I'm new to this forum so maybe I'm out of the loop, but looking at their route map there is a definite hole in the midwest.

Because they are clueless on how not to lose money there. Until recently, there only midwest city was ORD

One needs only look at their operation there to see how little impact they have in the region

Detroit, Cleveland and Chicago are in the Midwest and all are served by B6.

Because most of the Midwest is fly-over Country.

Where do people in NYC/BOS want to fly to? That's B6's only focus. Not many of those people want to fly to the Midwest.

JFK doesn't have enough slots and BOS doesn't have enough O&D. What most people forget is in an effort to curb B6 growth, WN curtailed B6 opportunities by adding markets like STL, IND, MCI, MKE and CMH, Between DL and WN there is no room for B6.

A good market to watch for B6 midwest possibilities is BNA. 5x between WN 737 and B6 A320 is unsustainable, so will be interesting to see who reduces first.

STL, IND, MCI, MKE and CMH could each add capacity to FLL, It seems like B6 add a really easy opportunity to grow to those markets around 2015 but let WN, F9, G4 take over those markets. Flights to Florida were and still are big in each of those markets, and jet blue would have had little to no competition on those routes.

80% of the total US revenue stream comes from the east coast and west of the Rockies.

B6 is NYC/BOS centric. They appear to ignore the destination side of O&D and focus on where their hometown residents want to go. When the economy was bad and fuel prices high this wasn't a bad strategy. But now that travel is up and fuel prices are down they need to look at who wants to go to NYC and BOS as well. The problem is they've waited too long in many markets and allowed the ULCCs to set up camp in the remnants of many legacy fortresses. CVG is a perfect example. F9 eased into the opportunity here and is doing well. G4 followed and now WN is finally starting service. B6 waited too long and lost an opportunity to grow a market before the competition was able to take hold. I know the local market here had been begging for them to come. With all of our new service, it doesn't seem as important anymore.

RL757PVD wrote:

A good market to watch for B6 midwest possibilities is BNA. 5x between WN 737 and B6 A320 is unsustainable, so will be interesting to see who reduces first.

BNA has been odd because there has been virtually no advertising here, even less than there was when they were in BNA 10 years ago. Most Nashville locals split their loyalties because of the WN hublet and I think would try B6 if there was more brand awareness and the price and schedule made sense.

Some speculate that if B6 could turn ORD into a focus city, you would see B6 starting service to other cities in the Midwest. While WN is the fortress carrier at MDW, it isn't that appealing to people who live or work in the north and northwest suburbs. If you live in Deerfield or Hoffman Estates, it's a long drive to MDW, especially if traffic is heavy.

This is the reason why B6 worked to get into ORD, when the FAA had the operations cap between 2004 and 2008. They were targeting people who, because of geography, didn't consider flying WN.

Cubsrule wrote:

RL757PVD wrote:

A good market to watch for B6 midwest possibilities is BNA. 5x between WN 737 and B6 A320 is unsustainable, so will be interesting to see who reduces first.

BNA has been odd because there has been virtually no advertising here, even less than there was when they were in BNA 10 years ago. Most Nashville locals split their loyalties because of the WN hublet and I think would try B6 if there was more brand awareness and the price and schedule made sense.

I think they are missing out on MEM to BOS and FFL, especially FFL.

In an Ideal World speculation: Alaska flies the West Coast and to other major cities. JetBlue flies the East Coast and other major cities. The two could encourage a truly regional airline to fly from their sparsely situated Midwest destinations to much of the 'flyover country'. Such a regional airline would need a contract that the few really profitable flights would not be poached upon by the two, and other such considerations. Most of this territory is losing population, and heavily dependent on federal subsidies of one sort or another. Truly integrated transportation (whether by land, sea or air LOL), is essential for any possible recovery. Subsidies should be directed to this end, along with certain essential medical services. Many would like living in emptier spaces.

ps - my west coast state was blissfully and sparsely populated in my youth - a truly glorious place to grow up. Alas, no longer. But it is exciting and prosperous. Nice in my old age.

jfklganyc wrote:

Because they are clueless on how not to lose money there. Until recently, there only midwest city was ORD

One needs only look at their operation there to see how little impact they have in the region

Interesting, DTW is in the Midwest. So is Cleveland. And they make money there...

