While JetBlue has been competing domestically for decades, in the past few years we’ve seen the airline launch transatlantic flights. Despite the incredibly strong demand for transatlantic flying, this hasn’t turned out to be the success that JetBlue hoped. In an effort to reduce unprofitable flying, JetBlue is continuing to cut its transatlantic network.
Several months ago, the airline revealed it would suspend many routes this upcoming winter, and now the airline has significantly shortened for how long it’s operating some routes this upcoming summer. Let’s first recap what was revealed several months ago, and then we’ll look at the latest update.
In this post:
JetBlue cuts unprofitable transatlantic flights in winter
In the summer of 2021, we saw JetBlue gradually launch transatlantic service, using newly delivered Airbus A321LRs. The JetBlue passenger experience is absolutely phenomenal, so from a comfort and value perspective, I’m delighted to see JetBlue’s growth across the Atlantic.
However, I’ve been skeptical about the economics of this service since launch:
- Transatlantic market share is heavily dominated by the “big three” joint ventures, and it can be hard for a newcomer to compete
- A321LRs are capable planes in terms of range, though with a fairly low capacity plus limited cargo capabilities, it can be tough to profitably fly these small planes into major airports
- The challenge with transatlantic flying is how seasonal demand is, especially with JetBlue overwhelmingly going after leisure travelers
- Some major European airports are slot controlled, so securing the right to fly to key airports is no small task; JetBlue has done a surprisingly good job forcing its way into these airports
Up until recently, JetBlue has continued to grow across the Atlantic, and has clearly viewed the Atlantic as a growth market where losses were just going to happen for some amount of time.
However, JetBlue’s new CEO has made it clear that the company needs to take a close look at its transatlantic service, and once routes reach a maturity point, they should only be kept around if they’re profitable. So in May 2024, JetBlue revealed it would make its first material cuts across the Atlantic:
- JetBlue’s routes from Boston (BOS) and New York (JFK) to London Gatwick (LGW) will become seasonal, and will be suspended for winter 2024/2025
- JetBlue’s route from Boston (BOS) to Amsterdam (AMS) will become seasonal, and will be suspended for winter 2024/2025
- JetBlue’s route from New York (JFK) to Paris (CDG) will be reduced from twice daily to once daily for winter 2024/2025
This means that during the winter season, JetBlue will operate:
- 2x daily New York (JFK) to London Heathrow (LHR) flights
- 1x daily Boston (BOS) to London Heathrow (LHR) flights
- 1x daily New York (JFK) to Amsterdam (AMS) flights
- 1x daily New York (JFK) to Paris (CDG) flights
- 1x daily Boston (BOS) to Paris (CDG) flights
Dropping four of the planned 10 daily transatlantic frequencies for winter is a pretty significant reduction. In summer, JetBlue will then restore the above frequencies, and will also operate service to Dublin (DUB) and Edinburgh (EDI).
![](https://cdn.onemileatatime.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/JetBlue-A321LR-JFK.jpeg)
JetBlue shortens summer season for transatlantic routes
Not only has JetBlue suspended several transatlantic routes for winter, but the airline has also shortened the summer season for several routes, in some cases only making for a very short travel window. As flagged by AeroRoutes:
- JetBlue’s Boston (BOS) to London Gatwick (LGW) flight will only resume on June 12, 2025, rather than March 29, 2025
- JetBlue’s New York (JFK) to London Gatwick (LGW) flight will only resume on June 12, 2025, rather than March 29, 2025
- JetBlue’s Boston (BOS) to Dublin (DUB) flight will only resume on April 17, 2025, rather than March 30, 2025
- JetBlue’s New York (JFK) to Dublin (DUB) flight will only resume on April 17, 2025, rather than March 30, 2025
- JetBlue’s New York (JFK) to Edinburgh (EDI) flight will only resume on May 22, 2025, rather than May 1, 2025
As you can see, in some cases those are significantly shortened seasons, with the London Gatwick flights getting over two months shaved off.
With many airlines, we’ve seen the length of the summer season increase, as many leisure travelers prefer to travel a little bit off season. However, JetBlue is very much sticking to the very peak of the summer season with some of its transatlantic services.
![](https://cdn.onemileatatime.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/JetBlue-Mint-Suite-16.jpeg)
Can JetBlue succeed with a seasonal Europe strategy?
I can’t say I’m surprised that Europe isn’t turning out to be a cash cow for JetBlue. Former JetBlue CEO Robin Hayes seemed to suggest this transatlantic service would be a turning point for JetBlue, though it hasn’t worked out that way.
Seasonally (in the very peak of summer) it’s easy enough to make money across the Atlantic, while winter is a different story. This is something that a countless number of airlines have learned the hard way over the years.
The only way to make money across the Atlantic in winter is to control many lucrative corporate contracts, and to command very high fares in premium cabins. Furthermore it requires having a huge network of connecting traffic, so that people can continue to Africa, India, etc. That’s something that JetBlue has clearly been struggling with.
Can JetBlue make the economics work of flying these premium A321s to Europe in summer, and then to other counter seasonal leisure destinations in winter? We’ve seen the airline introduce Mint on several more domestic routes.
On the surface, it doesn’t seem like a terrible strategy, especially with hubs in Boston and New York, where people are most definitely looking for warm weather in the winter. So it shouldn’t be too tough to shift Mint demand to places like the Caribbean, California, etc.
But still, JetBlue’s A321LRs are in a really premium configuration, with a low total seat count. I can’t help but wonder if JetBlue may end up reconfiguring its A321LRs with a bit less premium of a configuration, to better reflect the demand mix for markets where the plane could be used.
Obviously when the A321LR was ordered, the hope was that these planes would have all their business class seated filled year-round across the Atlantic, and that this service would consistently make sense. But if these planes are going to be flying eight or so months per year to other destinations, is this still the right layout for the aircraft?
JetBlue’s current management team is extremely focused on cutting unprofitable flying. It’s clear that the Europe flying was the vision of JetBlue’s former CEO, and I imagine the current JetBlue management team wishes this had never happened.
