There doesn't seem to be a network strategy for F9, unless I'm missing the point. During 2017 we went from "We're bypassing a hub at DEN as connecting traffic is too expensive" to "Regaining connecting share" to reducing IND-DEN (once served 3x daily) to 3x week, seemingly negating the connecting plan.

F9 has grown a lot in terms of new routes and its fleet is just beginning to really accelerate in growth. With the recent Indigo Partners order, large operations at DEN, MCO, CVG, TPA, LAS, etc., and plans to develop new connecting points such as CVG, what do you see for the future of F9?
Will there launch 50 routes a year, cut them all later in the year, and find more the next year "strategy?" continue?
How will they face an emboldened and growing UA at DEN?
How well will F9s low costs enable it to outmaneuver legacy price matching by AA, DL, and UA?
Is F9 closer in strategy to G4 or NK? Which would be a better merger partner? (I'm starting to lean toward G4....)
Will SY affect F9 as it plans to move to a lower cost model?
In some cases F9 has gone into secondary airports (PVD, TNT, ISP, etc.), but they also have enterered larger airports (MIA over FLL, for example). What is there strategy in doing so?
What can F9 do to distinguish its network from G4 (small cities to vacation destinations) and NK (larger cities to larger cities/vacation destinations). It seems somewhat of a hybrid of two currently.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Iacobus Viridis

When did they say CVG would be a connect point?

It's the same network strategy as NK where FLL is now DEN.

enilria wrote:

When did they say CVG would be a connect point?

It's the same network strategy as NK where FLL is now DEN.

http://www.cleveland.com/travel/index.s ... art_c.html

CLE, CVG, AUS, and MCO were listed, don't expect a lot of connecting passengers though...

Midwestindy wrote:

enilria wrote:

When did they say CVG would be a connect point?

It's the same network strategy as NK where FLL is now DEN.

http://www.cleveland.com/travel/index.s ... art_c.html

CLE, CVG, AUS, and MCO were listed, don't expect a lot of connecting passengers though...

The schedule at CVG is going fully banked in April, so there will be a bunch of connecting options. Wether people actually select those is another deal, but I expect a fair number of F9 connecting pax at CVG soon.

It doesn't look like CLE/MCO received much connecting itineraries at all, AUS has a few, but not much.

Just for an example, here are some of the connecting itineraries offered by F9 through CVG (this is not complete):
MSP-CVG-RDU/TPA/PHL/LGA/LAS/ATL
RSW-CVG-MSP/PHL/LAS
LAX-CVG-ATL
RDU-CVG-MSP/ATL/LAS
TPA-CVG-ATL
SAT-CVG-LAS/ATL
PHL-CVG-LAX/SAT/DEN/SAN/PHX/AUS/TPA/MIA/JAX
LGA-CVG-JAX/TPA/RSW/AUS/SAT
ATL-CVG-LAX/SAN/SJC/AUS/SAT
AUS-CVG-LGA/ATL/LAS
MIA-CVG-DEN/PHL/AUS
SJC-CVG-ATL
JAX-CVG-LAS
DEN-CVG-SAT/RDU/TPA/MSP/PHL
PHX-CVG-LGA/MSP/PHL/ATL
LAS-CVG-MCO
SAN-CVG-PHL/ATL
DFW-CVG-PHL/ATL/MSP

I believe CVG will be #4 (behind DEN, MCO, LAS) in F9's system by scheduled seats once all the new routes are added in. Given the central geography and amount of connections available (which has to be #2 behind DEN at this point) I don't think it is unrealistic to envision CVG as F9's eastern DEN.

Connections on Frontier from Portland through Denver are a joke, e.g. PDX-BNA: 23 hours with an 18-hour layover in DEN. PDX-CVG: 24.5 hours. PDX-MSY: 21 hours. PDX-RSW: 15 hours. PDX-MCI: 20.5 hours. Why bother loading these connections?

jbpdx wrote:

Connections on Frontier from Portland through Denver are a joke, e.g. PDX-BNA: 23 hours with an 18-hour layover in DEN. PDX-CVG: 24.5 hours. PDX-MSY: 21 hours. PDX-RSW: 15 hours. PDX-MCI: 20.5 hours. Why bother loading these connections?

