Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin America is again planning to enter the Chicago market. Doing so would enable travelers to connect to Virgin Atlantic, pictured here at its 2007 O'Hare debut. (Charles Cherney/Chicago Tribune)
Virgin America plans to wing its way into Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport next year, part of an aggressive expansion that could triple the low-cost carrier’s size by 2016.
Virgin intends to challenge the duopoly held by American and United Airlines on direct flights from O’Hare to Los Angeles International Airport and San Francisco International, flights popular with business travelers and, on occasion, movie stars.
San Francisco-based Virgin, founded in 2007, has quickly won a rabid fan base for its mood lighting and edgy customer amenities. All of its aircraft are outfitted with high-speed Internet connections, while its recently upgraded inflight menu includes less traditional items like tapas plates.
But Virgin could find it tough to woo corporate customers away from O’Hare’s heavy-weights on those routes if it enters O’Hare with just a handful of daily flights, said aviation consultant Robert Mann.
“I’m sure there are some fan boys and fan girls who will sign up for Virgin just because of the product they offer,” Mann said. But with no other Midwest cities to feed passengers into Virgin’s California-bound flights, “it’s going to be tough for them to break into the corporate business maintained by the big guys.”
The low-cost carrier had planned to enter the Chicago market in 2008 but cancelled plans when it couldn’t obtain gates at the airport even though other carriers were reducing flying.
Virgin is again negotiating with the city of Chicago for an “economically viable” deal at O’Hare, which it hopes to enter in the first half of 2011, said Virgin spokeswoman Abby Lunardini.
“We still have a lot of places to expand, but Chicago remains high on the list, as we hope to inject some healthy competition into a market that is still dominated by just a few legacy carriers,” Lunardini added.
The low-cost carrier affiliated with Sir Richard Branson also announced Thursday it would order 40 more Airbus A320 jets, which would triple its fleet to a total of 90 planes from its current 28 Airbus narrow-body aircraft.
“I am happy to celebrate my 60th birthday this week and I can’t think of a better present than getting 60 new planes,” Reuters reports Branson as saying Thursday via a satellite link-up to the Farnborough International Airshow.
Virgin America’s $3.3 billion order is not yet finalized, however. Among the details to be determined: the engines that will power the aircraft, and whether their wings will be equipped with “sharklets,” which lower fuel burn by about 3.5 percent over the long term.
At a time when larger airlines are boasting of “capacity constraints,” Virgin is again plotting to rapidly build its network across the U.S., adding about 20 new destinations by mid-decade.
The airline currently serves 10 cities, with expansion to Orlando, at least one more U.S. city and two destinations in Mexico by this winter. Virgin said expects to add three to four additional new destinations per year from 2011 to 2016.
This is good news for Chicago area travelers. I do wish VA flew Boeing jets, which I find infinitely more comfortable than the Airbus jets with their too-short, rock-hard seats. Ah well, can’t have everything.
I’m glad! They’re my favorite American carrier!
I’ve flown from ORD to London twice on Virgin on their prior attempts to fly out of Chicago. They are a great airline and I would fly with them again on my next trip.
Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America are two different airlines, geniuses.
I have flown VA outside the ORD market and can testify their planes are comfortable, their crew friendly and their prices are lower than any other airline…. if the does not revolutionize the market in Chicago I don’t know that will.
I don’t understand why people fly United… they won’t assign you a seat until you tell them you won’t pay $40 to board behind first class passengers…
American is a bit nicer than United, but watch out, Virgin is the airline we Chicagoans have been waiting for!
I agree with Nonya. I flew Virgin Atlantic from London to Chicago last Saturday. There’s no need to try again. They’re already doing it.
Virgin Atlantic fries across the big pond from ORD. Virgin America flies only within the US and does not currently fly out of ORD. They are two different airlines but Richard Branson has a stake in both of them.
ff: “I don’t understand why people fly United… they won’t assign you a seat until you tell them you won’t pay $40 to board behind first class passengers…”
That is a lie. I have flown United many times and have always received an asigned seat when I booked my flight.
