true. VX wasn't able to fill those gorgeous recliner seats up front, but to a select few. Anyone who travels enough, flies AA, UA or DL trans-con. I booked celebrity & fashion industry big wigs all over the world for years. They are extremely loyal & unless the person was SF based, there was little to no reason to fly them.

Look, I'm not bashing VX, I flew one of their A-320's right after AS took them over, in the big fancy white seat & it was like AA J/C seats Internationally in the 90's. Very comfy, but big heavy things, that took up far too much real estate to warrant the fares & loads they got.

VX did alright in the Y cabin, because they had decent rates & the cool vibe with messaging between seats & purple lights, while most airlines were flying 757's T-con which to most, is just another narrow-body & the A-320 almost made all their West bound flights, except in the winter & unscheduled stops cost VX a lot of money, just like it did B6 at first.

Plus, VX had SF crews, which VX was labor heavy, even though they paid lower at first. I lived in SF when VX launched & honestly, none of my industry fliers ever flew them F or Y. VX would never have survived long term going the direction they were going.

As they were new & tried to lease 100 A-319's & A-320's, they were given unfavorable terms on the aircraft leases, even though they were well backed financially, but with no hedged fuel, the market & suppliers didn't provide as much credit & for awhile, it had them paying more for their goods, period. This changed over time after they got more established.

Against those odds the made a name for themselves (or at least leased it) & VX had a small plucky fan base, cool vibe & flight attendants you never see, unless they were called to a seat, by the onboard ordering app. It was that style of flying that AAG had to beat out of them. Today an AS trained in cabin crew member, can easily tell if their F/A counterparts were from VX or not, by whom stays in the gallies & who walks the aisles.


You are simply wrong, with no data to back it up.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/396933 ... transcript
This is from 2016 Q1 earnings call
" But we are excited to say we are very happy with the quarter. our pretax income was up about a 170% and out operating income was up a 150% and our margin nearly doubled basically it did double from 4.0 last year to about 9.1 this year operating margin so we are happy with the way things came out."

Their CASM ex-fuel that quarter was $7.96, which is lower than JetBlue at 2019Q4 at $8.31
"Our CASM excluding fuel specialized in profit sharing for the quarter increased just 1.8% year over year to $7.96"
VX had a very long haul happy route network. The average stage length was over 1400 miles. So, adjusted for stage length, it probably would've been a little higher than what JetBlue had.

I know for sure the yield that VX got on JFK-LAX/SFO in 2016 would've been profitable at JetBlue's cost level and quite profitable (definitely above system average). More important, the yield they had on JFK-LAX/SFO were higher than what they got on other transcon routes. So if their system wide average margin was 9.1%, JFK-LAX/SFO would've been higher than that. Again, I tracked transcon yield numbers very closely from 2016 to 2019.

Please show some data to back up your views.


What this represents is, that at the time AAG decides to bid for VX & buys it, the value of stocks are higher, not because of performance, but because the deal with AAG over valued VX. Then yeah, just before a merger the acquired carriers stocks, often rise on the hopeful future, good find. I know what happened, I was there. My comments were based up VX's more modest beginnings up until it started to stop leaking cash so quickly.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 2:00 am

It's funny how armchair CEO's are all up in arms about AS discontinuing service out of SFO and LAX. Well, the concept is really simple...if people don't fly them...the service goes bye-bye. The more service AS leaves SFO and LAX means for others like SAN, PDX and SEA. It's not like SFO and LAX has a shortage of flights to many destinations.
 
hiflyeras
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 3:19 am

I love how people say that VX was making so much money. Maybe they did on a few routes but I doubt on the majority of them. And their aircraft interiors were falling apart. AS was saddled with huge repair bills to fix broken seats, screens, lavs, etc. I can’t speak to airframe and power maintenance but there seemed to delays and cancellations left and right on the inherited Airbus. VX didn’t seem to spend the money to maintain their fleet. That to me is not a sign of an airline that was profitable or having much of a future.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 3:39 am

hiflyeras wrote:
I love how people say that VX was making so much money. Maybe they did on a few routes but I doubt on the majority of them. And their aircraft interiors were falling apart. AS was saddled with huge repair bills to fix broken seats, screens, lavs, etc. I can’t speak to airframe and power maintenance but there seemed to delays and cancellations left and right on the inherited Airbus. VX didn’t seem to spend the money to maintain their fleet. That to me is not a sign of an airline that was profitable or having much of a future.


