Additional Max Order Rumored
12-24-2020 | 01:44 PM
#251
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 131
Likes: 9
The bottom 2 LA Capts displaced to ANC is just the beginning. As the Buses fade out, the true effect of the SLI will be felt by the senior side VX group (an effect which has largely been negligible in SFO and LAX). Just napkin math but it seems relative seniority is almost twice as bad in SEA and PDX as it would be in 737 LAX for the seniors. The only saving grace at this point would be if SFO opens as a Boeing base. That looks very unlikely. If that doesn’t happen and both SFO and LAX Buses close, where will they go? Closest base is 737 LAX and also the best in terms of relative seniority. I see a scenario where there’s tons of displacements out of LAX 737 as the Buses are reduced and guys force their way in. LAX could easily become the most senior base in terms of bidding action over the next 4 years.
12-24-2020 | 02:26 PM
#252
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
I’d imagine DCA/SNA just fine since I’ve seen 900’s in there and if the route isn’t a transcon it should be fine. As far as Hawaii markets I’ve heard it’s probably not going to work but who really knows. I’m sure the Max 8 will work just fine and Ben himself said they’re looking at the Max 7 which works in all of Hawaii just fine so maybe we use them on those niche routes with short runways.
12-24-2020 | 03:08 PM
#253
Banned
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,241
Likes: 0
It’s a MAX 9... It has different performance numbers then a 900ER... Hard to believe I know. It can fly 500 miles further too🤫.
There is honestly no need for a MAX 9 to fly into BUR or SNA, the efficiencies are realized in greater amounts the further it flies. Pretty sure 800NG will be sufficient for SNA and BUR.... DCA will see MAX 9’s and so will OGG
There is honestly no need for a MAX 9 to fly into BUR or SNA, the efficiencies are realized in greater amounts the further it flies. Pretty sure 800NG will be sufficient for SNA and BUR.... DCA will see MAX 9’s and so will OGG
12-24-2020 | 06:39 PM
#254
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
It’s a MAX 9... It has different performance numbers then a 900ER... Hard to believe I know. It can fly 500 miles further too🤫.
There is honestly no need for a MAX 9 to fly into BUR or SNA, the efficiencies are realized in greater amounts the further it flies. Pretty sure 800NG will be sufficient for SNA and BUR.... DCA will see MAX 9’s and so will OGG
There is honestly no need for a MAX 9 to fly into BUR or SNA, the efficiencies are realized in greater amounts the further it flies. Pretty sure 800NG will be sufficient for SNA and BUR.... DCA will see MAX 9’s and so will OGG
12-24-2020 | 07:03 PM
#255
Banned
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,241
Likes: 0
I guess, I don’t see your point. When you say something, say something that means something.
12-24-2020 | 10:08 PM
#256
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
OTZ, I know you are a max fan. It has longer legs than it’s predecessor and that is about it. Its runway performance-both in the take-off and landing arena is still poor. The 321NEO in every sense is the far superior airplane. Alaska Airlines did not need/does not need and has no plans for an airplane with its capacity/range and performance. You and I both knew the day we bought them they were gone. Our business model does not support an airplane like that.
12-26-2020 | 11:00 AM
#259
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Yes. If your business model supports it. Ours does not. We do not haul high value passengers. Period. We are an upscale tourist airline. We do not provide value to business customers. We are very much a regional airline....As in the Pacific Northwest Region. The Max is purpose built for cheap, tourist class travel. It can never have a real first class or business class. It provides a cramped, noisy uncomfortable travel experience for 45 minutes longer than an NG.
Going all Max9 will drive profitability much higher. Allows Alaska to have all the messy short haul and mid con in the 76-130 seat market handled by very inexpensive lift providers.
Alaska is brilliant in that they provide the illusion of an experience so well that passengers are willing to pay a little more for it.
Going all Max9 will drive profitability much higher. Allows Alaska to have all the messy short haul and mid con in the 76-130 seat market handled by very inexpensive lift providers.
Alaska is brilliant in that they provide the illusion of an experience so well that passengers are willing to pay a little more for it.
12-26-2020 | 12:32 PM
#260
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 131
Likes: 9
Yes. If your business model supports it. Ours does not. We do not haul high value passengers. Period. We are an upscale tourist airline. We do not provide value to business customers. We are very much a regional airline....As in the Pacific Northwest Region. The Max is purpose built for cheap, tourist class travel. It can never have a real first class or business class. It provides a cramped, noisy uncomfortable travel experience for 45 minutes longer than an NG.
Going all Max9 will drive profitability much higher. Allows Alaska to have all the messy short haul and mid con in the 76-130 seat market handled by very inexpensive lift providers.
Alaska is brilliant in that they provide the illusion of an experience so well that passengers are willing to pay a little more for it.
Going all Max9 will drive profitability much higher. Allows Alaska to have all the messy short haul and mid con in the 76-130 seat market handled by very inexpensive lift providers.
Alaska is brilliant in that they provide the illusion of an experience so well that passengers are willing to pay a little more for it.
Branson was the master of illusions, got his employees to work at a 40% discount and be happy about it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
