adamblang wrote:

enilria wrote:

*UA IAD-SHD APR 0>1.7 MAY 0>1.7 JUN 0>1.7 JUL 0>1.7 AUG 0>1.7
*UA LWB-SHD APR 0>1.0 MAY 0>1.0 JUN 0>1.0 JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0
*UA ORD-LWB APR 0>1.0 MAY 0>1.0 JUN 0>1.0 JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0

Interesting that UA 5018 (IAD-SHD-LWB-ORD) and UA 5014 (ORD-LWB-SHD-IAD) is a little bit of a milk run. Operated by Skywest CR2s.

It's the first new tag I've seen on a legacy carrier code in I don't know how long. Lower fuel makes them less horrible nowadays.

OKCDCA wrote:

Thanks as always enilria!

lavalampluva wrote:

G7 CVG-STL JAN 0>0.9 FEB 0>0.9 MAR 0>0.8 APR 0>0.9 MAY 0>0.9 JUN 0>0.8 JUL 0>0.9 AUG 0>0.9


Is this a One Jet knock off?

They have to publish something periodically to not lose their IATA code. Probably unsellable.

ucdtim17 wrote:

Are we sure this isn't just a mistake? The daily Q400 is still there through April and May.

Don't know. That's what they had published when the schedule was captured.

adamblang wrote:

tphuang wrote:

btw, are these filing errors?
AS BWI-CUN JUN 0>0.2 JUL 0>0.1 AUG 0>0.1
AS ORD-PVR JUN 0>0.2 JUL 0>0.1 AUG 0>0.1

It's seriously curious to me that AS would add BWI-CUN after they already canceled SFO-CUN.

It's probably a charter for someone like Apple Vacations.

Yes, they are both for Apple. They've been doing both for a while. They extend the schedule probably when they re-up the deal with Apple.

jetbluefan1 wrote:

It may have more to do with giving SJC point-of-sale customers more options, in a bid for their loyalty on more profitable routes. But you're right. Those average EWR-SJC fares on AS are pretty bad. Q1 2017 was $183, and Q2 was $212. Quite awful based on these data points (although we need to see a few more quarters before being able to draw bigger conclusions). For comparison, B6 yielded $202 and $251 from JFK during the same time period - which also isn't great.

Agreed, I was doing some analysis to see if SJC would be a possible mint route in the future, but based on the fare data I saw, not great option. Looks like SFO draws all the premium traffic on the transcon routes. Interesting enough though, I think PDX (at least in the summer time) and PHX might work.

The spread on EWR vs. JFK to SEA is probably due to expand once B6 introduces Mint this spring. Unrelated, but B6 has also loaded Mint on its third BOS-SEA frequency this summer, so AS will be getting even more competition soon...

Great catch. It really shows how important BOS is to B6 that both BOS-SAN and BOS-SEA got a 3rd mint frequency before JFK-SAN or FLL-LAX. I think they have caught on that mint will be huge driving force in consolidating their position in BOS. My guess is that BOS-LAX will get a 5th daily sometime next year.

tphuang wrote:

Really not sure where you get your jfk rumors but ewr sjc is one of the worst performing transcon routes in as network. Why would they add one out of JFK. And as had the lowest average fares on nyc SAN of all carriers, why would they add a very unfavorable timed option out of JFK which have far more options than out of ewr. As a point of reference, they yield much better out of ewr vs JFK to Seattle.

I've heard no rumors re: SJC-JFK (so-stated in my post) but since AAG is in a bit of a scuffle these days in SJC with WN and now perhaps DL, it makes sense for me to post what I did. DL offering SJC-JFK would certainly gain access to all the TATL service offered via Kennedy (that EWR doesn't.) Maybe that would make the difference in the amount of traffic that DL could carry versus what AS wouldn't. That's just my 2 cents and again, SJC service is just thinking out loud on my part.

