AS has announced new flights in response to Delta's addition of flights at SEA. Any predictions on the next city-pairs AS will announce? If I have it right, here are the newest additions:

SLC-PDX (6/9)
SLC-LAX (6/9)
SLC-SAN (6/9)
SLC-SJC (6/9)
SEA-BOI (6/18)
SEA-LAS (6/18)
SEA-SFO (6/18)

[Edited 2013-12-25 19:10:46]

[Edited 2013-12-25 19:13:48]

I see a second daily SEA-MCI or a PDX-MCI, their flights have a consistent load factor of 96%+ on their one daily flight.

Sorry, folks, I meant:

SLC-BOI (6/18)
SLC-LAS (6/18)
SLC-SFO (6/18)

Just a point of curiosity......I may have missed this before but WHO is AS going to use to handle their flights in SLC, above and below wing.

I predict anywhere From SLC that makes money if DL keeps adding into SEA.

FLY

[Edited 2013-12-25 19:25:56]

Depending on what DL does at SEA, maybe more SLC flying.

Quoting mayor (Reply 3): WHO is AS going to use to handle their flights in SLC, above and below wing.

AS seems to have a thing for Menzies Aviation...

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 6): Quoting mayor (Reply 3):WHO is AS going to use to handle their flights in SLC, above and below wing. AS seems to have a thing for Menzies Aviation...

AS had a thing for DGS, until they abruptly gave notice that they were no longer interested in Alaska's business.

A month ago I would've been pretty convinced that there would be at least one new route -- most likely with a Q or CRJ -- from SAN to start somewhere in the first half of 2014. Since it was said in one of the last conference calls that we should not expect any mainline growth in 2014 -- "we will stay steady and let all the recent new routes mature and develop in 2014" -- I lost any hope of seeing SAN-KOA started, or much of anything else involving 737s.

Of course now it's a whole new ballgame with AS and who knows what might be their strategy over the next several months? They can come up with 737s if they really want to (delayed retirements of older a/c, axing some existing or over-capacity flights, etc.) So will SLC continue to grow? Will there be anything left to expand with anywhere else? Will AS stick with their "no-growth in '14" statement with the exception of SLC?

In any case, there definitely are un-fulfilled turns on confirmed lines of flying at SAN (particularly with scheduled CRJ ops here) for 2Q2014 which certainly does not guarantee anything new, but makes for distinct possibilities of such. A prime question for me nowadays is, will AS jump on any WN-routes out of SAN or PDX as retaliatory moves for WN's moves of last week?

That all said, I will say that I think this would be a perfect time for AS to start SAN-STL, killing many birds with one stone...

bb

I think it would be interesting to see AS start SLC-BOS/DCA/IAD/BWI/MCO/FLL....obviously not all of those destinations but you see my point.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 7): AS had a thing for DGS, until they abruptly gave notice that they were no longer interested in Alaska's business.

HA! Touché...

PDX-YYC
PDX-YEG
PDX-DEN
PDX-JNU
PDX-EWR
PDX-MSP
PDX-MCO

i see AS making a play against DL's MSP hub if the bloodbath continues

they already have a big chunk of the PDX market so no need to over do it

SEA-RDU
SAN-RDU

those are my predictions.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 12): i see AS making a play against DL's MSP hub if the bloodbath continues

I think its stronger to hammer one hub then to expand. SLC-ANC/FAI, ?

SLC-FLL? FLL seems really crazy at first but it would be an easy fill even if its low yielding. Its guaranteed not to loose that much since they could fill the seats pretty easily. Guaranteed route to steal customers from Delta. The route might be better than we think maybe even a redeye?


Could Alaska really be adding all this SLC to make a case that the merger would kill competition and be bad for customers? If thats the case they might add more SLC. AS really does have some gate constraints unless they start adding odd hours like red eyes or something bizarre.

