It’s a tough time for the US airline industry, and consumers are the ones benefiting from that. Long story short, the industry is very much dominated by the “big four,” with Delta and United taking home the lion’s share of the profits.
The reality is that smaller carriers are really struggling to compete. That’s because so much of the industry profits come from loyalty programs and lucrative credit card agreements, and benefiting from that requires scale. Essentially, our airline tickets are either subsidized by shareholders (for airlines that are losing money) or by credit card companies and loyalty programs (for airlines that are making money). One wonders if the US airline business model may need to be reinvented at some point…
Among US airlines, I’d argue that JetBlue is in a unique position. The airline hasn’t turned a profit since the start of the pandemic, and at this point, doesn’t forecast making a profit this year or next year. What makes JetBlue different than other struggling airlines is that it has some really valuable assets… if only they could be used correctly.
In this post:
JetBlue has a lot of potential, but also challenges
From a passenger experience standpoint, JetBlue is pretty great. JetBlue tries to offer a superior experience, from seat back entertainment, to free Wi-Fi, to more legroom, to free drinks and tasty snacks.
Most importantly, JetBlue has a strong market position in both Boston (BOS) and New York (JFK), which should be very lucrative markets. Arguably JetBlue’s biggest asset is its size at JFK, between its presence in Terminal 5, and its future presence in Terminal 6.
Under the leadership of former CEO Robin Hayes, I’d argue that JetBlue was simply distracted, and not paying attention to consumer trends. The airline was focused on sexy transatlantic flying, and on acquiring Spirit (in a failed merger). However, none of that really addressed the carrier’s underlying problem, which is its lack of profitability. It seemed to view the industry’s realities as a temporary blip that would self-correct.
While New York and Boston are lucrative markets, the airline is competing head-on with Delta, and that’s not really an airline you want to compete directly with, especially when those are your biggest markets.
In 2024, the airline got a new CEO and President, and they’ve been trying to turn the airline around. While I think they’ve generally been doing a good job, it just doesn’t seem like there’s actually that much of a radical vision to transform things. Their focus seems to be on cutting costs in order to restore profitability, while tweaking the route network.
The network changes basically seem to revolve around continuing to reduce capacity to match weaker demand, and also continuing to look for opportunities to wind down underperforming routes, and shift flying to more profitable destinations. But I’d also think that this is what every airline is always doing, no? When that’s the extent of the strategy, it’s not exactly ideal…
As JetBlue’s CEO recently explained in a memo to employees:
We’re hopeful demand and bookings will rebound, but even a recovery won’t fully offset the ground we’ve lost this year and our path back to profitability will take longer than we’d hoped. That means we’re still relying on borrowed cash to keep the airline running.
That’s not exactly good…
Can JetBlue independently return to profitability?
Where is there potential for JetBlue? The way I see it, there are several areas that can help the carrier’s financial performance:
- JetBlue plans to efficiently introduce first class throughout the fleet as of 2026; honestly, this can’t come soon enough, and I think it’s mind-boggling that this hasn’t happened until now
- JetBlue is trying to make its TrueBlue program more profitable by making it more lucrative and engaging for members, but that’s an uphill battle, since JetBlue is kind of late to the game
- JetBlue is launching a new “Blue Sky” partnership with United, though it’s not yet clear how this will materially improve the carrier’s financial performance
Of course then there’s JetBlue’s strategy of just trying to shrink into profitability, which also seems questionable, at best.
I’ve gotta be honest, I kind of struggle to see how JetBlue can actually become profitable, at least based on current market dynamics. I’d love to hear other viewpoints, because I’m not claiming to be right. What do you think JetBlue can do to become profitable, and with what timeline, and what market conditions? I’d love answers other than just the equivalent of “stop being poor.”
In theory, most people are opposed to industry consolidation, because of course we all want a healthy, competitive industry. Personally, I have a different take on consolidation:
- Perhaps aside from Taiwan, it’s important to acknowledge that the United States has one of the world’s most competitive airline industries, when you compare the number of major players to the size of the population
- I think what ultimately benefits consumers the most is to have as much capacity as possible flying for airlines that can generate healthy profits from their loyalty programs; those programs subsidize ticket costs, since even the most profitable airlines barely have any margins on the tickets they sell
I think the most fundamental issue here is that JetBlue’s JFK hub is an asset that would be worth billions to other airlines, but JetBlue just can’t use it properly:
- JetBlue is primarily a domestic and short haul international airline, and most people don’t want to trek out to JFK rather than LGA to take a domestic flight; it feels like the right hub for the wrong airline
- JetBlue’s heavy focus on leisure flying up and down the East Coast is tricky in terms of yields, given how directional demand is in this region; for example, in winter, the demand is going south on Thursdays through Saturdays, and going north on Sundays and Mondays
JetBlue could be a huge asset to other airlines
For a moment, let’s forget regulatory concerns. If an acquisition of JetBlue were possible, what would make the most sense? The way I view it, there are three possible JetBlue acquisitions that could make sense (and one that I just think is totally unrealistic).
JetBlue & United combination
This is the most obvious one. JetBlue and United are launching a partnership, and it’s clear that United would love to acquire JetBlue, if there were no regulatory issues:
- United CEO Scott Kirby salivates at the thought of returning to JFK, and would pay just about anything for JetBlue’s assets there, if the deal could get approval
- United doesn’t have a hub in Florida, and has reportedly been exploring that, so it seems like it could benefit from JetBlue’s presence in Fort Lauderdale (FLL)
- United would benefit from JetBlue’s aircraft, and there’s quite a bit of fleet commonality there, plus JetBlue’s interiors are already somewhat comparable to how United is retrofitting its aircraft at this point
- United could fly JetBlue’s A321LRs much more profitably than JetBlue could, especially across the Atlantic out of New York and Newark
- JetBlue could really be the key to allowing United to compete more directly with Delta, and get into the carrier’s league
JetBlue & Alaska combination
Keep in mind that back in the day, JetBlue and Alaska were fighting against one another to acquire Virgin America. Alaska ultimately won, though paid quite a pretty penny for the airline. Arguably Virgin America would’ve been better suited for JetBlue, given the complementary route networks, commonality in aircraft types, etc.
Now we’ve seen Alaska acquire Hawaiian, and I can’t help but think that JetBlue and Alaska could be good complements to one another. For one, they’d allow Alaska to be a “national” competitor, by beefing up its East Coast presence in some markets that can be lucrative.
Alaska also belongs to the oneworld alliance and has much more robust airline partnerships, so has more potential to leverage JetBlue’s position in the Northeast to its advantage, including in partnership with American. Now, I think Alaska probably has its hands full already trying to figure out its current merger, but in theory, I could see this becoming interesting some point down the road.
JetBlue & American combination
We know that American and JetBlue had a partnership in the past, and ultimately JetBlue has now decided to pursue a partnership with United rather than American. Financially, American is in third place, behind Delta and United, and the airline really needs something to give it some momentum.
I can’t help but think that there would be huge upside to American acquiring JetBlue:
- It would allow American to expand in New York and (to a lesser extent) Boston, which really seems like a missing part of American’s strategy, in terms of beefing up long haul connectivity, and increasingly competing against Delta and United in the Northeast
- American could fly JetBlue’s A321LRs much more profitability, as part of the oneworld transatlantic joint venture
- It feels like in general, JetBlue would benefit greatly from joining oneworld, much like Alaska has
Simply put, American needs to do something to build momentum and compete, given what a financial mess the airline is compared to Delta and United. If nothing changes, the airline will just become increasingly irrelevant, which isn’t good for anyone. Admittedly a merger isn’t some magic pill that will solve everything, but I do think there could be merit to this…
American acquiring JetBlue would sort of also be the ultimately revenge against United, given the dynamics between the management teams at the two airlines.