They also didn’t spend much money on their employees.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 3:54 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
It's funny how armchair CEO's are all up in arms about AS discontinuing service out of SFO and LAX. Well, the concept is really simple...if people don't fly them...the service goes bye-bye. The more service AS leaves SFO and LAX means for others like SAN, PDX and SEA. It's not like SFO and LAX has a shortage of flights to many destinations.

People are point out that they bought this airline that flew all these routes and now they are canceling all of them. They could have just bought more 737s if they wanted to just expand out of Seattle. And done it a lot cheaper
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:01 am

Many people here are bashing VX. Fine, I'm largely indifferent having always been on the UA train. But at the same time, does Alaska's position in key west coast markets (SFO, LAX) justify their 2.6 bil VX buyout at the time? I don't know too much about LAX, but speaking about SFO, AS's all-time high for market share here was in 2016... the year they bought VX. It was somewhere around 20% ± 5% if I remember correctly. Now, from the last I've heard, it is hovering around 7 or 8%. Regardless of whether you are an AS fanboy or VX fanboy or not, this is a very drastic decrease. Of course, hindsight is 2020, but one has to wonder if buying VX to simply eliminate a competitor was the best move. And what's the next move for these coastal hubs? I've heard rumors that SFO is losing their mainline pilot base in the coming year or so which makes sense as AS transitions out the Airbus fleet and does not have any plans to base the MAX at SFO (the MAX has not even flown here once since it's introduction into the fleet). I appreciate any thoughts.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:09 am

32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
It's funny how armchair CEO's are all up in arms about AS discontinuing service out of SFO and LAX. Well, the concept is really simple...if people don't fly them...the service goes bye-bye. The more service AS leaves SFO and LAX means for others like SAN, PDX and SEA. It's not like SFO and LAX has a shortage of flights to many destinations.

People are point out that they bought this airline that flew all these routes and now they are canceling all of them. They could have just bought more 737s if they wanted to just expand out of Seattle. And done it a lot cheaper


It's been well-known that significant reason for buying VX to keep B6 out of building up any real significant operation along the west coast. Again, if people don't buy tickets to support the SFO and LAX service, like any airline, they'll leave the market. The concept seems pretty straight-forward to me.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:26 am

As an AS thread grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of it becoming a debate on VX approaches 1.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:43 am

Ok...I'll attempt to change the subject (in vain). On a different thread, someone had mentioned that SAN was getting two additional routes in addition to JFK. Does anyone know what those two routes might be?
 
Wneast
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:51 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
Ok...I'll attempt to change the subject (in vain). On a different thread, someone had mentioned that SAN was getting two additional routes in addition to JFK. Does anyone know what those two routes might be?

Where was this mentioned ?
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26651
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:01 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
It's funny how armchair CEO's are all up in arms about AS discontinuing service out of SFO and LAX. Well, the concept is really simple...if people don't fly them...the service goes bye-bye. The more service AS leaves SFO and LAX means for others like SAN, PDX and SEA. It's not like SFO and LAX has a shortage of flights to many destinations.


AS hasn't been shrinking at LAX. It's network has changed around but it has a larger network today from LAX than before the merger.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:40 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
It's funny how armchair CEO's are all up in arms about AS discontinuing service out of SFO and LAX. Well, the concept is really simple...if people don't fly them...the service goes bye-bye. The more service AS leaves SFO and LAX means for others like SAN, PDX and SEA. It's not like SFO and LAX has a shortage of flights to many destinations.

People are point out that they bought this airline that flew all these routes and now they are canceling all of them. They could have just bought more 737s if they wanted to just expand out of Seattle. And done it a lot cheaper


It's been well-known that significant reason for buying VX to keep B6 out of building up any real significant operation along the west coast. Again, if people don't buy tickets to support the SFO and LAX service, like any airline, they'll leave the market. The concept seems pretty straight-forward to me.

B6 can still expand on the west coast. In fact I know where they can pick up about 60 used a320s right now
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:47 am

Wneast wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Ok...I'll attempt to change the subject (in vain). On a different thread, someone had mentioned that SAN was getting two additional routes in addition to JFK. Does anyone know what those two routes might be?

