airbazar wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

$300/night is cheap in Hawaii. That said, I don't see why this matters. The majority of people arrive to Hawaii in coach on a narrowbody. Not exactly a high class experience.

That's Pandemic pricing and not sustainable. I was in Hawaii in 2019 and paid less than $200/nt for a 2br condo on a golf course and walking distance to the beach.

cedarjet wrote:

Re utilisation. Transatlantic works well because it can leave Philly at night say 2000, into Shannon at 0700 local which is only 0200 back in the USA, quick turn and be airborne again at 0830 local/0330 USA, fly west and be back in Philly at 1030 local.

Exactly. Or, because LCC TATL is predominantly O&D it can depart in the morning, arrive in Ireland early evening, turn around and arrive back in the U.S. that same day late at night then either fly West or a red-eye to Latin America/Caribbean.

jfk777 wrote:

This is another example of "you can but should you". Frontier does what they do well just because JetBlue is doing Europe doesn't mean they should. Frontier does not have a large presence in New York or Boston so where are they going to launch an Atlantic gateway from ? Frontier should continue doing what it does, the history of airline with Oceanic ambitions is littered with has beens.

TWA772LR wrote:

airbazar wrote:

[
IMO, the reason why TATL LC service has failed in the past has more to do with how poorly managed the airlines were rather than the market itself.

This.

Using Norwegian as an example, they had totally undisciplined network and fleet strategies. Dozens of brand new 787s, flying all over the world, and even establishing a domestic airline subsidiary in Argentina all in a span of less than a decade. Same can be said with WOW.

And other long haul LCCs of past utilized wide-bodies with close to 400 seats. One of the things of airline travel is you still have to fill the seats. A 240 seat A321 on PHL-DUB or MIA-BOG is a lot easier to fill than, say, a Laker DC10. Plus, F9 is definitely doing their homework on all kinds of service the 321XLR can offer. If TATL is in the cards, they'll take in to account the weight of 240 people and may even have a less dense cabin, MAY.

For Frontier, this is the time to strike, but not nuclear like Norwegian, surgical. F9 has PHL to work from, arguable the best city in the US with a US3 hub at the moment to launch this service. AA still isn't at pre-pandemic levels in PHL so there totally is room for F9 to jump in, despite the BA/EI/IB JV.

F9 also has a sister airline in the same airline group with 2 hubs in London, Wizz in LGW and LTN; as well as JetSmart in Chile (albeit already partnered with AA). Partner/sister airline feed is something none of the long haul LCCs had, a huge leg up for F9. Hell, Wizz (or their vendor) can straight up be F9s ground service provider.

No one says the long haul service has to be hourly, most of it will more likely be seasonal like their current international service is, with possibly DUB/SNN and LGW/LTN probably being the only true year-round service, with a reduced schedule in of peak times of the year, crew hotel needs notwithstanding. The likes of BOG/UIO/LIM-MCO/MIA can pretty much be daily year round.

F9 has the ability to make this work, but they'll figure out their needs and what suits them best before a massive decision like this is made.

AntonioMartin wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

This is another example of "you can but should you". Frontier does what they do well just because JetBlue is doing Europe doesn't mean they should. Frontier does not have a large presence in New York or Boston so where are they going to launch an Atlantic gateway from ? Frontier should continue doing what it does, the history of airline with Oceanic ambitions is littered with has beens.

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

This is another example of "you can but should you". Frontier does what they do well just because JetBlue is doing Europe doesn't mean they should. Frontier does not have a large presence in New York or Boston so where are they going to launch an Atlantic gateway from ? Frontier should continue doing what it does, the history of airline with Oceanic ambitions is littered with has beens.

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

PatrickZ80 wrote:

zuckie13 wrote:

Only way this could possibly work is with a tie up with Ryanair for passengers to go elsewhere in Europe - unless they think passengers would take these flights and self connect.