JetBlue & Delta combination
In theory, I’m sure Delta would love to acquire JetBlue, in the sense that it could knock out its biggest competitor in both Boston and New York, and have an ultra-dominant position. However, I have to imagine that such a combination wouldn’t receive regulatory approval no matter what, since it would be impossible to argue that there’s any real consumer benefit there.
Could a JetBlue takeover get regulatory approval?
Of course the immediate response people have is that “nope, there’s no way a ‘big three’ takeover of JetBlue would be approved.” That may very well be true. What I can’t wrap my head around is what alternative people propose.
Currently JetBlue is burning through borrowed money with no profitability on the horizon. The airline keeps shrinking and parking planes. If that trend continues, how do we benefit, as consumers, with JetBlue remaining independent?
I actually think it’s really interesting to reflect on the January 2024 filing, where a judge blocked JetBlue’s takeover of Spirit. In his decision, he wrote the following:
In sum, the Court has made its best attempt, applying the law to the evidence in this case, to predict the future of a dynamic market recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, in markedly uncertain times. For the reasons set forth above, therefore, the Court rules that the proposed acquisition violates Section 7 of the Clayton Act. Spirit is a small airline. But there are those who love it. To those dedicated customers of Spirit, this one’s for you. Why? Because the Clayton Act, a 109-year-old statute requires this result –- a statute that continues to deliver for the American people.
18 months later, how has that decision aged?
- Spirit has gone through bankruptcy protection, and has shrunk considerably, and continues to have absolutely horrible margins, burning through hundreds of millions of dollars per quarter
- The judge fundamentally misunderstood why people fly Spirit; people flew Spirit because the airline offered the best value (because their margins are negative 20% due to lack of pricing power), not because “there are those who love it” who are “dedicated customers of Spirit”
- I can understand that at the time, the judge may have decided that coming out of the pandemic, it was hard to determine the independent prospects of Spirit; however, I think most of us would now agree that the industry has fundamentally shifted
Presumably the argument against any sort of takeover of JetBlue would primarily center around the NYC area airports. Let’s actually talk about that a bit, by looking at domestic market share at the three NYC area airports:
- JetBlue has around 30% market share at JFK, around 5% market share at LGA, and around 5% market share at EWR
- Delta has just under 50% market share at JFK, around 50% market share at LGA, and around 5% market share at EWR
- American has around 20% market share at JFK, around 25% market share at LGA, and around 5% market share at EWR
- United has 0% market share at JFK, around 5% market share at LGA, and around 80% market share at EWR
Delta absolutely dominates NYC, with roughly 50% market share at both JFK and LGA. With that in mind, let’s look at the merger possibilities.
For example, if American were to acquire JetBlue, the airline would have around 50% market share at JFK and around 30% market share at LGA. The airline would still have an overall smaller presence at NYC area airports than Delta. Wouldn’t a strong, direct competitor to Delta be good, especially since that would almost certainly lead to global expansion from the airport? I think that would be better than two small competitors that are struggling, and being pushed around by Delta.
Alternatively, if United were to acquire JetBlue, the airline would have 30% market share at JFK, 10% market share at LGA, and 80% market share at EWR. Okay, maybe there would be some slot concessions at EWR, but that actually sounds to me like a much more competitive industry, no?
As a condition of a merger, require that the airlines maintain at least as much of a presence at JFK as JetBlue had before the merger, for some lengthy period of time. That way capacity will be maintained, and capacity is ultimately what matters.
None of this is to say that a merger would be approved. One would think that in theory, the Trump administration would be friendlier to consolidation than the Biden-Harris administration. That’s not to say that would actually be the case, though.
To me, it just comes down to recognizing that if airlines lose money for long enough, they won’t be in business anymore. And when the thing driving profitability is large scale loyalty programs (which benefits us consumers), then I think consolidation that maintains capacity has consumer benefits.
If you force JetBlue to remain independent, I can’t help but think that the airline will eventually end up in Chapter 11. However, that’s not some magic pill that fixes an airline — just look at Spirit. Instead, the underlying economics will remain unchanged, and if anything, the airline will just continue to shrink.
Bottom line
JetBlue hasn’t turned a profit since the start of the pandemic, and as much as the carrier has been trying to turn things around, things aren’t looking great. What makes JetBlue different than many other struggling airlines is that JetBlue has one of the most valuable terminal assets of any US airline, with its presence at JFK Terminal 5, and future presence at JFK Terminal 6.
Something’s gotta give here, and I don’t see how JetBlue is actually going to become profitable in this market, given the shift in industry dynamics. Maybe it could happen several years down the road, but one wonders just how much JetBlue will have shrunk by then.
Obviously there are concerns about regulatory approval for consolidation, and I get it. Though when you actually analyze the data, a pretty clear question emerges. Delta currently dominates NYC, and either an American or United takeover of JetBlue could give them a much more competitive position.
If American were to acquire JetBlue, the airline would still have an overall smaller presence in NYC than Delta. Wouldn’t consumers benefit from a strong, global competitor? Meanwhile if United were to acquire JetBlue, I think some slot concessions at Newark would be needed, but again, wouldn’t we be better off with the carrier actually being able to compete somewhere other than Newark?
What do you make of JetBlue’s financial situation, and the prospect of profitability and/or a merger?
Southwest was not mentioned. With Southwest getting rid of all that makes Southwest special, Southwest and JetBlue could work.
I favor an Alaska JetBlue tie up if it doesn't kill Alaska into bankruptcy.
"What I can’t wrap my head around is what alternative people propose."
A very simple one: let it fail, and then the others pick its bones for what the market will justify.
That's how it was for Pan Am, Eastern, and so many others. Not sure why JetBlue should be viewed as some special case who must be saved in-whole.
I hate to say it, but it sounds like where the big three would gain benefits isn't with JetBlue, but JetBlue's carcass. Pulling off a merger would be a political mess (even with the current White House) but waiting and seeing if JetBlue just keels over is the play they take. It certainly seems like Delta's best chance of growing in New York would be rummaging through the estate sale, rather than paying for the...
I hate to say it, but it sounds like where the big three would gain benefits isn't with JetBlue, but JetBlue's carcass. Pulling off a merger would be a political mess (even with the current White House) but waiting and seeing if JetBlue just keels over is the play they take. It certainly seems like Delta's best chance of growing in New York would be rummaging through the estate sale, rather than paying for the Airline itself. I'm not saying that's a good outcome, I just wouldn't be surprised if that's how this plays out.
you and immortal above get it.
DL is picking off the little meat that is left on B6 right now.
Just as was true with Eastern, a sick B6 is better for DL than a dead one.
DL's market share continues to grow in NYC and BOS.
and even if B6 assets do fall into someone else's hands, DL has a plan to ensure it remains at the top of the heap in those two metro areas.
One more - I also think Ben makes a bit of an error when he compares JFK, LGA and Newark in terms of domestic vs international traffic.
