There’s been a lot of chatter this week about the possible targets from JetBlue for a merger, and among them Alaska makes the most sense, but are they interested?
JetBlue Explores Merger Targets
As Matthew recently reported in JetBlue Merger Talks Analysis, JetBlue has been actively exploring potential merger scenarios with a range of partners, including United, Alaska, and Southwest. The reporting makes clear this is not idle speculation but a structured evaluation, with advisers engaged and regulatory feasibility playing a central role in how each option is being considered. At its core, the move reflects mounting pressure on JetBlue to find a sustainable path forward after years of inconsistent profitability and a failed attempt to acquire Spirit Airlines.
What stands out in his analysis is how differently each potential partner would reshape JetBlue’s future. A tie-up with United offers the most obvious network and slot advantages but would face intense regulatory scrutiny, while Alaska presents a more palatable antitrust profile with less obvious synergy. Southwest, meanwhile, represents the most unconventional path, with significant cultural and operational hurdles. Taken together, the report underscores that JetBlue is not just exploring growth, it is confronting a pivotal moment that could redefine its place in the US airline industry.
I want to dive deeper into the Alaska angle for a number of reasons.
Alaska-JetBlue Is The Most Logical
As Matthew points out, the route network is perfect for an Alaska-JetBlue merger (though this would undoubtedly be an acquisition of JetBlue by Alaska Airlines.) Alaska has an excellent position on the west coast, and out to Hawaii. It’s spreading its wings from Seattle and already has international long haul from Hawaii to Asia as well. But the northeast is extremely limited both in terms of airports served and connectivity. No one in Boston wants to fly to Seattle or Portland to connect to west coast options. The same was true for JetBlue’s experiment with operations in Long Beach trying to setup a west coast hub.
However, pairing those two lucrative coastal markets would provide incredible coverage. In a few years together, it could make sense to add a midwest hub to carry some of the load.
Alaska has also had an exceptional run as of late, has cash, highly valued stock, and a management structure the industry can trust.
Reasons Alaska Could Be Interested
If Alaska is truly interested in becoming a global carrier, it would be hard to ignore the northeast US market. Expanding into that market would be incredibly expensive and deeply embedded flag carriers would fight tooth and nail, including JetBlue assuming there was no merger. Buying into it could be a different matter. The table is already set, the customers have similar ethos: happy to fly a regional carrier with international aspirations that provides better service and has a personality.
As a defensive measure, Alaska has an opportunity to block other mergers. JetBlue is in the market and will find a suitor (if it can gain DOJ approval.) Its market is desirable, so is its fleet even if it could be run more profitably than it has been in the last few years. United has indicated that it’s open to an agreement but it’s incumbent on JetBlue to come to terms. American wanted a tie-up, had one, then years after it was disallowed by the Biden DOJ is now suing its former partner. While Matthew suggests American might want JetBlue – and it might – the carrier is probably not on the best terms with JetBlue management to construct a favorable deal and it can’t afford to run itself let alone take on more debt. Alaska can swing in and ensure that no one else gets them and expands their footprint and that alone could be worthwhile.
Buying JetBlue also helps grow its ambitions internationally. There’s little doubt that the future of trans-Atlantic international travel, especially for premium markets, is going to be on a narrowbody aircraft. Alaska, itself, is adding flights this summer to Iceland from Seattle on a 737. A base on the east coast with routes that can go to both alliance partner cities like London, Madrid, and Helsinki, and underserved premium markets in Scotland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, anywhere in western Europe, helps a great deal.
It’s not just the European routes, though. JetBlue also has excellent coverage throughout the northeast and via its Fort Lauderdale hub to destinations in the Caribbean. Alaska knows leisure markets well and was the largest operator to Hawaii for many years prior to its purchase of Hawaiian. But it has zero coverage in the Caribbean outside of Cancun and Belize City. Alaska with JetBlue could become a serious bi-coastal force.
Alaska could also cement its place as a serious contender domestically while it grows its international presence.
The credit card base could be an exciting component too, and would likely end Barclays involvement in the US airline affinity space entirely. TrueBlue is valued at $5.5bn (though $2.75bn was leveraged during COVID), and Bank of America only contributed $310MM last year, for which the airline still posted a substantial loss. The carrier also sells miles to American Express, Chase, Citi, and Capital One though each specific value is murkier. The airline expected $50MM in EBIT generated from its United partnership but this would almost certainly fall away in a an acquisition.
Reasons Alaska Will Pass
Jetblue is not in good financial shape. In 2024, the carrier posted a loss of nearly $800MM and while efforts in 2025 cut these losses by almost 25%, it still lost $600MM in 2025 too. At this pace the carrier will be breakeven at the turn of the decade. The value of the airline is not what it’s currently turning over but what it could be. That said, other mergers and acquisitions typically find significant cost savings when combining. Not just by reducing common route frequencies but also by shared resources in outstations (ex. instead of JetBlue and Alaska maintaining two check-in counters and gate allotments, it can reduce its overhead costs.) But these overlaps are limited ad thus so too would be cost savings.
Alaska is primarily a Boeing carrier with JetBlue an all-Airbus airline. This changes everything about the way a combined carrier would operate. It’s not just replacement parts and maintenance contracts but training facilities and range commonality. The Mint product from JetBlue is also something that the combined airline would want to keep especially for long haul flying internationally and trans-continental routes, but would be unlikely to equip across its own fleet even on its long haul narrowbody routes. That makes it tough to integrate.
The carrier is still busy with Hawaiian and its own expansion plans without inviting a regulatory challenge, and the mess of a far greater integration with more moving parts.