Where was this mentioned ?


It was in the San Diego Aviation Thread 2021.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:48 am

32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
People are point out that they bought this airline that flew all these routes and now they are canceling all of them. They could have just bought more 737s if they wanted to just expand out of Seattle. And done it a lot cheaper


It's been well-known that significant reason for buying VX to keep B6 out of building up any real significant operation along the west coast. Again, if people don't buy tickets to support the SFO and LAX service, like any airline, they'll leave the market. The concept seems pretty straight-forward to me.

B6 can still expand on the west coast. In fact I know where they can pick up about 60 used a320s right now


The real question is will B6 take that risk?
 
Wneast
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 5:58 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
Wneast wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Ok...I'll attempt to change the subject (in vain). On a different thread, someone had mentioned that SAN was getting two additional routes in addition to JFK. Does anyone know what those two routes might be?

Where was this mentioned ?


It was in the San Diego Aviation Thread 2021.

I could be wrong but I think they were talking about Monterey and another city starting service that day I don’t think it was two other new routes
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:09 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:

It's been well-known that significant reason for buying VX to keep B6 out of building up any real significant operation along the west coast. Again, if people don't buy tickets to support the SFO and LAX service, like any airline, they'll leave the market. The concept seems pretty straight-forward to me.

B6 can still expand on the west coast. In fact I know where they can pick up about 60 used a320s right now


The real question is will B6 take that risk?

Don’t know. But they can do it for a lot less than 2 billion
 
chrisair
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2000 11:32 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:24 am

32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
B6 can still expand on the west coast. In fact I know where they can pick up about 60 used a320s right now


The real question is will B6 take that risk?

Don’t know. But they can do it for a lot less than 2 billion


How much do you think a used A320 costs?
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:23 am

chrisair wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:

The real question is will B6 take that risk?

Don’t know. But they can do it for a lot less than 2 billion


How much do you think a used A320 costs?

Lease payments is a monthly expense that goes against revenue of the route its flying. It’s not straight cash.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9890
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 12:43 pm

It's not just a question of aircraft. Some major and important West Coast airports are facility or slot restricted. B6 could no more add tomorrow 240 flights (4 segments for each of those hypothetical 60 aircraft) at LAX, SFO,
and SNA that it could at JFK or BOS.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 2:27 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
It's not just a question of aircraft. Some major and important West Coast airports are facility or slot restricted. B6 could no more add tomorrow 240 flights (4 segments for each of those hypothetical 60 aircraft) at LAX, SFO,
and SNA that it could at JFK or BOS.

LAX and SFO aren’t slot restricted
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 1606
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 2:36 pm

32andBelow wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
It's not just a question of aircraft. Some major and important West Coast airports are facility or slot restricted. B6 could no more add tomorrow 240 flights (4 segments for each of those hypothetical 60 aircraft) at LAX, SFO,
and SNA that it could at JFK or BOS.

LAX and SFO aren’t slot restricted

Hypothetically...

Try getting a 7am or 4pm departure slot. Or gates...
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26651
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 2:39 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
It's not just a question of aircraft. Some major and important West Coast airports are facility or slot restricted. B6 could no more add tomorrow 240 flights (4 segments for each of those hypothetical 60 aircraft) at LAX, SFO,
and SNA that it could at JFK or BOS.

LAX and SFO aren’t slot restricted

Hypothetically...

Try getting a 7am or 4pm departure slot. Or gates...


LAX and SFO don’t have slots. Airlines lease their own gates it’s not common use.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 3:51 pm

tphuang wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
It's no secret that AS is handy with an axe & anything performing poorly must go or warrant a solid reason to its own existence. AAG never said they'd fly JFK-LAX/SFO, because VX was losing money doing it.


This part is simply not true. VX was doing quite well in all the JFK/EWR-LAX/SFO routes. They were definitely still making money on them all the way up until the quarter VX went away. The moment it switched over to AS, the fare numbers just crashed. I posted all the fare numbers on mint routes on a.net. You can see for it yourself.


