Virgin America Identifies First Cities

RL757PVD · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:15 pm

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070131/dcw021.html?.v=94

NYC DC SAN LAS to be the first....

Lists potential for 30 more within 5 years

RL757PVD · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:17 pm

Additional cities under consideration are:
Atlanta,
Austin,
Baltimore,
Boston,
Charlotte,
Chicago,
Cincinnati,
Cleveland,
Dallas,
Denver,
Detroit,
Fort Lauderdale,
Fort Myers,
Hartford,
Houston,
Indianapolis,
Jacksonville,
Kansas City,
Miami,
Milwaukee,
Minneapolis,
Nashville,
Newark,
New Orleans,
Orlando,
Philadelphia,
Phoenix,
Pittsburgh,
Providence,
Portland, Ore.,
Raleigh-Durham,
Sacramento,
Salt Lake City,
San Antonio,
San Jose, Calif.,
Sarasota,
Seattle,
St. Louis,
Tampa
West Palm Beach.

Kevin777 · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:20 pm

Whatever happened to SFO/OAK??? They're doing San Jose instead (and maybe Sacramento?) Wasn't thier hub supposed to be SFO??

Kevin777

AirframeAS · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:27 pm

Wait a second..... didnt the DOT deny Virgin America's application? What happened to the 10 day appeal, did they lose again on that?

soups · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:36 pm

No los angeles/Burbank? heh?

BigGSFO · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:37 pm

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 1):
Additional cities under consideration are:
Atlanta,
Austin,
Baltimore,
Boston,
Charlotte,
Chicago,
Cincinnati,
Cleveland,
Dallas,
Denver,
Detroit,
Fort Lauderdale,
Fort Myers,
Hartford,
Houston,
Indianapolis,
Jacksonville,
Kansas City,
Miami,
Milwaukee,
Minneapolis,
Nashville,
Newark,
New Orleans,
Orlando,
Philadelphia,
Phoenix,
Pittsburgh,
Providence,
Portland, Ore.,
Raleigh-Durham,
Sacramento,
Salt Lake City,
San Antonio,
San Jose, Calif.,
Sarasota,
Seattle,
St. Louis,
Tampa
West Palm Beach.

So basically, every major US city. sarcastic

RL757PVD · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:38 pm

Quoting Soups (Reply 4):
No los angeles/Burbank? heh?

Forgot to add that in the main thread, LA would be one of the first cities

Quoting Kevin777 (Reply 2):
Whatever happened to SFO/OAK??? They're doing San Jose instead (and maybe Sacramento?) Wasn't thier hub supposed to be SFO??

I believe these would be the first spokes FROM SFO

RL757PVD · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:41 pm

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 5):
So basically, every major US city.

Though whats interesting is they list SJC....we know it wont be SFO-SJC, indicating there will be a second focus somewhere else....

richierich · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:42 pm

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 5):
So basically, every major US city.

And its not like they would be held to this. Remember JetBlue's original list of cities that they presented back in 1999 or 2000? I'd be surprised if they serve half of those cities listed, seven years on.....

Quoting RL757PVD (Thread starter):
NYC DC SAN LAS to be the first....

(I sort of assumed that you meant from SFO.) Not a big shock with these cities.

PVD757 · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:44 pm

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 7):
Though whats interesting is they list SJC....we know it wont be SFO-SJC, indicating there will be a second focus somewhere else....

right, which would also explain thier interest in both BOS and PVD seeing how PVD's short runway might prohibit nonstops to SFO (but not from BOS).

MAH4546 · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:47 pm

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 5):

So basically, every major US city.

Ha, yeah, basiclly. Though in my non-expert opinion, at a rate of ten cities per year:

2008: LAX, SAN, LAS, SFO, SEA / IAD, BOS, MIA, JFK, PHL
2009: PDX, SMF, PHX, DEN / ORD, EWR, MCO, FLL, ATL, DFW
2010: Total toss-up

Kevin777 · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:48 pm

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 6):
Quoting Kevin777 (Reply 2):
Whatever happened to SFO/OAK??? They're doing San Jose instead (and maybe Sacramento?) Wasn't thier hub supposed to be SFO??

I believe these would be the first spokes FROM SFO

Okay, that was embarrassing..!

Isn't SFO a f*cked up place to start a hub? I mean fogged up, you always here about problems here. WHy not OAK or??

