Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

SANFan · Fri Dec 27, 2013 7:31 pm

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 99):
I meant SLC-ANC...

I kind'a thought that.

But then I again ask, what would AS find in SLC-ANC service? Lots of local traffic? I doubt that. Lots of AS connectors such as I mentioned in an earlier post that would simply fly, say, SAN-SLC-ANC instead of SAN-SEA-ANC, accomplishing exactly what for the airline?

Or would you propose that lots of folks would fly AS ANC-SLC then switch to DL to fly elsewhere in the US? In the current climate between AS and DL, would either AS or DL want or even do that? Would it be worth it for pax to have to make an inter-line connection at SLC rather than flying DL the whole way? And besides, all that would do is take those pax off ANC-SEA-XXX or ANC-PDX-XXX for which they could possibly use AS on the entire trip - depending on their final destination.

Just like those (you?) proposing that AS turn SLC into a full-blown west-east hub. I just don't understand the thinking of why this would be good or even more important, possible, for AS to do. Please explain to me.

bb

triangleGIS21 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 8:30 pm

Quoting EricR (Reply 92):
Let's assume we see a 25% growth rate. This would mean the PDEWs are 161 to SEA and 145 to SAN. While this may sound high enough to support a N/S, AS would need to capture 100% of this traffic. Sounds aggressive eh?

With loyalty programs and a percentage of the PDEWs always looking for the best fare, AS will only capture a percentage of that traffic and that percentage does not seem large enough to support a daily N/S.

I understand this point, and I've looked at this factor as well. The other big advantage that a Seattle flight would have (that San Diego doesn't) is feeder traffic to Alaska and other parts of the Northwest. Raleigh-Portland alone is about 58 PDEW, and I'd assume that Raleigh-Vancouver and (seasonally speaking) Raleigh-Anchorage is not a totally insignificant number. Even excluding Delta's international network, there is a VERY solid, business-centered O&D base in the Raleigh-Seattle market that is IMO more-than-able to support a daily 738, if timed with enough Alaska and Northwestern connections.

People in a business-centered context are usually biased towards a non-stop option anyways, and knowing the nature of RDU leisure traffic, most of that passenger base is centered around Florida, the Northeast, the Yucatan region of Mexico, Las Vegas, and the Caribbean. The West Coast and Pacific Northwest markets from RDU are unusually large for a city of its size and relative location, but it's because of the heavy business ties that my area has with cities in these two parts of the country, especially with Silicon Valley, Seattle, and increasingly Los Angeles being significant high-tech business centers, and with San Diego and San Francisco's significance in the US pharmaceutical industry.

Overall, Seattle would be a great short-term opportunity for Alaska to tap into IMO, and barring a Delta response, it would be a huge success for them if they see the same opportunity that my undisclosed source and I personally believes. San Diego should be more of a medium-term target due to the lack of available feed on either end of a potential flight, but I won't discourage the RDU board from inquiring and advocating for a once daily frequency of such a flight.

[Edited 2013-12-27 12:37:10]

wedgetail737 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 8:58 pm

Quoting SANFan (Reply 98):
How about SAN-MMH? (Just started and seasonal but no SEA-MMH exists.)

Unlike SAN-MRY, the MMH service was first started from LAX.

Quoting TriangleGIS21 (Reply 101):
The other big advantage that a Seattle flight would have (that San Diego doesn't) is feeder traffic to Alaska and other parts of the Northwest.

But SAN is an emerging market, especially of the fact that they have an entire concourse to themselves. I think AS could make a name for themselves and coexist with WN. Unlike SLC, AS has been serving SAN for a long time.

IMHO, Alaska's new service from SLC is marginally insane and I think there's a lot to prove there. If AS called for eastward expansion, that would be suicide. The same goes for PHX.

triangleGIS21 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:05 pm

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 102):
But SAN is an emerging market, especially of the fact that they have an entire concourse to themselves. I think AS could make a name for themselves and coexist with WN. Unlike SLC, AS has been serving SAN for a long time.

