Breeze Airways - News and Discussion Thread - 2022

airlinepeanuts · Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:51 pm

Don’t they have pretty strict hiring standards? I wonder if they did this to themselves by being selective in hiring.

ASFlyer · Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:47 pm

airlinepeanuts wrote:
Don’t they have pretty strict hiring standards? I wonder if they did this to themselves by being selective in hiring.

"strict hiring standards"? Are you serious? For what they're offering, they're lucky to have applicants at all. They did this to themselves by creating a schedule that they didn't have planes and people signed off by the FAA to operate.

airlinepeanuts · Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:43 pm

ASFlyer wrote:
airlinepeanuts wrote:
Don’t they have pretty strict hiring standards? I wonder if they did this to themselves by being selective in hiring.

"strict hiring standards"? Are you serious? For what they're offering, they're lucky to have applicants at all. They did this to themselves by creating a schedule that they didn't have planes and people signed off by the FAA to operate.

Exactly! I thought they were like requiring degrees for flight attendants at first?

MILakes · Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:45 pm

diverdave wrote:
Looks like CHS-HSV ends on September 5th.

Currently a 1-stop (Breeze thru) thru TPA. HSV-LAS also delayed until Sept. So current HSV schedule is 2x week TPA, with good load factors I'm told. Nearly all of us on this site are aviation enthusiasts and/or professionals with insight into the nuances inherent with a start up that operates less than daily service. However the PR trouble comes from the majority of the flying public who were/are/will be surprised when a flight is canx and they are left to figure out another way to their destination (or wait 3/4 days for the next MX flight). And passengers trying to get back to or from a place like HSV, a mid-market with limited capacity and schedule, may find few options on any airline for a day or so.

LBBflyer · Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:59 pm

Flflyer83 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:

It seems like the question has been answered several times now, and someone seemingly from the inside (until recently anyway?) has acknowledged that the entire operation is a "dumpster fire" (their words, not mine). Are you willing to acknowledge that Breeze should probably have approached this major expansion with a little less urgency?

Absolutely. What I didn’t really understand was this sense that the issues were all their fault or were unique to them when we hear almost daily about some other carrier facing a meltdown. This summer, unfortunately, has shades of 2000 for me and I expect for a lot of other folks who have been working in or following the industry for too long.

It does to me that MX has finally (and tardily) made a big push to schedule realistically and otherwise do right by passengers. I got another apology email from them yesterday.

Other carriers can rebook passengers relatively quickly on flights the same day or next day. Breeze cancelled successive flights on a point for point route last week that only flies twice a week… and they don’t rebook on other carriers. Not everyone can just go buy a 1200 ticket on another carrier at the last minute. That’s a big deal, especially when it is happening over and over and over. They have full control of their schedule. Period.

I think that anyone who thinks that Breeze is taking too much blame for this situation should pull up Twitter and take a look at the replies that Breeze staff have had to make of the past few days. Numerous passengers who were planning to get home on Breeze now having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars on replacement flights. Additionally, it appears that you have to manually request a full refund (instead of BreezePoints) and their on-line service is backed up for days. This is holding people's cash hostage when they need it to book flights on another airline.

TexasAirCorp · Tue Jun 28, 2022 7:31 pm

Bluegrass60 wrote:
Can the finger ultimately be pointed at the FAA/DOT and Pete Buttigieg U.S. Secretary of Transportation?

I highly doubt Pete Buttigieg will be scared about his position over this.

For the delay in certification, the finger can be pointed at the FAA, however the operational meltdown that's taking place right now is absolutely Breeze's fault. Yes the issue is the FAA being useless, but they knew there was only one qualified person available to certify. Committing to such massive growth when there was a major question mark over whether the resources required would be available at the right time was a stupid idea. Neeleman and his cronies are now paying the price for this.

Cubsrule · Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:14 pm

Flflyer83 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:

It seems like the question has been answered several times now, and someone seemingly from the inside (until recently anyway?) has acknowledged that the entire operation is a "dumpster fire" (their words, not mine). Are you willing to acknowledge that Breeze should probably have approached this major expansion with a little less urgency?

Absolutely. What I didn’t really understand was this sense that the issues were all their fault or were unique to them when we hear almost daily about some other carrier facing a meltdown. This summer, unfortunately, has shades of 2000 for me and I expect for a lot of other folks who have been working in or following the industry for too long.

It does to me that MX has finally (and tardily) made a big push to schedule realistically and otherwise do right by passengers. I got another apology email from them yesterday.

Other carriers can rebook passengers relatively quickly on flights the same day or next day. Breeze cancelled successive flights on a point for point route last week that only flies twice a week… and they don’t rebook on other carriers. Not everyone can just go buy a 1200 ticket on another carrier at the last minute. That’s a big deal, especially when it is happening over and over and over. They have full control of their schedule. Period.

I hear you. But isn’t the natural consequence of your position that carriers cannot start small unless they are willing to pay the freight for flights on other carriers (assuming there’s space)? I’m not side I’m comfortable saying that.