1) It is true that LGA is more convenient than JFK for domestic travel for many - but not necessarily for all. Remember that Queens and Brooklyn are bigger boroughs than Manhattan - not to mention Long Island proper. Many customers in those regions may prefer getting to...
One more - I also think Ben makes a bit of an error when he compares JFK, LGA and Newark in terms of domestic vs international traffic.
1) It is true that LGA is more convenient than JFK for domestic travel for many - but not necessarily for all. Remember that Queens and Brooklyn are bigger boroughs than Manhattan - not to mention Long Island proper. Many customers in those regions may prefer getting to JFK. And for many in Manhattan, New Jersey or whatever, Newark is the more convenient airport for domestic travel.
2) JetBlue offers significant domestic capacity out of JFK. United offers significant domestic capacity out of Newark - they aren’t going to duplicate that. American offers a moderate out of domestic capacity out of JFK - but they should offer more. Any acquisition of JetBlue by those two airlines would likely lead to a massive reduction in domestic service out of JFK, which no one really wants. We actually want more domestic service out of JFK - American is underutilizing the slots it already has, and we would like more flights from Alaska, Southwest, etc. Telling Nassau county residents they have to track to LGA or EWR for more expensive domestic flights isn’t a winning argument
well said, as usual.
the reality is that the Port Authority and abundant other data shows that LGA and JFK are, respectively, the preferred airports for short-haul domestic and longhaul domestic and international travel and both have more capacity combined than EWR which is why DL has a lower market share of both and still ends up with a higher share of passengers and flights from all 3 NYC airports.
and let's be clear that...
well said, as usual.
the reality is that the Port Authority and abundant other data shows that LGA and JFK are, respectively, the preferred airports for short-haul domestic and longhaul domestic and international travel and both have more capacity combined than EWR which is why DL has a lower market share of both and still ends up with a higher share of passengers and flights from all 3 NYC airports.
and let's be clear that all of this talk about a need for JBLU to merge is driven by the strategic failures at both AA and UA in NYC.
Scott Kirby handed DL 1/4 of the slots at LGA while UA's former execs walked away from JFK. AA has failed to figure out how to make NYC work despite being from there for more years of its existence than not.
even if UA managed to get all of B6, they would have to duplicate their EWR hub for longhaul traffic which would result in poor results - which is why they only want enough slots to operate a couple dozen transcon flights at most.
and all of this talk about B6 fails to address the biggest issue which is that no one is going to overtake DL at LGA which is the primary shorthaul airport and where DL is the largest. a big part of B6' failure is that it doesn't have the presence at LGA, AA has a larger share of LGA than it does at JFK but can't get the premium from it, and UA plus B6 at JFK would leave with a big hole in the largest portion by passengers boarded which is domestic short haul, inside the perimeter markets.
and it is not and never will be ideal for any of the big 3 to acquire any of B6' assets. Only if no one else comes up w/ a proposal and B6 fails is there a potential for a UA, AA or DL acquisition on the table.
UA is speaking so loud and so often because they want everyone to believe that UA should win B6' hand - when that is clearly a poor solution for everyone except UA
I continue to have some issues with the overall premise of this, and similar articles - that consumers specifically in New York and Boston would “benefit” from either American or United getting larger in order to “compete” with Delta.
1) Right now, across the three airports (we have to include Newark here), four airlines have significant presence - American, Delta, JetBlue, and United. Plus, Frontier and Spirit have decent presence at LGA. Alaska and...
I continue to have some issues with the overall premise of this, and similar articles - that consumers specifically in New York and Boston would “benefit” from either American or United getting larger in order to “compete” with Delta.
1) Right now, across the three airports (we have to include Newark here), four airlines have significant presence - American, Delta, JetBlue, and United. Plus, Frontier and Spirit have decent presence at LGA. Alaska and Southwest are more or less minor players at this point.
2) Consumers in NYC often benefit from lower pricing than you would expect on competitive routes out of these airlines given all of the major and low cost competition.
3) JetBlue also serves a lot of smaller airports in the area, such as White Plains.
4) If JetBlue were to be acquired, we would see service dropped from smaller northeast airports, likely reductions in service and routes out of NYC and Boston as the acquirer consolidates business, and higher prices. Ben admits the purpose of the merger would be to improve profitability, which can really only come with higher prices. I find it hard to understand how higher prices benefit consumers.
5) The alleged target of this consolidation - Delta- would also have more room to increase prices as the merger goes through. Travel bloggers like to see Delta taken down a notch because its frequent flier program isn’t as generous - but I fail to understand how encouraging Delta to struggle is a more compelling government interest than retaining low airfares in the NYC area.
6) Any merger like this would require slot divestitures to competitors to be approved. Who would be the buyers? Airlines like Frontier, Spirit, Breeze, Avelo, etc. These carriers would likely run a JetBlue like model. So you likely end up back where you started anyway.
7) Airline mergers are often unpredictable. Alaska Airlines was expected to be a strong competitor in the transcontinental market after it bought Virgin. It instead essentially abandoned the transcontinental market, much to Delta’s benefit. But the most relevant example is Southwest-AirTran. Southwest was supposed to be a strong competitor to Delta in Atlanta after that merger. Years later, Southwest has all bust abandoned the airport. There is no guarantee that American Airlines, for example, would actually try to compete in NYC after the actually acquire a JetBlue. They could easily just move more planes and assets to Dallas. United is more interesting as they want JFK - but do they really want to actually have a JFK presence outside of transcons and connections to star alliance partners? United/JetBlue would likely lead to a massive decline in domestic service out of the airport.
NYC customers benefit from the fact that you have a number of airlines competing on service, price, and network. Reducing competition via merger, IMO, just doesn’t seem consumer friendly. My suspicion is that courts and even many in the Trump DOJ agree.
JetBlue is a mess. It always has been. Does anyone remember the Valentine's Day Winter Storm fiasco where it took the airline weeks to recover in 2007? JetBlue flights are almost always late. The airline doesn't know what it wants to be. LCC or premium chaser? It doesn't have meaningful corporate business. It is a trunk airline for the Northeast to Florida market. The assets are the 321s and the 220s. JetBlue will be acquired...
JetBlue is a mess. It always has been. Does anyone remember the Valentine's Day Winter Storm fiasco where it took the airline weeks to recover in 2007? JetBlue flights are almost always late. The airline doesn't know what it wants to be. LCC or premium chaser? It doesn't have meaningful corporate business. It is a trunk airline for the Northeast to Florida market. The assets are the 321s and the 220s. JetBlue will be acquired and the only merger that makes any sense is one with American Airlines. They complement each other. United and B6 makes no sense and is even more controversial than the NEA, which had it not been for that, AA and B6 would already be united in matrimony.
"JetBlue is a mess, remember this thing from almost 20 years ago?"
Sure...
B6 is a mess especially when a layover is included. Mint is a great product, but still behind competition against big 3 given AA has overall advantage - lounge, 321T / soon 321XLR full flat seats, DL has the best ground service, and UA has all long-haul Polaris seats. Meanwhile, B6 is not strong against any big 4 at any major city - especially comparing to Alaska at SEA, ANC, and now HNL, and its...
B6 is a mess especially when a layover is included. Mint is a great product, but still behind competition against big 3 given AA has overall advantage - lounge, 321T / soon 321XLR full flat seats, DL has the best ground service, and UA has all long-haul Polaris seats. Meanwhile, B6 is not strong against any big 4 at any major city - especially comparing to Alaska at SEA, ANC, and now HNL, and its short haul service now is simply terrible - not even water for <1h NE regional flights.
