Oakland International Airport (OAK) is rebranding once again, trying to take advantage of its proximity to San Francisco. Will San Francisco International Airport (SFO) object this time around?
In this post:
Drama over Oakland Airport’s controversial rebranding
Airports are businesses, and of course they do what they can to attract as much traffic as possible. In early 2024, we saw the Port of Oakland try to rebrand its international airport, as “San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport.”
The idea behind this was obvious — OAK wanted to emphasize its proximity to San Francisco, to get more traffic among travelers looking to visit San Francisco. As you’d expect, executives at SFO weren’t happy about this, because any gain for OAK would be a loss for SFO. So they filed a lawsuit to try and block this rebranding.
A judge granted a preliminary injunction against OAK, demanding that the airport stop using the name “San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport,” and to not use “San Francisco Bay” in any promotions or products.
The judge decided that SFO would suffer irreparable harm from OAK’s name change, and that OAK violated SFO’s trademark for the airport. As the judge explained, “because the two airports offer identical services, the near identity of the marks makes them confusingly similar,” and that using the term “San Francisco” in OAK’s name “when there is in fact no affiliation, connection or association between the Oakland airport and San Francisco is contrary to how airports in the United States are normally named.”
Oakland Airport tries to add San Francisco to name, again
The Port of Oakland has now announced a new name for OAK, as the airport is being rebranded as “Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport.” Essentially, authorities are trying to do the same thing as last year, except they’re reversing the order of “Oakland” and “San Francisco Bay.”
Here’s how Craig Simon, Director of Aviation at the Port of Oakland, describes this:
“We are proud to be a central gateway to the Bay Area, and we’re proud to embrace a name that reflects both our local roots and regional reach. ‘Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport’ does both, putting Oakland first and highlighting our central location in the Bay Area for all visitors.”
The Port Board will consider adopting the new name at its July 10, 2025, meeting. Ahead of this, OAK executives have sent a letter to SFO executives, justifying why they believe that this is appropriate:
This new name is responsive to the court’s Order and your prior stated concerns about the existing Board Approved Name. It does not incorporate the entirety of SFO’s name and it does not start with the words “San Francisco.” Instead, it leads with “Oakland” — drawing an immediate connection to its location and identity as part of the City of Oakland (not the City and County of San Francisco), and is then followed by OAK’s location on the Bay. Many other airports use similar naming conventions to indicate geographic location or proximity. Given these changes, the City should not have any concerns about any purported potential for consumer confusion regarding the proposed name.
I’m no lawyer, but I feel like this name change is reasonable. I can understand the objection if the airport’s name started with “San Francisco,” and how that could cause confusion. However, “Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport” seems totally reasonable to me. After all, the airport is in Oakland, and the body of water that it’s on is called San Francisco Bay.
If there’s any claim of confusion among consumers, I feel like the word order should address those concerns. Anyway, we’ll see how this plays out…
Bottom line
Last year, OAK tried to rebrand as San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport. SFO took big issue with this, and a judge sided with SFO, and demanded that OAK cease using that branding. Now the airport is trying to rebrand once again, as Oakland San Francisco Bay International Airport, this time just flipping word order.
If you ask me, that seems like a reasonable rebranding that addresses concerns about potential confusion. For that matter, the name sort of just reflects the reality of the airport’s geography — the airport is in Oakland, and on San Francisco Bay. That’s not to say the airport authority won’t face legal issues, but at least that’s my take…
What do you make of OAK’s latest rebranding attempt?
By that same reasoning.. SF airport is not actually in San Francisco.. it's in San Bruno. Maybe they should change their name.
Seriously? All that is going to do is CONFUSE passengers even more!!!!!! Many people don't know the 3-letter codes for each airport, but by inserting "San Francisco Bay Area" into the description of OAK, it JUST MIGHT confuse the average person into thinking they are going to SFO !! I know it should be UP TO THE PAX to LOOK at their Itinerary/phone app (whatever) to see the exact airport he or she is flying...
Seriously? All that is going to do is CONFUSE passengers even more!!!!!! Many people don't know the 3-letter codes for each airport, but by inserting "San Francisco Bay Area" into the description of OAK, it JUST MIGHT confuse the average person into thinking they are going to SFO !! I know it should be UP TO THE PAX to LOOK at their Itinerary/phone app (whatever) to see the exact airport he or she is flying into or out of, but many people just ASSUME versus taking a minute to really look. I "see" a nightmare in some people's future if they're headed to the Bay area and don't know what airport they are really flying into or out of! Like travel isn't hard enough these days -- make it more challenging and confusing ....... way to go OAK !!
“A judge granted a preliminary injunction against OAK, demanding that the airport stop using the name ‘San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport,’ and to not use ‘San Francisco Bay’ in any promotions or products.”
Well, no, that’s not what the court did. Here is the full text of what was actually ordered:
“The Court PRELIMINARILY ENJOINS the Port of Oakland and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and all other persons who are in active...