Babyshark · Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:18 pm

SurfandSnow wrote:
Oh dear.. Breeze sounds just like Norwegian and Wow Air. I flew both of those carriers back in 2018, and both honestly offered a great product - even then, $325 for a nonstop LAX-MAD and $299 for a BCN-KEF-LAX return seemed like excellent value, especially for an early August visit to Spain. However, both expanded far too rapidly, and seemed to suffer from all kinds of delays and other issues. Lest we not forget that Norwegian's brand new 787s and 737 MAX planes faced all kinds of teething issues, just like the Breeze A220s.

Hopefully by drastically scaling back the network and growth plans, this "nice" new carrier can focus on the basics and achieve success.

they may need the scale to fund their operation and without it they won’t make it

The interesting question would be if it was cheaper to use used 737 or 320s from day 1 instead of boutique E190/220s?

And I’m talking strictly cheaper, not even considering seat miles. Just airframes.

But it would have been more asms, more revenue, more qualified FAA, more pilots applying, more everything.

Seems their product was the airplanes then the routes. Their product needed to be the routes first.

ASFlyer · Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:42 pm

airlinepeanuts wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:
airlinepeanuts wrote:
Don’t they have pretty strict hiring standards? I wonder if they did this to themselves by being selective in hiring.

"strict hiring standards"? Are you serious? For what they're offering, they're lucky to have applicants at all. They did this to themselves by creating a schedule that they didn't have planes and people signed off by the FAA to operate.

Exactly! I thought they were like requiring degrees for flight attendants at first?

no, they were trying to create some weird cult like airline where Flight Attendants were all temporarily employed part time at dirt poor wages and required to be enrolled in the college in Utah that David Neeleman received an honorary degree from. When nobody wanted any part of that they decided to just go the usual route and hire people for a job, but still offering basement wages and lousy work conditions.

diverdave · Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:49 pm

MILakes wrote:
Currently a 1-stop (Breeze thru) thru TPA. HSV-LAS also delayed until Sept. So current HSV schedule is 2x week TPA, with good load factors I'm told. Nearly all of us on this site are aviation enthusiasts and/or professionals with insight into the nuances inherent with a start up that operates less than daily service. However the PR trouble comes from the majority of the flying public who were/are/will be surprised when a flight is canx and they are left to figure out another way to their destination (or wait 3/4 days for the next MX flight). And passengers trying to get back to or from a place like HSV, a mid-market with limited capacity and schedule, may find few options on any airline for a day or so.

Thanks for the update! G4 served HSV briefly, but never recovered from an incident with bad PR. The G4 check-in agent left a bunch of south Florida bound cruise ship passengers still in the check-in line so he could go man the gate and get the flight out. G4 got a ton of bad press for that, even though they went above and eventually brought in another flight to transport those passengers.

David

FLALEFTY · Tue Jun 28, 2022 11:09 pm

Babyshark wrote:
SurfandSnow wrote:
Oh dear.. Breeze sounds just like Norwegian and Wow Air. I flew both of those carriers back in 2018, and both honestly offered a great product - even then, $325 for a nonstop LAX-MAD and $299 for a BCN-KEF-LAX return seemed like excellent value, especially for an early August visit to Spain. However, both expanded far too rapidly, and seemed to suffer from all kinds of delays and other issues. Lest we not forget that Norwegian's brand new 787s and 737 MAX planes faced all kinds of teething issues, just like the Breeze A220s.

Hopefully by drastically scaling back the network and growth plans, this "nice" new carrier can focus on the basics and achieve success.

they may need the scale to fund their operation and without it they won’t make it

The interesting question would be if it was cheaper to use used 737 or 320s from day 1 instead of boutique E190/220s?

And I’m talking strictly cheaper, not even considering seat miles. Just airframes.

But it would have been more asms, more revenue, more qualified FAA, more pilots applying, more everything.

Seems their product was the airplanes then the routes. Their product needed to be the routes first.

This is a good point. There is a larger supply of type-rated B737 & A32X pilots and flight attendants. There were literally hundreds of these aircraft sitting in the deserts and available from lessors during the peak years of COVID. Had Breeze taken the path similar to Avelo going with established planes like the B738 or A320, then finding pilots to fly them would have been much easier. The A220 is a great aircraft, but it is still in its very early stages of airline use and the type rated pilot pool is shallow. No type-rated A220 captains with either DL or B6 would resign their more stable gigs to go direct entry into the left seat with MX for substantially less money.

I really hope MX finds their way out of this mess and better establishes themselves in the market.

diverdave · Tue Jun 28, 2022 11:18 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
The A220 is a great aircraft, but it is still in its very early stages of airline use and the type rated pilot pool is shallow. No type-rated A220 captains with either DL or B6 would resign their more stable gigs to go direct entry into the left seat with MX for substantially less money.

Come July 15th, this aircraft has been in service for six years. The pilot pool may be shallow, but the aircraft is not a fledgling at this point in time.

