dwebb

Speaking of engines, I once heard that WN used "beefier" engines on its -700s compared to other carriers, though I have no idea if that's the case.

iahphx

I dunno. At first glance, WN's announced LGA routes are a little ho-hum. I am certain the legacy carriers are NOT quaking in their boots (despite what some previous posters believe). The only competitors likely to be "annoyed" are those with LGA nonstops to Chicago.

I believe that DL operates a rather obscure "shuttle" (maybe 6 flights a day?) between LGA and MDW. AA and UA have plenty of flights to ORD. Everyone seems to charge the same price, which I don't believe to be extortionate.

Logic would suggest that DL goes bye-bye on the LGA-MDW route. Other than spite, why would DAL try to compete on this route? In addition to having lower costs, WN essentially operates a hub at MDW, so it has great competitive advantage on the route. Logic would suggest that there are better uses for scarce LGA slots for DAL than competing with WN. That said, DL is historically not the smartest-run airline, so it may take some time.

Has anyone looked at the "beyond points" for those new MDW flights? Because of the perimeter rule, it would seem to make sense to fly them to cities beyond the perimeter, so WN could offer one stop LGA service.

I would think WN could capture some reasonable LGA-CHI market share. But I doubt it will be a big money maker. To some, MDW will have advantages, but to others, it will have disadvantages. Competing against two of the largest legacy carriers in the world (AA and UA) for Chicago share won't be easy. They will match anything that WN offers. Forever. And the business travellers on this route will like their perks like lounges, upgrades, etc.

The BWI flights are so silly that they can't be more than placeholders for something later. Sure, it connects to more of the WN network, but remember, WN is supposed to be chasing higher-yielding biz travellers. No higher yielding traffic wants to fly LGA-BWI on the way to someplace else. ATC space is just too congested in the Northeast to subject yourself to hopping about it. Even savvy leisure travellers will pay a signficant premium to fly nonstop in the Northeast. And there are plenty of way to do that from NYC, which already has plenty of discount carriers like Jetblue.

It's also hard to imagine ANYONE flying just to BWI from LGA. It could not possibly be worth it from a time/money standpoint -- and that's before you consider ATC delays. ANYONE flying to DC will fly into DCA. If you've ever flown to DCA, you know why -- that airport is super-convenient. I can't imagine a lot of leisure travellers looking to fly LGA-BWI at even $120 roundtrip. It just doesn't make sense -- drive or take the train or bus, all faster. And while WN will probably be able to fill the planes, it will be mostly with low yielding junk-fares to connecting destinations. Think LGA-BWI-MCO. Not the path to riches for an airline.

The best news out of this is that folks from outside NYC can now use their RR to visit New York. My guess is that the locals mostly yawn.

gsupstate

How much MORE $$ can there be in these over-served markets, with air travel down like it is?

Seat13c

Perhaps that their PAX were requesting a station in NYC a little closer to the city than ISP (which is totally not a NYC airport, hello LI). So, instead of constantly forcing the loyal PAX of WN to fly another carrier, thus trying the competitors, why not fly to NYC themselves? Its good business when you're established to offer a product, in this case XXX-LGA, and make a small profit at best rather than risk losing the one's entire business [to FL, B6, etc].

dwebb

Look, with so few flights, does WN really need local traffic?

My logic here is that, how many companies have turned down using WN as a carrier because they don't serve _____ (insert LGA, BOS, and MSP here). Adding these big cities could really help WN's case in attracting more travelers.

I'm just thinkin' that with 1,096 seats a day, WN can do fine with traffic coming into LGA from other parts of the network.

iahphx

I assume that's largely the strategy here. I mean, NYC is the biggest city in America and (if Washington doesn't completely take over Wall St.) the most important. WN is a pretty big airline not to be serving the nation's largest city. There have to be loyal WN customers who'd like to go there on WN, and now they can. Whether this actually makes WN any money, however, seems questionable.

