West coast strategy for JetBlue

Old Nov 20, 2017, 1:42 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: NYC
Programs: Marriott Platinum, JetBlue Mosaic, Hilton Silver
Posts: 711
I've flown on many routes out of LGB (JFK, SEA, PDX) and all are almost always full or close to full. I haven't flown to Vegas or SFO but would if I had to. I think LGB serves a need for more leisure travelers. Lots of Disneyland travelers will fly through LGB versus LAX--I've seen both transcon and West Coast travelers do this. But at the same time I also see a lot of business travelers going through LGB based on the Mosaics boarding flights.

I have flown through BUR too and think it's incomparable to LGB. It's much older and has nowhere near as much waiting area space as LGB does. I also think LGB is more geographically centralized and easy to get to locally. BUR is good for folks in the Hollywood area--I know of several actors who commute on this route from JFK.

My opinion would be for them to keep a presence at both airports as I think they serve different markets. I would also be open to them doing a cost/benefit analysis to the cost of setting up an E190 base at LGB for the underperforming A320 routes.
RWPrincess is offline  
Old Nov 20, 2017, 2:33 pm
  #17  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by RWPrincess
I've flown on many routes out of LGB (JFK, SEA, PDX) and all are almost always full or close to full.
But the yields suck so the company isn't necessarily making much money on those flights. Full isn't always profitable.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Nov 21, 2017, 7:57 am
  #18  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,587
I would be sad to see jetBlue leave the intra-California market. For almost a decade they have been setting low prices that Southwest has quietly matched. I subscribe to jetBlue's fare sale emails for exactly that purpose.

jetBlue's low fares have saved me thousands of dollars flying Southwest from LAX. Currently there's a market share war between Southwest and Alaska/VX, but I'm pretty sure Southwest will jack up their fares when that fight ends.

Edited to add: Interesting article, Seth. Long Beach residents will regret their mistreatment of jetBlue after jetBlue leaves town and everyone has to drive to LAX or Orange County.
ptownca likes this.
nsx is offline  
Old Nov 21, 2017, 1:24 pm
  #19  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by nsx
jetBlue's low fares have saved me thousands of dollars flying Southwest from LAX.
Surely you can imagine that this isn't a great solution for JetBlue though, right??
sbm12 is offline  
Old Nov 24, 2017, 9:08 pm
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,628
If they're gonna go LGB-ski resorts, then for the love of God, go LGB-DEN.
DenverBrian is offline  
Old Nov 25, 2017, 4:23 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: LAS
Posts: 1,525
You all realize JetBlue for years now only has one flight a day out of BUR (to/from JFK)? The rest of their routs have gone the way of the Dodo Bird. They used to have two flights a day to JFK and one flight to LAS. And, before they used to fly to MCO and it was either BOS or DC-area once a day. Those flights didn't work out for them either. Why would they expand at BUR with a track record like that? I'd be very surprised if JetBlue expands service at BUR.

Last edited by NextTrip; Nov 25, 2017 at 4:32 pm
NextTrip is offline  
Old Nov 25, 2017, 8:12 pm
  #22  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,485
Originally Posted by NextTrip
You all realize JetBlue for years now only has one flight a day out of BUR (to/from JFK)? The rest of their routs have gone the way of the Dodo Bird. They used to have two flights a day to JFK and one flight to LAS. And, before they used to fly to MCO and it was either BOS or DC-area once a day. Those flights didn't work out for them either. Why would they expand at BUR with a track record like that? I'd be very surprised if JetBlue expands service at BUR.
It doesn't make sense to split up operation across 2 secondary LA area airport given B6 size in West coast. LGB made sense when B6 controlled all the slots and was trying to get FIS built there. Now that WN entering LGB has killed profits B6 there and they get fined $6000 for each broken curfew. BUR has a couple of things going for it now that it didn't before:
1) LAX is one of their most profitable stations given mint success. The area between LAX and BUR are where a lot of money is. People that achieved mosaic status through all the mint flying are most likely around there rather than at long beach.
2) While there are nimby's around BUR, B6 can run a smaller operation than at LGB without worrying about WN taking slots and getting fined for breaking curfew.
3) JetSuiteX has moved into BUR and is providing a great service with growing network. Given B6 relationship with JetSuiteX, this is a great way to promote each other
tphuang is offline  
Old Nov 25, 2017, 11:02 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: LAS
Posts: 1,525
Originally Posted by tphuang
It doesn't make sense to split up operation across 2 secondary LA area airport given B6 size in West coast. LGB made sense when B6 controlled all the slots and was trying to get FIS built there. Now that WN entering LGB has killed profits B6 there and they get fined $6000 for each broken curfew. BUR has a couple of things going for it now that it didn't before:
1) LAX is one of their most profitable stations given mint success. The area between LAX and BUR are where a lot of money is. People that achieved mosaic status through all the mint flying are most likely around there rather than at long beach.
2) While there are nimby's around BUR, B6 can run a smaller operation than at LGB without worrying about WN taking slots and getting fined for breaking curfew.
3) JetSuiteX has moved into BUR and is providing a great service with growing network. Given B6 relationship with JetSuiteX, this is a great way to promote each other
I still don't see B6 expanding there.
Could you explain how a relationship between JetSuiteX and JetBlue would do anything to promote each other. I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means.
Besides, doesn't BUR have a 10pm curfew.
NextTrip is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 5:51 am
  #24  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by tphuang
1) LAX is one of their most profitable stations given mint success.
Launching significant intra-California service is a great way to change that.