David

airlinepeanuts · Wed Jun 29, 2022 12:54 am

ASFlyer wrote:
airlinepeanuts wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:

"strict hiring standards"? Are you serious? For what they're offering, they're lucky to have applicants at all. They did this to themselves by creating a schedule that they didn't have planes and people signed off by the FAA to operate.

Exactly! I thought they were like requiring degrees for flight attendants at first?

no, they were trying to create some weird cult like airline where Flight Attendants were all temporarily employed part time at dirt poor wages and required to be enrolled in the college in Utah that David Neeleman received an honorary degree from. When nobody wanted any part of that they decided to just go the usual route and hire people for a job, but still offering basement wages and lousy work conditions.

That’s it! Thanks! Shocked it’s falling apart lmao

FLALEFTY · Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:18 am

diverdave wrote:
FLALEFTY wrote:
The A220 is a great aircraft, but it is still in its very early stages of airline use and the type rated pilot pool is shallow. No type-rated A220 captains with either DL or B6 would resign their more stable gigs to go direct entry into the left seat with MX for substantially less money.

Come July 15th, this aircraft has been in service for six years. The pilot pool may be shallow, but the aircraft is not a fledgling at this point in time.

David

Delta is the first US-based airline to take delivery of the A220. A221 N101DU was delivered to Delta on October 25, 2018, which is less than 4 years ago. The 10 A221s and 5 A223s received in 2020, the peak of COVID, were immediately put in storage at SBD and gradually put into service starting the first quarter of 2021. The average age of DL's A220 fleet is 2.3 years old.

As for B6, they took their first A223 on December 21, 2020 then paused deliveries for 4 months, taking their 2nd A223 April 28, 2021. The average age of the B6 A223 fleet is less than 1 year old.

To finish off North American A220 operators (except MX), Air Canada's first A220 delivery was on December 20, 2019 & is 2.5 years old. AC's average age of their A220 fleet is 1.4 years old.

My data source is Planespotters.net.

B747forever · Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:19 am

LBBflyer wrote:
Flflyer83 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

Absolutely. What I didn’t really understand was this sense that the issues were all their fault or were unique to them when we hear almost daily about some other carrier facing a meltdown. This summer, unfortunately, has shades of 2000 for me and I expect for a lot of other folks who have been working in or following the industry for too long.

It does to me that MX has finally (and tardily) made a big push to schedule realistically and otherwise do right by passengers. I got another apology email from them yesterday.

Other carriers can rebook passengers relatively quickly on flights the same day or next day. Breeze cancelled successive flights on a point for point route last week that only flies twice a week… and they don’t rebook on other carriers. Not everyone can just go buy a 1200 ticket on another carrier at the last minute. That’s a big deal, especially when it is happening over and over and over. They have full control of their schedule. Period.

I think that anyone who thinks that Breeze is taking too much blame for this situation should pull up Twitter and take a look at the replies that Breeze staff have had to make of the past few days. Numerous passengers who were planning to get home on Breeze now having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars on replacement flights. Additionally, it appears that you have to manually request a full refund (instead of BreezePoints) and their on-line service is backed up for days. This is holding people's cash hostage when they need it to book flights on another airline.

Nope, one is able to request either refund to original form of payment or breezepoints for refund. Very straightforward process.

Also, got an email this morning that they will credit $100 to my account for all the cancellations.

krsw757 · Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:45 am

I requested the full refund via the app on Saturday and it posted to my account today. I also received the $100 credit.

Cubsrule · Wed Jun 29, 2022 2:23 am

B747forever wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:
Flflyer83 wrote:

Other carriers can rebook passengers relatively quickly on flights the same day or next day. Breeze cancelled successive flights on a point for point route last week that only flies twice a week… and they don’t rebook on other carriers. Not everyone can just go buy a 1200 ticket on another carrier at the last minute. That’s a big deal, especially when it is happening over and over and over. They have full control of their schedule. Period.

I think that anyone who thinks that Breeze is taking too much blame for this situation should pull up Twitter and take a look at the replies that Breeze staff have had to make of the past few days. Numerous passengers who were planning to get home on Breeze now having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars on replacement flights. Additionally, it appears that you have to manually request a full refund (instead of BreezePoints) and their on-line service is backed up for days. This is holding people's cash hostage when they need it to book flights on another airline.

Nope, one is able to request either refund to original form of payment or breezepoints for refund. Very straightforward process.

Also, got an email this morning that they will credit $100 to my account for all the cancellations.

Requiring a choice between credit and a refund isn't customer friendly, but it also isn't inconsistent with what the Big 4 US carriers do. It's been a while since I had a cancelation on DL or UA, but my memory is that they require a choice and AA and WN definitely do.

Moreover, the refund process on MX is in line with WN, which is the easiest of the Big 4. It's marginally easier than DL or UA, and markedly easier than AA, which has a nasty habit of holding on to money for weeks or months. My recent refund posted to my account about 72 hours after I requested it, which is in line with returns/refunds in other industries and the turnaround of the better airlines.

