Logan Airport Flights and Airlines Discussion

BosDevelop

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
36
Massport is projecting (as of their June board meeting) Q2 2022 as when the airport will get back to pre-COVID numbers, at least hit 85%+ of pre-COVID numbers.
I hope I am proven wrong but that seems VERY ambitious. That's really only about 17 months from now. I think we may be looking at 2023 before Logan gets close to Pre-COVID numbers.
 

shmessy

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
1,703
Reaction score
445
Massport is projecting (as of their June board meeting) Q2 2022 as when the airport will get back to pre-COVID numbers, at least hit 85%+ of pre-COVID numbers. The same could be said for a large number of airports in this country. Logan has been on a big roll the last 9 years. Give it time, in a few years when the B to connector is done, all of the terminal roadway work is done, the terminal C canopy of done and the first phase of the terminal E expansion is done, the airport will start chugging a long again.
Ergo.......time to accelerate the massive construction NOW. Full steam ahead. Efficiency takes advantage of situations like this.
 

atlantaden

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
2,167
Reaction score
200
Ergo.......time to accelerate the massive construction NOW. Full steam ahead. Efficiency takes advantage of situations like this.
Exactly! That's why I was so disappointed to see back in June that MassPort cut the Terminal E addition in half. Why not just build it now and have it ready to welcome back the massive numbers of returning passengers in a few years, now is the time when borrowing money is so cheap (though I guess they sell bonds for new construction), and when the disruption from flights and thousands of daily passengers passing thru is at a minimum.
 

TallIsGood

Active Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
403
Reaction score
20
Exactly! That's why I was so disappointed to see back in June that MassPort cut the Terminal E addition in half. Why not just build it now and have it ready to welcome back the massive numbers of returning passengers in a few years, now is the time when borrowing money is so cheap (though I guess they sell bonds for new construction), and when the disruption from flights and thousands of daily passengers passing thru is at a minimum.
💵💵💵 not enough with the drop in flights and passengers.
 

mass88

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
2,041
Reaction score
35
Exactly! That's why I was so disappointed to see back in June that MassPort cut the Terminal E addition in half. Why not just build it now and have it ready to welcome back the massive numbers of returning passengers in a few years, now is the time when borrowing money is so cheap (though I guess they sell bonds for new construction), and when the disruption from flights and thousands of daily passengers passing thru is at a minimum.
Was it really cut in half? I took it as them simply kicking the can down the road a few years on phase 2. Phase 1 will add 4 new wide body gates and build out the majority of the terminal expansion.
 

jass

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
4,788
Reaction score
253
Exactly! That's why I was so disappointed to see back in June that MassPort cut the Terminal E addition in half. Why not just build it now and have it ready to welcome back the massive numbers of returning passengers in a few years, now is the time when borrowing money is so cheap (though I guess they sell bonds for new construction), and when the disruption from flights and thousands of daily passengers passing thru is at a minimum.
These is no guarantee that business volume will ever come back.

The idea of flying somewhere for a meeting that can be conducted on zoom is odd. Why set money on fire like that?
 

shmessy

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
1,703
Reaction score
445
These is no guarantee that business volume will ever come back.

The idea of flying somewhere for a meeting that can be conducted on zoom is odd. Why set money on fire like that?

Business may not come back, but tourism (international, especially) will flourish.

I'm a financial advisor for a Fortune 500 company and what we are seeing is incredible. We are now at the beginning of a demographic explosion for retired seniors age 65+ who are living longer and far more active retirements. Historically significant destinations like Boston will see an avalanche of international tourists for decades to come. The masses with discretionary travel income from India, China, Indonesia, Brazil, etc. are coming. Those hotels that are, as we speak, going up all around Greater Boston will be very much full for a long time.

Massport needs to be Gretzky here (the ability to see where the puck WILL be before others do).
 

BosDevelop

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
36
It would be interesting to see some data (if it even exists) breaking down the increase in Logan passenger traffic/international destinations etc. over the last 10 or so years between business and leisure. I have a hunch it is split pretty evenly which means both will have to come back for Logan to see pre-COVID numbers.
 

Stlin

New member
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
93
Reaction score
60
It would be interesting to see some data (if it even exists) breaking down the increase in Logan passenger traffic/international destinations etc. over the last 10 or so years between business and leisure. I have a hunch it is split pretty evenly which means both will have to come back for Logan to see pre-COVID numbers.
To a certain extent, you could do that by carrier, destination, and equipment choice. To London for example, Norwegian and Virgin would have mostly been leisure seats, and BA, AA, DL would have represented more of the business traveler market. Hainan tends to have more leisure travelers from china than Cathay Pacific, Level vs Iberia, that sort of thing. Call it business travelers who earn hundreds of thousands of miles yearly on the company dime preferring the legacy alliance carriers.

Equipment choice is also revealing; international routes that cater to more business travelers often call for equipment that tend to weight capacity towards premium cabins; some UA 767s have 46 business class seats and only 56 standard economy seats. The opposite would be true on Virgin, Norwegian or Hainan, which cater to the cost conscious leisure traveller who flies in economy. Most major international airlines have configuration options to choose from when assigning jets to routes and even specific flights depending on the demand mix.

As far as destinations go, some are obvious. Seasonal flights are almost certainly leisure oriented, especially warm weather or ski towns. Some serve local immigrant communities, such as Cabo Verde. But others are less clear and I'd be inclined to say that you'd need to look at each city pair. As in, is Latam to sao paulo business or expatriate serving? I don't know, but here frequency can be revealing. A once or twice a week flight isn't serving business travelers, but a daily or even multiple daily likely is.

Domestically, much harder to say. I'd say frequency and flight timing is the tell; flights that get you in for a day of meetings and home again might be business heavy. But anything that is primarly a hub spoke, is a wrench. Boston, by Massports reckoning, is overwhelmingly an Origin and destination city. But what about, say NYC? Chicago? LA? All hubs, but all with lots of origin and demand for Boston. These would be very hard to parse. (All of United's routes are to their hubs, for example. Only SFO is different, as it is definitely a business route for the equipment choice rationale above - a "ps service", operated on jets with lie flat first.) Delta is interesting, and I don't know how they swing a Hub in Boston, nor do I know much about their ops here about transfer rates etc.

But either way, you won't find many business road warriors on the Frontier, Spirit, Allegiant types. Though, admittedly Southwest has a following amongst biz travellers.
 
Last edited:

BosDevelop

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
36
Just saw JetBlue announced nonstop flights from Logan (and JFK and LAX) to Montrose, CO (MTJ) starting in December. Another Ikon Pass destination for JetBlue from Logan (albeit a bit of ride from MTJ to Telluride but the scenery is A+)) along with Hayden/Steamboat and Bozeman. Hopefully Jackson Hole is next. Reno in the winter for access to the Lake Tahoe ski resorts would be interesting too.
 

lexicon506

Active Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
504
Reaction score
34
Reno/Tahoe seems like an obvious add if JetBlue is chasing ski traffic, along with Eagle/Vail.
 

Top