If you ask me, JetBlue would’ve been much smarter focusing on introducing first class on all domestic flights (something the airline is reportedly working on), rather than trying its hand at transatlantic flying. Keep in mind that the airline has deferred most new aircraft deliveries to 2030 and beyond, so we won’t see many more planes joining JetBlue’s fleet in the coming years.
![](https://cdn.onemileatatime.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/JetBlue-A321LR-Cabin-1.jpeg)
Bottom line
JetBlue plans to significantly reduce its transatlantic service. First, the airline will be eliminating four of its planned 10 frequencies this winter, cutting Boston and New York to London Gatwick, as well as Boston to Amsterdam, altogether, as well as cutting one of the daily New York to Paris flights. On top of that, JetBlue will be shortening the season on several of its transatlantic routes, with some only launching in June.
Up until recently, JetBlue has been willing to sustain losses across the Atlantic, thinking the markets haven’t yet reached maturity. JetBlue’s new management team is much more focused on having the airline return to profitability ASAP, and that includes making some tough decisions with transatlantic service.
What do you make of JetBlue’s transatlantic route cuts?
Seems like JetBlue might want to refocus on the US.
TATL is not going to be profitable without significant cargo revenue; Of course, A321 does not have the capacity.
If JetBlue opened lounges in JFK/BOS/LAX/SFO/MIA (maybe a few others) and added FC on the remaining domestic routes, it could be the best domestic carrier. Then it could cut individual deals with INTL airlines for international routes, giving it global access.
The Wall Street Journal had an article about the attempts by low cost carriers to become more upscale by adding premium services - and how difficult that process is.
The article noted that DL is not only the financial leader in the US airline industry but also the customer service leader among the big 3.
DL also happens to be B6' biggest competitor and DL has managed to grow larger than B6 not just...
The Wall Street Journal had an article about the attempts by low cost carriers to become more upscale by adding premium services - and how difficult that process is.
The article noted that DL is not only the financial leader in the US airline industry but also the customer service leader among the big 3.
DL also happens to be B6' biggest competitor and DL has managed to grow larger than B6 not just at JFK but also in BOS.
IN an industry where size, service, and profits matter, DL is winning on every front in its competition with B6.
there has been talk of adding premium seats on domestic flights but B6 still has to win the premium revenue that DL as well as AA and UA generate.
And the biggest hurdle to B6 winning premium revenue is to fixing its operation. DL operates larger hubs to the same delay-prone NE airports as B6 and outperforms B6 by a wide margin.
B6 is an airline that developed a product-driven strategy that was easily matched and they have yet to demonstrate a full-airline approach to having market advantages and that is why B6 lags so much compared to other low cost carriers.
EDI started on 22 May this year, so restarting on that date next year isn't a shorter season when compared year to year.
I really think the lack of lounges on both ends of their TATL operation has had an impact (especially on core business markets LHR/CDG).
As discussed on here, I'm not sure how these 321LRs can make money domestically given the heavy J configuration. Might work on Ski markets on Sat/Sun but other days will be tough.
Hawaii may be an option off the West Coast but those F yields are not especially high.
...
I really think the lack of lounges on both ends of their TATL operation has had an impact (especially on core business markets LHR/CDG).
As discussed on here, I'm not sure how these 321LRs can make money domestically given the heavy J configuration. Might work on Ski markets on Sat/Sun but other days will be tough.
Hawaii may be an option off the West Coast but those F yields are not especially high.
I really like JetBlue and so want them to succeed - but it seems like there are not many options. They should have pursued the appeal of the NE alliance rather than focusing on acquiring Spirit - but that is water over the dam at this point.
B6 Mint transatlantic is an underwhelming experience from end to end, even at $1800.
I have a bottle of champagne in my refrigerator for the day this misbegotten excuse for an airline goes bust. Appealing only to the mammoth egos of Noo Yawk Yankets and Massholes, conning everyone into thinking its Shint is something more than overhyped domestic First, treating everything but the coasts as Flyover Country that could be safely ignored...its sins are many and numerous, and it deserves nothing less than death. The tears that will be...
I have a bottle of champagne in my refrigerator for the day this misbegotten excuse for an airline goes bust. Appealing only to the mammoth egos of Noo Yawk Yankets and Massholes, conning everyone into thinking its Shint is something more than overhyped domestic First, treating everything but the coasts as Flyover Country that could be safely ignored...its sins are many and numerous, and it deserves nothing less than death. The tears that will be wept when people realize that we in Chicago have a Hometown Airline but Noo Yawk and Bahstun don't will taste very, very sweet.
Wow. What an absurd comment....
This person's inferiority complex and projection on the so-called "coastal elitists" is very one-sided and bizarre.
How is it absurd? My hatred of New York, Boston, its residents, and its Hometown Airline is perfectly valid. It comes from experience.
So dumb
Heads up theres a typo where you said winter twice in a row.
"Absolutely phenomenal?" That's generous :)
It has its ups and downs. On average IF you don't have to deal with any airport staff and don't have delays or IROPS it is better than the other US carriers. But I don't think that qualifies for "absolutely phenomenal".
On topic the TATL strategy feels as aimless as the rest of Jetblue of the last 5 years. "If only they flew to London, B6 would be...
"Absolutely phenomenal?" That's generous :)
It has its ups and downs. On average IF you don't have to deal with any airport staff and don't have delays or IROPS it is better than the other US carriers. But I don't think that qualifies for "absolutely phenomenal".
On topic the TATL strategy feels as aimless as the rest of Jetblue of the last 5 years. "If only they flew to London, B6 would be my carrier of choice" said no one. Now they have very premium-heavy configs on new A321s and I don't know what they're going to do with them. I am surprised they went to Europe first when they could've gone to Hawaii from LA/SF/SEA rotating in their mint planes from transcons. The west coast does not need more Y seats to Hawaii but they could've probably filled their J flatbeds. Better than east coast to Europe that doesn't need more J nor Y seats.
Not surprising for JetBlue - we'll see if those premium mint routes to ski destinations in Big Sky work out although I doubt it.
To Tim Dunn - the math does not math for your Pacific and Atlantic claims via DOT on profitability. For Q1 and Q2 2024 YTD, net income:
- Delta: $1.34B
- United: $1.20B
Delta is more profitable (by ~10%), but this is TOTAL net income - the gap is partially...
