FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   JetBlue | TrueBlue (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue-492/)
-   -   Route speculation [2011] (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue/1170176-route-speculation-2011-a.html)

sbm12 Jan 9, 2011 10:30 am

Route speculation [2011]
 
Last year's thread was quite entertaining and informative and even got a couple of the predictions correct. Let's see what wild (or reasonable) predictions we can come up with this year and just how many turn out to be accurate.

I'll start with two that are actually noted as routes served on one of the TrueBlue pages but are not actually in the system:
  • SFO-ORD
  • SAN-MCO
Wading into the SFO-ORD mess with AA, UA and potentially VX could be a rough play but there's a lot of business there, too. SAN-MCO seems highly unlikely but they've at least thought about it enough for someone to put it on a list.

PWM 22 Jan 9, 2011 10:35 am

Not an addition, but a subtraction
 
B6 seems to have cut daily non-stop PWM to MCO effective May 2011. It was once a day, and will become Saturday only. Personally, not so happy about this change. :td:

Seat13c Jan 9, 2011 7:27 pm


Originally Posted by sbm12 (Post 15618672)
Last year's thread was quite entertaining and informative and even got a couple of the predictions correct. Let's see what wild (or reasonable) predictions we can come up with this year and just how many turn out to be accurate.

I'll start with two that are actually noted as routes served on one of the TrueBlue pages but are not actually in the system:
  • SFO-ORD
  • SAN-MCO
Wading into the SFO-ORD mess with AA, UA and potentially VX could be a rough play but there's a lot of business there, too. SAN-MCO seems highly unlikely but they've at least thought about it enough for someone to put it on a list.

Either its in the works or a typo... However, SFO-ORD seems a little more possible than SAN-MCO (Is there really a large enough demand for SAN-MCO???). At this point, I would start questioning any route that involve a UA/CO hub b/c of the merger which always shakes out a few newly unhappy PAX.

ByrdluvsAWACO Jan 11, 2011 11:35 pm


Originally Posted by sbm12 (Post 15618672)
  • SFO-ORD

I would think that B6 has more pressing issues than jumping into a meatgrinder against UA, AA, and WN ex-MDW. Both UA and WN would punch B6 on both ends of the route.

ByrdluvsAWACO Jan 11, 2011 11:46 pm

I would like to see some AA-B6 cooperation out of LAX. AA is about to start LAX-PHX, but B6 would be a better candidate on that route with a lower cost structure.

N830MH Jan 12, 2011 12:09 am


Originally Posted by Seat13c (Post 15621790)
Either its in the works or a typo... However, SFO-ORD seems a little more possible than SAN-MCO (Is there really a large enough demand for SAN-MCO???). At this point, I would start questioning any route that involve a UA/CO hub b/c of the merger which always shakes out a few newly unhappy PAX.

According to O&D passengers traffic stats and there is more than 400 dailies passengers traffic through MCO/FLL/MIA-SAN. I'm pretty confident about B6 will eventually to starts new nonstop MCO/FLL-SAN sometimes in the future. It will have a great opportunity to brings more specific new routes MCO/FLL-SAN. That's will be a logical choices.

haddon90 Jan 12, 2011 4:23 pm

being leisure markets...i can't see SAN-anwhere in fla. maybe FLL, but i don't think there's enough O&D for that route to sustain itself.

Seat13c Jan 12, 2011 10:11 pm


Originally Posted by N830MH (Post 15639778)
According to O&D passengers traffic stats and there is more than 400 dailies passengers traffic through MCO/FLL/MIA-SAN. I'm pretty confident about B6 will eventually to starts new nonstop MCO/FLL-SAN sometimes in the future. It will have a great opportunity to brings more specific new routes MCO/FLL-SAN. That's will be a logical choices.

400 PAX per day to FLL, MIA, and MCO? Sorry... That's not much of a market.
400 to each? That's barely enough to warrent trying one transcon flight per day. You would need those PAX to pay a premium to make it work which it wouldn't. Not to mention, you'd be tying up one aircraft for the entire day to do one round trip.

Either way, there are bigger fish to fry.

N830MH Jan 12, 2011 10:55 pm


Originally Posted by Seat13c (Post 15647457)
400 PAX per day to FLL, MIA, and MCO? Sorry... That's not much of a market.
400 to each? That's barely enough to warrent trying one transcon flight per day. You would need those PAX to pay a premium to make it work which it wouldn't. Not to mention, you'd be tying up one aircraft for the entire day to do one round trip.

Either way, there are bigger fish to fry.

Actually, I think there is more than 2 daily R/T is good enough for now. They should have enough more demands. There is good possible lots of navy people who likely go to SAN for everyday. I knows it will have a great opportunity for B6, NK, DL will announced it to brings new nonstop FLL/MCO-SAN. There is no payload restrictons the entire A320/A319 aircraft can handle enough the range.

Seat13c Jan 13, 2011 7:17 pm


Originally Posted by N830MH (Post 15647677)
Actually, I think there is more than 2 daily R/T is good enough for now. They should have enough more demands. There is good possible lots of navy people who likely go to SAN for everyday. I knows it will have a great opportunity for B6, NK, DL will announced it to brings new nonstop FLL/MCO-SAN. There is no payload restrictons the entire A320/A319 aircraft can handle enough the range.

Let's say it is 400 PAX for SAN-FLL and SAN-MCO each. B6 would need to carry 1/3 of the total traffic to minimally have a good enough load factor for route on a 1X frequency basis. Make it a 2X daily to each station and you would need it to be 70% of the daily PAX for each of the city pair for a decent load factor. Now the real question would be what kind of fare would be required to make it profitable and good enough deal to attract people away from CO, AA, and other carriers serving these PAX.

Dieuwer Jan 16, 2011 7:16 pm

Is there any demand for cargo between SAN-FLL/MCO? Maybe you can make it work with pax + cargo.

AdamSouthFL Jan 17, 2011 10:13 pm

I'll say FLL-ORD

I wonder if B6 will continue expansion in S.A. Seems funny to have one flight to BOG.

FLL-SJO would be nice too.

Heck, I predict B6 will buy NK.

N830MH Jan 17, 2011 10:39 pm


Originally Posted by AdamSouthFL (Post 15679617)
I'll say FLL-ORD

I wonder if B6 will continue expansion in S.A. Seems funny to have one flight to BOG.

FLL-SJO would be nice too.

Heck, I predict B6 will buy NK.

I'd says Where B6 will started new routes FLL-PTY/MGA/SAL/LIR/SJD/PVR/ZIH/MZT.

rrz518 Jan 28, 2011 6:55 pm

Why oh why?
 
Cleveland, Detroit, or CAK???????? So many people in those areas longing to be served by a good carrier other than WN

N830MH Jan 28, 2011 10:09 pm


Originally Posted by rrz518 (Post 15757503)
Cleveland, Detroit, or CAK???????? So many people in those areas longing to be served by a good carrier other than WN

It'll will work! I think it will have consider to brings more specific new routes CLE/CAK/DTW-FLL I think it will have enough more O&D passengers traffic. It will guaranteed B6 will have to announced it sometimes in the future. Why not B6 will reinstating back in CMH? I thought B6 didn't workout very well for a last time due to low demands. I wasn't sure if B6 will ever reinstating to BNA or CMH sometimes in the future.

How about B6 will ever considered to brings more new routes LEX/SDF/TRI/TYS/CHA-FLL?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:08 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.