If AS were to add red eyes it would have plenty of gate space but seems risky. Just something creative if they really need more space and want to add more flights to SLC fearing a hostile takeover. I could see redeye SLC-BOS, SLC-EWR, SLC-PHL. SLC-MCO or SLC-FLL. All existing Delta cities.

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 1): I see a second daily SEA-MCI or a PDX-MCI, their flights have a consistent load factor of 96%+ on their one daily flight.

That's interesting. MCI and SAT would have been far down my guess list of next new AS cities, but obviously they know what they are doing.

My next guesses are:

MSP-ANC
SLC-ANC
PDX-MSP
SJC-MSP
SAN-MSP
SJC-FLL
SJC-MEX
and a number of PDX additions as mentioned above like PDX-JNU.

SAN-ATL
SJC-ATL
SLC-ATL
PDX-MSP
SLC-MSP
SAN-MSP
SEA-DTW
SEA-JFK
SEA-CVG
SEA-RDU
SEA-MSY

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 15): That's interesting. MCI and SAT would have been far down my guess list of next new AS cities, but obviously they know what they are doing.

AS is the only carrier to SEA out of MCI now that F9 has left the market. Their fares are relatively high, but they maintain an amazing load factor! I am surprised as well. Cargo was doing extremely well for them as well in the past year, not sure what their current numbers are. I think PDX or a second daily SEA would make sense out of MCI.

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 17): AS is the only carrier to SEA out of MCI now that F9 has left the market. Their fares are relatively high, but they maintain an amazing load factor! I am surprised as well. Cargo was doing extremely well for them as well in the past year, not sure what their current numbers are. I think PDX or a second daily SEA would make sense out of MCI.

I know that a friend of mine flies PDX-MCI a lot, and that WN non-stop is almost always full. I think AS would be good to start a PDX-MCI flight. I still feel AS will continue to slowly add dots to the PDX hub.

Quoting rwsea (Reply 16): PDX-MSP

IMO, one of the best routes AS could start, for revenue and tactically speaking.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 8): Since it was said in one of the last conference calls that we should not expect any mainline growth in 2014

I agree that most of the resources AS has, will be used protecting what they have already. I'd expect very few new routes, if any at all.

Quoting ANA787 (Reply 11): PDX-DEN

As has been said in the past, with UA, F9 and WN I'd expect this route to be low on the AS list, but I like the idea.

Quoting ANA787 (Reply 11): PDX-EWR

I've been surprised that AS has not already done this, I took AS to EWR way back in 2003 and that 73G was packed full

I eventually hope to see them at DTW. It only seems natural for them to announce DTW if DL keeps announcing new routes in their territory.

Here's hoping.  

Quoting a321luke (Reply 19): I eventually hope to see them at DTW.

They would be relegated to the "North Terminal" which is not nearly as nice as the DL terminal.

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 20): They would be relegated to the "North Terminal" which is not nearly as nice as the DL terminal.

But a much nicer relationship with AA who could handle AS in DTW.

The North Terminal at DTW is newer than the McNamara (Delta's) terminal and equally as nice. Alaska would be well received there along with every other US carrier and Royal Jordanian and Lufthansa.

I suspect that Alaska's moves will be calibrated to what Delta does given that Delta announced 40 new flights and 10 new cities would be coming from SEA in the first 6 months of 2014. I expect Delta to add east coast cities and frequencies into the mix - RDU, BOS etc...

This will be interesting for both airlines given plane and gate limitations...will be interesting to see where the airlines come up with these.

I could see SLC-ANC, SLC-MCO, and maybe a few routes to Mexico from SLC. Mexico routes less than daily. Can one plane operate ANC-SLC-MCO-SLC-ANC on a daily basis?

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 14): SLC-FLL? FLL seems really crazy at first but it would be an easy fill even if its low yielding. Its guaranteed not to loose that much since they could fill the seats pretty easily. Guaranteed route to steal customers from Delta. The route might be better than we think maybe even a redeye?

DL used to run that flight with a 757 and it was always PACKED!