“A judge granted a preliminary injunction against OAK, demanding that the airport stop using the name ‘San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport,’ and to not use ‘San Francisco Bay’ in any promotions or products.”
Well, no, that’s not what the court did. Here is the full text of what was actually ordered:
“The Court PRELIMINARILY ENJOINS the Port of Oakland and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and all other persons who are in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this order by personal or other service, from using, displaying, or registering the name or trademark “San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport” in connection with any products or services, including in connection with advertising, marketing, or other promotion, distribution, offering for sale, or sale, of any products or services.”
That SFO managed to prevent the previous name of San Francisco Bay Oakland is wild. So many cities have multiple airports - London has six which start with “London”. And yet somehow SFO was granted trademark protection?? Oakland airport is literally on the same bay and in the same metro area.
Even the airport knows, nobody in their right mind would fly to Oakland. What a dump of a city!
"Oakland San Francisco Bay International Airport" is a fine name! (Although a hyphen between "Oakland" and "San Francisco Bay" would be welcome.) And if they want to change their IATA airport code from OAK then they've got a couple open options like OBY and OFR. Or strike a deal with Osage Beach, Missouri, to get OSB. OAK is memorable, though, so I'd keep that.
In terms of precedents and analogs, Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport is...
"Oakland San Francisco Bay International Airport" is a fine name! (Although a hyphen between "Oakland" and "San Francisco Bay" would be welcome.) And if they want to change their IATA airport code from OAK then they've got a couple open options like OBY and OFR. Or strike a deal with Osage Beach, Missouri, to get OSB. OAK is memorable, though, so I'd keep that.
In terms of precedents and analogs, Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport is located in unincorporated Fort Snelling, not in either Minneapolis or Saint Paul. Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport is located in Romulus, Michigan. (The Coleman A. Young International Airport is owned by the City of Detroit.) Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport is owned by the city, although it's mostly located in Kenner with a tiny bit in unincorporated St. Charles Parish. Gary/Chicago International Airport is located in Gary, Indiana. Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport is located in Boone County, Kentucky. Pittsburgh International Airport is located in Findlay and Moon Townships. St. Louis International Airport is located in unincorporated St. Louis County. Indianapolis International Airport is located in Wayne and Decatur townships. Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is located in Sea-Tac (not in either Seattle or Tacoma). And (ironically) San Francisco International Airport is actually located in unincorporated San Mateo County, not in the city of San Francisco. (Although the airport has tried to finesse its reality by arranging a San Francisco Zip code and postal address.)
Seems fine.
I think it is more a matter of which airlines fly there and the management company. Consider other related examples, such as Newark (EWR). The Port Authority for New York and New Jersey manages that airport as well as the other NYC airports, so it is integrated. Furthermore, a few airlines have a handful of flights to Newark, but generally speaking those on certain airlines or certain alliances will fly there (or vice versa with...
I think it is more a matter of which airlines fly there and the management company. Consider other related examples, such as Newark (EWR). The Port Authority for New York and New Jersey manages that airport as well as the other NYC airports, so it is integrated. Furthermore, a few airlines have a handful of flights to Newark, but generally speaking those on certain airlines or certain alliances will fly there (or vice versa with the other two NYC airports). Perhaps something similar could be done here.
I lived in San Francisco for 15 years. I tried flying OAK to SLC using Republic Airlines (the original BIG Republic) and America West ( I am OLD ) to LAS and PHX.
Pain in the ass compared to SFO. Poor Oakland, there are a couple really nice neighborhoods....but yeah, NO.
And while as the crow flies...it may be close to The City, the crow doesn't drive to The City or Peninsula from OAK
Eh. Oakland is just fine. That they're so vested in changing the name of the airport is weird.
Oakland Airport was never very convenient for me (I only ever used it once - SFO was closer to my home.)
Call it the East Bay Airport!
The easiest way to be popular is to leach off the popularity of others. That's why we propose changing the town's name from Springfield to Seinfeld!
I APPROVE this!!!
I don't like it but it gets rid of the overused "international". Too many U.S. airports use "international". There is no need for "international". Really big airport don't need to brag, like Heathrow or Gatwick.
I hope the name doesn't change from Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport to Oakland San Francisco Bay Amelia Earhart Cesar Chavez Martin Luther King Jr. James Meredith Malcolm X International Airport at Alameda County.
Nice how you managed to squeeze a little hate into the topic.
Maybe Oakland should take a page from Trump's playbook and start calling it Oakland Bay.
This is a prime example of liberalism.
Lipstick on a pig. Oakland needs a new city administration and another 1000 police officers.
See what happens when you can "name your own pronoun".
Renaming an airport is a joke to all of you.
But not using a correct pronoun triggers chaos.
Politically correct airport?
Ah, the San Francisco 49ers, who play their games 45 miles south of San Francisco in Santa Clara. Maybe they should start being called the San Jose 49ers, as that's only a few miles away. Also the Anaheim Angels of Los Angeles, only about 20 miles from downtown Los Angeles, albeit in another county.