But that doesn't fit your tired narrative that everything B6 does is wrong. Did you get fired from them or something?

B6 would probably be in MSP if SY didn't exist.

SY serves all of B6's natural opportunities. Plus MCO and FLL are already quite competitive as is. B6 doesn't stand to gain much in either market other than making the already low prices even lower. BOS is served by SY and DL year around with NK adding a seasonal flight. And I don't think a LGB flight would really do much for B6. If anything, MSP might get a BOS flight and that's about it. And this isn't due to a lack of effort from the airports commission.

I think B6's problem is that they're too late in many markets. The LCCs (and WN) have already taken their share of the market and are still expanding.

I'd love it if they would fly JFK-STL on an e-jet.. I'd consider flying them over DL.

catiii wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

Because they are clueless on how not to lose money there. Until recently, there only midwest city was ORD

One needs only look at their operation there to see how little impact they have in the region

Interesting, DTW is in the Midwest. So is Cleveland. And they make money there...

But that doesn't fit your tired narrative that everything B6 does is wrong. Did you get fired from them or something?

As has been discussed above, CMH, CVG, IND, STL, MKE, and MSP are all in the Midwest. They're all nice-sized population centers in flyover country. With BNA and ATL back on the map, CMH is one of the few cities they've dropped and not restarted.

You could argue they're only in CLE because of the gold rush that came after UA closed the hub and F9 and NK also started service there.

PanHAM wrote:

Because most of the Midwest is fly-over Country.

I understand that the midwest is certainly not on the top of people's travel bucket list, however that doesn't mean there isn't business in midwest. Midwest clearly has big enough markets to support hubs in DTW, ORD, MDW, MSP, CVG, plus all of WN's mini-hubs in the midwest. My point is the Midwest clearly has some untapped routes after DL shrinking CVG, DL closing MEM, American leaving STL, e.t.c. This is especially evident due to the fact that AS/VX (B6's equivalent on the west coast) has added SEA-IND/ORD/BNA/OMA/STL/MKE/OKC, PDX-MCI/STL/MKE/ORD, SFO-MCI/IND/ORD/BNA. Now, you obviously have to take into account different markets and the fact that most of these locations didn't have good connections to the west coast. But if AS can add dozen of routes in the span of less than a year with virtually no brand recognition, I don't see why B6 would sit idly by while WN takes all their potential market share with routes from the midwest to the northeast and florida.

nycbjr wrote:

I'd love it if they would fly JFK-STL on an e-jet.. I'd consider flying them over DL.

I would love if anyone flew JFK-STL just for European connection reasons. There are a bunch of flights to LGA, I would think someone could find a way to do one to JFK.

Also, WN keeps upping the flights from STL-BOS (Now 4 in summer) to keep JetBlue out, but that is one of the most expenisive flights from STL (I never see it under $160, its usually closer to $200 each way). You can fly anywhere on the west coast for cheaper. So, I would think DL or JetBlue could do a once daily (even on a smaller plane) and still make money, even if the price goes down some.

Its simple, business travelers from the Midwest do not want to fly to JFK. Period. The majority of the Midwest to East coast flyings is LGA or EWR specific, and AA/DL/UA have those markets covered.

MSP to the NYC market is substantial and is flown by 4 carriers. MSP to WAS market is also substantial and flown on 6 carriers (AA/UA/SY/DL/WN/Spirit).

I don't buy the argument that no one in the NYC market wants to go to the Midwest, or that we are flyover country. The market is just already covered and there isn't room for B6.

Adam

I've been saying for a while in the Ohio threads the PDEW on CMH-FLL could support significantly more than one daily WN flight plus a non-daily LCK-FLL flight on G4. Why NK or B6 haven't tried it yet surprises me given the connections on the FLL end.

