I wonder how long before the gamechanging CSeries sees AUS in Delta colors? My guess is 2019.

Someone mentioned AMS, how about a 767 to CDG? Or both!

MSPNWA wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

Uh, CVG, RDU, BOS? We can debate the "hubness" of those destinations, but those are the routes what you would expect from a "focus city".

But those are all, at a minimum, currently focus cities for DL. AUS is right now simply a point on their focus city networks.

How about OKC, TUL, MCI, OMA, TPA, MIA, MSY.

United tried AUS as a focus city, albeit with 50 cities and failed. The problem with AUS as a focus for DL is that AA, UA & WN are all pretty strong there already. To add anything outside of what they already serve, all three can quickly add as well leveraging their FF base. Does it make sense on paper, sure. Will be interesting to see if they can make it work.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

United tried AUS as a focus city, albeit with 50 cities and failed. The problem with AUS as a focus for DL is that AA, UA & WN are all pretty strong there already. To add anything outside of what they already serve, all three can quickly add as well leveraging their FF base. Does it make sense on paper, sure. Will be interesting to see if they can make it work.

UA and AA won’t do anything other than fly to their hubs, so they aren’t an issue. The only obstacle is WN, but DL can offer TATL service while WN can’t. If DL adds AUS-AMS and some p2p flying, they can get some corporate contracts and start building up their FF base. Then they can add more if demand warrants.

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that DL would win out in any “war” with WN over AUS because most of the business community would prefer DL, due to the greater connectivity and international flights DL offers. Also, a DL focus city could help land KE down the road.

Maybe someone at Delta knows something about Amazon HQ2 landing in Austin?

TWFlyGuy, I think you're confusing AUS with SAT on the UA focus operation, but I understand your point.

I'm having trouble seeing where DL could go with a focus-city operation at AUS. First, the terminal is quite full. Second, DL already serves its primary hubs and focus cities (ATL, BOS, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, SLC, and SEA) from AUS, with CVG and RDU on Delta Connection.

The only other market I could see being "easy" would be MCO, due to DL's large presence. Even there, they'd be competing with WN, B6, F9, not to mention Allegiant and ViaAir's service to Sanford.

Other opportunities seem saturated as well: PDX? They'd compete with AS, F9, and WN. SFO? Covered by AS, WN, and UA. Intra-Texas? WN, AA, and UA already own that.

Perhaps there would be an international opportunity, with service to MEX. Outside that, it's hard for me to see DL risking a longer-haul route (say to AMS or Asia) from AUS.

FSDan wrote:

DL's after tech traffic (same as with some other recent expansion focus destinations like RDU and BOS). Given that, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see DL start AUS-SJC at some point in the near future. That could be a good E75 or CS100 route. They already serve the important markets of SEA, LAX, RDU, JFK, and BOS, although there could be an extra frequency or two added here and there. In the longer term I actually wouldn't be completely surprised to see 1-2x daily on AUS-ORD, although that wouldn't happen until DL has more gates at ORD, and I'd expect it to come after ORD-LAX and ORD-BOS. AUS-MCO and AUS-LAS are two leisure routes that could make sense for DL - they're strong in both MCO and LAS, and have them connected to most of their focus cities.

I wouldn't expect any intra-Texas expansion until much further down the road, if things go well for DL in the short term in AUS and if metro Austin continues to grow at a rapid rate.

On the international front, I wouldn't be surprised to see DL start Sat-only AUS-CUN and maybe AUS-AMS (good onward connections to UK, Northern Europe, and India). I'm not sure what the East Asia O&D is like for AUS, but perhaps if growth continues it would make sense for KE to come in with a 3-4x weekly 789 service.

I would expect AUS-MSY to be added also. Frontier and Southwest are running non-stops, but MSY would be a good P2P destination once or twice daily from/to Austin.

Has this been confirmed? If not should't "rumored" be in the thread title so people know it's not official.

ADrum23 wrote:

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that DL would win out in any “war” with WN over AUS because most of the business community would prefer DL, due to the greater connectivity and international flights DL offers. Also, a DL focus city could help land KE down the road.

