Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
jetwet1 wrote:Wet lease a wide body with B6 interior and cabin crew ?
LondonXtreme wrote:So far, the B6 is doing quite well on LHR and LGW routes. But with the slot restrictions on LHR. It's hard to see B6 can go beyond 2 daily(1 for JFK and 1 for BOS). Is that a good strategy for B6 to fly A321LR to LHR in the long term? I think JFK-LHR can easily filled with a 787 or A350 and all the airlines are utilise the LHR slots with larger aircrafts.
DLHAM wrote:Flying a too small plane means a lot of profit can be made. Its like Continental and United flying the 757 to HAM for years. The aircraft was too small for the demand, but no need to upgrade because of no competiton (most times) and only few to no seats had to be sold at Junk fares. (Of course Widebody shortage also played a role!).
So better have an airplane too small and selling every seat at a great price than having an airplane too big and having to sell seats at low fares to fill them. Less risk and especially much lower operating cost A321 vs 787/330neo.
Vicenza wrote:jetwet1 wrote:Wet lease a wide body with B6 interior and cabin crew ?
But that would not then be a wet lease though.
Max Q wrote:Why would customers want to pay significantly more for a full service carrier they didn’t want ?