As for SAN-NYC, AAG got their foot in the door with EWR and those loads are doing well from what I've heard. If they do add SAN-JFK -- which I think they will -- it would be a red-eye e/b and a morning w/b -- just like SEA and PDX both got -- which I think would work ok. B6, AA and DL all operate such schedules now and I remember that both Blue and DL started serving SAN-JFK with a single red-eye r/t. West coasters are very familiar with red-eyes and some travelers use them regularly; AS has never been shy with operating red-eyes on their schedules from the w/c.

Of course depending on what AAG does with all those JFK slots/flights acquired thru VX, at some point, it's possible that we could see a few of those switched to other AS routes. (Again, I'm thinking out loud here...)

bb

Shields wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

enilria wrote:

DL SEA-LAX MAR 9>8
DL SEA-SFO MAR 7>6

More reductions in SEA again this week. Interesting.

Looking ahead to June, SEA-SFO is operated 8x/daily, exclusively on mainline. This is a significant capacity increase from as recently as two years ago, when the route was almost entirely E75 and perhaps had one mainline r/t.

Also noteworthy:

In June, LAX-SFO goes 100% DL mainline equipment (exclusively 738). And, DL is adding mainline equipment (717) to the LGA/ORD shuttle run beginning in April. That route sees 5x/daily 717 (in addition to the E70/75 service) come June.

I'm not the least bit surprised to see LGA-ORD Shuttle flights go mainline considering AA flies how many flights daily on 738s? UA also has it's share of A319/A320/737 flights on the route as well. It was only a matter of time before DL increased capacity on a heavily competitive route.

grbauc wrote:

RamblinMan wrote:

panamair wrote:

Interestingly enough, this looks like a domestic add given the flight times (815am out of JFK, and a red-eye return from SJC). Aircraft will be a 738.

Yes, service between two points in the same country is generally considered a domestic flight.

SJC is in California. SJO is the one in Costa Rica. Hippie friend of mine on his way to Costa Rica once bought a ticket to the wrong one and didnt realize it until he saw the Oakland Coliseum during descent.

Yikes that sucks. I was flying 3 different cities weekly and my car was at ONT and I was flying into LAX I forgot when doing my flights and remember looking down thinking man this pilot is going to have to drop fast if were going to Land at ONT. I got the pleasure of a 3 hour Blue van ride back to ONT.

Was boarding a flight to Florence, SC one time with a lady who thought we were going to Italy. She didn’t realize it until she saw the Dash-8 and asked another passenger “are we taking this all the way to Europe?”

jetbluefan1 wrote:

It may have more to do with giving SJC point-of-sale customers more options, in a bid for their loyalty on more profitable routes. But you're right. Those average EWR-SJC fares on AS are pretty bad. Q1 2017 was $183, and Q2 was $212. Quite awful based on these data points (although we need to see a few more quarters before being able to draw bigger conclusions). For comparison, B6 yielded $202 and $251 from JFK during the same time period - which also isn't great.

Not that it will drive yield necessarily, but it is noteworthy that DL will be the only one operating a morning departure on NYC-SJC. DL departs at 08:15, AS and UA depart at 16:05, and B6 departs at 17:19. Eastbound, Delta and B6 have very similar redeye schedule, while UA (06:25) and AS (09:25) are both in the morning. I could imagine some NYC-based consultants may be interested in spending Sunday night at home and flying out to SJC in time to work a half day Monday rather than having to depart NYC on Sunday.

SANFan wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Really not sure where you get your jfk rumors but ewr sjc is one of the worst performing transcon routes in as network. Why would they add one out of JFK. And as had the lowest average fares on nyc SAN of all carriers, why would they add a very unfavorable timed option out of JFK which have far more options than out of ewr. As a point of reference, they yield much better out of ewr vs JFK to Seattle.

I've heard no rumors re: SJC-JFK (so-stated in my post) but since AAG is in a bit of a scuffle these days in SJC with WN and now perhaps DL, it makes sense for me to post what I did. DL offering SJC-JFK would certainly gain access to all the TATL service offered via Kennedy (that EWR doesn't.) Maybe that would make the difference in the amount of traffic that DL could carry versus what AS wouldn't. That's just my 2 cents and again, SJC service is just thinking out loud on my part.

