Naturally Delta flies into AA or UA hubs, as UA flies into DL and AA hubs. Clearly not as many frequencies as the hub airline may have: example UA & AA flying into Atlanta.

But if I really want to stick with my hometown or favorite airline my options are fewer.

Is there a strategy or formula that an airline uses to determine how many flight they should have flying from their hub to a competitor’s hub?

This week I was shocked to find out that UA did not even have 1 flight a day from Denver to Miami? I want to stick with UA for status purposes- but not even 1 great connection through IAH. Everything was either sold out or had crazy layover times. I wound up going through Chicago! Really? UA couldn’t get 2 E175’s or 73G to work from DEN to MIA (2 major cities) to work?

Also SFO to MIA, UA has 1 flight on a 737- with a 5 hour flight time.

Is it just not worth it for an airline like Delta trying harder to get to SFO for Atlantan’s? Not when UA is so dominant? Same with AA doing Philly to ATL?

UA has DEN-FLL it’s the preferred airport for most of the customers.. 25 miles north of MIA

UA has a long, bad history in MIA.

Dehubbed post 9/11...it was almost completely gone (sans a couple of Express/TED) flights for some of the 2000s.

Their increased presence now has to do with the CO merger.

U

DEN-MIA happens occasionally. Usually during peak travel times such as thanksgiving and Christmas. If it was a money maker they’d fly it year round.

The airlines have realized that they can’t be everything to everyone at all times, and sometimes it’s better to let a competitor have a route to themselves.

UA will have daily DEN-MIA from 7 January to 4 May 2018 using the 738. It's for snowbirds I guess.

What would offer UA via DEN to PAX to/from Miami? There are not many destinations via DEN on UA that cannot be served by ORD, SFO or IAH. And as others have mentioned DEN-FLL is up the road.

On the other hand, AA can hub many PAX via MIA to plenty of LatAm and European destinations.

SCQ83 wrote:

What would offer UA via DEN to PAX to/from Miami? There are not many destinations via DEN on UA that cannot be served by ORD, SFO or IAH. And as others have mentioned DEN-FLL is up the road.

On the other hand, AA can hub many PAX via MIA to plenty of LatAm and European destinations.

A lot to offer via Denver to the mountain west and California north to PNW.

If you search on Google for "airlines mutual forbearance multimarket contact," you'll find some interesting articles.

In the 1990s, researchers were looking into companies that competed with each other across many markets--and using airlines as their test case. What they found was that companies that do so more often ("multimarket contact") tend to compete less aggressively with each other ("mutual forbearance"). In other words, by having more capacity into a competitor's hub, an airline had a bigger threat to wield if the competitor were to cut fares, enter "their" market, etc. This "golden rule" led to airlines reinforcing an oligopoly. Does it still apply today, and is that active thinking in management vs. the unintended consequence? I don't know.

ORD-ATL is an interesting route. 11 mainline Delta flights, a mixture of mainline and express makeup UAs 7 and AAs 6 flights.

As far as MIA goes, AA dominates. United has 7 EWR-FLL flights this time of year and it goes as high as 9. EWR-MIA has 4-5. EWR-PBI has 5-6. EWR-MCO has 9-11. Obviously UA is earning more on flights to FLL and MCO than MIA.

Well, this is why I asked, thanks.
I totally understand the massive domination of AA at MIA, and as I’m a New Yorker sun seeking I fly to MIA about every 6/8 weeks year round. This was my first time I flew EWR to DEN for business and then tagged on MIA for a short vacation at the beach, but even UA’s connections weren’t that great and I had to fly via ORD. I did not want to get an Uber from FLL although next time I might.
I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!
Its not like UA doesn’t fly to MIA, there is plenty of UA metal landing here from other hubs when combined.
It’s just that both happen to be 2 domestic destinations I fly to often between business and leasure.
I will say this however: doesn’t matter where I seem to go nowadays domestically, every UA flight is packed, and almost entirely full booking 1-2 weeks out. I tried to leave Miami today (one day early) and the 1k desk did not have ONE seat in any class, nonstop or with a connection. Nothing!
Will all the new 737MAX’s coming help remedy this? Amazing for an airline people don’t seem to like very much

VC10er wrote:

Well, this is why I asked, thanks.
I totally understand the massive domination of AA at MIA, and as I’m a New Yorker sun seeking I fly to MIA about every 6/8 weeks year round. This was my first time I flew EWR to DEN for business and then tagged on MIA for a short vacation at the beach, but even UA’s connections weren’t that great and I had to fly via ORD. I did not want to get an Uber from FLL although next time I might.
I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!
Its not like UA doesn’t fly to MIA, there is plenty of UA metal landing here from other hubs when combined.
It’s just that both happen to be 2 domestic destinations I fly to often between business and leasure.
I will say this however: doesn’t matter where I seem to go nowadays domestically, every UA flight is packed, and almost entirely full booking 1-2 weeks out. I tried to leave Miami today (one day early) and the 1k desk did not have ONE seat in any class, nonstop or with a connection. Nothing!
Will all the new 737MAX’s coming help remedy this? Amazing for an airline people don’t seem to like very much

Help remedy what? Full flights?

gunnerman wrote:

UA will have daily DEN-MIA from 7 January to 4 May 2018 using the 738. It's for snowbirds I guess.

