With the VX merger still in digestion stage, a pilot shortage at QX (Horizon) that is still a lingering problem (or is it?), and the ever-present "war" with DL at SEA, what news/thoughts/analysis do you have about the AS network.

Current moves of note:

The SFO expansion has been mixed, with DEN and some frequencies cut
The war with WN to become California's "Go-to" airline has been pulling on financial results
Airbus transcontinental flying has been pulled down in favor of expanded B737 operations from SFO/LAX
JFK-LAX/SFO has been cut in frequencies
DL while growing in SEA, hasn't taken any AS market share
The AA codeshare has been reduced to settle antitrust concerns, lessening AS access to the east coast/southeast
PAE is coming, but on hold

So how will AS do against the entrance of WN on Hawaiian routes?
Will AS focus return to the SEA/PDX core or continue on CA
Replacement for the Airbus fleet?
SAN/SMF/SJC focus cities?
Outlandish? - Asia from ANC - or a possibility?
(I know this one has beaten to death but....) East coast focus city/hub?
(even more beaten to death.... ) AS/B6 merger?
Will the DAL focus city stay? (personally I can't see it)


Overall, has AS taken on more than it can chew with VX? The pilot problems and large purchase price (for VX) have shaken AS at the very least. Still financially strong, what wil be the impact of the above major network moves, what do you envision/predict/know for the AS future? How will the Eskimo thrive in a competitve environmentthat is heating up by the day?


Gratias tibi ago, - I.V.

I'm very surprised that it took this long to start a 2018 network thread for Alaska. Some notes to the questions that you've posted above:

- I doubt that Alaska is worried about Southwest's Hawaii enterence. Although, they're looking to start service in similar markets such as SMF, OAK, SJC, SAN which Alaska already serves quite well. I think Southwest's entrance into the market may catch up to Alaska someday, but at first I think Southwest will be the one struggling here.

- I think it'll take some time for the merger to take further effect before focus reshifts to the pacific northwest. Personally, I'd like to see some new trans-con routes into Florida, such as SEA-JAX and PDX-TPA + PDX-FLL. Other than TPA and FLL, other top unserved destinations from PDX are IND, MSY and BNA, so maybe we'll see these in the future as well. But, I would rather see seasonal destinations go year-round, such as ATL, BWI, DTW, MKE, OMA, PHL, and TUS, as well as upgrading PDX-MSP from the E175 to the Boeing 737. Also perhaps the return of PDX-STL as well. One can only hope for so much, though.

- I think the Airbus fleet is going to ultimately stick around for quite awhile. I just don't see why they would give up perfectly reliable aircraft that they have while spending money on new replacement aircraft.

- I don't think SMF is really a focus city. They serve some Hawaii destinations from there, as well as from OAK, but that's about it, other than PDX/SEA. I think SAN and SJC will continue to grow, although I don't know what that'll mean for the fate of LAX/SFO, though.

- Asia from ANC is obviously not going to happen. An Airbus A320/Boeing 737 would barely make it to the northern provinces of China, and I think the O&D stats for ANC-China would have to be much greater than it currently is in order for it to successfully work, since most people would probably rather fly through SEA or California instead, in order to get to China.

- An east coast focus city isn't going to happen. The only option that I could see would be JFK because of their lounge their, and that they have terminal 7 almost all to themselves.

- I'm probably one of the only few people that would actually like an AS/B6 merger. Although, it would create some problems, mainly over if the supposed mergered airline should be called "Alaska" or "JetBlue", as well as if the HQ should be located in Seattle or New York City.

- At this point in time, DAL isn't really a focus city at all for Alaska anymore. The airport is already losing its Alaska flights to and from LGA and DCA. The only other logical adds to and from DAL, in my opinion, would be OAK and SMF.

FA9295 wrote:

I'm very surprised that it took this long to start a 2018 network thread for Alaska. Some notes to the questions that you've posted above:
- I think the Airbus fleet is going to ultimately stick around for quite awhile. I just don't see why they would give up perfectly reliable aircraft that they have while spending money on new replacement aircraft.

Could AS exchange planes with DL, where AS acquires some 737-800 planes from DL and where DL acquires some of the former VX A319 and A320 planes from AS? The A319ceo, A320ceo, and A321ceo planes that are already in the DL fleet are equipped with CFM56-5 engines like the former VX A319ceo and A320ceo planes are.