If that were true, AA or UA would already be the dominant carrier at AUS because they offer "greater connectivity and international flights." They're not. Most business travelers aren't flying overseas; they're flying somewhere domestic, and often to a city within an hour or two by air. WN caters to this population, which is why they offer ~35 non-stop (including seasonal markets) destinations from AUS. DL is exceedingly unlikely to offer the same level of regional connectivity as WN, especially when corporate policy is to keep a lid on capacity growth.

ADrum23 wrote:

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that DL would win out in any “war” with WN over AUS because most of the business community would prefer DL, due to the greater connectivity and international flights DL offers. Also, a DL focus city could help land KE down the road.

You're vastly underestimating how popular WN is with business travelers, particularly in Texas. In the grand scheme of things, relatively few business travelers need international flights or even upgrade potential when they (or their companies) are looking at carriers.

WN got to where it is today by catering heavily to the business traveler. It's not, and never has been, a primarily leisure-focused airline.

DFWAviator76 wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that DL would win out in any “war” with WN over AUS because most of the business community would prefer DL, due to the greater connectivity and international flights DL offers. Also, a DL focus city could help land KE down the road.

You're vastly underestimating how popular WN is with business travelers, particularly in Texas. In the grand scheme of things, relatively few business travelers need international flights or even upgrade potential when they (or their companies) are looking at carriers.

WN got to where it is today by catering heavily to the business traveler. It's not, and never has been, a primarily leisure-focused airline.

Yes but WN doesn't have domestic first class or lounges. Two things that DL will offer for every flight starting in 2019.

YellowJ wrote:

Has this been confirmed? If not should't "rumored" be in the thread title so people know it's not official.

there is no confirmation or announcement of any kind. There was a job posting on LinkedIn. They have not announced even any routes. They might add a couple of more routes out of AUS like AMS or MEX, but I don't see any suggestion that this is going to get as large as some members think this will. In the end of the day, fuel prices are going up and even Delta will reduce the number of expansion opportunities. These things cost a lot of resources.

Its a smart move by Delta IMHO

AUS has alot of the traits that make CLT and SLC profitable and Legacy hub worthy. AUS will keep getting better

ENOUGH piling on the user who suggested people check the AUS thread. The user has apologized. Please discuss the thread topic, DL potentially opening a focus city at AUS. Further off-topic posts will result in this thread being locked.

I love all of the people who are saying no way Delta grows Austin. Case in-point, carriers don't double their gates (from 3-6 in this case) and add a flagship-based Sky Club to maintain their current levels. That would be an astronomical increase in cost with little to no increase in revenue. Whether Delta turns Austin into a true "FOCUS" city or just increases frequencies/destinations, be assured they will not be staying with the status quo when the new terminal expansion comes on line.

Sure, WN gets it's fair share of business pax for regional travel. For anyone frequently traveling outside of the south-central region, they are usually choosing one of the legacies. What business travel does not go to WN gets split largely between AA and UA, with AA having a commanding lead. For 90% of business travelers, F9 is not an option. Their schedule is not as accomodating, and if you get a delay/cancellation, there is little to no recovery.

Don't underestimate the value of a lounge to a business customer. The agents there move mountains, and when you're traveling for business, usually you HAVE to be somewhere at a certain time. Yes, you always plan ahead and don't take the last flight, but without the assistance of the lounge agents sometimes, it can be difficult to get on the next flight out.

For the record, I am a business traveler out of Austin and I typically travel 3 weeks out of the month. I have been doing this for four years. Initially, my allegiance was to UA, but for the last 3 has been to AA. DL would be a consideration for me, depending upon what their increased offerings are. I'd be curious how many people here throwing out "facts" or "certainties" have ever even flown into or out of Austin, as some of these posts clearly do not reflect the realities of what is happening.

flymia wrote:

Maybe someone at Delta knows something about Amazon HQ2 landing in Austin?

Nobody at Delta has any information about HQ2. Amazon is extremely secretive about this.