VX was successful on JFK-LAX/SFO because the competitive landscape then was different than what it is now. I'm not sure exactly when MINT rolled out, but prior to it, B6 was much less of formidable competitor on these routes than what it is today. Also, AA was still flying the outdated, ancient 762 on LAX/SFO and while they were capturing a large chunk of the business travel market, the A321T product only began to roll out in 2014, two years before VX merged into AS. UA exited JFK in 2015. DL was building up. VX was niche and did well. AS on LAX/SFO isn't competitive relative to what is on offer today. It is basic, domestic first class seats and AS likely does not have a large slice of the corporate travel market. It should come as no surprise that AS is exiting LAX out of JFK and I think SFO will be gone too in a year.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5903
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:30 pm

hiflyeras wrote:
I love how people say that VX was making so much money. Maybe they did on a few routes but I doubt on the majority of them. And their aircraft interiors were falling apart. AS was saddled with huge repair bills to fix broken seats, screens, lavs, etc. I can’t speak to airframe and power maintenance but there seemed to delays and cancellations left and right on the inherited Airbus. VX didn’t seem to spend the money to maintain their fleet. That to me is not a sign of an airline that was profitable or having much of a future.
d

My friends in AAG, ALL told me the same thing. Deferred maintenance was awful on the VX birds & every aircraft had to have something done to bring it to AS standards. VX was a good carrier, had fun gadgets & some cool aspects, but as I said before, most people who really travel, need International & Domestic, or at least partner carriers. VX to VS or VA, was not going to cut it.

I have enough insider info, nothing earth shattering, but plenty of input on the merger, the employees, front line to boardroom. The planes were obviously kept flying with non-essential repairs due. The Big White seats were marked in ink, hard as heck to keep clean & were not sold enough. The fact VX did not upgrade was a reason F almost always had an open seat or two, maybe except T-cons, as they had only 8 seats.

I think you have given a better perspective on the market at the time & AA has been the Hollywood airline since the 90's, which is why LAX is important to them. DL wants that premium, but fails to offer other places the Hollywood types travel on. It took me 30 minutes just to get a celebrity to fly NZ in J LAX-LHR, as UA was sold out in both premium cabins that evening. Then he requested NZ from then on.
 
hiflyeras
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:29 pm

RWA380 wrote:
.I think you have given a better perspective on the market at the time & AA has been the Hollywood airline since the 90's, which is why LAX is important to them. DL wants that premium, but fails to offer other places the Hollywood types travel on. It took me 30 minutes just to get a celebrity to fly NZ in J LAX-LHR, as UA was sold out in both premium cabins that evening. Then he requested NZ from then on.


I was just checking on mileage redemption and airfares on AA's new service from LAX to Christchurch. Yikes! And to Auckland it's not much better. I'd love to fly NZ but am married to oneworld...they really lack when it comes to the South Pacific. The South Island is on my bucket list!
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5903
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:10 pm

hiflyeras wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
.I think you have given a better perspective on the market at the time & AA has been the Hollywood airline since the 90's, which is why LAX is important to them. DL wants that premium, but fails to offer other places the Hollywood types travel on. It took me 30 minutes just to get a celebrity to fly NZ in J LAX-LHR, as UA was sold out in both premium cabins that evening. Then he requested NZ from then on.


I was just checking on mileage redemption and airfares on AA's new service from LAX to Christchurch. Yikes! And to Auckland it's not much better. I'd love to fly NZ but am married to oneworld...they really lack when it comes to the South Pacific. The South Island is on my bucket list!


QF is One World also, if Australia is part of your journey. AA added cities that QF either left (in the case of AKL) serving from the USA, or cities that people want to incorporate into a trip of that distance. AKL, CHC are the first or last stop on a One World itinerary.

Routing XXX is home city, XXX-LAX on AS, LAX-CHC on AA, separate leg on NZ to AKL, AKL-SYD QF, then return home on QF or AA (depending on city) MEL, BNE, SYD to LAX, then AS to XXX.
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:12 pm

hiflyeras wrote:
RWA380 wrote:
.I think you have given a better perspective on the market at the time & AA has been the Hollywood airline since the 90's, which is why LAX is important to them. DL wants that premium, but fails to offer other places the Hollywood types travel on. It took me 30 minutes just to get a celebrity to fly NZ in J LAX-LHR, as UA was sold out in both premium cabins that evening. Then he requested NZ from then on.