Though true, that base is still too small to have any real ability to capture connection traffic. The increased San Diego flying has to do with its constantly growing O&D base and said base's ever-increasing distaste for driving to/connecting at LAX for better flight options.

Wingtips56 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:49 pm

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 95):
I know I've flown PDX-RDD-ACV before on a QX Dash-8-200, the LAX flight must have been an extension of the SEA/PDX service.

That's what they started out with, later up-gauging to the Q400. In an attempt to bolster the flight, it's last generation shifted to SEA from PDX, meaning SEA-RDD-ACV.
They also ran LAX-ACV-RDD-LAX and LAX-RDD-ACV-LAX round-robin with the Q400, which I dearly wish had not been discontinued.

For a while, when both the SEA/PDX and LAX circuits were running, they sometimes operated LAX-ACV-RDD-PDX/SEA, with overlapping flight numbers selling LAX-ACV-RDD with one, and ACV-RDD-PDX/SEA with another, rather than selling one flight number LAX-PDX/SEA as thru.

Anyway, the city I most notice missing from this overall discussion in SMF, which is already a multi-destination AS city, and has always been a somewhat underserved market in general (suffering from bleed-off to SFO due to better coverage). While I don't see enough local market to add SMF-SLC in this war with DL, I do see potential for other markets.

Frankly, I'm surprised that AS is pitching it's battle head-to-head with DL, unless they are really just building up shared AS/DL markets with more frequency. It seems to me that AS would be better using it's resources in markets without incumbent carriers, whether DL or someone else. Anything they do add should certainly be marketed with AA on codeshares from Day 1.

TPAfan · Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:03 pm

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 77):

Seeing those numbers you posted, am I seeing things wrong, or is that 866 PDEW between IND-SEA? And there isn't a nonstop yet? And also, what about the 86 PDEW for SEA-MSY? Are these correct?

I think it would be interesting if AS started nonstops between FLL-SLC and TPA-SLC. Both are fairly large stations for DL (TPA ranging from 29-35 mainline flights), and FLL similar, and I believe both have been run previously by DL. Heading east from SLC into larger DL stations would be a message, but also an opportunity that DL seems to be leaving open, where there is likely demand, especially heavy seasonal.

But I believe TPA-SEA will happen fairly soon with IND-SEA, and possibly RDU-SEA and BNA-SEA

Where can I find numbers for domestic city pairs, and if you would like to post it:
TPA-SEA (saw 520)
TPA-SLC
TPA-SAN
TPA-PDX
TPA-SFO (or SJC)

WesternA318 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:18 pm

Quoting SANFan (Reply 100):
Just like those (you?) proposing that AS turn SLC into a full-blown west-east hub. I just don't understand the thinking of why this would be good or even more important, possible, for AS to do. Please explain to me.

I wouldnt propose such a ludicrous idea. The focus city concept that AS is building up is about as far as I'd go out of SLC, with maybe one-two important east-west legs for good measure, BUT, SEA is AS' turf, thats where the East-West junk should be flown from.

triangleGIS21 · Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:27 pm

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 106):
The focus city concept that AS is building up is about as far as I'd go out of SLC, with maybe one-two important east-west legs for good measure, BUT, SEA is AS' turf, thats where the East-West junk should be flown from.

And Portland, too. Don't forget about that very-sizable operation up there as well.

But yes, building SLC into a hub is one of the worst kinds of money pits that an airline of Alaska's size could possibly get themselves into, because not only is SLC's population base way too small to support two hubs, Delta will throw an even bigger fit than they already have. They're better off with simply weathering the storm and let the market naturally prevent Delta from intruding further into the Seattle market. They have a strong enough support system in the Seattle/Portland FF base, their west coast operation, and their near-complete domination in the high-yielding Alaska market to not over-react to Delta's moves.

[Edited 2013-12-27 14:29:07]

flyinggoat · Sat Dec 28, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 106):
Seeing those numbers you posted, am I seeing things wrong, or is that 866 PDEW between IND-SEA? And there isn't a nonstop yet? And also, what about the 86 PDEW for SEA-MSY? Are these correct?