Originally Posted by tphuang
2) While there are nimby's around BUR, B6 can run a smaller operation than at LGB without worrying about WN taking slots and getting fined for breaking curfew.
WN has a significant operation at BUR already. I count approximately 60 departures scheduled for 26 Nov. How is JetBlue advantaged competing against that versus the handful of WN flights at LGB today??
sbm12 is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 10:56 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: B6 Mosaic, Bonvoy LT Titanium (x SPG LT), IHG Spire, UA Silver
Posts: 5,834
Originally Posted by NextTrip
I still don't see B6 expanding there.
Could you explain how a relationship between JetSuiteX and JetBlue would do anything to promote each other. I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means.
Besides, doesn't BUR have a 10pm curfew.

1. It is a low risk way for jetBlue to ente/test out a market with very little investment.
2. It gives Jetblue loyal passengers another option while still earning TrueBlue points
3. At certain times of day depending on where your final destination is, LGB or BUR could be more convenient and traffic a lot less horrific.

With the new new service from Oakland to BUR, I can take B6 from SFO to LGB on a Friday night when it is reasonably easy to get to the LAX area or the Westside with Uber/Lyft. On a Sunday coming back, jetsuitex from Burbank is more convenient. Instead of taking VX,WN, UA etc from the mess that is LAX, I can now return from Burbank or LGB depending on where in the LA area I am.

Obviously at at this point the jetsuiteX schedule is limited but with the addition of SJC and OAK, I have two upcoming trips that would have been on VX, that are now one way on B6 and one way on jetsuiteX. If more service were added from OAK/SJC I would definitely take them more. There are lots of possibilities for incremental adds over time- especially given gate constraints at SFO/LAX for the next couple years. Building up a base of loyal flyers will help once B6 do have the gate space to expand at LAX/SFO.
sfozrhfco is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 2:42 pm
  #26  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,485
Here is an interview with Alex Wilcox on JetSuite https://skift.com/2017/05/16/ceo-int...to-the-masses/

You can see the part on cooperation with JetBlue in there.
I think JetSuiteX has been getting great reviews from people that have flown on them, but just not enough people know about them. If JetSuiteX becomes more successful on these intra-california route, I could see greater cooperation bw B6 and them so that someone can fly these shorter routes (to non-SFO destinations) on JetSuiteX and other places on B6. And that will make B6 and TrueBlue program more attractive to someone living in the West Coast. Especially since both JetSuiteX and mint attract the higher yielding types.
tphuang is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 5:41 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: FAT
Programs: AA LT GLD, AS 75K, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 181
Originally Posted by sbm12
Launching significant intra-California service is a great way to change that.
Would love to see B6 service at FAT
FightOnFlyer is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 6:05 pm
  #28  
ryw
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATL
Programs: DL GM, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,238
Originally Posted by sbm12
Launching significant intra-California service is a great way to change that.
I'd love to see that personally. Of course they'd be competing with Southwest and Alaska, so not sure how much of a winning proposition that is, especially given their partnership with JetSuite X which I believe already flies several intra-CA routes from BUR. But given that they already have a presence at major CA airports (LAX, LGB, BUR, SFO, OAK, SJC, SMF, SAN, PSP), but few flights between pairs that don't include LGB, one might imagine that they could provide more intra-CA options given adequate gate space and planes. I wonder if any of those routes might be contenders for E190s.
ryw is offline  
Old Nov 26, 2017, 7:01 pm
  #29  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by FightOnFlyer
Would love to see B6 service at FAT
Originally Posted by ryw
I'd love to see that personally.
Y'all realize that the "change" I was describing there was from having a profitable LAX operation to one that is not profitable by growing on intra-California routes, right??

Originally Posted by ryw
few flights between pairs that don't include LGB, one might imagine that they could provide more intra-CA options given adequate gate space and planes. I wonder if any of those routes might be contenders for E190s.
Operating those routes would be a blood bath. Even if the planes were free it would be a very, very challenging market.

And the west coast stuff was E90 for a while. It was an operational nightmare. Part of that was because the E90s were a total mess early on (compared to the only mostly mess today). But also because there wasn't a good way to rotate them through the operation on the east coast, reducing utilization and flexibility.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Nov 27, 2017, 12:45 am
  #30  
ryw
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATL
Programs: DL GM, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,238
Originally Posted by sbm12
Y'all realize that the "change" I was describing there was from having a profitable LAX operation to one that is not profitable by growing on intra-California routes, right??
Whoops I see it now. But I'm also under no illusion - the intra-CA routes I'd like B6 to operate for my benefit are likely to hemmorage money and will probably never happen. More realistically I'd be interested to see how B6 develops their LAX strategy and if the partnership with Jetsuite at BUR develops further.

Like nsx posted upthread I've also befitted on WN as a passenger due to the B6 competition on SFO/OAK-LGB routes. Recently I've had much more transcon flights than usual and I've come to really enjoy and value the B6 product. Unfortunately for me, most of my travel next year is looking like intra-CA which likely means shifting a lot of my travel back to WN next year.
ryw 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.