But you guys are right, my post was rude.

Thank you very much for that. It would have been easy to become defensive, but you stood up like a man.

tcfc424 wrote:

I love all of the people who are saying no way Delta grows Austin. Case in-point, carriers don't double their gates (from 3-6 in this case) and add a flagship-based Sky Club to maintain their current levels. That would be an astronomical increase in cost with little to no increase in revenue. Whether Delta turns Austin into a true "FOCUS" city or just increases frequencies/destinations, be assured they will not be staying with the status quo when the new terminal expansion comes on line.

Sure, WN gets it's fair share of business pax for regional travel. For anyone frequently traveling outside of the south-central region, they are usually choosing one of the legacies. What business travel does not go to WN gets split largely between AA and UA, with AA having a commanding lead. For 90% of business travelers, F9 is not an option. Their schedule is not as accomodating, and if you get a delay/cancellation, there is little to no recovery.

Don't underestimate the value of a lounge to a business customer. The agents there move mountains, and when you're traveling for business, usually you HAVE to be somewhere at a certain time. Yes, you always plan ahead and don't take the last flight, but without the assistance of the lounge agents sometimes, it can be difficult to get on the next flight out.

For the record, I am a business traveler out of Austin and I typically travel 3 weeks out of the month. I have been doing this for four years. Initially, my allegiance was to UA, but for the last 3 has been to AA. DL would be a consideration for me, depending upon what their increased offerings are. I'd be curious how many people here throwing out "facts" or "certainties" have ever even flown into or out of Austin, as some of these posts clearly do not reflect the realities of what is happening.

I'm not suggesting that DL can't 'grow' in Austin. However, I find the possibility of a focus city - or the "winning" of a "war" with WN - unlikely (the latter even more so). There are, of course, many factors to consider - if Austin continues to grow at such an accelerated rate and O&D grows in massive proportions, obviously the likelihood is greater. Believe me, as a business traveler, I greatly value an expanded network, lounge access, and upgrade opportunities. That being said, I'm still not sure that, given the longstanding history of WN at AUS, and its proximity to major AA and UA hubs in the same state, that AUS could support a DL focus city operation. DL is already a major player there, serving 10 destinations. I just question where else they could effectively compete.

Could they sign Via Air up as a DL connection partner? Easy 50 seater expansion to some markets out of AUS.

What DL tried to do at DFW, and couldn't, DL is trying to do with AUS.
AUS could be another CLT... making the leap from minor league to the majors... because AA's and UA's in-state investment will be in their hubs in other parts of Texas, just as DL watched CLT happen under its nose.
I think DL's network planners envision a symmetric hub strategy: two west coast, two mid-continent, and two east coast.... perfect for regional feed in sextiles.

jetmatt777 wrote:

Could they sign Via Air up as a DL connection partner? Easy 50 seater expansion to some markets out of AUS.

I'm sure VC would love that that infusion of cash. The VC destinations from AUS: AMA, TUS, TUL, OKC, LIT, BTR, HDN, and BKG.

WPvsMW wrote:

What DL tried to do at DFW, and couldn't, DL is trying to do with AUS.
AUS could be another CLT... making the leap from minor league to the majors... because AA's and UA's in-state investment will be in their hubs in other parts of Texas, just as DL watched CLT happen under its nose.
I think DL's network planners envision a symmetric hub strategy: two west coast, two mid-continent, and two east coast.... perfect for regional feed in sextiles.

You mean three four continent hubs (DTW, MSP, SLC, AUS).

Regardless, the state of Texas has been a gaping hole in DL's network ever since DFW was de-hubbed. Flyers from Mississippi to the Arizona border have to backtrack to coastal or mid-continent hubs (SLC, DTW) to go many places that a hub in Austin would alleviate.

Nola wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

What DL tried to do at DFW, and couldn't, DL is trying to do with AUS.
AUS could be another CLT... making the leap from minor league to the majors... because AA's and UA's in-state investment will be in their hubs in other parts of Texas, just as DL watched CLT happen under its nose.
I think DL's network planners envision a symmetric hub strategy: two west coast, two mid-continent, and two east coast.... perfect for regional feed in sextiles.