More competition at O’Hare is welcome. There is no large company I’ve ever dealt with that treats its customers with greater contempt than United.
I didn’t know there were any Virgins LEFT in Chicago to fly out???
rd
<>
As soon as they get their wings, they are GONE!
But United get you to your destination on time more than any other airline. It is too bad that Virgin “American” doesn’t buy more Boeing planes.
Nonya;
Before being snide, perhaps you ought to look at the company’s structure. Virgin America was formed as a separate company because of obsolete US laws regarding airline ownership. Though one is discount and one is full-service, they are effectively the same company.
“But United get you to your destination on time more than any other airline…”
No they don’t. If you’re talking about United’s ads saying that it’s #1, you should know that they’re only #1 among the legacy airlines. In other words, they ignore airlines like Southwest whose on-time perfromance is better than United’s.
XC, it all depends on what period you are looking at. Over the 12 month period ending May 2010 United had a better on time performance than Southwest. Howevre if you look at a longer period of time, Southwest had a better on time performance.
http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2010/July/2010JulyATCR.PDF
VX (Virgin America) rocks! I fly them first and foremost whenever I fly domestically. Since they are newer and not a lot of routes, I fly B6 (Jetblue), Sun Country, or Airtran in that order. The mainline carriers suck. If I fly internationally, I always, always, always, chose a non-American carrier. United and Delta really should be put down like lame horses at the track. Go VIRGIN!
the airline consultant whom mentions “fanboy/girl” in a dismissive way does not get it. UAL and AA treat the customer like crap. Yes VX does not have the feeder network but many people mite want to fly VX on these routes any way.
Glad to see that Virgin is going Airbus for their growth. They are so much more comfortable than the tanks that Boeing turns out. Was thrilled to see UAL boot their fleet of 737s in favor of A320’s. Will look to try Virgin out once they are here.
Richard Branson is HUNG LIKE A HORSE
People who treat VX like it’s the second coming need to wake up and smell the People Express. VX can get you to maybe 10 cities, and so far has yet to do it profitably. And that’s before they had to make lease payments on 20 new planes and make gate payments at ORD, one of the most expensive airports to operate out of. When they start nickel and diming you so they can actually turn a profit, then ask people how much they like VX.
Our company contracts with the big boys (UA, AA and WN) for a reason–they can get people from point A to point B with minimal hassle. You can’t even get from JFK to Boston on Virgin. And VX usually has 2 or 3 flights a day; if you miss your flight or it gets cancelled you are screwed. United on the other hand has 10 daily departures to LAX from ORD alone, which comes in quite handy when the snow starts blowing in the windy city. And United first is generally regarded as one of the best in the business; I doubt our CEO is going to give up the United First product for Virgin America’s lousy “Hey you get the same alcohol we give coach for free” first class.
I have to agree with most of the criticism of United, they really are a terrible airline when it comes to all they CAN and are able to do. I live in LA and visit my family in Chicago at least 4-5 times a year and am forced to use them most of the time (though, I try to opt for AA if I can). They have the most delays, cancellations, lost baggage, etc. complaints from me and others I know. They have lots of routes because they are a legacy carrier that bought out the routes through the years when other airlines fell on hard times and consolidated. The airline industry in the US has really suffered as a result of consolidation. Of the big three, I’d say Delta, AA, and UAL in that order (w/ UAL a distant third).
And don’t even get me started on international, UAL may be the worst first-world carrier when it comes to international. Their planes aren’t very new and renovated and they don’t offer courteous service like most european or asian airlines stress. And they don’t offer free alcohol in coach (although most US airlines don’t). I’d rather pay a little more and fly a non-American airline.
VX is still very nascent and small but they have a lot of backing from the Virgin group which helps when competing with the UALs and AAs. The JetBlue’s and Air Tran’s of the world don’t have that type of backing. Still, it will take a long time to break up the UA/AA duopoly at ORD. I wish them all the best though!