I don't think they'd tie up with Ryanair given the fact that Frontier is part of Indigo Partners. So is Wizzair, which makes Wizzair a logical partner for them in Europe. That pretty much rules out Ireland, where Wizzair has no presence. But they can fly into the Wizzair focus cities in the UK and near mainland Europe where Wizzair can pick up the connecting traffic.

Passengers will self-connect anyway, that's what many people did in Dublin when Norwegian flew DUB-SWF. Dublin is one of the largest Ryanair bases, lots of Europeans flew to Dublin on Ryanair in order to self-connect to Norwegian across the pond.

TYWoolman wrote:

Frontier into the international arena can work, even TATL. They just need to find popular/touristy international "destinations" that have a plethora of travel options and accommodations at such cities. Budget-minded folks traveling internationally to explore/vacation pretty much have the street-smarts and enthusiasm to seek other budget-friendly modes of transportation/accommodations on their own beforehand or once there. But what Frontier can do is search, seek and procure those "budget itineraries" as package presentations to the customer at point of sale Frontier.com

Don't forget airports with lots of self-connecting opportunities. For many of the passengers on these routes their final destination won't be where Frontier takes them, it's just their way to get their feet on European soil. Once in Europe they can fly a European ULCC to wherever they want to go, which includes destinations where a direct flight isn't viable.

Besides, on these flights the European point of sale matters. Frontier has little brand recognition in Europe but their partner Wizzair does. Wizzair might be selling Frontier flights.

PHLspecial wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

cledaybuck wrote:

airbazar wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

$300/night is cheap in Hawaii. That said, I don't see why this matters. The majority of people arrive to Hawaii in coach on a narrowbody. Not exactly a high class experience.

That's Pandemic pricing and not sustainable. I was in Hawaii in 2019 and paid less than $200/nt for a 2br condo on a golf course and walking distance to the beach.

cedarjet wrote:

Re utilisation. Transatlantic works well because it can leave Philly at night say 2000, into Shannon at 0700 local which is only 0200 back in the USA, quick turn and be airborne again at 0830 local/0330 USA, fly west and be back in Philly at 1030 local.

Exactly. Or, because LCC TATL is predominantly O&D it can depart in the morning, arrive in Ireland early evening, turn around and arrive back in the U.S. that same day late at night then either fly West or a red-eye to Latin America/Caribbean.

IMO, you will never see those prices again. We are going into 2023 and prices are still sky high in Hawaii.

airbazar wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

airbazar wrote:

That's Pandemic pricing and not sustainable. I was in Hawaii in 2019 and paid less than $200/nt for a 2br condo on a golf course and walking distance to the beach.

Exactly. Or, because LCC TATL is predominantly O&D it can depart in the morning, arrive in Ireland early evening, turn around and arrive back in the U.S. that same day late at night then either fly West or a red-eye to Latin America/Caribbean.

IMO, you will never see those prices again. We are going into 2023 and prices are still sky high in Hawaii.

Really? Here's the same place I stayed in 2019. $200/nite.
https://www.airbnb.com/rooms/22925342?a ... 7aIPd0lN5e

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

CairnterriAIR wrote:

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

Bingo! I always thought Frontier’s business model was not to compete with majors, or to do so with such minimal impact the major carrier won’t react. Making a transatlantic base/hub/connection point at PHL going directly against a major with a primary hub, FF base, alliance partners, large efficient aircraft, and the ability to manage yields through additional capacity increase would give Frontier a hard time. Same as if they attempted this out of JFK or Boston. If they did set up transatlantic operations, they may offer a flight from PHL a few times a week to SNN, but more so seasonal leisure services to SNN (preclearance) from midsized stations (BUF, PVD, BDL, BWI etc).

aerace wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

Bingo! I always thought Frontier’s business model was not to compete with majors, or to do so with such minimal impact the major carrier won’t react. Making a transatlantic base/hub/connection point at PHL going directly against a major with a primary hub, FF base, alliance partners, large efficient aircraft, and the ability to manage yields through additional capacity increase would give Frontier a hard time. Same as if they attempted this out of JFK or Boston. If they did set up transatlantic operations, they may offer a flight from PHL a few times a week to SNN, but more so seasonal leisure services to SNN (preclearance) from midsized stations (BUF, PVD, BDL, BWI etc).