SumChristianus wrote:

Will AS focus return to the SEA/PDX core or continue on CA

There are still some huge holes in the SEA market, including the lack of daily nonstop service to CLE, CMH, BDL, and ORF from SEA. F9 does have seasonal less-than-daily nonstop service to CLE from SEA, but there is enough demand for AS, DL, or WN to serve CLE nonstop from SEA, and the lack of nonstop service to CLE from SEA on a non-ULCC is a huge hole. AS could add nonstop service to CLE, CMH, BDL, and ORF from SEA in order to fill in some of the biggest remaining holes in the SEA market.

While AS does not currently serve CVG, DL does serve CVG nonstop from SEA. CVG and JAC are also currently the only destinations in North America with nonstop service from SEA on DL that are not served on AS. AS could enter the CVG market and add nonstop service to CVG from SEA in order to better compete against DL in the SEA market.

CLT and MIA are currently the only AA hub airports that aren't served by AS, but AS does serve the Miami/Fort Lauderdale market through FLL. AS also doesn't serve LGA nonstop from SEA due to perimeter restrictions at LGA, but AS already serves JFK and EWR in the NYC market nonstop from SEA. AS can no longer codeshare on flights between CLT and the other AA hubs due to restrictions imposed by the US DOJ as a result of the AS-VX merger, and AS miles can no longer be earned on AA's SEA-CLT nonstop flights. AS could add SEA-CLT nonstop service to provide competition on the SEA-CLT nonstop route and to fill in a void left by the restrictions imposed on AA-AS codesharing.

FA9295 wrote:

- An east coast focus city isn't going to happen. The only option that I could see would be JFK because of their lounge their, and that they have terminal 7 almost all to themselves.- I'm probably one of the only few people that would actually like an AS/B6 merger. Although, it would create some problems, mainly over if the supposed mergered airline should be called "Alaska" or "JetBlue", as well as if the HQ should be located in Seattle or New York City.

Agree, its an unpopular opinion but I like the idea of AS/B6 under the B6 name (blue eskimo?)
Q400s/E175s would help LGB operations for B6 while A320/A321/E190s could move to the west coast (SEA-BOI/GEG/SMF/etc.)

To focus on the present day AS, sorry
Anything on SEA-CMH/CLE/FAR/etc.?

jplatts wrote:

Could AS exchange planes with DL, where AS acquires some 737-800 planes from DL and where DL acquires some of the former VX A319 and A320 planes from AS? The A319ceo, A320ceo, and A321ceo planes that are already in the DL fleet are equipped with CFM56-5 engines like the former VX A319ceo and A320ceo planes are.

Highly doubt it, DL wouldn't give up planes to a competitor. If it could get an AT/WN 717 style deal on them, yes, but :

jplatts wrote:

There are still some huge holes in the SEA market, including the lack of daily nonstop service to CLE, CMH, BDL, and ORF from SEA. F9 does have seasonal less-than-daily nonstop service to CLE from SEA, but there is enough demand for AS, DL, or WN to serve CLE nonstop from SEA, and the lack of nonstop service to CLE from SEA on a non-ULCC is a huge hole. AS could add nonstop service to CLE, CMH, BDL, and ORF from SEA in order to fill in some of the biggest remaining holes in the SEA market.

In order to add these, AS would be best to start with the A319, so it should keep them until it can make a long term plan for the 100-130 seat market.
B6 C-Series ?

AS/QX/VX major station load factors (excludes OO) (all routes from station)(all of 2017)
ORIGIN Load Factor PDEW (Segment not O/D) Stage Length Block Time (Min)
JFK … 87.1% … 1677.906849 … 2355.5 … 369.8536167
LAX … 86.1% … 8290.841096 … 1456.852868 … 196.1801562
SEA … 85.1% … 23050.01644 … 1327.200698 … 187.9515264
SJC … 84.6% … 1792.446575 … 1436.048485 … 174.3633384
SAN … 84.2% … 2991.958904 … 1628.597701 … 195.6818748
PDX … 83.3% … 6137.682192 … 1238.935588 … 172.3314562
SFO … 79.3% … 8791.205479 … 1267.27115 … 172.2186927
ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657
Grand Total … 82.4% … 88415.19452 … 1341.284378 … 197.0534035

