Norwegian identifies CHI, WAS, MSY, and Texas as next target markets for US ops

LAX772LR · Wed May 31, 2017 7:56 pm

Ramdahl said Norwegian will continue to grow here both by connecting the dots between the European and U.S. cities it already serves and by expanding to new U.S. destinations altogether.

For the latter, Ramdahl said Chicago is high on Norwegian’s list and said an announcement for flights there could come by the end of this year. Also under consideration for future growth: Washington, New Orleans and the big markets in Texas, according to Ramdahl

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 102338008/

PatrickZ80 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:01 pm

With Washington I assume they'll mean Baltimore-Washington International airport. Dulles might be too expensive for them and Washington National too small. Baltimore has become the LCC airport for Washington.

ty97 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:08 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
With Washington I assume they'll mean Baltimore-Washington International airport. Dulles might be too expensive for them and Washington National too small. Baltimore has become the LCC airport for Washington.

For Chicago, I wonder if they'd go to MKE?

jnev3289 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:09 pm

Is there much O/D from MSY? I don't think of it as a place foreign carriers with no feed can succeed. I guess BA did just start service there though right?

448205 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:15 pm

I guess they aren't losing money fast enough!

PatrickZ80 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:19 pm

ty97 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
With Washington I assume they'll mean Baltimore-Washington International airport. Dulles might be too expensive for them and Washington National too small. Baltimore has become the LCC airport for Washington.

For Chicago, I wonder if they'd go to MKE?

Highly unlikely. First of all, Milwaukee is not Chicago. It is a whole other city which they didn't say they're interested in. There are 3 airports that call themselves Chicago and Milwaukee is not one of them.

Chicago O'Hare seems most likely. It's the largest and most convenient Chicago airport. Norwegian is known to use more large airports, certainly with their dreamliners.

Rockford is the other Chicago airport they can use. Quite far from Chicago and therefor less obvious, buf if they feel adventurous....

Midway is the third Chicago airport, but I'm sure they won't go for it. The longest runway at Midway is 1988 meters, which is very short. Too short for a Dreamliner.

behramjee · Wed May 31, 2017 8:21 pm

Dallas and Houston dont have a large ethnic/VFR traffic base for Europe that Chicago, LAX and NYC have + nor does it have the large leisure demand from Europe which MIA/MCO has hence I dont think Texas would be a good market for them to risk operating to. They need to focus on their core markets/routes that they currently serve and build up those with large ethnic populations rather than expand recklessly.

PatrickZ80 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:22 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
I guess they aren't losing money fast enough!

Who says they're losing money? I was under the impression most of these flights are actually profitable. Keep in mind that Norwegian has one of the highest load factors of all airlines. Of course load factors say little about profitability, but it does say a lot of people are willing to fly with them and pay for it.

jnev3289 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:23 pm

behramjee wrote:
Dallas and Houston dont have a large ethnic/VFR traffic base for Europe that Chicago, LAX and NYC have + nor does it have the large leisure demand from Europe which MIA/MCO has hence I dont think Texas would be a good market for them to risk operating to. They need to focus on their core markets/routes that they currently serve and build up those with large ethnic populations rather than expand recklessly.

This. I feel like airlines love to expand very quickly to get their beloved economies of scale, but it can easily backfire. Tortoise beats the hare right?

LAXdude1023 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:24 pm

behramjee wrote:
Dallas and Houston dont have a large ethnic/VFR traffic base for Europe that Chicago, LAX and NYC have + nor does it have the large leisure demand from Europe which MIA/MCO has hence I dont think Texas would be a good market for them to risk operating to. They need to focus on their core markets/routes that they currently serve and build up those with large ethnic populations rather than expand recklessly.

Ethnic markets no. Ill go a step further and say that, while business traffic between Texas and Europe is very large, rarely would they stoop to Norwegians level. But there is a very large amount of Texans that travel to Europe for vacation in the summer.

MBSDALHOU · Wed May 31, 2017 8:25 pm

I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

KTPAFlyer · Wed May 31, 2017 8:33 pm

Rapid expansion is a double edged sword. If it goes well, you win. If not, then everything goes up in flames. It is of worthy note that DY currently does not service any form of fortress hub, only the big cities where it's a level playing field. DY is going to find out very quickly in ORD, DFW, and IAH that having the lowest fares won't always work.

Irehdna · Wed May 31, 2017 8:34 pm

I'm surprised they are not considering/focusing on EWR and YUL.