As for SAN-NYC, AAG got their foot in the door with EWR and those loads are doing well from what I've heard. If they do add SAN-JFK -- which I think they will -- it would be a red-eye e/b and a morning w/b -- just like SEA and PDX both got -- which I think would work ok. B6, AA and DL all operate such schedules now and I remember that both Blue and DL started serving SAN-JFK with a single red-eye r/t. West coasters are very familiar with red-eyes and some travelers use them regularly; AS has never been shy with operating red-eyes on their schedules from the w/c.

Of course depending on what AAG does with all those JFK slots/flights acquired thru VX, at some point, it's possible that we could see a few of those switched to other AS routes. (Again, I'm thinking out loud here...)

bb

Btw I apologize for coming off a little aggressive in my first reply.

My thought on sjc
I heard from as ft that ewr sjc is one of the easiest routes to get upgraded on which is verified with the fare data we have seen. They could try to add JFK sjc but the timing most likely will be not well primed and it won't do any better than ewr sjc. I have seen the fare numbers from NYC to secondary Bay Area airport. It's really pretty horrendous.

As for NYC to San, it is a much higher yielding market. There are few reasons working against as adding an JFK flight here.
1) they do much better out of ewr on transcon because there is just much less competition. For Seattle routes, they averaged $50 more out of ewr than JFK. So if they do add, it makes more sense to add a second out of ewr.
2) JFK San has really gotten competitive since mint entered. Now both dl and aa are stepping up their game here. As already gets the lowest fare out of all airlines in NYC to San. Jfk would do worse than ewr given the more competitive nature out there. Not a smart add imo.
3) then there is the issue of JFK itself. Aside from not having optimally time slots available unless they pull from other transcon markets, as at t7 would be a much inferior experience to t4 and t5.

Just my 2 cents.

enilria wrote:

FAQ
DL LAN-MSP APR 3>1.9 MAY 3>1.8 JUN 3>2.0 JUL 3>1.9 AUG 3>2
DL MLI-MSP APR 1.9>1.0 MAY 1.8>1.0 JUN 1.8>1.0 JUL 1.8>1.0 AUG 1.9>1.0

These both appear to be filing errors. This is showing up periodically on Delta Connection CR2 flying, particulary if they switch operating carriers as many of these are being transitioned over to Skywest (OO) that may have been Endeavor (9E) in the past.

LAN-MSP is still showing 3x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest
MLI-MSP is still showing 2x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest

MLI is showing 2x CRJ MSP, 2x CRJ DTW, 3x CR9 ATL for Summer 2018.

enilria wrote:

*DL ATL-GRK JAN 1.4>0.7 FEB 1.4>0 MAR 1.5>0 APR 1.6>0 MAY 1.5>0 JUN 1.6>0 JUL 1.5>0 AUG 1.6>0

I suppose ATL was a bridge too far. I've done both IAH and DFW to GRK and would have liked to have done ATL but since my daughter divorced the army guy...

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

enilria wrote:

FAQ
DL LAN-MSP APR 3>1.9 MAY 3>1.8 JUN 3>2.0 JUL 3>1.9 AUG 3>2
DL MLI-MSP APR 1.9>1.0 MAY 1.8>1.0 JUN 1.8>1.0 JUL 1.8>1.0 AUG 1.9>1.0

These both appear to be filing errors. This is showing up periodically on Delta Connection CR2 flying, particulary if they switch operating carriers as many of these are being transitioned over to Skywest (OO) that may have been Endeavor (9E) in the past.

LAN-MSP is still showing 3x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest
MLI-MSP is still showing 2x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest

MLI is showing 2x CRJ MSP, 2x CRJ DTW, 3x CR9 ATL for Summer 2018.