You mean three four continent hubs (DTW, MSP, SLC, AUS).

Actually, I'm implying that the growth of AUS could slow the growth of SLC, DTW, and CVG. The latter would linger in the fuzzy world of focus cities while AUS' tech traffic goes ULH to Asia. Corporate accounts drive nonstop ULH.

Imagine six dots on a map of CONUS: LAX, SEA, AUS, MSP, ATL, JFK.

Is BA the only airline offering Austin Int. First class travel?

jetmatt777 wrote:

Could they sign Via Air up as a DL connection partner? Easy 50 seater expansion to some markets out of AUS.

The same thought also popped up in my mind. With their vast expansion into rural Texas and the southern US this would play perfectly for DL.

What about AUS-CDG or AMS? They would only operate one of the two, like at CVG, PDX and RDU. (At least in the near future.)

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

Its a smart move by Delta IMHO

AUS has alot of the traits that make CLT and SLC profitable and Legacy hub worthy. AUS will keep getting better

Keep in mind that CLT doesn't have one thing that will make AUS a tough row to hoe...very little competition expecially on the LCC side. WN & B6 have a small presence, Alligiant is up in Concord...sometimes. Small F9 presence...sometimes. No Spirit. AA just prints money here.

Austin is a great town, and would make a great place to set up shop. The only problem is that AUS is outside the perimeter for DCA and LGA.

DFWAviator76 wrote:

TWFlyGuy, I think you're confusing AUS with SAT on the UA focus operation, but I understand your point.

I'm having trouble seeing where DL could go with a focus-city operation at AUS. First, the terminal is quite full. Second, DL already serves its primary hubs and focus cities (ATL, BOS, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, SLC, and SEA) from AUS, with CVG and RDU on Delta Connection.

The only other market I could see being "easy" would be MCO, due to DL's large presence. Even there, they'd be competing with WN, B6, F9, not to mention Allegiant and ViaAir's service to Sanford.

Other opportunities seem saturated as well: PDX? They'd compete with AS, F9, and WN. SFO? Covered by AS, WN, and UA. Intra-Texas? WN, AA, and UA already own that.

Perhaps there would be an international opportunity, with service to MEX. Outside that, it's hard for me to see DL risking a longer-haul route (say to AMS or Asia) from AUS.

Apologies, thanks for the correction. it has been a while. I agree that the point is similar.

tcfc424 wrote:

I love all of the people who are saying no way Delta grows Austin. Case in-point, carriers don't double their gates (from 3-6 in this case) and add a flagship-based Sky Club to maintain their current levels. That would be an astronomical increase in cost with little to no increase in revenue. Whether Delta turns Austin into a true "FOCUS" city or just increases frequencies/destinations, be assured they will not be staying with the status quo when the new terminal expansion comes on line.

Sure, WN gets it's fair share of business pax for regional travel. For anyone frequently traveling outside of the south-central region, they are usually choosing one of the legacies. What business travel does not go to WN gets split largely between AA and UA, with AA having a commanding lead. For 90% of business travelers, F9 is not an option. Their schedule is not as accomodating, and if you get a delay/cancellation, there is little to no recovery.

Don't underestimate the value of a lounge to a business customer. The agents there move mountains, and when you're traveling for business, usually you HAVE to be somewhere at a certain time. Yes, you always plan ahead and don't take the last flight, but without the assistance of the lounge agents sometimes, it can be difficult to get on the next flight out.

For the record, I am a business traveler out of Austin and I typically travel 3 weeks out of the month. I have been doing this for four years. Initially, my allegiance was to UA, but for the last 3 has been to AA. DL would be a consideration for me, depending upon what their increased offerings are. I'd be curious how many people here throwing out "facts" or "certainties" have ever even flown into or out of Austin, as some of these posts clearly do not reflect the realities of what is happening.