IND-SEA should be 299 passengers with a distance of 1,866. SEA-MSY should be 297 passengers with a distance of 2,086 mi. For some reason, the forum deleted the spaces I had in the chart and everything is now jumbled together. I don't think it was like that when I posted it. Also, the numbers I posted are total round-trip numbers, so PDEW would be half that.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 106):
Where can I find numbers for domestic city pairs, and if you would like to post it:
TPA-SEA (saw 520)
TPA-SLC
TPA-SAN
TPA-PDX
TPA-SFO (or SJC)

TPA-SEA is 327
TPA-SLC is 191
TPA-SAN is 234
TPA-PDX is 166
SJC-TPA is 499

TPA-PHL has the most at 1,376

The above numbers are 2013 Q2 results. I believe they are round-trip stats, so you would have to divide that in half to get PDEW.

http://www.dot.gov/office-policy/avi...airfare-report-second-quarter-2013

Note: The data in my previous post was 2012 Q3 data and not 2013. 2013 Q3 data has not been released yet.

WesternA318 · Sat Dec 28, 2013 12:59 am

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 108):
flyinggoat

Why am I being tagged in this??

FATFlyer · Sat Dec 28, 2013 1:10 am

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 104):
Anyway, the city I most notice missing from this overall discussion in SMF, which is already a multi-destination AS city, and has always been a somewhat underserved market in general (suffering from bleed-off to SFO due to better coverage). While I don't see enough local market to add SMF-SLC in this war with DL, I do see potential for other markets.

SMF is seeing O&D numbers running 20% below 2007. The increased operating costs from the new terminal are probably a major reason.
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/12/13/599...er-levels-dropping-sacramento.html

flyinggoat · Sat Dec 28, 2013 1:44 am

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 109):
Why am I being tagged in this??

Sorry, I meant to quote TPAfan's post, which was right above yours. I clicked the wrong quote button.

slcdeltarumd11 · Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:23 am

Quoting SANFan (Reply 100):
Or would you propose that lots of folks would fly AS ANC-SLC then switch to DL to fly elsewhere in the US? In the current climate between AS and DL, would either AS or DL want or even do that? Would it be worth it for pax to have to make an inter-line connection at SLC rather than flying DL the whole way? And besides, all that would do is take those pax off ANC-SEA-XXX or ANC-PDX-XXX for which they could possibly use AS on the entire trip - depending on their final destination.

AS has codeshares on alot of flights out of SLC already. There are tons of makets that Delta offers service to from SLC that AS doesn't or locations where SLC is the only realistic connection geogrpahically.

Florida-SEA-So Cal for example is insane but AS flying people FLL-SLC-LA etc for example would probably steal people off FLL-ATL-so cal even if its only the long portion and steal delta passengers off SLC-ATL-FLL if priced right since its non-stop. The Delta FFs would even earn their skymiles etc. Its such a weird concept since the airlines fighting are codeshare and FF partners!

Also AS can fly people ANC-SLC-GTJ/ABQ/MSY/CLT/RDU/CVG/FAR there would be plenty of places to connect people onto and cities AS doesn't serve or give them the ability to offer more departure opportunities aka times. I think the AS ANC FF base would love this flight and a chance to stay on AS more often and longer. Plus DL FFs can still earn miles flying it etc etc. Its not as crazy it you would think because AS has codeshares in place already for the places you would need. I don't think DL would be as mad about ANC as

I do think AS should not poke a sleeping Delta but there still might be some opportunities out there

AS does not have the gate space to create their own large east-west connection setup delta has all the gates they are dependent on Delta but they have the ability to do that just like DL uses them to feed their Asian flights. They have a codeshare and FF deals in place. Its just two airlines chasing money as much as Delta might hate AS flying SLC-ANC or SLC-FLL they still benefit off the connections and its better then say spirit starting the route?

oosnowrat · Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:39 am

How about SLC-AZA? DL will never go there.