Thanks for posting that. I knew MLI-MSP had to be more than just 1x daily. I also didn't know there was that much lift to ATL which might explain why MLI-MSP isn't minimum 3x daily.

Few points:

1. JFK IND increase. B6 is rumored to start IND this year. I believe this is DL beefing up.

2. T7 vs T4 or T5. T7 is a very nice, small terminal. Much easier than dealing with the giant TSA checkpoint in T4.

3. SJC/AS rumor is that Alaska will add at JFK. They have a new lounge. They have gates. The redeye adds dont use slots. SJC and SAN are naturals. EWR was done before VX and their large JFK operation came into play

4. Being competitive for AS....They don’t need to compete with Lie flat seats. The West Coast cities are major cities for them… They just need a presence on routes to New York. This rounds out their network for their west coast fliers

jfklganyc wrote:

Few points:

1. JFK IND increase. B6 is rumored to start IND this year. I believe this is DL beefing up.

2. T7 vs T4 or T5. T7 is a very nice, small terminal. Much easier than dealing with the giant TSA checkpoint in T4.

3. SJC/AS rumor is that Alaska will add at JFK. They have a new lounge. They have gates. The redeye adds dont use slots. SJC and SAN are naturals. EWR was done before VX and their large JFK operation came into play

4. Being competitive for AS....They don’t need to compete with Lie flat seats. The West Coast cities are major cities for them… They just need a presence on routes to New York. This rounds out their network for their west coast fliers

About 16 flights or so a day as got from vx out of Jfk doesn’t really make it a “large operation” out of Jfk when AA/DL/B6 being the big 3 operators have an average of 175 daily flights. B6 does more out of sfo and it’s not considered a large operation on their west coast.
If they start San/sjc from Jfk, which I doubt, it will be a losing match especially if they compete on the same red eyes going eastbound. It will dilute the already bad yields as is getting out of ewr and with no high end premium on the front end of it they can’t attract a high end yield. I think sticking to just feeding Jfk to the lax/sfo hubs would be most prudent on that market.

They already added PDX and added freq to SEA, so obviously that isnt their plan.

For an airline AS or B6s size, a spoke with 16 flights is absolutely a large station. These arent legacy carriers with 8 different hubs to fly to from each spoke

For AS' Apple Vacations flying, do AS also sell seats on the flight as a scheduled flight or is the entire flight an Apple charter?

jfklganyc wrote:

Few points:

1. JFK IND increase. B6 is rumored to start IND this year. I believe this is DL beefing up.

2. T7 vs T4 or T5. T7 is a very nice, small terminal. Much easier than dealing with the giant TSA checkpoint in T4.

3. SJC/AS rumor is that Alaska will add at JFK. They have a new lounge. They have gates. The redeye adds dont use slots. SJC and SAN are naturals. EWR was done before VX and their large JFK operation came into play

4. Being competitive for AS....They don’t need to compete with Lie flat seats. The West Coast cities are major cities for them… They just need a presence on routes to New York. This rounds out their network for their west coast fliers

AS has a new lounge somewhere?

yes in T7. Under construction

Dominion301 wrote:

For AS' Apple Vacations flying, do AS also sell seats on the flight as a scheduled flight or is the entire flight an Apple charter?

I do know that F9 did when they had the Apple contract out of RFD a few years ago, but I don't think AS does, but somebody may know better than me.

loisencroach wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

For AS' Apple Vacations flying, do AS also sell seats on the flight as a scheduled flight or is the entire flight an Apple charter?

I do know that F9 did when they had the Apple contract out of RFD a few years ago, but I don't think AS does, but somebody may know better than me.