Not surprising for JetBlue - we'll see if those premium mint routes to ski destinations in Big Sky work out although I doubt it.
To Tim Dunn - the math does not math for your Pacific and Atlantic claims via DOT on profitability. For Q1 and Q2 2024 YTD, net income:
- Delta: $1.34B
- United: $1.20B
Delta is more profitable (by ~10%), but this is TOTAL net income - the gap is partially driven by the refinery and bigger AmEx deal. How much we don't know but w/o those factors the gap like for like is DEFINITELY smaller.
You claim Delta is far more profitable than United in international travel, and point out United is 4th in domestic travel. So where does United make up that gap? The overall profitability like-for-like in 2024 is likely less than 5%.
there are indeed differences in the total net income by region compared to what is reported on the bottom line for the SEC.
The numbers for UAL are actually pretty accurate.
the reasons are not because of the refinery or SkyMiles/Amex because that is allocated to each region but because of non-operating costs which include DL's equity investments.
DL's profitability in the MRQ was impacted by losses on its equity investments; otherwise,...
there are indeed differences in the total net income by region compared to what is reported on the bottom line for the SEC.
The numbers for UAL are actually pretty accurate.
the reasons are not because of the refinery or SkyMiles/Amex because that is allocated to each region but because of non-operating costs which include DL's equity investments.
DL's profitability in the MRQ was impacted by losses on its equity investments; otherwise, it would have been significantly more profitable than UA. Also, UA has not raised FA pay raises while DL has multiple times.
Not only on an apples to apples cost basis, the big 3 are not presently comparable but there are differences in global region vs. system level SEC-reported net income because of factors which are not allocated to each global region.
That does not explain the magnitude of the DOT profitability you refer to.
The net income figures subtract total operating revenue with total operating costs - this includes non-passenger related costs (i.e., AmEx deal + refinery), so this is relevant even when you allocate to regions. In fact, this alone accounts for the revenue gap between Delta and United and for a chunk of the net income difference.
Flight attendants attribute for ~25% of United's...
That does not explain the magnitude of the DOT profitability you refer to.
The net income figures subtract total operating revenue with total operating costs - this includes non-passenger related costs (i.e., AmEx deal + refinery), so this is relevant even when you allocate to regions. In fact, this alone accounts for the revenue gap between Delta and United and for a chunk of the net income difference.
Flight attendants attribute for ~25% of United's workforce and a lower ~10-15% of salary costs. Given United's YTD salary cost of $8B, even taking the more aggressive 15% estimate of salary (~$1.2B) and applying the ~20% increase Southwest is ~$250M.
That results in a net income of ~$1.35B vs ~$950M, a chunk of that gap again from the Amex deal and refinery.
Even if you exclude non-operating revenue and expenses and look at operating income, Delta is at $2.8B YTD vs United's $2.0B which excludes equity investments. Even with the labor costs (~$250M), Delta cannot be 2x more profitable in the Atlantic (~20% of rev. for both carriers), comparable in LatAm, more profitable in the US, and equally profitable in the Pacific with that gap. The math does not math - there is something wrong in those numbers.
just as I have told everyone else that wants to question the numbers, feel free to tell us how to redistribute the profits between global regions if you don't like the way it is reported to the DOT - BY THE AIRLINES.
Delta made $2 billion more in system net profit than United in 2023 and $3 billion more than American.
The division of profits (or losses) has to add up to the same...
just as I have told everyone else that wants to question the numbers, feel free to tell us how to redistribute the profits between global regions if you don't like the way it is reported to the DOT - BY THE AIRLINES.
Delta made $2 billion more in system net profit than United in 2023 and $3 billion more than American.
The division of profits (or losses) has to add up to the same system number.
UA is closing the profit gap with DL but also hasn't raised FA wages.
The refinery is not delivering benefits near as large as it did post covid but it does reduce fuel costs for the airline; the benefit is allocated to the airline.
DL's loyalty and credit card is the biggest revenue differentiator; UA realizes that the reason they can't get a better credit card deal is because credit cards look at domestic revenue primarily and UA's focus on international revenue does not allow it to get the high margin credit card revenue.
And international markets have not been near as profitable as domestic markets for most of the post-deregulation period of the industry.
AA simply has not addressed the reasons for its underperformance in continental Europe and Asia including its inability to compete in major markets in the NE and west where DL and UA are stronger.
and FA costs will increase at AA and UA and there will be retro or DL will continue to gain revenue because of its ability to deliver better service.
and the trends between how AA, DL and perform in each region and overall is still very much correlated with the strategies that each make. It is only people that want to argue otherwise that discard things like the fact that AA is not taking delivery of anywhere near the number of new widebodies as DL and UA that they clearly do not see profitability in much of their international network.
And UA, for all that it wants to be international, has made some huge strategic failures including dumping capacity across the Pacific which absolutely showed up in DOT profitability and its execs statements that the Atlantic underperformed in 2023 which led to them pull back capacity this summer.
again, feel free to tell us what the profitability by region should say with all of the adjustments but you can't just reject it because you don't like what it says.
LOL all that text and nothing to the point. You can reject the data if it does not match up with the official numbers reported to the SEC to investors.
The DOT numbers you refer to are not standardized and do not have the same reporting stipulations. You yourself can't defend those numbers, because frankly even you know they do not make sense since they are not right.
Greg,
it is pretty obvious that it is you that spent enormous amounts of time trying to manipulate the numbers to close the gap in profitability between DAL and UAL which is what you really want.
The DOT profitability by global region data includes differences and the DOT and the airlines themselves know those differences very well.
And yet, UAL made $2 billion less than DAL on their income statement for 2023; there...
Greg,
it is pretty obvious that it is you that spent enormous amounts of time trying to manipulate the numbers to close the gap in profitability between DAL and UAL which is what you really want.
The DOT profitability by global region data includes differences and the DOT and the airlines themselves know those differences very well.
And yet, UAL made $2 billion less than DAL on their income statement for 2023; there is no way you can make UAL's international network as profitable as DAL's on an ASM basis (since UAL is a larger international carrier) unless you make UAL's domestic system lose money or be breakeven at best.
