jk88usa

sfozrhfco

No kidding. LGA/DCA are still the most convenient airports for Long Island City and Crystal City and AS has no slots there now. They can't add anything beyond what they already have at DCA/JFK and other carriers are in a better position to serve the needs of DCA/LGA/JFK based employees anyway.

If they wanted to add more capacity from DCA/LGA to the West Coast they could only have added one stop flights but for the next 10 years that is not on the cards as WN has those slots. All the rest is not even relevant

DrAlex

A good FT Armchair CEO might point out that AS is the ONLY carrier running SEA-DCA nonstop service - 2x daily (currently with a 738). AS could also increase load by switching to the A321 for +26 seats per flight.

jrl767

UGs are tough enough on those flights with 12F and 30 PC ... 8F and 18 PC will be miserable

of course that's only in the forefront of the Armchair CEO's mind

Tracer_SEA

Also, Alaska's SEA-NYC service has doubled in just the past year or two -- there used to be just 3X SEA-EWR for a long time, and now it's 4X SEA-EWR + 2X SEA-JFK

Given that UA, DL, B6 and AA are all flying NYC and DCA is heavily controlled, I don't expect additional flights near term, though as noted AS could well put the 321s into DCA and JFK to maximize capacity

CalanMan

Even sooner than that. At least some of the slots revert back to Alaska if the perimeter restrictions are listed, even before the least term is up.

From: https://paxex.aero/2018/04/alaska-ai...al-routes-cut/
No mention of how many "some" is.

eponymous_coward

Not for DCA-SEA (if you're schlepping out to IAD/BWI you probably live closer to them anyway).

If AS isn't getting traction in DAL (and VX surely wasn't), serving LGA/DCA-DAL having DCA/LGA-(random city that isn't DAL)-West Coast isn't going to really work out either, I think. A one stop gives you zero advantage over a carrier with hubs at JFK/LGA/DCA or in the middle of the country like pretty much everyone else.

They already do for DCA/JFK out of pmVX hubs. And they could take more A321s. And those A321s will soon have more seats in them.

Yeah, I dimly recalled this. AS would be crazy not to insist on that language, since those slots turn into gold for them once you can fly more West Coast-LGA/DCA destinations. They would certainly serve DCA/LGA from anyplace they serve BWI/IAD/EWR/JFK from.

WebTraveler

All those Seattle transplants in NY and DC and added a whole bunch of others. We'll never know, but what could have been had Alaska not closed the Virgin America NY pilot base. All those transplants could have helped fuel some expansion out of NY and N. Virginia. Too bad the timing was not different.

sfozrhfco

The point is that Amazon is not adding 50,000 East Coast jobs just to fly them all to Seattle to work. In fact many people that transplanted themselves to SEA are actually from areas East of the rockies. The East Coast positions are to focus on Amazon in the East Coast and other airlines are in a far better position to serve those needs. NY is already a huge city and 25,000 people--many of whom will not be travelling at all for work--is a drop in the bucket. DL/B6/UA/AA all have major operations there while AS has a very minor presence. With 1000s of options on a wide variety of airlines, other airlines will get the bulk of whatever new business comes along and will also be in a much better position to get inroads into Amazon given that their world will no longer revolve around SEA. There will arguably be less need to fly people from SEA to the East Coast given they will have 50,000 people already there. DCA is never going to have the enough slots for AS to get the number of flights they would need to compete with AA/DL and UA obviously is the leader at IAD. Whatever way you slice it, AS is non existent for flights within the Eastern part of the United States and doesn't fly to Europe or Latin America from the East Coast. Aside from a small percentage of people who will be originating on the East Coast and going only to the West Coast, everybody else is going to be better served by UA/DL/AA/B6/WN. Nothing AS can do aside from taking over one of those airlines is going to change that fact.

eponymous_coward

WebTraveler

First of all there are all sorts of possibilities, but none of them are ever going to happen in the short term now. You're right LGA and DCA are slot restricted, but things are a little easier at Newark and open possibilities at IAD and BWI. There's potential growth. All I was ever saying is its too bad one can't consider this now.

That said, take whatever cheap shot at me you want. Shows who you are to attack me rather than focus on the issue to make yourself feel better. And for the record, the issue is and always has been the lack of a domestic partner after the Virgin America purchase. It never, not even once, had anything to do with non-stop flights. It is the fact the last two decades I could largely get anywhere in the country or the world on Alaska or one of its partners. I can't do that anymore post Virgin America purchase. Maybe it was going to happen anyway, at some point, but that's the issue and always has been the issue. Facts do matter rather than made up BS to make yourself feel good and superior. You're not, so best that I let it go at that.

WebTraveler

There will be traffic between the cities and there will be a workforce that is going to see some direction to one or more carriers. Could have been something to build on. That's it. You are way over analyzing it.

eponymous_coward

They have expanded at EWR/IAD/BWI to hubs and focus cities (they do or will serve LAX-BWI and SJC-EWR, for instance), but if you're saying they needed to be expanding on the other coast based on a pmVX pilot base and trying for EWR/IAD/BWI focus cities that serve non-AS hubs/focus cities, I still don't think it makes any more sense than what they are doing in California, for the same reasons: Alaska has natural traffic to SEA/PDX from California (a number of multiple dailies) to build focus cities and hubs on that it doesn't have on the East Coast. Any expansion midcon or East Coast is WAY down the pike, once they have taken care of other business. California is a much more logical expansion market than jamming themselves into places where the operations are by necessity smaller because instead of 4-6xSEA/2-3xPDX it's maybe 1-2xSEA and maybe 1-0xPDX.

You can still, though. You can even do it on an Alaska ticket domestically using AA. What you don't get is EQM/RDM if it's on AA inside of the United States.

If maybe it was going to happen anyway, then blaming the VX purchase for this development doesn't make a lot of sense. Subsisting on the crumbs that fall from DL's and AA's tables, maxing out SEA/PDX/ANC and nibbling around the edges in California wasn't going to last forever at delivering growth for a company that wants to deliver growth to shareholders (SEA's jam packed and bursting at the seams right now, and that has almost nothing to do with VX). Maybe blame that.

Flying for Fun

Unless, of course, it is a code-share flight that is AS Marketed and AA operated. I just booked AS6543 PHX-SJC. Full EQM/RDM (621/1397) & Alaska Baggage allowance. Booking with AA the price is $27 less but didn't include baggage. AA EQM/RDM 621/415 while EQD is $83.

James

eponymous_coward

Correct, that does work. I probably should have qualified it like that. AS from about 2010 to 2017ish was a unicorn: accrue on a bunch of domestic and foreign airlines, spend on a bunch of airlines. Switzerland style "we love everyone" doesn't work when the beancounters at other domestic airlines are trying to lock everyone to their own FFP (not Alaska's) or the airlines want to expand in AS hubs, and AS wants their own ability to expand too.