Polot · Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:43 am

Cubsrule wrote:
B747forever wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:

I think that anyone who thinks that Breeze is taking too much blame for this situation should pull up Twitter and take a look at the replies that Breeze staff have had to make of the past few days. Numerous passengers who were planning to get home on Breeze now having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars on replacement flights. Additionally, it appears that you have to manually request a full refund (instead of BreezePoints) and their on-line service is backed up for days. This is holding people's cash hostage when they need it to book flights on another airline.

Nope, one is able to request either refund to original form of payment or breezepoints for refund. Very straightforward process.

Also, got an email this morning that they will credit $100 to my account for all the cancellations.

Requiring a choice between credit and a refund isn't customer friendly, but it also isn't inconsistent with what the Big 4 US carriers do. It's been a while since I had a cancelation on DL or UA, but my memory is that they require a choice and AA and WN definitely do.

Again in the US if an airline cancels a flight they are required by law to offer a refund. Travel vouchers (which is what Breezepoints essentially are) are not refunds.

To be honest in the current situation MX wants you to take the refund, as it gets them out of the contract of carriage and there is no obligation to get you to your final destination on MX’s part anymore. Larger airlines of course would prefer you don’t refund and rebook to another flight instead (with a travel voucher to further encourage you to do that) so they can keep your money, but Breeze doesn’t have that flexibility in their operations.

Adding Breezepoint credits on top of full refund is MX trying to be customer friendly, they are not required to do that.

LBBflyer · Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:55 pm

B747forever wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:
Flflyer83 wrote:

Other carriers can rebook passengers relatively quickly on flights the same day or next day. Breeze cancelled successive flights on a point for point route last week that only flies twice a week… and they don’t rebook on other carriers. Not everyone can just go buy a 1200 ticket on another carrier at the last minute. That’s a big deal, especially when it is happening over and over and over. They have full control of their schedule. Period.

I think that anyone who thinks that Breeze is taking too much blame for this situation should pull up Twitter and take a look at the replies that Breeze staff have had to make of the past few days. Numerous passengers who were planning to get home on Breeze now having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars on replacement flights. Additionally, it appears that you have to manually request a full refund (instead of BreezePoints) and their on-line service is backed up for days. This is holding people's cash hostage when they need it to book flights on another airline.

Nope, one is able to request either refund to original form of payment or breezepoints for refund. Very straightforward process.

Also, got an email this morning that they will credit $100 to my account for all the cancellations.

Well, I'm glad to hear it's easier than people complaining on Twitter were describing. That's what I get for believing the general public.

On another note, it appears that the E190 does not have the range to make the LAS flights as speculated. MX244 from RSW-LAS, appears to be making a fuel stop in TUL. I wonder if it will need one back eastbound later today.

MEA-707 · Wed Jun 29, 2022 2:51 pm

LBBflyer wrote:
B747forever wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:

On another note, it appears that the E190 does not have the range to make the LAS flights as speculated. MX244 from RSW-LAS, appears to be making a fuel stop in TUL. I wonder if it will need one back eastbound later today.

The E190 has decent range, I flew on an Air Canada E190 YYZ-SEA without problems. What happened here was probably due to hot weather, maybe they didn't fuel up enough and then were caught in a detour or disappointing head wind. Eastwards it should definitely pose no problems.

Polot · Wed Jun 29, 2022 3:00 pm

MEA-707 wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:
B747forever wrote:

The E190 has decent range, I flew on an Air Canada E190 YYZ-SEA without problems. What happened here was probably due to hot weather, maybe they didn't fuel up enough and then were caught in a detour or disappointing head wind. Eastwards it should definitely pose no problems.

RSW-LAS might be a bit more of a struggle because I’m not sure the planes are properly equipped to cut across the Gulf of Mexico, meaning they have to take a longer more northernly route staying near the coast.

N383SW · Wed Jun 29, 2022 7:11 pm

Polot wrote:
MEA-707 wrote:
LBBflyer wrote:

The E190 has decent range, I flew on an Air Canada E190 YYZ-SEA without problems. What happened here was probably due to hot weather, maybe they didn't fuel up enough and then were caught in a detour or disappointing head wind. Eastwards it should definitely pose no problems.

RSW-LAS might be a bit more of a struggle because I’m not sure the planes are properly equipped to cut across the Gulf of Mexico, meaning they have to take a longer more northernly route staying near the coast.

Also IIRC the MX cabins are more dense that AC's. Hopefully they can use the EMB's without a lot of problems and somewhat smooth out the operation for everyone involved.

LBBflyer · Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:55 pm

N383SW wrote:
Polot wrote:
MEA-707 wrote:
The E190 has decent range, I flew on an Air Canada E190 YYZ-SEA without problems. What happened here was probably due to hot weather, maybe they didn't fuel up enough and then were caught in a detour or disappointing head wind. Eastwards it should definitely pose no problems.

RSW-LAS might be a bit more of a struggle because I’m not sure the planes are properly equipped to cut across the Gulf of Mexico, meaning they have to take a longer more northernly route staying near the coast.