They seem to be offering a lot of overnight/red-eye connections through DEN, which makes those long layovers. Though it depends on the day of the week, for instance, here is a 1.5 hour connection in DEN for PDX-CVG: https://www.google.com/flights/#search; ... ;a=F9;eo=e. My guess is some people are willing to fly them if the price is low enough.

It seems they have capped connections at 7 hours at CVG, most are around 1 to 3 hours, with a couple long 4-7 hour connections thrown in there.

I'm sure some people will be connecting. There are still some convenient connection times. My sister is flying F9 in March TYS-MCO-DEN because it was about $300-$350 cheaper per trip compared to all the other options. For six passengers that adds up to about $2000 in savings. The connection time on the outbound is around 8 hours though so they are going to find something to do to kill the time. If you're connection is an overnight period one could just grab a cheap hotel somewhere if your trip allows for that.

cvgComair wrote:

Just for an example, here are some of the connecting itineraries offered by F9 through CVG (this is not complete):
MSP-CVG-RDU/TPA/PHL/LGA/LAS/ATL
RSW-CVG-MSP/PHL/LAS
LAX-CVG-ATL
RDU-CVG-MSP/ATL/LAS
TPA-CVG-ATL
SAT-CVG-LAS/ATL
PHL-CVG-LAX/SAT/DEN/SAN/PHX/AUS/TPA/MIA/JAX
LGA-CVG-JAX/TPA/RSW/AUS/SAT
ATL-CVG-LAX/SAN/SJC/AUS/SAT
AUS-CVG-LGA/ATL/LAS
MIA-CVG-DEN/PHL/AUS
SJC-CVG-ATL
JAX-CVG-LAS
DEN-CVG-SAT/RDU/TPA/MSP/PHL
PHX-CVG-LGA/MSP/PHL/ATL
LAS-CVG-MCO
SAN-CVG-PHL/ATL
DFW-CVG-PHL/ATL/MSP

I believe CVG will be #4 (behind DEN, MCO, LAS) in F9's system by scheduled seats once all the new routes are added in. Given the central geography and amount of connections available (which has to be #2 behind DEN at this point) I don't think it is unrealistic to envision CVG as F9's eastern DEN.

That is the premise of F9s schedule though it, they "bank" their flights out of almost every station, they are already doing that now at CVG. I'm sure you can find similar itineraries if you look throughly ORD, PHL, ATL, e.t.c. Even if you look at IND, which only has at most 3 flights a day they are timed for connections. For example the inbound flight is DEN and the outbound is RSW or the inbound flight is LAS and the outbound is MCO, e.t.c, e.t.c.

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Just for an example, here are some of the connecting itineraries offered by F9 through CVG (this is not complete):
MSP-CVG-RDU/TPA/PHL/LGA/LAS/ATL
RSW-CVG-MSP/PHL/LAS
LAX-CVG-ATL
RDU-CVG-MSP/ATL/LAS
TPA-CVG-ATL
SAT-CVG-LAS/ATL
PHL-CVG-LAX/SAT/DEN/SAN/PHX/AUS/TPA/MIA/JAX
LGA-CVG-JAX/TPA/RSW/AUS/SAT
ATL-CVG-LAX/SAN/SJC/AUS/SAT
AUS-CVG-LGA/ATL/LAS
MIA-CVG-DEN/PHL/AUS
SJC-CVG-ATL
JAX-CVG-LAS
DEN-CVG-SAT/RDU/TPA/MSP/PHL
PHX-CVG-LGA/MSP/PHL/ATL
LAS-CVG-MCO
SAN-CVG-PHL/ATL
DFW-CVG-PHL/ATL/MSP

I believe CVG will be #4 (behind DEN, MCO, LAS) in F9's system by scheduled seats once all the new routes are added in. Given the central geography and amount of connections available (which has to be #2 behind DEN at this point) I don't think it is unrealistic to envision CVG as F9's eastern DEN.

That is the premise of F9s schedule though it, they "bank" their flights out of almost every station, they are already doing that now at CVG. I'm sure you can find similar itineraries if you look throughly ORD, PHL, ATL, e.t.c. Even if you look at IND, which only has at most 3 flights a day they are timed for connections. For example the inbound flight is DEN and the outbound is RSW or the inbound flight is LAS and the outbound is MCO, e.t.c, e.t.c.