The real issue you should be focused on is why UAL's profitability trails DAL's and if you do you will find that
1. UAL has a less fuel efficient fleet - both for international and domestic aircraft.
2. UAL like AAL uses many more regional jets which are less fuel efficient but also much less labor efficient.
3. UAL is much more driven by a need to protect market share and to chase aviation geek metrics than to maximize profitability.
4. UAL gets much less revenue from non-transportation sources which is what gets DAL much higher margins.
and we could go on....
but the future is what matters.
UAL has stated it intends to grow its domestic network aggressively and yet it will have to displace AAL, DAL and LUV in multiple markets in order to gain share - a very difficult task.
Meanwhile, DAL sees the profits UAL is making in international markets - half of their profits came from international even though international was less than half of their revenue - and DAL is positioning itself to grow in international markets and do it more efficiently and with better strategies than UAL. It is far more likely that DAL will be much closer to UAL in total international size in 5 years than that UAL will gain share from any of the other big 4.
If news of UAL's potential purchase of used 777-300ERs turns out to be true, UAL will be locking in higher costs than DAL on its international system for a decade or more.
And the real irony of this discussion is that it is UAL that has been crowing the financial downfall of the low cost and ultra low cost carrier segment and yet JBLU and SAVE, the two weakest carriers in the industry, are larger in DAL and AAL markets than in AAL markets. so DL and AA are far more likely to benefit from the downfall of the carriers that UA is cheering to fall.
let's not forget that UA was in the longest and most expensive chapter 11 reorganization among any US airline and still has not achieved Scott Kirby's goal of matching DAL's profitability.
UAL has made a whole lot of progress but UA has not freed itself from its own history
and more importantly JBLU and the rest of the industry are far more likely to figure out how to restructure themselves than for them to disappear from the scene.
Regarding the fleet efficiency of UA and DL, where and when is your data from?
UA has taken delivery of almost 250 brand new domestic planes over the last few years while retiring dozens of 30 year A320s and domestic 757s.
I know their fleet was older before the new deliveries, but, just in 2023-2024 alone, their domestic fleet age has to have decreased significantly.
it can be easily calculated from the statistical summary section of the earnings report. ASMs divided by fuel burn.
Keep in mind that UAL has longer stage lengths so their fuel efficiency should be better; shorter flights burn more fuel per ASM than longer flights.
and fuel efficiency is calculated on a SYSTEM basis so it includes regional carrier seats - all of the big 3 no longer want to segregate their mainline vs. regional...
it can be easily calculated from the statistical summary section of the earnings report. ASMs divided by fuel burn.
Keep in mind that UAL has longer stage lengths so their fuel efficiency should be better; shorter flights burn more fuel per ASM than longer flights.
and fuel efficiency is calculated on a SYSTEM basis so it includes regional carrier seats - all of the big 3 no longer want to segregate their mainline vs. regional operations and so report it as one.
and fleet age is not a factor. DL's fuel efficiency is about the same percentage better than AA's as it is for UA - and the reasons are the same - regional jets and DL's decision to get rid of the 777-200 which is the most fuel INEFFICIENT widebody.
DO you realize that the A330-300 burns about 15% less fuel than the 777-200/ER? the 333 can and does fly most of the same routes that AA and UA use the 772ER on... that is a huge difference in fuel burn on TATL and S America routes.
and DL has gotten rid of hundreds of CRJs and has also taken delivery of 200 A321s (CEOs and NEOs) and 160 737-900ERs so all of the big 3 have taken delivery of large numbers of aircraft.
and finally, average gauge is a big determinant of fuel efficiency. DL has the largest average aircraft size of the big 3.
UA is making big strides to fix the issues that held it back - but everyone else is moving as well.
And the big difference between DL and UA is widebody fuel efficiency - DL has simply poured a much higher percentage of its fleet spending into new generation aircraft WHILE GETTING RID of older, less fuel efficient widebodies.
Well your figures for 2023 are iffy too - operating income removing for equity investments in FY23:
- Delta: $5.5B GAAP; $6.3B Adjusted
- United: $4.2B
And again there is a chunk driven by the refinery and Amex deal. No matter how you cut it, it is impossible that Delta is 2x more profitable across the Atlantic, equally as profitable in the Pacific, and given the difference in domestic revenue more profitable by a...
Well your figures for 2023 are iffy too - operating income removing for equity investments in FY23:
- Delta: $5.5B GAAP; $6.3B Adjusted
- United: $4.2B
And again there is a chunk driven by the refinery and Amex deal. No matter how you cut it, it is impossible that Delta is 2x more profitable across the Atlantic, equally as profitable in the Pacific, and given the difference in domestic revenue more profitable by a margin. These are just FACTS - I thought maybe you knew something about those DOT numbers, but it's clear you do not and instead are parroting misleading statistics that do not match with actual financial results. So basically it's pretty easy to conclude those claims are FALSE.
Greg,
once again,
what you can't stand to admit is that Delta is much more profitable on the bottom line net income on their SEC reported income statement.
Feel free to tell us how the $2 billion difference in net income for 2023 between DL and UA should be divided but the total is $2 billion and it will get allocated to each global region in one way or another.
You...
Greg,
once again,
what you can't stand to admit is that Delta is much more profitable on the bottom line net income on their SEC reported income statement.
Feel free to tell us how the $2 billion difference in net income for 2023 between DL and UA should be divided but the total is $2 billion and it will get allocated to each global region in one way or another.
You can tell us how you think the numbers should be but there is at least a $2 billion difference.
DOT regulations allow some costs to be allocated to regions and some not to be. The difference in DL's SEC bottom line and the sum of its global region profitability is explained by those rules. If you don't like them, argue with the DOT, not me.
what you and a whole bunch of ego-driven UA people can't stand to admit is that 7 years after Scott Kirby said UA would match DL's profitability, then have yet to do it.
As much as I want to believe that UA can and will close that gap, when you and others refuse to admit that UA repeatedly makes financially poor decisions like dumping capacity into the Pacific in the winter and chasing market share and the number of dots on a route map, then my hopes that UA can close that gap are repeatedly dashed - UA mgmt simply wants to focus on things that are contrary to maximizing profitability.