Also IIRC the MX cabins are more dense that AC's. Hopefully they can use the EMB's without a lot of problems and somewhat smooth out the operation for everyone involved.

Looks like the first E190 visit to LAS is not going too smoothly. It arrived basically on-time after only spending 30 minutes on the ground in TUL, pretty good. However, it is not also scheduled for a stop in TUL on the return leg, and is scheduled to depart (at least) 2.5 hours late. They can't seem to catch a break.

LHUSA · Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:59 am

This cannot be fun for the poor crew having to continually operate with so many cancelations, changes and long delays. I wonder if some are starting to jump ship to the majors who are so aggressively hiring? I wish MX well but don’t see much incentive to work there outside of living in a specific base.

Manderson12 · Thu Jun 30, 2022 5:51 am

I would give it to October 6, that is when Breeze have announced many of their re-starts and new services, that should tell the story of whether they have sorted the problems out or if they are still in this death spiral.

hooforce · Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:40 pm

LBBflyer wrote:
N383SW wrote:
Polot wrote:
RSW-LAS might be a bit more of a struggle because I’m not sure the planes are properly equipped to cut across the Gulf of Mexico, meaning they have to take a longer more northernly route staying near the coast.

Also IIRC the MX cabins are more dense that AC's. Hopefully they can use the EMB's without a lot of problems and somewhat smooth out the operation for everyone involved.

Looks like the first E190 visit to LAS is not going too smoothly. It arrived basically on-time after only spending 30 minutes on the ground in TUL, pretty good. However, it is not also scheduled for a stop in TUL on the return leg, and is scheduled to depart (at least) 2.5 hours late. They can't seem to catch a break.

Same for the RIC-LAS flights today. It is diverting to TUL to refuel and then will head to Vegas/Richmond. Not exactly the nonstop flight advertised, but at least MX is still flying the route.

ATLgaUSA · Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:45 pm

Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

N0dak · Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:27 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
SurfandSnow wrote:
Oh dear.. Breeze sounds just like Norwegian and Wow Air. I flew both of those carriers back in 2018, and both honestly offered a great product - even then, $325 for a nonstop LAX-MAD and $299 for a BCN-KEF-LAX return seemed like excellent value, especially for an early August visit to Spain. However, both expanded far too rapidly, and seemed to suffer from all kinds of delays and other issues. Lest we not forget that Norwegian's brand new 787s and 737 MAX planes faced all kinds of teething issues, just like the Breeze A220s.

Hopefully by drastically scaling back the network and growth plans, this "nice" new carrier can focus on the basics and achieve success.

they may need the scale to fund their operation and without it they won’t make it

The interesting question would be if it was cheaper to use used 737 or 320s from day 1 instead of boutique E190/220s?

And I’m talking strictly cheaper, not even considering seat miles. Just airframes.

But it would have been more asms, more revenue, more qualified FAA, more pilots applying, more everything.

Seems their product was the airplanes then the routes. Their product needed to be the routes first.

This is a good point. There is a larger supply of type-rated B737 & A32X pilots and flight attendants. There were literally hundreds of these aircraft sitting in the deserts and available from lessors during the peak years of COVID. Had Breeze taken the path similar to Avelo going with established planes like the B738 or A320, then finding pilots to fly them would have been much easier. The A220 is a great aircraft, but it is still in its very early stages of airline use and the type rated pilot pool is shallow. No type-rated A220 captains with either DL or B6 would resign their more stable gigs to go direct entry into the left seat with MX for substantially less money.

I really hope MX finds their way out of this mess and better establishes themselves in the market.

A larger “pool” of type rated pilots wouldn’t have helped anything. A type rated pilot would be required to go through the same training as a non-typed one.

You’re correct that there would be little incentive for someone to leave a carrier like DL or stay at Breeze any longer than necessary. The pay or QOL don’t even compare.

diverdave · Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:12 pm

ATLgaUSA wrote:
Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

Wow that's pretty small change. After all, AirTran extracted in excess of a million dollars for service that was eventually pulled down by WN.

Also note that Breeze does not qualify for this subsidy with their current schedule of two flights weekly to TPA. I do not think the breeze through flights to CHS would qualify.

The subsidy would start in September with the addition of HSV-LAS. There would be 7 flights to LAS and 9 to TPA, which would bring them to the 16 flight threshold.

(We'll overlook the current operational crisis which makes it seem unlikely that HSV-LAS will start as scheduled.)

The article also says there is another $10K for a third destination. Not enough detail to know if the breeze through to CHS would qualify for that

David

ASFlyer · Thu Jun 30, 2022 5:25 pm

diverdave wrote:
ATLgaUSA wrote:
Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

Wow that's pretty small change. After all, AirTran extracted in excess of a million dollars for service that was eventually pulled down by WN.

Also note that Breeze does not qualify for this subsidy with their current schedule of two flights weekly to TPA. I do not think the breeze through flights to CHS would qualify.

The subsidy would start in September with the addition of HSV-LAS. There would be 7 flights to LAS and 9 to TPA, which would bring them to the 16 flight threshold.