All stations:
ORIGIN Load Factor
TPA 93.7%
TUS 90.5%
PHX 89.1%
HNL 88.1%
LIH 87.9%
SAT 87.5%
ABQ 87.3%
BUR 87.2%
JFK 87.1%
IAH 86.9%
SNA 86.8%
PHL 86.8%
KOA 86.7%
MCO 86.3%
BOS 86.3%
LAX 86.1%
OGG 86.1%
ORD 85.9%
DCA 85.8%
BNA 85.4%
MSY 85.4%
EWR 85.3%
MSP 85.1%
SEA 85.1%
CHS 85.1%
BOI 85.0%
ONT 85.0%
FLL 84.7%
RDU 84.6%
SJC 84.6%
DEN 84.5%
SMF 84.5%
DFW 84.4%
BWI 84.3%
LGA 84.3%
SAN 84.2%
LAS 83.8%
OAK 83.3%
PDX 83.3%
ATL 83.2%
DAL 82.0%
OMA 81.6%
IAD 81.3%
MCI 80.8%
AUS 80.7%
STL 80.5%
GEG 80.5%
DTW 79.5%
SFO 79.3%
IND 78.7%
ANC 76.7%
PSP 76.4%
BLI 75.1%
FAI 73.9%
SBA 71.8%
SLC 70.8%
KTN 65.7%
ADQ 64.3%
JNU 63.7%
SIT 63.0%
OME 61.1%
PSG 60.5%
WRG 55.9%
BET 55.3%
OTZ 54.5%
BRW 53.9%
SCC 53.0%
DLG 49.9%
AKN 47.0%
CDV 39.9%
GST 36.8%
YAK 34.1%
ADK 25.2%
Grand Total 82.4%

VX actually considered serving Houston, but VX didn't specify which Houston airport it would serve. However, AS only serves IAH in Greater Houston, and AS still does have opportunities to add SFO-IAH and LAX-IAH nonstop service.

VX also considered starting service to ATL and PHX from SFO and LAX prior to the VX-AS merger. However, the FL LAX-ATL nonstop route was transferred to WN through the WN-FL merger, and both AA and F9 also added LAX-ATL nonstop service after VX announced plans to start service to ATL from California. AS still does have an opportunity to add SFO-ATL nonstop service, and AS is also already at ATL with nonstop service to SEA and PDX from ATL.

AS did operate SFO-PHX nonstop service on a seasonal basis earlier this year for Spring Training, but AS has never done SFO-PHX nonstop service on a year-round basis. AS has also never served PHX nonstop from LAX, but AS possibly does have an opportunity to add LAX-PHX nonstop service and bring back SFO-PHX nonstop service on a year-round basis.

AS also still has an opportunity to add LAX-AUS nonstop service, and AS already serves West Coast destinations other than SEA and PDX nonstop from AUS, including SFO, SJC, and SAN. In addition to the previously mentioned opportunities that AS has for expansion in California, AS also has an opportunity to add SFO-ANC, SJC-ANC, and SAN-ANC nonstop service.

Will AS ever take advantage of any opportunities to further expand at SFO or LAX?

What are the load factors on Horizon/Skywest from BIL to PDX and SEA?

I wouldn't mind seeing AS and B6 merge as well.
The issue to me that AS has is a weak east coast network. Sure major cities have 1 or even 2 flights a day. But say you want to go to Jacksonville. Or Buffalo. Or Providence.
You can't do that with AS and with the DL partnership gone and AA pretty weak, it actually makes DL a more attractive airline to fly in many cases.

So maybe in 5 years? LOL

There's going to be a lot of slack in the fleet as PAE is delayed plus seasonal reductions starting this fall. They'll also be absorbing a significant increase in WN capacity on competing routes at SJC. AS has thus far refused to retaliate at OAK, despite extensive marketing in the East Bay. Hopefully they'll finally jump on the large OAK-BUR/LAX/SNA/SAN routes. The WN monopoly routes (BUR/SNA/SAN) seem particularly ripe for competition.

ucdtim17 wrote:

There's going to be a lot of slack in the fleet as PAE is delayed plus seasonal reductions starting this fall. They'll also be absorbing a significant increase in WN capacity on competing routes at SJC. AS has thus far refused to retaliate at OAK, despite extensive marketing in the East Bay. Hopefully they'll finally jump on the large OAK-BUR/LAX/SNA/SAN routes. The WN monopoly routes (BUR/SNA/SAN) seem particularly ripe for competition.

I could see AS possibly adding nonstop service to LAX and SAN out of OAK, but I am unsure if AS will ever add nonstop service to BUR or SNA from OAK. AS only serves PDX, SJC, and SEA nonstop from BUR, and I do not see AS serving BUR nonstop from OAK. SNA also has slot and capacity restrictions, and AS would only add OAK-SNA nonstop service if it had room at SNA to do so.