And when they drone on about the A321XLR while holding onto older widebody fuel INEFFICIENT aircraft and talking about buying used 777-300ERs because they can't get 787s from Boeing even though the 777 cannot do what the A350 - which UA has had on order but been deferring for a decade - then it is clear that UA can't fix its profit gap with DL because it can't make the right basic decisions
You keep saying the UA 777s are inefficient, yet a reason for that “on paper” inefficiency is because the planes have more premium configurations.
These configurations allow for more revenue, a seemingly winning strategy and both AA and DL are making their planes “less efficient” by adding more premium seats while reducing the total capacity.
Plus 2024 numbers have UA and DL on more equal footing, after taking into account the Q1 MAX...
You keep saying the UA 777s are inefficient, yet a reason for that “on paper” inefficiency is because the planes have more premium configurations.
These configurations allow for more revenue, a seemingly winning strategy and both AA and DL are making their planes “less efficient” by adding more premium seats while reducing the total capacity.
Plus 2024 numbers have UA and DL on more equal footing, after taking into account the Q1 MAX issues. So either DL is losing their edge or UA is gaining ground.
Wondering why B6 doesn't consider an Air Transat model, flying from JFK & BOS to secondary cities? B6 has a great feeder network, too. Why beat your head against a brick wall with most resources flying to London or Paris? I've flown Air Transat a few times and their planes are full.
Except for flying to Manchester, airlines serving England want to be at LHR. Birmingham and Gatwick have never been winners for TATL profitability.
"... it would suspend many routes this upcoming winter winter,..."
Extra word.
All of B6's TATL routes are vanity/prestige routes that lose money. The carrier has no corporate traffic to speak of. It relies on leisure to fill the seats. My bet is that these routes will all be gone in a year.
I highly doubt JetBlue made any money flying Transatlantic with an A321. If anything they may have broke even on some routes. When an A321 is up against a more spacious widebody (777/787/A350 and A330) and the Joint Venture Alliances that the US3 enjoy there is limited opportunities in the Marketplace. Cargo alone can make a difference on many routes and also working against JetBlue is Brand familiarity on the other side of the Atlantic.
Who cares? It is what it is. Airlines add and cut routes all of the time. Let's move on.
This might not be the blog for you.....
A clear example of why Tim Dunn’s constant hawking of DOT regional profitability as a credible argument isn’t taken seriously along with most of his statements.
If we were to use DOT regional profitability:
-B6 has only lost money flying over the Atlantic 2 of the 13 total quarters reported.
-B6 unlike DL never lost money flying over the Atlantic in any quarter of 2022 or 2023.
-B6 never lost money...
A clear example of why Tim Dunn’s constant hawking of DOT regional profitability as a credible argument isn’t taken seriously along with most of his statements.
If we were to use DOT regional profitability:
-B6 has only lost money flying over the Atlantic 2 of the 13 total quarters reported.
-B6 unlike DL never lost money flying over the Atlantic in any quarter of 2022 or 2023.
-B6 never lost money flying to Latin America in any full year since 2009 other than in 2020.
-B6 had smaller loses compared to DL over the Atlantic in total and on an ASM basis in the MRQ.
B6’s leadership current team is doing the complete opposite of what the DOT regional profitability suggests. Perhaps Robin Hayes was the messiah we all crucified on the cross that is DOT regional profitability. As it is written, he will rise again on the 3rd day as CEO of Airbus North America.
To the surprise of absolutely no one, a large number of Tim’s ratings on SA have negative returns and poor success rates. Tim constantly reminds Ben and Gary that they aren’t anything but #1 on the Top 10 miles and points website list, but has the little to show in terms of viewership, comments, income, or frankly anything other than word count.
in other words, you can't stand the facts that I factually present and you think that B6 current management is making a mistake.
Take it up with them.
DOT data is far more useful for established carriers of similar size to show movement and relative size than as an absolute metric even though the bottom line results for each geographic region remain the same.
and DOT regional profitability data shows that B6 has lost massive...
in other words, you can't stand the facts that I factually present and you think that B6 current management is making a mistake.
Take it up with them.
DOT data is far more useful for established carriers of similar size to show movement and relative size than as an absolute metric even though the bottom line results for each geographic region remain the same.
and DOT regional profitability data shows that B6 has lost massive amounts of money in the domestic marketplace for 5 years - a far higher percentage than any of the big 4 have lost.
It is entirely possible they could make money flying the Atlantic but they have to turn their domestic system around because international won't work if domestic continues to fail.
Either way, you are arguing with B6' current management; they made the cuts to B6' TATL network and not me.
If you think my previous comment was an indictment of the current B6 leadership and their decisions, then it is absolutely no surprise why you continue to hemorrhage on your ratings.
B6 knows they have a problem and they’re taking the appropriate steps to fix them. They also have the advantage of adding to the leadership team someone who knows the inner workings of DL and its JV partners. You on the other hand...
If you think my previous comment was an indictment of the current B6 leadership and their decisions, then it is absolutely no surprise why you continue to hemorrhage on your ratings.
B6 knows they have a problem and they’re taking the appropriate steps to fix them. They also have the advantage of adding to the leadership team someone who knows the inner workings of DL and its JV partners. You on the other hand have a multitude of problems and yet do nothing to address them.
Literally, no one other than yourself uses DOT regional profitability as the ultimate litmus test on the success of an airline is in a particular region. Stick to the retirement home, and leave the discussion to people who actually know what they’re talking about.
first, let's be clear that you speak for no one except for your cowardly self. You are unwilling to even post under a made up unique name of your own.
What you really want to do is eliminate any credibility about me or DOT data since I have repeatedly noted the differences between DL and both AA and UA in the international marketplace.
And yet the "it's just accounting tricks" makes no sense given...
first, let's be clear that you speak for no one except for your cowardly self. You are unwilling to even post under a made up unique name of your own.
What you really want to do is eliminate any credibility about me or DOT data since I have repeatedly noted the differences between DL and both AA and UA in the international marketplace.
