Mobile Downtown Airport (Gulf Shores: promotional, tenants, moving to)

[AU HSV]

Originally Posted by PortCity

Crazy smh

This is somewhat surprising especially if the airport press release in the report is accurate.
Mobile did everything right including filling the planes, Frontier is receiving a large number of planes this year but what the airport said about moving resources does make sense. What doesn't make sense why eliminate flights that are successful? What more can the community do?

"The authority, in its news release, called the Frontier experience a “success story.” Since the airport opened on May 1, the airline has served “more than 40,000 passengers providing non-stop direct seasonal service," to Denver and Chicago, and that the “planes were full,” according to the authority’s news release.
The authority said the business strategy for Frontier is to “pursue opportunities recently presented at airports in large metro areas” such as Los Angeles, Newark and Miami."

This is not a good look for Frontier, and hurts Mobile and the state. Hopefully they will return or another carrier will come in and provide even better service. Birmingham lost them as well but Frontiers scheduling makes it difficult to use them regularly.

[ITGuyAL]

Originally Posted by AU HSV

Birmingham lost them as well but Frontiers scheduling makes it difficult to use them regularly.

Exactly. I can't tell you how many times I looked into flying Frontier, but the scheduling was so insane that I could never make it work.

I really hope we can get another lowcost airline into BFM. Southwest would be kind of a longshot, but I can see Spirit happening, especially since they just opened a new hub in Miami.

[rturnclyde]

For a low cost carrier, Frontier provides pretty good service. A city of our size is a niche market for them. To fill the larger planes, they can only run a few flights a week, which isn't convenient for business travel. Leisure travelers in the summer, going on vacations, are willing to make compromises to get the low fare. We were lucky and originally had a Saturday flight in the summer which coincided with the weekly beach condo check in and out day. Planes were full. For the past few months, the public parking lot at BFM as been pretty empty. Any other carrier will be faced with the same challenges. I can see another coming in and having a successful summer season, but I'm not sure it can hold throughout the year. It looks like more of a seasonal market at this point. It would be interesting to see if a carrier would have more success with using smaller planes and having more flights per week; however, I think the national trend has been larger planes and fewer flights.

The Airport Authority is going to say it was a success, and it was for a while, but I'm not sure how you spin it that way when looked at in totality. I don't think they could have done more. They did a great job of getting that building ready on pretty short notice, and in promoting it. Hopefully, they keep at it and one day we have long term success with one of these low cost airlines.

[Lizap]

Originally Posted by rturnclyde

For a low cost carrier, Frontier provides pretty good service. A city of our size is a niche market for them. To fill the larger planes, they can only run a few flights a week, which isn't convenient for business travel. Leisure travelers in the summer, going on vacations, are willing to make compromises to get the low fare. We were lucky and originally had a Saturday flight in the summer which coincided with the weekly beach condo check in and out day. Planes were full. For the past few months, the public parking lot at BFM as been pretty empty. Any other carrier will be faced with the same challenges. I can see another coming in and having a successful summer season, but I'm not sure it can hold throughout the year. It looks like more of a seasonal market at this point. It would be interesting to see if a carrier would have more success with using smaller planes and having more flights per week; however, I think the national trend has been larger planes and fewer flights.

The Airport Authority is going to say it was a success, and it was for a while, but I'm not sure how you spin it that way when looked at in totality. I don't think they could have done more. They did a great job of getting that building ready on pretty short notice, and in promoting it. Hopefully, they keep at it and one day we have long term success with one of these low cost airlines.

Bingo. I had doubts Mobile had enough air traffic to support Frontier. Frontier has other areas they deem more profitable or they would have stayed. Not at all sure plowing so much $ into BFM was a good idea.

[Southsky]

Originally Posted by Lizap

Bingo. I had doubts Mobile had enough air traffic to support Frontier. Frontier has other areas they deem more profitable or they would have stayed. Not at all sure plowing so much $ into BFM was a good idea.

The Press-Register quoted an airport authority rep stating that Frontier’s load factors were in the 90s, meaning over 90 percent of the seats were purchased. There’s plenty of air traffic for Frontier and others, obviously.

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2020/...om-mobile.html

[P_Mac]

Originally Posted by Lizap

Bingo. I had doubts Mobile had enough air traffic to support Frontier. Frontier has other areas they deem more profitable or they would have stayed. Not at all sure plowing so much $ into BFM was a good idea.

Pumping the money was a good idea. It's the future for Mobile and needed a lot of work before any other airlines would take it seriously. Also, have the runways maintained properly is a huge deal for our budding Aerospace Industry here.

[rturnclyde]

That load factor was for a few days a week. They probably have similar load factors in other niche markets that are also losing flights. If you can take the same asset and place it in one city that will provide the same revenue generation you had in multiple cities on different days of the week, it would seem you would experience a reduction in operating costs and more profit on that asset. It may not be that simple, but that is how it looks to me.

[eshore78]

So it sounds like the Boeing problems had a little something to do with this..

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2020/...ALcomMobile_sf

[AU HSV]

Originally Posted by eshore78

So it sounds like the Boeing problems had a little something to do with this..

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2020/...ALcomMobile_sf

maybe indirectly, Frontier does not fly Boeing. Frontier has nearly 150 Airbus A320neo and A321neo on order all being built in Mobile.
Believe they take delivery on 20 or so this year. Probably will be used for their Newark and Miami expansion.

[Southsky]

Originally Posted by rturnclyde

That load factor was for a few days a week. They probably have similar load factors in other niche markets that are also losing flights. If you can take the same asset and place it in one city that will provide the same revenue generation you had in multiple cities on different days of the week, it would seem you would experience a reduction in operating costs and more profit on that asset. It may not be that simple, but that is how it looks to me.

Frontier is moving a lot of their assets to Newark to establish a beachhead in the NE, and for that they need aircraft. Whatever threshold they set for reductions elsewhere, Mobile must have been right under it considering the 90+% load factors out of BFM. Besides, Frontier had zero investment in Mobile other than the flights themselves... the MAA staffed and serviced their flights.