Airliners.net

Midwestindy posted this interesting bit of info in the DL add IND-CDG thread. He got it from another forum.

Speaking about Delta: "This is a result of Network turning their efforts to "focus" cities. These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors. The model for DL was RDU. In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR. Can't talk specifics on this open forum. Think of large cities, near competitor hubs that we currently have only 4x service each day to a couple of our hubs. Austin would fit that description and we have already announced increased service. There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."

Midwestindy then said: I think this might deserve a separate thread...

So I'll get it started. What does the above mean? Which cities will become focus cities? Which cities will get AMS flights?

My guess is AUS will be one of the cities getting a year-round AMS flight on DL in the near future.

DL will announce RDU-AMS at somepoint. Mark my words.

Thanks

I am really intrigued by two parts of this
1. "In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR"
2."There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

787fan8 wrote:

DL will announce RDU-AMS at somepoint. Mark my words.

Maybe, but I still think that is a little while yet. I think it is more likely European LCC's like WOW and Condor enter RDU before DL announces a second TATL flight. Between AA to LHR and DL to CDG, RDU is pretty well-covered for full service TATL flights.

I think the most likely candidates for DL starting new TATL flights (in no particular order) are AUS, MSY, BNA, CMH, CLE, MCO, etc.

I think DL will focus more expansion in IND. They already have an investment here with the Sky Club and now the CDG flight coming. They have a very long history here and a big FF base. They also have plenty of room to expand. Not saying they would, but they have the space to easily double their operation here.

flyfresno wrote:

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......

ADrum23 wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......

Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?

Is this any different from Mr. Anderson's "s-curve strategy" from immediately after the merger? That always made sense to me but sort of petered out.

flyfresno wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......

Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?

BNA is closer to ATL than RDU, so I don't know if DL would be keen on making Nashville a focus city. Especially since CVG is still a hub and it's fairly close to BNA as well.

flyfresno wrote:

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

Since it was said that "and are not a hub for competitors" wouldn't that rule out PDX and to a lesser extent SJC.

Since it mentioned 6 six cities I'll add in IND, considering it just got the CDG flight, and the post was directly related to that news!
IND, CMH, RDU(Already a focus city, so might not count), AUS, MCO, and LAS are the six that make sense considering they have lots of p2p flying, but BNA might fit in there as well.

Oh and just to stir the pot a little, when IND was approving their new incentives this summer, they included a pretty hefty incentive to any carrier that planned on creating a "focus city " in IND.


Funny, this tweet from the middle of the summer had some truth to it: "https://twitter.com/GoldboxATL/status/893457158473486337

"Hearing #Delta will be announcing new international routes as early as today; some from focus cities. Let the guessing games begin."

I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.

msycajun wrote:

I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.

Do you think Paris would be a successful destination from MSY? Isn't London and Frankfurt the top two destinations from MSY?

ADrum23 wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......

Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?

BNA is closer to ATL than RDU, so I don't know if DL would be keen on making Nashville a focus city. Especially since CVG is still a hub and it's fairly close to BNA as well.

The problem in BNA is more so the competitive environment (largely WN) than the geography. DL would be dealing with WN and somebody else on just about any focus city-type route.

ADrum23 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.

Do you think Paris would be a successful destination from MSY? Isn't London and Frankfurt the top two destinations from MSY?

From the Brooking numbers LON and PAR were the top two, following more distantly by (in order) AMS, FCO, and FRA. PAR is still quite a bit smaller than LON, but much larger than the next largest market to Europe. There are the obvious cultural connections and not so obvious business ties to Paris. I think an AF 789 would work 4-5 weekly, given the connections available and the huge ST flier base here. If they don't step up, DY will in the next year or two.

ADrum23 wrote:

Speaking about Delta: "This is a result of Network turning their efforts to "focus" cities. These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors. The model for DL was RDU. In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR. Can't talk specifics on this open forum. Think of large cities, near competitor hubs that we currently have only 4x service each day to a couple of our hubs. Austin would fit that description and we have already announced increased service. There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."

Midwestindy then said: I think this might deserve a separate thread...

Who is being quoted?

MIflyer12 wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Speaking about Delta: "This is a result of Network turning their efforts to "focus" cities. These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors. The model for DL was RDU. In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR. Can't talk specifics on this open forum. Think of large cities, near competitor hubs that we currently have only 4x service each day to a couple of our hubs. Austin would fit that description and we have already announced increased service. There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."

