Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > JetBlue | TrueBlue
Reload this Page >

Long Beach Rejects LGB Customs Facility Proposal

Long Beach Rejects LGB Customs Facility Proposal

Old Jan 26, 2017, 1:14 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SMF
Posts: 1,251
Long Beach Rejects LGB Customs Facility Proposal

Long Beach just voted against any further consideration of constructing a customs facility at LGB to allow B6 (and other airlines) to operate international flights. Since this was part of JetBlue's long term plans, it will be interesting to see how they respond, and if they begin to cut back service.

I would be very disappointed to see JetBlue start to withdraw, but it seems their hand may be forced.

Cranky did a great write-up about their decision: http://crankyflier.com/2017/01/26/lo...-jetblue-walk/
Big4Flyer is offline  
Old Jan 26, 2017, 1:47 pm
  #2  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Programs: SkyMiles, AAdvantage, TrueBlue, Rapid Rewards, Global Entry
Posts: 204
The NIMBY's (to use a polite phrase) of LGB strike again. JetBlue in all honesty would be wise to keep a couple flights out of LGB but move the majority of the operations to SNA/ONT/LAX.
Super80Fan is offline  
Old Jan 26, 2017, 2:26 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Cape Cod
Programs: Free agent
Posts: 1,535
This is terrible news. LGB is one of my favorite facilities in the US.
MSYtoJFKagain is offline  
Old Jan 26, 2017, 6:36 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,485
on the earning call today, they did say that they are looking into route cuts. Seeing how low some of those fares out of LGB are, good place for some quick cuts.
tphuang is offline  
Old Jan 26, 2017, 9:51 pm
  #5  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SMF
Posts: 1,251
Originally Posted by MSYtoJFKagain
This is terrible news. LGB is one of my favorite facilities in the US.
Same here, anytime I need to go to the LA basin, it always makes so much more sense to fly into LGB given the low fares and the ease of the airport. How many airports are there in California when you can consistently arrive at the airport 30 minutes before your flight and go from curb to the gate in 2 minutes.

That being said, I wouldn't blame B6 for leaving or scaling back at all. They've put so much into the airport and community there and just got burned. Unfortunately there's nowhere they could create a hub that has the slots available that they have at LGB. Maybe we'll see them do more point to point flying and abandon the west coast hub idea completely.
Big4Flyer is offline  
Old Jan 27, 2017, 12:21 pm
  #6  
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: Flying Blue Platinum, JetBlue Mosaic, Hyatt Globalist, Alaska MVP Gold.
Posts: 1,962
I hope B6 'rewards' them in kind with abandoning the airport. What a silly decision on LGB's part.
caliform is offline  
Old Jan 27, 2017, 4:06 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 1,032
I smell WN...
radiowell is offline  
Old Jan 30, 2017, 9:22 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Cape Cod
Programs: Free agent
Posts: 1,535
Originally Posted by Big4Flyer
Same here, anytime I need to go to the LA basin, it always makes so much more sense to fly into LGB given the low fares and the ease of the airport. How many airports are there in California when you can consistently arrive at the airport 30 minutes before your flight and go from curb to the gate in 2 minutes.

That being said, I wouldn't blame B6 for leaving or scaling back at all. They've put so much into the airport and community there and just got burned. Unfortunately there's nowhere they could create a hub that has the slots available that they have at LGB. Maybe we'll see them do more point to point flying and abandon the west coast hub idea completely.
I hope they don't abandon LGB. Flying into LAX gives me the willies.
MSYtoJFKagain is offline  
Old Jan 30, 2017, 6:14 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: GE
Posts: 247
It is a shame that the application for FIS was denied but closing down ops in LGB because of that would just be sour grapes. LGB is an outstanding facility post-renovation and an excellent west-coast hub for B6.

Honestly if B6 slows or stops servicing LGB then I will probably switch airlines. They would need massive upgrades at LAX to compete there and SNA/ONT are nonstarters given how far away they are.
bbtrvl is offline  
Old Jan 30, 2017, 6:37 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by bbtrvl
It is a shame that the application for FIS was denied but closing down ops in LGB because of that would just be sour grapes. LGB is an outstanding facility post-renovation and an excellent west-coast hub for B6.