Would this type of acquisition face more scrutiny from oneworld than Hawaiian? Maybe, it’s a possible factor and as the airline grows globally, it’s something it will have to consider. American Airlines likely benefits from Alaska’s network participation in the Pacific Northwest and doesn’t really put up a fight in Los Angeles. But in the Northeast it could be a different story.
Conclusion
JetBlue should absolutely consider all viable options for a merger or an acquiring partner. Alaska could be a great fit for JetBlue, and frankly, US consumers. But Alaska doesn’t need another project and that’s exactly what JetBlue would be. It requires its own turn around, there’s no fleet commonality, and no significant operational cost savings. JetBlue might be a great fit for Alaska, but probably not right now. That said, I’d love to see it and it would make the combined carrier a juggernaut and offer serious competition on the coasts and against the majors.
What do you think?
I want it!
Also, just a wild armchair CEO guess, but what about a Midwest hub in STL? Alaska runs some non-hub Saturday flying out of there, the airport has tons of capacity in the closed terminal, and there’s a lot of legacy TW/AA flyers that would be all over more OW options. They’d need to do some work on the AC, though.
As a frequent flyer, I’d much prefer more competition, less mergers. For the workers, I’d probably also prefer more competition.
However, if I were an top-level executive, or a lawyer at the firm that handles the merger, or a majority shareholder who stands to profit immensely, then I’d probably celebrate less competition, sure.
What I really wish is that all airlines would follow JetBlue’s generous legroom in economy, IFE screens and free WiFi on most aircraft, and Mint (hard product, premium lie-flat, better food and beverage).
Alaska-JetBlue-Hawaiian would be my dream airline. This could be the biggest American Airline one day (a while away if the merger happens, but still).
Re: fleet – with the Hawaiian merger, Alaska execs have said they haven’t decided on whether they’re keeping the A321neos. They did, however, say they’d be open to it if the fleet got bigger and they had better economies of scale. jetBlue’s fleet would give them that scale.
The Midwest connection is the hardest for this proposal. AS and B6 would have good coast coverage, but they would need a hub somewhere in the middle of the country. There just aren’t good candidates. MCI, STL, and MDW are all pretty filled out by Southwest, so you would have to fight for a position. I also don’t think those places have the growth to justify it. The choices would be: MKE (taking the old Midwest Express hub and adding over time — perhaps peeling off high quality traffic from the northern suburbs of Chicago), AUS (taking on Delta and Southwest), or perhaps redeveloping one of the older DL/NWA hubs like MEM or CVG.
AS and B6 may one day come together under the same roof, but not now.
On the other hand, a merger of MX (63 aircraft) with B6 (291 aircraft) seems also impossible at the moment. David Neeleman stated earlier this year that MX was not considering such a deal, but if the price is right (and the timing is opportune), who knows? After all, Neeleman is the man who founded B6 and might want to get his old airline back; and the aviation world is full of surprises!
I’d love for that to happen, but Breeze doesn’t have the cash and would probably need to get it from investors Neeleman is connected with.
I’m also not sure what happens to Breeze’s pure point to point model if that were to happen. They’re not going to sacrifice being the largest gate holder at BOS and having 25% of slots at JFK
Such a merger doesn’t seem possible for the time being.
Since I don’t live on a coast, I don’t care about a merger between them. I do, however, want to see the complete destruction of B6. Given what happened to Virgin America and what’s happening to Hawaiian, AS is just the airline that will do that. Mint Is Shint. As much as I prefer a complete destruction from My Hometown Airline, putting it in the hands of Seattle’s Hometown Airline would be acceptable, as long as complete destruction happens.
AS had a strong East Coast presence when they acquired VX. Then they squandered it, and basically de-hubbed SFO and LAX. Now they fly everywhere from Seattle, and for some reason Portland and San Diego. I’m assuming it’s because they don’t want to compete with the big 3 at SFO and LAX.
But all that East Coast flying from the VX days is gone. I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t do the same with B6.
No one will be interested in B6 until they take a trip through chapter 11 and she some debt.
and they aren’t selling assets that they may need to build a new business plan
In any case, AS can be considered a logical buyer with minimal route overlap, potentially offering the easiest path for regulatory approval.
I don’t disagree but the point is that B6 will have to take a trip through bankruptcy court before anyone takes them.
With love
this is the usual Kyle “little thought put into this” article for a sunday — just post it. Dude, I don’t know your background, but you just truly have no knowledge on the industry — sunday after sunday. it’s mind boggling how basic your articles are.
the reality is that AS is a proxy for AA. AS might care about BOS — s0 does AA but they don’t need it to be AA to be successful. AS doesn’t care about JFK — AA does. They’d sell nearly all to AA or work out a codeshare for it to work for OneWorld to be a bigger picture in JFK. that’s the only way it makes sense for AS and it’s kind of obvious. AS doesn’t need to be a clear 2nd place in JFK and they’d never want to be.
YOU NAILED IT!
AA GAVE ALASKA A LHR SLOT.
ITS IN THE WORKS!
CHECK OUT LAX AIRPORT FACILITIES.
ONE LONG ONE WORLD TICKET COUNTER WITH MULTIPLE CONCOURSES.
SO OBVIOUS!
you truly have no clue.
AS and AA do not have a joint venture or revenue sharing competitor.
Less than a couple percent of AS’ passengers are even AA coded.
Dreams of AA and AS being any help to each other are fantasies of delusions.
Why would anyone want to buy an airline with nearly $10 billion in debt that last made a profit in 2019 and has no prospects to change that?
Let’s add that the struggling B6 ended 2025 with approximately $9 billion in debt and lease obligations, including $7 billion in net debt.