tphuang wrote:

Thanks again enilria!

Thanks!

knope2001 wrote:

Thanks as always, enilria!

Regarding Frontier it does seem more like a pretty big adjustment. There are more than a few routes which appear unchanged for October (it's not like *all* markets got hacked off in a scheduled reversion), so I do think these are probably real.

Among the changes are new markets and some flight increases, nearly all to warm destinations.

Thanks. If it is real then they have a ton of new things left to announce.

jetbluefan1 wrote:

JFK-LAX is by far B6's most lucrative market.

I suspect there are routes in BOS that make more money than anything at JFK.

usflyer msp wrote:

Looks to me like WN is moving back towards its short-haul roots. It makes sense.

I think they are just airplane short because of the mass retirement as I predicted a while back, they have always cut long-haul when they need airplanes because it minimizes reaccom.

jbs2886 wrote:

flights than they cut (albeit shorter flights). Didn't understand enrila's "must

Maybe it's even, but when they do temporary cuts to long haul it has been because fo a fleet shortfall plus we know this is the 737-300 retirement timeframe.

knope2001 wrote:

Actually if you look at the details I think enilria is right on the fewer-planes-than-they-originally-scheduled-for issue.

It's hard to tell without a detailed analysis, but since WN doesn't run red-eyes those long-hauls basically pop a plane out, but those short-hauls ccan/could be fringe times.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The DY CDG-EWR flight is actually a moving of a flight that was to go to JFK. I do wonder if Air France might resurrect AF18/19 under the Boost brand when it starts.

Also, B6 might be beating everyone else on JFK to LAX basically turning that into a shuttle every 2 hours.

One thing that I don't think has been discussed anywhere...

DY has basically gutted any opportunity for B6 to do Europe to NYC with narrowbodies. BOS I think is still feasible, but I think DY pricing and the breadth of their schedule make it very hard for B6 to do it from JFK coupled with the limited range of a narrowbody. B6 could still do widebodies deeper into Europe from NYC. B6 has a lot more feed, but the higher yield local market is too important for those markets to work now for B6 IMHO. B6 also gets a much greater fare premium in BOS than JFK.

When Southwest makes changes within a schedule period already rolled out it's usually to add, not to pull things which are coming up weak. These September cuts start in about 50 days which is pretty much unprecedented for Southwest. Nothing other than bad news about fleet is a reasonable explanation.

Jfk to lax mint are now start selling at 959 on most flights and over 1300 on selected ones and rises very quickly after that. Nothing in Boston really comes close to that. On all the mint routes, the fares out of JFK is a lot higher than bos. Once they start flying to Europe, they won't be competing with Norwegian for the bottom of the barrel traffic.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Also, B6 might be beating everyone else on JFK to LAX basically turning that into a shuttle every 2 hours.

It essentially is a "shuttle" type service across AA/B6/DL from JFK (and UA from EWR). The 'traditional' shuttle service would be difficult to run given the 4-hour difference in time zone. Not a whole lot of flights leaving the West Coast for the East Coast between 4-8PM local time.

The more intriguing development, IMO, will be how AS competes in this market. AS is a fantastic airline, but its premium product is nowhere near competitive the products AA/B6/DL throw at this market. And the frequency disadvantage certainly won't help matters.

That said, the market is so enormous - and growing - that there should be enough room for all competitors to play profitably.

enilria wrote:

jetbluefan1 wrote:
JFK-LAX is by far B6's most lucrative market.

I suspect there are routes in BOS that make more money than anything at JFK.

I'm sure there are a few BOS markets which have higher margins, but from a sheer dollar amount, JFK-LAX probably contributes the most to the bottom line.

In a way, it's crazy to think that JFK-LAX/SFO are the two highest ASM contributors to the B6 system, yet B6 was in neither of these markets a decade ago.

enilria wrote:

One thing that I don't think has been discussed anywhere...

DY has basically gutted any opportunity for B6 to do Europe to NYC with narrowbodies. BOS I think is still feasible, but I think DY pricing and the breadth of their schedule make it very hard for B6 to do it from JFK coupled with the limited range of a narrowbody. B6 could still do widebodies deeper into Europe from NYC. B6 has a lot more feed, but the higher yield local market is too important for those markets to work now for B6 IMHO. B6 also gets a much greater fare premium in BOS than JFK.