Noise · Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:48 am

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 108):
TPA-SEA is 327
TPA-SLC is 191
TPA-SAN is 234
TPA-PDX is 166
SJC-TPA is 499

Where are you getting these numbers, exactly?

slcdeltarumd11 · Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:27 am

Quoting oosnowrat (Reply 113):
How about SLC-AZA? DL will never go there.

True but so far AS has only chose cities with large AS FF bases which is very safe. It would be a whole different ball game to start a new city unless they had a nice incentive. I don't see SLC offering an incentive unless its international or maybe FLL, TPA some actual new destination? Even Florida seems extremely unlikely SLC is so well served it seems weird for them to offer an incentive to such large tourist destinations but you never know.

EA CO AS · Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:38 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 112):
I do think AS should not poke a sleeping Delta

You've got a funny definition of "sleeping" since DL has been very, very active in terms of undermining their partners at AS.

krsw757 · Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:55 am

An absolute long shot, but what about SEA-RSW? So far 3 airlines serve DEN-RSW (which probably answers my question) but that's the furthest flight to the west RSW has.

EA CO AS · Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:06 am

Quoting krsw757 (Reply 117):
An absolute long shot, but what about SEA-RSW?

Good thought, but you'd see SEA-TPA before ever seeing SEA-RSW.

SANFan · Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:35 am

Quoting TriangleGIS21 (Reply 103):
Though true, that base is still too small to have any real ability to capture connection traffic. The increased San Diego flying has to do with its constantly growing O&D base and said base's ever-increasing distaste for driving to/connecting at LAX for better flight options

As AS grows SAN, they are making a concerted effort to set up skeds with connections in mind. It's of course true that the opportunities in SAN are very minor when compared with SEA, and even PDX, but I'm impressed with the number of working connections that are being created at Lindbergh. It's obvious that at least up to now, AS has been building SAN with connections very much in mind,

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 104):
Anyway, the city I most notice missing from this overall discussion in SMF, which is already a multi-destination AS city, and has always been a somewhat underserved market in general (suffering from bleed-off to SFO due to better coverage). While I don't see enough local market to add SMF-SLC in this war with DL, I do see potential for other markets.

As already pointed out by someone, it's the costs at SMF (due to their recent and extravagant expansion) that are keeping the cx at bay when it comes to adding (and even maintaining) service there. However, as I have suggested elsewhere, I could see AS adding a single SLC flight from there if the SLC-thing continues!

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 108):
SJC-TPA is 499

Wooooow! Hold the presses. This number should be 85 (for a PDEW of ~43!) This comes from the DOT's Table 1a, not Table 6 where you found "499'. Table 6 uses the Bay Area combined- metro-area number for SFO, OAK and SJC to Tampa. (Feel free to IM me if you have any questions.)

And yes, your numbers represent total pax, so they have to be cut in half to produce the PDEWs. And, IMO, the PDEWS listed for TPA are all pretty marginal to support nonstop service. SEA-TPA's PDEW of 164 COULD possibly be considered by AS (due to the added connecting pax) but otherwise, I doubt any of those other routes are likely to happen anytime real soon.

bb

[Edited 2013-12-27 23:04:16]

SANFan · Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:40 am

[Hey EA CO AS, just wanted to let you know that I've tried to IM you several times and it's impossible. Maybe you have something set to refuse IMs (from me at anyway?) but I wanted you to know.]

bb

RWA380 · Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:45 am

Quoting SANFan (Reply 119):
As AS grows SAN, they are making a concerted effort to set up skeds with connections in mind. It's of course true that the opportunities in SAN are very minor when compared with SEA, and even PDX, but I'm impressed with the number of working connections that are being created at Lindbergh. It's obvious that at least up to now, AS has been building SAN with connections very much in mind

Even when looking for flights from PDX to Hawaii, SAN was offered as a connection option PDX-SAN-LIIH on AS.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 119):
I could see AS adding a single SLC flight from there if the SLC-thing continues!

If it was the OGG flight with the 738 that would be a great OGG-SMF-SLC option, but even a service on a CR7 that connected with OGG would help fill the seats, SLC-SMF-SLC.

Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

RE: Prediction On New AS City-Pairs?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net