(We'll overlook the current operational crisis which makes it seem unlikely that HSV-LAS will start as scheduled.)

The article also says there is another $10K for a third destination. Not enough detail to know if the breeze through to CHS would qualify for that

David

A “breeze-through” is what every other airline calls a direct flight. I can’t imagine they’re going to subsidize an airline for flights that make stops unless the first stop is a completely new destination. A direct flight to CHS isn’t providing anything Delta or American don’t provide except you get to sit in the plane while it’s on the ground at the intermediate stop.

Bluegrass60 · Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:00 pm

ASFlyer wrote:
diverdave wrote:
ATLgaUSA wrote:
Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

Wow that's pretty small change. After all, AirTran extracted in excess of a million dollars for service that was eventually pulled down by WN.

Also note that Breeze does not qualify for this subsidy with their current schedule of two flights weekly to TPA. I do not think the breeze through flights to CHS would qualify.

The subsidy would start in September with the addition of HSV-LAS. There would be 7 flights to LAS and 9 to TPA, which would bring them to the 16 flight threshold.

(We'll overlook the current operational crisis which makes it seem unlikely that HSV-LAS will start as scheduled.)

The article also says there is another $10K for a third destination. Not enough detail to know if the breeze through to CHS would qualify for that

David

A “breeze-through” is what every other airline calls a direct flight. I can’t imagine they’re going to subsidize an airline for flights that make stops unless the first stop is a completely new destination. A direct flight to CHS isn’t providing anything Delta or American don’t provide except you get to sit in the plane while it’s on the ground at the intermediate stop.

"There are very few "direct" flights on the Legacy Carriers. Their idea of direct is a connection thru a hub. Even WN has fewer directs opting to connect via a "focus city" (aka a hub)"

FLALEFTY · Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:01 pm

N0dak wrote:
FLALEFTY wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

A larger “pool” of type rated pilots wouldn’t have helped anything. A type rated pilot would be required to go through the same training as a non-typed one.

You’re correct that there would be little incentive for someone to leave a carrier like DL or stay at Breeze any longer than necessary. The pay or QOL don’t even compare.

Interesting that you say that type-rated pilot availability "wouldn't have helped anything". Global Crossing Airlines, a start-up that is roughly the same age as MX, has been hiring in direct-entry A32X captains. Here's an ad from their webpage:

https://www.globalairlinesgroup.com/careers.html

Another start-up airline, Avelo has been hiring in direct-entry captains for their 737 fleet, too. Here's the job description & requirements:

https://www.airlineapps.com/jobs/detail ... ry-Captain

And before you quibble over the "Type rating preferred" wording, I imagine very few of their direct-entry captains hired so far lacked an appropriate type rating for the aircraft those airlines were operating.

Polot · Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:28 pm

Bluegrass60 wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:
diverdave wrote:

Wow that's pretty small change. After all, AirTran extracted in excess of a million dollars for service that was eventually pulled down by WN.

Also note that Breeze does not qualify for this subsidy with their current schedule of two flights weekly to TPA. I do not think the breeze through flights to CHS would qualify.

The subsidy would start in September with the addition of HSV-LAS. There would be 7 flights to LAS and 9 to TPA, which would bring them to the 16 flight threshold.

(We'll overlook the current operational crisis which makes it seem unlikely that HSV-LAS will start as scheduled.)

The article also says there is another $10K for a third destination. Not enough detail to know if the breeze through to CHS would qualify for that

David

A “breeze-through” is what every other airline calls a direct flight. I can’t imagine they’re going to subsidize an airline for flights that make stops unless the first stop is a completely new destination. A direct flight to CHS isn’t providing anything Delta or American don’t provide except you get to sit in the plane while it’s on the ground at the intermediate stop.

"There are very few "direct" flights on the Legacy Carriers. Their idea of direct is a connection thru a hub. Even WN has fewer directs opting to connect via a "focus city" (aka a hub)"

“Direct” has nothing to do with the status of the connection point in an airline’s network. Breezethru flights are just same plane connections. Same plane HSV-ATL-JFK (for example) on DL would still be considered a direct flight even though ATL is a DL hub.

Offering connections that require plane changes increases operational complexity and costs (airlines are liable for connection, so if first flight is delayed and passenger misses second flight MX has to get pax to final destination or pay out compensation) so for now Breeze only offers same plane connections. If you want otherwise you have to self connect (in which case MX is not liable if you miss your second flight).

F9Animal · Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:41 am

ASFlyer wrote:
airlinepeanuts wrote:
Don’t they have pretty strict hiring standards? I wonder if they did this to themselves by being selective in hiring.

"strict hiring standards"? Are you serious? For what they're offering, they're lucky to have applicants at all. They did this to themselves by creating a schedule that they didn't have planes and people signed off by the FAA to operate.

Exactly!! They cannot possibly think they will get the most qualified applicants with their payscales. I can even bet they can't even hire enough flight attendants with their payscales. Most of the majors are hiring like crazy, and they can't compete with pay.

