JetBlue founder Dave Neeleman says the cost of jet fuel could put the airline into bankruptcy this year according to remarks he made to his current airline’s pilots on Tuesday, which were leaked by aviation watchdog JonNYC.
You know, JetBlue’s in a really tough spot. They really are. They, you know, I think I told you this last week, but when Jamie Baker, who’s an analyst for JP Morgan, came out with his estimates for all the airlines based on 450 fuel, two bucks, it showed JetBlue losing $1.3 billion this year. That would probably put them, you know, into bankruptcy, I would assume.
The cost of jet fuel last week was as high as $4.80 a gallon last week and is currently hovering around $4.
Neelman says their debt service is strangling them and that’s why United won’t buy them.
[T]hat would also take them to $9 billion in debt. Today they’re paying over 600 million in interest on that debt, and that would take it up to closer to $800 million of interest. So that’d be tough.
There’s some thought out there that United’s just doing this with American to clear the decks to buy JetBlue, but I know it from pretty good source inside of United that they’re very concerned about JetBlue’s debt. And they’re not really interested in taking on that. So I think JetBlue has very few options.
He also says “I don’t think Southwest is interested in them. I know Alaska isn’t.” So their best hope, he thinks, is Spirit to go out of business and fuel to get back to $2.50 a gallon. That barely puts JetBlue’s “nose above the water.” (Spirit’s demise would help JetBlue in Fort Lauderdale.)
“from the April 14 pilot pocket session at Breeze where David Neeleman is answering a question about his belief on the state of jetblue.” pic.twitter.com/jujcYppWH4
— JonNYC (@xJonNYC) April 15, 2026
In addition to founding JetBlue and serving as founder and CEO of Breeze Airways, Neeleman co-founded Morris Air in 1984 and sold it to Southwest (he sat on Southwest’s Executive Planning Committee afterward). He helped found WestJet in Canada, Azul in Brazil, and led the privatization of TAP Air Portugal in 1996.
Neeleman isn’t right about everything. He predicted in December that Spirit and Frontier would merge (I suppose they still could) and he uses a Delta SkyMiles credit card.
You mean, Mormon David Neeleman? (Calm down, it’s a call-back.)
He hasn’t been directly involved since 2008. Fine, he’s got like 4% of shares, so, clearly, he cares if it falls apart, not to mention, it’s his legacy, but, like the guy is focused on Breeze (LETSROLL)!
The really interesting economic question is what happens if there is indeed no buyer at all, and the airline’s assets are instead dispersed across multiple carriers, effectively creating a real-world test of decentralized reallocation in a network industry. From a microeconomic standpoint, this could produce a more competitive equilibrium than a single-firm acquisition, since multiple carriers would independently optimize routes and assets rather than rationalizing overlap within one network, potentially lowering entry barriers and increasing route-level competition. It would also expose how little empirical evidence we actually have on whether fragmented redistribution or traditional consolidation delivers better outcomes in fares, capacity, and consumer surplus, suggesting that the true analytical opportunity lies not in who acquires the airline, but in observing how the market reconstructs itself if no one does.
@Gary: Coud you tell Dave that I have $10 bill and will buy it, so the second problem is solved.
The partial elimination of debt in bankruptcy would make them more attractive to someone.
And fuel will be back down within 120 days. I hope they either hedged or can simply hold out.
@Mike Hunt — That’s pretty high-brow. Maybe regulators would be happier if airlines failed instead of merged. There’s like $9 billion on the line with jetBlue; and about $5 billion for Spirit. Practically, there’s still demand for some assets, like slots, gates, planes, parts, depending on where/what. I’d think United still wants another go at JFK, so if jetBlue disappeared overnight, there’d still be bids for T5 and their slots, for sure. Or, maybe your beloved Southwest could jump in on-the-cheap! (Not.)
@Rusty — Oh, so now it’s only 4 months, eh? Huh, funny because there’s still a blockade (now by US), and the last tankers are making it to ports worldwide, and the 80+ refining sites over there may take years to restore, so… yeah, ignore all that noise. Let’s trust Rusty on this one!
Let’s face it, jetBLUE is more valuable broken up and sold in pieces rather than whole. Outside of slots at JFK, the Terminal at JFK and Ops in BOS what do they really offer any Airline? Answer, NOTHING. No one needs or wants Orlando based on Low Yield and FLL is even worse. FLL will never be viable to MIA regardless what you think of the facility. SJU……………those days are long over being a Hub for anyone. Why any Airline would even consider Acquiring them, taking on All of their Employees and giving Pay Raises, all their aircraft and all their debt would be asinine. Even when JB had that partnership with AA, the ONEWORLD Alliance had zero interest in extending an offer to JB which speaks volumes. I just do not see Any of the likes of UAL,SWA.AS or AA willing to take them On.
JetBlue will be broken up, auctioned off, and sold off in pieces. American Airlines will likely get a big slice of their assets, and so will United. The airline is a hot mess. Always has been. The assets are limited to the slots at JFK and BOS, and the FLL and MCO concentration, the jets, and the JFK terminal. The rest is worthless.
The irony of it all is that B6 repurposed itself again in the last year as a Northeast to Florida airline, with a handful of vanity routes across the Atlantic. The same strategy that has doomed many brands in the 1980s and early 1990s.
@shoeguy — jetBlue is most certainly not ‘a mess’ and has been a great airline for passenger experience (extra legroom, free WiFi, live TV, Mint). They also expanded across the Atlantic, unlike SW, even though some like @Tim Dunn are still pitching that pipe dream. Listen, times are getting tough for a lot of people and companies, but jetBlue still has value.
He’s probably right. A “great airline” for passengers does not equate to a viable business. Being able to sell your product and services for more than the cost of delivering those products and services is a viable business.
