We Can Actually Be A Reliever Airport If We Have Flights
To put this in perspective we urged the City of Worcester to get out of the aiport business and put the entire airport out to bid starting ten plus years ago. The example we used was Stewart and how they were leased out to National Express for 99 years. Not many people were on our side.
In the end, the airport was sold to Massport, which we applauded vigorously. Ironically National Express sold Stweart to the Port Authority of NY and NJ. To date Massport has been a godsend to the taxpayers of Worcester investing over 100 million including CAT III and bringing commerical service back to Worcester Airport (JetBlue & American).
We need to state this up front, before we are called negative and ask why we hate Massport???
We are not being negative, we like Massport and we believe Worcester Airport can be a true "reliever" airport for Boston, but this one JetBlue flight to JFK simply is not working. Is that being negative? Merely look at the numbers, they are bad, real bad.
The marketing efforts have been dismal, but even with improved marketing, this flight will neither provide the added "relief" Boston needs nor help Worcester Airport meet their potential as currently structured. One flight per day is not a true shuttle service, while Boston has a true shuttle service with 7 flights per day.
We have a great idea. Why not give up one of the 7 flights to Worcester. You would still have 6 other flights and what is now 2 JetBlue flights per day out of Boston?? Think about this JetBlue has or is close to having 200 flights per day out of Boston, but their "reliever" airport has 3?
Massport has been great for the Worcester Airport and has invested alot of money into us, why not let us start providing a return for your investment??? Give us one of your 7 flights with JetBlue to JFK, you still have 6! Market JetBlue to JFK, 8 flights per day from Boston and Worcester!!
Sadly if a second flight is not added this flight is doomed, especially with American coming with 2 flights per day in October. Come on Massport give us a fighting chance!!
ad space for rent : email@example.com
Post your comment
commented on 2018-07-02 09:19:44
Cannot agree more! Another flight is needed (one that arrives at ORH about 330pm, departs ORH 4:15 - just my opinion).
commented on 2018-07-02 10:39:47
It's JetBlue's decision where they want to add or cut routes, not Massport's. Why would they want to take a profitable flight and move it to another airport where they can't even fill 40% of the seats on their existing flight? You also mentioned several airports the other day where you think JetBlue can move a flight to Worcester. Those airports are doing anywhere from 700,000 to 25,000,000 passengers a year while Worcester did 50,000 in 2017. Over the past 30 years I haven't seen any proof that enough people want to fly to hubs from Worcester to make connecting flights. In fact, back in 1989 we had flights to the following hubs: Newark, LaGuardia, BWI, Pittsburg, Boston, and Dulles. All of those flights pulled out eventually. By advocating that Worcester should keep adding airlines and routes without any evidence there is demand for such is repeating the mistakes of the past. It didn't work back then when conditions were more favorable for ORH to grow and it won't work now. There’s a difference between being an airport advocate and being delusional.
commented on 2018-07-02 10:42:00
it sounds like your beef is with jetblue, not massport. I know a bit about aviation law, and in your previous article, you said the one AA flight should be rejected. WRA receives federal funds as a public use airport. they cant deny service. That would be a violation of their Grant Assurences and would be illegal. nor can they redirect flight schedules to other times or other airports. again illegal, and an airline devision. The only advertising ive seen is from massport. why dont you ask jetblue to change their schedule and start advertising themselves? Its their business and their decisions. sounds like you have contacts with them. why dont you as them directly and let us know what the answers are?
commented on 2018-07-02 11:28:32
I don’t take this JFK flight for work because if it’s cancelled I can’t make my meeting. I fly at least 2x a month sometimes 4. I love this option for personal flights. I’m actually taking it tomorrow. But I would move all of My business travel to ORH if there was a mechanic on duty and there was more than one flight a day.
commented on 2018-07-02 11:58:01
The BOS-JFK by B6 has a LF of about 70% (according to a graph I found on the airliners.net forum). So their airplanes are not super-full but still much better than ORH. Can they get to 70% from here?
commented on 2018-07-02 13:41:16
I agree with you for the most part on most things but if Worcester is going to be the airport Massport wants it to be they need connector options. Since the mid 2000s the hub and spoke system has made a comeback. Back then southwest and JetBlue were killing the connector routes with primarily point to point service from secondary airports. Now even southwest and JetBlue have turned their stations into massive connection points along with a mix of leisure service. Massport is not investing this money into ORH for 3-5 flights a day to Florida. I think bills point is if they’re investing this money why are we seeing the results like JFK and the first American setup? It’s the airlines choice but Massport does have some serious influence as well. JFK as it stands now has no chance of success and numbers show that. Atleast give it the chance it needs and deserves so we know for sure the issue is demand. Right now there are massive holes.
commented on 2018-07-03 07:07:05
Couldn't agree more!