"Our California Game is Stepping Up"....Not You Oakland
Nov 11, 2017, 11:47 am
#31
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,485
A lot of smaller airports have slots due to community noise restrictions. LGB also has it and so does HPN. SNA has one of the most valuable slot systems due to its location in the OC.
Nov 11, 2017, 9:50 pm
#32
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,639
Airlines are not charities but there are other considerations that go into this beyond simply maximizing profits on any given route. Since the VX purchase AS has thrown every resource they can on any route they can at SFO to try to work towards building up a competitive hub, no matter if the fares are low and the planes are not full. It's not hard to imagine an alternate scenario with no VX purchase, and AS working to organically grow and develop existing routes and airports that aren't SFO (like OAK). Every communication from the company pre-VX seemed to indicate the E175s would be headed for routes like PDX-OAK (they told me as much every time I complained about the Q400s), but instead today we get SFO-ABQ, SFO-MSP, SFO-MCI, etc.
Nov 11, 2017, 10:50 pm
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,415
In addition to this, there are retaliatory expansions. AS did not built up SLC because they thought it was undeserved by DL; they did it to be annoying and retaliate for DL building up SEA. WN keeps adding routes and frequencies at SFO/SJC in moves that appear directed primarily at AS but AS refuses to retaliate on WN's home turf at OAK. WN thanks them for this courtesy.
PS: WN bought Morris Air back in the day. SLC was their hub. DL still owns SLC, 20-some years later (thanks to their purchase of Western). So it appears incumbency and hub domination has advantages.
If your idea is "AS should add some random routes out of OAK where they have zero feed on either end and zero ability to really respond once WN decides to set some $29 fare sales all the time and run hourly shuttles, so they can get crushed by WN and withdraw the service 18 months later once they're tired of losing money", well, OK then.
Last edited by eponymous_coward; Nov 11, 2017 at 11:01 pm
Nov 12, 2017, 1:29 am
#34
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend, Moderator, Information Desk, Ambassador, Alaska Airlines
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: FAI
Programs: AS MVP Gold100K, AS 1MM, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz PC, Marriott Titanium LTG, CO, 7H, BA, 8E
Posts: 42,957
It was rather scenic, especially the approach for landing- a bit bumpy into SLC. LAS had STS as well on QX that didn't survive.
Nov 12, 2017, 7:32 am
#35
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,639
... and routes like SLC-LAS have washed out and been withdrawn (in a move that should surprise absolutely no-one) because SLC is a captive hub for DL (at around 72% when you add DL and OO), just like OAK is for WN.
PS: WN bought Morris Air back in the day. SLC was their hub. DL still owns SLC, 20-some years later (thanks to their purchase of Western). So it appears incumbency and hub domination has advantages.
If your idea is "AS should add some random routes out of OAK where they have zero feed on either end and zero ability to really respond once WN decides to set some $29 fare sales all the time and run hourly shuttles, so they can get crushed by WN and withdraw the service 18 months later once they're tired of losing money", well, OK then.
PS: WN bought Morris Air back in the day. SLC was their hub. DL still owns SLC, 20-some years later (thanks to their purchase of Western). So it appears incumbency and hub domination has advantages.
If your idea is "AS should add some random routes out of OAK where they have zero feed on either end and zero ability to really respond once WN decides to set some $29 fare sales all the time and run hourly shuttles, so they can get crushed by WN and withdraw the service 18 months later once they're tired of losing money", well, OK then.
Last edited by ucdtim17; Nov 12, 2017 at 7:56 am
Nov 12, 2017, 9:53 am
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,415
So you're basically down to LAX and SAN, maaaaaaybe SNA.
Nov 12, 2017, 10:30 am
#37
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,639
... which are now AS hubs/focus cities where connectivity sort of makes sense (though let's see if AS keeps them or drops them to add intra-CA service or tweak what's on offer for SFO/SJC), and for obvious reasons will never get OAK service.
So you're basically down to LAX and SAN, maaaaaaybe SNA.
So you're basically down to LAX and SAN, maaaaaaybe SNA.
Nov 13, 2017, 12:03 am
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Danville, CA, USA;
Programs: UA 1MM, WN CP, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Gold, IC Plat
Posts: 15,734
The OAK<->LAS weekend route is so profitable (read high fares) that JetsuiteX is competing from CCR. AS could certainly make money here as WN service is not that great (many delays from LAS). WN is also charging premium weekend fares OAK<->SJD and AS could probably add similar non stops without cannibalizing VX SFO biz (and continuing to feed from SEA/PDX).
There are quite a few profitable routes here where WN is making a killing that don’t require frequency but do require some number crunching and desire to expand. Personally I would much prefer AS if that is an option.
There are quite a few profitable routes here where WN is making a killing that don’t require frequency but do require some number crunching and desire to expand. Personally I would much prefer AS if that is an option.
Last edited by Boraxo; Nov 13, 2017 at 12:49 pm
Nov 13, 2017, 9:53 am
#41
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,639
Nov 13, 2017, 10:28 am
#42
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,045
i can't find the documents but SNA is slot controlled on a specific aircraft (large planes). i believe the ER-175 does not fall into that category but i could be mistaken.
Nov 13, 2017, 11:07 am
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,415
Other than that, what could possibly go wrong?
Last edited by eponymous_coward; Nov 13, 2017 at 11:23 am
Nov 13, 2017, 11:41 am
#44
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: San Diego, Ca
Programs: AA 2MM LT PLT; AS MVP Gold75k; HHonors Diamond; IHG PLT
Posts: 3,508
The OAK<->LAS weekend route is so profitable (read high fares) that JetsuiteX is competing from CCR. AS could certainly make money here as WN service is not that great (many delays from LAS). WN is also charging premium weekend fares to SJD - AS could probably add similar non stops without cannibalizing VX SFO biz (and continuing to feed from SEA/PDX).
There are quite a few profitable routes here where WN is making a killing that don’t require frequency but do require some number crunching and desire to expand. Personally I would much prefer AS if that is an option.
There are quite a few profitable routes here where WN is making a killing that don’t require frequency but do require some number crunching and desire to expand. Personally I would much prefer AS if that is an option.
Nov 13, 2017, 12:56 pm
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Danville, CA, USA;
Programs: UA 1MM, WN CP, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Gold, IC Plat
Posts: 15,734
So yes, it's a huge market - VX (and UA) have captured a piece from SFO but weekend plans are full and OAK (like BUR) is more convenient for many plus rare flight delays.
I can't comment on SLC but that strikes me a low value leisure v. high value leisure. Just because route is not full of business travelers and starlets does not mean it is relegated to LCC territory. Just ask folks flying to Hawaii during peak season.
Again I am not on a mission to promote Vegas but just pointing out that there are profitable routes from OAK.