SFOPHX
SJCPHX
SEACLE
SEACLT
SEABDL

And let’s see SFO get comfortably above 100 flights/day and 80% load factor.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

SFOPHX
SJCPHX
SEACLE
SEACLT
SEABDL

And let’s see SFO get comfortably above 100 flights/day and 80% load factor.

It is interesting that LFs at SJC are slightly higher than at SFO. Is it plausible that this is the reason (or one reason) for the slight shift in flights from SFO to SJC?

As for DAL and the east coast, I’d say AS is a carrier whose focus is the west coast and its cities. They serve markets in the midewest and east from select cities in the west, and that’s their market. Do they really *need* to try to be an “everything to everyone” airline across the US in order to succeed?

SumChristianus wrote:

So how will AS do against the entrance of WN on Hawaiian routes?
Outlandish? - Asia from ANC - or a possibility?
Will the DAL focus city stay? (personally I can't see it).

I think we'll have to see how exactly WN is planning on connecting the islands to the gateways they announced. For example, if they launch SMF-OGG, that's going to be more relevant to AS than if they choose to launch SMF-HNL/ KOA instead. AS's Hawaii flying is pretty well established. ANC- Asia does seem pretty remote...something like a seasonal ANC-NRT might technically be feasible on the MAX/ NEO and may be able to capture some traffic in the style of KEF, but that still seems very unlikely and AS seems pretty well focused on the west coast strategy. DAL isn't really a focus city, its service will only be to AS's west coast hubs and focus cities after this fall, it's simply a station serving the area that AS happens to have access to that most other airlines don't.

jplatts wrote:

Could AS exchange planes with DL, where AS acquires some 737-800 planes from DL and where DL acquires some of the former VX A319 and A320 planes from AS?

AS's Airbus fleet is almost entirely leased, Alaska does not own the bulk of these planes.

jplatts wrote:

There are still some huge holes in the SEA market, including the lack of daily nonstop service to ... ORF from SEA.

I think this would largely depend on demand generated from the naval and military presence on each end, which I'm not sure is enough...ORF doesn't have nonstop service to JAX or SAN either. I think it would also be the smallest east coast market AS would serve from SEA apart from CHS (which has an obvious business connection), I don't know that I'd say ORF is really a huge hole.

I’d think ORF is about as big a hole for AS as EUG is for B6. In other words, not that big. I can think of many markets that are likely higher on the list for AS than ORF, and that ignores the need/ability to connect more existing dots first.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I’d think ORF is about as big a hole for AS as EUG is for B6. In other words, not that big. I can think of many markets that are likely higher on the list for AS than ORF, and that ignores the need/ability to connect more existing dots first.

There was an average of 234 passengers a day traveling between ORF and SEA (in both directions) in Q3 2017, and there is enough O&D demand for either AS or DL to add SEA-ORF nonstop service. The population of the ORF market is also over 1.7 million people.

SumChristianus wrote:

All stations:
ORIGIN Load Factor
TPA 93.7%

Damn -- you think they'd give this a second frequency, at least on peak days and during peak season. Are fares so low as to necessitate a load factor like this?

SumChristianus wrote:

a pilot shortage at QX (Horizon) that is still a lingering problem (or is it?)

There is no pilot shortage at Horizon. There was an internal employee meeting where Horizon management verified that they've had no problem attracting candidates and upcoming classes are full. And, by the way, Horizon now has the best on-time performance of all regional carriers in the United States.

One last comment: I have a suspicion that AS and B6 are working on developing an extensive codeshare relationship.

PDX … 83.3% … 6137.682192 … 1238.935588 … 172.3314562
SFO … 79.3% … 8791.205479 … 1267.27115 … 172.2186927
ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657

These are the underperformers of all of AS main stations....

jplatts wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I’d think ORF is about as big a hole for AS as EUG is for B6. In other words, not that big. I can think of many markets that are likely higher on the list for AS than ORF, and that ignores the need/ability to connect more existing dots first.

There was an average of 234 passengers a day traveling between ORF and SEA (in both directions) in Q3 2017, and there is enough O&D demand for either AS or DL to add SEA-ORF nonstop service. The population of the ORF market is also over 1.7 million people.

A big chunk has to be military-related traffic that DL would probably rather connect over ATL like they always have rather than use up scarce real estate at SEA with a nonstop.

axiom wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

All stations:
ORIGIN Load Factor
TPA 93.7%

Damn -- you think they'd give this a second frequency, at least on peak days and during peak season. Are fares so low as to necessitate a load factor like this?