BTW, in my earlier post, I mentioned the possibility of using the Chicago and Baltimore flights as ways to "evade" the LGA perimeter rule. That's probably a good business strategy, but it has one obvious flaw -- when there are delays at LGA (and trust me, there will be), it will spread the pain throughout WN's system. I would never knowingly book a MDW-LAX flight if I knew it was starting at LGA! I assume this is a price WN is willing to take? I doubt they they would simply shuttle the flights back and forth between BWI and LGA to isolate the delays.

myadvice

US has 9 nonstops BWI-LGA. Mostly on Dash's with a CRJ or two. That's over 330 seats. US is currently charging $254 RT (incl. tax - priced on 4/27-4/28).

HPN-HRL

My first rough pass through the new schedule, weekdays 2nd week of August:

1305 LGA BWI
1540 LGA BWI
617 LGA BWI
3753 LGA MDW PHX SAN SJC
2695 LGA MDW
3496 LGA MDW
3929 LGA MDW
242 LGA MDW

453 DAL MSY TPA BWI LGA
275 JAX BWI LGA
1339 LAS PHX SDF BWI LGA
1216 MDW LGA
421 LIT STL MDW LGA
648 LAS MDW LGA
208 MDW LGA
91 IND MDW LGA

iahphx

I'm sure they're living off connecting traffic, too. I wonder if we can find a single flyertalker who routinely flies from LGA to BWI. It just doesn't make any sense.

Looks like US will have some prop planes to move elsewhere. I'm sure they're not going to try to compete with WN's new flights with that kind of service.

BTW, these "crazy" commuter flights are a real problem in the Northeast. They gunk up the works for little competitive value. AA tends to be the worst offender with this -- it almost seems like they're place-holding slots. It would be great if the gov't mandated that Northeast slots be used with larger aircraft, so that the most seats possible could be squeezed into the limited airspace.

myadvice

I think it is just another indication of US's historic northeast franchise continuing to be taken over by WN. WN still has a substantial cost advantage over US afterall.

Edited to add: Just saw one of BoeingBoy's post on another board. US's Mainline CASM in 2008 was 14.66 (with express CASM > 19). WN's CASM was 10.24.

ftnoob

Only #3753 (the 6:10am departure) can be booked beyond MDW. It continues on to PHX, SAN, and SJC. None of the BWI flights continue anywhere.

KNRG, it's the other way around; #453 flies TPA-BWI-LGA.

Beckles

That presentation is from 2002. WN has actually pulled back coast-to-coast service in the past two years after trying it out, take a look at their route map and you'll see there's basically no coast-to-coast service with the exception of 2 SAN-BWI flights a day, everything else connects through MDW, BNA, MCI, LAS, PHX, DEN, etc. I see no reason why they'd want to change that out of LGA.

I believe WN had mentioned that they could limit the impact of LGA delays, and it appears that they are doing that by not running those planes as continuing flights in most cases, allowing them more flexibility as to where the plane goes next without disrupting passengers.

haddon90

this won't do anything to the shuttle routes into DCA. but it definitely helps with traffic going out west.

but then again, B6 is doing a pretty decent job of keeping some airlines in check.

haddon90

it's like DCA, but DCA has a few outer perimeter slots. the perimeter rule is waived at LGA on Saturday's I believe, unless that was changed.

and from a quick glance, DEN is the furthest flight from LGA.

ClueByFour

PIT-STL and PIT-RDU have no nonstop competition for US, much less lowfare nonstop competition. Beyond that, PIT-STL is marginally longer than PIT-NYC.

People take connections on these routes because the cost is often half the nonstop. That makes some sense.

Well, I suppose they might. I just don't think it's going to be in mammoth numbers.

In the case of LGA, there is no doubt that they are doing BWI to open the network. They are not doing it to open the network to a PIT or CLE or someplace close that has all kinds of competition (some of it low-cost) to NYC.

I like WN, I really do. If I still lived in PIT, I'd take CO to EWR or B6 to JFK before I did a tango via BWI.

We (as FT members) might intentionally take a connection because of RR credits and the like, but most people (if the price is right) are getting on the nonstop on a flight like that.