At smaller stations though I'd venture to say that's just the nature of a ULCC...with the turnarounds so fast (often 30-40 minutes from what I've seen at CVG) the outbound flight for the inbound flight can be a "banked connection". Now that CVG is a larger station though, it would be interesting to see if they really actually try to time their schedule so some of the inbound flights arrive at similar times to create a semi-banked schedule for multiple connections. I wonder if that's what cvgComair is claiming what the CVG F9 schedule will look like. Although, what is F9's peak daily departures from CVG? I'd imagine it's hard to have a few banks with 3-5 planes arriving at similar times in the day if we don't exceed 15-20 or so daily flights.

cvgComair wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

Connections on Frontier from Portland through Denver are a joke, e.g. PDX-BNA: 23 hours with an 18-hour layover in DEN. PDX-CVG: 24.5 hours. PDX-MSY: 21 hours. PDX-RSW: 15 hours. PDX-MCI: 20.5 hours. Why bother loading these connections?

They seem to be offering a lot of overnight/red-eye connections through DEN, which makes those long layovers. Though it depends on the day of the week, for instance, here is a 1.5 hour connection in DEN for PDX-CVG: https://www.google.com/flights/#search; ... ;a=F9;eo=e. My guess is some people are willing to fly them if the price is low enough.

It seems they have capped connections at 7 hours at CVG, most are around 1 to 3 hours, with a couple long 4-7 hour connections thrown in there.

That’s after April when they add. Right now Frontier operates only one daily departure from Portland.

jtwall wrote:

At smaller stations though I'd venture to say that's just the nature of a ULCC...with the turnarounds so fast (often 30-40 minutes from what I've seen at CVG) the outbound flight for the inbound flight can be a "banked connection". Now that CVG is a larger station though, it would be interesting to see if they really actually try to time their schedule so some of the inbound flights arrive at similar times to create a semi-banked schedule for multiple connections. I wonder if that's what cvgComair is claiming what the CVG F9 schedule will look like. Although, what is F9's peak daily departures from CVG? I'd imagine it's hard to have a few banks with 3-5 planes arriving at similar times in the day if we don't exceed 15-20 or so daily flights.

Here is a link for April 10th, 12 departures, according to this they sometimes have 2 planes arriving at similar times. For April 11th, there are 13 departures, but there is only one "bank" with three flights departing in around an hour.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Midwestindy wrote:

jtwall wrote:

At smaller stations though I'd venture to say that's just the nature of a ULCC...with the turnarounds so fast (often 30-40 minutes from what I've seen at CVG) the outbound flight for the inbound flight can be a "banked connection". Now that CVG is a larger station though, it would be interesting to see if they really actually try to time their schedule so some of the inbound flights arrive at similar times to create a semi-banked schedule for multiple connections. I wonder if that's what cvgComair is claiming what the CVG F9 schedule will look like. Although, what is F9's peak daily departures from CVG? I'd imagine it's hard to have a few banks with 3-5 planes arriving at similar times in the day if we don't exceed 15-20 or so daily flights.

Here is a link for April 10th, 12 departures, according to this they sometimes have 2 planes arriving at similar times. For April 11th, there are 13 departures, but there is only one "bank" with three flights departing in around an hour.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Seems like CVG has a long way to go then until any even remotely significant connecting hub is built up...even though CVG may be #4 in F9's network, it's a very, very long way from being the "eastern DEN".

Midwestindy wrote:

That is the premise of F9s schedule though it, they "bank" their flights out of almost every station, they are already doing that now at CVG. I'm sure you can find similar itineraries if you look throughly ORD, PHL, ATL, e.t.c. Even if you look at IND, which only has at most 3 flights a day they are timed for connections. For example the inbound flight is DEN and the outbound is RSW or the inbound flight is LAS and the outbound is MCO, e.t.c, e.t.c.