Or start a route to other stations, like SJC, SAN, or PDX.

Here is Alaska Airlines Fleet Status and Repaint Progress link for everyone to look at: https://alaskafleetstatus.weebly.com/

AirFiero wrote:

As for DAL and the east coast, I’d say AS is a carrier whose focus is the west coast and its cities. They serve markets in the midewest and east from select cities in the west, and that’s their market. Do they really *need* to try to be an “everything to everyone” airline across the US in order to succeed?

AS does not really need to be an "everything to everyone" airline across the US in order to succeed. AS already carries more passengers to, from, or through SEA than WN does out of any of its airports (including MDW), and AS's SEA hub is also the largest non-US3 hub in the US. AS is also currently the only airline to serve Hawaii nonstop from Alaska, and AS also operates intra-Alaska routes that do not have any nonstop competition.

axiom wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

All stations:
ORIGIN Load Factor
TPA 93.7%

Damn -- you think they'd give this a second frequency, at least on peak days and during peak season. Are fares so low as to necessitate a load factor like this?

The lowest round-trip fare on this route on Alaska (non stop) through December 2018 is $458. Most fares through July seem to range between $748 and $898 RT.

Fares don't seem to be low, especially compared to connecting options. The demand is simply there. Whether or not demand would be there for an increase in frequency is another story, and if your'e Alaska, why take the risk of being less profitable?

Delta could start 1x daily TPA-SEA, but I'm not sure both carriers would remain profitable on the route or not at this time (although I would like to think they could).

FA9295 wrote:

axiom wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

All stations:
ORIGIN Load Factor
TPA 93.7%

Damn -- you think they'd give this a second frequency, at least on peak days and during peak season. Are fares so low as to necessitate a load factor like this?

Or start a route to other stations, like SJC, SAN, or PDX.

I know the TPA airport would sweeten the pot for PDX - it's probably the last big missing piece of the airport's domestic portfolio.

lhpdx wrote:

ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657

These are the underperformers of all of AS main stations....

Not sure about this one. Anchorage has a lot of half-full monopoly and EAS subsidized flights that may be a lot more profitable than full but competitive flights out of Seattle.

lhpdx wrote:

PDX … 83.3% … 6137.682192 … 1238.935588 … 172.3314562
SFO … 79.3% … 8791.205479 … 1267.27115 … 172.2186927
ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657

These are the underperformers of all of AS main stations....

I wouldn't necessarily call PDX "underperforming", but the numbers there are definitely lower than I had thought...

SumChristianus wrote:

ABQ 87.3%

Is this including the QX routes that started last fall to SAN, SNA, and PDX? Or OO to SFO? I'd find it remarkable if the load factors held up so well with such a big increase in the market. Alaska went from one flight a day to SEA in fall of 2016 to five flights and five destinations in fall of 2017.

NameOmitted wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657

These are the underperformers of all of AS main stations....

Not sure about this one. Anchorage has a lot of half-full monopoly and EAS subsidized flights that may be a lot more profitable than full but competitive flights out of Seattle.

The 70ish seat combi's were also phased out last year, there are no AS aircraft carrying passengers intra-Alaska now smaller than a 73G.

jplatts wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

As for DAL and the east coast, I’d say AS is a carrier whose focus is the west coast and its cities. They serve markets in the midewest and east from select cities in the west, and that’s their market. Do they really *need* to try to be an “everything to everyone” airline across the US in order to succeed?

AS does not really need to be an "everything to everyone" airline across the US in order to succeed. AS already carries more passengers to, from, or through SEA than WN does out of any of its airports (including MDW), and AS's SEA hub is also the largest non-US3 hub in the US. AS is also currently the only airline to serve Hawaii nonstop from Alaska, and AS also operates intra-Alaska routes that do not have any nonstop competition.

The problem with AS is sometimes they are hard to choose. I will always pick AS when they are even close to being in the ballpark.

Try choosing AS on trips to GSP or MAF. Nope, have to fly DL or AA. No code shares on the connecting segments, or it’s much more expensive on AS.

For a recent trip to SLC, AS was much more expensive than DL for less convenient times. We flew DL.

I looked at a possible Hawaii trip over Thanksgiving week. AS was much more expensive than DL, so I would have had to choose DL. AS isn’t a candidate for the domestic trip I’m going to do during that time either.

I WANT to choose AS every time I travel. They just aren’t making it easy to pick them in a lot a cases.