I agree that DY has thrown a monkey wrench in B6 plans, but I don't know if it's truly "gutted". As you mentioned, B6 has a lot more feed than DY. B6 also has a premium cabin, and a loyal following in NYC and BOS. It could still work...especially from BOS, where B6 could command some higher yielding corporate travel.

Of course DY could eat into some of these advantages if B6 doesn't react, and soon...

How does DL expect to be competitive on BOS-SFO with 2 flights when B6 will now have 5 and UA will have 6-7?
Frequency isn't the only competitive vector, especially on flights of some duration. This will test their commitment to growing BOS, however.

It will be interesting to watch. BOS-SFO capacity has gone up very, very quickly over the past 6 months, and there is more capacity coming on line. While obviously a growing market, it's hard to see how this ends without some capacity right sizing.

Somewhat funny to see that BOS-LAX gets nowhere near this amount of love. B6 is the only consistent lie-flat in the market, and is quietly adding a 4th frequency in the coming months. Obviously the links between Boston and LA are much different than Boston and SF, but it's still a huge market with plenty of higher yielding demand.

F9 MCO-MSP is resumption of seasonal service. They flew it daily on an A321.

Apparently, bos to Seattle mint starts in Feb 15th and jfk to Seattle starts in April 15th. Checked on Google flights, all of their Seattle flights are mint by end of April.

Most surprisingly, even bos to Las have become mint. 2 out of 3 flights out of both jfk and bos to Las are mint by end of April.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Also, B6 might be beating everyone else on JFK to LAX basically turning that into a shuttle every 2 hours.

AA already operates JFK-LAX as an hourly shuttle, but DL and B6 aren't far behind.

Slow SEA buildup continues by DL, add of MFR and increase on AUS.

SteveXC500 wrote:

F9 MCO-MSP is resumption of seasonal service. They flew it daily on an A321.

I wonder if all the additions are seasonal resumptions. Perhaps then there are truly "new" routes still to be unveiled.

tphuang wrote:

Apparently, bos to Seattle mint starts in Feb 15th and jfk to Seattle starts in April 15th. Checked on Google flights, all of their Seattle flights are mint by end of April.

Most surprisingly, even bos to Las have become mint. 2 out of 3 flights out of both jfk and bos to Las are mint by end of April.

Good catch! Mint was never announced for BOS-LAS. Exciting to see it loaded on 2 of 3 frequencies this upcoming spring.

Mint is also loaded at 2x on BOS-SEA and 1x on JFK-SEA, so by the time April 2018 rolls around, all announced Mint flying - plus the not-yet-announced BOS-LAS - will have commenced. Of question is whether Mint is added to the second JFK-SEA summer frequency, and if it covers all frequencies from JFK/BOS-LAS.

I hope to hear some guidance about future expansion plans on the Q2 earnings call.

klm617 wrote:

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

enilria wrote:

DL ATL-LHR FEB 3>1.8

Any ideas what's going on here? Just temporary for February?

Maybe VS will be picking up the slack.

My speculation: new flagship A350's in place of 767? Seems to be similar number of seats.

jbs2886 wrote:

michman wrote:

klm617 wrote:

DL DTW-LHR NOV 2>1.5 DEC 2>1.6 JAN 2>1.5 FEB 2>1.3 MAR 1.8>1.5

This is confusing because Delta never operated this flight more than once daily in the winter months.

It's not being compared to what was operated last year, it's reflecting an adjustment to what was already loaded in the schedule for these months. DL had 2 daily flights loaded in the schedule for this winter, and is now going to less than daily for the second flight.

Which means an increase over last year. DL is sure screwing DTW.

VS also operated the route last winter (although it may have been less than daily, I don't recall). So total seats on the route are probably similar or somewhat less than last year.

knope2001 wrote:

When Southwest makes changes within a schedule period already rolled out it's usually to add, not to pull things which are coming up weak. These September cuts start in about 50 days which is pretty much unprecedented for Southwest. Nothing other than bad news about fleet is a reasonable explanation.

But I thought they didn't loose the planes until October?

The Ohio experiment by F9 seems to have been a bust. They just keep struggling to build hubs. Maybe they gave up too soon on this one.

jetbluefan1 wrote:

The more intriguing development, IMO, will be how AS competes in this market. AS is a fantastic airline, but its premium product is nowhere near competitive the products AA/B6/DL throw at this market. And the frequency disadvantage certainly won't help matters.