And yet the "it's just accounting tricks" makes no sense given that Delta was twice as profitable as both AA and UA in the domestic market in 2023. in fact, DOT data shows that DL made more domestic profit in 2023 than AA, UA and WN COMBINED. so trying to argue that international data is wrong because profits can just be shifted between regions is actually CONTRARY to actual facts.
DL simply runs a better business and an airline. And you and others can't stand to admit that.
AA can't make money flying the Atlantic or Pacific although it certainly makes money flying some routes, more than offset by loss-making routes.
UA is hellbent on being the largest even if it comes at the cost of profitability and esp. in comparison to DL. Even on a system basis, they fly more ASMs than DL but make less money - and that relationship holds true at least on an ASM basis across every region.
B6 management - with or without someone that was formerly at DL - knows their current strategies don't work. Domestic is the largest loss-maker - not unlike HA.
B6 hasn't been flying the size of its longhaul international network long enough for data to even be posted; the DOT hasn't even released 2nd quarter 2024 profitability by global region data. B6 mgmt doesn't have to wait for that data to act on the data they see which is that their current strategy doesn't work.
nobody uses DOT data as the ultimate litmus test but it tells a lot that goes beyond system level bottom line results. If AA and UA were reporting system profitability on par or even close to DL, you might have a point - but DL leads the industry by a substantial amount in total profitability and that is not changing any time soon based on the investor guidance that each airline has provided.
You can hide behind the bushes denying the reality that facts say about AA and UA - which matters a whole lot more to you than B6.
and let's also not forget that AA and UA both have yet to settle with their FAs for new contracts which means their costs are going to up proportionately more than DL's will and even further skew the economics of AA and UA TATL narrowbody ops vs. DL widebody ops.
And beyond economics, 30K upset AA and UA FAs is the best strategy DL can hope for to keep winning over new customers.
and the lack of clarity about B6' future has a measurable impact on B6 customers and employees - again to DL's benefit.
speak for yourself and deal with facts, no matter how much you dislike them.
btw, you have no clue about how market recommendations work. Even professional sell side analysts do not put time horizons for their recommendations. A stock might legitimately be a buy for 3 months and then become a sell or hold. It is only if the analyst revises their recommendations that they track w/ stock performance.
My track record for airline recommendations has been as good as or better than professional sell side analysts depending on...
btw, you have no clue about how market recommendations work. Even professional sell side analysts do not put time horizons for their recommendations. A stock might legitimately be a buy for 3 months and then become a sell or hold. It is only if the analyst revises their recommendations that they track w/ stock performance.
My track record for airline recommendations has been as good as or better than professional sell side analysts depending on the period when those recommendations are measured.
Hi Tim,
Just FYI...Delta sucks.
Best wishes,
Constance.
There are a multitude of resources that track those recommendations and revisions to see how successful (or in your case unsuccessful) those ratings perform.
It’s clear you don’t understand how they work either given how poorly your recommendations have tracked.
yes, there are multiple resources that track recommendations - which of course have nothing to do with B6' cut in profitability or profitability by global region.
There are a whole of people that can't stand to hear that DL outperforms its competitors in every global region - including domestic - and so they attack the messenger.
Feel free to post a side by side comparison of stock recommendations by sell side analysts, other Seeking Alpha...
yes, there are multiple resources that track recommendations - which of course have nothing to do with B6' cut in profitability or profitability by global region.
There are a whole of people that can't stand to hear that DL outperforms its competitors in every global region - including domestic - and so they attack the messenger.
Feel free to post a side by side comparison of stock recommendations by sell side analysts, other Seeking Alpha contributors, and me and you will see that I have a better track record than either group.
Airline stock recommendations are inherently bullish compared to the performance of the sector and yet the principle is still true that there is no date specificity for any stock rating. I and others have issued either positive or negative recommendations for a stock and there have been times those have been correct; until those recommendations are replaced, those are still valid but that didn't make them wrong at some point.
and again, none of this changes that B6 mgmt is making dramatic cuts across its network; as much as some want to argue that their TATL network is not the problem, B6' current mgmt at the least knows they cannot sustain and grow an international operation as long as their domestic operation loses as much money as it is losing.
and AA and UA still operate much less profitability across their global regions (other than AA to Latin America) than DL AS WELL AS in the domestic marketplace.
Those that want to argue against DOT data cannot reconcile the fact that DL outperforms both AA and UA across their entire systems so it isn't a surprise that they outperform in global regions.
and there are a whole lot of people that can't stand to hear that reality.
and as long as they keep trying to attack me, I will simply keep making the facts that they can't deny
“B6 hasn't been flying the size of its longhaul international network long enough for data to even be posted.”
-False.
Year Domestic International Total
ASM
2019 49M 15M 64M
2022 47M 17M 64M
2023 49M 20M 69M
Passengers
2019 34M 9M 43M
2022 31M 9M 40M
2023 32M 11M 43M
Flights
2019 295K 75K 370K
2022 264K 70K 334K
2023 271K...
“B6 hasn't been flying the size of its longhaul international network long enough for data to even be posted.”
-False.
Year Domestic International Total
ASM
2019 49M 15M 64M
2022 47M 17M 64M
2023 49M 20M 69M
Passengers
2019 34M 9M 43M
2022 31M 9M 40M
2023 32M 11M 43M
Flights
2019 295K 75K 370K
2022 264K 70K 334K
2023 271K 78K 349K
If a reader wants a thousand paragraphs of meaningless conjecture on how to lose money in aviation stocks, Tim Dunn is the industry leading expert.
@Tim - can you provide data on your picks (date, ticket, recommendation, and price [if buy rec, exit price and if sell rec, cover price])? I think it would be fun to benchmark you to the JETS ETF (can’t do S&P since airline stocks get absolutely nuked by broad indices). This is the only way IMO to show your alpha.
Scooter et al,
the correct apples to apples comparison for my recommendations is other analysts for THE SAME STOCKS, not ETFs. I have covered JETS before but prefer covering the big 4 because they generate higher page clicks - something Ben sees in his articles; foreign airline articles get far fewer page clicks than the big 3 which is where he gets his largest number of page clicks.
Airline stocks are volatile so...