FA9295 wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

PDX … 83.3% … 6137.682192 … 1238.935588 … 172.3314562
SFO … 79.3% … 8791.205479 … 1267.27115 … 172.2186927
ANC … 76.7% … 4091.336986 … 1014.841237 … 163.5538657

These are the underperformers of all of AS main stations....

I wouldn't necessarily call PDX "underperforming", but the numbers there are definitely lower than I had thought...

Let's also not go with the narrative that LF = yield. SFO is definitely under performing. ANC and PDX are not. ANC is also all on mainline which are harder to fill up.

AS hubs/focus city profitability are basically like this.
SEA/PDX/ANC > everything else

Is this including the QX routes that started last fall to SAN, SNA, and PDX? Or OO to SFO? I'd find it remarkable if the load factors held up so well with such a big increase in the market. Alaska went from one flight a day to SEA in fall of 2016 to five flights and five destinations in fall of 2017.

SFO-ABQ is a bloodbath for AS.

BoeingGuy wrote:

jplatts wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

As for DAL and the east coast, I’d say AS is a carrier whose focus is the west coast and its cities. They serve markets in the midewest and east from select cities in the west, and that’s their market. Do they really *need* to try to be an “everything to everyone” airline across the US in order to succeed?

AS does not really need to be an "everything to everyone" airline across the US in order to succeed. AS already carries more passengers to, from, or through SEA than WN does out of any of its airports (including MDW), and AS's SEA hub is also the largest non-US3 hub in the US. AS is also currently the only airline to serve Hawaii nonstop from Alaska, and AS also operates intra-Alaska routes that do not have any nonstop competition.

The problem with AS is sometimes they are hard to choose. I will always pick AS when they are even close to being in the ballpark.

Try choosing AS on trips to GSP or MAF. Nope, have to fly DL or AA. No code shares on the connecting segments, or it’s much more expensive on AS.

For a recent trip to SLC, AS was much more expensive than DL for less convenient times. We flew DL.

I looked at a possible Hawaii trip over Thanksgiving week. AS was much more expensive than DL, so I would have had to choose DL. AS isn’t a candidate for the domestic trip I’m going to do during that time either.

I WANT to choose AS every time I travel. They just aren’t making it easy to pick them in a lot a cases.

I think Alaska tends to be more expensive than Delta for two reasons:
1). Delta offers basic economy, where Alaska does not. (although basic economy isn't really a lower price overall, but just a more expensive price for main cabin instead).
2). Delta's fleet is much larger than Alaska's, allowing for more flexibility and less rigid scheduling than Alaska, making it easier for the airline to plan given routes.

BoeingGuy wrote:

The problem with AS is sometimes they are hard to choose. I will always pick AS when they are even close to being in the ballpark.

Try choosing AS on trips to GSP or MAF. Nope, have to fly DL or AA. No code shares on the connecting segments, or it’s much more expensive on AS.

I WANT to choose AS every time I travel. They just aren’t making it easy to pick them in a lot a cases.

Good point. WN also has nonstop service to LAS from both MAF and the West Coast, and WN can also connect passengers to MAF from the West Coast through LAS.

jplatts wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

The problem with AS is sometimes they are hard to choose. I will always pick AS when they are even close to being in the ballpark.

Try choosing AS on trips to GSP or MAF. Nope, have to fly DL or AA. No code shares on the connecting segments, or it’s much more expensive on AS.

I WANT to choose AS every time I travel. They just aren’t making it easy to pick them in a lot a cases.

Good point. WN also has nonstop service to LAS from both MAF and the West Coast, and WN can also connect passengers to MAF from the West Coast through LAS.

WN has a lot of weird nonstops from LAS, such as smaller airports in Texas as well as BHM, BUF, ELP, LIT, BDL, etc.

scoping2008 wrote:

One last comment: I have a suspicion that AS and B6 are working on developing an extensive codeshare relationship.

Let me start out by saying I have zero information concerning this.

Having said that, it can easily be argued that both carriers "have a significant Delta Air Lines problem" on their respective coasts, and comprehensive codesharing across their networks, with reciprocal FF benefits, would go a long way toward making each more competitive.

We'll see if that ever happens, but never say never. Personally, I love the idea of B6 being a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alaska Air Group, allowing that comprehensive codesharing, FF benefits, and so on to take place without the cost and headache of full-on M&A activity.

ANC probably has a low load factor, but does the cargo revenue make up for that?

ooslc wrote:

ANC probably has a low load factor, but does the cargo revenue make up for that?