Right now they only have EWR-FCO/BCN. EWR should have lower slot costs than JFK, and is still located within driving distance of NYC. I still find it surprising that DY has not started at least EWR-LGW or EWR-CDG (both are underserved markets IMO, and EWR-LGW does not even exist yet). Running EWR-LGW could perhaps become the most affordable way to travel between 2 highly-influential global cities, assuming passengers are willing to travel from NYC-EWR/London-LGW. EWR will make them more price-competitive than JFK, but given that they chose CDG instead of ORY, but LGW instead of LHR, I don't fully see a definite path in which they are taking in terms of airport selection.

YUL is a big tourist city above a business centre, and Rouge has a huge service there. Is there room for DY to disrupt the market? I would imagine there is big potential to connect Europeans to Montreal/Quebec.

loisencroach · Wed May 31, 2017 8:45 pm

Both RFD and MKE have been courting Norwegian for a long time:

https://www.openourskies.com/

http://www.rrstar.com/news/20170107/exc ... an-flights

Sooner787 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:52 pm

MBSDALHOU wrote:
I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

Spirit has a nice hub going at DFW , It would be intersesting to see Norwegian set up some
kind of agreement with NK for pax feed.

Actually, any international option other than AA / BA to Europe would be a welcome sight at DFW.

jnev3289 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:52 pm

RFD and MKE both make a lot of sense

ty97 · Wed May 31, 2017 8:54 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
ty97 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
With Washington I assume they'll mean Baltimore-Washington International airport. Dulles might be too expensive for them and Washington National too small. Baltimore has become the LCC airport for Washington.

For Chicago, I wonder if they'd go to MKE?

Highly unlikely. First of all, Milwaukee is not Chicago. It is a whole other city which they didn't say they're interested in. There are 3 airports that call themselves Chicago and Milwaukee is not one of them.

Chicago O'Hare seems most likely. It's the largest and most convenient Chicago airport. Norwegian is known to use more large airports, certainly with their dreamliners.

Rockford is the other Chicago airport they can use. Quite far from Chicago and therefor less obvious, buf if they feel adventurous....

Midway is the third Chicago airport, but I'm sure they won't go for it. The longest runway at Midway is 1988 meters, which is very short. Too short for a Dreamliner.

MDW had been my first thought been then figured out the runways were too short, thus pondered if they may go for MKE. They're doing SWF, PVD, and BDL (albeit with their 737 fleet not their 787 fleet) so going to a secondary airport for a major metro is not completely outside of their wheelhouse.

OSL777FLYER · Wed May 31, 2017 8:58 pm

RFD could maybe be a market for them. They already fly out of there on behalf of Apple Vacations. (although that would not be feeder traffic for them)

Yes, RFD is a ways out, but if charges are lower, and there's no congestion............. who knows?

787fan8 · Wed May 31, 2017 9:11 pm

It will either be MKE or RFD if they fly to Chicago. Personally, the better option would be RFD considering it would be cheaper to operate at.

CHI787ORD · Wed May 31, 2017 9:14 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
ty97 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
With Washington I assume they'll mean Baltimore-Washington International airport. Dulles might be too expensive for them and Washington National too small. Baltimore has become the LCC airport for Washington.

For Chicago, I wonder if they'd go to MKE?

Highly unlikely. First of all, Milwaukee is not Chicago. It is a whole other city which they didn't say they're interested in. There are 3 airports that call themselves Chicago and Milwaukee is not one of them.

Chicago O'Hare seems most likely. It's the largest and most convenient Chicago airport. Norwegian is known to use more large airports, certainly with their dreamliners.

Rockford is the other Chicago airport they can use. Quite far from Chicago and therefor less obvious, buf if they feel adventurous....

Midway is the third Chicago airport, but I'm sure they won't go for it. The longest runway at Midway is 1988 meters, which is very short. Too short for a Dreamliner.

There are four airports that call themselves Chicago, you forgot GYY. Although obviously they wouldn't be an airport Norwegian could use.

vadodara · Wed May 31, 2017 9:23 pm

Texas could be a tricky one; Europe to TX is not leisure like LA/NY or FL. However, there is a large TX to Europe market.