Quoting Noise (Reply 13): SAN-RDU

I try to look at what numbers I can when realistically trying to predict what markets out of SAN might see new nonstop service. (Which is one reason I keep yacking about SAN-STL!)

Unfortunately, RDU-SAN, which the DOT traffic tables continue to show at about 100 PDEW, is probably pretty unlikely to see a nonstop any time soon, on AS or anybody else. It, like most markets from SAN, IS very consistent year-round but since there are other un-served cites with higher PDEWs (like IND for example), I would be quite surprised to see Raleigh-SAN. (Not that I wouldn't be thrilled to see it, don't get me wrong. Just trying to be realistic here.)

RDU-SEA? I don't follow those numbers but my guess would be that they are fairly similar to SAN-RDU with the added factor of connecting opportunities beyond SEA that AS offers, such as to Alaska... or Hawaii? That would possibly help that market's potential but enough to lead AS to invest an entire airplane for a daily f/t? (Seems like another long, thin route that would probably not do to well as a red-eye. But who knows?)

bb

OMA-SEA just started and the first month was a 82% load factor for November. I think this market will do well with no competition and maybe this would switch to a 737-700. OMA-PDX I think could work on a CR7, also, no nonstop competition. I would guess these decisions are a year or two away so the more data can be gathered on the new OMA-SEA flight first to make sure it does well year round. January and February could be a bit rough for this route, otherwise I see the other 10 months not having any issue.

PDX-MSP
PDX-EWR
SEA-ABQ
PDX-SJD (seasonal)
ANC-MSP

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 24): I could see SLC-ANC, SLC-MCO, and maybe a few routes to Mexico from SLC. Mexico routes less than daily. Can one plane operate ANC-SLC-MCO-SLC-ANC on a daily basis?

Is the assumption around here that SLC will become AS's #3 hub? I really just don't see them adding SLC-East Coast flights. I'm a biased PDX guy, but this fight over SLC seems a little silly compared to a noble fight at SEA. SEA is a much bigger area with a lot more industry to feed flights from. SLC is geographically advantageous. Arguments could be made for the LDS Church's presence and the skiing, but the church's travel is intermittent and skiing is seasonal.

I think AS's expansion at SLC is perfect for what it is now, but I have a hard time believing it will become anything larger than that unless someone finds a suicide note next to Alaska Airlines' hotel bed. I LOVE Alaska as an airline, but the truth is they are smaller than Delta, don't have as many resources as DL, and DL has the ability to murder them quickly and painfully if they choose to.

I think Alaska should be the bigger man and quit this pissy fight with Delta and just do what they do and let Delta do what they do whilst still maintaining a strong competitive presence at SEA.

I'm not on the inside of either, but from the outside, this competition between DL/AS is just getting stupid. AS has every right to be defensive, and DL should stop being a d**k, but to me, all of these massive rounds of adds seem to be happening more out of retaliation than anything else.

Just saying….

Quoting flyenvi (Reply 29): Is the assumption around here that SLC will become AS's #3 hub?

I wouldn't go that far. Maybe I should have prefaced my posting with, "If AS adds anything else from SLC, this is what I see as most likely:"
I don't have a good enough feel for the larger AS network to guess at what they might add in other places, and I honestly doubt that they will add much more from SLC. But as I've mentioned in other threads, I'd personally love to see them add a few SLC-Montana routes, though I doubt it will happen.

RDU-SEA 221 daily pax at ~$620
IND-SEA 220 daily pax at ~$524

SAN-RDU 199 daily pax at $604
SAN-IND 286 daily pax at $445
SAN-STL 394 daily pax at $397

I would say if someone does RDU-SEA, they could do RDU-SAN.. iND May have more pax but RDU is going to give you higher yields...

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 30):

Fair enough. I'm probably just reading too much into it all. I think SLC was a long time coming for AS and I'm ecstatic about that addition to the AS network. I guess time will tell what happens.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 26): RDU-SEA?

