Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

jumpdriveair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 169 posts

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#21

Post by dsr_ »

nolok wrote: post #20
tlb wrote: post #2

Maybe a good idea, but the site does a bad job of selling it. The front page starts with a big rant about how bad existing airlines are. That's not how you sell things. You should focus on what you do, which is SFO-LAX flights through private terminals on a monthly subscription. The private terminal is a huge win -- it saves a good hour on travel. But that's buried in the FAQ. You should redesign so that all of the f…

What does a "private terminal" mean ? Or rather, in what precise way is it better ? I have a vague idea of what it can provide but I'm not sure how it can shed up to an hour of time. Does it include a dedicated secrity and immigration service (so no gigantic lines) ?

No TSA security. No big-airline check-in lines.

Immigration doesn't apply on domestic flights anyway.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#22

Post by matt4077 »

I applaud the audacity of starting an airline from scratch, considering it's way up there in terms of capital requirements and regulatory burden, and the industry has been losing money in the US, collectively, since the Carter administration.

But it needs to be said that SFOLAX is, at just 300 miles, and with the high demand shown by such startups, a perfect example of everything that is wrong with transportation in the US.

Compare BerlinMunich which happens to be almost exactly the same distance: even with some political compromises requiring the trains to stop in towns along the route that planners would rather have avoided, total travel time is only 3 1/2 hours. Train stations are also in the middle of each city, saving you about an hour of time on each end. And you can just hop onto any train without booking in advance, without going through security, without discarding your bottle of water, without the yoga-like contortions of economy class, and without the existential threat of not having internet for two hours.

That even an environmentally friendly US state such as California can't get its act together, and instead "solves" its traffic needs in the most resource-intensive ways available, is a scathing indictment of the US' lost faith in the power of government to solve collective action problems.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#23

Post by fludlight »

jtchang wrote: post #14
tlb wrote: post #2

Maybe a good idea, but the site does a bad job of selling it. The front page starts with a big rant about how bad existing airlines are. That's not how you sell things. You should focus on what you do, which is SFO-LAX flights through private terminals on a monthly subscription. The private terminal is a huge win -- it saves a good hour on travel. But that's buried in the FAQ. You should redesign so that all of the f…

100% agree on the messaging here. Is it use it or lose it type flights? I didn't even notice the private terminal stuff (didn't get that far). I thought it was some type of group buying thing on big carriers like Delta, etc. Private terminal is a huge win. I know some friends who want to live in LA but work remotely in SF. 1-2 flights a month in a private terminal for this pricing seems like a steal especially when y…

A corporate plan for x flights per month without a named passenger would be interesting, too. This would be useful for companies with employees in both cities who occasionally need to meet face to face with the other team. It would certainly be easier, faster, and probably cheaper than the cluster that arranging corporate travel currently is.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#24

Post by jedanbik »

dannyminutillo wrote: post #3
tlb wrote: post #2

Maybe a good idea, but the site does a bad job of selling it. The front page starts with a big rant about how bad existing airlines are. That's not how you sell things. You should focus on what you do, which is SFO-LAX flights through private terminals on a monthly subscription. The private terminal is a huge win -- it saves a good hour on travel. But that's buried in the FAQ. You should redesign so that all of the f…

Thanks for the great feedback. This was our site's first draft so we really appreciate your comments. We'll definitely update it and keep your points above the fold on the homepage. We weren't aware that the private terminals are such an appealing feature to people, but that aspect has been a feature that we've been receiving a lot of positive feedback about so we appreciate you pointing it out. Thank you again and w…

Blog link is dead.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#25

Post by ovao »

matt4077 wrote: post #22

I applaud the audacity of starting an airline from scratch, considering it's way up there in terms of capital requirements and regulatory burden, and the industry has been losing money in the US, collectively, since the Carter administration. But it needs to be said that SFO LAX is, at just 300 miles, and with the high demand shown by such startups, a perfect example of everything that is wrong with transportation in…

This is a private company attempting to solve a cost and convenience issue, not the State of California attempting to solve a travel-related environmental issue.

There are other industries attempting to solve transportation and environmental problems in more general ways.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#26

Post by huebnerob »

dingaling wrote: post #17
aardvark291 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding a photo of the actual aircraft would also be nice. From the website it's hard to tell whether this is a real business that's currently in operation, or just a site mock-up. Have you actually started flying yet? I can't tell.