Kevin777 Wink

PVD757 · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:49 pm

VA inaugural route = SFO-JFK

first 6 cities: SFO, JFK, LAX, IAD, LAS, and SAN

then they will choose from the previously posted list of 40...

MSYtristar · Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:53 pm

Wow, just what the world needs, more SFO-LAX/LAS/JFK service.

BigGSFO · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:03 am

Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 13):
Wow, just what the world needs, more SFO-LAX/LAS/JFK service.

Makes one wonder if they will have the same patience that F9 has in establishing SFO-LAX. I would think that with each passing day that they aren't airborne investors are getting anxious. VX might not have the financial strength to develop some of these routes. Should be interesting.

Any guess which terminal at SFO they will operate from? Aside from the abandoned central terminal (which would require yet more money to complete), there aren't exactly a lot of empty gates.

georgiaame · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:08 am

I'm still ticked that JetBlue left Atlanta, leaving us to AirTran and Delta. AT isn't bad, DL isn't good, and I would really, really appreciate a choice in carriers here at the busiest airport on the planet. Hope springs eternal...

billreid · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:18 am

I for one really want them to enter the game.

Sarasota FL, where I reside wants to add more capacity not enter into a consolidation match.

The rest of the world works on a majority control position where nationals must have 50% ownership. Not on governmental paranoia. See rules for the EU with DG-7.
So why not us ..... I forgot, Virgin America is a threat to national security, would destroy the military complex within two weeks with low cost service. Yes the AF, Navy and the Army would go into a complete mess because of Virgin offering coast to coast flights.

Give us all a break and allow free enterprise to reign.
I forgot again, America doesn't believe in free enterprise, we were founded on Governmental Bureaucracy.

Give Virgin a break.
Send them to SRQ!

SANFan · Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:41 am

To me, the big question is what will be the actual routes flown amongst these initial cities? Most posters on this thread seem to assume SF to all the other cities. What if they serve many of the city pairs as trans-cons, e.g., SFO-JFK/IAD, SAN-JFK/IAD, LAX-JFK/IAD, LAS-JFK/IAD? There could also be a couple of SAN-SFO, LAX-LAS, IAD-JFK short-hauls but as tag-ons...

I don't know any more than anyone else but let's think outside the box. Maybe they will have more of a P-T-P operation than a hub-spoke; I actually believe that would make more sense. It could be said that the hub-and-spoke type of operation has seen it's peak and the trend these days is more point-to-point. Perhaps SFO isn't a hub but just a focus city and headquarters. (And please, let's not start the "WN -- hub and spoke?" discussion in this thread!)

Just a thought.

In any case, I look forward to see VX get approved and in SAN soon -- going somewhere, anywhere!

bb

WesternA318 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:01 am

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 1):
Salt Lake City,

Woo! I can't WAIT for that one...

AirframeAS · Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:19 am

Ive asked this earlier: Did Virgin America finally get their DOT application approved during round 2 or was it denied a 2nd time?

steeler83 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:36 am

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 1):
Pittsburgh,

Ohhh.... my... gosh...

Although it would be even more of a surprise if that one was to be mentioned as one of the first 10 cities to be started after LAS, LAX, SAN, and JFK service...

Then, wasn't PIT on the original list that B6 made in 1999? It took them 7 years to add it to their network... They'll probably be scared off when they find out how much they'll have to cough up to land there. Then again, maybe not, considering their headquarters Smile

Oh yeah, forgot, the ACAA is offering half the landing fee cost for new airlines, like B6 and WN...

daron4000 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:35 am

the article says pending dot approval
filler
filler

legacyins · Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:40 am

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 14):
Any guess which terminal at SFO they will operate from? Aside from the abandoned central terminal (which would require yet more money to complete), there aren't exactly a lot of empty gates.

The airport just finished tearing down a pier in Terminal 1. Thus opening up the last 3 gates at International Terminal -A. I would say they will be using those gates.

corey07850 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:48 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 19):
Ive asked this earlier: Did Virgin America finally get their DOT application approved during round 2 or was it denied a 2nd time?

To me this is simply a PR stunt to get more citizens in favor of the airline... To the average flyer looking at the list: "Hmmm this fancy new airline wants to fly to my home airport? Hmmmmm letvafly.com? Sign the petition???? OK!"

This article stated nothing but the most blatantly obvious routes-- who was surprised to see SFO to JFK? What it did do is promote letvafly.com, twice. The VA group realized their public exposure was fading fast and needed something to get them back in the spotlight... pretty smart move on their part

BigGSFO · Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:01 am

Quoting Legacyins (Reply 22):
The airport just finished tearing down a pier in Terminal 1. Thus opening up the last 3 gates at International Terminal -A. I would say they will be using those gates.

