redanman

I flew out of PHL to SFO on 24 Dec and there were incoming VX flights on the ETA board. Internet and website searches showed no flights. Anyone know what changes are planned for restoration of service?

gooseman13

It will be a long while before VX brings scheduled service back to PHL, and by long while I mean no current plans. Perhaps the airport didn't update something in its flight information system? Or maybe it was a diversion or charter or something else one-off.

mattfusf

Hope they do return, although I passed by their former gates in terminal E 3 weeks ago. All branding (incl the painted mural) is gone, computers/gate displays removed, etc.

Doesn't look like they will be back anytime soon i'm afraid.

bayhouse

It's more likely that that VX returns to PHL than it is that they restart SNA or SJC. But if they do return to PHL, it will likely not be for a few years. Their new planes will most likely be used to restore frequencies to existing routes first. The DAL, LGA, and DCA opportunities arose inconveniently early for them, which prompted cuts to other markets too. If the new planes arriving in 2015 and 2016 are used to launch new routes, they will likely be higher-priority markets (Hawaii comes to mind) before they re-launch PHL.

GrayAnderson

Agreed on the use of existing planes. I get a feeling that Toronto would be high on the restoration list, too...IIRC that was cut not because it was performing badly as such but because there were other markets that were simply better opportunities.

Assuming Hawaii happens, that's probably 3-4 planes out of the 10 right there (assuming one daily flight from SFO and one daily flight from LAX). Adding a second daily flight to Orlando might also make the list (and/or flying MCO-NYC)...the single flight to/from MCO feels like a really odd outlier in the system. O'Hare would be another one that would be worth some more effort (IIRC Chicago got cut in the scramble to take advantage of those opportunities), and I wouldn't be surprised if through flights New York-O'Hare-[SFO/LAX] entered the picture at some point.

bayhouse

I agree about Orlando. IIRC, it was launched with daily service to/from LAX and SFO, but it was reduced to LAX only for plane utilization reasons. (MCO-SFO was either cut or reduced to seasonal service.) MCO-NYC would be interesting. It probably depends on how well the JFK-FLL route does. If the route is a success, I could see them adding more routes catering to NYC snowbirds next winter.

Chicago did get cut in the scramble, many of the flights no longer operate daily. In addition to restoring Chicago, I imagine they'll also add DAL-ORD -- eventually. A few months ago, staff there told me that it won't be added until planes are available, and definitely not in April as originally planned.

cmd320

Personally I'd love to see a consistent MCO-SFO flight. That would seal the deal for me not having to fly AA/DL/UA transcon again.

MCO-NYC would be interesting, however IMO does not fit the VX model particularly well. It's a pretty low rent market with mainly leisure travelers. Perhaps a JFK flight with some nice international feed from partner airlines would work well.

bridge29

I'd love to see VX return to PHL. Now that UA has reduced frequencies on SFO-PHL, perhaps there's an opportunity. LAX is going to be tougher, but fares on US right now are super high now that they own the route. If only we had an LCC that did transcons.

GrayAnderson

This is actually what I'm thinking. Virgin Atlantic has rather thin award availability to MCO but has a lot into JFK, so I can see them being able to draw on that relationship (since an award trip on Virgin Atlantic to JFK and then a paid reservation on VX to MCO might prove to be cheaper than paying for a direct flight to MCO, and if award availability is any indication of general availability, Virgin Atlantic might do well by being able to divert some of that traffic over to JFK).

Actually, as a serious question: How does winter service to FLL fit VX's model? I guess I stereotype FLL as being not too different from MCO (rather tourist heavy, albeit with a bias towards cruises to make up for not having Disney next door...and with MIA having most of the connecting traffic to overseas), but is that incorrect?

[Actually, that leads me to a stickier question: VX behaves in a way that is unlike any other carrier I can think of. There are some elements of your generic "low cost" model, such as the buy-on-board program that they've turned into a selling point by making the selections good...but they also have an unmatched domestic FC product and their MCS is fairly comparable with FC on Delta...and I'd point out that it's not like LAX-LAS is the highest-rent market in the country, though it is near the peak of volume alongside LAX-SFO. So how would you describe their model?]

nova08

PHL has a ton of US loyalists that probably never gave VX a try. However VX suffered from a stiff competition at the beginning (including a drastic increase in capacity) and never got a foot hold into the market. Before VX entered PHL-SFO, US was at ~5x day and UA was at 2 to 3x day. VX entered with 2 flights, US added 1 and UA added 1, and for one summer there were 12 PHL-SFO flights. Now this upcoming summer it is back down 7. Maybe if PHL continues it's growth as a tech, healthcare, innovation hub there will be increased demand between PHL-SFO.

bayhouse

I was in Miami at a music launch last winter, and while I was there, I learned that there is Dec - April is one of their busiest periods. Nearly everyone I met at the event told me they were vacationing from New York or Boston. It was the first time I'd heard of this, but it seems to be a big thing.