Scooter et al,
the correct apples to apples comparison for my recommendations is other analysts for THE SAME STOCKS, not ETFs. I have covered JETS before but prefer covering the big 4 because they generate higher page clicks - something Ben sees in his articles; foreign airline articles get far fewer page clicks than the big 3 which is where he gets his largest number of page clicks.
Airline stocks are volatile so no one does well with buy recommendations compared to other industries which are less volatile; the only way you can get around the volatility is to continually change your recommendations which neither sell side analysts - which do read my work on Seeking Alpha - or SA analysts do. In fact, SA has restrictions on writing on the same stock on a frequent basis.
This is Ben's site and what goes on elsewhere on the internet should be discussed there.
The only reason why some bring it up is because they don't want to admit that I understand the US airline industry very well and know where to find the data to make my points even and esp. if they don't like it.
AA and UA run businesses that don't do near as well as DL and that is true in domestic and international markets. Trying to argue that there are accounting tricks in the DOT's global region profitability only would matter IF there were big differences in global region profitability that are offset by opposite differences in domestic profitability but that doesn't happen.
And to the argumentative coward,
Since you at least use the same user name over and over, your motive is clear. You want to snuff out any criticism of any airline other than DL and you want to discredit anyone that dares say the realities that you don't want to hear.
DOT data is as valid as the SEC data which includes global region REVENUE.
You simply can't stand to admit that DL doesn't keep making the same stupid strategic mistakes that AA has made for decades and is not driven by the egos that drive UA's route planning - which values size over profitability.
You also don't want to hear or read that DL has made very solid long-term strategic decisions that will pay huge dividends esp. in the regions where DL has the ability to close the gap with UA - the Pacific and west coast - and to potentially surpass them in size - Latin America where there is just a 5% difference in revenue.
the principles that B6 is finding WRT narrowbody transatlantic costs and revenues will apply to AA and UA with the XLR. Network benefits of the XLR will be limited to the gateway cities where those XLRs operate. Stronger interior US hubs will support widebody TATL connections to European carriers better and more economically than coastal hubs to secondary cities.
B6, on a much smaller scale is finding the realities that AA and UA will find.
Ok - let’s make this fun: I want you to give me 12/31/24, 6/30/25, and 12/31/25 total returns (dividend included) for the big four carriers. When there’s something that changes your price recommendation, note it and how much it changes it. Put your money where your mouth/thumbs are!
Investing in airlines for the long term is suicide compared to buy and hold of the S&P. Except for worrying if an airline will go bk, their fincials don't matter much since they should not be owned.
Brian,
providing a recommendation for a stock does not mean how it compares to other investments. Not for me or for any sell side analyst.
An investment adviser or an individual retail investor weighs all of the data and decides how to build their portfolio. I do not provide recommendations about how to build a portfolio or compare any individual stocks to the broader market as a whole.
Indices often outperform any single...
Brian,
providing a recommendation for a stock does not mean how it compares to other investments. Not for me or for any sell side analyst.
An investment adviser or an individual retail investor weighs all of the data and decides how to build their portfolio. I do not provide recommendations about how to build a portfolio or compare any individual stocks to the broader market as a whole.
Indices often outperform any single stock over a period of time and that is not limited to airlines. Airlines have outperformed indices at times.
scooter,
there are abundant tools available to provide total return evaluations.
among AAL, ALK, DAL, JBLU, LUV, and UAL, DAL has been the best performing stock on a total return basis over the past year - and it is down just under 1%. DAL is the only one of those 6 that has positive growth over the past 6 months while DAL, LUV and UAL are positive with UAL slightly higher than DAL.
And since JBLU is the subject of this article, it is worth noting that AAL stock has performed worse over multiple time periods than JBLU.
No no no - i want the Tim Dunn crystal ball. Anyone can look at past returns (United has outperformed DAL ytd up ~8% vs DAL up ~5%), but that doesn’t mean a thing now). I want to see YOUR projections and calls for the future. You make these grandiose claims but never give us actual future numbers to see if you are real. Real analysts have a dollar value.
This is what happens when your companies stock price is in the single digits. And your company is barely worth 1 billion dollars. Cost cutting time.
BOS traveler here. I travel a few times a year to London, and every now and again maybe Paris. Jet Blue, pricing wise, out of BOS, seems to be quite high, at least when I look. I fly mostly Delta or Virgin over. For the same price Jet Blue charges, I get the lounge access at Terminal E, which is a huge lounge, an arrivals lounge at LHR, and the Virgin lounge on the way...
BOS traveler here. I travel a few times a year to London, and every now and again maybe Paris. Jet Blue, pricing wise, out of BOS, seems to be quite high, at least when I look. I fly mostly Delta or Virgin over. For the same price Jet Blue charges, I get the lounge access at Terminal E, which is a huge lounge, an arrivals lounge at LHR, and the Virgin lounge on the way back. A few weeks ago I flew BA, business out, first back. While not my preferred airline, I still had two lounges to use on my trip. Maybe it is just me, but I like having lounge access. I have access through Priority pass but I like the airline lounges better. Plus, I get no real benefits for flying Jet Blue, since I fly them rarely anyway Because of my status with Delta, I am flying with my wife from BOS to HNL, direct, Delta One, for the price of coach. So, paying for a Mint ticket, for the same price, or more, as for Delta/Virgin, is not really worth it to me. Call me shallow I guess.
Same here. Fly to London a few times a year for work out of BOS. I fly business there and premium economy back. Occasionally I’ll fly business back.
JetBlue is nearly always more expensive than BA/Delta/Virgin for RT business, and they don’t offer premium economy so I’d never choose them if I’m flying PE home.
this is why Ben noted accurately that trying to break into the transatlantic market would be a huge hurdle for B6.
They touted the low fares that they would be able to offer in business class and yet as you and others are seeing, their fares are not that low.
DL and other airlines that have international operations at BOS and JFK can easily match the lowest fares that B6 offers on some of its...
this is why Ben noted accurately that trying to break into the transatlantic market would be a huge hurdle for B6.
They touted the low fares that they would be able to offer in business class and yet as you and others are seeing, their fares are not that low.