Why are you talking to Breeze’s CEO who has been out of JetBlue for 18 years?
JetBlue’s number #1 asset is their stellar employees . And I mean in every department that I’ve done business with.
Highly trained, exceedingly professional in service delivery and even uniform appearance. That little airline could teach the big boys A LOT.
The only merger that makes sense right now (barely) is between United Airlines and Alaska Airlines. A United Airlines / American Airlines combination is largely a red herring.
The article is right that JetBlue Airways’s debt load is too high for any carrier to justify a deal in the current risk environment.
That said, Alaska Airlines still needs to fully clear the deck with its integration of Hawaiian Airlines. Until that’s complete, any additional transaction would be a stretch operationally and strategically.
Over the next 1–2 years, the landscape could and will shift quickly. JetBlue Airways and Alaska Airlines remain the most likely M&A targets and partners as balance sheets, fuel prices, ticket prices, and integration outcomes become clearer.
Wind down the operations. Liquidate the assets. Pay the creditors. Repeat with Frontier for the trifecta.
@Greg M – United/Alaska would certainly have to deal with issues at SFO. What does Alaska have outside of its LAX presence that United might want, that would be worth the expense and hassle?
Gary
Seattle, and PDX maybe. Better West Coast reach to Asia. Better reach to HNL and the South Seas?
If they could keep the Oman Air partnership (a big if, give that Oman Air is Oneworld), better coverage via the ME rather than their limited partnership with Emirates.
@Mike : “The really interesting economic question is what happens if there is indeed no buyer at all.” The late, great Walter Williams asked the same question when an airline was tettering. Most never think about the fact that virtually every resource is constrained. Freeing resources from inefficient users is good.
@JC Shannon gets it.
@George Romey — Ugh, here we got again with the ole ‘we’re a business, not a charity’ trope. Yeah, I know, and yet, great airlines can, should, and are viable businesses. Instead of adopting those positive passenger experiences, monopolies would create worse experiences and higher prices. So, if you fly, or work in the industry, you should want more healthy competition, not less.
@1990 – A handful of financially-healthy survivors beats a shambling horde of “zombie” airlines.
@Denver Refugee — We thinkin’ 28 Days Later or more Shaun of the Dead?
I have said for months that no one will touch B6 unless it takes a trip through chapter 11 or pays a high premium for assets and Neeleman’s comments validate that.
It is also very possible that someone else could come in and be interested in B6 after they go through chapter 11 – which could take at least a year – so the notion of fast mergers involving weak carriers is not at all a given
I hope everyone is wrong- I love flying Jetblue since I am not a business class flier. They provide the best economy service with easy upgrades to their version of economy+. Their demise will mean that those of us who travel ~10-12 times a year (i.e. enough to care but not enough to be elligible for business class upgrade) and cannot get reimbursed for business class are @!###.
I think enough Jetblue customers are loyal that if they raised their prices by 20% we would continue to fly them, though I have no numbers to back that up or figure out if that is enough.
Buh Bye jetBlue!
@Gary
A United Airlines takeout of Alaska Airlines (and Hawaiian Airlines) is about locking down the West Coast and the Pacific, which are structurally higher yielding than the East.
Yes, United has long wanted more LAX terminal access, but that is not the driver.
Seattle is the prize: a fortress hub and the most fuel efficient U.S. gateway to Asia via great circle routes. It also removes a key Oneworld partner from American Airlines and collapses competitive feed.
Hawaii is a systemwide loyalty engine. It drives co brand credit card spend and engagement across the network, not just coastal origin and destination traffic, with demand pull from Kansas as much as California.
Layer in hard to replicate infrastructure, slots, fleet and order book optionality, and a relatively clean balance sheet. That is the value. I am not saying it happens, just that it is the most logical asset set available right now.
@Greg zm – SFO and SEA don’t both make sense for the Pacific, and United is already huge to Hawaii they don’t need a hub there. Hard to replicate slots? Alaska is pretty small at slot-controlled airports.
If even part of this is a result of the many awful return flights with 8+ hour layovers for a flight that can be done in 3 hours, then good riddance.
@1990 – “Return of the Living Dead.” Specifically, the ending.
@Denver Refugee — So, there’s a “continency plan” after all…
@ Gary
You are thinking about it as redundancy, but it is really about optionality and flow. EWR/IAD do not effect JFK acquisition of B6…
United Airlines is SFO constrained and operationally complex. SEA gives them a second Pacific gateway that is more fuel efficient on great circle routings and de risks the operation. They would not replace SFO, UA would be adding a cleaner, scalable complement.
On Hawaii, it is not about needing a hub for local demand. Hawaiian Airlines adds a mid Pacific platform and, more importantly, a systemwide loyalty driver. Hawaii demand pulls from the entire network, not just the West Coast, and that shows up in co brand economics.
On slots, it is less about absolute scale and more about position. Alaska Airlines brings targeted access at constrained airports plus West Coast feed that is currently outside of United’s control. Combined with removing a Oneworld partner from American Airlines, that is real strategic value.
I am not advocating for the merger, rather pointing out there is more value right now in a United Alaska combination than United JetBlue. Ultimately it comes down to shareholder value, and at the moment that equation is volatile with too many variables.
@Greg M — “Ultimately it comes down to shareholder value…” Hear me out, maybe, just maybe, there’s more to existence than ‘shareholder value.’
I always knew the Judge in the antitrust case would be proven to have made a bad decision.
“Spirit fans, this one’s for you”
That didn’t age well.
Whoops. Sorry. It should read:
“Spirit is a small airline.
But there are those who love it.
To those dedicated customers of Spirit, this one’s for you.
Why?
Because the Clayton Act, a 109-year-old statute requires
this result –- a statute that continues to deliver for the
American people.”
Deliver them into what, exactly?