Honestly if B6 slows or stops servicing LGB then I will probably switch airlines. They would need massive upgrades at LAX to compete there and SNA/ONT are nonstarters given how far away they are.
Far away from whom? Not I. Would welcome more JetBlue flights from both SNA and ONT. Could put a lid on the fares to Vegas. SoWest is the only airline to have direct Vegas flights out of SNA and ONT. Love to see that from JetBlue.
wetsand is offline  
Old Jan 30, 2017, 6:54 pm
  #11  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
B6 cannot really grow more at LGB so the only way to increase the value of the operation is to get higher yielding fares. That's where the Mexico service was going to play a role. Without that the company is flying a bunch of intra-California stuff mostly at fares too low to be a good use of resources.

I love the terminal there and hope JetBlue comes up with a way to make it work. But without the ability to expand or to grow yields it is hard to see what the future is.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Jan 30, 2017, 10:42 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: GE
Posts: 247
Originally Posted by wetsand
Far away from whom? Not I. Would welcome more JetBlue flights from both SNA and ONT. Could put a lid on the fares to Vegas. SoWest is the only airline to have direct Vegas flights out of SNA and ONT. Love to see that from JetBlue.
Of course, far is relative, especially in Southern California. If you're going to the OC then SNA is perfect. But if your business is in LA proper, such as on the west side, beach cities/Inglewood, or downtown, then SNA or ONT is 15-20 miles further away. Even LGB is a stretch when LAX is so close.

At some point the convenience & comfort factor tilts back to LAX, which is unfortunate as LAX is neither.

I admit, it totally depends on where you are and how far you're willing to drive. Since we're talking Mexico, I know plenty of people who will drive all the way to TIJ to fly Volaris domestic.

Originally Posted by sbm12
B6 cannot really grow more at LGB so the only way to increase the value of the operation is to get higher yielding fares. That's where the Mexico service was going to play a role. Without that the company is flying a bunch of intra-California stuff mostly at fares too low to be a good use of resources.

I love the terminal there and hope JetBlue comes up with a way to make it work. But without the ability to expand or to grow yields it is hard to see what the future is.
I would love higher value service out of LGB. The terminal is a beauty. I started flying in and out of LGB years ago when the "terminal" was a shack (still was better then, than T3 @ LAX is today)

Don't get me wrong, I like the regional destinations too, but given the limited number of takeoffs from LGB I'm surprised there's not more long-hauls. B6 used to go to ORD and IAD and AA to DFW. There's only one daily to BOS. Not even a whiff of a possibility of BNA (not wanting to challenge WN?).

I'm not familiar with the LGB noise restrictions but I was cautiously optimistic that eventual adoption of the A321neo could mean significant passenger volume growth @LGB (if not more routes) within the same noise envelope.
bbtrvl is offline  
Old Jan 31, 2017, 6:21 am
  #13  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by bbtrvl
I'm not familiar with the LGB noise restrictions but I was cautiously optimistic that eventual adoption of the A321neo could mean significant passenger volume growth @LGB (if not more routes) within the same noise envelope.
I believe that's viable. But selling even more seats in the same low-yield markets seems unlikely to improve the economics of such sufficiently.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Feb 3, 2017, 10:40 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,044
Originally Posted by Big4Flyer
Same here, anytime I need to go to the LA basin, it always makes so much more sense to fly into LGB given the low fares and the ease of the airport. How many airports are there in California when you can consistently arrive at the airport 30 minutes before your flight and go from curb to the gate in 2 minutes.
quite a few, actually. BUR, ONT, SNA i've been curb to gate in a few minutes
haddon90 is offline  
Old Feb 3, 2017, 11:24 am
  #15  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SMF
Posts: 1,251
Originally Posted by haddon90
quite a few, actually. BUR, ONT, SNA i've been curb to gate in a few minutes
Sure, I've flown through each of these, but still maintain that LGB has the best and simplest passenger experience. Depending on where your gate is you can have quite a walk at SNA, and BUR needs an update. I'm also a sucker for boarding plans without a jet bridge, and while you do the same at BUR, you don't get the same fantastic views of the ramp that you do at LGB.
Big4Flyer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.