Richierich From United States, joined Nov 2000, 2789 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4614 times:
A reduction in capacity is rarely a good thing, no matter how you look at it.
However, with things the way they are in the USA right now, its probably the right call. To paraphrase the great Dean Smith regarding the NCAA tournament, "survive and advance"... this is probably apt to US domestic operations on every airline right now.
PanAm330 From United States, joined Mar 2004, 1907 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4562 times:
Quoting SANFan (Reply 1): Questions: what species of a/c will be cut loose?
Almost guaranteed that it's A320s going, since they're 'old' compared to the Embraers. I suppose the maintenance costs are getting up there (read: they're due for heavy checks soon), and they'd rather dump them than drop a few million bucks to keep them when they can just have new ones delivered. Speaking of which, have they halted A320 deliveries, or just scaled them back? I think I read that they scaled back the E190 deliveries awhile ago.
B6JFKH81 From United States, joined Mar 2006, 708 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4420 times:
Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 3): Quoting SANFan (Reply 1):
Questions: what species of a/c will be cut loose?
Almost guaranteed that it's A320s going, since they're 'old' compared to the Embraers. I suppose the maintenance costs are getting up there (read: they're due for heavy checks soon), and they'd rather dump them than drop a few million bucks to keep them when they can just have new ones delivered. Speaking of which, have they halted A320 deliveries, or just scaled them back? I think I read that they scaled back the E190 deliveries awhile ago.
A320's are the ones being sold (have been for a few years now) at a rate that allow for minimal amount of fleet expansion. The last plan that I heard was selling 1 or 2 less than the amount of new deliveries coming in for the year.
Also, if you take a look at some of the point to point service added to overfly JFK it was bound to happen that the flights that were originally used to transfer people at JFK and complete their trip to Florida would get cut back a bit since there wouldn't be as many transfer customers as before the point to point service.
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
Lightsaber From United States, joined Jan 2005, 3528 posts, RR: 65 Reply 6, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4260 times:
Quoting SKYYBLUE (Reply 5):
This isn't anything new. This year, JetBlue will net 3-new A320s and 6-E190s.
So, in reality, they will grow in 2008.
From the article:
Quote: ''Hope is not a plan. We're not planning on the cost of oil moving down again, and we have to plan accordingly,'' Barger said. ''Our financial strength, the cash we have in the bank, our ability to discipline our growth rate'' will help JetBlue cope.
Hope is not a method was taught in my high school health class. Seriously, the airlines have to be proactive. Something has to be done more than just hope that fuel prices will go down. As B6 noted, they lose ~$10 million the first year of a new route. (IIRC, an LAX threat with B6, but I'm going from memory).
I sad to see Jetblue stop growing, but I understand the wisdom. There must be a reduction in service in order to boost industry RASM by about 22% to meet the costs of fuel. The question is, how much capacity must be removed domestically to do that? We all know about WN's wise decision to go heavy on the fuel hedges... so they are the only one I expect to grow in the US domestic market in 2008. So how will the reduction in capacity go?
Quoting Richierich (Reply 2): A reduction in capacity is rarely a good thing, no matter how you look at it.
However, with things the way they are in the USA right now, its probably the right call. To paraphrase the great Dean Smith regarding the NCAA tournament, "survive and advance"... this is probably apt to US domestic operations on every airline right now.
Well said. You cannot 'cut to greatness.' But at $126/bbl, its time to retrench and rethink.
And get a GTF out there for the A320 family.
Lightsaber
If at first it doesn't fly, put on a bigger engine!
Soxfan From United States, joined Mar 2008, 155 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4084 times:
Would "cutting capacity" include removing seats--as they did previously on the A320 by removing one row--or does the term primarily refer to reducing the number of aircraft overall?
FreequentFlier From United States, joined Feb 2007, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3872 times:
Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 6):
Well said. You cannot 'cut to greatness.' But at $126/bbl, its time to retrench and rethink.
The general wisdom is that you cannot shrink to profitability. However, with oil prices escalating as they are, there is simply WAY too much capacity out there. The industry will have to shrink if it is to survive.
Hiflyer From United States, joined Nov 2004, 1223 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3780 times:
Am I mistaken in thinking that this is the third occurrence of aircraft sales? Seem to remember them announcing 5 frames being sold in Oct of 2006 and 3 more in July 2007 and now 6 more frames Dec 2008.
SANFan From United States, joined Aug 2006, 1712 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (1 month 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3694 times:
Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 9): Am I mistaken in thinking that this is the third occurrence of aircraft sales? Seem to remember them announcing 5 frames being sold in Oct of 2006 and 3 more in July 2007 and now 6 more frames Dec 2008.
Yeah, has Blue actually done a heavy check on one of their AirBi yet? It seems to me their business plan has been pretty much "get rid of 'em before they're due."
We have had the debate before re: B6 and "capacity reduction" vs. "slowing growth"; this time it definitely seems to be talking about reducing existing capacity. I notice on their latest PDF timetable (effective May 10), many flights are being cancelled on Tuesdays, or Tuesdays/Wednesdays. (They're doing this on a SAN-SLC and the SAN-IAD flight.) This is certainly one "bearable" way to reduce capacity without outright flight cancellation.
I would continue to wonder about the life expectancy of both Ontario and Portland, OR; if transcon-only stations were to be eliminated, these look to me to still be the most likely candidates. Both cities are still seeing 1 flight only (a red-eye to JFK) even during the peak summer months. B6 has to be taking a REAL critical look at keeping these 2 stations open! We've seen the axe wielded in TUS and I'm sure there will be more sacrifices.
I know many will disagree with me, but that's my opinion.
bb
Now available for employment in airline scheduling and planning!
BGIplanefreak From United States, joined Jul 2003, 66 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 month 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 702 times:
Has jetblue scrapped its plans to start MCO-Bogota this year? I heard a lot about the new route a few months ago, but since then I haven't seen any news about when the service will begin. I figured if they were going to actually start the service they would have done so already to capitalize on the busy summer season when a lot of latin american tourists travel to Orlando, and when Colombians in central Florida likely go back home for a visit.
B6FA4ever From United States, joined Aug 2003, 765 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (1 month 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 493 times:
Quoting BGIplanefreak (Reply 12): Has jetblue scrapped its plans to start MCO-Bogota this year? I heard a lot about the new route a few months ago, but since then I haven't seen any news about when the service will begin. I figured if they were going to actually start the service they would have done so already to capitalize on the busy summer season when a lot of latin american tourists travel to Orlando, and when Colombians in central Florida likely go back home for a visit.
for all the airlines that applied to serve BOG (well, colombia for that matter), wasn't it a tentative (spelled?) award? i havn't heard/read anything yet that the airlines have started the new service. doesn't this award still need a "Final" approval? (not familiar w/ the procedure). once finalized, don't the airlines have to start the route within a certain time period? much mahalo for any answers!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Sep 2007, 524 posts, 
Seriously, the airlines have to be proactive. Something has to be done more than just hope that fuel prices will go down. As B6 noted, they lose ~$10 million the first year of a new route. (IIRC, an LAX threat with B6, but I'm going from memory). 
Printer friendly format 