If they play their cards right, perhaps they can find the right level of profitable service.

dfwjim1 · Wed May 31, 2017 9:32 pm

MBSDALHOU wrote:
I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

Or DY could perhaps set up shop in San Antonio and service both San Antonio and the Austin metro area. At least at SAT they would not have competition from BA and Condor.

lesfalls · Wed May 31, 2017 10:30 pm

loisencroach wrote:
Both RFD and MKE have been courting Norwegian for a long time:

https://www.openourskies.com/

http://www.rrstar.com/news/20170107/exc ... an-flights

DY used both airports for charters this past winter so they have experience at both airports. I think MKE makes the most sense as they are planning to expand their Internaional area of the airport and plus MKE petitioned even for NAI to receive approval from the U.S.

klm617 · Wed May 31, 2017 10:39 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
MBSDALHOU wrote:
I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

Spirit has a nice hub going at DFW , It would be intersesting to see Norwegian set up some
kind of agreement with NK for pax feed.

Actually, any international option other than AA / BA to Europe would be a welcome sight at DFW.

If they were going to tie up with Spirit they would be much better off doing it at Detroit rather than DFW.

MBSDALHOU · Wed May 31, 2017 10:49 pm

I never thought of SAT! It's about a 90 min drive from north Austin to SAT and a fairly easy drive (compared to Houston!) so I can't imagine why that wouldn't do well. Even tho I live in Houston I would drive to SAT to fly out.

LAX772LR · Wed May 31, 2017 10:57 pm

jnev3289 wrote:
Is there much O/D from MSY?

Would this airline be publicly acknowledging their intent to serve it, multiple times, if there weren't?

jnev3289 wrote:
I don't think of it as a place foreign carriers with no feed can succeed.

Based on ______?

jnev3289 wrote:
I guess BA did just start service there though right?

MSY currently has transatlantic nonstops to LHR and FRA, and actively seeking more.

Midwestindy · Wed May 31, 2017 10:58 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
MBSDALHOU wrote:
I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

Spirit has a nice hub going at DFW , It would be intersesting to see Norwegian set up some
kind of agreement with NK for pax feed.

Actually, any international option other than AA / BA to Europe would be a welcome sight at DFW.

Oh god, PLEASE do not let Spirit partner with Norwegian!

777PHX · Wed May 31, 2017 11:12 pm

I don't know where you guys are getting the notion in your head that DY is Allegiant and that they only serve secondary airports, but DY serves the major airport in every single US city they serve.

ORD is clearly the only choice. MKE is Milwaukee, MDW is too small, and it won't be RFD.

freakyrat · Wed May 31, 2017 11:12 pm

jnev3289 wrote:
RFD and MKE both make a lot of sense

You can also throw in GYY and SBN in the mix. We aren't talking about the Dreamliners though. Something more right sized and economical in the Airbus A321LR that Norwegian is getting in 2018. The aircraft has the range with reserves to make it from the Midwest to Dublin. Both GYY and SBN have the runway length for such flights. SBN has already handled Airbus A330 sports charters to Dublin.

I believe that Norwegian is actually looking to serve secondary airports in the Chicago area unstead of competing at ORD much like they do at SWF and PVD.

LAX772LR · Wed May 31, 2017 11:32 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Midway is the third Chicago airport, but I'm sure they won't go for it. The longest runway at Midway is 1988 meters, which is very short. Too short for a Dreamliner.

Not necessarily.

Observe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmxW9V0g-vY

MSY's Rwy2/20 is only 2134m (7000ft), and despite the availability of the much longer Rwy11/29, BA has no problem doing MSY-LHR off the shorter runway.

And even that's not very impressive, considering that BY does BRS-CUN off of 2011m Rwy 9/27.

Both of the are with 787s. MDW's runways shouldn't be that much of an impediment, if that's what DY really want

spinkid · Wed May 31, 2017 11:34 pm

RFD and any other secondary depends on how things go with SWF. If they are able to make it work there in terms of using buses into NYC then I think they will expand that type of service to other airports, otherwise it will be ORD and the main airports.

Many have commented about the lack of O &D, but you all seem to be thinking about the U.S. based customer. Norwegian certainly markets in the U.S., however a large chunk of their business comes from Europe. Europeans, especially Scandinavians love to travel.

MSY is a huge draw, and IIRC there is a growing cruise industry there.

I doubt we will see them partnering with any U.S. LCC in the near future, jetBlue would be a better choice as they have a sense of style which Norwegian also has.