DL and other airlines that have international operations at BOS and JFK can easily match the lowest fares that B6 offers on some of its TATL flights but do it on a lower percentage of seats on a widebody.
as Ben notes, B6 is too small to get corporate travel contracts which usually involve multiple cities around the country - and B6 is very weak outside of its core markets and isn't even the largest carrier in any of its core cities.
Add in that B6 can't offer a competitive product including lounges and loyalty programs as well as a more global and national network and there is very little reason why enough travelers would choose B6 over a legacy carrier.
B6 is really the story of David vs. Goliath. B6 was gifted slots at JFK in order to get started and yet they have not developed a single product or network attribute that other carriers have not matched or exceeded. The same is true for their TATL network.
B6 has some real soul-searching to do but they have clearly not figured out or least publicly released what their strategy is to be viable on a long-term basis.
The cuts they are announcing are just to stop the worst of the bleeding to give themselves time to restrategize and hope for a change in the business environment.
@Tim
Curious. I'm oneworld for the last decade+, previously SkyTeam, but that when it was nascent.
I do think that there is a window, albeit small, for B6 in the corporate sector. They just need to be laser-focused on SME ex-NYC and BOS. They don't have the network for anything else than the SME mainly East Coast accounts. I could/should look it up further, but I can't see an SME loyalty program being offered on...
@Tim
Curious. I'm oneworld for the last decade+, previously SkyTeam, but that when it was nascent.
I do think that there is a window, albeit small, for B6 in the corporate sector. They just need to be laser-focused on SME ex-NYC and BOS. They don't have the network for anything else than the SME mainly East Coast accounts. I could/should look it up further, but I can't see an SME loyalty program being offered on their website? That seems a big miss, especially if they could combine it with their CC partnerships (really, why would you have a B6 CC if not primarily traveling in their region anyways).
You should note the recent news that JetBlue has entered a code sharing agreement with BA. That should help their LHR flying, especially in
The off season.
JetBlue has also cut Boston-Amsterdam
During the winter. You indicate above its year round.
no, B6' current management realizes that they cannot devote dozens of aircraft to TATL service and cannot financially succeed as a year round transatlantic carrier so they are skimming off the largest markets and serving them on a year round basis and operating the rest of their network on a seasonal basis.
As much as some people will argue to their death otherwise, narrowbodies operating on 8+ hour flights have much higher operating costs per...
no, B6' current management realizes that they cannot devote dozens of aircraft to TATL service and cannot financially succeed as a year round transatlantic carrier so they are skimming off the largest markets and serving them on a year round basis and operating the rest of their network on a seasonal basis.
As much as some people will argue to their death otherwise, narrowbodies operating on 8+ hour flights have much higher operating costs per seat than widebodies so they do very poorly over the Atlantic in the winter.
AA and UA are both committing to use the A321XLR over the Atlantic in order to fly to multiple more cities in the summer than can be served by widebodies and also to try to serve cities in the winter that are not viable with widebodies, either for AA because of its small TATL network or for cities that cannot command enough revenue to sustain a widebody for UA.
DL has the most profitable strategy which is to use as many widebodies to serve Europe in the peak summer season (which could be as long as 6 months depending on the route) as can be economically be used on a year round basis somewhere in the network and then connect traffic in the off-peak seasons via its joint venture hubs.
The good thing about the A321 is that it can be used on domestic routes and to Latin America but still will result in an excess of premium configured narrowbodies outside of summer.
B6 is proving what AA and UA will find out and that is that narrowbody transatlantic routes do not work but for a small window of the year and the configuration necessary to serve TATL is not suitable - either on a widebody or narrowbody to also serve domestic routes.
UA is very different than B6. UA and its predecessor CO has operated narrow bodies transatlanticslly since the 1990s. They understand the economics.
Jason,
CO had much lower costs than the legacy carriers at the time in part because of the multiple chapter 11 reorgs and also because CO went into a high growth rate mode.
They did recognize the value of building a hub in NYC, something no other carrier had done, and used EWR - then significantly underutilized though not so now - to add dots to their route map.
The 757 was...
Jason,
CO had much lower costs than the legacy carriers at the time in part because of the multiple chapter 11 reorgs and also because CO went into a high growth rate mode.
They did recognize the value of building a hub in NYC, something no other carrier had done, and used EWR - then significantly underutilized though not so now - to add dots to their route map.
The 757 was a very cost efficient way to fly lots of international routes instead of buying widebodies.
In contrast, UA has labor costs as high as AA and DL and UA has a very large widebody fleet.
UA has chosen to use narrowbodies over the Atlantic solely to add more dots to its route map; and yet, the benefit is minimal outside of the gateway city for those routes - pretty much just EWR or IAD - because every other city requires a connection. BA/AA has air service via LHR to more US cities than any other European airport. AF/DL/KL serve more than a dozen of the largest US O&D markets outside of NYC, BOS, and WAS via AMS and CDG. There is very limited strategic value of using narrowbodies to smaller markets.
and finally, as much as I hate to keep bring it up, there are good reasons why UA makes half of what DL does across the Atlantic and half of what DL makes across the Pacific on an ASM basis. Across the Pacific is related to the deteriorated economics of NRT as a hub while across the Atlantic it is because UA does not cut its winter schedules deep enough and tries to fly routes with narrowbodies that cannot be sustained on a year round basis. As soon as you and others would like to start telling us the reasons for UA's underperformance across the Atlantic and Pacific, then we can start discussing strategies that will address those shortfalls but I have seen data that explains large portions of UA's underperformance compared to DL and it involves narrowbody flying over the Atlantic.
The A321XLR's fuel savings will not offset the much higher labor costs that have been put in place over the past several years and the much higher ownership costs for the XLR compared to the ownership and maintenance costs of the 757.
AA's strategy of using 788s and 321XLRs interchangeably between Europe and S. America makes more sense even though both will be high CASM aircraft.
Narrowbody transatlantic flying doesn't work outside of peak summer season for B6 and won't for AA or UA. Transatlantic fares fall too low during off peak periods to maintain narrowbody service during the winter regardless of the route.
The only hope is to use XLRs somewhere else in the network but you still have to find a one for one placement of those premium aircraft during the off-peak parts of the year.