However, they are offering significantly more connections through CVG than similarly sized stations. Here are the # of 1-stop connecting itineraries for some of F9's largest stations (using June 18, 2018):
CVG: 64
AUS: 23
PHL: 20
ATL: 19
MCO: 18 (solely US-Carribean connections)
ORD: 13
CLE: 11
LAS: 10

jtwall wrote:

Seems like CVG has a long way to go then until any even remotely significant connecting hub is built up...even though CVG may be #4 in F9's network, it's a very, very long way from being the "eastern DEN".

It may be a long way from DEN, but CVG is currently #2 for # of connecting flights by quite a bit. With about 60 aircraft coming to F9 over the next few years and 100+ on the horizon, I would certainly think more connecting flights will be added across the network. If this structure (banks is not the right word, not sure what to call it) proves successful at CVG, I would think they would continue to add more connections since CVG is the largest market for F9 in a geographically strong location with enough space for expansion (hence why they have added more connections vs other stations).

I'm not going to debate the schedule set-up that Frontier has planned for CVG. I know that the Frontier operation here will be significantly different than it was last summer and I know that comparing the Frontier schedule in IND to the schedule in CVG is apples to oranges. To have a better understanding of the F9 schedule for CVG starting in April I built this spreadsheet a while back https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing. This spreadsheet also shows what the Frontier schedule looked like exactly one year prior. No offense to Midwestindy's spreadsheet but this one is easier to read.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the daily ATL and PHL flights are A321's and arrive into CVG in the morning and depart CVG in the evening. The whole point of that is to allow as many passengers as possible to connect to flights in CVG. ATL and PHL are significant Frontier operations and I believe both are bases which is what I hear CVG is heading towards in the future.

AirportRival wrote:

I'm not going to debate the schedule set-up that Frontier has planned for CVG. I know that the Frontier operation here will be significantly different than it was last summer and I know that comparing the Frontier schedule in IND to the schedule in CVG is apples to oranges. To have a better understanding of the F9 schedule for CVG starting in April I built this spreadsheet a while back https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing. This spreadsheet also shows what the Frontier schedule looked like exactly one year prior. No offense to Midwestindy's spreadsheet but this one is easier to read.

No offense taken

AirportRival wrote:

I'm not going to debate the schedule set-up that Frontier has planned for CVG. I know that the Frontier operation here will be significantly different than it was last summer and I know that comparing the Frontier schedule in IND to the schedule in CVG is apples to oranges. To have a better understanding of the F9 schedule for CVG starting in April I built this spreadsheet a while back

My point wasn't to compare IND's schedule to CVG's, it was to show that connections are made across the F9 system

cvgComair wrote:

CVG: 64

46... not 64, 64 is the number of 1 and 2 stop itineraries through CVG

Midwestindy wrote:

My point wasn't to compare IND's schedule to CVG's, it was to show that connections are made across the F9 system

My point was not to suggest F9 is creating large banks at CVG, more that the structure at CVG is different than other F9 stations to facilitate connections. I think AirportRival's spreadsheet shows this pretty well. Compared to cities like MCO/LAS/PHL, CVG has fewer nonstop destinations on F9, yet they structure the flights in such a way that significantly more connections are possible. The large aircraft/daily service on routes like CVG-ATL/PHL/LGA allows many of these connections to work, in years past CVG-ATL/PHL were less than daily A319's, this year they are daily A321's to facilitate the new connections.

Some growth opportunities I see for F9 not only in 2018, but by the end of the decade:

Growing CVG and MCO: I believe that it's not too hard to imagine CVG and MCO being F9's "DEN East and South". Some growth opportunities I can think of from MCO are DFW, IAH, MIA, MCI, SLC, SJC, PUJ, and MBJ. As others have said, I know a few "connecting banks" are emerging at CVG and some of these routes are for that purpose. Future routes I can think of from CVG are IAH and SFO coming back, IAD, PBI, SEA, PDX, CLT, and either MBJ, PUJ, or SJU.

Expanding in California: F9 has kind of not paid much attention to California, and some intra-CA fares are very high. If F9 wants to put 2-4x daily on LAX/ONT/SAN/SNA(if slots permit)-SFO/SJC/SMF I think they'd be a huge hit for price-sensitive travelers or just people that only need a personal item, nothing else.

