Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
ILovWendoverPro wrote:How much would an Austin Amazon HQ2 effect Delta's precense at AUS?
ADrum23 wrote:Sightseer wrote:TransWorldOne wrote:
Don't you think London is already well covered from AUS with both BA and Norwegian connecting the two cities? I'd put my money on AUS-AMS before AUS-LHR on VS.
I agree. DL, within the context of trans-Atlantic JVs, has yet to inaugurate service from a city to LHR before either CDG or AMS, so I doubt AUS will be any different.
VS will only come if DL goes full scale hub at AUS. If it just remains a focus city, then they'll only do either AMS or CDG. Though AUS would seem like a good city for VS.
LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
WWads wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
They're building a massive new SkyClub with outside seating. They're not building that sort of SC for their current schedule, it's almost certainly for a major expansion in the near-future.
flyingclrs727 wrote:ADrum23 wrote:Sightseer wrote:I agree. DL, within the context of trans-Atlantic JVs, has yet to inaugurate service from a city to LHR before either CDG or AMS, so I doubt AUS will be any different.
VS will only come if DL goes full scale hub at AUS. If it just remains a focus city, then they'll only do either AMS or CDG. Though AUS would seem like a good city for VS.
Only if they want to engage in a bloodbath on AUS-LON routes. There's no way VS needs to go head to head with BA with daily 744 or 77W (seasonally) to LHR and DY daily in the summer to LGW.
ADrum23 wrote:flyingclrs727 wrote:ADrum23 wrote:
VS will only come if DL goes full scale hub at AUS. If it just remains a focus city, then they'll only do either AMS or CDG. Though AUS would seem like a good city for VS.
Only if they want to engage in a bloodbath on AUS-LON routes. There's no way VS needs to go head to head with BA with daily 744 or 77W (seasonally) to LHR and DY daily in the summer to LGW.
Agreed. I doubt VS would come even with a full hub. I think DL would just do AMS and CDG and call it a day.
Though I personally don't think DY's AUS-LGW flight will last.
LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
ADrum23 wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
One thing I have learned from this site over the past year is we (myself included) sometimes get caught up too much in conventional wisdom. We sometimes focus on the here and now too much and have trouble seeing into the future. Of course, none of us can predict the future, but the fact of the matter is, we need to expect that once-unthinkable things can and will happen. For example, people said DL would never amount to anything at JFK and LAX and look what happened. People scoffed at the idea of cities like BNA/IND getting TATL service and looked what happened. People scoffed at the buildup of DL at SEA and look what happened. There are many more examples, but you get the point.
Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue. Will it affect their bottom line? No, but they would miss out on the opportunity to have the most unrivaled network of any of the US3. I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state. People can be skeptics all they want, but there is some merit here if one thinks about the future and connects it to what is currently happening at AUS.
WWads wrote:On a sidenote, it's incredible that the new SC at AUS will have showers, but none of the UA clubs at IAD do. #UAFail
ADrum23 wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
One thing I have learned from this site over the past year is we (myself included) sometimes get caught up too much in conventional wisdom. We sometimes focus on the here and now too much and have trouble seeing into the future. Of course, none of us can predict the future, but the fact of the matter is, we need to expect that once-unthinkable things can and will happen. For example, people said DL would never amount to anything at JFK and LAX and look what happened. People scoffed at the idea of cities like BNA/IND getting TATL service and looked what happened. People scoffed at the buildup of DL at SEA and look what happened. There are many more examples, but you get the point.
Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue. Will it affect their bottom line? No, but they would miss out on the opportunity to have the most unrivaled network of any of the US3. I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state. People can be skeptics all they want, but there is some merit here if one thinks about the future and connects it to what is currently happening at AUS.
SumChristianus wrote:ADrum23 wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
One thing I have learned from this site over the past year is we (myself included) sometimes get caught up too much in conventional wisdom. We sometimes focus on the here and now too much and have trouble seeing into the future. Of course, none of us can predict the future, but the fact of the matter is, we need to expect that once-unthinkable things can and will happen. For example, people said DL would never amount to anything at JFK and LAX and look what happened. People scoffed at the idea of cities like BNA/IND getting TATL service and looked what happened. People scoffed at the buildup of DL at SEA and look what happened. There are many more examples, but you get the point.
Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue. Will it affect their bottom line? No, but they would miss out on the opportunity to have the most unrivaled network of any of the US3. I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state. People can be skeptics all they want, but there is some merit here if one thinks about the future and connects it to what is currently happening at AUS.
I'm going to expand this idea into a new thread, but for now I completely agree with your point. In an un-conspiratorial manner I'm sure there is a grand strategy team at DL that has had this planned iut for years. As LAX/SEA/NYC reach maturity for DL they're moving on to new areas of focus. I doubt that the short term goal is too make a DFW replacement but AUS can follow the model of DL's growth in RDU, a market similiar to AUS in many ways...for now
TBC....
Wish i knew the strategy, but again DL's moves since around 2008 have been so strategic and....save that for later...there is a PLAN.
mpdpilot wrote:ADrum23 wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
One thing I have learned from this site over the past year is we (myself included) sometimes get caught up too much in conventional wisdom. We sometimes focus on the here and now too much and have trouble seeing into the future. Of course, none of us can predict the future, but the fact of the matter is, we need to expect that once-unthinkable things can and will happen. For example, people said DL would never amount to anything at JFK and LAX and look what happened. People scoffed at the idea of cities like BNA/IND getting TATL service and looked what happened. People scoffed at the buildup of DL at SEA and look what happened. There are many more examples, but you get the point.
Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue. Will it affect their bottom line? No, but they would miss out on the opportunity to have the most unrivaled network of any of the US3. I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state. People can be skeptics all they want, but there is some merit here if one thinks about the future and connects it to what is currently happening at AUS.
This is very well said and I couldn't agree more.
It has been a gaping whole in DL's network for some time, and AUS is the perfect Delta city to over come that whole.
While Austin is small by mega hub standards, it is only marginally smaller than CLT, RDU, MKE, and SLC. While AUS will never be ATL, DFW, or IAH, there is nothing stopping a significant build up. Starting with a focus city is a low risk way to setup for the future. If AUS continues to grow, Delta can continue to grow. Delta growing to number 1 or 2 in AUS would be the spring board so to speak to more if the market is ready for it in the future. Because to grow much beyond a focus city would require a significant terminal infrastructure growth that would be quite risky.
I am excited about the future.
ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
WWads wrote:They're building a massive new SkyClub with outside seating. They're not building that sort of SC for their current schedule, it's almost certainly for a major expansion in the near-future.
Indy wrote:WWads wrote:They're building a massive new SkyClub with outside seating. They're not building that sort of SC for their current schedule, it's almost certainly for a major expansion in the near-future.
The Sky Club has to raise eyebrows for sure. Not sure outdoor seating in Texas is really the best idea. I imagine that the seating will be very hot and uncomfortable during the summer. Especially surrounded by concrete and buildings.
ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
ldvaviation wrote:ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
At least $5 B in capital improvements for a single-airline expansion.
ldvaviation wrote:ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
At least $5 B in capital improvements for a single-airline expansion.
jetmatt777 wrote:ldvaviation wrote:ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
At least $5 B in capital improvements for a single-airline expansion.
All this from a corporate sales job for a “focus city”!
Listen, I get it. Everyone wants to see their home airport turn into something huge. But really, some of this needs to be toned down. I don’t think we’ll see anything like what is being described in some of these posts. If this focus city comes to fruition, it will likely start out as a few more P2P routes, and if those work they might add a few more.
I really don’t think a full blown hub is being built because they are creating a corporate sales job for austin. That’s just running wild...
mpdpilot wrote:ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
Totally agree, and I would bet that that is part of why it could be an option down the road. There are a lot of capacity limited airports in this country, and AUS is not one at the moment. Perhaps, Delta is taking something from the limits they are facing in seattle.
To your last point, The beauty of this, is that it doesn't have to be an ATL, DFW, or IAH, and you are exactly right that it just needs to serve its region. The interesting thing in my mind though, is what if in the future, it does begin to rival MSP or DTW. A little far fetched, I know, but I love thinking about all the posibilities that involve bigger airports
malev2012 wrote:Indy wrote:WWads wrote:They're building a massive new SkyClub with outside seating. They're not building that sort of SC for their current schedule, it's almost certainly for a major expansion in the near-future.
