Texas Booster

Gary,

While the resources today greatly favor OAK, that is because it is a West Coast hub equivalent for WN.

Would it make sense for WN to add a Hawaii pair from SJC, to spread out the business, rather than concentrating all of it into OAK?

Same with SFO - spread out the flights even if OAK continues to be the main hub?

I am not based in the SFO Bay area, but my trips through there make me think that each airport serves different clientele, besides the time difference it takes to get to OAK from other sides of the bay.

Maybe a differentiator, in addition to putting pressure on AS and HA by having service from each location.

sdsearch

Just how many different places does Southwest need nonstop to Hawaii from?

Why should they use them all up on the Bay Area? There's lots of other cities in California (and beyond) that are within equally easy range of Hawaii.

Southwest does not run hob and spoke, they run point-to-point. They may be able to serve Hawaii from certain airport more easily by connecting than with a nonstop.

Ie, from the plane perspective, the routes will be nonstop. But from a travelers ability to fly there perspective, all that matters (to many) is that they can get there somehow, not that they get there nonstop.

So I think the primary focus for Southwest should be on the maximum number of people in the country who can fly to Hawaii on Southwest, no the maximum number of cities with each just a little bit of Hawaii nonstop service.

ucdtim17

I think most would agree SJC is a very likely candidate for Hawaii service. WN is the largest operator there and is competing hard with AS; it'd be very odd to offer Hawaii at other airports but fully cede that market to AS/HA at SJC. OAK is probably most likely to start but I would expect they'd be eager to get SMF, SJC, LAX, SAN, LAS, PHX connected to Hawaii as quickly as possible.

Texas Booster

Because they fly point to point, I expected WN to serve Hawaii with as many planes as they can spare, presuming that the revenue is there.

The limiting factor may become planes and pilots.

I do not expect to see flights from cities that are on the West Coast, but that would also be nice.

If there is capacity, why not fly from SEA, POR, PHX and LAS?

If the planes and crew will handle it, toss in some flights from SAC, SAN and ONT. Even SLC if the range is there.

I do not expect WN to start off with any of these additional cities at first but would welcome a layover in a larger airport to break up my flight from the Midwest or East Coast.

garykung

It would eventually. But no for now.

SFO T1, where WN is located, is expanding now. So SFO could be a potential candidate as well.

Let's check with AS and see...

Agree. This is why OAK is a way better candidate than SJC.

Wingrider

Ok, 2 of those sound valid. Thanks for that.

To the flip side- BA rolls a 787 daily to Heathrow out of SJC now. I'd wager WN adds it to SJC perhaps in a second rollout. I'm happy to fly out of OAK for now once they get this going. I'll cling to the almost in your 3rd point to someday be Hawaii bound in a matter of minutes from home. :-)

Wingrider

I watched the announcement and Gary specifically called out California. I'd think more states (LAS) would get added once they get this new capability figured out.

toomanybooks

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/3...flier-programs

Couple interesting stats here:

"Nationwide, 6.8% of all fliers are flying free, burning up miles. But on routes to Hawaii, the percentage burning miles is higher, 11.4%. That’s half again more passengers flying free.

Southwest Airlines is a special case. While the national average of passengers burning miles is almost 7%, on Southwest it’s double that, almost 14% of passengers using points instead of cash. So if the average on Hawaii routes is more than 11%, half again more than the national average, on Southwest that would work out to 21%, better than one passenger in five, flying free."

And considering honeymooners and couples with a CP, it would not be surprising to me at all for the number to be even higher.

This will be something to watch.

nsx

Agreed. If Southwest can't find a way to estimate the effect on other bookings of having the option to fly to Hawaii for free, they will incorrectly consider the new service a failure.

sdsearch

But without knowing the cause of existing airlines seeing double on Hawaii, we can't know if it will be the same for Southwest or not.

Remember, most (all?) of those other airlines that go to Hawaii use real miles, and for the most-populated parts of the US, the 35k or so needed for an economy round trip to Hawaii is an even better value than the 25k or so needed for an economy round trip within the lower 48. Plus Hawaii is a long flight from anywhere, so probably some of those people use miles for "up front" seats to Hawaii even if they wouldn't bother (and thus would just pay cash) for lower 48 travel.

OTOH, Southwest doesn't do redemption based on charts, it does it as a fixed proportion to cash cost (with occasional exceptions). So there's no better value on one redemption than another with Southwest. And it doesn't have multiple cabins, so someone can't choose to fly "up front" on their special trip to Hawaii (and redeem for that reason) on Southwest. And thus it's not clear that there would be a doubling at Southwest, just because there was a doubling at miles-based chart-based-redemption airlnes.

(By "up front" I mean what some airlines call business class, some airlines call first class, etc. I don't just mean the front of the plane, i mean whatever the class "up front" is called on two-class planes that fly to Hawaii.)

The Companion Pass is a completely separate issue, because it works on both paid and reward flights. But most other airlines don't have it the same "unlimited" way that Southwest does. Companion Passes thus aren't factored into the statistics for other airlines that you mentioned.

toomanybooks

Oh, sure, I know all that. Cannot blindly extrapolate this stuff. Food for thought, though, IMO.

It can work all kinds of ways. With miles, people often horde for some future possible golden score. With WN points, there’s not much sense in hanging onto them, since your best redemption is pretty well known. Hence the source of that 7% vs. 14% stat. The latter of which has been going up about 1% a year for several years, per WN’s 10-Ks.

The specific precise dynamics of this are unknowable at this point, it seems to me.

garykung

BA pax are connected at LAX for Hawaii.

Wingrider

Most likely they'll set the points "cost" to be significant if it's able to be de-coupled from the cost of the fares. That will cause some to potentially way if the points burn is worth it + CP if they're carrying.

N830MH

Yes, they do have connected flight through LAX and then go on next flight to Hawaii by operated American Airlines.

Wingrider

My point was that BA is flying to the UK from SJC using a 787 and that SJC has enough cred. and PAX to potentially justify flying from there to Hawaii.

Basically, it's not a minor airport.