I'm fairly certain they are adding gates in CLT as the new terminal extension opens with no intention to add significant flights. It could be as simple as a loss of RON off gate parking or needing less crew to move off gate RON aircraft around makes it more feasible. It could be a number of reasons. And they are probably adding some incremental service but i don't see a full fledged focus city.

SabresDoc wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

I agree with some of the others that ORD and the intra-Texas routes may not be what DL has in mind. But, living in TPA, I would love to have the AUS-TPA route added to compete with WN.

I think Delta will try some of the intra-Texas. Even add OKC, Tulsa. I would fly from OKC to AUS to avoid changing planes in DFW. ORD will probably happen as well. Delta is getting more gates with the expansion at O'Hare.

910A wrote:

:bigthumbsup: How about an a350 flight from PHX to AUS...

I'll take that, and my camera to take pics in PHX!

I’m surprised SNA is not on the list.

WPvsMW wrote:

Nola wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

What DL tried to do at DFW, and couldn't, DL is trying to do with AUS.
AUS could be another CLT... making the leap from minor league to the majors... because AA's and UA's in-state investment will be in their hubs in other parts of Texas, just as DL watched CLT happen under its nose.
I think DL's network planners envision a symmetric hub strategy: two west coast, two mid-continent, and two east coast.... perfect for regional feed in sextiles.

You mean three four continent hubs (DTW, MSP, SLC, AUS).

Actually, I'm implying that the growth of AUS could slow the growth of SLC, DTW, and CVG. The latter would linger in the fuzzy world of focus cities while AUS' tech traffic goes ULH to Asia. Corporate accounts drive nonstop ULH.

Imagine six dots on a map of CONUS: LAX, SEA, AUS, MSP, ATL, JFK.

CVG has been shrinking for a long time. DTW is too far north and too important to the system (particularly for automotive contracts to Asia) to really be impacted by Austin. The question for SLC would be how many of its passengers are connecting there that would otherwise connect in AUS... but SLC does have a heavy role in the intermountain region as a counterpoint to DEN, and Utah has been growing economically with tech and other industries that are fleeing the costs of the West Coast.

ncflyer wrote:

This may be discussed ad nauseum in other places but what difference does it make what Delta calls Austin? Isn’t all that matters the number of flights? if Delta calls it a focus city does that open up new connecting possibilities that would otherwise not be bookable? Not trying to be flip i’m Honestly trying to understand. Is it simply a badge of honor for Austin?

I would suppose that means Delta is going to put some focus on that city and give the city the flights that makes sense for it.

whether they be more point to point or possibly a flight to London whatever is needed for that city.

jscottwomack wrote:

SabresDoc wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

I agree with some of the others that ORD and the intra-Texas routes may not be what DL has in mind. But, living in TPA, I would love to have the AUS-TPA route added to compete with WN.

I think Delta will try some of the intra-Texas. Even add OKC, Tulsa. I would fly from OKC to AUS to avoid changing planes in DFW. ORD will probably happen as well. Delta is getting more gates with the expansion at O'Hare.

Why do people think DL would try AUS-ORD? DL doesn't run RDU/BOS/-ORD they just cut ORD-CDG a while back, ORD is not a good station for DL at all, CVG-ORD is hurting as well due to the introduction of WN on CVG-MDW. The only reason they serve ORD as much as they do is to satisfy their corporate travelers, in the case of AUS especially DL AUS-ORD would be a terrible idea.

Nola wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

Nola wrote:

You mean three four continent hubs (DTW, MSP, SLC, AUS).

Actually, I'm implying that the growth of AUS could slow the growth of SLC, DTW, and CVG. The latter would linger in the fuzzy world of focus cities while AUS' tech traffic goes ULH to Asia. Corporate accounts drive nonstop ULH.

Imagine six dots on a map of CONUS: LAX, SEA, AUS, MSP, ATL, JFK.

CVG has been shrinking for a long time.