Midwestindy then said: I think this might deserve a separate thread...

Who is being quoted?

A DL 767 pilot

Cubsrule wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?

BNA is closer to ATL than RDU, so I don't know if DL would be keen on making Nashville a focus city. Especially since CVG is still a hub and it's fairly close to BNA as well.

The problem in BNA is more so the competitive environment (largely WN) than the geography. DL would be dealing with WN and somebody else on just about any focus city-type route.

True, but I could see DL starting a CDG or AMS flight from BNA at some point. Though I think that is a few years away though.

I think Austin is the obvious one here. They can obviously add more to Las Vegas and msy, but those are just low yielding cities with too much ulcc competition.

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

klm617 wrote:

Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect.

"These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors"

I would consider UA and WN competitors of DL

As I said earlier, Airlines love serving Capital cities such as Austin and Sacramento plus Indianapolis. Think "Government Jobs / Government Money".

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.

MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.

If you look at RDU and the other cities, you have to look hard. Like IND, RDU had incentives for the CDG flight and I believe it has been successful for the most part for DL. But as far as the focus City goes, that was exclusive of the CDG flight. The focus City came first and without incentives but with DL starting flights on their own. And it was a careful, calculated add. Everything didn't come at once but a gradual build. Added flights to hubs doesn't equate to focus city but adding p2p does. So if we look at DL legacy special cities.. we get RDU, CMH, BDL, MCO, TPA... then you can add IND... each of the first 5 truly have P2P routes.. IND has a couple... so, in my opinion, if there are any international focus City adds... it would probably be from those cities.. and we've seen it with MCO to AMS and IND to CDG.. I think we may see 757 from CMH and BDL to CDG.. TPA to CDG... maybe RDU to AMS or to LHR because I believe DL really wants that corporate contract.. I could be wrong but history has shown these are these are DL areas of focus

Two cities that should be next for AMS service with DL are STL and CMH. CMH should be able to support the flight much the way IND got CDG. And while STL did get WOW, it is a big enough market to support DL/AMS at the same time.

I would expect the next announced route will be LAS-AMS on an A332.

LAS already has service to all the hubs and SNA, SAN, and SJC. With the new JV it can leverage the KE flight to ICN. LAS-Europe is around 5400 miles, which may be pushing the range of the 763 in LAS's heat. DL already routes multiple A332's through AMS, and can send one to LAS no problem.

ERJ170 wrote:

Added flights to hubs doesn't equate to focus city but adding p2p does. So if we look at DL legacy special cities.. we get RDU, CMH, BDL, MCO, TPA... then you can add IND... each of the first 5 truly have P2P routes.. IND has a couple...

IND has more than TPA, CMH, BDL, and TPA

p2p flights by cities you mentioned:
TPA: 2 (RDU/CUN)
BDL:4 (CUN/RDU/CLE/MCO)
CMH: 5 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN)
IND: 6 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN/CDG)
MCO: 19
RDU: Already officially a focus city

Would you consider MCO already a de-facto focus city for DL?

I hope DL doesn't start MSY-Europe. I don't want to see BA and DE suffer, which I'm sure they would in some respect if DL starts a flight, granted BA moreso.

I'd like to see a MSY-CDG flight but not this soon. The nonstop European market needs time to mature. Let's revisit the idea in two years. Until then, quite happy with direct service to LHR and FRA!

Midwestindy wrote:

IND has more than TPA, CMH, BDL, and TPA

p2p flights by cities you mentioned:
TPA: 2 (RDU/CUN)
BDL:4 (CUN/RDU/CLE/MCO)
CMH: 5 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN)
IND: 6 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN/CDG)
MCO: 19
RDU: Already officially a focus city

CDG is a hub.. doesn't count.. and I did add IND in the mix, it just was not a DL focused city until it acquired NW.. the others have a legacy of being DL focused cities..

As far as Delta at RDU goes, here's what Andy Renner, Director of Route Network says..

Via exclusive interview, Renner says building on the network Delta has in place at RDU has been “a big part of my job over the past year.” And it’s more than just improvements to a single route.