Does seem like a nice link if RDU has decent demand to Asian connecting flights. I am not sure the demand but it does seem like a route they should consider maybe if there are asian connections.

Quoting flyenvi (Reply 29): Is the assumption around here that SLC will become AS's #3 hub? I really just don't see them adding SLC-East Coast flights. I think AS's expansion at SLC is perfect for what it is now, but I have a hard time believing it will become anything larger than that

   Well said. (And that's not just because I've posted the same thoughts more than once in the last couple of weeks!...)

This talk by many of add-this and add-that from SLC (like Alaska, Montana, Idaho, etc.) just makes no sense to me at all. For AS to try to run connections now through a SLC-"hub", rather than SEA and/or PDX, would be ridiculous. The last thing in the world they should be doing at this point is lowering traffic levels through their 2 hubs. If AS starts say, ANC-SLC, or MSO-SLC, and offers connections from SAN via Utah, all they'd do is get connecting pax off SAN-SEA and SAN-PDX flights and that seems very counterproductive to me. And I certainly don't think that any of these suggested adds from SLC have local O&D traffic anywhere near levels that would make them successful.

If OTOH, they've carefully selected established AS cities to connect with SLC where they can expect to bleed off some of the local O&D traffic (from DL), fine. This makes sense. I think this is what they've done and, as I've predicted already, I can see just a few more markets added from SLC, such as PHX and YVR and that's it. Then they can get back to their regularly scheduled programming!

I truly believe AS has their hands full keeping SEA hopping, and I hope, building their presence in places such as SAN. In the long run, this seems like the "Alaska way" and I expect that's what will end up happening.

bb

I still think AS should switch EWR to JFK and operate from AA's JFK terminal and add PDXJFK.

I think there's still hope for SAN-KOA, but just not in Alaska's attention right now.

Other routes I hope for are:

SEA-MRY
SAN-TUS
SAN-DCA
SJC/SFO/OAK-MMH
STS-LAS

Mainline replacement on:

SEA-OMA
SEA-COS

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 35): I still think AS should switch EWR to JFK and operate from AA's JFK terminal and add PDXJFK.

They're the only one keeping EWR-SEA prices in check. If the hands the keys over to UA, the prices would be through the roof.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 31): RDU-SEA 221 daily pax at ~$620 IND-SEA 220 daily pax at ~$524 SAN-RDU 199 daily pax at $604 SAN-IND 286 daily pax at $445 SAN-STL 394 daily pax at $397 I would say if someone does RDU-SEA, they could do RDU-SAN.. iND May have more pax but RDU is going to give you higher yields...

Thanks for confirming my numbers and hunches. (I assume these are all the 2Q13 DOT figures.)

So yes, RDU-SEA and RDU-SAN are quite similar, both with marginal local traffic but pretty high fares. Of course RDU is a trans-con while both IND and STL are quite a bit shorter stage length to the w/c. While SEA , as mentioned, would offer many connecting options on AS, SAN could also be used for connections from North Carolina, to places like Hawaii, Mexico, and even some possibilities of intra-CA destinations (like FAT, MRY, ???)

I just have a feeling that, while RDU is undoubtedly on the list for future AS stations, it's probably not real near the top.

I can't help but wonder where IND is on that list? (And I continue to maintain that SAN-STL IS pretty high on "The List", especially since STL is already an AS station. That must make it that much easier to consider...)

One last comment (I promise.) I think right now AS might have to be thinking, and I'm talking here especially about SAN, where the cities on their list are on WN's list? AS must be wondering how likely is SAN-IND for example, to be at the top end of WN's list of potential new routes? What are the chances that WN is ready to make SAN-STL daily and permanent, or even more than once daily? (Obviously, this logic also applies to SEA, PDX, etc., as well.)

Ah the work-day life of route planners....

bb

If AS starts ANC-SLC they can connect people to anywhere it the Delta network. It gives their ANC FF base an additional flight to a new city and more time to stay on AS.