And the high fares intra-Alaska where driving is not an option, and the subsidies on EAS routes.

scoping2008 wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

a pilot shortage at QX (Horizon) that is still a lingering problem (or is it?)

There is no pilot shortage at Horizon. There was an internal employee meeting where Horizon management verified that they've had no problem attracting candidates and upcoming classes are full. And, by the way, Horizon now has the best on-time performance of all regional carriers in the United States.

One last comment: I have a suspicion that AS and B6 are working on developing an extensive codeshare relationship.

Good to hear it's resolved

Alias1024 wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

ABQ 87.3%

Is this including the QX routes that started last fall to SAN, SNA, and PDX? Or OO to SFO? I'd find it remarkable if the load factors held up so well with such a big increase in the market. Alaska went from one flight a day to SEA in fall of 2016 to five flights and five destinations in fall of 2017.

To be clear, this data only includes QX/AS/VX numbers for 2017 because including OO would include all of its operations for AA/DL/UA in these numbers.

Flyingstump wrote:

The lowest round-trip fare on this route on Alaska (non stop) through December 2018 is $458. Most fares through July seem to range between $748 and $898 RT.Fares don't seem to be low, especially compared to connecting options. The demand is simply there. Whether or not demand would be there for an increase in frequency is another story, and if your'e Alaska, why take the risk of being less profitable?Delta could start 1x daily TPA-SEA, but I'm not sure both carriers would remain profitable on the route or not at this time (although I would like to think they could).

DL will be happy to serve unmet demand through LAX/SLC/MSP/ATL/DTW.
AS will want to increase yield as much as possible so will flow spill traffic over PDX-TPA (if it launches) or through LAX/SAN?
Unless there's a business contract that wants more frequency I think this will stay as is, but its surprising how much capacity has been added to SEA-MCO (a similiar market) by DL/AS. 93.7% year round is stunning, so maybe to backtrack on my statement a bit, AS could add another frequency on a few peak days, but, think they'll be content to eventually add PDX-TPA (along with PDX-FLL) and flow traffic through there.

FA9295 wrote:

Or start a route to other stations, like SJC, SAN, or PDX.

Again, like that

WkndWanderer wrote:

jplatts wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I’d think ORF is about as big a hole for AS as EUG is for B6. In other words, not that big. I can think of many markets that are likely higher on the list for AS than ORF, and that ignores the need/ability to connect more existing dots first.

There was an average of 234 passengers a day traveling between ORF and SEA (in both directions) in Q3 2017, and there is enough O&D demand for either AS or DL to add SEA-ORF nonstop service. The population of the ORF market is also over 1.7 million people.

A big chunk has to be military-related traffic that DL would probably rather connect over ATL like they always have rather than use up scarce real estate at SEA with a nonstop.

Any idea on yield? ORF seems far out, but CHS happened so.....

‘- I doubt that Alaska is worried about Southwest's Hawaii enterence. Although, they're looking to start service in similar markets such as SMF, OAK, SJC, SAN which Alaska already serves quite well. I think Southwest's entrance into the market may catch up to Alaska someday, but at first I think Southwest will be the one struggling here.’

I think AS is very worried about WN’s entrance in Hawaii. AS serves SMF, OAK, SJC, and SAN very well as you mention. But not even close to the service WN has provided for many years. AS doesn’t have half the flights to these stations as WN, and WN has long rooted loyalty. I think AS will struggle some tying to compete, even in the short term.

‘It is interesting that LFs at SJC are slightly higher than at SFO. Is it plausible that this is the reason (or one reason) for the slight shift in flights from SFO to SJC?’

It is plausible, but not probable. Most likely the fact WN is much stronger in SJC than SFO, so protecting turf. AS has to cover many bases and threats. But again, load factor does not guarantee revenue, different stat.

BoeingGuy wrote:

jplatts wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

As for DAL and the east coast, I’d say AS is a carrier whose focus is the west coast and its cities. They serve markets in the midewest and east from select cities in the west, and that’s their market. Do they really *need* to try to be an “everything to everyone” airline across the US in order to succeed?

AS does not really need to be an "everything to everyone" airline across the US in order to succeed. AS already carries more passengers to, from, or through SEA than WN does out of any of its airports (including MDW), and AS's SEA hub is also the largest non-US3 hub in the US. AS is also currently the only airline to serve Hawaii nonstop from Alaska, and AS also operates intra-Alaska routes that do not have any nonstop competition.

