So the Seattle Times article a handful of posts up above didn’t mention it was for connections. They mentioned most the cut routes were because they weren’t bringing in enough money on them, even with full planes. I believe AS said “cutting their losses with lower fares” on those routes. So again, would the PSC-PDX flight still been 80%+ full if they had bumped the fare up $15 to $20 each direction? I mean I don’t want to pay more, but an extra $30 to $40 for a round trip compared to a connection in Seattle and probably a $50 to $100 increase in cost is kinda a no brainer.

Also, if they were connections and specifically AS connections (think onward to Hawaii and SoCal, Vegas, NY markets) then will that mean the PDX flights to those places will start to see a reduction in pax? I certainly would not fly from PSC into Seattle just to get to PDX so I can catch a flight to Hawaii or to BUR/LAX. That would be crazy to make it 3 steps vs 2.... unless it was like $100+ CHEAPER. If AS already is trying to manage costs, I can’t imagine too much routing where 3 flights were less then 2 flights to the same place...

So is this a sign that PDX might get frequency cut back on transcons and SoCal flights to once daily? (If any are currently more then once) Will they lose Hawaii for an extra flight to Hawaii going out of SEA and PDX people will have to shuttle up there first?

Or is this really more like 95% trying to hog the gates at SEA to make trouble for Delta? Again, I TOTALLY understand that... but maybe think about doing that before you spend a boat load of money buying an airline that was mainly out of California. Because reducing Horizon service just to boost SEA seats and keeping all the Virgin California locations gets you a lot of smaller PNW locations that are pissed off at you now.

What makes them better then Delta or United now at those locations? (Other then mileage plan; but for the leisure traveler AS isn’t going to stand out of the pack except for price or convenience, and they may have just got rid of the convenience for a lot of those cut routes...)

I was thinking of all the route cuts to PDX and instead into SEA.

It’s like asking if WN needs to dehub PHX. The way AS runs their network is closer to WN than AA; they’re much more willing to explore new markets like SAN and SJC, much like WN did through their history. While they can get some international feed unlike WN, they are optimized for domestic operations like WN. They are used to having to scrap in the LCC bucket in hubs where they are 50% or less of the market (also similar to WN in PHX, DEN, DAL/DFW, Bay Area, LAX and surrounds).

I wouldn’t be particularly worried.