3 gates in the internatinal terminal? Hardly setting the world on fire. Smile

They claim to be setting up SFO as a base/hub of operations and truly there isn't enough vacant terminal space at SFO that could handle that type of operation, unless they have plans to renovate terminal 2. Maybe the 3 international gates could be short-term so they could build up terminal 2....

Lexy · Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:51 am

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 1):
Additional cities under consideration are:
Atlanta,
Austin,
Baltimore,
Boston,
Charlotte,
Chicago,
Cincinnati,
Cleveland,
Dallas,
Denver,
Detroit,
Fort Lauderdale,
Fort Myers,
Hartford,
Houston,
Indianapolis,
Jacksonville,
Kansas City,
Miami,
Milwaukee,
Minneapolis,
Nashville,
Newark,
New Orleans,
Orlando,
Philadelphia,
Phoenix,
Pittsburgh,
Providence,
Portland, Ore.,
Raleigh-Durham,
Sacramento,
Salt Lake City,
San Antonio,
San Jose, Calif.,
Sarasota,
Seattle,
St. Louis,
Tampa
West Palm Beach.

Actually, it's cities that have proven marketability and good O & D. This list should surprise no one on here. Interesting nonetheless though.

spinkid · Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:17 am

So basically this is nothing but them announcing the cities they plan to serve initially. I'll believe it when I see it. They still don't have their DOT approval.

style · Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:56 am

Thats all the airline industry needs. Another NY-Cali flight. Im thinking jetBlue will be affected most with Virgin USA.

Anyone know if they have publicly stated if they are for or opposed Virgin USA?

flynavy · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:01 am

It's a shame to not see ORF, PHF, or RIC isn't on that list.

ERJ170 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:07 am

Of the cities mentioned above, which ones do not have service (currently) to the BAY area (SFO, OAK, SJC)... I would look at those more closely if it were me.. but it's not so, like MAH said..it would probably be those well served higher OD routes where the competition would be most fierce..

deltaguy767 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:12 am

Some marketing strategy, list every city in the Continental US which has a descent airport and pax numbers. Like spinkid said, I'll believe it when I see it, I dont think any opinions have changed from the DOT's side regarding the Virgin America proposal and once again, I expect any new proposal to be rejected, unless it severs ties from Virgin completely. Hey, I'd like to see more service at BDL, but where to? The big three at BDL, DL, WN, AA, have all of the major destinations covered leaving nothing but a losers market here at BDL for a start-up.

Cheers from BDL, wave

DeltaGuy67

NWAROOSTER · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:17 am

Virgin Atlantic's Richard Branson thinks he can buy his way into the airline business at the expense of other American carriers, including low cost carriers. Well, BULLY for him. Read the item below off their website.

Former Department of Transportation Secretary and White House Chief of Staff Samuel K. Skinner joins Virgin America Board as Vice Chairman
Company Files Detailed Revisions to its Corporate Structure and Governance...

WestJetYQQ · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:18 am

If you look at the polls on the website, The leaders of the vote are as follows:

Austin 18%
Portland 10%
Seattle 5%
New Orleans 5%
Boston 4%
San Antonio 4%
Miami 4%

Looks like Austin has quite a fair lead. I myself voted Seattle. These are all the already major US cities. It would be a good thing for VA to fly into the large cities' secondary airports, or new releiver airports.

steeler83 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:28 am

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 32):
If you look at the polls on the website

Is there a link to these polls. I want to put a couple in for PHL and PIT...

detroitflyer · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:30 am

honestly, what is the point in seving both FLL AND MIA???

WestJetYQQ · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:41 am

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 33):
Is there a link to these polls

http://www.letvafly.com/mt/2007/01/tell_us_where_you_think_virgin.html

MCOflyer · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:52 am

MCO should be up on that list as it is a popular desination for tourist and VS can feed traffic from their Euro services.

MCOflyer

MAH4546 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:54 am

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 36):
MCO should be up on that list as it is a popular desination for tourist and VS can feed traffic from their Euro services.

The goal of Virgin America is not to feed their London flights, and Orlando is an absolutley horrible Europe-USA connection point. Orlando will obviously be on their route map, but it has nothing to do with Virgin Atlantic.

Quoting Detroitflyer (Reply 34):
honestly, what is the point in seving both FLL AND MIA???