“It’s a little premature to talk about 2018,” he says. “We certainly have ideas on new destinations to be serving out of Raleigh-Durham, but it’s a little too early to announce anything.”

Raleigh has long been a priority for Delta, initially because of its proximity to Delta’s home turf in Atlanta. “But the reality is, Raleigh is a big city in its own right and, more importantly, it’s a high-growth city,” he says. “Part of my job is to figure out where people want to live – where people want to fly, and for me to anticipate that.”

Renner says budget carrier competition isn’t what keeps him up at night. “We’re a global airline and we offer a full service product, so we certainly will want to attract the budget conscious leisure traveler, but a big part of our game is to provide a schedule that’s important to the business or corporate traveler. That’s what’s driving a lot of the growth in Raleigh-Durham.”

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

Maybe MKE will get more adds when the C series is here?

I also think MKE will get a Europe flight or two once the E terminal becomes a small international one. At the very least one of the ultra low cost carriers will come.

SunsetLimited wrote:

I hope DL doesn't start MSY-Europe. I don't want to see BA and DE suffer, which I'm sure they would in some respect if DL starts a flight, granted BA moreso.

I'd like to see a MSY-CDG flight but not this soon. The nonstop European market needs time to mature. Let's revisit the idea in two years. Until then, quite happy with direct service to LHR and FRA!

I don't think BA would suffer. Granted it's spot checks, but if you compare MSY/AUS/BNA/SJC-LHR nonstops, MSY is routinely 40-100% more expensive. If they feel there is that kind of demand, a Skyteam nonstop should do well. Remember there are a lot of DL loyalists who are not flying BA or DE, especially at those prices. FRA is a comparatively small market, so I'd gladly trade DE's limited seasonal service for a year-round service to CDG with more frequency.

Midwestindy wrote:

A DL 767 pilot

...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.

Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.

RDUDDJI wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

A DL 767 pilot

...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.

Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.

I might agree with you, but this isn't the first time this has come up, this "rumor" was talked about in the summer and since then MCO-AMS and IND-CDG were announced. So, with that in mind, and the fact that it came from a 767 pilot(which many of these potential flights would be run on) it holds more merit.

jreuschl wrote:

I also think MKE will get a Europe flight or two once the E terminal becomes a small international one. At the very least one of the ultra low cost carriers will come.

While I wouldn't rule it out entirely, MKE will have a hard time landing TATL service given its close proximity to ORD (especially whenever ORD gets going on the terminal rebuild/expansion projects).

Midwestindy wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.

Since it was said that "and are not a hub for competitors" wouldn't that rule out PDX and to a lesser extent SJC.

Since it mentioned 6 six cities I'll add in IND, considering it just got the CDG flight, and the post was directly related to that news!
IND, CMH, RDU(Already a focus city, so might not count), AUS, MCO, and LAS are the six that make sense considering they have lots of p2p flying, but BNA might fit in there as well.

Oh and just to stir the pot a little, when IND was approving their new incentives this summer, they included a pretty hefty incentive to any carrier that planned on creating a "focus city " in IND.


Funny, this tweet from the middle of the summer had some truth to it: "https://twitter.com/GoldboxATL/status/893457158473486337

"Hearing #Delta will be announcing new international routes as early as today; some from focus cities. Let the guessing games begin."

MCO is a hub for jetBlue & Spirit, as well as focus city for Southwest and already a focus city for Delta so thats out.
LAS is a major operation for AA & Southwest & has Allegiant.
Both these options are heavy competition and thus reverse of the idea of going into airports that are not major hubs for other carriers.

ADrum23 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.

Do you think Paris would be a successful destination from MSY? Isn't London and Frankfurt the top two destinations from MSY?

LHR they would compete with BA & their huge connection options. Virgin Atlantic cannot offer much in connections to compete. AMS would make more sense.
Also as New Orleans is a former French city & there are a lot of family links CDG would make much more sense before FRA.

I will be interested to see where this goes, DL has really stepped up PTP routes in recent years and I think it is a really exciting strategy. DL has a pretty interesting hub/focus city structure, which is quite unique:

Large Hubs: ATL, MSP, DTW, LGA/JFK, SLC
Small Hubs: LAX, SEA, CVG, BOS
International Hubs: NRT, CDG, AMS, LHR
Focus Cities: RDU, MCO

DL has already been expanding aggressively in their small hub category, I think focus cities are the next logical step. I could see IND/AUS/BNA/CMH/MSY/MKE all being good cities for expansion.