And they should just come straight out and explain how the flights are operated. Sublease of the aircraft? Block-booking of seats on scheduled commercial services? Commercial charters? The more they hide the less confidence people will have in them. The contact name in the WHOIS appears to be an attorney. I don't see any entry for JumpDriveAir or variations thereof in the ICAO operating agency list ( Doc 8585 ) so I…

I'd wager that at this moment they've not done much more than ideation and (I pray dearly) feasibility studies.

We won't even be able to start arguing whether this idea has wings until the first wheels leave the tarmac.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#27

Post by Eugr »

dingaling wrote: post #17
aardvark291 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding a photo of the actual aircraft would also be nice. From the website it's hard to tell whether this is a real business that's currently in operation, or just a site mock-up. Have you actually started flying yet? I can't tell.

And they should just come straight out and explain how the flights are operated. Sublease of the aircraft? Block-booking of seats on scheduled commercial services? Commercial charters? The more they hide the less confidence people will have in them. The contact name in the WHOIS appears to be an attorney. I don't see any entry for JumpDriveAir or variations thereof in the ICAO operating agency list ( Doc 8585 ) so I…

Yes, I'm curious too. They are not in the list of certificated air carriers or commuter services on FAA website, not even in the applicants list.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#28

Post by geofft »

Who flies the planes themselves - do you contract with the same airlines who run regional flights for the national carriers? (What's the planes' livery?)

Part of why I'm curious is that I've noticed that the national carriers in the US have an extremely safe record of late - I believe there has been one death from 2002-present from the national carriers (Southwest 1248 slid off a snowy runway in Chicago, hit two cars, and killed one child), but there have been a many fatal accidents with regional or private carriers, so I'd like to know who the actual operating carrier is and what their safety record is.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#29

Post by dhzjxnbzn »

matt4077 wrote: post #22

I applaud the audacity of starting an airline from scratch, considering it's way up there in terms of capital requirements and regulatory burden, and the industry has been losing money in the US, collectively, since the Carter administration. But it needs to be said that SFO LAX is, at just 300 miles, and with the high demand shown by such startups, a perfect example of everything that is wrong with transportation in…

I'm a fan of rail in general, and the German system is fantastic. But the LA and SF Bay Areas consist mostly of sprawl and don't have good transit to begin with. You need to drive to get somewhere fast. In those circumstances, taking off from the burbs is a feature, not a bug.

Re: Show HN: Monthly subscription airline with SFO-LAX flights starting at $78

#30

Post by briandear »

matt4077 wrote: post #22

I applaud the audacity of starting an airline from scratch, considering it's way up there in terms of capital requirements and regulatory burden, and the industry has been losing money in the US, collectively, since the Carter administration. But it needs to be said that SFO LAX is, at just 300 miles, and with the high demand shown by such startups, a perfect example of everything that is wrong with transportation in…

For me, airplanes are preferable to running train tracks across the landscape. It's also cheaper. I live in southern France near Marseille and for me to get to Frankfurt by train -- it's a time consuming mess. I can be there by airplane in about an hour. Getting to Geneva from Marseille is faster by airplane by multiple hours and even driving a car is more convenient than the train depending on the connections and road conditions -- especially if I'm ultimately going to Chamonix.

I could take a train from Marseille to Brussels -- but why would I? I can spend almost 7 hours on a train or 1.25 hours on an airplane AND I don't have to drive all the way into Marseille, find a place to leave my car and risk getting attacked or robbed in the station [1][2]

> Train stations are also in the middle of each city, saving you about an hour of time on each end

That's assuming that you actually want to be in the middle of each city.

SFO to Cupertino by car is about 50 minutes.

Downtown San Francisco to Cupertino is roughly double that.

Not everyone traveling to San Francisco (or LA) actually wants to be in the city center. LAX to Santa Monica, Venice or most other west LA destinations is faster than downtown Los Angeles to those areas. LAX to Long Beach is faster than from downtown LA.

[1] http://ktla.com/2017/10/01/at-least-2-dead-after-knife-attac... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/world/europe/marseille-fr...

Post reply on HN