Why did we not restrict codesharing with Available Seat Mile (ASM) limits? It seems like we can codeshare with Alaska for a massive network.
In our process of investigating codeshare agreements, we learned that—contrary to popular belief—the non-flying code share partner is paid pennies on the dollar, typically one or two pennies. Because of this, code sharing between Alaska and JetBlue, whether it be us codesharing with Alaska on the West Coast or Alaska code sharing with us on the East Coast, would yield almost no return for either company. For instance, if JetBlue flew from JFK-LAX, and did a code share with Alaska from LAX-SEA, JetBlue would not generate significant revenue on the LAX-SEA segment, and Alaska would not generate substantial revenue on the JFK-LAX segment. For a company to make money, they need to assume the risk by flying the route. To put it differently, no-one code shares if they can make a profit doing the flying. Carriers code share to generate feed, not revenue. That is why, notwithstanding that there is presently no meaningful restriction on code sharing with Alaska or anyone else in JetBlue’s present non-CBA manuals or in Alaska’s CBA, there is no massive network of code sharing with Alaska. We would also add that under the TA we could not code share with Alaska under circumstances in which we are not growing in terms of both pilots and block hours.

Although ASM ratios between codeshare partners have been negotiated, experience shows that carriers can comply with the ratios while still contracting and drawing down flying.