Originally Posted by
Bluedriver
The problem with both your arguments is history.
Then please explain why both Delta and American tightened their codeshare language in their new contracts. If history says they're good, then why are they tightening control?
We are going to grow, even with the codeshares. You mention American. They want to codeshare with us. We can either codeshare with them, get the revenue from it, and continue to expand into OTHER cities. Or, we could say NO, and be forced to start those new routes ourselves, while competing in a fare war with the new AA on those routes. And those new routes that we have to do battle on, are planes that can't be used to start other routes that could have been more profitable...
Which is why I'm arguing for codeshare CONTROL. If the markets are profitable, why not start them and get a greater share of the revenue rather than a percentage through a code share? If they're not (or won't work in our system), that's when a code share becomes a valid point. I don't see us ever flying Allentown-Philadelphia, but we might be able to pick up some customers that live in Allentown that want to get to Boston that way.
You guys that think that we should just deny any codesharing because it would force us to fly to Hawaii, or Dublin, or wherever are delusional. It won't. All it will do is limit our revenue that could be used to start flying other places. It WON'T make them order 100 more new planes so that we can fly those routes ourselves.... If we aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet.
Negative. I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm arguing for RESTRICTIONS on code sharing, not denying them. If you'll re-read my post, I even point that out in regards to international flying. Not sure where you're getting that I'm saying deny all code shares.
Personally, I would rather codeshare with AA on routes that we don't have to start an all-out war, and use those revenues to start new routes to other places where we don't have to have a fare war.
But no control over the codeshares leads to us potentially NOT growing. If we can garner revenues hand over fist via a code share, where's the incentive to enter another market. We've got tons of places we could fly domestically that are tripping over each other to bring us in. CLE and CVG have both expressed interest, and I think we could do well. By your argument, however, we should just let AA (or even Delta) operate out of BOS to those cities while we concentrate elsewhere. What happens when it comes to the point where we make more money by NOT doing anything? With code share controls, we could start the market ourselves and generate revenue that way. Does it hurt the bottom line? Not much, but what it DOES do is protect jobs at jetBlue rather than further growth at American (likely dba American Eagle). This all ties back into the scope that you're supporting in a later post. Scope isn't just about protecting our flying from the regionals anymore.