Virgin America Adds Long Haul Flights, JetBlue Cuts Them

I'm back from my Peruvian travels. Did you miss me? Yeah, I didn't think so.
There were some very interesting developments in transcontinental flying while I was gone, and I think it's important to note how two similar airlines are reacting the current market conditions.
First up, we have Virgin America. In the past, the airline has jumped into some of the most competitive markets in the country with far fewer frequencies than its competitors. That has led to the airline needing deep discounting to fill seats, and even then it's lagged its competitors in load factor. So now, Virgin has said it will bump up frequencies in its core transcontinental markets. This is a very interesting move, because it's certainly a big change in strategy. Most of the airline's moves lately have involved adding short haul markets. This returns to the original long haul strategy and actually tries to make the airline a competitor with schedule, something that it desperately needs if it wants to succeed. I tend to think it's the right move for the product the airline is trying to sell, but that doesn't mean it's going to work.
In the opposite corner, we have JetBlue. That airline was planning to begin flights from LAX to both Boston and New York/JFK (the latter in competition with Virgin America), and it decided to pull the plug just a couple weeks before it was to begin. Why? Of course, the airline blames fuel costs . . .

The Forest Hills, N.Y.-based airline said it cost about $9,600 to fill up its Airbus A320 aircraft fuel tanks for a transcontinental flight last year. That cost has now climbed to more than $15,000, according to the official.