You should put NYC instead of JFK because I believe LGA is a hub too

Midwestindy wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

A DL 767 pilot

...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.

Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.

I might agree with you, but this isn't the first time this has come up, this "rumor" was talked about in the summer and since then MCO-AMS and IND-CDG were announced. So, with that in mind, and the fact that it came from a 767 pilot(which many of these potential flights would be run on) it holds more merit.

Yes but who talked about "this rumor" more than once. This is the second time I've seen it and this post is based on his comment on the other post. Don't oversell it!

msycajun wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.

MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.

First of all when traveling from IND to europe most flights require a double connect even over DTW. The only places you could reach one stop over DTW are LHR, AMS, CDG, and FRA year rounf and FCO and MUC in the summer. The only hubs that offer onestop connections to most of Europe in the US are JFK and ATL so any for city around those hubs it would be pointless to waste a frame if they can connect at either JFK or ATL that is unless a city is offering big money.

rbavfan wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.

Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.

I might agree with you, but this isn't the first time this has come up, this "rumor" was talked about in the summer and since then MCO-AMS and IND-CDG were announced. So, with that in mind, and the fact that it came from a 767 pilot(which many of these potential flights would be run on) it holds more merit.

Yes but who talked about "this rumor" more than once. This is the second time I've seen it and this post is based on his comment on the other post. Don't oversell it!

Cool, you can believe whatever you want...

klm617 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.

MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.

First of all when traveling from IND to europe most flights require a double connect even over DTW. The only places you could reach one stop over DTW are LHR, AMS, CDG, and FRA year rounf and FCO and MUC in the summer. The only hubs that offer onestop connections to most of Europe in the US are JFK and ATL so any for city around those hubs it would be pointless to waste a frame if they can connect at either JFK or ATL that is unless a city is offering big money.

Ninety percent or more of the IND-Europe O&D can connect one-stop over DTW, ORD and/or PHL, and I'm not sure why you assume ATL is uncompetitive.

Cubsrule wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.

If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam

klm617 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.

If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam

I'm not sure if you have heard, but Delta's two largest TATL hubs are ATL and JFK, and MKE has plenty of service to both.

Cubsrule wrote:

klm617 wrote:

msycajun wrote:

That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.

MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.

First of all when traveling from IND to europe most flights require a double connect even over DTW. The only places you could reach one stop over DTW are LHR, AMS, CDG, and FRA year rounf and FCO and MUC in the summer. The only hubs that offer onestop connections to most of Europe in the US are JFK and ATL so any for city around those hubs it would be pointless to waste a frame if they can connect at either JFK or ATL that is unless a city is offering big money.

Ninety percent or more of the IND-Europe O&D can connect one-stop over DTW, ORD and/or PHL, and I'm not sure why you assume ATL is uncompetitive.

Because it adds time to your trip and 376 miles in each direction at least out of the way who wants to do that when you can transfer at ORD with either AA or UA and probably cheaper. ATL is very noncompetitive if you are an IND originating traveler headed to Europe.

klm617 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.

I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.

If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam

Get your facts straight there are no nonstops on Delta from MKE to JFK and who the hell wants to fly all the way down to ATL if you're going from MKE to Europe.

cvgComair wrote:

I will be interested to see where this goes, DL has really stepped up PTP routes in recent years and I think it is a really exciting strategy. DL has a pretty interesting hub/focus city structure, which is quite unique:

Large Hubs: ATL, MSP, DTW, LGA/JFK, SLC
Small Hubs: LAX, SEA, CVG, BOS
International Hubs: NRT, CDG, AMS, LHR
Focus Cities: RDU, MCO

DL has already been expanding aggressively in their small hub category, I think focus cities are the next logical step. I could see IND/AUS/BNA/CMH/MSY/MKE all being good cities for expansion.

I would also add RIC PIT STL MCI and SJC, that list for dom. expansion.
Lot of dote to Conn.

Cubsrule wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.

If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam

I'm not sure if you have heard, but Delta's two largest TATL hubs are ATL and JFK, and MKE has plenty of service to both.

Please provide me with a link to where I can find MKE to JFK nonstops