Hawaii...maybe? If intra-CA expansion goes well, it might be worth F9's while to add SFO/SJC-HNL. These two cities would be easily reachable with an A320NEO or maybe an A321CEO, because they're the closest mainland cities to Hawaii. I'm sure that $120-$300 RT fares would also be a big success for price-sensitive people, and a schedule something like a 5:30 pm departure, 8:30 arrival at HNL, 9:30 departure from HNL, ~5:30 arrival at SFO would take up the least time for a plane and wouldn't "tie it up" on that one route for the day.

New focus cities are difficult to predict but I think that F9 will expand more at SJC this year. All other cities I'm not sure about. Who knows, all of these things I predicted might happen, or none of these may happen too. Like I've said, F9's route map is difficult to predict.

With Frontier's dartboard strategy, I really don't understand why they haven't re-entered MDT.

bridge29 wrote:

With Frontier's dartboard strategy, I really don't understand why they haven't re-entered MDT.

Or BMI

Frontier 14

bridge29 wrote:

With Frontier's dartboard strategy, I really don't understand why they haven't re-entered MDT.

Maybe when the fleet increases I’m hoping they will. They were profitable when they were here, but times have changed since 2014 when they announced they were leaving. Another long shot would be AVP 2-3 weekly to MCO. I know G4 pulled out so it would seem Scranton might not be attractive to them, but they seem willing to try some interesting markets.

I wonder too if Frontier will re-enter some of the smaller markets they left after the Indigo takeover. In the case of BMI there was a large financial guarantee for the success of Frontier. The airline never had to use a dime of the support incentive with load factors of 90% or better. But the new owners said they wanted to go to larger markets and left not only BMI but other markets also. I sure hope that decision gets revisited and they reverse course. The market still exists!

Would love to see them try MHT-MCO

With BTV applying for grant service for BTV-DEN (as noted in separate thread), I wonder if F9 will try it's hand at BTV?

Obviously, if it did with this grant service, it would have to do BTV-DEN, but they most likely could do MCO/TPA as well.

UA could do BTV-DEN, but it basically overlaps their network, so not sure if as worth it to them.

Looks like the MIA expansion isn't going well....

Midwestindy wrote:

Looks like the MIA expansion isn't going well....

LF's from Oct were really poor across the board (DEN/LAS being the exceptions):
DEN-MIA: 93%
LAS-MIA: 86%
TTN-MIA: 75%
CVG-MIA: 74%
PHL-MIA: 73%
ORD-MIA: 71%
PVD-MIA: 65%
DTW-MIA: 55%
CLE-MIA: 55%
ISP-MIA: 47%
MKE-MIA: 46%

Buffalo to Florida (Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Ft. Myers) all seem to be going well ..... They will be starting seasonal flights to Denver soon.

Pretty cool to see NEOs and A321s at BNIA!

cvgComair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Looks like the MIA expansion isn't going well....

LF's from Oct were really poor across the board (DEN/LAS being the exceptions):
DEN-MIA: 93%
LAS-MIA: 86%
TTN-MIA: 75%
CVG-MIA: 74%
PHL-MIA: 73%
ORD-MIA: 71%
PVD-MIA: 65%
DTW-MIA: 55%
CLE-MIA: 55%
ISP-MIA: 47%
MKE-MIA: 46%

MKE/PVD/TTN-MIA aren't showing up past the first week in April even though they were supposed to be year-round, ISP-MIA is showing n/s flights but they aren't available for booking

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:

Buffalo to Florida (Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Ft. Myers) all seem to be going well ..... They will be starting seasonal flights to Denver soon.

Pretty cool to see NEOs and A321s at BNIA!

What are you basing that off of, numbers aren't even out yet and all those routes started ~a month ago..... Way way way too early to jump to those conclusions

Midwestindy wrote:

MKE/PVD/TTN-MIA aren't showing up past the first week in April even though they were supposed to be year-round, ISP-MIA is showing n/s flights but they aren't available for booking

PVD was announced as seasonal:

http://www.pvdairport.com/corporate/new ... providence

"MIAMI (MIA) – PROVIDENCE (PVD)

F9 988 Depart MIA: 9:45 a.m. Arrive PVD: 12:57 p.m.

