Originally Posted by channa
(Post 30381827)
It's true everywhere, but WN's absence from most GDS systems plus conditioned behavior over the years have East Bay flyers just checking the WN website and calling it a day as opposed to comparison shopping. Just makes it more difficult for someone else to get in.
They'll only look beyond southwest.com if it's a route WN doesn't conveniently serve. Which is why WN adding Hawaii doesn't bode well for AS's Hawaii service. |
Originally Posted by ucdtim17
(Post 30381463)
Yes. If you're going to force everyone to to go SFO, a large portion will just use WN at OAK, and then if you're going to SFO, you have a much larger network with UA and many more options overall to consider.
In the Bay Area: •For infrequent travelers Alaska means bag and change fees vs WN. •For frequent travelers it means change fees, a limited schedule, and no lounge vs UA or WN. Either way not hitting the mark. |
IF the results are poor for AS out of OAK i chalk it up to a self fulfilling prophecy. Example: For years the PDX - OAK route was one of the longest Q400 routes in the system (competing with WN using 737s). Now with better equipment they cut service to twice a day. The reality is that East Bay residents or travelers specifically DON'T want to fly to/from SFO. And the Southwest "experience" leaves a lot to be desired, especially for business travelers. It's been many years since AS actually went all out to serve Oakland (other than on their Hawaii flights). I've found the saturation of flights on multiple airlines from SFO to the Northwest often makes fares from SFO much lower than out of Oakland. So I doubt there is a profit margin issue since the few OAK flights are generally full. Surrendering to WN is bad sign for Alaska's long-term success. "Most West Coast" should be changed to "Most West Coast - unless another airline wants to compete with us in which case we run away".
|
There are 2.7 million people who live in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. It's tough to imagine they couldn't make more work with a concerted effort to counter WN's marketing.
|
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 30387816)
There are 2.7 million people who live in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. It's tough to imagine they couldn't make more work with a concerted effort to counter WN's marketing.
|
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward
(Post 30388586)
You mean like how UA, DL and BA have worked for those customers by abandoning routes or the station completely? It isn't that I don't like SFO (save the delays) and without traffic, it is about 10 minutes more travel time than SFO. 10 and 20 and 30 years ago, I had to plan for traffic. What we have now isn't traffic anymore. It is life-ruining eternal congestion. Coming home in the afternoon (including Saturdays) - 2+ hour drive home. 25 miles. No joke. BART? Up to 20 minute wait for a train (then have to change trains) and it is an hour plus on the train and then an UBER/LYFT from the station. This causes business people to fly OAK even if their preferred airlines don't service the airport. |
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 30388703)
BART? Up to 20 minute wait for a train (then have to change trains) and it is an hour plus on the train and then an UBER/LYFT from the station.
|
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 30388703)
They could have, and there's plenty of money to be made here, but no one wants to devote the resources. So we have a de facto monopoly forming @ OAK. You can't operate the shorter hops at minimal frequency and expect your business travelers to stick around.
It isn't that I don't like SFO (save the delays) and without traffic, it is about 10 minutes more travel time than SFO. 10 and 20 and 30 years ago, I had to plan for traffic. What we have now isn't traffic anymore. It is life-ruining eternal congestion. Coming home in the afternoon (including Saturdays) - 2+ hour drive home. 25 miles. No joke. BART? Up to 20 minute wait for a train (then have to change trains) and it is an hour plus on the train and then an UBER/LYFT from the station. This causes business people to fly OAK even if their preferred airlines don't service the airport. Let’s look at what their effectively uncontested hubs are (in that they are top dog and there isn’t a bigger airline fighting for it): DL has ATL, SLC, MSP, DTW. UA has IAH, EWR, SFO, IAD. BA has LHR. WN has MDW, HOU, DAL, OAK, SJC, BAL, SAN* AS has ANC and PDX. * yes, I know, WN doesn’t have hubs. They sure are top dog in those airports though. Go look at those metro populations and tell me who’s got the better position. ”Let’s start a land war in Asia, I mean Oakland, while all but two of our hubs/focus cities are all under attack by a bigger airline (and those are the smallest ones by population, and one is useless for connecting anyone outside the state of Alaska) during a merger” might not be the best strategy. To be honest, AS is arguably MORE aggressive against WN than they have been in the past: they’ve pushed BAL, SJC, SAN. They restarted SJC-AUS after folding it when WN entered. They haven’t completely folded DAL yet (and TBH maybe they should and move everything to DFW, they could pick up some AA connecting traffic that way). I find it hard to give them grief that they pick and choose battles against bigger airlines. But I don’t live in the East Bay. Maybe I’d feel differently if I did. |
Duplicate |
This really sucks for me. I need to get to Contra Costa county and keeps getting harder and harder to do so. WN does not fly anywhere remotely close to my home airport so I am not going to drive 6 hrs to Spokane to fly them, DL has pretty limited frequency and UA moved out of OAK completely years ago.
I obviously do not know the rationale for these reductions there, but with SFO being such a mess so often I would think that OAK would be a really decent alternative. I guess that is what SJC is for? |
Originally Posted by ucdtim17
(Post 30381410)
There is certainly marketing out there. There's the giant Durant billboard facing both terminals at OAK, and similar advertising ("Bring it in, Oakland") throughout BART, even at SFO. Most Ford bike share stations in Oakland are Alaska-branded. AC Transit bus shelters have AS-to-Hawaii advertising now. I doubt there's an airline with more physical advertising out there now. It's just odd to do so much in the east bay, including Oakland-specific advertising, but then not try to leverage with any actual service.
On the other hand, you never see any ads for UA and they fly everywhere, usually many times per day, from SFO. |
Originally Posted by DG206
(Post 30390537)
This really sucks for me. I need to get to Contra Costa county and keeps getting harder and harder to do so.
I'm within an hours drive of all three Bay Area airports, plus Sacramento and Santa Rosa. My preference is always to fly from Sacramento, when the fares or award travel work out, given how easy it is to get in and out of there, providing it's not during commute hours. Have you thought about SMF as an option? If you're dependent on public transportation, though, you don't want to fly from there. |
Originally Posted by tom911
(Post 30392625)
Living just across the bridge from Contra Costa, let me comment.....
I'm within an hours drive of all three Bay Area airports, plus Sacramento and Santa Rosa. My preference is always to fly from Sacramento, when the fares or award travel work out, given how easy it is to get in and out of there, providing it's not during commute hours. Have you thought about SMF as an option? If you're dependent on public transportation, though, you don't want to fly from there. |
Originally Posted by bofc
(Post 30387531)
And the Southwest "experience" leaves a lot to be desired, especially for business travelers.
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 30388703)
It isn't that I don't like SFO (save the delays) and without traffic, it is about 10 minutes more travel time than SFO. 10 and 20 and 30 years ago, I had to plan for traffic. What we have now isn't traffic anymore. It is life-ruining eternal congestion. Coming home in the afternoon (including Saturdays) - 2+ hour drive home. 25 miles. No joke. BART? Up to 20 minute wait for a train (then have to change trains) and it is an hour plus on the train and then an UBER/LYFT from the station.
This causes business people to fly OAK even if their preferred airlines don't service the airport |
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 30393730)
I've come to actively hate flying WN. The slim-lined aircraft are terribly uncomfortable and I've just had too many bad neighbor experiences the past few years.
Yes OAK has a substantial natural advantage if you live in the east bay. In addition to horrific traffic (bay bridge westbound now backs up at 5 am, and as you note, leaving SFO between 2 pm and 7 pm likely means 2 hrs plus to cross the bridge), last BART train departs SFO right before midnight, and after that you're subject to risk of a 3x Uber surge. I've paid $150+ to get to Oakland at 1 a.m. The lineup for the bridge backing up is right outside my window... |
Originally Posted by VegasGambler
(Post 30393761)
You know... cabs still exist :) I take them from time to time when the surge is ridiculous.
|
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 30393730)
I've come to actively hate flying WN. The slim-lined aircraft are terribly uncomfortable and I've just had too many bad neighbor experiences the past few years.
At least WN gives you 32" on every non exit row seat on the 738s and 7M8s. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:16 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.