The Sky Club has to raise eyebrows for sure. Not sure outdoor seating in Texas is really the best idea. I imagine that the seating will be very hot and uncomfortable during the summer. Especially surrounded by concrete and buildings.
Well unlike the skydeck at JFK it'll be great in February!
MIflyer12 wrote:mpdpilot wrote:ADrum23 wrote:AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
Totally agree, and I would bet that that is part of why it could be an option down the road. There are a lot of capacity limited airports in this country, and AUS is not one at the moment. Perhaps, Delta is taking something from the limits they are facing in seattle.
To your last point, The beauty of this, is that it doesn't have to be an ATL, DFW, or IAH, and you are exactly right that it just needs to serve its region. The interesting thing in my mind though, is what if in the future, it does begin to rival MSP or DTW. A little far fetched, I know, but I love thinking about all the posibilities that involve bigger airports
Not gonna happen. There isn't room in the market for a 400+ Delta flight per day (DTW/MSP-sized) hub in competition with AA @ DFW, UA @ IAH, and WN at DAL and HOU. Not in the 3-15 year term.
There just isn't.
RDU-sized -- maybe 60-80 flights a day, including Aeromexico codeshares -- sure, that's in the realm of possibility within a decade. In that construct the region served is AUS; there won't be a lot of intra-TX flights.
Delta has been very explicit about its plans for upgauging and the cost benefits it brings. (See the 12/2017 Investor Day presentation.) Running 3x CR9s out of Texas city XXX is simply not cost or frequency competitive against 6x AA 319/738s.
ADrum23 wrote:mpdpilot wrote:ADrum23 wrote:
Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
One thing I have learned from this site over the past year is we (myself included) sometimes get caught up too much in conventional wisdom. We sometimes focus on the here and now too much and have trouble seeing into the future. Of course, none of us can predict the future, but the fact of the matter is, we need to expect that once-unthinkable things can and will happen. For example, people said DL would never amount to anything at JFK and LAX and look what happened. People scoffed at the idea of cities like BNA/IND getting TATL service and looked what happened. People scoffed at the buildup of DL at SEA and look what happened. There are many more examples, but you get the point.
Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue. Will it affect their bottom line? No, but they would miss out on the opportunity to have the most unrivaled network of any of the US3. I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state. People can be skeptics all they want, but there is some merit here if one thinks about the future and connects it to what is currently happening at AUS.
This is very well said and I couldn't agree more.
It has been a gaping whole in DL's network for some time, and AUS is the perfect Delta city to over come that whole.
While Austin is small by mega hub standards, it is only marginally smaller than CLT, RDU, MKE, and SLC. While AUS will never be ATL, DFW, or IAH, there is nothing stopping a significant build up. Starting with a focus city is a low risk way to setup for the future. If AUS continues to grow, Delta can continue to grow. Delta growing to number 1 or 2 in AUS would be the spring board so to speak to more if the market is ready for it in the future. Because to grow much beyond a focus city would require a significant terminal infrastructure growth that would be quite risky.
I am excited about the future.
AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
cvgComair wrote:ILovWendoverPro wrote:How much would an Austin Amazon HQ2 effect Delta's precense at AUS?
Probably not much. Perhaps another daily flight to SEA and CVG, but that is all I could see. Amazon does not do a lot of traveling for a company its size and is quite frugal when it comes to paying for flights. Even then, additional service on AUS-SEA/CVG will probably come due to rising demand anyway, so I am not sure that Amazon would be the sole driver of growth on either route.
LovePrunesAnet wrote:ADrum23 wrote:mpdpilot wrote:
This is very well said and I couldn't agree more.
It has been a gaping whole in DL's network for some time, and AUS is the perfect Delta city to over come that whole.
While Austin is small by mega hub standards, it is only marginally smaller than CLT, RDU, MKE, and SLC. While AUS will never be ATL, DFW, or IAH, there is nothing stopping a significant build up. Starting with a focus city is a low risk way to setup for the future. If AUS continues to grow, Delta can continue to grow. Delta growing to number 1 or 2 in AUS would be the spring board so to speak to more if the market is ready for it in the future. Because to grow much beyond a focus city would require a significant terminal infrastructure growth that would be quite risky.
I am excited about the future.