On the other hand, I am not towards any big 4 or Alaska eating up B6 alone. This can break the delicate balance in the market. I am towards UA taking a majority of JFK and some of BOS, EWR and LGA, AA taking a minority of JFK, some of BOS and LGA while AS or DL taking the rest.
first, Mint only exists on a fairly small percentage of B6' fleet which is why they are talking about adding a domestic first class product on the rest of their fleet which WN is also rumored to be doing.
second, all of the big 3 have A321NEO based premium aircraft on order. DL will simply uses theirs for domestic-only (transcon flights) while AA and UA will use the XLR and use it on transcon...
first, Mint only exists on a fairly small percentage of B6' fleet which is why they are talking about adding a domestic first class product on the rest of their fleet which WN is also rumored to be doing.
second, all of the big 3 have A321NEO based premium aircraft on order. DL will simply uses theirs for domestic-only (transcon flights) while AA and UA will use the XLR and use it on transcon and international flgihts.
and third, UA has 2X2 business class seating on their 757s so does not have a consistent business class product at all.
and the chances of B6 being broken up to multiple airlines is very small. It rarely happens in the airline and there is no reason to think that B6 will ever get to that point.
I could be wrong, but I doubt JetBlue's outright acquisition by either United or Delta would pass regulatory muster. Without accompanying divestitures, either combination would create too much concentration in the overall New York market. A merger with Alaska probably won't have that issue, but does Alaska have the same desire to merge with JetBlue as the avgeek community apparently does? I wonder. As I see it, which, again, could be wrong, a more likely...
I could be wrong, but I doubt JetBlue's outright acquisition by either United or Delta would pass regulatory muster. Without accompanying divestitures, either combination would create too much concentration in the overall New York market. A merger with Alaska probably won't have that issue, but does Alaska have the same desire to merge with JetBlue as the avgeek community apparently does? I wonder. As I see it, which, again, could be wrong, a more likely scenario would be to divide JetBlue's assets among the interested parties. New York is one of those markets where market fragmentation isn't necessarily a bad situation.
Considering how much Scott Kirby is trying to cozy up to the Trump administration, you can never say no. I won’t be surprised if Trump signs some executive order to facilitate a UA-B6 merger
you can't force a merger through executive order.
and people love to talk about Kirby's sucking up routine but DL also gave $1 million to Trump's inauguration party. Delta just talks much less about what they want to do than United does but you can bet that DL has ideas about B6' future.
and states are the ones that can be more difficult to work w/ in antitrust cases.
since when is the US President interested in what he can or cannot do?
Airlines have enormous economies of scale, both to shareholders and to passengers. At some point, scarce resources (planes and slots) for marginal carriers like B6 would probably just be more efficiently used boosting a different carrier, most clearly AA so there is a third real player in New York.
Alaska should consider a name change. The current one is far too provisional if it’s going to keep acquiring planes.
Where does that leave SouthWest?
“Southwest”is more generic than Alaska.
+1
Right, because people always buy based on the name of the airline...
As far as I am concerned, B6 has got to go. The last time I flew B6 they had a meltdown. I realize meltdowns have happened to other airlines but B6 is unique. When they passed a one hour delay, they actually brought a Police Officer in to make further delay announcements. She also upholstered her weapon and stated she was ready so passengers should behave. I checked with NYPD and I was told for...
As far as I am concerned, B6 has got to go. The last time I flew B6 they had a meltdown. I realize meltdowns have happened to other airlines but B6 is unique. When they passed a one hour delay, they actually brought a Police Officer in to make further delay announcements. She also upholstered her weapon and stated she was ready so passengers should behave. I checked with NYPD and I was told for a weapon to be upholstered without a clear threat was a huge risky wrongdoing.
B6 ultimately got me to an adjacent State with a 6 hour delay. B6 denied any compensation for the extreme cab fare and DENIED having a Police Officer present!
Interesting analysis but where do you get that DL “absolutely dominates NYC”?
UA and DL carry almost the same number of passengers, UA carries way more cargo, and UA flies to more destinations with bigger planes.
perhaps because DL actually serves all 3 airports.
I know you and other UA fan kids are going to try desperately to avoid admitting that DL has any advantage but the public doesn't care what kinds or sizes of planes any airline flies.
and they sure don't care about cargo, a line of business in which B6 hardly participates.
DL offers 20% plus more flights and carries more passengers. It was "just about the...
perhaps because DL actually serves all 3 airports.
I know you and other UA fan kids are going to try desperately to avoid admitting that DL has any advantage but the public doesn't care what kinds or sizes of planes any airline flies.
and they sure don't care about cargo, a line of business in which B6 hardly participates.
DL offers 20% plus more flights and carries more passengers. It was "just about the same" between DL and UA for years; the EWR flight caps flipped the total squarely in DL's favor.
In reality, neither DL and UA dominate NYC but Ben is correct that DL does dominate the airport where B6 competes the most - JFK.
and foreign airlines carry 1/3 of all passengers in/out of JFK
Does your tongue ever get tired from the continual analingus you provide to Ed the Secret Homophobe (Hauenstein is lavender-washing)?
and as ever, tim
DL is 20% behind UA on the one NYC metric considered industry behind -- Capacity.
DL is 20% UA on NYC capacity no much how much it seems to make Tim mad and furious (and it always does)
And to reinforce, as you freely admit, Delta is WOEFULLY behind United on revenue in NYC
Delta needing 20% more flights to carry the same amount of passengers seems very inefficient and shows how much more Delta relies on regional jets.
Plus LGA, one of their two NYC hubs, is perimeter restricted.
You’ve pointed out many times how split hubs are inferior to single airport hubs.
And EWR is the most reliable NYC hub, now that they have the same traffic restriction benefit long enjoyed by the other...
Delta needing 20% more flights to carry the same amount of passengers seems very inefficient and shows how much more Delta relies on regional jets.
Plus LGA, one of their two NYC hubs, is perimeter restricted.
You’ve pointed out many times how split hubs are inferior to single airport hubs.
And EWR is the most reliable NYC hub, now that they have the same traffic restriction benefit long enjoyed by the other NYC airports.
As one example, UA had two flights a day from NYC to Tokyo, while DL didn’t even bother applying for JFK-HND, a route they surely would have been awarded but knew they wouldn’t be able to compete on.
And finally, with billions of extra credit card revenue each year, DL was still less profitable than UA in Q1. UA is more profitable in the running of the operation. DL gets more credit card revenue, for now. UA has taken major steps, especially with Kinnective media, to ensure the credit card revenue gap is closed in a few years.
Mark and Max,
of course you two want to ignore the reality that United used to be the largest in NYC on all 4 metrics - number of flights, passengers boarded, local market revenue and ASMs.
United lost the title of number of flights to DL two years and ago and lost the title of number of passengers also to DL when the EWR capacity restrictions went in place. The chances are high that...
Mark and Max,
of course you two want to ignore the reality that United used to be the largest in NYC on all 4 metrics - number of flights, passengers boarded, local market revenue and ASMs.
United lost the title of number of flights to DL two years and ago and lost the title of number of passengers also to DL when the EWR capacity restrictions went in place. The chances are high that UA can never recover that metric.