I did a tiny bit of digging. Unless these haven't been yet uploaded to AS' schedule, and assuming these are both Saturday-only (as opposed to say Sundays), then neither of these flights are available for sale directly with AS and are strictly Apple charters. BWI-CUN gives you an error message whilst ORD-PVR is bookable, but only via a connection.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

enilria wrote:

FAQ
DL LAN-MSP APR 3>1.9 MAY 3>1.8 JUN 3>2.0 JUL 3>1.9 AUG 3>2
DL MLI-MSP APR 1.9>1.0 MAY 1.8>1.0 JUN 1.8>1.0 JUL 1.8>1.0 AUG 1.9>1.0

These both appear to be filing errors. This is showing up periodically on Delta Connection CR2 flying, particulary if they switch operating carriers as many of these are being transitioned over to Skywest (OO) that may have been Endeavor (9E) in the past.

LAN-MSP is still showing 3x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest
MLI-MSP is still showing 2x CRJ weekdays, all operated by Skywest

MLI is showing 2x CRJ MSP, 2x CRJ DTW, 3x CR9 ATL for Summer 2018.

I was thinking that too. MLIDTW has been at 3x the last 2 years, so it seems we lost the frequency there, not to MSP. Last spring we saw some large RJs on MSP and DTW, so that will be quite a reduction for this spring, unfortunately.

Cannot believe that UA is still keeping FWA-EWR with 46% Load Factors.

Back in the '80's during the oil boom WN served MAF to OKC non-stop for a brief time.....RW was thinking about flying to MAF....would be HOU-MAF then onto a city in California that RW already served out of HOU then RC was thinking about it after they merged with RW.........Trans-Central airline's flew MAF-OKC non-stop for a brief time using a metroliner

evank516 wrote:

Shields wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

More reductions in SEA again this week. Interesting.

Looking ahead to June, SEA-SFO is operated 8x/daily, exclusively on mainline. This is a significant capacity increase from as recently as two years ago, when the route was almost entirely E75 and perhaps had one mainline r/t.

Also noteworthy:

In June, LAX-SFO goes 100% DL mainline equipment (exclusively 738). And, DL is adding mainline equipment (717) to the LGA/ORD shuttle run beginning in April. That route sees 5x/daily 717 (in addition to the E70/75 service) come June.

I'm not the least bit surprised to see LGA-ORD Shuttle flights go mainline considering AA flies how many flights daily on 738s? UA also has it's share of A319/A320/737 flights on the route as well. It was only a matter of time before DL increased capacity on a heavily competitive route.

All three are hourly. AA is all 738 with the occasional 32B, UA is majority mainline, and DL is all E17. for now.

Good to see DL compete with UA and AA. TW did in the past, but DL has filled the gap.

Does anyone know how many seats there are on weekdays between Chicago (ORD / MDW) and Nee York (LGA / EWR / JFK / HPN)? Has to be a large number.

CHI2DFW wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Shields wrote:

Looking ahead to June, SEA-SFO is operated 8x/daily, exclusively on mainline. This is a significant capacity increase from as recently as two years ago, when the route was almost entirely E75 and perhaps had one mainline r/t.

Also noteworthy:

In June, LAX-SFO goes 100% DL mainline equipment (exclusively 738). And, DL is adding mainline equipment (717) to the LGA/ORD shuttle run beginning in April. That route sees 5x/daily 717 (in addition to the E70/75 service) come June.

I'm not the least bit surprised to see LGA-ORD Shuttle flights go mainline considering AA flies how many flights daily on 738s? UA also has it's share of A319/A320/737 flights on the route as well. It was only a matter of time before DL increased capacity on a heavily competitive route.

All three are hourly. AA is all 738 with the occasional 32B, UA is majority mainline, and DL is all E17. for now.

Good to see DL compete with UA and AA. TW did in the past, but DL has filled the gap.

Does anyone know how many seats there are on weekdays between Chicago (ORD / MDW) and Nee York (LGA / EWR / JFK / HPN)? Has to be a large number.

Well if you think about it, with AA's hourly service to ORD on 738s, UA's mainline flights to ORD, DL's Shuttle, and even NK's one or two ORD flights topped with WN's maybe 8 dailies to MDW, we're probably talking a few thousand.

tphuang wrote:

SANFan wrote:

A couple of thoughts.