AUS doesn't currently have the infrastructure for a hub operation, but they have plenty of space to develop it. The airport is well laid out for a future hub operation, they could add a third runway next to the current 12,000 ft one with little to no property acquisition and build several new 30+ gate concourses to the south of the current one, with possibly a southern terminal/entrance in the super long-term (most of this is currently being proposed in the latest master plan). A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
Ok now weve gone into "several 30+ gate gate concourses and a secondary gateway to Latin America." From a single sales job position. You AUS fanboys must have been hanging out with the XNA fanboys, but you're making them look reasonable by comparison. Ridiculous ideas here, but hey, as long as you're having fun with the hobby, why not indulge?
SUNCTRY738 wrote:cvgComair wrote:ILovWendoverPro wrote:How much would an Austin Amazon HQ2 effect Delta's precense at AUS?
Probably not much. Perhaps another daily flight to SEA and CVG, but that is all I could see. Amazon does not do a lot of traveling for a company its size and is quite frugal when it comes to paying for flights. Even then, additional service on AUS-SEA/CVG will probably come due to rising demand anyway, so I am not sure that Amazon would be the sole driver of growth on either route.
What about all the other related Amazon traffic, like their partners/corporate clients/legal/marketing suppliers/advertising companies/etc.....For a company that size, I have to think the corporate traffic would be heavy.
fsafsx wrote:Austin has so much potential not only for Delta but for so many different airlines to go in and build a strong hub. Frontier, Allegiant, Delta and Via air can all be hubs.
fsafsx wrote:Austin has so much potential not only for Delta but for so many different airlines to go in and build a strong hub. Frontier, Allegiant, Delta and Via air can all be hubs.
LovePrunesAnet wrote:Ok now weve gone into "several 30+ gate gate concourses and a secondary gateway to Latin America." From a single sales job position. You AUS fanboys must have been hanging out with the XNA fanboys, but you're making them look reasonable by comparison. Ridiculous ideas here, but hey, as long as you're having fun with the hobby, why not indulge?
MIflyer12 wrote:Not gonna happen. There isn't room in the market for a 400+ Delta flight per day (DTW/MSP-sized) hub in competition with AA @ DFW, UA @ IAH, and WN at DAL and HOU. Not in the 3-15 year term.
There just isn't.
RDU-sized -- maybe 60-80 flights a day, including Aeromexico codeshares -- sure, that's in the realm of possibility within a decade. In that construct the region served is AUS; there won't be a lot of intra-TX flights.
Delta has been very explicit about its plans for upgauging and the cost benefits it brings. (See the 12/2017 Investor Day presentation.) Running 3x CR9s out of Texas city XXX is simply not cost or frequency competitive against 6x AA 319/738s.
ERJ170 wrote:fsafsx wrote:Austin has so much potential not only for Delta but for so many different airlines to go in and build a strong hub. Frontier, Allegiant, Delta and Via air can all be hubs.
How? There isn’t that much demand from AUS. That’s more demand than from cities like ORD or NYC.. AUS May be nice but its pretty well serviced as it is... if an airline wants to make it a connecting hub, it’s gonna be using all the O&D there is to make it somewhat profitable.. and WN has that pretty much tied up with a bow, forwarding tag, and postage included.. I’m just at awe at where you guys see all this demand? A hub? A big ole focus city? 2 international flights? 80 flights from 6 gates? ITrans-Texas flights? No other focus city has any of these... I’m just flabbergasted... awestruck.. confuddled..
cvgComair wrote:Amazon does not do a lot of traveling for a company its size and is quite frugal when it comes to paying for flights. Even then, additional service on AUS-SEA/CVG will probably come due to rising demand anyway, so I am not sure that Amazon would be the sole driver of growth on either route.
mpdpilot wrote:This mentality is exactly what the other poster was saying about thinking outside the box a little. And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers . You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
BTRfan wrote:If true about DL making AUS a focus city and possibly a future hub I can see they mirroring their old DFW hub as east west connecting hub and add smaller cities like: HSV BHM MOB MGM LIT FSM XNA JAN GPT MSY BTR LCH LFT SHV MLU MEM BNA MCI STL OKC TUL various intra Texas routes ONT LAS PHX ABQ DEN COS SAN SFO OAK SNA SJC HNL OGG
mpdpilot wrote:The long term speculation is that perhaps by some future date, say 2035, Delta COULD have a 250 flight operation at AUS.
