FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   JetBlue | TrueBlue (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue-492/)
-   -   LAX--New focus city (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue/2021288-lax-new-focus-city.html)

sfozrhfco Jul 9, 20 11:23 am

LAX--New focus city
 
https://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...Strategy-Lands

"NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--JetBlue (NASDAQ: JBLU) today announced it will make Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) its primary base of operations in greater Los Angeles, advancing its focus city strategy and building relevance for the airline in one of the busiest markets in the world. To enable the shift, the airline will move service currently operated at Long Beach Airport (LGB) to LAX, along with its Long Beach crew and maintenance bases, beginning in October.

With support from Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA), JetBlue plans to embark on a strategic expansion over the next five years with plans to reach roughly 70 flights per day by 2025. This will include multiple new markets, both domestic and international, some of which have never had nonstop service to and from LAX."

Great to see some growth on the West Coast and finally moving to an airport where they can actually grow.

wifiguru Jul 9, 20 11:31 am

Yep, just got an email saying they are getting rid of LGB service. Wonder who's taking their old slots.
"https://static.cdn.responsys.net/i5/...ges/spacer.gif
Hello, wifiguru,

We hope you and your loved ones are safe and well, and we can't wait to see you on board again when the time is right. In the meantime, we want to give you a heads-up about some changes we are making to our route network in Southern California.

After careful consideration, as of 10/7/2020, we will be moving our scheduled Long Beach (LGB) flights to LAX*. We have proudly served LGB for many years, so no longer offering service has been a difficult decision.

However, our commitment to Southern California remains strong, and we are delighted that our LAX service will increase to 30+ flights daily, including both New York (JFK) and Newark in the New York City area, Boston, Fort Lauderdale, Orlando, Austin, Buffalo, plus destinations in the West including San Francisco, Las Vegas, Seattle, Reno/Tahoe, Salt Lake City, and seasonal service to Bozeman. You'll also have more Mint service from LAX, with new service to Newark, as well as continuing to serve New York (JFK), Boston and Fort Lauderdale.

In addition to our increases at LAX, nonstop service will continue at Ontario (ONT), Burbank (BUR) and San Diego (SAN), as well as our seasonal service to Palm Springs (PSP).

As you're probably aware, our route network and the cities we serve are driven by customer demand, airport considerations, and scheduling needs, among other factors. We always strive to provide the best service and schedules for our customers, which requires constant re-evaluation on how best to serve you. We look forward to continuing to serve you at one of our Southern California area airports.

Thanks, as always, for being a valued TrueBlue member.

Here's to blue skies ahead,
"

tphuang Jul 9, 20 11:51 am

I mean it was obvious that they were going to do this once legacies start shrinking at LAX. I'm still surprised they are getting enough gates at LAX to be able to grow to 70+ flights. We will see where that comes from. I had estimated they will grow LAX into a 50 flight station. This is beyond my expectations. The byproduct is that Florida will have to wait and BOS plans will slow down too.

In a couple of year, you will probably be able to finally fly JetBlue from Northeast to PVR/SJD via LAX.

GW McLintock Jul 9, 20 12:59 pm

This was a long time coming, we just didn't know the exact date. Overall it is good news. They will no longer be under the restrictive environment of LGB with regard to slot usage, curfews, and aircraft performance. On the other hand, the biggest losers here are passengers. I for one loved the convenience and simplicity of LGB, and this will make going to the Long Beach area a lot more difficult.

My heart goes out to the employees who work at the airport. I wish them the best of luck during this transition.

-J.

sbm12 Jul 9, 20 1:34 pm


Originally Posted by tphuang (Post 32519796)
In a couple of year, you will probably be able to finally fly JetBlue from Northeast to PVR/SJD via LAX.

The destinations tipped during the internal staff briefing were beyond Mexico, though the Mexican beach destinations remain possible, just not as likely. Too much competition on those routes anyways. And JetBlue seems to prefer VFR traffic over vacation where it can make the numbers work. A bit more consistent flow, I'd assume, and less price sensitive.

(Link to my story; you've been warned per FT rules)

ianmanka Jul 9, 20 1:55 pm

Perhaps their uptick in flights at LAX is a combination of additional gates becoming available at the TBIT mid-concourse and legacies drawing down service?

sbm12 Jul 9, 20 2:27 pm


Originally Posted by ianmanka (Post 32520146)
Perhaps their uptick in flights at LAX is a combination of additional gates becoming available at the TBIT mid-concourse and legacies drawing down service?