Breeze really didn't think about the fact that finding flight crews at their dysmal pay would attract applicants. They have to either up that payscale to attract more, or they will continue to struggle completing flights. If they can't do that, then their only other option is to slow down their growth dramatically. They definitely bit off more than they could chew.

As others mentioned, it's a dumpster fire in the making. Whoever was in charge of planning the growth failed miserably. Whoever decided the rapid expansion, failed miserably. Sounds like Breeze needs to rethink their plans, and be much more cautious about growth during these times. It also sounds like some leadership changes are already needed.

lesfalls · Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:51 am

Not sure if this was covered but they’re hiring cabin crew for BDL and PVU currently?

Cubsrule · Fri Jul 01, 2022 11:46 am

Polot wrote:
Bluegrass60 wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:

A “breeze-through” is what every other airline calls a direct flight. I can’t imagine they’re going to subsidize an airline for flights that make stops unless the first stop is a completely new destination. A direct flight to CHS isn’t providing anything Delta or American don’t provide except you get to sit in the plane while it’s on the ground at the intermediate stop.

"There are very few "direct" flights on the Legacy Carriers. Their idea of direct is a connection thru a hub. Even WN has fewer directs opting to connect via a "focus city" (aka a hub)"

“Direct” has nothing to do with the status of the connection point in an airline’s network. Breezethru flights are just same plane connections. Same plane HSV-ATL-JFK (for example) on DL would still be considered a direct flight even though ATL is a DL hub.

Offering connections that require plane changes increases operational complexity and costs (airlines are liable for connection, so if first flight is delayed and passenger misses second flight MX has to get pax to final destination or pay out compensation) so for now Breeze only offers same plane connections. If you want otherwise you have to self connect (in which case MX is not liable if you miss your second flight).

I'm not sure I understand the disagreement you see. Bluegrass60 said WN has fewer direct flights, and it's certainly true that WN uses more flight numbers and has fewer direct flights than in the past. I'm flying an aircraft today that's operating BWI-MBJ-BWI-BNA-PHL with four flight numbers. It's also true, though, than WN has many (many, many) more direct flights than anyone else.

Bluegrass60 · Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:09 pm

Polot wrote:
Bluegrass60 wrote:
ASFlyer wrote:

A “breeze-through” is what every other airline calls a direct flight. I can’t imagine they’re going to subsidize an airline for flights that make stops unless the first stop is a completely new destination. A direct flight to CHS isn’t providing anything Delta or American don’t provide except you get to sit in the plane while it’s on the ground at the intermediate stop.

"There are very few "direct" flights on the Legacy Carriers. Their idea of direct is a connection thru a hub. Even WN has fewer directs opting to connect via a "focus city" (aka a hub)"

“Direct” has nothing to do with the status of the connection point in an airline’s network. Breezethru flights are just same plane connections. Same plane HSV-ATL-JFK (for example) on DL would still be considered a direct flight even though ATL is a DL hub.

Offering connections that require plane changes increases operational complexity and costs (airlines are liable for connection, so if first flight is delayed and passenger misses second flight MX has to get pax to final destination or pay out compensation) so for now Breeze only offers same plane connections. If you want otherwise you have to self connect (in which case MX is not liable if you miss your second flight).

"Direct is not the same as a connection. Breeze thru's are direct...TPA-SDF-SFO is an example. The TPA passenger gets on the plane in TPA...it stops in SDF....they stay on the plane...then it takes off to SFO. The legacy carriers offer very few direct flights...the majority are thru their hubs or point to point. WN used to fly more directs than they do now. Most is pt to pt or a connection via a focus city."

hiflyeras · Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:55 pm

ATLgaUSA wrote:
Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

Ooooh…that’ll keep ‘em afloat! :hyper:

airboss787 · Fri Jul 01, 2022 11:08 pm

ATLgaUSA wrote:
Looks like Breeze convinced HSV to pay them $10k/month to not pull out.

https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2022/06/huntsville-willing-to-pay-10000-a-month-to-land-low-cost-airline-service.html

So Breeze has found a unique reverse subscription based business model. They get airports to subscribe to their service. $10k/month. Cancel anytime.

flightsimer · Sat Jul 02, 2022 3:00 am

FLALEFTY wrote:
N0dak wrote:
FLALEFTY wrote:

A larger “pool” of type rated pilots wouldn’t have helped anything. A type rated pilot would be required to go through the same training as a non-typed one.

You’re correct that there would be little incentive for someone to leave a carrier like DL or stay at Breeze any longer than necessary. The pay or QOL don’t even compare.

Interesting that you say that type-rated pilot availability "wouldn't have helped anything". Global Crossing Airlines, a start-up that is roughly the same age as MX, has been hiring in direct-entry A32X captains. Here's an ad from their webpage:

https://www.globalairlinesgroup.com/careers.html

Another start-up airline, Avelo has been hiring in direct-entry captains for their 737 fleet, too. Here's the job description & requirements:

https://www.airlineapps.com/jobs/detail ... ry-Captain

And before you quibble over the "Type rating preferred" wording, I imagine very few of their direct-entry captains hired so far lacked an appropriate type rating for the aircraft those airlines were operating.

