Originally Posted by DrSteveBrule

Can also say JM told us in ground, planning is evaluating bases, only consideration is in the NE and any decisions will be made based largely on real estate availability.

I take that to mean: EWR if we end up with a bunch of gates, but that's a wish. Possibly PHL if we end up with more gates, but that's a less likely wish, or BWI, where we could add 50 flights tomorrow and the airport could accomodate us. Legacies are dug in at IAD and DCA and dont really mess around with BWI clientele or compete on price with themselves with their other DC metro ops, though they all dabble there. There are also income demographics and operating costs at play here. Ranking cost per airports, MCO, FLL, and LAS are all top five most affordable airports. BWI is top 10 and LAX is top 25. On the expensive side, DFW ranks top 10, DTW not far behind, while EWR is most expensive and PHL and ATL are not far behind.
Mgmt wants low sticker price. We dont fly to YMNN because taxes are 50% of the airfare. Doesnt matter that every other airline also has to deal with that cost. They have an idea of what they want for fares, and high costs prohibit that. I surmise the only two real choices for a base at this time, if any, are BWI and LAX. That said, it's also an argument for why ACY works so well. Full planes, lost cost, no phl traffic. LAX is still tough because there's not enough flying in the west to support multiple red eye bases at this time imo. Too inefficient. Add five or six more west coast cities then maybe. Mgmt loves the 1000nm stage length, and bwi is far better positioned to accomodate that given the current network.

Thoughts?

For your health