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 30): I wouldn't go that far. Maybe I should have prefaced my posting with, "If AS adds anything else from SLC, this is what I see as most likely:" I don't have a good enough feel for the larger AS network to guess at what they might add in other places, and I honestly doubt that they will add much more from SLC. But as I've mentioned in other threads, I'd personally love to see them add a few SLC-Montana routes, though I doubt it will happen.

Agree. I can't see they will add more in SLC. If there is more expansion on DL's turf, I think they may look at LAX. AS already has a decent size presence there with plenty to of FF and maybe there are DL routes that they can tap into there.

Quoting ANA787 (Reply 11): PDX-YYC PDX-YEG PDX-DEN PDX-JNU PDX-EWR PDX-MSP PDX-MCO

I could see most of those happening. I know they tried MCO from PDX before, but it was quite awhile. DEN is a big gap.

Quoting 787pdx (Reply 28): SEA-ABQ

Yes - very large gap. Big hole in the route map.

A couple other route thoughts:
SEA-CLT (for feed with the new AA)
LAX-BZE
LAX-SJO
Would there be enough traffic for SEA in Ohio? - CLE,CMH or CVG?


Last thought - I think AS should keep their eye on PHX. It will be interesting to watch what happens there over the next couple years. Two differing thoughts - 1) They keep their code share with AA and PHX becomes a great opportunity for increased code share and flights. I think between AS and the new AA there are 10+ flights a day; or 2) AA begins to pull back on PHX. AS is well known in PHX and they now fly SEA, PDX and ANC. AS could add some flights out of PHX to pick up business travelers that don't like SW and like SEA there is good O&D traffic to be had.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 40): Agree. I can't see they will add more in SLC. If there is more expansion on DL's turf, I think they may look at LAX. AS already has a decent size presence there with plenty to of FF and maybe there are DL routes that they can tap into there

The only routes they could start which would be a blow to Delta would be LAX-ATL, LAX-MSP or LAX-DTW. Nothing else would be something at LAX would even make Delta blink.

SLC makes more of a statement and also makes the case that consolidation is bad for consumers etc etc. I could see a few more opportunities out there for AS if they really want too but why start a war with DL unless they add more. There is more space at SEA to expand than SLC so Delta has the real upper hand to expand more, not the best position to be in.

Quoting tlecam (Reply 23): I expect Delta to add east coast cities and frequencies into the mix - RDU, BOS etc...

It'll be interesting to see how that element plays out. We know that DL is adding flights on existing AS short haul routes out of SEA, and we know that they will always have a strong presence to existing DL hubs. What we haven't seen yet is any proactive adds to east coast cities that AS doesn't yet serve but that DL could "rain on their parade" by preemptively adding. RDU would be a logical add. IND (one of NW's coveted "Heartland cities") might be another.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 26): RDU-SEA? I don't follow those numbers but my guess would be that they are fairly similar to SAN-RDU with the added factor of connecting opportunities beyond SEA that AS offers

That is somewhat of an understatement.   SEA connecting opportunities are more than "an added factor" - they are huge. ALL ex-SEA destination on AS/QX/OO as well as the various international partner connections will play a major role in determining such an add. SAN-RDU looks like a great route, but is it even remotely as strategic to AS at thsi stage? I'm not so sure.

Quoting 787pdx (Reply 28): SEA-ABQ

A glaring hole (along with SLC up until this year).

Quoting flyenvi (Reply 29): I really just don't see them adding SLC-East Coast flights.

Me either. Their existing adds in SLC were more fill-the-gaps type stuff while also giving the finger to DL. Adding ANYTHING east of SLC would seem to be taking it to a whole different level - that'd be insane, particularly when they can just funnel people to DL (until they drop the codeshare, were that to happen).

Quoting flyenvi (Reply 29): think Alaska should be the bigger man and quit this pissy fight with Delta and just do what they do and let Delta do what they do whilst still maintaining a strong competitive presence at SEA.