Why don't you ask American Airlines, Continental, Northwest, AeroMexico, Avianca, and about a dozen others?

af773atmsp · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:00 pm

I can't wait for Virgin America to fly to MSP! bouncy

Would Virgin fly out of the Humphrey Terminal?

WestJetYQQ · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:01 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 37):
The goal of Virgin America is not to feed their London flights

I don't see how that makes any sense. Why would they not want to contribute to their affiliates?

aerlingusa330 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:22 pm

This is great...but there's only one problem.

They still need to get DOT approval.

schipholjfk · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:25 pm

Quoting Nwarooster (Reply 31):
Virgin Atlantic's Richard Branson thinks he can buy his way into the airline business at the expense of other American carriers, including low cost carriers. Well, BULLY for him. Read the item below off their website.

Former Department of Transportation Secretary and White House Chief of Staff Samuel K. Skinner joins Virgin America Board as Vice Chairman
Company Files Detailed Revisions to its Corporate Structure and Governance...

And the problem is? It's good old American capitalism. Capitalism, Competition... isn't that we preach to the world? We do the same thing around the world - buy our way into many things... as long as it is LEGAL, it is fair. So stop whining! No wonder some of our airlines are running at a lose while airlines in Europe and Asia are turning profit. So many cry babies in America today. Just compete and put out a great product... the customers will be loyal to you then!

aogdesk · Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:32 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 19):
Ive asked this earlier: Did Virgin America finally get their DOT application approved during round 2 or was it denied a 2nd time?

My understanding is that Virgin essentially has made concessions in their DOT Filing that supposedly show a change in ownership and possibly executive mgmt if necessary. I glanced briefly at the initial DOT response before realizing that it would take a doctorate in finance/investment to figure out the ownership structure that VA proposed.

mkirch72 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:03 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 37):
Quoting Detroitflyer (Reply 34):
honestly, what is the point in seving both FLL AND MIA???

Why don't you ask American Airlines, Continental, Northwest, AeroMexico, Avianca, and about a dozen others?

don't forget - CO, AA, NW and all the US majors also serve PBI. Reason? Demand - not only from tourists but also from residents and snowbirds. The numbers below usually double in the winter when the snowbirds come to roost.

Palm Beach County (PBI) - 1.22 million permanent residents
Broward County (FLL) - 1.72 million permanent residents
Miami Dade County (MIA) - 2.34 million permanet residents

Throw in the snowbirds and tourists and you can see why there are 3 major airports within an hour's drive of eachother.

cofannyc · Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:05 pm

Quoting PVD757 (Reply 12):
VA inaugural route = SFO-JFK

first 6 cities: SFO, JFK, LAX, IAD, LAS, and SAN

My first reaction to Virgin America was "sure let them fly". But the more I think about it, the last thing we really need is an airline that does the same things as 6+ other carriers.

If they were coming in to start services ala XJT, I'd probably be more in favor of them starting operations. But in reality there are a lot more needy markets than SFO-JFK.

YYZatcboy · Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:27 pm

They should fly to YYZ. It would be nice to see a virgin SOMETHING here, since they axed VS service here.

[Edited 2007-02-01 06:40:29]

ikramerica · Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:42 pm

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 41):
We do the same thing around the world - buy our way into many things... as long as it is LEGAL, it is fair. So stop whining! No wonder some of our airlines are running at a lose while airlines in Europe and Asia are turning profit.

But their attempt was NOT legal. That's the whole point. And I personally don't support US corporations destroying foreign markets, so why would I support the reverse?

As for who's running at a LOSS, which USA carriers are they again? Most turned profits this year. The few that didn't were hit by a 20 year weather event in Denver...

BN727 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:11 pm

Give Virgin America a U.S. Operating certificate and you may as well do the same for Air India, Air China, BA. While we're at it, let's see how Virgin Atlantic would welcome Southwest, JetBlue or all United States Air carriers to operate United Kingdom domestic air routes....I say "No Way VA"

legacyins · Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:26 pm

I say two

for VA and hope they DO get their operating cert. The legacy carriers need to realize the passenger comes first and competition is the fruit of a capitalist society.

copaair737 · Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:33 pm

I hope they offer some flights like SFO-FLL or SFO-MSY. Even SFO-TPA would be great.
I do hope they get the certification. It'd be great to have a California-centric airline again. Sort of like AirCal or PSA.

I just hope they fill in some of the holes from SFO. Hope they get their stuff together.

-Copa

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net