GuppyPuppy

What I don't seem to get is that it seems to me there are no restrictions when it comes to domestic code sharing.

Please tell me I'm wrong.

GP

402DRVR

Toronto for sure is in range, though they could argue that Porter's destination is Toronto City Center which we can't do because of runway size, but Pearson is easily used.

And wouldn't Rekjavich (spelling??) be within range of a 320? Not sure on that one. We code share with Iceland Air.

rvr1800

There are a few restrictions. JetBlue has to be growing by pilots and by block hours in order to sign new codeshares and renew existing codeshares and the end of their contract. Also the company it codeshares with can only be similar size or smaller than jetBlue.

GuppyPuppy

So, we can open up Alaska, Hawaiian, Sun Country and Frontier's entire network to our customer's on jb.com? Not to mention Seaborne, Cape Air, Silver, JetSuite X, etc...

Please explain how this is good for JB pilots. Why have JB fly an A320 LGB-SJC/RNO/etc... when JetSuite X can do it for us? Why not have Horizon fly Q400s between JFK-SYR/ROC/ORH?

This is my biggest problem with the TA.

No limitations other than we have to grow by 1 block hour or 1 pilot per year?

How does this help us?

GP

rvr1800

Your Horizon example cannot happen. We cannot have a capacity purchase agreement in any form. Unless Horizon wanted to start selling their own tickets. They’re set up as a fee for departure company. And even if they changed to a regular airline who sells their own seats it could then only be a codeshare.

Your Alaska example doesn’t really hold much water either. We’d merge with them before we did something like that. Codeshares make pennies on the dollar compared to selling those seats on our own metal. Have you watched the Scope video?

AYLflyer

I think you're confusing codesharing and regional fee for departure.

JB won't be making any sort of real profit off of simply codesharing our current flying. According to everything I've read so far, selling a ticket on JetSuite lands JB literally pennies on the dollar. If they want to stay in business as an airline and not a travel agency, then they won't be farming off all of our flying.

That said, I want to make sure I understand the scope as near 100% as possible. I'm hoping the road shows will clarify the information.

To those who have decided NO because of scope, can I ask, why are you willing to give up a contract now with scope in it, vs risking working under a PEA with no security and risking jetblue farming out flying in the next 12+ months while a new TA is drafted and voted in?

Also from the FAQ

nuball5

I agree. Watching the Scope video online, it sounds like the MEC is very content with the way Section 1 was agreed upon. In contrast watching the "Section 3 Compensation" video, you can tell they aren't as thrilled. If this agreement gets voted down, I'm willing to bet that Section 1 in TA2 would almost be copy & paste.

BeatNavy

We can codeshare on horizon or SkyWest planes under the Alaska code if we codeshared with them. Doesn’t have to be a CPA/FFD agreement. The idea with codesharing isn’t necessarily to make a lot of profit from a route. It’s to get customers on our planes from markets we don’t serve with little to no risk. It’s market access with no investment or cost. Then they connect on us and we make money that way. We get intl customers on our flights that way. With domestic codesharing, we can access west coast markets via Alaska and their CPAs with SKW and Horizon if we codeshared with them. How is that a good thing? That is incentive to not spend the money to grow organically into those markets.

Why was SWAPA so loud when SWA mgmt started privately discussing possible codeshares? Read this article and then tell me if you still think codesharing is harmless, and if so, how you came to that conclusion...I’m genuinely curious and want to know how it’s not a threat to growth.
https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/...share-and.html

International or routes we can’t fly is one thing. Like cape...I don’t care about a small piston plane flying on our code with pax getting on our flights. We have nothing that can effectively fly those routes that cape has codeshared with us. Ditto for international (until we get the capability, which I wish had more controls to end codeshares if we can fly the routes with new planes).

I’ve read the TA scope section probably 30-40 times, read the FAQs, and still don’t see how essentially unlimited domestic codeshares is a good (or even okay) thing. 1% growth? 1 block hour per year? 1 pilot added to the list a year. That’s our controls put in place? I’m not sold.

Bluedriver

Those that say they aren't worried about domestic codesharing simply don't understand the threat.

I'm not saying vote NO because of it, but I am saying to understand the true nature of the threat and acknowledge it exists.

Delta, for years, maintained a significant domestic codeshare with Alaska out of Seattle. Many Delta pilots we're VERY unhappy with the arrangement because all of the Pacific Northwest Delta commuters were watching Delta sell all these seats on to Alaska aircraft while maintaining a small senior Seattle base for Delta and most of those Delta guys having to commute to SLC, MSP, DTW or NYC. Delta management loved the arrangement because they got to sell connections on to a significant PCNW network that they didn't have to spend billions to develop themselves. Delta wanted to continue this arrangement which harmed Delta mainline pilots but became frustrated that Alaska was also codesharing with AA out of SEA. So DL gave Alaska an ultimatum, either codeshare exclusively with DL out of SEA or we will build our own SEA hub.

Well, you know the results, Delta pilots that live out West are huge winners now that the company built it's own SEA hub.

How does this apply to us?

Well, we have an east coast Airline with no network in the middle of the country and now with our announced reductions in intra-westcoast flying, no West coast network. We fly people to and from the west coast, but no West coast network.

We have been trying to find a way to build a west coast network, but have so far failed miserably. There are NO gates at any of the desirable airports.

Both Alaska and JB are being targeted by emboldened legacy carriers on both coasts, and unlike AK and JB, they can offer valuable business corporate accounts a FULL domestic network.

There is a very real possibility that JB and AK solve this problem with a large, mutually beneficial (for the airlines) large domestic codeshare.

And the same is potentially true for Moxy with there new C300 jets, as well as JetSuiteX.

If you really want to understand the threat, go ask about it in the APC Delta forum. This is the one area of our TA where we are absolutely NOT protected.

I'm not suggesting that we would furlough pilots or anything stupid like that. I'm not saying they are going to take our existing flying, that's just stupid. But, we may very well, and I think those chances are presently increasing, begin a large domestic codeshare with Alaska IN LIEU of building our own organic west coast network.

Not saying vote NO. Not saying doom and destruction. But understand the nature of the threat and stop telling the few of us that have concerns that it doesn't exist.

There are recent historical examples DL-AK, AA-AK, I think NWA-Continental. The PILOTS of those Airlines didn't like it because it reduced the airlines need to organically grow network relevance.

BD

Bluedriver

All correct.

And for emphasis, we CAN put JB customers on Skywest RJs via a codeshare with Alaska (who has NO scope or RJ limits).

I know you said it, just emphasizing it.

Guys, I may very well end up holding my nose and voting YES. I'm telling you this so you can at least understand the threat.