I think to a large degree they have been very reserved. I'm not saying that they have a lot of options, but they really haven't done much of anything other than the SLC adds. I would say that AS has had a very pragmatic response to the whole DL/SEA build-up. At the same time, nobody knows what DL's end game is in SEA, though many seem to speak as though they are in the planning center in ATL. The reality is that there is probably a lot of pressure on the folks at AS to make all the right decisions, and with so many different directions to go in I think they've been pretty thoughtful so far in their moves.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 31): I would say if someone does RDU-SEA, they could do RDU-SAN..

They "could" but for AS the connctions in SEA are exponentially greater than they are in SAN. The connections that do exist, such as the referenced ones to Mexico and Hawaii, are largely leisure and not usually major destinations for East Coast folks. I'd be interested in RDU-Hawaii/MX numbers, but I cani't imagine in the current environment in SEA with DL that they would devote a plane to SAN-RDU.

WN or DL? Maybe.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 36): SAN-TUS

Against WN? Only on QX or OO I'd imagine, and even then, doubtful.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 38): SAN could also be used for connections from North Carolina, to places like Hawaii, Mexico, and even some possibilities of intra-CA destinations (like FAT, MRY, ???)

I think I responded above to the same thought, but I just have a hard time envisioning this route being added at this time by AS.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 40): If there is more expansion on DL's turf, I think they may look at LAX.

The problem with LAX is that you can't step on DL's toes without stepping on AA's toes.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 40): DEN is a big gap.

Tried and failed already. Might come back, but again, in the current environment when they need to be ready to do battler with DL on routes ex-SEA, why add PDX-DEN which arguably does nothing to bolster their defenses with DL while also putting them head-to-head with F9, WN, and UA?

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 40): SEA-CLT (for feed with the new AA)

Again, why piss AA off as well? If they can codeshare on the route, let AA carry the water and keep the revenue. Small price to pay to keep yet another airline from picking a fight with you.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 40): LAX-BZELAX-SJO

Yes, please.   These are long overdue adds, though I'm sure there are good reasons for it.

-Dave

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 36): I think there's still hope for SAN-KOA, but just not in Alaska's attention right now. Other routes I hope for are: SEA-MRY SAN-TUS SAN-DCA SJC/SFO/OAK-MMH STS-LAS

I just like the way you think, D! And on an entirely different subject, it's uncanny how YOUR hope list and mine have lots of overlap!

I just wish I knew if AS is really considering SAN-KOA of if there simply is not any local traffic there. (Which would really surprise me but I suppose it's possible.) This continues to be the one gap in AS's otherwise tight web of Hawaii service. But I certainly agree with you that other things right now are somewhat more pressing for AS!

MRY-SEA would seem a very logical extension of the (successful?) MRY-SAN flight. Since AS started their only service into MRY (from SAN, in June 2012) the r/t has not been altered at all and that, to me at least, is a good sign. The route is timed nicely for some connecting options at SAN and I can't imagine that it will not be extended up to SEA soon.

I think SAN-TUS would be a great add for AS, and a nice swing at WN to boot. WN runs, unopposed, 3 or even 4 daily 737s in the market. Even if AS (OO) could just put a daily double CR7 on that run, I think it would do very well (and I've mentioned that many times in the past.) There would be lots of connecting possibilities, including PDX, SEA, Hawaii, Mexico, FAT, MRY, BOI, etc. This seems like just the kind of opportunities AS is looking for at SAN.

Of course there's no doubt that I have always wanted AS to get the SAN-DCA route and was very disappointed last year when it instead went to (was taken by to be more precise) US. And I truly believe that AS really did want it as well. We just have to wait 'til the next beyond-perimeter hearing and hope it happens then! (In the meantime, at least we will soon technically have AA on the route, rather than US, and that's a big improvement IMHO.)

Regarding the Bay Area to MMH, that's probably a matter of chasing the money. I know that SAN-MMH (and LA as well?) are subsidized by MMH; in fact, UA's route from SFO is probably as well. So unless some more $$ becomes available to increase service from the Bay Area, I wouldn't count on seeing that.

