In trying to catch up on various threads, I posted the following item on another board. I apologize for repeating it for those who also read that board, but some of the points address things on this board as well. And rather than cut up the document and try to find what existing threads different pieces should be pasted into, I figured it would be easier just to post the whole thing here.

Please do take note that the tone of some items is primarily to address comments on the other board, not necessarly things posted here. However that aside, the meat of the post is relevant here, and many of the items do cover things posted here, even if they were somewhat less extreme than some other boards have been.


-----------

On the two new Branson markets:
If you take a closer look at exactly what the new Branson routes are, one might find they are less alarming than they seem at first blush. BKG-AUS is a 3x/week ERJ, using slack RJ lift to extend the 3x/week MKE-BKG down to Austin and back. BKG-PHX is a Saturday-only flight, again using weekend schedule slack. Neither of these markets "replaces" anything. This is not a Frontier "trade" from one subsidized route to another. Instead, in the case of AUS it is them finding a profitable use for surplus RJ lift, and in the case of PHX it is them finding use for Saturday slack during the months when very little traditional vacation travel takes place.

On flight reductions (seasonal and other) this fall:
To a great extent, flight reductions this fall are a function of the fleet reduction already well-discussed in prior months. No matter what you think of the E170 deal, whether you think it was a very shrewd stratiegic move or a piss-poor decision with RAH stunting the branded operation for their own short-sided needs, that there are cuts this fall was something easily predicted. And frankly...most of the specific cuts so far were not all that tough to predict. Yet with every reduction comes hand-wringing and prognostication that the wheels are coming off, that Frontier can't make it. After all, if they can't make XXX work, then it's clearly hopeless (or so the CW goes). This is akin to saying that global warming isn't happening, and then using the (predictable) seasonal drop in temps come fall as more proof to bolster one's arguement. Now...that flight reductions this fall are fully to be expected because of the fleet circumstances...that does not prove that everything is peachy at F9. It proves nothing either way.

On Frontier's unconventional markets, including subsidized and low-frequency service:
A critical thing that some people fail to realize is that it is very difficult for any airline to penetrate another airline's loyal busienss segment, and it's especially difficult for a smaller airline like Frontier. Time and again various pundits bemoan low-frequency service. The fact of the matter is that in many markets, Frontier needs to be able to break even on nearly 100% price-conscious leisure traffic because they are not giong to get much else. Now there are quite a few markets -- especially at Denver -- where volume is high enough that they can offer business-useful schedules and compete for their piece of the business market. But that is simply not true everywhere, and there's not much Frontier can do to change that. One frequent contributor has lamented that Frontier doesn't have frequent enough service year-round to Tucson to offer business-friendly flight options. That's true, but there's just not enough leisure volume for Frontier to tap into at Tucson (short of giving seats away) to justify a frequent year-round schedule, and the prospects of Frontier making large gains in the local TUS business segment are just not there even if they fly a classic "business schedule". To be sure, this is *not* the case in every market, and Frontier does compete relatively well for business traffic in some markets. But Frontier has to be very selective where they make a stand to improve penetration into the loyal-traveler segment because it can be very costly to do so. And beyond such targeted initiatives, the rest of their expansion is necessarily in markets where they have to be prepared to make it on leisure traffic. In those sorts of markets where your role is serving the leisure market, there's no point in flying year-round if there's not enough traffic year-round, or flying daily just for the point of flying daily. Would they like to be able to penetrate Green Bay enough to fly a business-friendly year-round GRB-DEN schedule? Of course. But the odds of succeeding at stealing enough loyal DL and UA flyers at GRB to make this work are nil. Does this mean Frontier is a bottom-feeder in these markets? You bet it does. The reason that Frontier targets a lot of less-conventional markets like GRB, PHF, FSD, TYS are that the "bottom" is not as low as it might be in some more competitive large markets like PIT, JAX, CMH, etc. And among those less-conventional markets are those which offer subsidy.

Now there's a fair amount of oversimplification in all that...Frontier is not only a bottom feeder, there are not zero routes where they make a stand to achieve business market share, the world is not cleanly divided black-and-white between business traffic which pays high fares and leisure traffic which pays junk fares, brand recognition is not perfectly meaningless in a market like PHF, etc., etc. Yet I think it helps to illustrate the circumstances a small airline like Frontier faces, and how it leads them to do what they do. Of course people are free to disagree with the strategy Frontier uses, but I think in many cases critics don't recognize some of the realities that go into decisions, and just dismiss everything as flakey or wrong. The conventional multiple-flight / business friendly schedule many of us have been groomed to view as "right" just doesn't work in a lot of cases, especially when someone else already owns the business market or the business market is thin. It's just not realiitic to think that Frontier is going to come in and eat someone else's lunch...the big boys often fail at this. The fight-for-every-passenger way to penetrating a market is costly, and Frontier can't affort to fight a whole lot of those battles at once. They need to fight them when they can or risk morphing into another Spirit (if they're lucky), but they also need to figure out how to make a buck when/where they are not picking their battles. Not every new market can be a tough fight like MCI-MSP because they couldn't withstand the losses that kind of fight can bring. So their expansion necessarily includes places where they can make it on high volume leisure traffic, including markets where the way to make it work is with lower frequency and/or a subsidy.