Well, there goes a name drop of PHL. Doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make it their sole TATL hub, but when you have the opportunity to potentially connect (currently) 30 destinations through PHL, it kinda makes sense to send planes where there's some feed.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/frontier- ... AE4744363C

"All of Ireland," he said, noting that several Irish airports offer U.S. customs pre-clearance before boarding flights to the U.S., meaning that Frontier could operate to smaller airports — such as Islip — that do not have passport control or customs facilities.

william wrote:

Frontier owners might as well make a play for EasyJet and have ops on both side of the Atlantic.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

aerace wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

Bingo! I always thought Frontier’s business model was not to compete with majors, or to do so with such minimal impact the major carrier won’t react. Making a transatlantic base/hub/connection point at PHL going directly against a major with a primary hub, FF base, alliance partners, large efficient aircraft, and the ability to manage yields through additional capacity increase would give Frontier a hard time. Same as if they attempted this out of JFK or Boston. If they did set up transatlantic operations, they may offer a flight from PHL a few times a week to SNN, but more so seasonal leisure services to SNN (preclearance) from midsized stations (BUF, PVD, BDL, BWI etc).

Well, there goes a name drop of PHL. Doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make it their sole TATL hub, but when you have the opportunity to potentially connect (currently) 30 destinations through PHL, it kinda makes sense to send planes where there's some feed.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/frontier- ... AE4744363C

I don't doubt that, if Frontier goes to Europe at all, it will do so in part from PHL, and that they will connect some passengers here. After all, we are/were their fourth-largest airport market. I just don't know how much of their business plan will involve connections here. Most of Frontier's PHL destinations are either major cities where Frontier is the third or fourth airline in the market, or sun destinations like Florida, and almost all of both categories already have Europe nonstops of their own. Frontier will need very cheap costs to be able to hold its own in these markets while offering ULCC-quality flying and 1-2 extra stops; and if they fly beyond Ireland they'll suffer from having split operations between Terminal E and Terminal A.

Telling in the article that Barry Biffle calls out one, and only one, specific set of European destinations:

"All of Ireland," he said, noting that several Irish airports offer U.S. customs pre-clearance before boarding flights to the U.S., meaning that Frontier could operate to smaller airports — such as Islip — that do not have passport control or customs facilities.

If they're looking at ISP as a potential TATL route, even seasonally (good luck with that short runway!), then they're almost certainly also looking at SWF, PWM, ACY, ALB, ROC, SYR, and other Northeastern airports where they'd have TATL nonstop to themselves. It also solves their split ops problem here in PHL and probably some other F9 stations with limited FIS gates.

aerace wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

airbazar wrote:

[
IMO, the reason why TATL LC service has failed in the past has more to do with how poorly managed the airlines were rather than the market itself.

This.

Using Norwegian as an example, they had totally undisciplined network and fleet strategies. Dozens of brand new 787s, flying all over the world, and even establishing a domestic airline subsidiary in Argentina all in a span of less than a decade. Same can be said with WOW.

And other long haul LCCs of past utilized wide-bodies with close to 400 seats. One of the things of airline travel is you still have to fill the seats. A 240 seat A321 on PHL-DUB or MIA-BOG is a lot easier to fill than, say, a Laker DC10. Plus, F9 is definitely doing their homework on all kinds of service the 321XLR can offer. If TATL is in the cards, they'll take in to account the weight of 240 people and may even have a less dense cabin, MAY.

For Frontier, this is the time to strike, but not nuclear like Norwegian, surgical. F9 has PHL to work from, arguable the best city in the US with a US3 hub at the moment to launch this service. AA still isn't at pre-pandemic levels in PHL so there totally is room for F9 to jump in, despite the BA/EI/IB JV.