It will be interesting to watch. BOS-SFO capacity has gone up very, very quickly over the past 6 months, and there is more capacity coming on line. While obviously a growing market, it's hard to see how this ends without some capacity right sizing.

Somewhat funny to see that BOS-LAX gets nowhere near this amount of love. B6 is the only consistent lie-flat in the market, and is quietly adding a 4th frequency in the coming months. Obviously the links between Boston and LA are much different than Boston and SF, but it's still a huge market with plenty of higher yielding demand.

VX/AS on BOS-SFO are not getting great loads of their FC seat from the days I checked. I typically saw about half sold a couple of days out. Not hard to see why given they are charging more for a less product. I think they are at the highest risk to see frequency cuts on premium transcon markets.

There was a lot of talk of UA flyers in the bay area possibly shifting to AS/VX. If UA's added capacities can get AS to cut frequency on JFK/EWR/BOS-SFO, it would be huge for them retaining their high valued customers.

As for BOS-LAX, AA isn't likely to put a premium product here and from what I gather, upgrades are not easy to come by, which would indicate they are still selling FC pretty well. Even with that, it doesn't look like B6 is getting better yield here than BOS-SFO.

AA already operates JFK-LAX as an hourly shuttle, but DL and B6 aren't far behind.

basically, B6 has added their frequencies whereas the other ones have stayed the same.

Good catch! Mint was never announced for BOS-LAS. Exciting to see it loaded on 2 of 3 frequencies this upcoming spring.

Mint is also loaded at 2x on BOS-SEA and 1x on JFK-SEA, so by the time April 2018 rolls around, all announced Mint flying - plus the not-yet-announced BOS-LAS - will have commenced. Of question is whether Mint is added to the second JFK-SEA summer frequency, and if it covers all frequencies from JFK/BOS-LAS.

it's great for BOS flyers. Not great news for AS.

FATFlyer wrote:

Y4 SBD-GDL NOV 0>0.3 DEC 0>0.3 JAN 0>0.3 FEB 0>0.3 MAR 0>0.3

Optimism or have the SBD issues really been resolved?

The official reason given for the "postponement" of the SBD-GDL service was due to CBP staffing issues.

While SBD has onsite FIS for general aviation, and an on-call system for activity outside of the local CBP operating hours, the staffing component was not adequate for commercial flight activity.

CBP typically performs personnel requisitions during the summer preceding the following IATA winter scheduling season. A November reschedule sounds reasonable....though I imagine Y4 would rather wait until December to launch.

There is clearly more coming from F9.... PVD-MCO upgauges to a 321 and departs at 3pm and returns to PVD at 11pm, but obviously does not sit there til 3pm (DEN stays a 320 and becomes an afternoon turn). Considering its an A321 I would assume that means RSW or TPA will be added in that morning slot.

aaway wrote:

FATFlyer wrote:

Y4 SBD-GDL NOV 0>0.3 DEC 0>0.3 JAN 0>0.3 FEB 0>0.3 MAR 0>0.3

Optimism or have the SBD issues really been resolved?

The official reason given for the "postponement" of the SBD-GDL service was due to CBP staffing issues.

While SBD has onsite FIS for general aviation, and an on-call system for activity outside of the local CBP operating hours, the staffing component was not adequate for commercial flight activity.

CBP typically performs personnel requisitions during the summer preceding the following IATA winter scheduling season. A November reschedule sounds reasonable....though I imagine Y4 would rather wait until December to launch.

The November date was tentatively set a month or two back when the Customs staffing issues came up.

But three weeks ago the SBD Director of Aviation was still hedging in public about whether the November date would be met.

That is why I was curious if anyone knew definitively if they have managed to resolve the issues for SBD in the last few weeks. Otherwise we might be seeing another schedule change.

enilria wrote:

DL BOS-CDG FEB 0.6>0.7
DL BOS-LHR JAN 1.0>0.8 FEB 1.0>0.7

I've been waiting for them to cut back on BOS-LHR. I was hoping for otherwise but the numbers just aren't good enough (I think aroung 60% LF). Hopefully daily will come back in the spring.

The frequency increases in the OAG filing for B6 on BOS-SFO and JFK-LAX are reflected in the following press release.