448205 · Wed May 31, 2017 11:35 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
MBSDALHOU wrote:
I could see them settling in quite nicely into Austin. BA has done killer on that route so why not try there?

Spirit has a nice hub going at DFW , It would be intersesting to see Norwegian set up some
kind of agreement with NK for pax feed.

Actually, any international option other than AA / BA to Europe would be a welcome sight at DFW.

I hope not. NK is a ghetto disaster of an operation. The IRROPS could put people a week behind schedule.

ty97 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:33 am

777PHX wrote:
I don't know where you guys are getting the notion in your head that DY is Allegiant and that they only serve secondary airports, but DY serves the major airport in every single US city they serve.

ORD is clearly the only choice. MKE is Milwaukee, MDW is too small, and it won't be RFD.

I don't think anyone is saying that DY only does secondary airports, we are simply acknowledging that they do, in some cases, use secondary airports. That doesn't mean that they will do so in Chicago, but it seems that ruling it out completely right now doesn't make sense either.

ty97 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:37 am

MBSDALHOU wrote:
I never thought of SAT! It's about a 90 min drive from north Austin

At 3am on a Saturday

khinstorff · Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:45 am

If they do look at Houston, is HOU the preferred airport for them?

MAH4546 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:58 am

behramjee wrote:
Dallas and Houston dont have a large ethnic/VFR traffic base for Europe that Chicago, LAX and NYC have + nor does it have the large leisure demand from Europe which MIA/MCO has hence I dont think Texas would be a good market for them to risk operating to. They need to focus on their core markets/routes that they currently serve and build up those with large ethnic populations rather than expand recklessly.

VFR to Western Europe? That's not a market.

There's some from Portugal from the Northeast, Italy from Miami/New York, French Jews who escaped to Miami and LA, and maybe traces of it still from Boston to Ireland, and that might be the extent of it. These are tourists flights.

CalTex · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:28 am

Nice to hear Norwegian acknowledging Texas! Given the large populations in the DFW and IAH areas (7 and 5.5 million respectively), sufficiently large number of people interested in international travel, and the fortress hubs that produce high fares to Europe, Norwegian definitely has some room for market stimulation. Now, the question is - from which airports would they fly? I can easily picture Norwegian succeeding on 3x weekly flights to airports like LGW, BCN, or FCO, but I'm not as sure about their Scandinavian destinations.

scutfarcus · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:28 am

I feel pretty good about MKE over RFD. First of all MKE is rolling out the red carpet for any and all new flights - especially Europe which they've never had. The city and local press would go bananas for it.

Second, MKE is not much further from Chicago than RFD but is a far better established airport with amenities and most importantly - a direct train to Chicago. It's not something the business traveller would use but European tourists going to Chicago would have no problem hopping on for a one hour train trip to their Chicago vacation.

Just my two cents!

mke717spotter · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:46 am

OSL777FLYER wrote:
RFD could maybe be a market for them.

787fan8 wrote:
It will either be MKE or RFD if they fly to Chicago. Personally, the better option would be RFD considering it would be cheaper to operate at.

Seriously? RFD? I just can't see that happening at all. No one except for G4 has been able to sustain service there (F9, UA, etc.), so I can't imagine how that's a great indicator for now wanting to start international flights there.

wnflyguy · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:48 am

GYY has basically offered Norwegian Everything for free if they choose them for the Chicago location.
For the typical Norwegian passenger GYY is a more ideal location than MKE or RDF.
25 miles to the South Loop of Chicago.
Plus Chicago south shore Meta line has stop right at the airport.

Flyguy

ty97 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:05 am

wnflyguy wrote:
GYY has basically offered Norwegian Everything for free if they choose them for the Chicago location.
For the typical Norwegian passenger GYY is a more ideal location than MKE or RDF.
25 miles to the South Loop of Chicago.
Plus Chicago south shore Meta line has stop right at the airport.

Flyguy

I didn't even consider GYY because I figured they didn't have the necessary runway length, perhaps incorrectly on my part.

jeffrey1970 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:23 am

I would love to see more international growth at BWI. Especially flights to Europe.

jbs2886 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:30 am

I don't understand why everyone is focused on Norwegian using secondary (and tertiary) airports. Sure, they are using PVD and Stewart, but for the MAX 8 flights. The 787s are still going to primary airports and I suspect they will continue to. If/when Norwegian comes to Chicago, I'm confident they will use ORD - it has the facilities, experience, infrastructure, etc. to handle those flights and is consistent with the approach to 787 flights.

knope2001 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:35 am

scutfarcus wrote:
MKE is not much further from Chicago than RFD but is a far better established airport with amenities and most importantly - a direct train to Chicago. It's not something the business traveller would use but European tourists going to Chicago would have no problem hopping on for a one hour train trip to their Chicago vacation.