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

I think the real reason is predatory pricing. There is tons of money to make in middle America - that is why AA, DL, UA and WN make SO much money at the aggregate level.

B6 is excluded from the main money-making parts of the market in the USA, because its rivals do not want to deal with them. And B6 is primarily a coastal brand and speaks to a coastal customer base. I guess everybody is happy with that.

Flighty wrote:

I think the real reason is predatory pricing. There is tons of money to make in middle America - that is why AA, DL, UA and WN make SO much money at the aggregate level.

B6 is excluded from the main money-making parts of the market in the USA, because its rivals do not want to deal with them. And B6 is primarily a coastal brand and speaks to a coastal customer base. I guess everybody is happy with that.

Huh? That makes no sense. How are the majors using predatory pricing on B6, when B6 has never attempted to fly into those markets?????

Midwestindy wrote:

I'm new to this forum so maybe I'm out of the loop, but looking at their route map there is a definite hole in the midwest.

There is a definite hole, although it is (slowly) being filled in.

The short answer is that B6's hubs/focus cities mostly sit on the East Coast, where the majority of air travel demand is to other East Coast cities, the West Coast, or international. B6 tends to focus on point of sale activity from its hubs/focus cities, and generally does not invest heavily in building loyalty in the spoke cities.

flyingfromcvg wrote:

B6 is NYC/BOS centric. They appear to ignore the destination side of O&D and focus on where their hometown residents want to go. When the economy was bad and fuel prices high this wasn't a bad strategy. But now that travel is up and fuel prices are down they need to look at who wants to go to NYC and BOS as well. The problem is they've waited too long in many markets and allowed the ULCCs to set up camp in the remnants of many legacy fortresses. CVG is a perfect example. F9 eased into the opportunity here and is doing well. G4 followed and now WN is finally starting service. B6 waited too long and lost an opportunity to grow a market before the competition was able to take hold. I know the local market here had been begging for them to come. With all of our new service, it doesn't seem as important anymore.

One needs to take into account opportunity cost. While B6 was skipping adding Midwest markets, it was diverting its resources to strengthen its growing BOS and FLL operations. B6 only has so many aircraft to work with...

jfklganyc wrote:

Because they are clueless on how not to lose money there. Until recently, there only midwest city was ORD

One needs only look at their operation there to see how little impact they have in the region

I think that was true for a little while. For example, when B6 entered PIT, it was from JFK only - and it lost money. Today, JFK-PIT is no longer flown, but BOS-PIT is one of B6's most profitable routes, and PIT sustains year-round service to FLL. It seems B6 is deploying a similar strategy to other Midwest markets (CLE, DTW), and it's working.

I think the Midwest will continue to fill-in in due time, primarily from BOS, and secondarily to FLL.

usflyer msp wrote:

Flighty wrote:

I think the real reason is predatory pricing. There is tons of money to make in middle America - that is why AA, DL, UA and WN make SO much money at the aggregate level.

B6 is excluded from the main money-making parts of the market in the USA, because its rivals do not want to deal with them. And B6 is primarily a coastal brand and speaks to a coastal customer base. I guess everybody is happy with that.

Huh? That makes no sense. How are the majors using predatory pricing on B6, when B6 has never attempted to fly into those markets?????

I guess the point was, there must be a reason why B6 declines to compete in the central USA, and I think that reason is the likely reaction of their competitors, who are doing very well and would have deep pockets to make B6 regret coming in. I would guess B6 uses their prior experiences to forecast what would occur.

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

And that I believe is the best answer. Others have touched on the fact that from the Midwest, JFK is not the preferred airport for NYC-destinating traffic, also add in that MCO and FLL are pretty well-covered to the Midwest by WN and other ULCCs. With the exception of service to BOS for certain markets, there really isn't a whole lot B6 can offer to Midwest travelers.

