Sticking it to ISP passengers
 

Ever since WN began flights from LGA, it has been making travel increasingly tough for would-be ISP passengers going out west. The most egregious example is their decision to eliminate ISP-LAS routing this spring, except on Saturdays. (This was after ISP-LAS flights were placed on the schedule). I was told by the customer service department that this was a marketing decision. Don't the marketing geniuses realize that, without an ISP option, Long Islanders will choose to go nonstop JFK-LAS on Delta or Jet Blue rather than flying LGA-LAS with one stop on WN?

Are AA / UA / DL "sticking it " to ISP passengers too by not offering the options you want?

Except for AA many years ago, the legacy airlines have never had a major presence at ISP. And when a WN flight goes from ISP-BWI and a second flight, 90 minutes later, goes nonstop BWI-LAS but WN will not sell that route in favor of LGA-LAS one-stop routes, they are indeed sticking it to ISP passengers IMHO.

What does that even mean? The airline harbors some sort of personal animus towards Long Islanders?

Wow, Southwest runs five of the six scheduled routes out of ISP. That's hardly "sticking it". You will have a lot of trouble finding a comparable airport the size of ISP that is convenient to fly transcon in (outside of NK/F9 routes).

And the marketing people don't make the business calls.

That is interesting that it's not selling ISP-BWI-LAS. I think it has more to do with WN wanting to keep fares very low with ample number of seats on BWI-LAS for BWI originating pax, as it tries to push out/make life hard for Spirit that is operating the route, moreso than making ISP pax take a LGA based connection. It is selling BWI-LAS for $99 WGA on many days.

Not for nothin' but do you really need another thread on this?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/south...ing-route.html

Another note on the OPs comments, it looks like this only impacts flights to LAS and not all of the West coast. I'm seeing a TON of 1 stop connections ISP-BWI-ZZZ to the west coast and for decent fares.

For LAS, as described in the other threads, you are just going to have to book round trips ISP-BWI-LAS

Considering that WN has one-stop or non-stop flights to LAS from virtually every other east coast airport, and has a schedule that could easily accommodate ISP-LAS passengers with one stop and a plane change at BWI , ISP passengers who are banned from flying that route are getting no LUV from WN. But perhaps it is a marketing ploy to accommodate BWI-LAS passengers in the wake of competition from Spirit, as rtalk25 suggested.

I wonder if somebody booked an ISP-BWI flight and BWI-LAS flight as separate itineries but workable with a 1 hour- 3.5 hour layover. Then, is it possible for the pax to then call a WN agent to combine this an itinery to allow for the checked bag to transfer, and to also protect oneself in case of IRROPs? I know in case of IRROPs, WN agents are able to route pax in ways that are not always salable.

I also noticed it's not selling PWM-LAS (via BWI) and no BOS-BWI-LAS either.

It is a little odd that the strategy is to not push through many connections on the BWI end for the BWI-LAS flight while instead selling a lot of low fares to just make it difficult for Spirit. Spirit seems to be growing in BWI, despite WN's fare matching actions.

I'd think WN would make more revenue selling an ISP-BWI-LAS and other east city-BWI-LAS flight than keeping many $94/5,144 point redemption BWI-LAS seats. But, maybe some low fares can be a loss leader where WN wants to stimulate additional interest in the WAS market to encourage WAS pax to fly WN often from all 3 airports and use points easily.

Connections might not be pushed through the LAS end from BWI originating flights either. One thing that I notice is there doesn't seem to be BWI-LAS-LAX/SNA/SAN that is being sold. I didn't try the other airports.

I also noticed awhile back that it was was cheaper booking BWI-LAS and LAS-PHX as two separate itineries rather than BWI-PHX (nonstop or connection) A hidden city itinery from BWI to PHX is BWI-PHX-LAS where those fares are discounted deeply over other BWI-PHX options.

If you have been flying them exclusively, from day one, when they came to town in 1999, see the huge 8 gate terminal they built for themselves and realize what service has Devolved to (pun intended), you would feel this way, rationally or not... ;)

Don't know why ISP can't attract or keep the other carriers. They've had & lost hub service over the years to ORD, CLE, CVG, EWR, IAD, PIT, CLT, ATL plus a number of other northeast destinations (BUF, BOS, ALB, SYR.)

I think marketing has a bit to do with it. The name MacArthur doesn't resonate nationally, but if they renamed it Suffolk County Airport, that could help. There's a ton of population from mid-Nassau & east that they should be able to skim traffic from.

I guess the question becomes, why would I want to go to ISP if I don't live on Long Island. Where would I go, other than Long Island, if I flew into ISP?

Are you referring to Lawn Guyland? :)

it is what it is
 

It is kind of interesting that ISP service has been kind of a bust. When SW first entered ISP, there was a lot of hoopla that ISP would be there NYC gateway. The building of the 8 gate facility was touted as something that would lead to a big expansion. Presumably, the 8 gate facility suggested that SW envisioned building up to 80 flights. Now, the small operation could fit into one gate.

Not sure I would call this "sticking it to ISP"--Presumably the cutback in flights reflects the market--SW would have a bigger operation if they could make $$ with a bigger operation. Still, it is clear that SW once had big plans for ISP and those plans were not realized. Some of this may reflect the move into LAG and EWR. But, the move into these airports probably also reflected the realization that the hope that SW would capture a substantial part of the NYC market via ISP was not to be.