Also of note is that we have official word that Mint will be deployed 2x on JFK/BOS-SEA/LAS, although there is no indication if the seasonal 2x on JFK-SEA will now go year-round, and if the third seasonal BOS-SEA and 3x/4x frequencies to LAS will eventually see Mint.

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2 ... ans-Set-80

mtnwest1979 wrote:

I would think the return of scheduled service into Inyokern, CA (IYK) by anyone would deserve an *. More sso than already known WN MKE-SFO/SAN elimination.

Agreed. Boutique Air's website shows this route starts 8 August, with the following schedule:

Flight Number Origin Destination Departure Time (local) Arrival Time (local) Schedule
M T W T F S SU
341 IYK LAX 06:15 07:00 X X X X X X
342 LAX IYK 12:55 13:40 X X X X X X
343 IYK LAX 14:10 14:55 X X X X X X
344 LAX IYK 17:15 18:00 X X X X X X

Remember back in the 1970s, when Golden West flew LAX-IYK using Twin Otters, with a tag from IYK to Trona?

enilria wrote:

3M MIA-BIM AUG 0.3>0.5 SEP 0.3>0.4

This route has always boggled my mind, given the hub at FLL. Anyone have any info on how it does? It's purpose?

jetbluefan1 wrote:

enilria wrote:

One thing that I don't think has been discussed anywhere...

DY has basically gutted any opportunity for B6 to do Europe to NYC with narrowbodies. BOS I think is still feasible, but I think DY pricing and the breadth of their schedule make it very hard for B6 to do it from JFK coupled with the limited range of a narrowbody. B6 could still do widebodies deeper into Europe from NYC. B6 has a lot more feed, but the higher yield local market is too important for those markets to work now for B6 IMHO. B6 also gets a much greater fare premium in BOS than JFK.

I agree that DY has thrown a monkey wrench in B6 plans, but I don't know if it's truly "gutted". As you mentioned, B6 has a lot more feed than DY. B6 also has a premium cabin, and a loyal following in NYC and BOS. It could still work...especially from BOS, where B6 could command some higher yielding corporate travel.

Of course DY could eat into some of these advantages if B6 doesn't react, and soon...

Here are my extended reasons why B6 is screwed on Transatlantic narrowbodies from JFK now:
1) The traffic more Europe point-of-sale to NYC from the places a narrowbody can reach. Advantage DY.
2) Winter is easier to make work for the Europe airlines than the USA airlines because the point of sale seasonality is better from Europe to the USA than the reverse. Mostly weather driven. DY.
3) DY has significantly lower costs. Big DY.
4) B6 is only going to fly from JFK. Ironically domestically B6's strategy is to operate from every NYC airport, but DY has a clear advantage in a market like SWF-Europe because of #1-3. B6 only has leverage at JFK over DY in any fashion. DY.
5) Yes, B6 can connect at JFK, but you are talking low-yield connects on to a transatlantic narrowbody and to second tier destinations mostly, like Dublin or Bergen. LGW is probably the only significant one, but on a narrowbody it's go to be cheap. So basically the local market is trashed with DY fares and the connects are garbage because the narrow product sucks plus no business traffic. Also, JFK is expensive to operate at and CASM is always higher on a narrowbody. DY big time.
6) As stated B6 has no fare premium to begin with in NYC. That means they basically have to match DY, with maybe a little sell-up because the fee structure is a little better. DRAW
7) B6 has the JFK slots for peak times, but SWF has partially offset that. B6
8) The biggest problem is the A320 NEO probably can't even make it to LGW. If it can that's definitely it...and it will probably be weight limited. I don't think B6 can make markets like Bergen or EDI work without DY level fares and they can't offer that with their costs and product structure.

They are screwed. An A330 that could go to CDG/FRA/etc plays more to their strengths because the CASM is lower and that suits the low yield connects better. THe opportunity now is really BOS for the NEO.

MODS
BTW, I just love somebody took the AUS-AMS from this thread title and created their own separate thread to talk about it. This keeps happening. What is to be discussed in this thread if people are just going to break the schedule changes up into their own threads? Very irritating...

enilria wrote:

jetbluefan1 wrote:

enilria wrote:

One thing that I don't think has been discussed anywhere...