F9 also has a sister airline in the same airline group with 2 hubs in London, Wizz in LGW and LTN; as well as JetSmart in Chile (albeit already partnered with AA). Partner/sister airline feed is something none of the long haul LCCs had, a huge leg up for F9. Hell, Wizz (or their vendor) can straight up be F9s ground service provider.

No one says the long haul service has to be hourly, most of it will more likely be seasonal like their current international service is, with possibly DUB/SNN and LGW/LTN probably being the only true year-round service, with a reduced schedule in of peak times of the year, crew hotel needs notwithstanding. The likes of BOG/UIO/LIM-MCO/MIA can pretty much be daily year round.

F9 has the ability to make this work, but they'll figure out their needs and what suits them best before a massive decision like this is made.

Can we also talk about how F9 has been around in the States for decades and is the only true US-based ULCC operation that would be doing this (not including B6 but not sure where they even fit these days)? Long-haul ULCCs that tanked were all from the Euro point of sale as well: Wow, Primera, Norwegian to name a few, had next to no feed from the other side. If F9 cozies up to Wizz, I think this could make for a really unique case study.

SurfandSnow wrote:

F9 is already established in markets like PVD and SWF. Why not give Europe a try someday? I'm sure many travelers will appreciate the ease and convenience of using airports like those as O&D or connecting pax - perhaps a great alternative to slogging it through BOS, JFK or EWR...

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Have you ever heard of this cute little town called Philly? Maybe they could try there!

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

rbavfan wrote:

So Icelandair is a failure. I guess they have not been told yet.

william wrote:

Frontier owners might as well make a play for EasyJet and have ops on both side of the Atlantic.

LAXintl wrote:

Adding a DFW pilot and flight attendant crew base and 5 additional routes - BWI. LGA, MBJ, RDU and SNA

https://www.dallasnews.com/2022/11/03/f ... tinations/

NJFlyer27 wrote:

Does anyone know how many slots Frontier has at LGA?

They have limited flights with just MIA, ATL and MCO - which has a departure time on 10:45pm! Likely because it operates after 10pm which doesn’t require a slot.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

zuckie13 wrote:

Only way this could possibly work is with a tie up with Ryanair for passengers to go elsewhere in Europe - unless they think passengers would take these flights and self connect.

I don't think they'd tie up with Ryanair given the fact that Frontier is part of Indigo Partners. So is Wizzair, which makes Wizzair a logical partner for them in Europe. That pretty much rules out Ireland, where Wizzair has no presence. But they can fly into the Wizzair focus cities in the UK and near mainland Europe where Wizzair can pick up the connecting traffic.

Passengers will self-connect anyway, that's what many people did in Dublin when Norwegian flew DUB-SWF. Dublin is one of the largest Ryanair bases, lots of Europeans flew to Dublin on Ryanair in order to self-connect to Norwegian across the pond.

TYWoolman wrote:

Frontier into the international arena can work, even TATL. They just need to find popular/touristy international "destinations" that have a plethora of travel options and accommodations at such cities. Budget-minded folks traveling internationally to explore/vacation pretty much have the street-smarts and enthusiasm to seek other budget-friendly modes of transportation/accommodations on their own beforehand or once there. But what Frontier can do is search, seek and procure those "budget itineraries" as package presentations to the customer at point of sale Frontier.com

Don't forget airports with lots of self-connecting opportunities. For many of the passengers on these routes their final desti

Besides, on these flights the European point of sale matters. Frontier has little brand recognition in Europe but their partner Wizzair does. Wizzair might be selling Frontier flights.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

rbavfan wrote:

So Icelandair is a failure. I guess they have not been told yet.

They're not a failure but they're in a whole other league. Way more premium. Frontier is an ULCC, Icelandair is not. At most they're a regular low-cost airline (not ultra low-cost) but I like to think of them as a hybrid airline.