F9 989 Depart PVD: 1:45 p.m. Arrive MIA: 5:09 p.m.

Frequency: Daily

Aircraft: Airbus A320

Service Start: Oct. 5

Seasonal"

And I've always assumed TTN-MIA will be seasonal; - whatever Wiki says - because otherwise the airport would be a clusterf*ck when they add the summer routes. I don't think anyone knew what was going to happen at ISP.

LGA-MIA is seasonal because of the LGA slot which is used for DEN-LGA in summer.

mariner

mariner wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

MKE/PVD/TTN-MIA aren't showing up past the first week in April even though they were supposed to be year-round, ISP-MIA is showing n/s flights but they aren't available for booking

PVD was announced as seasonal:

http://www.pvdairport.com/corporate/new ... providence

"MIAMI (MIA) – PROVIDENCE (PVD)

F9 988 Depart MIA: 9:45 a.m. Arrive PVD: 12:57 p.m.

F9 989 Depart PVD: 1:45 p.m. Arrive MIA: 5:09 p.m.

Frequency: Daily

Aircraft: Airbus A320

Service Start: Oct. 5

Seasonal"

And I've always assumed TTN-MIA will be seasonal; - whatever Wiki says - because otherwise the airport would be a clusterf*ck when they add the summer routes. I don't think anyone knew what was going to happen at ISP.

LGA-MIA is seasonal because of the LGA slot which is used for DEN-LGA in summer.

mariner

I know you are a F9 fan, but I think you are avoiding the crux of what is happening here....

Midwestindy wrote:

I know you are a F9 fan, but I think you are avoiding the crux of what is happening here....

What's being "a fan" got to do with pointing that several routes to MIA are seasonal?

So - what is the crux of what is happening here?

mariner

For PVD at least, MIA was a new seasonal route on a new airline starting in an off peak month. If it stays at 65% in winter months, then I’d be worried.

The hurricanes pulled inbound (to FL) October numbers down. Outbound was probably higher, right?

cvgComair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Looks like the MIA expansion isn't going well....

LF's from Oct were really poor across the board (DEN/LAS being the exceptions):
DEN-MIA: 93%
LAS-MIA: 86%
TTN-MIA: 75%
CVG-MIA: 74%
PHL-MIA: 73%
ORD-MIA: 71%
PVD-MIA: 65%
DTW-MIA: 55%
CLE-MIA: 55%
ISP-MIA: 47%
MKE-MIA: 46%

We had better LF's out of SBN on SBN-DEN when F9 served the market. Averaged 84% on 3 times weekly service and some flights were over 90% full.

cvgComair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Looks like the MIA expansion isn't going well....

LF's from Oct were really poor across the board

To be fair, September, and more so October, are low times to visit So. Florida because of inclement weather (i.e. hurricanes). F9 should add MYR into it's network, as it'd help September and October issues, as it's generally good months to visit MYR at that time.

PVD757 wrote:

For PVD at least, MIA was a new seasonal route on a new airline starting in an off peak month. If it stays at 65% in winter months, then I’d be worried.

There are serval issues with that list of load factors, not least being what you and others have said - that it was October, low season, hurricane season, off peak. LAS did well as a return but it came back in August so it had time to settle in. I'm not quite sure what happened to another return LGA-MIA, though.

And for October, ISP-MIA was - optimistically - 2 x daily, but that was reduced in November to 1 x daily.

MIA's an expensive airport. I don't know if Frontier was able to make use of the waiver (DEN maybe?) and I'lI be interested to see what happens with MIA-SJU.

mariner

SumChristianus wrote:

The hurricanes pulled inbound (to FL) October numbers down. Outbound was probably higher, right?

Hurricane Maria occurred in early September (almost a full month before any of the aforementioned routes started), and did minimal damage to Miami...

mariner wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

I know you are a F9 fan, but I think you are avoiding the crux of what is happening here....

What's being "a fan" got to do with pointing that several routes to MIA are seasonal?

So - what is the crux of what is happening here?

mariner

I think you know what I mean when I say you are a F9 "fan"

Either way TTN/ISP/MKE-MIA have all seen service trimmed, so there isn't really a way for you to spin that in Frontiers favor. And, the "crux "of what is happening is that MIA service (at least for the time being) has not been successful, or else they wouldn't be decreasing service on several routes.