DeltaRules wrote:

catiii wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

Because they are clueless on how not to lose money there. Until recently, there only midwest city was ORD

One needs only look at their operation there to see how little impact they have in the region

Interesting, DTW is in the Midwest. So is Cleveland. And they make money there...

But that doesn't fit your tired narrative that everything B6 does is wrong. Did you get fired from them or something?

As has been discussed above, CMH, CVG, IND, STL, MKE, and MSP are all in the Midwest. They're all nice-sized population centers in flyover country. With BNA and ATL back on the map, CMH is one of the few cities they've dropped and not restarted.

You could argue they're only in CLE because of the gold rush that came after UA closed the hub and F9 and NK also started service there.

As also has been discussed in other threads, and during the I-Day presentation, they're in 39 of the top 50 destinations out of BOS (ex. LHR, DUB, KEF, CDG, YYZ, MKE, CMH, MCI, STL, IND, MSP) with margins in Boston north of 30 points. All that is to say the other domestic cities are coming...

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

usflyer msp wrote:

Flighty wrote:

I think the real reason is predatory pricing. There is tons of money to make in middle America - that is why AA, DL, UA and WN make SO much money at the aggregate level.

B6 is excluded from the main money-making parts of the market in the USA, because its rivals do not want to deal with them. And B6 is primarily a coastal brand and speaks to a coastal customer base. I guess everybody is happy with that.

Huh? That makes no sense. How are the majors using predatory pricing on B6, when B6 has never attempted to fly into those markets?????

B6 tried CMH before and retreated. It is slowly getting back into selective markets in the Midwest, with routes, but it's a slow process and B6 only wants to take on so much risk at once. F9 and NK have been faster in putting up service in Midwest markets, e.g F9 in CVG or NK in MCI, but those carriers are also fine running low frequency service, being seasonal and they are content just servicing the leisure traffic.

Clearly the only reason MCI can't attract B6 is because of our outdated terminal layout. If only we had a brand new terminal . . .the possibilities are endless!

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is fine for point-to-point to the Midwest, but in many of these markets (unless B6 decides to battle incumbent carriers for market share), it's hard to justify opening a completely new station for just 2-3 flights to BOS. B6, for any number of reasons, has been slow to grow into new markets. Not so many years ago cities like CVG, MEM, MCI and IND were very low hanging fruit for a mix of BOS and Florida flying (None, or very little LCC competition and expensive fare bases), all of those markets have now been sufficiently picked over by other airlines and I just don't much that would be available for B6 unless want to battle it out with one of the other LCCs to run them off some routes.

I might be mischaracterizing a bit, but B6 seems to have painted themselves in a corner as a niche North-South airline (and not to impugn, they serve this market very profitably and very well) with a little West Coast trunk route flying thrown into the mix. Hard to see any other area they could grow into (save for the long-rumored TATL flights).

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is a geographically terrible place for a hub for an airline that flies domestically and to the Caribbean/Latin America. This is why B6's network is heavily skewed to the places that Northeasterners want to go on vacation (the point to point focus city that you are talking about). This doesn't work as well with mid sized Midwestern cities.

FlyingJhawk wrote:

Clearly the only reason MCI can't attract B6 is because of our outdated terminal layout. If only we had a brand new terminal . . .the possibilities are endless!

That has absolutely nothing to do with that. B6 would be going for O&D, that kind of market that doesn't depend on terminal layout.

flyguy89 wrote:

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is fine for point-to-point to the Midwest, but in many of these markets (unless B6 decides to battle incumbent carriers for market share), it's hard to justify opening a completely new station for just 2-3 flights to BOS. B6, for any number of reasons, has been slow to grow into new markets. Not so many years ago cities like CVG, MEM, MCI and IND were very low hanging fruit for a mix of BOS and Florida flying (None, or very little LCC competition and expensive fare bases), all of those markets have now been sufficiently picked over by other airlines and I just don't much that would be available for B6 unless want to battle it out with one of the other LCCs to run them off some routes.

