Comments on: Southwest to Start LAX – SFO http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/ Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:25:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: RickSeaney.com » The Battle for California’s Skies: SW vs. VX http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/comment-page-1/#comment-67636 RickSeaney.com » The Battle for California’s Skies: SW vs. VX Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:29:06 +0000 http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/#comment-67636 [...] The Cranky Flier said, Its going to be a bloodbath as these guys fight it out. Could we see the return of $19 fares? [...] [...] The Cranky Flier said, Its going to be a bloodbath as these guys fight it out. Could we see the return of $19 fares? [...]

]]> By: SJ http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/comment-page-1/#comment-4515 SJ Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:19:09 +0000 http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/#comment-4515 Agree entirely. If SF could get the runway problem solved it would be huge Although it's not all over yet, buried in the last paragraph of a SF Chronicle article was this statement "The infusion of service is helping drive major expansion projects at Bay Area airports. San Jose and Oakland are spending hundreds of millions of dollars each to expand and upgrade their facilities, and the return of passenger traffic to pre-2001 levels is helping SFO ready its long-planned renovation of the shuttered former international terminal, which will become SFO's third terminal for domestic flights." If that actually happens the many SFO travelers can finally stop complaining about the eyesore stuck in the middle of the airport and might actually get an improved experience, although they've been saying this for a few years now. Agree entirely. If SF could get the runway problem solved it would be huge

Although it’s not all over yet, buried in the last paragraph of a SF Chronicle article was this statement “The infusion of service is helping drive major expansion projects at Bay Area airports. San Jose and Oakland are spending hundreds of millions of dollars each to expand and upgrade their facilities, and the return of passenger traffic to pre-2001 levels is helping SFO ready its long-planned renovation of the shuttered former international terminal, which will become SFO’s third terminal for domestic flights.”

If that actually happens the many SFO travelers can finally stop complaining about the eyesore stuck in the middle of the airport and might actually get an improved experience, although they’ve been saying this for a few years now.

]]> By: CF http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/comment-page-1/#comment-4458 CF Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:31:53 +0000 http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/#comment-4458 For the overall "Bay to Basin" market, I agree completely that Southwest is the big dog. But LAX-SFO is still one of the bigger markets in the country and that one is owned by United. If only they could get past the environmentalists and spread out those two Bay runways. Then you'd have a perfectly functioning airport in all weather conditions with direct light rail access to the City. I'll stop dreaming now. OAK is a great alternative for those in the City as long as you're willing to take the BART. Sitting in traffic on the Bay Bridge makes me want to fly to SFO even with fog delays. But yes, the airport costs less to operate from and it's far more convenient for the East Bay and Napa. That being said, SFO has done a lot of work to bring their costs down and that's why you've seen airlines like Southwest come back into the airport. For the overall “Bay to Basin” market, I agree completely that Southwest is the big dog. But LAX-SFO is still one of the bigger markets in the country and that one is owned by United. If only they could get past the environmentalists and spread out those two Bay runways. Then you’d have a perfectly functioning airport in all weather conditions with direct light rail access to the City. I’ll stop dreaming now.

OAK is a great alternative for those in the City as long as you’re willing to take the BART. Sitting in traffic on the Bay Bridge makes me want to fly to SFO even with fog delays. But yes, the airport costs less to operate from and it’s far more convenient for the East Bay and Napa.

That being said, SFO has done a lot of work to bring their costs down and that’s why you’ve seen airlines like Southwest come back into the airport.

]]> By: SJ http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/comment-page-1/#comment-4457 SJ Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:27:25 +0000 http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/#comment-4457 Love the blog...but felt I had to get in this one. Southwest is really the big dog in the market, not United. I understand Virgin and SFO, but the fog at SFO can be killer and when they shutdown the second runway delays stack up quickly. The only people confined to SFO for short hops are SFO residents, less then 900,000 strong. Peninsula, South Bay inc. San Jose and East Bay residents, which make up the majority of the Bay Area population (San Jose is something like the 9th largest city in the country, bigger than San Fran) all flock to Oakland and San Jose for short hops. Both airports are surprisingly well-located for those demographics, and people farther east in the valley can use Sacramento. There are I think 22 daily flights OAK-LAX, and another 16 from OAK-BUR, 12 OAK-ONT and 9 OAK-SNA. That's 57 daily Southwest flights from Oakland to the LA area alone, and that's not counting JetBlue doing OAK (and now SFO as well) to Long Beach. OAK didn't really come away as an afterthought though in the whole Southwest bit...its cheap landing fees and monopoly on Terminal 2 (and the new extension) pretty much made OAK synonymous with Southwest for the past 10 years or so. Love the blog…but felt I had to get in this one. Southwest is really the big dog in the market, not United. I understand Virgin and SFO, but the fog at SFO can be killer and when they shutdown the second runway delays stack up quickly. The only people confined to SFO for short hops are SFO residents, less then 900,000 strong. Peninsula, South Bay inc. San Jose and East Bay residents, which make up the majority of the Bay Area population (San Jose is something like the 9th largest city in the country, bigger than San Fran) all flock to Oakland and San Jose for short hops. Both airports are surprisingly well-located for those demographics, and people farther east in the valley can use Sacramento.

There are I think 22 daily flights OAK-LAX, and another 16 from OAK-BUR, 12 OAK-ONT and 9 OAK-SNA. That’s 57 daily Southwest flights from Oakland to the LA area alone, and that’s not counting JetBlue doing OAK (and now SFO as well) to Long Beach. OAK didn’t really come away as an afterthought though in the whole Southwest bit…its cheap landing fees and monopoly on Terminal 2 (and the new extension) pretty much made OAK synonymous with Southwest for the past 10 years or so.

]]> By: Flight Wisdom » Competition Heats Up, New Routes, and More http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/comment-page-1/#comment-4439 Flight Wisdom » Competition Heats Up, New Routes, and More Wed, 29 Aug 2007 04:35:07 +0000 http://crankyflier.com/2007/08/28/southwest-to-start-lax-sfo/#comment-4439 [...] face competition from upstart Virgin America with six flights ago. The Cranky Flier has a great analysis of the comparison. Virgin has a four hour gap without flights in mid morning, and their last flight [...] [...] face competition from upstart Virgin America with six flights ago. The Cranky Flier has a great analysis of the comparison. Virgin has a four hour gap without flights in mid morning, and their last flight [...]

]]>