LGA is perimeter restricted but it is the preferred airport for short haul traffic from NYC just as JFK is for longhaul traffic. EWR was simply never the preferred airport; UA just had a larger operation.
No, I haven't pointed out that split hubs are inferior. You have. You spout your own nonsense, Mark, so much that you believe yourself. DL is the largest airline at 2 of NYC's 3 airports and those 2 are the preferred airports for their type of travel.
according to DOT data through March (the latest released), JFK has the best on-time of the 3, not EWR. and I can assure you that EWR will not take that title through June when one of the runways was still closed. and even if EWR does become a more on-time airport, it won't be by much and EWR is and will have far less capacity than it did before UA mismanaged what should have been a routine runway construction project.
and the final title that will fall will be local market revenue and ASMs as soon as DL starts adding flights from JFK to E and S. Asia = and that day is coming this decade. and it will involve DL 35Ks that will do routes that UA can only dream about.
Yes Tim, you have said split hubs are inferior. Of course not here, where it would hurt your case.
You’ve said when you made the laughable attempt at saying Tokyo is inferior to Seoul since NH and JL have operations in HND and NRT.
You also said when you wanted to put down BA, relative to KL and AF, saying that BA is inferior since they have operations in LHR and LGW.
...Yes Tim, you have said split hubs are inferior. Of course not here, where it would hurt your case.
You’ve said when you made the laughable attempt at saying Tokyo is inferior to Seoul since NH and JL have operations in HND and NRT.
You also said when you wanted to put down BA, relative to KL and AF, saying that BA is inferior since they have operations in LHR and LGW.
But apparently it doesn’t apply to DL.
And the “number of flights” metric isn’t a a reflection of UA’s move to more mainline and larger gauge, a move that has allowed UA to surpass DL in airline revenue and profits in the last quarter.
Forgot to mention, you can have the last word. I’m always wary of getting sucked into an “argument loop” with you, as Brett Snyder termed conversations with you.
nobody including me needs to have the last word. I do and will provide the ACCURATE word which you are unable and unwilling to do because it proves your failed logic.
UA's lead in NYC is shrinking. and you and Max and others can't admit it.
and NRT and HND are parallel international hubs just as is LGW vs LHR or CDG vs ORY. LGA is a domestic perimeter restricted airport.
it is YOU...
nobody including me needs to have the last word. I do and will provide the ACCURATE word which you are unable and unwilling to do because it proves your failed logic.
UA's lead in NYC is shrinking. and you and Max and others can't admit it.
and NRT and HND are parallel international hubs just as is LGW vs LHR or CDG vs ORY. LGA is a domestic perimeter restricted airport.
it is YOU that can't accept that DL has the largest market share at two of NYC's 3 airports and the 2 where it leads are the preferred airports for short and longhaul traffic.
and DL can upgauge too. Why you think that UA has a strategy that DL hasn't already showed them is laughable.
all you or anyone else including CF needs to do is argue w/ facts and data. You and others - not CF - exclude the data and facts that paint the story you don't want to hear which is why you repeatedly are shown to be wrong.
@Tim Dunn
"and foreign airlines carry 1/3 of all passengers in/out of JFK"
That is JetBLue's hidden future. To carry the domestic leg for Euro & Asian Star carriers at T6. JetBlue needs UA to sponsor its Star membership in exchange for the JFK gates. Being a founding member of Star, UA has veto power on new members.
AS and B6 have indeed built a business model on being the domestic partner for many foreign airlines.
AS thinks it can build its own international operation and keep all of those partners while B6 likely realizes that they cannot be in an alliance and keep all of those relationships.
I think B6 is right on this and AS has yet to face the reality that they are undercutting their own international growth prospects.
AS and B6 have indeed built a business model on being the domestic partner for many foreign airlines.
AS thinks it can build its own international operation and keep all of those partners while B6 likely realizes that they cannot be in an alliance and keep all of those relationships.
I think B6 is right on this and AS has yet to face the reality that they are undercutting their own international growth prospects.
And Star is not going to let B6 codeshare w/ every Tom, Dick and Harry that is not part of Star anymore than oneworld would.
problem for B6 (and AS) is that they both are already carrying lots of foreign carrier domestic passengers and aren't making money doing it because that part of the business is low yielding.
I would like to see a United / jetBlue merger and a Frontier / Spirit merger.
I see both UA and B6 as quality carriers and I would like to see UA with more north-south Eastern Seaboard routes and a Florida hub serving points in the Caribbean and northern South America.
I have a deep dislike for AA so......yeah.
Just saying.
Agree 100 percent
Feels like there are 2 paths that will get regulatory approval. Alaska can probably get JetBlue without any concessions. There really is no overlap between the 2. By early next year, Alaska may have the bandwidth to do another deal in early 2026. United will have too much share in NY. I could see a multi way deal, UA takes B6 except JFK/EWR minus the slots UA is supposed to get at JFK and AA/AS...
Feels like there are 2 paths that will get regulatory approval. Alaska can probably get JetBlue without any concessions. There really is no overlap between the 2. By early next year, Alaska may have the bandwidth to do another deal in early 2026. United will have too much share in NY. I could see a multi way deal, UA takes B6 except JFK/EWR minus the slots UA is supposed to get at JFK and AA/AS gets the rest of the JFK/EWR slots. I'm including AS as they might want some JFK or EWR slots, but they won't want them all. And the rest of JFK is probably too robust for AA. JFK slots are also valuable to oneworld members so AA could sell some B6 slots to OW members. UA does get that value from Florida and they would get Boston and access to JFK. I do think DL needs not to apply.
JetBlues management is completely incompetent. There turn around plan “JetForward” is so flawed. I don’t know how investors or the board don’t see this. First: Trying to be only an east coast leisure airline. The company has already admitted that they can only make money at 6 peak times of year; being just a leisure airline. You have to target more customers all the time. Operating cost and flying airplanes empty the rest of the...
JetBlues management is completely incompetent. There turn around plan “JetForward” is so flawed. I don’t know how investors or the board don’t see this. First: Trying to be only an east coast leisure airline. The company has already admitted that they can only make money at 6 peak times of year; being just a leisure airline. You have to target more customers all the time. Operating cost and flying airplanes empty the rest of the year is impossible.
Second: Backing themself into
A corner of the Northeast ( NY and BOS) bogs them down. Again the CEO cries the blues that Air Traffic Control and weather have drastically hurt there ability and yet JetBlue is doubling down on NE canceling a lot of west cost and Midwest flying.
Third: JetBlue's target demographic is very price sensitive and again CEO complains that JetBlue can not raise fares by one dollar yet they are doubling down on these same travelers.
Maybe if JetBlues CEO went to business school or had a MBA they could see this.
But instead they promoted a HR lawyer to CEO !!!
Unfortunately the Big 3 don’t need to buy JetBlue. The blood is already in the water. All they have to do is wait and can pick JetBlues carcass apart aka JFK, BOS, FLL
At least the incompetent management knows the difference between “there” and “their.”
On ATC, THEY’RE making the same argument THEIR competitors are about ATC staffing impacting the Northeast and the market THERE.
I’ve never heard her say anything about not being able to raise fares. In fact the opposite, about adding in premium products to charge higher fares.
Based on Ben's market share numbers, a merged UA/B6 would have 30% market share at JFK and 85% market share at EWR. Is EWR considered a "New York" airport where the 85% would be an issue or is EWR far enough away were it's only the market shares at LGA and JFK that would matter for the merger to succeed?