IMHO, OAK’s issue isn’t name but the lawlessness of the Oakland city. Improve that and rest will follow.
just watch OAK name themselves OSF :P
Golden Gate International
It’s a long and convoluted name.
I still think changing to Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport is a tad too much, but I could see it changing to Oakland Bay Area International Airport.
Isn’t there an exact parallel to this situation in the DMV area?
Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA)
Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD)
Baltimore-Washington International (BWI)
"Washington" for DCA and IAD are fair game. BWI is stretching a bit. More egregious are Orlando area airports: Sanford (SFB) calling itself "Orlando Sanford International" and Melbourne (MLB) naming itself "Melbourne Orlando International." (MLB is way out in left field)
Why?
BWI is a grand total of 4 nautical miles farther from central D.C. than IAD is, and the two are co-terminals in both the UK and EU bilaterals with the USA, the former dating before the 1977 formation of Bermuda II.
Not a single one of those airports has any problem drawing traffic unlike OAK. Why is that? I'm flying out of DCA tomorrow. Going in I know I don't have to worry about my safety or stepping in piles of human excrement. All three are in very vibrant areas unlike OAK where businesses are leaving. The solution should be obvious.
I am a SFBA native, and last month, I got into a Lyft going to OAK and nearly had a heart attack when I looked up my flight and saw "San Francisco" as the first words in the airport name. The potential for confusion was real. This will reduce it.
SFBA natives riding in in Lfyts / Ubers usually know if they are on 101 or 880 ;)
imho the word order probably helps address the likelihood of confusion issue, but they're still going to have to deal with the fact that using 'San Francisco' "when there is in fact no affiliation, connection or association between the Oakland airport and San Francisco is contrary to how airports in the United States are normally named."
Maybe we should rename this "Bay of America"...
Entirely reasonable to have SF Bay in the name, since it's literally next to SF Bay. Fair marketing too, given proximity and even good transit access to downtown SF.
It’s basically *in* SF Bay.
It is indeed. "San Francisco Bay Area" or simply "Bay Area" encompasses Oakland, San Jose, and San Francisco. So Oakland is not *next* to the Bay Area, it's well and truly within it, and it's fully deserving of this name change.
I was thinking they could go with Bay Area International Airport or Oakland Bay Area International Airport. Bay Area is a common term for the region.
A lot of SF residents find OAK more convenient. And it's right there, not like it's miles and miles away.
Interestingly though none of the NYC airports officially have "New York" in their name. Both Chicago airports use "Chicago" but are located in Chicago while only LAX uses "Los Angeles" so there is some precedent to keeping OAK from using "San Francisco" (though I'm not sure about "San Francisco Bay"). On the other hand DFW...
A lot of SF residents find OAK more convenient. And it's right there, not like it's miles and miles away.
Interestingly though none of the NYC airports officially have "New York" in their name. Both Chicago airports use "Chicago" but are located in Chicago while only LAX uses "Los Angeles" so there is some precedent to keeping OAK from using "San Francisco" (though I'm not sure about "San Francisco Bay"). On the other hand DFW isn't located in "D" nor is it located in "FW"
I couldn’t care less about the name of any airport.
Just a little further south, newly hired PhDs at Meta Superintelligence Labs are on the verge of changing the world. And schmucks are fighting like schoolchildren over a name?
Truly a display of the variance of intelligence within homo sapiens.
You might not care, but sadly a lot of people really do have negative impressions of Oakland and it's enough to actually prevent them from flying there even when it would better suit their agendas and budgets.
Evan if you ignore "reputations"/impressions, as others have mentioned OAK is just as conveniently located to downtown SF as SFO... and the term "San Franciso Bay" encompasses more than just the west side of the bay.
I'm all...
You might not care, but sadly a lot of people really do have negative impressions of Oakland and it's enough to actually prevent them from flying there even when it would better suit their agendas and budgets.
Evan if you ignore "reputations"/impressions, as others have mentioned OAK is just as conveniently located to downtown SF as SFO... and the term "San Franciso Bay" encompasses more than just the west side of the bay.
I'm all for this change... ironically that's the same name Norwegian used to use for OAK lol.
You spent your time commenting in this thread and completely missed your own reflection while you were at it. So congrats on proving your own point about homo sapiens.
I think a city-wide airport code would be much more helpful for them than a name change. When I search for flights to NYC, I type in NYC to check prices at all three. SF should offer the same for SFO and OAK (and maybe SJC).
I love this idea. When I lived in NorCal, OAK and SJC were usually much simpler/easier to use than SFO, and the locations are great.
Yes. that's what OAK needs - to coordinate w/ airlines and search OTAs to make the list for San Francisco. The way LAX and BUR shows up for Los Angeles (although there are certainly more choices) and IAD, DCA, BWI shows up for Washington.
Little brother syndrome.