WOW Air tried to be the ULCC in Iceland but they failed. Icelandair is offering the same thing full-service airlines are offering only slightly cheaper, kind of like JetBlue. Cheap for their service level but not cheap overall. At an ultra low-cost airline such as Frontier the service level is being lowered in order to be able to offer even lower prices.

880dc8707 wrote:

AA may be quite vulnerable . I also avoid AA when possible and live seven miles from PHL. Fly out of EWR , better choices and prices,. I think PHL passengers are fed up with horrible in flight service and high prices. Perfect opening for Frontier to slip in and at least test the water..

Metchalus wrote:

STN are looking to add new destinations including the US.

Now there's no way that AA or DL are going there, but STN may be willing to give Frontier a good deal in terms of charges.

Wizzair also has a presence there although it is relatively minor.
Wizzair does have a much larger presence at LTN, however LTN's shorter runway may be problematic.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Metchalus wrote:

STN are looking to add new destinations including the US.

Now there's no way that AA or DL are going there, but STN may be willing to give Frontier a good deal in terms of charges.

Wizzair also has a presence there although it is relatively minor.
Wizzair does have a much larger presence at LTN, however LTN's shorter runway may be problematic.

Wizzair doesn't fly to Stansted at all. Perhaps you're confused with EasyJet, which has a minor base at Stansted. You're right about the self-connecting opportunities but those would be mostly on Ryanair which has it's largest base there.

Luton has a short runway indeed but it should be possible.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

aerace wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

Bingo! I always thought Frontier’s business model was not to compete with majors, or to do so with such minimal impact the major carrier won’t react. Making a transatlantic base/hub/connection point at PHL going directly against a major with a primary hub, FF base, alliance partners, large efficient aircraft, and the ability to manage yields through additional capacity increase would give Frontier a hard time. Same as if they attempted this out of JFK or Boston. If they did set up transatlantic operations, they may offer a flight from PHL a few times a week to SNN, but more so seasonal leisure services to SNN (preclearance) from midsized stations (BUF, PVD, BDL, BWI etc).

Well, there goes a name drop of PHL. Doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make it their sole TATL hub, but when you have the opportunity to potentially connect (currently) 30 destinations through PHL, it kinda makes sense to send planes where there's some feed.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/frontier- ... AE4744363C

I don't doubt that, if Frontier goes to Europe at all, it will do so in part from PHL, and that they will connect some passengers here. After all, we are/were their fourth-largest airport market. I just don't know how much of their business plan will involve connections here. Most of Frontier's PHL destinations are either major cities where Frontier is the third or fourth airline in the market, or sun destinations like Florida, and almost all of both categories already have Europe nonstops of their own. Frontier will need very cheap costs to be able to hold its own in these markets while offering ULCC-quality flying and 1-2 extra stops; and if they fly beyond Ireland they'll suffer from having split operations between Terminal E and Terminal A.

Telling in the article that Barry Biffle calls out one, and only one, specific set of European destinations:

"All of Ireland," he said, noting that several Irish airports offer U.S. customs pre-clearance before boarding flights to the U.S., meaning that Frontier could operate to smaller airports — such as Islip — that do not have passport control or customs facilities.

If they're looking at ISP as a potential TATL route, even seasonally (good luck with that short runway!), then they're almost certainly also looking at SWF, PWM, ACY, ALB, ROC, SYR, and other Northeastern airports where they'd have TATL nonstop to themselves. It also solves their split ops problem here in PHL and probably some other F9 stations with limited FIS gates.

panam330 wrote:

NJFlyer27 wrote:

Does anyone know how many slots Frontier has at LGA?

They have limited flights with just MIA, ATL and MCO - which has a departure time on 10:45pm! Likely because it operates after 10pm which doesn’t require a slot.

I had no idea they stopped DEN-LGA. That’s a shame.

CairnterriAIR wrote:

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

We have a cute a MSA population of 6.2 million.