The problem with AS is sometimes they are hard to choose. I will always pick AS when they are even close to being in the ballpark.

Try choosing AS on trips to GSP or MAF. Nope, have to fly DL or AA. No code shares on the connecting segments, or it’s much more expensive on AS.

For a recent trip to SLC, AS was much more expensive than DL for less convenient times. We flew DL.

I looked at a possible Hawaii trip over Thanksgiving week. AS was much more expensive than DL, so I would have had to choose DL. AS isn’t a candidate for the domestic trip I’m going to do during that time either.

I WANT to choose AS every time I travel. They just aren’t making it easy to pick them in a lot a cases.

I’m an AAdvantage member and fly AA when I need to fly on the airlines. Wouldn’t someone like me be able to use AA or AS effectively, depending on where I need to go?

ooslc wrote:

ANC probably has a low load factor, but does the cargo revenue make up for that?

The low load factor is driven by all the subsidized intra-Alaska flying. Remove those flights, and ANC's load factor is likely anything but low.

Also a lot of the intra Alask flights are one way traffic and priced accordingly. They bump one of bags in sold out flights to AKN and DLG this time a year but the plane returns nearly empty.

A note on Essential Air Service -- Alaska Airlines receives subsides to Adak and three of their southeast panhandle cities that make up the 'milk-run' route. Nome, Bethel, Kotzebue, Barrow and Fairbanks all hold their own without subsidies. So when speaking about the Anchorage hub lets not assume it exists solely due to government handouts.

BWIAirport wrote:

flybynight wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing AS and B6 merge as well.
The issue to me that AS has is a weak east coast network. Sure major cities have 1 or even 2 flights a day. But say you want to go to Jacksonville. Or Buffalo. Or Providence.
You can't do that with AS and with the DL partnership gone and AA pretty weak, it actually makes DL a more attractive airline to fly in many cases.

So maybe in 5 years? LOL

They're starting to develop bigger markets off the east coast. Not saying this has anything to do with a merger, but they serve:
4 destinations out of PHL
5 destinations out of BWI, BOS, DCA, and MCO
6 destinations out of EWR
7 destinations out of JFK (including seasonal PSP!)

Yes, AAG has 8 to 10 cities on the west coast, from SAN to SEA, including 4 hubs and 2 focus cities, most of which could eventually be flown to most of their non-west coast stations. JFK sees service to essentially 6 cities out west, including LAS and could easily see an additional couple of destinations, assuming they continue to serve LAS.

Since AS's purpose is to serve the west coast, I don't think of their east coast ops as weak at all. And I believe there are still lots of routes over which AS can expand their network. When there is sufficient traffic wanting to fly to BUF or JAX from the w/c, AS will begin serving those markets.

bb

Anecdote but pretty shocking how few seats AS has Bay Area-PDX on evenings (post-6 pm). It's currently one A320 from SFO plus one E175 from OAK. WN has three 737s from OAK, three 737s from SJC and one from SFO. UA has one 737 and one A320 from SFO. #mostwestcoast

ucdtim17 wrote:

Anecdote but pretty shocking how few seats AS has Bay Area-PDX on evenings (post-6 pm). It's currently one A320 from SFO plus one E175 from OAK. WN has three 737s from OAK, three 737s from SJC and one from SFO. UA has one 737 and one A320 from SFO. #mostwestcoast

Yes, #mostwestcoast not #mostbayareaportland

Alaska always disappoints in one area or the other. But so does everyone else. How many years did we in SEA wait for WN to add nonstops to SoCal? UA LAX-SEA on a CR2? lol JetBlue? Don't get me started.

Give it time - maybe they'll come through for you. If you're holding your breath to meet your every expectation, though, then join the rest of us in passing out long before they do.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

Anecdote but pretty shocking how few seats AS has Bay Area-PDX on evenings (post-6 pm). It's currently one A320 from SFO plus one E175 from OAK. WN has three 737s from OAK, three 737s from SJC and one from SFO. UA has one 737 and one A320 from SFO. #mostwestcoast

Yes, #mostwestcoast not #mostbayareaportland

Alaska always disappoints in one area or the other. But so does everyone else. How many years did we in SEA wait for WN to add nonstops to SoCal? UA LAX-SEA on a CR2? lol JetBlue? Don't get me started.

Give it time - maybe they'll come through for you. If you're holding your breath to meet your every expectation, though, then join the rest of us in passing out long before they do.

An observation, not a personal complaint. They can do what they want.

Will AS pull the plug on BOS-LAX/SFO?