I might be mischaracterizing a bit, but B6 seems to have painted themselves in a corner as a niche North-South airline (and not to impugn, they serve this market very profitably and very well) with a little West Coast trunk route flying thrown into the mix. Hard to see any other area they could grow into (save for the long-rumored TATL flights).

This too.

Ok, being snarky, but isn't like 80 percent of B6 between BOS/NYC to Florida

bfitzflyer wrote:

Ok, being snarky, but isn't like 80 percent of B6 between BOS/NYC to Florida

I'm not sure what you are trying to get at?

ckfred wrote:

Some speculate that if B6 could turn ORD into a focus city, you would see B6 starting service to other cities in the Midwest. While WN is the fortress carrier at MDW, it isn't that appealing to people who live or work in the north and northwest suburbs. If you live in Deerfield or Hoffman Estates, it's a long drive to MDW, especially if traffic is heavy.

This is the reason why B6 worked to get into ORD, when the FAA had the operations cap between 2004 and 2008. They were targeting people who, because of geography, didn't consider flying WN.

Ive long thought that ORD would be or would have made a good focus city/hub for the midwest. But NK and F9 have expanded there and there really isnt any space to get a decent sized operation.

I am saying a good percentage of JetBlue's routes are between Boston/NYC to Florida

B6 makes too much money going to the DR and other islands that makes flying to other Midwest cities a second thought when aircraft are being utilized so much. B6 flies more hours on the a32x fleet than any other a32x operator in the world. Msp has been in the works for years but keeps getting but to the side for demand for flights to the DR.

bfitzflyer wrote:

I am saying a good percentage of JetBlue's routes are between Boston/NYC to Florida

Yeah...they are an east coast carrier, that doesn't mean they can't expand their routes to places outside of Boston/NYC to Florida. AS for example was in the same boat as B6, and they also had a majority of their flights solely on the west coast, until they have recently SUCCESSFULLY expanded to add connections throughout the country INCLUDING the midwest. Just because an airline has a lot of routes on a very limited set of destinations doesn't mean they can't expand, in fact that is even more reason for an airline to expand.

I would love it if B6 came to MCI. If they flew Ejets to all of their popular destinations from MCI I would fly them a lot. Sadly that is probably a pipe dream.

FlyingJhawk wrote:

Clearly the only reason MCI can't attract B6 is because of our outdated terminal layout. If only we had a brand new terminal . . .the possibilities are endless!

I know this is really a comment for another thread, but why won't Kansas City just go for renovating and re-opening terminal A at MCI and building indoor walkways between all 3 terminals instead?

Regardless, I would love to see B6 come to MCI but I don't think that's happening anytime soon.

flyguy89 wrote:

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is fine for point-to-point to the Midwest, but in many of these markets (unless B6 decides to battle incumbent carriers for market share), it's hard to justify opening a completely new station for just 2-3 flights to BOS. B6, for any number of reasons, has been slow to grow into new markets. Not so many years ago cities like CVG, MEM, MCI and IND were very low hanging fruit for a mix of BOS and Florida flying (None, or very little LCC competition and expensive fare bases), all of those markets have now been sufficiently picked over by other airlines and I just don't much that would be available for B6 unless want to battle it out with one of the other LCCs to run them off some routes.

I might be mischaracterizing a bit, but B6 seems to have painted themselves in a corner as a niche North-South airline (and not to impugn, they serve this market very profitably and very well) with a little West Coast trunk route flying thrown into the mix. Hard to see any other area they could grow into (save for the long-rumored TATL flights).

It was justified in DTW and CLE, and there would be no difference in these other markets. Over 80% of B6's traffic is point to point. JFk is predominantly leisure and BOS is predominantly business. Adding three flights to MCI, IND, CMH, etc would not be hard and would be thoroughly consistent with what B6 has done in other markets out of BOS

cledaybuck wrote:

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Because their hubs are terrible for Midwest flying.

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is a geographically terrible place for a hub for an airline that flies domestically and to the Caribbean/Latin America. This is why B6's network is heavily skewed to the places that Northeasterners want to go on vacation (the point to point focus city that you are talking about). This doesn't work as well with mid sized Midwestern cities.