And a cute little local behemoth called American Airlines, which will absolutely bury any F9 TATL base in PHL with 787s and its own XLRs, both of which it's short on now, but will have plenty of by the time F9 has XLRs of its own.

I could maybe see F9 try to set up a base at KEF, SNN, or GLA to try to run the Norwegian playbook of running to secondary and tertiary airports in the Northeast US, but that's a plan with a lot of moving parts and a track record of only failures so far. But it would make more sense than trying to run connecting service across a legacy airline's superhub.

IMO, if there's an unfilled niche for (U)LCC across the Atlantic, it's for an airline based in YUL or Atlantic Canada, where shorter stage lengths and the weak Loonie might make for a better business case than trying to go head-to-head with an incumbent. The possibility of aggregating a lot of eastbound-daylight demand, and avoiding the highest-priced peak hour airport slots, also presents itself. But that's straying away from the topic of what F9 can do with its XLRs.

Bingo! I always thought Frontier’s business model was not to compete with majors, or to do so with such minimal impact the major carrier won’t react. Making a transatlantic base/hub/connection point at PHL going directly against a major with a primary hub, FF base, alliance partners, large efficient aircraft, and the ability to manage yields through additional capacity increase would give Frontier a hard time. Same as if they attempted this out of JFK or Boston. If they did set up transatlantic operations, they may offer a flight from PHL a few times a week to SNN, but more so seasonal leisure services to SNN (preclearance) from midsized stations (BUF, PVD, BDL, BWI etc).

If you need to fly a ULCC, you probably should not bother with visiting Hawaii because it only gets more expensive once you get there.

Aptivaboy wrote:

If you need to fly a ULCC, you probably should not bother with visiting Hawaii because it only gets more expensive once you get there.

It isn't a question of needing to fly a ULCC. If its cheaper to fly one one, then that leaves you with more cash to spend on those expensive Hawaiian lodgings, meals, and rental cars. A good friend flies Southwest almost religiously (okay, not a ULCC but you get the idea) solely to save money on the trips that she takes; the airfare saves might mean a spa day. She saves a few hundred bucks here and there, which then can go into her vacation budget. Another friend of the family flies Frontier regularly for the same reason.

LAXintl wrote:

Adding a DFW pilot and flight attendant crew base and 5 additional routes - BWI. LGA, MBJ, RDU and SNA

https://www.dallasnews.com/2022/11/03/f ... tinations/

LAXintl wrote:

Frontier today held its Investor Day.

The presentation(pdf) can be downloaded at >> https://ir.flyfrontier.com/static-files ... 5aff126b87

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Just curious: I usually fly with an entirely floppy carryon. While if stuffed it would be too big it never is and squeezes into well below maximum size all three dimensions. Would that be affected?

djack wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Just curious: I usually fly with an entirely floppy carryon. While if stuffed it would be too big it never is and squeezes into well below maximum size all three dimensions. Would that be affected?

Had a similar bag and as I adjusted the bulky shoulder straps into the sizer my wallet quickly became $99 lighter. I've flown with them to six airports since they started the crackdown mid-October. Keyword is it has to slide into the sizer, can't be pushed or squeezed. Prior to this you were pretty safe with a regular backpack. Should be interesting as temps drop and clothing gets bulkier. I've seen people get on the plane wearing four and five layers.

I have to wonder if they are offering incentives to the gate agents on the gate bag fees. $15 an hour with zero benefits and no job security from a random airline contractor would not be enough for me to live that life.

From the investor day presentation there is a pretty big push to grow ancillary revenue and this is how they are going to do it. Avelo has an even smaller carryon dimensions the size of a small purse, I could see Frontier going in that direction. That's why I was pretty happy the Frontier Spirit merger didn't happen. The combination would have been made them a pretty strong force in markets like mine. Those famous ultra low fares would have shot right up, but that relentless nickel and diming and 3rd rate service would have stuck around.