For what it's worth some driving information (per Google maps) without traffic.from the central city (Loop for Chicago, for example)

Car -- traffic can readily add 40-60 minutes
Chicago to ORD
25 minutes
Chicago to GYY
37 minutes
Chicago to MKE
84 minutes
Chicago to RFD
86 minutes
Chicago to SBN
98 minutes
New York to SWF
85 minutes
Boston to PVD
63 minutes

Train -- no traffic delays
Chicago to GYY
53 minutes (average)
Chicago to MKE
74 minutes
Chicago to SBN
130 minutes

Certainly none of this indicates Norwegian won't choose O'Hare -- they might. But neither Milwaukee nor Rockford would be out of the norm considering they are serving New York via Stewart and are moving Boston flights to Providence.

Gary is certainly somewhat closer than MKE or RFD but it's not that much closer than RFD or MKE. Rail is only about 20 minutes faster to GYY than MKE, Neither RFD nor GYY are especially amenity-filled, though at least RFD has been serving international arrivals already during winter. South Bend may be too far out to compete.

Maybe Norwegian will squeeze every last nickel and the final decision will be about which airport is willing to give the most away. But

jnev3289 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:49 am

Really great discussion in here, and people say this place has gone downhill!

ty97 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:03 am

knope2001 wrote:
scutfarcus wrote:
MKE is not much further from Chicago than RFD but is a far better established airport with amenities and most importantly - a direct train to Chicago. It's not something the business traveller would use but European tourists going to Chicago would have no problem hopping on for a one hour train trip to their Chicago vacation.

For what it's worth some driving information (per Google maps) without traffic.from the central city (Loop for Chicago, for example)

Car -- traffic can readily add 40-60 minutes
Chicago to ORD
25 minutes

I lived near the Kennedy between The Loop and O'Hare from 2009 to 2013. I'm not sure I ever experience this 'no traffic' situation

I jest...somewhat. But I was always amazed how it could be a parking lot, in both directions, at Noon on a sunny Saturday. I pretty much always used the Blue Line to/from O'Hare, even when I was on the company dime, rather than sit in a taxi in traffic.

PatrickZ80 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:03 am

mke717spotter wrote:
Seriously? RFD? I just can't see that happening at all. No one except for G4 has been able to sustain service there (F9, UA, etc.), so I can't imagine how that's a great indicator for now wanting to start international flights there.

That's what people said when they announced Stewart too, still they're doing it and with success I would say.

wnflyguy wrote:
GYY has basically offered Norwegian Everything for free if they choose them for the Chicago location.
For the typical Norwegian passenger GYY is a more ideal location than MKE or RDF.
25 miles to the South Loop of Chicago.
Plus Chicago south shore Meta line has stop right at the airport.

Flyguy

True, I totally forgot about them. But do they have a FIS? It's called Gary Regional airport, and regional airports in the US mostly don't have a FIS. This opposed to Europe where just about every airport (even the smallest) has a FIS.

448205 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:22 am

jnev3289 wrote:
Really great discussion in here, and people say this place has gone downhill!

Speculation.

LAX772LR · Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:01 am

CalTex wrote:
I can easily picture Norwegian succeeding on 3x weekly flights to airports like LGW, BCN, or FCO, but I'm not as sure about their Scandinavian destinations.

Can definitely see them doing Houston-Norway if/when the oil industry gets stronger again.

MAH4546 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:08 am

LAX772LR wrote:
CalTex wrote:
I can easily picture Norwegian succeeding on 3x weekly flights to airports like LGW, BCN, or FCO, but I'm not as sure about their Scandinavian destinations.

Can definitely see them doing Houston-Norway if/when the oil industry gets stronger again.

Oil industry isn't flying Norwegian and the market is still small notwithstanding. There's just a lot of business classs demand to Stavenger, it's still a tiny market.

Norwegian is opening bases at what are arguably the four biggest destination points for Americans going to Europe, LON, CDG, FCO and BCN, and that's where service to markets with small European-originating demand like Texas, MSY, CHI, etc. will likely be served from.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net