Ah, the Holiday Season -- dreaming of sugarplums and new AS routes....  

bb

Quoting SANFan (Reply 43): I think SAN-TUS would be a great add for AS, and a nice swing at WN to boot. WN runs, unopposed, 3 or even 4 daily 737s in the market.

I'm not sure that sounds like a worthy battle to fight, but I'm not in route planning either.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 43): There would be lots of connecting possibilities, including PDX, SEA, Hawaii, Mexico,

Personally, I'd pick TUS-SJC over TUS-SAN because it gives you Hawaii, the bay area, BOI, and SLC, and NO WN nonstop competition.  

I'm not down on SAN. I love the adds they've done. I just don't see TUS as a good battleground UNLESS they have an idle Q400 in SAN that needs a quick turn for utilization purposes.

-Dave

I think AS could make a go out of AUS-PDX. Their only competition is WN (seasonal) , and IMO there is room for another carrier on the route...especially with the brand loyalty AS has in the PNW.

Rgds,  


Jonas

[Edited 2013-12-26 10:54:57]

[Edited 2013-12-26 10:55:36]

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 42): That is somewhat of an understatement. SEA connecting opportunities are more than "an added factor" - they are huge.

Is it? (Are they?) I constantly hear on A.net (and elsewhere) that airlines chase local traffic; that connecting traffic is diluted (much lower yielding, etc) and secondary income on a flight. I'm not a numbers guy and don't really know a CASM from a spasm but I know what I keep hearing.

That's why I tend to look at local traffic level, stage length, yield of a potential new route first. If that's solid, then sure, connecting traffic is the icing that fills up the plane. Therefore, when I see RDU-SEA/SAN at right around 100-110 PDEW (and that's year-round out of SAN but I expect SEA is more seasonal), that says that an airplane would be much more profitable elsewhere.

Maybe I'm totally wrong but if the O&D PDEW is 100, AS might see, what, 60-70 of those pax at the most, so even if the flight is topped off with connecting pax, that means about 60% of the seats are filled with connecting pax - maybe online or perhaps even involving another carrier. Is that really enough for AS to use a very valuable 12 hours of airplane time to serve?

  

bb

Quoting tlecam (Reply 23): I suspect that Alaska's moves will be calibrated to what Delta does given that Delta announced 40 new flights and 10 new cities would be coming from SEA in the first 6 months of 2014. I expect Delta to add east coast cities and frequencies into the mix - RDU, BOS etc...

Is there really THAT much demand from RDU for SEA? I just don't see it. WN would fly it if there was demand plain and simple. You can talk connection crap all you want, but that's just the bottom line. If it (RDU) that special of a place, it would be flown RIGHT NOW whether year-round or seasonal. I'll give you BOS, I guess.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 44): Personally, I'd pick TUS-SJC over TUS-SAN because it gives you Hawaii, the bay area, BOI, and SLC, and NO WN nonstop competition.

SJC-TUS would definitely have to be either a CRJ-700 or mainline. That route would be too long for a Q400.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 44): I'm not sure that sounds like a worthy battle to fight, but I'm not in route planning either.

I think SAN-TUS would work out with Q400. Would you have thought the SJC-LAX route would last with DL, AA, UA, VX and WN on that route?

Quoting UA735WL (Reply 45): I think AS could make a go out of AUS-PDX. Their only competition is WN (seasonal) , and IMO there is room for another carrier on the route...especially with the brand loyalty AS has in the PNW.

I agree. I think AS would be more successful than returning the SJC-AUS route.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 38): I can't help but wonder where IND is on that list?

Who would have thought OMA was in Alaska's sights?

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 48): Who would have thought OMA was in Alaska's sights?

Exactly! I'd throw BNA into the mix because of the strong ties with Asian business'. That's a HUGE push by the MNAA right now.