That is no longer the case. Delta is up 12% YOY in capacity at CVG and the number will push even higher as we get into the summer/fall. CVG was the fastest growing airport in the US for 2017/first half of 2018 and DL was responsible for a big chunk of those added passengers. Like DTW, I think AUS is too far from CVG to have any effect on its growth. DL has said that the next phase of its growth is in focus cities, so expect CVG/AUS/BOS/RDU to see lots of growth. What will be interesting it to see if growth at the big hubs is affected.

jscottwomack wrote:

I think Delta will try some of the intra-Texas. Even add OKC, Tulsa. I would fly from OKC to AUS to avoid changing planes in DFW. ORD will probably happen as well. Delta is getting more gates with the expansion at O'Hare.

Delta might be able to make nonstop service to AUS from smaller Texas markets that are not on the Texas-Mexico border work because of international connections onto AM's AUS-MEX nonstop flights. However, AM already serves the DFW Metroplex through DFW, Greater Houston through IAH, Greater San Antonio through SAT, Greater Laredo through NLD on the Mexican side of the border, the Rio Grande Valley through REX and MAM on the Mexican side of the border, and the El Paso area through CJU on the Mexican side of the border.

The lack of DL service to AMA, LBB, and MAF is one of the biggest domestic holes in the DL network since AMA, LBB, and MAF are more than a 3 1/2 hour drive from the closest airports that are served by DL. There are many DL frequent flyers in the MSP, CVG, DTW, ATL, JFK, RDU, and BOS markets who prefer to fly on DL over AA, WN, and UA, and DL's frequent flyers currently have to connect on AA, UA, or WN to get to AMA, LBB, and MAF from DL's hubs and focus cities. DL can probably make AUS-AMA, AUS-LBB, and AUS-MAF nonstop service work with connections to these destinations from DL's Midwestern and East Coast hubs and focus cities in addition to local O&D from the Central Texas region.

Austin cannot duplicate the success of CLT for 2 very simple reasons.
1) It currently does not have the gate space. And it would take years to build it to the size of a good hub. During that time, it would have to compete against AA at DFW, UA at IAH and WN at both HOU/DAL. Which are all airports with much larger O&D. It would simply get crushed as long as it's that much smaller than those mega hubs around them.
2) WN is much larger with much deeper roots. DL has much higher cost than WN, so it needs to generate consistent revenue premium in order to be viable. It simply can't do that. I've seen the numbers on BOS-AUS, the one root where it doesn't own point of sale on the other end and both B6/WN are crushing them on that route.

Now the next question is whether it can develop into a focus city the size of RDU/CVG. This is more plausible. But the big problem is where AUS is located and who it's largest markets are.
Out of the top markets, DL currently operates to ATL/LAX/NYC. In order to be more viable, it needs to fly to one of Dallas/Houston, Chicago and San Francisco and maybe Phoenix. Those are all large for business travellers out of Austin. Delta has no presence in any of those cities. Is it going to add flight to DAL or DFW? No, it would get crushed. Same with IAH or HOU. Same with ORD, where it still doesn't operate flights to LAX and it's ORD-SEA flight is bleeding money. Could it add flight to SFO or SJC? I really doubt it. Already multiple competitors with dominant point of sale or much lower cost.

So, the only markets I see it could add in the near term are LAS, MCO, IND, CUN, MEX and AMS. AMS is going to be a problem because BA/AA JV is going to take the higher yielding customers to Europe along with the largest O&D location. MEX/CUN will probably do fine over time. IND should do fine. I can't see it making any money on MCO given how entrenched WN/B6 are in that market. And same with LAS which is dominated by WN on both end.

As for serving small Texas communities, that's going to be hard. AA and UA already covers all these communities out of DFW and IAH. Both of those markets have much larger O&D than AUS and longer history in Texas. DL would have to be picking the lowest yielding crowd and that's not going to work with their very high costs.

Reality is Texas will always be hard for DL. That's why Ed Bastian said "Mexico is DL's Texas". They will have far easier time making MCO/IND into focus cities.

Maybe DL can do AUS-ABQ daily instead of the current situation we have with 3 airlines each doing it two or three days per week. Have a great day everyone!