EWR is indeed considered a “New York” airport.
I am in favor of anything that kills B6 as quickly as possible. The tears shed by Noo Yawkers losing their hometown airline would taste so, so sweet. And if it gets swallowed up by Chicago's Hometown Airline...ambrosia.
Nothing says "I'm from America's third-largest city" like a pathological hatred of #1, whose residents don't even know you exist.
@DJT
"I'm from America's third-largest city"
You mean Tel Aviv?
There should be some pharmaceutical that might help you. It is worth a try.
Your pizza sucks and you don't know how to.
I love Chicago and they are great at many things, but pizza is not one of them.
You guys are both wrong. Pizza rules and both cities make awesome versions of it. Don't even get me started on how America sleeps on Chicago thin.
Good Pizza comes from Italy ...
DUDE ! LMAO !
ORD_Is_My_Second_Home: Your ad hominem attacks add nothing, and you just say the same thing over and over again.
Breaking Up to Build Forward: A Rational Path for JetBlue’s Future Amid Merger Talks
As discussions continue around the future of JetBlue—whether through a merger or other strategic options—it’s clear that regulatory approval and employee retention will be key hurdles. Rather than pursuing a single-buyer merger or attempting to force a regulatory exception, a more thoughtful approach would be to break up JetBlue’s assets in a way that maximizes both strategic alignment and regulatory viability.
...Breaking Up to Build Forward: A Rational Path for JetBlue’s Future Amid Merger Talks
As discussions continue around the future of JetBlue—whether through a merger or other strategic options—it’s clear that regulatory approval and employee retention will be key hurdles. Rather than pursuing a single-buyer merger or attempting to force a regulatory exception, a more thoughtful approach would be to break up JetBlue’s assets in a way that maximizes both strategic alignment and regulatory viability.
While a public auction might yield the highest immediate return for shareholders, it risks creating chaos and uncertainty for employees, customers, and communities. Instead, a structured sell-off—pre-negotiated with select carriers—could provide clarity and protect the long-term value of JetBlue’s legacy.
Here’s a proposed framework that balances market logic with political and regulatory realities:
American Airlines acquires JetBlue’s JFK assets and A320/A321 aircraft
This enhances American’s position at JFK while rationalizing transcontinental and Caribbean flying from a core strategic hub. The A320-family aircraft are already aligned with American’s fleet, making integration smoother.
United Airlines takes over JetBlue’s Boston (BOS) operation and A320/A321s
Boston has long been a battleground, and this move would turn BOS into a secondary transatlantic relief hub for Newark (EWR), helping decongest operations and add flexibility. JetBlue’s Boston presence is strong, and United is well-positioned to absorb it.
Delta picks up Fort Lauderdale (FLL) operations and A220s
Delta has repeatedly struggled to compete with American at Miami (MIA). Acquiring JetBlue’s FLL assets would finally give Delta a viable South Florida foothold, challenging American’s dominance without the sunk costs of MIA expansion. The A220s also fit neatly into Delta’s fleet plan.
United also acquires Orlando (MCO) operations
Though a lower-yield market, MCO has long been on United’s radar as a potential Southeast U.S. leisure hub. JetBlue’s infrastructure and frequency at MCO would give United a ready-made platform in a key growth corridor.
Remaining assets (LGA, DTW, LAX, and others) are split among Alaska (AS), Frontier (F9), and Southwest (WN)
These carriers are best positioned to benefit from smaller JetBlue holdings. Spirit is notably absent from this list—not due to oversight, but because its financial and operational weakness likely removes it from serious contention in any asset reallocation.
This proposal isn’t about dismantling JetBlue’s legacy; it’s about ensuring that its people, routes, and value are preserved in a way that is rational, defensible, and forward-looking. A clean, pre-arranged distribution of assets reduces the regulatory friction that derailed JetBlue’s proposed merger with Spirit, while giving employees a clearer future with viable, stable carriers.
In a time when aviation consolidation is under intense scrutiny, pragmatism may be the clearest path to progress.
Just curious but why no consideration or analysis of a Southwest/Jetblue merger? Left them and Frontier out of the equation albeit I don’t think frontier has the capital to make this happen but who knows.
there is the problem with aircraft commonality and right now WN has enough issues of its own creating. Not to mention the IT integration...
Alaska has the fleet commonality issue as well as they transformed themselves into an all 737 fleet after the Virgin merger plus they are still very much in the middle of a current merger dealing with IT, culture, operational, and labor contract integration but somehow Alaska is still a viable candidate to take over JetBlue in this Article. I agree that Southwest has issues of its own right now in the form of Elliot Investment...
Alaska has the fleet commonality issue as well as they transformed themselves into an all 737 fleet after the Virgin merger plus they are still very much in the middle of a current merger dealing with IT, culture, operational, and labor contract integration but somehow Alaska is still a viable candidate to take over JetBlue in this Article. I agree that Southwest has issues of its own right now in the form of Elliot Investment Management and a transformation of the business model to a more traditional, legacy like model by going to assigned seating, charging for bags, and a more segmented fare class but saying Southwest has their own problems while ignoring Alaska
current situation and Americans problems with reduced margins, failed corporate strategy around business travelers, and high debt loads seems kind of one sided to me. Southwest has expressed their desire to transform and adapt, moving to assigned seats, red eye flying, and extra leg room seating (which has been the JetBlue model for the past 2 decades). Along with that they have done loads of work on IT, announcing 2 international partners with potentially another 4-6 being announced this year alone, and is running either the number 1 or number 2 best operation in the industry right now. Couple that with their high cash balance, lack of northeast presence, lack of total network overlap, potential need for a smaller airframe in the form of the A220 and a bigger airframe in the form of the A321, a desire to move towards premium offerings such as potential lounges, a genuine first class, and trans Atlantic flying, and you have a merger with the potential for a decent amount of synergy. Lastly the average age of JetBlues A320 is just over 20 years old. The Average age of a Southwest 737-700 is also roughly 20 years. Southwest can’t get the Max7 yet and JetBlue isn’t take many (if any) 320NEO’s. The new Max8 fleet and large Southwest order book solves that A320 issue and the JetBlue A220 and order book solves SWA’s current Max7 issue while giving SWA and 200+ seat airplane in the A321LR and XLR. I don’t know maybe I’m crazy which is totally possible, but to not even consider SWA as a potential interested party due to historical allegiance to the 737 and current structural changes to the businesses model to align with the rest of the industry while simultaneously ignoring the potential synergies to be had between the two while also still considering/analyzing Alaska and American even with the current position of Alaska and financial debt loads at American seems crazy to me.
Jon thinks he knows things...but he really doesn't. When he says "a ton of work has gone into it" he's relying on some analyst on the commercial team who DM'ed him a wet dream he had.
I feel like JetBlue could've had it all, if they marketed themselves as the premium airline the way that Delta pretends it is.
JetBlue serves the most amount of premium transcon destinations w/ Mint, which is truly a competitive edge. They serve secondary destinations that doesn't always get the best product like YVR/SAN/Caribbean, etc. That alone would be reason enough to fly JetBlue everywhere, as that's significantly better than domestic first class.
Unfortunately, because they...
I feel like JetBlue could've had it all, if they marketed themselves as the premium airline the way that Delta pretends it is.