Re: SJC-JFK on DL. I think this could be a pre-emptive move aimed at AAG. Rumors are out there that since AAG's move to T7 at JFK, with added room, AS might expand nontops to the west coast, in addition to LAX, SFO, SEA and PDX that are already served: I've definitely heard SAN mentioned and SJC -- another AAG focus city -- would also seem like a possibility. (In fact, DL is going 4x daily SAN-JFK next summer so another entry into the Bay Area wouldn't surprise me.)

Re: STS service on AAG. My guess here is that this a combination of seasonal service plus 'the QX pilot' issue. The smaller Q400 stations in CA often see strange schedules and added and subtracted service at times. FAT often sees the same kind of thing.

That being said, I would expect EMJ service on the horizon (pun intended!) on STS service. I'm also delighted to see a STS-SAN service increase mentioned; I've heard that the loads are very good and figure there's enough traffic on the route now that another r/t would allow daily r/t commuting in both directions. Hope it happens! EMJs to SAN, LAX and SEA would seem like a winning move for AAG.

bb

Really not sure where you get your jfk rumors but ewr sjc is one of the worst performing transcon routes in as network. Why would they add one out of JFK. And as had the lowest average fares on nyc SAN of all carriers, why would they add a very unfavorable timed option out of JFK which have far more options than out of ewr. As a point of reference, they yield much better out of ewr vs JFK to Seattle.

Do you have data on the SJC-EWR pax loads?

Abeam79 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

Few points:

1. JFK IND increase. B6 is rumored to start IND this year. I believe this is DL beefing up.

2. T7 vs T4 or T5. T7 is a very nice, small terminal. Much easier than dealing with the giant TSA checkpoint in T4.

3. SJC/AS rumor is that Alaska will add at JFK. They have a new lounge. They have gates. The redeye adds dont use slots. SJC and SAN are naturals. EWR was done before VX and their large JFK operation came into play

4. Being competitive for AS....They don’t need to compete with Lie flat seats. The West Coast cities are major cities for them… They just need a presence on routes to New York. This rounds out their network for their west coast fliers

About 16 flights or so a day as got from vx out of Jfk doesn’t really make it a “large operation” out of Jfk when AA/DL/B6 being the big 3 operators have an average of 175 daily flights. B6 does more out of sfo and it’s not considered a large operation on their west coast.
If they start San/sjc from Jfk, which I doubt, it will be a losing match especially if they compete on the same red eyes going eastbound. It will dilute the already bad yields as is getting out of ewr and with no high end premium on the front end of it they can’t attract a high end yield. I think sticking to just feeding Jfk to the lax/sfo hubs would be most prudent on that market.

What if AS *moved* the EWR flight to JFK? Would there be any advantage? Does EWR do anything for AS versus JFK?

AirFiero wrote:

tphuang wrote:

SANFan wrote:

A couple of thoughts.

Re: SJC-JFK on DL. I think this could be a pre-emptive move aimed at AAG. Rumors are out there that since AAG's move to T7 at JFK, with added room, AS might expand nontops to the west coast, in addition to LAX, SFO, SEA and PDX that are already served: I've definitely heard SAN mentioned and SJC -- another AAG focus city -- would also seem like a possibility. (In fact, DL is going 4x daily SAN-JFK next summer so another entry into the Bay Area wouldn't surprise me.)

Re: STS service on AAG. My guess here is that this a combination of seasonal service plus 'the QX pilot' issue. The smaller Q400 stations in CA often see strange schedules and added and subtracted service at times. FAT often sees the same kind of thing.

That being said, I would expect EMJ service on the horizon (pun intended!) on STS service. I'm also delighted to see a STS-SAN service increase mentioned; I've heard that the loads are very good and figure there's enough traffic on the route now that another r/t would allow daily r/t commuting in both directions. Hope it happens! EMJs to SAN, LAX and SEA would seem like a winning move for AAG.

bb

Really not sure where you get your jfk rumors but ewr sjc is one of the worst performing transcon routes in as network. Why would they add one out of JFK. And as had the lowest average fares on nyc SAN of all carriers, why would they add a very unfavorable timed option out of JFK which have far more options than out of ewr. As a point of reference, they yield much better out of ewr vs JFK to Seattle.