I was just checking on mileage redemption and airfares on AA's new service from LAX to Christchurch. Yikes! And to Auckland it's not much better. I'd love to fly NZ but am married to oneworld...they really lack when it comes to the South Pacific. The South Island is on my bucket list!

You could always try Fiji. They're oneworld connect aren't they? And their A350 biz product from LAX is great - A330 biz from SFO isn't bad either.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1955
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:30 pm

It also doesn't help on the transcons that United is paying some travel agents 20% commission, American is 10% to 20% with exclusive fares, Delta is 5% and up (also exclusive fares). Alaska & JetBlue: 0%.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 9:42 pm

Wneast wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Wneast wrote:
Where was this mentioned ?


It was in the San Diego Aviation Thread 2021.

I could be wrong but I think they were talking about Monterey and another city starting service that day I don’t think it was two other new routes


I think AS already flies the SAN-MRY route.
 
Wneast
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 9:45 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
Wneast wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:

It was in the San Diego Aviation Thread 2021.

I could be wrong but I think they were talking about Monterey and another city starting service that day I don’t think it was two other new routes


I think AS already flies the SAN-MRY route.

No the article though was in SANFAN was talking about had two routes starting that day and they just mentioned adding JFK so I think that’s why it said three new routes
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5750
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Mon Jun 28, 2021 11:28 pm

Wneast wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Wneast wrote:
I could be wrong but I think they were talking about Monterey and another city starting service that day I don’t think it was two other new routes


I think AS already flies the SAN-MRY route.

No the article though was in SANFAN was talking about had two routes starting that day and they just mentioned adding JFK so I think that’s why it said three new routes


Oh got it.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:24 am

RWA380 wrote:
hiflyeras wrote:
I love how people say that VX was making so much money. Maybe they did on a few routes but I doubt on the majority of them. And their aircraft interiors were falling apart. AS was saddled with huge repair bills to fix broken seats, screens, lavs, etc. I can’t speak to airframe and power maintenance but there seemed to delays and cancellations left and right on the inherited Airbus. VX didn’t seem to spend the money to maintain their fleet. That to me is not a sign of an airline that was profitable or having much of a future.
d

My friends in AAG, ALL told me the same thing. Deferred maintenance was awful on the VX birds & every aircraft had to have something done to bring it to AS standards. VX was a good carrier, had fun gadgets & some cool aspects, but as I said before, most people who really travel, need International & Domestic, or at least partner carriers. VX to VS or VA, was not going to cut it.

I have enough insider info, nothing earth shattering, but plenty of input on the merger, the employees, front line to boardroom. The planes were obviously kept flying with non-essential repairs due. The Big White seats were marked in ink, hard as heck to keep clean & were not sold enough. The fact VX did not upgrade was a reason F almost always had an open seat or two, maybe except T-cons, as they had only 8 seats.

I think you have given a better perspective on the market at the time & AA has been the Hollywood airline since the 90's, which is why LAX is important to them. DL wants that premium, but fails to offer other places the Hollywood types travel on. It took me 30 minutes just to get a celebrity to fly NZ in J LAX-LHR, as UA was sold out in both premium cabins that evening. Then he requested NZ from then on.


AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:29 am

ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.
 
Wneast
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:31 am

sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.

I’m sure them trying to go at WN at SJC might be a disaster but who knows
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:37 am

sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.


SJC as a focus city hasn't really worked for anyone who has tried it, and many have, starting with AA, which found no success with the Reno Air purchase, and neither has DL of late.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:46 am

ContinentalEWR wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.


SJC as a focus city hasn't really worked for anyone who has tried it, and many have, starting with AA, which found no success with the Reno Air purchase, and neither has DL of late.

Or, you know, VX, which ended up putting itself up for sale.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:47 am

sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.


It was 12% at the end of 2020. SFO traffic has gone off a cliff during COVID, the worst for any major airport. Are you suggesting AS should be chasing share in a disrupted market?

Wneast wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.

I’m sure them trying to go at WN at SJC might be a disaster but who knows


AS has been competing against WN at SJC for years. They’ve been #2 for about 10 years?
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 3:32 am

sxf24 wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
AS acquiring VX was all about making sure B6 didn't, + getting more heft in SFO. It was a very expensive acquisition relative to what it produced return wise.

Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.