The jury is still out on ISP, but ISP-MSY already being cut is not a good sign

I think some interesting markets to watch for F9 will be TUL, SAN, ISP, MIA, MSY, PVD, COS, SJC and SFO, and SAT considering they are trying some "riskier" flights from those airports. F9 will be in good shape if they do well in those airports.

I think the gist is that most of these MIA routes will not be back next year. Low season or not, history shows that F9 cuts routes that are not preforming well, regardless of "other" factors... Many of the new routes will eventually be cut, it is just the F9 way .

Hopefully they refocus on providing solid connecting opportunities for 2019, they already have the hub in DEN, plus emerging operations in CVG/LAS/MCO/ORD/PHL which pretty much over the entire US. It would be nice to see them have a strong base of operations to supplement their dart board strategy. A balance between the two is key, especially with the huge upcoming fleet growth.

cvgComair wrote:

I think the gist is that most of these MIA routes will not be back next year. Low season or not, history shows that F9 cuts routes that are not preforming well, regardless of "other" factors... Many of the new routes will eventually be cut, it is just the F9 way .

Hopefully they refocus on providing solid connecting opportunities for 2019, they already have the hub in DEN, plus emerging operations in CVG/LAS/MCO/ORD/PHL which pretty much over the entire US. It would be nice to see them have a strong base of operations to supplement their dart board strategy. A balance between the two is key, especially with the huge upcoming fleet growth.

I agree with everything said here! LAS, CVG, MCO, DEN, ORD, PHL, ATL, and AUS/PHX/TPA all appear to be relatively stable compared to the rest of the network

Many on here like to dump on Frontier for their quick trigger to dump routes that are not profitable. However, I admire them for being willing to try some unusual routes rather than putting a 25th daily flight on SFO-LAX for example.

Midwestindy wrote:

I think you know what I mean when I say you are a F9 "fan"

No, I don't, because to me it is as used as meaning that I have little or no sense of reality or objectivity and I find that offensive.

Midwestindy wrote:

Either way TTN/ISP/MKE-MIA have all seen service trimmed, so there isn't really a way for you to spin that in Frontiers favor. And, the "crux "of what is happening is that MIA service (at least for the time being) has not been successful, or else they wouldn't be decreasing service on several routes.

If MIA is doing so poorly, why did they bring LAS back?

Midwestindy wrote:

The jury is still out on ISP, but ISP-MSY already being cut is not a good sign

That would apply to PVD as well, then, where they also cut MSY. And TTN, where MSY didn't last, either.

Midwestindy wrote:

I think some interesting markets to watch for F9 will be TUL, SAN, ISP, MIA, MSY, PVD, COS, SJC and SFO, and SAT considering they are trying some "riskier" flights from those airports. F9 will be in good shape if they do well in those airports.

You put MIA on your list of interesting places to watch but you've also said MIA is doing poorly so I'm confused. But then I'm just a "fan."

mariner

If ISP, PVD, and TTN all lost MSY, why is the jury still out on those 3 stations and not MSY being the common denominator? Didn’t G4 just trim a few MSY markets in the last OAG thread too?

I also wonder if MSY is a winter market from the northeast where everyone tends to go to Florida, Arizona, and the Caribbean.

mariner wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Either way TTN/ISP/MKE-MIA have all seen service trimmed, so there isn't really a way for you to spin that in Frontiers favor. And, the "crux "of what is happening is that MIA service (at least for the time being) has not been successful, or else they wouldn't be decreasing service on several routes.

If MIA is doing so poorly, why did they bring LAS back?

MIA-LAS was added in August, before any of the aforementioned routes had even started and before anyone knew how successful their expansion would be in MIA, so it doesn't fit into this equation.

mariner wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

I think some interesting markets to watch for F9 will be TUL, SAN, ISP, MIA, MSY, PVD, COS, SJC and SFO, and SAT considering they are trying some "riskier" flights from those airports. F9 will be in good shape if they do well in those airports.

