Fwd: Comment: Virgin @ SFO means party over for OAK, SJC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I don't quite agree with this guy: there's enough business east of
the bay to support traffic at OAK, and UA probably has more to fear
from a Virgin America than do HP or B6.

--- In BATN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "6/15 San Mateo Journal" <batn@xxxx>
wrote:
Published Tuesday, June 15, 2004, in the San Mateo Daily Journal

Comment

The party is over for Oakland and San Jose

By Stanford M. Horn

Virgin Airways' selection of San Francisco International Airport as
its operational headquarters was hot news to SFO. But it had to be
like an ice-cold splash in the face of two airlines and two airports.
Because now the party's over.

Southwest and JetBlue airlines and the Oakland and San Jose airports
they serve had gotten fatter than they had ever dreamed of because of
an anomaly that is now about to be shattered. These two airlines cut
fares, and the relatively smaller airports promoted themselves well.
During the same period, no other airlines at SFO countered the
competition and the giant-sized SFO didn't to promote itself and
defend its turf. Consequently, passengers began to move away from SFO
to Oakland and San Jose. SFO's loss was enormous. Passenger traffic
at SFO dropped from 41 million to 29 million. Meanwhile, Oakland's
traffic went up because of those willing to put up with some
inconvenience to save big dollars.

For several years, the Oakland airport, Southwest and JetBlue enjoyed
the ride, setting records and no doubt wondering why their
competitors across the San Francisco Bay didn't wake up and take
steps to stem the tide.

Now Virgin has. Before Virgin, six other low-fare carriers -- Air
Tran, America West, American Trans Air, Frontier, Midwest Express and
Ted -- chose to land at SFO and the number of passengers started
rising for the first time since early 2001.

Here is the new business paradigm. It's never been any secret that
more than half of the passengers who go to Oakland really don't want
to go to Oakland. They're only flying JetBlue or Southwest because
they're a lot cheaper. Now, Virgin will step in and meet those fares
and compete on many of the best routes. It will heavily promote its
service and cheeky personality. This will result in JetBlue and
Southwest losing passengers to Virgin and SFO. In this situation what
will JetBlue and Southwest do? Will they keep their satisfied
customers and the Bay Area market share by following them back to SFO?

Low-fare carriers have often invaded the turf of "legacy"
carriers ... and won. Never before, though, has a low-fare carrier
invaded the turf of other low-fare carriers to the extent that Virgin
will here. The good news for millions of Bay Area travelers and
visitors seems to be not-so-good for Oakland and San Jose airports
and their two-star carriers.

Their party is over.


Stanford M. Horn writes on Bay Area transportation and development
issues. He is a resident of Millbrae.


[BATN: See also

Give-aways, real estate lured Virgin discount carrier to SFO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/18683

Airline workers await Virgin's landing
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/18651

Virgin lands at SFO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/18648

Give-aways, schmooze land Virgin at SFO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/18645

Virgin discount air carrier to be based at SFO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/18620 ]
--- End forwarded message ---

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]