JetBlue serves the most amount of premium transcon destinations w/ Mint, which is truly a competitive edge. They serve secondary destinations that doesn't always get the best product like YVR/SAN/Caribbean, etc. That alone would be reason enough to fly JetBlue everywhere, as that's significantly better than domestic first class.
Unfortunately, because they didn't build themselves up that way, even Mint fares are consistently lower than the competition in DL, AA, UA.
I am so sick of writing this comment but ALASKA DOES NOT WANT JETBLUE. It is the only option listed where the airline likely has no interest in the acquisition. Alaska has been very open that they have been profitable bc they have been careful and chosen to grow very incrementally. The HA acquisition was completely logical (and largely anticipated). Even Sun country basically made a public statement inviting an offer from Alaska that they...
I am so sick of writing this comment but ALASKA DOES NOT WANT JETBLUE. It is the only option listed where the airline likely has no interest in the acquisition. Alaska has been very open that they have been profitable bc they have been careful and chosen to grow very incrementally. The HA acquisition was completely logical (and largely anticipated). Even Sun country basically made a public statement inviting an offer from Alaska that they don't seem to have taken.
If JetBlue's former leadership were in charge of Alaska, then yes they would go after JetBlue - which is exactly why Alaska is profitable and JetBlue isn't.
except that HA was not profitable and neither was Virgin America.
AS, like every airline, takes a look at opportunities and acts.
No airline (except perhaps UA which goes back and forth w/ saying they want as close of a relationship with B6 as possible to denying a merger or acquisition) says publicly that they want to acquire another airline.
AS wants to grow beyond its current size and it is naive to think...
except that HA was not profitable and neither was Virgin America.
AS, like every airline, takes a look at opportunities and acts.
No airline (except perhaps UA which goes back and forth w/ saying they want as close of a relationship with B6 as possible to denying a merger or acquisition) says publicly that they want to acquire another airline.
AS wants to grow beyond its current size and it is naive to think they are content to stay just w/ what they have with AS and HA and whatever they can organically grow.
Maybe AS will bite and maybe they won't.
The key takeaway is that AS would have - by far- the easiest pathway to a B6 merger or acquisition of any existing US airlines.
VS are HA lack of profitability are irrelevant to what I was saying, just as is JetBlue's lack of profitability. AS's growth strategy is physically incremental (literally incrementally spreading on a map). Their current top areas for growth are San Diego and Boise. I'm sure Allegiant at LAS is much more appealing to them than JetBlue
Agreed with PortlanJuanero - so much of Alaska's growth is layering strength on strength. BOI has so many cultural/economic connections with Portland, Seattle, California, etc... that it's logical growth for them to succeed, already coming from a place of strength. Same goes for SAN. Same goes for HNL. Funny you would mention LAS because there is some precedent for growth there too, using E175s to compete against Southwest (they added STS, SBP and Mexico flying)....
Agreed with PortlanJuanero - so much of Alaska's growth is layering strength on strength. BOI has so many cultural/economic connections with Portland, Seattle, California, etc... that it's logical growth for them to succeed, already coming from a place of strength. Same goes for SAN. Same goes for HNL. Funny you would mention LAS because there is some precedent for growth there too, using E175s to compete against Southwest (they added STS, SBP and Mexico flying). All of that is strength on strength. Expanding to have a major east coast presence would be a disaster for them as they'd have virtually no brand recognition on the eastern seaboard.
If I were AS I'd actually double/triple down on this strategy by deploying more E175s into EUG, PSC, GEG and other "strength" communities, flying to places like PHX and LAS just to serve the local market better so when those same pax need to fly to RDU they'll be more likely to have loyalty and connect in SEA. I'd also be taking a hard look at SMF and the market dynamics there with WN reeling, relatively little transcon service and an enormous catchment area in the one part of California that's still growing quite a bit.
Buying VX was a high price for an unprofitable airline, but in many ways it served its strategic goal by massively expanding Alaska's presence in the state of California, even if a lot of the original SFO and LAX markets went away.
except that AS COULD have stuck with its internal/organic growth strategy but instead acquired Virgin America and then less than a decade later, Hawaiian.
and AS pulled down much of what it acquired in SFO and LAX.
DL is now the 2nd largest carrier at SFO by mainline with AS 4th behind AA.
At LAX, AS is behind not just the big 3 but also WN.
and as much as some would like...
except that AS COULD have stuck with its internal/organic growth strategy but instead acquired Virgin America and then less than a decade later, Hawaiian.
and AS pulled down much of what it acquired in SFO and LAX.
DL is now the 2nd largest carrier at SFO by mainline with AS 4th behind AA.
At LAX, AS is behind not just the big 3 but also WN.
and as much as some would like to argue against B6' strategy of heavily serving predominantly leisure markets, that is exactly what Hawaii is - on top of Alaska.
Even AS' latest int'l move - FCO - is a leisure move. There is more validity to arguing for business demand to Tokyo and Seoul but not to Rome on a seasonal basis.
the biggest difference between AS and B6 is that AS is in an alliance and has greater market share in its key hubs than B6.
What is "2nd largest carrier at SFO by mainline"? Just making up more metrics to promote Delta?
it simply says that on their own metal, not including regional carriers, DL is the 2nd largest carrier.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having a leisure focus. All the growth post-COVID has been for leisure / premium leisure travel while business travel is down. You just need to be able to serve both so you can build loyalty.
In hindsight I don’t know if AS would make the decision again to buy VX. It was very expensive (and a distraction) with relatively little gain. Learning from mistakes is what differentiates good...
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having a leisure focus. All the growth post-COVID has been for leisure / premium leisure travel while business travel is down. You just need to be able to serve both so you can build loyalty.
In hindsight I don’t know if AS would make the decision again to buy VX. It was very expensive (and a distraction) with relatively little gain. Learning from mistakes is what differentiates good management. Yet another reason why they’d be unlikely to acquire JetBlue
The B6 route network (dominated by East Coast routes) makes zero sense for a West Coast carrier that isn’t transcon heavy. Unlike UA, DL, AA there’s zero presence in a midcon hub to help flow planes.
UA has ORD, IAH and DEN.
...DL has MSP, DTW and SLC.
AA has ORD, PHX and DFW.
A merged AS/B6 has nothing more than 60 miles away from a coast in the continental U.S (PDX).
The B6 route network (dominated by East Coast routes) makes zero sense for a West Coast carrier that isn’t transcon heavy. Unlike UA, DL, AA there’s zero presence in a midcon hub to help flow planes.
UA has ORD, IAH and DEN.
DL has MSP, DTW and SLC.
AA has ORD, PHX and DFW.
A merged AS/B6 has nothing more than 60 miles away from a coast in the continental U.S (PDX).
It’s the same problem US had before the AA merger.
It would also massively complicate things for AS with AA having to be frenemies in NYC. Probably kills any chance for AS to be invited to the OW TATL JV since in the most important US market (NYLON) you would have two airlines actually not competing on price. Well, unless you bribe Uncle Donnie sufficiently I guess.
We haven’t even gotten to fleet incompatibility yet…
So no, I am pretty confident AS isn’t going to acquire B6. The markets don’t line up well like they did for VX and HA, and frankly it probably works better for AS as an AA acquisition anyway, because a stronger AA in NYC means DL has more to worry about.