You put MIA on your list of interesting places to watch but you've also said MIA is doing poorly so I'm confused. But then I'm just a "fan."

mariner

I included MIA, because there is a chance some of the routes have improved since Oct/Nov/Dec

Midwestindy wrote:

MIA-LAS was added in August, before any of the aforementioned routes had even started and before anyone knew how successful their expansion would be in MIA, so it doesn't fit into this equation

The big expansion (in;lcuing MIA) was announced in July and MIA-LAS came back in August. They had been flying to MIA for some and had flown MIA-LAS before so they knew what the market could do.

And while Frontier may know how the new routes at MIA are doing, all "we" know is one month, one introductory, out-of-season month.

Midwestindy wrote:

I included MIA, because there is a chance some of the routes have improved since Oct/Nov/Dec

Always keep your options open, eh?

PVD757 wrote:

If ISP, PVD, and TTN all lost MSY, why is the jury still out on those 3 stations and not MSY being the common denominator? Didn’t G4 just trim a few MSY markets in the last OAG thread too?

One of the more sensible questions on the thread.

mariner

MSY is just not that strong from secondary markets/airports, with a few exceptions - USA and LCK seem to do well on G4. F9 is doing well on the larger markets with year-round demand (in regard to MSY)

mariner wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

MIA-LAS was added in August, before any of the aforementioned routes had even started and before anyone knew how successful their expansion would be in MIA, so it doesn't fit into this equation

The big expansion (in;lcuing MIA) was announced in July and MIA-LAS came back in August. They had been flying to MIA for some and had flown MIA-LAS before so they knew what the market could do.

And while Frontier may know how the new routes at MIA are doing, all "we" know is one month, one introductory, out-of-season month.

You lost me there, MIA-LAS was announced in May not July https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 102096284/

mariner wrote:

PVD757 wrote:

If ISP, PVD, and TTN all lost MSY, why is the jury still out on those 3 stations and not MSY being the common denominator? Didn’t G4 just trim a few MSY markets in the last OAG thread too?

One of the more sensible questions on the thread.

mariner

ISP and PVD are brand new markets for F9 started last year, MSY has been around for a while... btw when did F9 run TTN-MSY?

Midwestindy wrote:

You lost me there, MIA-LAS was announced in May not July

My poor wording, I expect. MIA-LAS was't part of the big July announcement - although some included it - because, yes, it had already been announced in May that it would start in August.

Midwestindy wrote:

ISP and PVD are brand new markets for F9 started last year, MSY has been around for a while... btw when did F9 run TTN-MSY?

This is from January 31, 2013:

https://www.broward.org/Airport/About/D ... launch.pdf

"Frontier’s Service from Trenton Takes Flight - Tomorrow, nonstop service to New Orleans, La. (MSY) begins."

From memory they kept it to summer, suspended it for the hot months - July/August - and then didn't bring it back. I was told that the loads were good but the yields - not so much. And in those days, Frontier needed every dime it could gather.

mariner

Midwestindy wrote:

mariner wrote:

PVD757 wrote:

If ISP, PVD, and TTN all lost MSY, why is the jury still out on those 3 stations and not MSY being the common denominator? Didn’t G4 just trim a few MSY markets in the last OAG thread too?

One of the more sensible questions on the thread.

mariner

ISP and PVD are brand new markets for F9 started last year, MSY has been around for a while... btw when did F9 run TTN-MSY?

Shortly after F9 added PVD and ISP, NK announced daily service to BOS and EWR. More recently, they announced 4 weekly ACY. I thought PVD and ISP could have been successful at the time they were announced, but aren't competitive with a daily ULCC to the primary airports.

G4 did cut a few Tuesdays this spring from IND, CVG, and RDU. WN is running Sunday IND and RDU service, which absorbs some of the demand, plus Tuesdays are notoriously slow at MSY. I know the ULCCs like to do 247 or 1356 for less than daily, but Thursday, Saturday, Sunday would do better for them than Tuesday, Thursday, Sunday - especially with cruise ship demand.

Great insight on MSY, thank you. It would seem that running PVD-MSY in the fall and winter instead spring and summer on 247 wasn’t the best recipe. Maybe F9 can revisit this in the future. If not maybe G4 could look at it from February/Mardi Gras through September on either 15 or 47?