Maybe DL can do AUS-ABQ daily instead of the current situation we have with 3 airlines each doing it two or three days per week. Have a great day everyone!

tphuang wrote:

So, the only markets I see it could add in the near term are LAS, MCO, IND, CUN, MEX and AMS. AMS is going to be a problem because BA/AA JV is going to take the higher yielding customers to Europe along with the largest O&D location. MEX/CUN will probably do fine over time. IND should do fine. I can't see it making any money on MCO given how entrenched WN/B6 are in that market. And same with LAS which is dominated by WN on both end.

They already serve MEX through AM JV. Don't underestimate AMS is a much better connection airport than LHR to most of Europe, and many businesses that had their Euro base in LHR have moved continental post Brexit. MCO yes to WN, but B6 with once daily E190s aren't exactly entrenched. Yea LAS would be a bloodbath with G4, F9 in addition to WN.

AUS-HKG!

Seriously, what are the international routes served out of AUS?

questions wrote:

AUS-HKG!

Seriously, what are the international routes served out of AUS?

MEX - Aeromexico
YYZ - Air Canada
LHR - British Airways
LGW - Norwegian Air Shuttle
FRA - Condor
CUN - Southwest, Sun Country
SJD - Southwest
PUJ - Vacation Express
GDL - Volaris

readytotaxi wrote:

Is BA the only airline offering Austin Int. First class travel?

Yes, and BA is the only year round TATL flight serving AUS at the moment. DY and DE are seasonal and less than daily. There is room for DL to do a daily flight to AMS or CDG.

questions wrote:

Seriously, what are the international routes served out of AUS?

BA daily AUS-LHR, DI 3x weekly AUS-LGW, DE 3x weekly AUS-FRA, as well as service by AC to YYZ and AM to MEX, Y4 to GDL as well as seasonal CUN, SJD, and PUJ

jplatts wrote:

The lack of DL service to AMA, LBB, and MAF is one of the biggest domestic holes in the DL network since AMA, LBB, and MAF are more than a 3 1/2 hour drive from the closest airports that are served by DL. There are many DL frequent flyers in the MSP, CVG, DTW, ATL, JFK, RDU, and BOS markets who prefer to fly on DL over AA, WN, and UA, and DL's frequent flyers currently have to connect on AA, UA, or WN to get to AMA, LBB, and MAF from DL's hubs and focus cities. DL can probably make AUS-AMA, AUS-LBB, and AUS-MAF nonstop service work with connections to these destinations from DL's Midwestern and East Coast hubs and focus cities in addition to local O&D from the Central Texas region.

This isn't a big hole in DL's network. AMA, LBB, and MAF are more than adequately served by AA, UA, and WN. Each market has nonstop service to PHX, LAS, and DEN, from which anyone can connect to the west coast and the Pacific, as well as DFW, DAL, and IAH, from which connections to the east coast, Latin America, and Europe. I seriously doubt those markets are large enough to support a fourth major carrier.

Interesting. Not sure that the job posting tells us anything that we didn't already assume from previous moves. Maybe it's ancillary validation, but nice catch to the OP.

In the short term, DL will have to be prepared to invest. However, this is aligned to Delta's strategy of expanding beyond the traditional large hubs - looking at SEA, BOS, RDU etc... SEA is obviously a different animal since it's mail role is as a TPAC gateway.

This has been discussed before, but I think that this is reflective of the differences in DL's main hubs compared to AA and UA. AA and UA have major hubs that are also concentrated in major business centers, but they have more competition. DL has fortress hubs in significant cities, but they're not quite the major business centers. They are able to drive economies of scale through the hubs, but I think they're pursuing a bi-modal strategy of smaller focus cities with P2P flights to balance that out.

AUS is a reasonable city to plug into that strategy.

Given the tech business in AUS, it would be interesting to see if they get a flight to Seoul at some point. I do not think that is imminent.

Does anyone have O&D numbers for AUS-BDL? I know AUS is one of the cities BDL management is targeting for future service and Delta has historically been strong at BDL.