100% agree that if AS does anything else in the foreseeable future, it's a merger with or being taken over by AA. No other combo makes sense since AA and AS do not overlap to any meaningful degree (although any deal likely would require some divestments at SEA, MIA, PDX, and/or LAX to ensure competition).
If you're looking at competitiveness, is it not better to look at concentration on an airport rather than national basis. Irrespective of national share, if an airline has, say 80%+ of the slots at Kansas, its national share is irrelevant.
JetBlue started off as the airline that had a better coach product but couldn't scale that on a profitable basis in the long run. Also, starting with the 2007 meltdown the realities of not spending money on needed systems and staff to handle irregular operations showed.
Then the airline tried to be a mini US3 with plans of International routes and expansion in the US. Much of that never panned out from a profit standpoint.
...JetBlue started off as the airline that had a better coach product but couldn't scale that on a profitable basis in the long run. Also, starting with the 2007 meltdown the realities of not spending money on needed systems and staff to handle irregular operations showed.
Then the airline tried to be a mini US3 with plans of International routes and expansion in the US. Much of that never panned out from a profit standpoint.
Now unprofitable and cashflow negative the airline is trying to reinvent itself as something between an ULCC and a network airline. It's not going to be easy. It lacks much of what a legacy airline has (extensive route structure, lounges, premium offerings) and it's cost structure is too high for an ULCC. It operates a large chunk of it's flights out of delayed prone airports/airspace.
The most viable option would be an acquisition, setting aside finding a willing partner and an agreeable DOJ.
Yeah, I feel like they were the airline to beat in the early 2000s.
UA still by far the most likely, a ton of work has gone into it.
the amount of work that goes into any initiative doesn't begin to translate into whether it will happen or be successful
Jon thinks he knows things...but he really doesn't. When he says "a ton of work has gone into it" he's relying on some analyst on the commercial team who DM'ed him on X about a wet dream he had.
As long as senile Biden is not around, mergers would happen.
Biden killed JetBlue and almost killed US Steel and TikTok.
Killing TikTok is a good thing and society will greatly benefit from it, no wonder you are also senile, since TikTok is doing the brain rot for you
And those three reasons are why I love the old guy. Five stars, voted fir him once, would happily do so again.
And without industry consolidation you would end up paying 5 times more for the same thing. No different than the tariff idea of the other guy you didn't vote for.
I don't pay for my flights, so pride is irrelevant to me.
Price is irrelevant to me. Pride is very relevant to me.
And Trumps Supreme Court just ruled they won’t take up AA’s case on the Jet Blue partnership. So how was Biden administration ruling any different?
There really is no way out, other than bankruptcy. The route cuts, along with downsizing of staff and aircraft, will allow them to break even at some point, but paying down debt and making future investments will be difficult.
They lack the scale that network competitors have. The pressure applied by DL, combined with the inflationary increases in operating costs, is challenging their value proposition.
Long term, they will need to link up...
There really is no way out, other than bankruptcy. The route cuts, along with downsizing of staff and aircraft, will allow them to break even at some point, but paying down debt and making future investments will be difficult.
They lack the scale that network competitors have. The pressure applied by DL, combined with the inflationary increases in operating costs, is challenging their value proposition.
Long term, they will need to link up with another airline to create a larger network with scale, to improve the value proposition of its reward program.
AA would make sense in NYC, not sure about BOS and FLL, perhaps too much overlap there without concessions. UA would need to make huge concessions to get b6 slots at JFK. And I think Alaska is better off merging with AA in the long run.
I know it's a different administration but I'd still be shocked if any of the big 3 were allowed to swallow up B6. And AA merging with AS would be even more problematic (who would even be acquiring who?).
I think the idea of AA and AS merging gets so much flack is resultant size of the new airline being considerably the biggest. But there’s very little overlap between the two. AA is weak on the west coast, Hawaii, and Asia. AS can provide AA west coast hubs to rectify that. LA is the only overlap but even there AS is a small player and a concession could be made.
another good article, Ben.
B6 simply believed that a sexy onboard product would give them an advantage and DL essentially copied and expanded B6' onboard products and built a larger network on top of B6 in the process.
Of any existing US airlines, AS makes the best sense as a merger/acquisition partner with DL the obvious least and UA not far behind.
There could be a basis for a merger/acquisition by WN - surprised...
another good article, Ben.
B6 simply believed that a sexy onboard product would give them an advantage and DL essentially copied and expanded B6' onboard products and built a larger network on top of B6 in the process.
Of any existing US airlines, AS makes the best sense as a merger/acquisition partner with DL the obvious least and UA not far behind.
There could be a basis for a merger/acquisition by WN - surprised you didn't include them - but WN does not do well in legacy carrier hubs.
WN is likely moving to a full legacy carrier model w/ first class, lounges, and widebody flying.
The real question is who gets around to making a merger/acquisition offer to B6 first. UA thinks that by starting slow and playing below federal regulators and consumer advocates they will be better positioned to dig their claws in deeper in the future - but I expect the feds and state regulators will be no less critical of a combination involving any of the big 3 and B6 as they have in the past.
Virgin Atlantic still exists primarily because of Delta's equity infusion. What would a Lufthansa infusion into JetBlue, including membership in Star Alliance, look like? LH keeps on snapping up wobbly European airlines, so perhaps a maximum allowable stake in B6 to use it as a regional airline out of primarily BOS/FLL as well as using B6 planes for additional transatlantic capacity into secondary German and Italian markets. As a Star member, it might make an...
Virgin Atlantic still exists primarily because of Delta's equity infusion. What would a Lufthansa infusion into JetBlue, including membership in Star Alliance, look like? LH keeps on snapping up wobbly European airlines, so perhaps a maximum allowable stake in B6 to use it as a regional airline out of primarily BOS/FLL as well as using B6 planes for additional transatlantic capacity into secondary German and Italian markets. As a Star member, it might make an interline deal with United and United taking over JFK-LHR less complicated and position B6 as a US version of Eurowings.
read up on foreign ownership rules
But that's the thing, US is supposedly a beacon of free market economics and its current president supposedly is as pro-business as one can ever be. What's stopping them from changing the rules to bring in some FDI for struggling companies and additional competition for consumers?
I think everything you've written - all the different options - can be argued as good ideas for JetBlue. But also, none of them are obvious and easy #1 winners, they all have some drawbacks. Makes it again obvious that JetBlue is in a tough position. Seems like Alaska has made much better strategic decisions over the past 10+ years (expansion, VX and Hawaiian acquisitions). I don't think they'd be interested in buying/merging with JetBlue....
I think everything you've written - all the different options - can be argued as good ideas for JetBlue. But also, none of them are obvious and easy #1 winners, they all have some drawbacks. Makes it again obvious that JetBlue is in a tough position. Seems like Alaska has made much better strategic decisions over the past 10+ years (expansion, VX and Hawaiian acquisitions). I don't think they'd be interested in buying/merging with JetBlue. Organic expansion on the east coast is a better idea for them.
My thought... JetBlue should just charge more. Multiple times their fares from SFO to MCO/FLL and BOS have been significantly less than Alaska. Fly to east coast multiple times a year to visit wife's family. Prefer Alaska (wife if 75K), but sometimes JetBlue is so much less expensive it becomes a no-brainer. Especially when redeeming miles. For a trip in a few weeks it cost 12.5k miles for SFO-BOS at the most desirable time. That is way too cheap for them! We probably would've paid double!