Do you have data on the SJC-EWR pax loads?

I am basing it on q1 and q2 fare data. For example ewr sea averages $100 more. Sjc ewr is by far the lowest amongst the transcon routes I looked at out of as network. Nothing else even close.

Not surprisingly, they do the best out of sea and pdx.

Moving flights from ewr to JFK will simply move to a more competitive market in both sea and San case. They do far better out of ewr than JFK with the same aircraft.

AirFiero wrote:

Do you have data on the SJC-EWR pax loads?

T100 shows AS at 80.3% Mar-Aug and UA at 80.4% for the same period, both carriers started the route in March.

Shields wrote:

Looking ahead to June, SEA-SFO is operated 8x/daily, exclusively on mainline. This is a significant capacity increase from as recently as two years ago, when the route was almost entirely E75 and perhaps had one mainline r/t.

Also noteworthy:

In June, LAX-SFO goes 100% DL mainline equipment (exclusively 738).

It might not be the increase you might think. First, the schedule has to hold, and this far out that's definitely not a given (as seen by the March cuts). And the gauge matters too. Last summer DL had 4 mainline on a peak a day on SEA-SFO, with two being 739s. 8x 717s is only a bit more capacity than 4x E75s, 2x 717s, and 2x 739s, for example.

All mainline on LAX-SFO is noteworthy, but it has been attempted before. The only true increase might be LGA-ORD.

Rdh3e wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Do you have data on the SJC-EWR pax loads?

T100 shows AS at 80.3% Mar-Aug and UA at 80.4% for the same period, both carriers started the route in March.

That doesn't sound like a bad passenger load.

AirFiero wrote:

Rdh3e wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Do you have data on the SJC-EWR pax loads?

T100 shows AS at 80.3% Mar-Aug and UA at 80.4% for the same period, both carriers started the route in March.

That doesn't sound like a bad passenger load.

But if you take the information upthread as truth, then they're getting ~$200 per head which equates to approx 7.8c yield, times 80% load puts the PRASM at around 6.3c. Surely that is near the bottom of their network.

Dominion301 wrote:

For AS' Apple Vacations flying, do AS also sell seats on the flight as a scheduled flight or is the entire flight an Apple charter?

It's an Apple Charter. I've never seen seats for sale from AS.

Rdh3e wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Rdh3e wrote:

T100 shows AS at 80.3% Mar-Aug and UA at 80.4% for the same period, both carriers started the route in March.

That doesn't sound like a bad passenger load.

But if you take the information upthread as truth, then they're getting ~$200 per head which equates to approx 7.8c yield, times 80% load puts the PRASM at around 6.3c. Surely that is near the bottom of their network.

Point taken, but at least they are getting butts in seats. Maybe they are thinking long term on this route?

But back to the original info, that DL is jumping into SJC-JFK, my reaction was...WHOA! Big surprise. What does DL know that we don't?

AirFiero wrote:

But back to the original info, that DL is jumping into SJC-JFK, my reaction was...WHOA! Big surprise. What does DL know that we don't?

Maybe they are hearing from their corporate accounts in SJC that they aren't flying DL on a connection when two carriers are flying non-stop, that's probably the most likely scenario.

Shame to see LAX-OKC go. United has served that route for close to 10 years, I believe this route started in July 2008.

Ultimately AA entered the market in 2010 with 1 daily flight and has slowly pushed them out. At one time AA and UA had a combined 5 round trips a day. I believe that was summer 2013. Now we are down to 2 daily on AA.

Speaking of MAF, heard of the possibility of UA starting ORD-MAF soon?

f18raider wrote:

Speaking of MAF, heard of the possibility of UA starting ORD-MAF soon?

From whom did you hear?