If it is tied to the mid-field concourse it will be because other airlines move out there, per the internal briefing this afternoon. JetBlue has no interest in moving out of T5 at this point.

uclacolumbiaunc Jul 9, 20 5:29 pm

Why not move to SNA if the main reasons they left LGB are because of curfew restriction and lack of international processing facility?

Going into LAX when there are already crowded with major airlines is a bone-head move, IMO. Plus traveler will complain the increasing car traffic.

GW McLintock Jul 9, 20 5:35 pm


Originally Posted by uclacolumbiaunc (Post 32520537)
Why not move to SNA if the main reasons they left LGB are because of curfew restriction and lack of international processing facility?

Going into LAX when there are already crowded with major airlines is a bone-head move, IMO. Plus traveler will complain the increasing car traffic.

JetBlue does not fly to SNA, and WN would present enormous competition by scale. At LAX with AA downsizing there is an opportunity, not to mention they already have operations at LAX.

-J.

buckeyefanflyer Jul 9, 20 6:01 pm

Dumb move. LAX to congested people and air traffic. With the virus need to spread people out create more hubs and this moves goes in the wrong direction.

ACCDraw Jul 9, 20 6:40 pm


Originally Posted by uclacolumbiaunc (Post 32520537)
Why not move to SNA if the main reasons they left LGB are because of curfew restriction and lack of international processing facility?

Going into LAX when there are already crowded with major airlines is a bone-head move, IMO. Plus traveler will complain the increasing car traffic.


downinit Jul 9, 20 6:48 pm

This is 100% due to the NIMBY's in Long Beach who complained to city hall about how terrible it would be to open up a customs facility at LGB. It would have added jobs and revenue to the airport and city, and would not have had any impact to the number of flights or time of the flights. However, the squeaky wheel gets the grease...even though the wheel is usually squeaking because it is broken and in need of replacement.

GW McLintock Jul 9, 20 7:11 pm


Originally Posted by downinit (Post 32520642)
This is 100% due to the NIMBY's in Long Beach who complained to city hall about how terrible it would be to open up a customs facility at LGB. It would have added jobs and revenue to the airport and city, and would not have had any impact to the number of flights or time of the flights. However, the squeaky wheel gets the grease...even though the wheel is usually squeaking because it is broken and in need of replacement.

I say 90%. It was also at least 10% the city council who would not stand up for themselves and will now have to explain why their airport suddenly lost half its jobs and has no flights to anyplace meaningful. The entire thing is just a mess.

I do understand that JetBlue didn't exactly treat them well. They underutilized slots, blew the curfew (sometimes multiple times a day)... it was almost like a game of chicken. And now everyone loses.

-J.

tphuang Jul 9, 20 7:17 pm


Originally Posted by sbm12 (Post 32520098)
The destinations tipped during the internal staff briefing were beyond Mexico, though the Mexican beach destinations remain possible, just not as likely. Too much competition on those routes anyways. And JetBlue seems to prefer VFR traffic over vacation where it can make the numbers work. A bit more consistent flow, I'd assume, and less price sensitive.

(Link to my story; you've been warned per FT rules)

Wait, was that last part aim at me? I certainly did not need your post to guess pvr and sjd as where they will fly to. I wrote my post before I saw your story. That's for sure.

If that was aimed at me, you should apologize, because you are completely wrong.

bpe Jul 9, 20 7:34 pm


Originally Posted by GW McLintock (Post 32520685)
I do understand that JetBlue didn't exactly treat them well. They underutilized slots, blew the curfew (sometimes multiple times a day)... it was almost like a game of chicken. And now everyone loses.

How were fares and yields from LGB? If they can get better fares from LAX, especially on transcon flights, then it's probably a win for JetBlue in the medium to long term. No longer having to worry about the curfew is a bonus, although it's not like they were violating the curfew just for the fun of it, and the low slot utilization suggests low yields, as it was better for them to prevent someone else from adding a flight rather than adding one themselves.

What will be more telling is if Southwest adds flights (if they see that there is money in LGB) or if they pull back (if they were just competing with JetBlue).


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:44 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.