While JFK-FLL isn't a traditional fit for Virgin America's model, it does suit a seasonal niche market very well. Simultaneously, there is reduced West Cost-NYC demand during the winter months, so VX has less yield stemming from their JFK slots. Temporarily allocating one JFK slot for FLL instead of LAX/SFO helps match capacity with demand, while also catering to a seasonal market.

cmd320

From what I've seen, the main difference between the markets at MCO and FLL is that FLL sees a lot more wealthy leisure travel than MCO does. FLL pulls from much wealthier regions of the state in Palm Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami Beach, Pompano Beach, and even as far north as Vero Beach for O&D leisure travel. There are plenty of affluent residents in these areas who have no problem routinely flying leisure flights in paid F.

MCO on the other hand sees mainly inbound tourist families from other parts of the country and world, focusing mainly on theme parks and family style vacations. These are typically your lower yielding, searching for the best fare types.

Now the bigger question of the VX model is a very interesting one, and one I am certainly no expert on. The way I see it, VX is currently offering the most premium domestic F product there is by far (outside of the few premium transcon routes that exist of course). There really aren't any domestic products that can really touch VX in any way. Further, as you mention, MCS rivals the F products offered these days on AA/DL/UA, and in some cases exceeds them IMO.

VX certainly seems to have found a niche catering to both a more premium market as well as a low-cost leisure market. They certainly have the best product out there, and I believe they have the pricing power to go up against airlines like AA/DL/UA on many transcon and midcon type routes. With the amount of consolidation that has occurred in the past 6 years, there are definitely many opportunities out there for VX to expand. I like that they're taking a shot on an east coast route and hope that it will perform well and lead to further expansion. I just wish they would hurry up and get some more planes!

This is one big issue VX must cope with. While they clearly have a far superior product to US, they have to fight to pull loyalists away from larger carriers. These days I feel that job is becoming easier as loyalty programs are devalued, products are cheapened, and prices are rising. I just flew my first VX flight a few months ago and had never really considered them before due to my loyalty to AA and before that, DL. Now that I've tried the VX product, I'll be looking to fly them anywhere I can as I transition my business away from the major network carriers for both domestic and intercontinental travel.

GrayAnderson

On the planes front, I can't help but wonder if VX would be able to buy or lease additional planes prior to the 2020-ish arrival of their next major order (i.e. aside from the 10 planes due in the near future).

As to the model...yes, I think that makes sense. What you've mentioned about catastrophic devaluations likely, when combined with the rebounding economy, has driven them into profitability recently.

And as to Orlando...well, I guess my thought there is that for 1-2 flights a day VX doesn't need to peel much market share off. Orlando-New York comprises something like 8300 pax/day...VX doesn't need more than 2-3% market share to pack two daily flights on a regular basis, and they wouldn't need to add any airports to make it happen.

Of course...according to the FAA's report, VX was the lowest-fare carrier between DC and the Bay Area...and between PHL and the Bay Area. Apparently they had 12% of the PHL-San Francisco market (though in a number of other markets out there they've been climbing into the 20s...look at the Q1 Domestic Consumer Airfare Report...) before pulling out, which really does suggest that there's a good chance their withdrawal was more equipment-based than due to unprofitability (VX has apparently had a bunch of cases where they had to pick which of several routes would make more money).

rtalk25

That's true. VX also had a limited schedule compared to US, and towards the end when it was down to 1x daily, the flight was timed for SFO based pax, not PHL based pax.

Now, UA and US have no incentive to lower fares without a LCC to fend off, and the steep fares might stifle demand.

The fares seem high now with the VX pull out.

Southwest just launched BWI-OAK year-round, and that flight might attract some pax that might otherwise be using PHL. I wouldn't be surprised if some defect to BWI and EWR for lower fare nonstop flights, thus helping demand into those airports over PHL.

Connection flights will be taken by many, but those are prone to 8 hour flight itineries and more likelihood of IRROPS. With Southwest acquiring up AirTran and limiting PHL to less than 25 Southwest daily departures, and Frontier not interested in connections through DEN from PHL, even the connection market has become less competitive.

cubachao

Why not the LAX market. US is the only carrier fly to lax. Surprise DL and UA are not adding a flight after VX exit. Hope Spirit could add one flight