It was 12% at the end of 2020. SFO traffic has gone off a cliff during COVID, the worst for any major airport. Are you suggesting AS should be chasing share in a disrupted market

Regarding market share %, my bad - I may have looked at numbers that excluded Skywest operated flights - still not a great number. And about "chasing share in a disrupted market," yes, I believe that AS must either fully resign themselves to being uncompetitive and start picking apart SFO, or fully commit to chasing share. Why else are they opening a lounge at SFO later this summer??

There are too many mixed signals coming from AS re SFO but as long as the lounge plan is on track, which it is, I expect them to chase share at SFO regardless of how disrupted the market may be. Let me pose the question back to you in a different way: Why is AS building a lounge in such a disrupted market in which they continue to lose share? Opening a lounge shows commitment to the area and a commitment to premium pax. They either must match this commitment route/network-wise from SFO, or they should be stopping lounge construction and instead reallocate resources to other hubs/focus cities that they may seem to care about more. And the former seems much more likely than the latter at this point in time.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 6:47 am

sfojvjets wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
Yeah. That ship sailed quite some time ago... imagine going from over 20% to ~7% SFO market share in the span of just 4 years. Ouch.

At the same time I hope to see AS grow in SJC. Unlikely though as they are caught between a rock (United) at SFO and a hard place (WN) at SJC. Being successful in the Bay Area is hard, as they have most certainly found.


It was 12% at the end of 2020. SFO traffic has gone off a cliff during COVID, the worst for any major airport. Are you suggesting AS should be chasing share in a disrupted market

Regarding market share %, my bad - I may have looked at numbers that excluded Skywest operated flights - still not a great number. And about "chasing share in a disrupted market," yes, I believe that AS must either fully resign themselves to being uncompetitive and start picking apart SFO, or fully commit to chasing share. Why else are they opening a lounge at SFO later this summer??

There are too many mixed signals coming from AS re SFO but as long as the lounge plan is on track, which it is, I expect them to chase share at SFO regardless of how disrupted the market may be. Let me pose the question back to you in a different way: Why is AS building a lounge in such a disrupted market in which they continue to lose share? Opening a lounge shows commitment to the area and a commitment to premium pax. They either must match this commitment route/network-wise from SFO, or they should be stopping lounge construction and instead reallocate resources to other hubs/focus cities that they may seem to care about more. And the former seems much more likely than the latter at this point in time.

Cus the marketing lounge people and the schedule planning people probably aren’t talking
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: Alaska Airlines Fleet/Network Thread - 2021

Tue Jun 29, 2021 7:21 am

32andBelow wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
sxf24 wrote:

It was 12% at the end of 2020. SFO traffic has gone off a cliff during COVID, the worst for any major airport. Are you suggesting AS should be chasing share in a disrupted market

Regarding market share %, my bad - I may have looked at numbers that excluded Skywest operated flights - still not a great number. And about "chasing share in a disrupted market," yes, I believe that AS must either fully resign themselves to being uncompetitive and start picking apart SFO, or fully commit to chasing share. Why else are they opening a lounge at SFO later this summer??

There are too many mixed signals coming from AS re SFO but as long as the lounge plan is on track, which it is, I expect them to chase share at SFO regardless of how disrupted the market may be. Let me pose the question back to you in a different way: Why is AS building a lounge in such a disrupted market in which they continue to lose share? Opening a lounge shows commitment to the area and a commitment to premium pax. They either must match this commitment route/network-wise from SFO, or they should be stopping lounge construction and instead reallocate resources to other hubs/focus cities that they may seem to care about more. And the former seems much more likely than the latter at this point in time.

Cus the marketing lounge people and the schedule planning people probably aren’t talking

...I don't think that's an accurate conclusion at all. Opening a lounge is not about marketing, it's about catering to the necessities of a premium audience. Marketing is saying "we're blocking middle seats because of covid" or "we have a sale, buy tickets fast," not "we are opening a lounge at location xxx because we understand that we need this to be competitive."

And opening lounges is most definitely a coordinated effort facilitated by many different facets of the airline. Planning is paramount so the execution can be successful.

This does bring me to an interesting point, though. As mainline operations at SFO remain stagnant/decrease, regional operations on the E175 have been on the rise. It's interesting to wonder if it makes sense to still call SFO a hub but have the vast majority of flying done by Embraers and outsourced to Skywest/Horizon.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos