But I thought the point was that BUR and LAX are too close together?

BUR is actually Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena airport, and is managed by a board made up of officials from the three cities.

Local citizens, especially those who live in Burbank directly in the airport's flight paths, are strongly critical of increasing air traffic. There are even special rules for takeoff, so that planes minimize noise. In other words, it's a tough challenge for airlines to increase service out of BUR.

BUR-JFK? probably not . . .

Anyone ever surprised by no BUR-JFK?

Actually, yes. I wake up every morning and I'm surprised all over again that there is still no AA BUR-JFK flight. Nor is there a JFK-BUR one. I'm thinking about starting a petition.

Another thing to keep in mind is that B6 services the route 5 times per day. The entertainment industry executives might like a single flight per day in a premium cabin, but I doubt AA would make much in the economy class market.

There's another important thing you aren't thinking of: just because a lot of studio execs work in Burbank doesn't mean they live there. In fact, I'm guessing very few of them do. Places like Santa Monica, Pacific Palisades, Brentwood, and Bel Air are are as convenient to LAX as BUR, if not more so. Add to that the better amenities at LAX (FL for those paying for first to NY, AC for those forking over for business), and a lot of extra options if one flight (the one flight with the OP's proposal) is delayed or cancelled and you have a strong case for keeping AA's resources largely concentrated at LAX.

There are a lot of reasons why there are no non-stops to NYC from BUR on AA. And yet, I would give an arm to get one. B6 brought the only non-stop daily flight to JFK, and I don't see AA matching that flight for the same reasons that AA left LGB. It actually eroded their premium LAX-JFK traffic and was not a money maker even though loads were high.

Similarly, right before 9/11, DL announced non-stop service to ATL out of BUR. But it never happened immediately for obvious reasons. But they did start flying a few years later. I flew it many titmes and then they pulled it out for the winter, returning in the following spring, only to end the service completely a few months later. A good friend of mine at Delta told me the reason was that the revenue was just not there. The load was running in the mid 70s, which is profitable on most routes, but the revenue sucked. They weren't getting a lot of paid F, nor freight, and mostly T and U fares. I love to fly BUR to DFW and beyond on AA. But the fares are usually higher than flying out of LAX. I do fly BUR, but most of the time, it is out of LAX (on the BNA and EWR non-stops). Adding a flight to compete against B6 would also erode those fares on flights routed through DFW also.

Something else to consider is that because of the short runways, it can limit how many passengers are loaded on a JFK run. B6 frequently makes stops due to the Santa Anas or the heat at BUR. Even to DFW on AA, I have had to make 3 or 4 fuel stops in PHX before. It is not uncommon.

Finally, I would be surprised if the slots exist and BUR is slot controlled and they don't have any more gates to add, so who knows.

i'm not reAAlly surprised.

(deleted: oops I see that JumboD already made my point. Is there any button to remove a post?)

Most of the big entertainment companies have contracts with UA. AA was dominant until a few years ago when they ceased the huge discounts they were offering.

Sony, Fox, Paramount and most of the high profile production companies are in the city. Warners, Disney and Uni/NBC are in the Valley. Disney and Uni do not have as significant operations in NY as the others do. Many of the divisions of WB (such as HBO) are in the city, not on the WB lot. Just doing the math there really isn't a big reason for anyone to shift. And, perhaps more importantly, most of the upper level execs live in the city, whether or not they work in the Valley.

(And just so people know where I am coming from: I have worked for most the companies mentioned, either on staff or freelance, over the last decade or so. And am fairly familiar with their travel contracts and procedures.)

While I consider the idea presented in the OP completely unreasonable, I should point out that your statement isn't entirely accurate: Uni is a small part of a very large comapny whose headquarters is a short drive from JFK.

Yes, but it is a question of how much the execs and production people actually fly back and forth. Uni also has a couple (well, don't quote me on specific numbers) of corporate jets that do fly out of BUR, as do pretty much all the production companies for their top tier execs. These will usually fly into TEB or HPN.

I'd actually been thinking of GE execs, but on second thought, if the Uni execs get to use private jets, I'm guessing their bosses get nicer ones ;).

Don't recall ever hearing about GE execs coming out to check the Uni operations, or vice versa. i am sure it happens, but not a regular enough occurrence to justify a commercial flight. Honestly, the studio heads are not generally flying commercial. The commercial contracts seem to me to be aimed more at capturing the significant amount of production business. Producers, talent and directors are generally guaranteed first or business in their contracts. High level production people below them are generally guaranteed biz. Despite productions fleeing to Canada, Seattle and other locations, the bug US cities are still the most popular. Plus, premiers, meetings, etc...

The BUR-JFK on B6 is *extremely* popular with NBCU folks. I'd be shocked to be on one of those flights and NOT have any NBCU staff on that flight.

Interesting. I'd always sort of wondered how air travel worked on the production side of the biz. Thanks for sharing.