There are probably tens to hundreds of FAA examiners available for the A320/737 due to the fleet size and history of those planes. There are roughly 75 A220’s operating in the US and the number of FAA qualified examiners on that fleet is almost non existent.

Jgsushi · Sat Jul 09, 2022 5:46 am

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RdKMSLelMBwYkJPLfYudRRbY6MEfSQJqzJIZ11WRgs4/edit?usp=sharing

A cool spreadsheet by Seth Miller from Paxex.aero

luv2cattlecall · Mon Jul 11, 2022 8:32 pm

Jgsushi wrote:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RdKMSLelMBwYkJPLfYudRRbY6MEfSQJqzJIZ11WRgs4/edit?usp=sharing

A cool spreadsheet by Seth Miller from Paxex.aero

They seem to be having a good amount of what looks like maintenance issues/teething problems pop up.

KCaviator · Mon Jul 11, 2022 9:04 pm

[code][/code]

Jgsushi wrote:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RdKMSLelMBwYkJPLfYudRRbY6MEfSQJqzJIZ11WRgs4/edit?usp=sharing

A cool spreadsheet by Seth Miller from Paxex.aero

Holy ****, that is atrocious!

ASFlyer · Mon Jul 11, 2022 9:37 pm

Sounds like Breeze is still a complete gong show.

yyztpa2 · Mon Jul 11, 2022 9:52 pm

I don't know. I think they have gotten past some of the earlier turmoil and flights are more consistent now. The shared document is two weeks old

Flflyer83 · Mon Jul 11, 2022 9:59 pm

yyztpa2 wrote:
I don't know. I think they have gotten past some of the earlier turmoil and flights are more consistent now. The shared document is two weeks old

They cancelled so much of their network that they HAVE to be doing better… much better than the thousands of passengers that had their travel plans cancelled last minute.

luv2cattlecall · Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:37 pm

Flflyer83 wrote:
yyztpa2 wrote:
I don't know. I think they have gotten past some of the earlier turmoil and flights are more consistent now. The shared document is two weeks old

They cancelled so much of their network that they HAVE to be doing better… much better than the thousands of passengers that had their travel plans cancelled last minute.

At the very least, for currently booked passengers and those looking to book flights, it feels like things are more dependable.

yyztpa2 · Tue Jul 12, 2022 5:16 pm

luv2cattlecall wrote:
Flflyer83 wrote:
yyztpa2 wrote:
I don't know. I think they have gotten past some of the earlier turmoil and flights are more consistent now. The shared document is two weeks old

They cancelled so much of their network that they HAVE to be doing better… much better than the thousands of passengers that had their travel plans cancelled last minute.

At the very least, for currently booked passengers and those looking to book flights, it feels like things are more dependable.

I agree and though there were definitely some customers left seriously inconvenienced, the number of flights over the number of days post launch might suggest that "thousands of customers" might be a stretch.

luv2cattlecall · Tue Jul 12, 2022 6:48 pm

So I booked a ticket on the PVU inaugural and noticed that they have a "Technology Development Charge" - similar to NK/G4/F9 and their carrier usage fees. Basically a part of the fare that isn't subject to the 7.5% excise tax. With the other carriers, the way to get that fee dropped is to buy your ticket at the ticket counter whenever it's open. Breeze seems to be making it really tricky to avoid the fee - you can only buy your ticket between 11am-1pm on a Tuesday.

There are some cities which have unstaffed counters at that time, so I'm not sure how that works out?

https://www.dansdeals.com/more/news/air ... hts-trick/

FlyingElvii · Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:16 pm

Babyshark wrote:
SurfandSnow wrote:
Oh dear.. Breeze sounds just like Norwegian and Wow Air. I flew both of those carriers back in 2018, and both honestly offered a great product - even then, $325 for a nonstop LAX-MAD and $299 for a BCN-KEF-LAX return seemed like excellent value, especially for an early August visit to Spain. However, both expanded far too rapidly, and seemed to suffer from all kinds of delays and other issues. Lest we not forget that Norwegian's brand new 787s and 737 MAX planes faced all kinds of teething issues, just like the Breeze A220s.

Hopefully by drastically scaling back the network and growth plans, this "nice" new carrier can focus on the basics and achieve success.

they may need the scale to fund their operation and without it they won’t make it

The interesting question would be if it was cheaper to use used 737 or 320s from day 1 instead of boutique E190/220s?

And I’m talking strictly cheaper, not even considering seat miles. Just airframes.

But it would have been more asms, more revenue, more qualified FAA, more pilots applying, more everything.

Seems their product was the airplanes then the routes. Their product needed to be the routes first.

Breeze got the 190’s at almost scrap value, and still beat the Previous-US-Lessor provision.
They were a steal that more than makes up for the initial costs involved compared to a 737.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net