ASeverywhere

I was flying AS from STL to LAX through PDX recently, and got to thinking: could LAX to STL nonstop service be a viable option for AS? To my knowledge, the only airlines that offer that route currently are AA and WN. But, perhaps STL is such a small market that the added capacity would be too much?

PV_Premier

I have got to think this would be far down on AS' list of potential targets, even its potential targets out of LAX. Sure, they could probably do it with an E175, but they could also do something like PDX-ABQ or SEA-DSM with that frame that would better fit their strengths and primary customer base.

ASeverywhere

Point well taken.

Given that during the 2015 Investor Day, Alaska leadership explicitly stated that they are looking to initiate non-stop routes that don't already exist, some of the potential routes you mentioned may be more in line with the airline's current interests.

I do believe though, that considering how underserved STL as a market seems to be, there is a great potential for AS growth in that market, by initiating routes between STL and AS focus cities.

JCSTL

I think AS could really benefit in adding a couple more flights out of STL. Its not the market it used to be but I do believe it is rebounding. WN is on the rise here and could use a little competition.

ASeverywhere

Yes...In addition to STL-LAX, I could imagine STL-SAN being very useful. There is NO airline that offers this nonstop route, not even WN. I am uncertain if airlines attempted this route in the past, only to later suspend service when it proved to be unprofitable. But, I could see this route being very popular for leisure travelers in STL.

jinglish

I'd love to see AS establish a solid foothold somewhere past the Rockies, and I'd bet that they'd like people in the midwest and east to think of them as more than "that airline that flies to Seattle," if those people are even aware of AS. I'm just skeptical it'll happen anytime soon given the current situation with Delta.

beckoa

Wirelessly posted (beckoa's BB: Mozilla/5.0 (BB10; Kbd) AppleWebKit/537.35+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.3.2.858 Mobile Safari/537.35+)

Well AS has been making 'tech' stops for crew at a certain airport recently

FriendlySkies

That airport would welcome additional flights, if it had enough space to accommodate them

qukslvr619

I don't see much incentive for AS to add LAX just because AA has it pretty well covered and they can codeshare. However on the topic of STL, if AS was serious about making SAN a hub/focus city/taco stand/whatever they are trying to do there, then they would look at adding SANSTL. WN seems sporadic...sometimes its daily, then its seasonal, then its gone. My only data point on AS was flying STLPDX flying onto SAN; seemed full in the back although F went out with empty seats. But I think anyone that's flying to the West Coast will probably not want to trek all the way to PDX on a E-175. Nice plane, but it just seemed like a really long flt...of course the internet was crapping out so that probably didn't help.

ASeverywhere

People from the Midwest and East already consider AS to be an airline they will never use. Working closely with people who live in those regions, I always hear, "their planes are old and I can't use them to fly anywhere I might want to go." While I disagree with the contention about the age of the aircraft (with certain notable exceptions that should be addressed soon), I agree completely with comments about AS' reach in terms of destinations.

To AS' credit, it has added frequencies to some Midwest and East Coast cities serviced through Seattle and Portland. And I think that's a good starting point in terms of making the airline a viable option for travelers who require a little more flexibility.

But, AS will not be able to capture the travelers that require an expansive network or a larger share of Midwest and East Coast travelers, if it does not add a Midwest or East Coast hub. STL would be a good candidate for that hub considering its central geographic location and the abundance of unused gates at that airport. And I think that travelers in STL would really get behind AS.

That being said, I think AS leadership has made it quite clear that for the time being, the airline will focus on strengthening its Seattle hub and starting nonstop service between cities where such service does not exist. I'm not sure that starting a new hub and initiating new non-stop routes have to be mutually exclusive goals; I believe STL is a market in which these interests could merge.

eponymous_coward

What makes you think it's underserved? Is it because they don't have a "hub" (which isn't exactly true, WN service is pretty darn close to a "hub")?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tistical_Areas

As MSA's go, it's not "OMG, such a big city, why doesn't it have a major hub?", though there are some smaller hubs on that list.

FWIW, LAX is not top 10 on this list...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamber...p_destinations

PV_Premier

perhaps it's the same gripe that CVG/MEM/CLE have, which is the one of 'former hub' status... but, TWA was many moons ago now...

i'm not 100% confident that the wikipedia list about destinations out of STL actually captures O/D traffic. i think what that data is showing is the number of passengers on a given route that is already served nonstop. i guess you could argue that since WN and AA serve LAX nonstop already and it's not in the top 10 there is not room for another carrier, which would be valid probably. however, i don't think the data can be interpreted to say that LAX is not a top 10 O/D destination when also considering connecting traffic.

dayone

+1.

WebTraveler

Southwest has had a STL-SAN non-stop. Its not operating now, but does on the summer schedule. But noting that the Lambert webpage does list San Diego as a non-stop destination, its been covered. If Southwest can't make it year around with connecting traffic, Alaska certainly can't with point to point service.

http://flystl.com/Airlines/NonStopService.aspx

qukslvr619

Southwest can't make it year round with connecting traffic because the arrival times into STL aren't very conducive to connections. I looked at SANLGA/BOS/MCO/RDU/PHL on a peak day in the summer and none of these city pairs connected thru STL. They either missed midday flts or had 3-4+ hour gaps between flts.

I disagree on the lack of local traffic though and there are a couple of reasons why. If WN is looking to capture business traffic, it doesn't do a lot of good to operate a flight between these markets only during summer vacation travel periods. For that matter people in STL would probably want to go to SAN during the winter and if WN is sporadic with when they operate nonstops, there isn't much incentive to think to fly on WN in the first place.

Maybe they wouldn't be able to fill a 739 every day of the year, but starting off a E-175 would be more than adequate.