ADrum23 wrote:Just because DL has snubbed Texas in the past does not mean they will going forward. Like I've said ad nauseam, DL cannot ignore Texas going forward. Texas is the second largest state in the country and growing. It contains the fastest growing metro area in the county (Austin-Round Rock MSA). It contains three of the top five fastest growing city economies in the country (Austin, San Antonio and Dallas/Fort Worth). It has a well diversified economy in agriculture, energy, healthcare, technology, defense, etc. Either Dallas Fort Worth or Houston will surpass Chicago to become the third largest market within the next decade or two, with the other likely becoming 4th shortly thereafter. All 3 of DL's main competitors (AA, UA and WN) have large operations in the state.
If DL ignores Texas, they are going to miss out on a lot of extra revenue... I think they know this, and they want to use AUS as their vehicle to get back into the state....A fourth runway could even be added if they relocate the jail elsewhere and the airport buys the land.
I agree AUS will never be ATL, DFW, IAH or even MSP/DTW. I see it in the 250-350 flight range long term; a bigger SLC mostly serving E/W connections for those in the south central region (as well as intra-Texas connections) and perhaps a secondary Latin America gateway in cooperation with jv partner AM.
Midwestindy wrote:mpdpilot wrote:And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers. You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
CLT and AUS aren't even on the same plane. CLT is the 3rd largest financial center in the country (was #2 until last year), and has the HQ of Bank of America which spends an insane amount on corporate travel, plus the East Coast HQ of Wells Fargo and Microsoft.
mpdpilot wrote:And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers. You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
jetmatt777 wrote:Midwestindy wrote:mpdpilot wrote:And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers. You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
CLT and AUS aren't even on the same plane. CLT is the 3rd largest financial center in the country (was #2 until last year), and has the HQ of Bank of America which spends an insane amount on corporate travel, plus the East Coast HQ of Wells Fargo and Microsoft.
Yeah but Austin is getting a lounge with a shower and an outdoor patio! LOL
WWads wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:This "Austin is a new focus city for DL" has a bit too much "fanboy"ing. I'm with the many skeptics up thread on this one, off of a job posting, but I know it won't convince the fanboys.
They're building a massive new SkyClub with outside seating. They're not building that sort of SC for their current schedule, it's almost certainly for a major expansion in the near-future.
Midwestindy wrote:mpdpilot wrote:And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers. You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
CLT and AUS aren't even on the same plane. CLT is the 3rd largest financial center in the country (was #2 until last year), and has the HQ of Bank of America which spends an insane amount on corporate travel, plus the East Coast HQ of Wells Fargo and Microsoft.
Midwestindy wrote:mpdpilot wrote:And your statement is so difinitive. AUS is similar in size to CLT and has 10-15 million less travellers. You really think that in the future (we didn't specify a time frame which I will get to in a second) that this country won't be able to support another 15 million connecting passengers? By that logic, why would airlines ever grow or add new routes.
CLT and AUS aren't even on the same plane. CLT is the 3rd largest financial center in the country (was #2 until last year), and has the HQ of Bank of America which spends an insane amount on corporate travel, plus the East Coast HQ of Wells Fargo and Microsoft.
LovePrunesAnet wrote:they have to put in showers because everybody who sits on the outside patio is going to be sweating like a beast when they come back inside, and they'll need to shower before they sit next to you on the new nonstops to Hawaii on Southwest out of Austin. On A380s. After Southwest buys Hawaiian.
Occasional Refuelling stop at XNA. Sorry I'm mixing about three absurd threads that currently exist here on a net
ADrum23 wrote:Except there was a KXAN news article as well. Say what you want about that, but I highly doubt they would have put that out if DL wasn't planning something.
cvgComair wrote:You forgot the hourly shuttle to DTW!
cvgComair wrote:LovePrunesAnet wrote:they have to put in showers because everybody who sits on the outside patio is going to be sweating like a beast when they come back inside, and they'll need to shower before they sit next to you on the new nonstops to Hawaii on Southwest out of Austin. On A380s. After Southwest buys Hawaiian.
Occasional Refuelling stop at XNA. Sorry I'm mixing about three absurd threads that currently exist here on a net
You forgot the hourly shuttle to DTW!