I think the fundamental mistake most posters on these boards make is that they think of B6 in the construct of a DL, AA, UA network. By and large BOS, JFK, etc are not "hubs" with connecting banks. BOS fully supports the markets it does based on the business travel contracts B6 has in the BOS area, and through EK, EI, etc feed.

DTW does fine with BOS, they've upgraded one of 3 flights to an A320. Aside of FLL and BOS I wonder what could be next.

Just a thought here as a complete newbie.

What would it take for B6 to get more LGA slots?

Took a look yesterday for the airlines with the least number of slots in LGA, I see 3 slots with VX, 3 slots with F9 and 8 slots with WS.

for the 3 slots with VX, would AAG be willing to part with those for B6's DCA slot with exemption + another slot in DCA or JFK? That would allow another transcon flight for AS to west cost from DCA and another from JFK. That seems to be the most obvious ones they could trade for.

Maybe they could try to buy F9's 3 slots or see what it would take to get those.

And for WS, my guess is they are probably loosing a lot of money on their 8 YYZ-LGA flights. They always have far lower fares than AC and the flight loads are horrible based on my personal experience of flying them on this line. Maybe they would be willing to sell some of their slots.

If they get the 3 slots from VX, they could reduce one flight to PBI and FLL. Now they can fly 5 a day to ORD from LGA. If they get 3 slots from F9, they could fly 3 a day to DTW. If they get 2 slots from WS, they could maybe drop PBI completely and fly 6 a day to ORD, 3 a day to DTW and CLE. If they don't have enough gate space in ORD, they can wait for more to become available and just start with flights to DTW.

catiii wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

catiii wrote:

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is a geographically terrible place for a hub for an airline that flies domestically and to the Caribbean/Latin America. This is why B6's network is heavily skewed to the places that Northeasterners want to go on vacation (the point to point focus city that you are talking about). This doesn't work as well with mid sized Midwestern cities.

I think the fundamental mistake most posters on these boards make is that they think of B6 in the construct of a DL, AA, UA network. By and large BOS, JFK, etc are not "hubs" with connecting banks. BOS fully supports the markets it does based on the business travel contracts B6 has in the BOS area, and through EK, EI, etc feed.

Correct, BOS is not a legacy type hub, which is why it can't support all of the routes that the legacies fly out of their hubs.

catiii wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

catiii wrote:

Not BOS, which is a business market that strongly supports the point to point focus city flying.

BOS is fine for point-to-point to the Midwest, but in many of these markets (unless B6 decides to battle incumbent carriers for market share), it's hard to justify opening a completely new station for just 2-3 flights to BOS. B6, for any number of reasons, has been slow to grow into new markets. Not so many years ago cities like CVG, MEM, MCI and IND were very low hanging fruit for a mix of BOS and Florida flying (None, or very little LCC competition and expensive fare bases), all of those markets have now been sufficiently picked over by other airlines and I just don't much that would be available for B6 unless want to battle it out with one of the other LCCs to run them off some routes.

I might be mischaracterizing a bit, but B6 seems to have painted themselves in a corner as a niche North-South airline (and not to impugn, they serve this market very profitably and very well) with a little West Coast trunk route flying thrown into the mix. Hard to see any other area they could grow into (save for the long-rumored TATL flights).

It was justified in DTW and CLE, and there would be no difference in these other markets. Over 80% of B6's traffic is point to point. JFk is predominantly leisure and BOS is predominantly business. Adding three flights to MCI, IND, CMH, etc would not be hard and would be thoroughly consistent with what B6 has done in other markets out of BOS

DTW is a much bigger market and B6 came into CLE right after the UA dehubbing. MCI, IND, and CMH all have WN service to BOS (IND and CMH have DL too) and are all strong airports for WN. I am not saying B6 couldn't do it, but I think it would be a fight. I'm not sure that fight is worth it.