DY has basically gutted any opportunity for B6 to do Europe to NYC with narrowbodies. BOS I think is still feasible, but I think DY pricing and the breadth of their schedule make it very hard for B6 to do it from JFK coupled with the limited range of a narrowbody. B6 could still do widebodies deeper into Europe from NYC. B6 has a lot more feed, but the higher yield local market is too important for those markets to work now for B6 IMHO. B6 also gets a much greater fare premium in BOS than JFK.

I agree that DY has thrown a monkey wrench in B6 plans, but I don't know if it's truly "gutted". As you mentioned, B6 has a lot more feed than DY. B6 also has a premium cabin, and a loyal following in NYC and BOS. It could still work...especially from BOS, where B6 could command some higher yielding corporate travel.

Of course DY could eat into some of these advantages if B6 doesn't react, and soon...

Here are my extended reasons why B6 is screwed on Transatlantic narrowbodies from JFK now:
1) The traffic more Europe point-of-sale to NYC from the places a narrowbody can reach. Advantage DY.
2) Winter is easier to make work for the Europe airlines than the USA airlines because the point of sale seasonality is better from Europe to the USA than the reverse. Mostly weather driven. DY.
3) DY has significantly lower costs. Big DY.
4) B6 is only going to fly from JFK. Ironically domestically B6's strategy is to operate from every NYC airport, but DY has a clear advantage in a market like SWF-Europe because of #1-3. B6 only has leverage at JFK over DY in any fashion. DY.
5) Yes, B6 can connect at JFK, but you are talking low-yield connects on to a transatlantic narrowbody and to second tier destinations mostly, like Dublin or Bergen. LGW is probably the only significant one, but on a narrowbody it's go to be cheap. So basically the local market is trashed with DY fares and the connects are garbage because the narrow product sucks plus no business traffic. Also, JFK is expensive to operate at and CASM is always higher on a narrowbody. DY big time.
6) As stated B6 has no fare premium to begin with in NYC. That means they basically have to match DY, with maybe a little sell-up because the fee structure is a little better. DRAW
7) B6 has the JFK slots for peak times, but SWF has partially offset that. B6
8) The biggest problem is the A320 NEO probably can't even make it to LGW. If it can that's definitely it...and it will probably be weight limited. I don't think B6 can make markets like Bergen or EDI work without DY level fares and they can't offer that with their costs and product structure.

They are screwed. An A330 that could go to CDG/FRA/etc plays more to their strengths because the CASM is lower and that suits the low yield connects better. THe opportunity now is really BOS for the NEO.

MODS
BTW, I just love somebody took the AUS-AMS from this thread title and created their own separate thread to talk about it. This keeps happening. What is to be discussed in this thread if people are just going to break the schedule changes up into their own threads? Very irritating...

There's going to be overlap on threads. Some bigger or more interesting stuff are fine in a stand alone thread. In the reverse, should you be precluded from discussing topics that may have been previously mentioned? No, of course not.

AA DCA-MCO NOV 5>4
AA DCA-MYR JAN 0.3>0.1 FEB 0.3>0.1
AA DCA-VPS JAN 0.3>0.1 FEB 0.3>0.1

This frees up some slots. Seems odd that FLA destinations would be cut back during winter. Will AA redeploy slots or just sit on them for now?

FATFlyer wrote:

aaway wrote:

FATFlyer wrote:

The November date was tentatively set a month or two back when the Customs staffing issues came up.

But three weeks ago the SBD Director of Aviation was still hedging in public about whether the November date would be met.

That is why I was curious if anyone knew definitively if they have managed to resolve the issues for SBD in the last few weeks. Otherwise we might be seeing another schedule change.

My response was somewhat speculative, but rooted in past observations of CBP staff planning for the Los Angeles region.

By this time, CBP has polled carriers operating/planning to operate international services for the upcoming IATA Winter season. Note that though Mexican carriers are not subject to the seasonal timing variations that Asian and European carriers have for U.S. flights, the Mexican carriers are still required to submit future schedules to CBP for CBP staff planning purposes.

If that staff plan has not yet been finalized, it will be shortly. Once CBP has made their assessment, the carriers will then receive an approval (or disapproval) of their respective schedules (formally known as a 'landing right') by CBP.

My speculation (since I do not conduct my work at SBD) is that, at very least, Y4 has been given signal that staffing services will be available for the flight. I doubt that Y4 randomly chose the week of 09July2017 to refile the flight for display in GDS.