Snowbirds and those going on a cruise. January through April is prime cruise season and roughly 4 million people a year sail out of Port Everglades every year.

Perhaps the reason UA only provides limited service to FL from DEN is that origin pax prefer to travel to Mexico and Hawaii over Florida? DEN has nonstops to almost every vacation spot in Mexico and daily flights to each main airport in Hawaii.

UA provides 871 daily seats year-round but can’t offer even 76 seats to MIA?

77H

77H wrote:

Perhaps the reason UA only provides limited service to FL from DEN is that origin pax prefer to travel to Mexico and Hawaii over Florida? DEN has nonstops to almost every vacation spot in Mexico and daily flights to each main airport in Hawaii.

UA provides 871 daily seats year-round but can’t offer even 76 seats to MIA?

77H

No way. DEN-Florida will have many more seats than Hawaii/Mexico.

Jetmatt summed it up pretty well I think.

In general, I think you see other hubs flights are based in overall O&D demand. The OA Hub is going to have advantage on traffic originating in that Hub and from spoke cities connected to that hub. That leaves the 2nd airline with traffic primarily originating in its hub and cities that hub connects to that also dont have service to the OA Hub. They can also price compete in connected spokes.

It's also important to remember that MIA is a high cost airport with a single dominant carrier. Airlines that aren't named AA can serve south Florida as a destination just fine from FLL. Sure, some people probably have reasons for preferring MIA over FLL, but my sense is that preference isn't as strong as other places.

One of Scott Kirby's priorities with UA was building up UA hub to DL/AA hub service to what it should be. The EWR-ATL is the classic example of this. DL flies that route 12x on all mainline. UA was suffering, so it gradually kept reducing gauge and frequency to try to improve yields. Over time, UA ended up flying EWR-ATL with a really paltry schedule — something like 5x on all RJs. But UA can and has added gauge and frequency back to routes like that, and it's not like DL is going to respond by doing 22x or putting 777s on the route.

UA has beefed up service to competitor hubs from DEN. DEN-DFW used to be all RJ, and I think DEN-ATL was 2x CRJ-200 at one point. DEN-CLT is now 3x E175, and I don't think UA flew it at all back when US was around. I really think the MIA landing fees and presence at FLL explain why UA hasn't added much more to MIA.

Definitely, AA has eaten UA's lunch on the DEN-MIA market. I remember when AA used to deal this market as a seasonal ski route with one flight a day and now manages two nonstops year round, and now facing competition from F9.

flyguy84 wrote:

VC10er wrote:

Well, this is why I asked, thanks.
I totally understand the massive domination of AA at MIA, and as I’m a New Yorker sun seeking I fly to MIA about every 6/8 weeks year round. This was my first time I flew EWR to DEN for business and then tagged on MIA for a short vacation at the beach, but even UA’s connections weren’t that great and I had to fly via ORD. I did not want to get an Uber from FLL although next time I might.
I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!
Its not like UA doesn’t fly to MIA, there is plenty of UA metal landing here from other hubs when combined.
It’s just that both happen to be 2 domestic destinations I fly to often between business and leasure.
I will say this however: doesn’t matter where I seem to go nowadays domestically, every UA flight is packed, and almost entirely full booking 1-2 weeks out. I tried to leave Miami today (one day early) and the 1k desk did not have ONE seat in any class, nonstop or with a connection. Nothing!
Will all the new 737MAX’s coming help remedy this? Amazing for an airline people don’t seem to like very much

Help remedy what? Full flights?

Yes, remedy full flights that probably drive business elsewhere. Remedy over-sold flights. Did you think I thought the remedy was for UA to fly less people and make less money? If UA can pack every flight 100% more than 80% of the time- then more seats from UA (on the right routes) in the sky might lead to growth, might make it easier to get seats days, or a week or two out- especially for business travelers who are less sensitive about price and more about available seats at the departure/arrival times that matter. Getting a 150 new 737MAX’s and E-175’s which could be filled up as well on top of the birds they already have might also provide more choice on UA.
International is not much different. Lately getting a Polaris seat on the flight I really want has been an issue- I’ve had to select connections or another carrier a number of times.
Forget about trying to use upgrade certificates!

The problem is brainwashed passengers. If you fly only a few flights a year, you should anyway stop thinking of status. If you fly a lot, a few flights on a different airline should not kill your status. If UA does not have a direct flight, why not use another airline, that does have a direct flight?

Pre merger US had a paltry schedule to MIA as well, FLL was the much bigger operation of the two. MIA is very expensive airport and while I think the passenger experience is now better at MIA many pax consider FLL as the more user friendly experience.

DL has tons of flights between NYC and Chicago, granted this is a huge business route, but LGA-ORD is hub-hub for AA while it's hub-spoke for DL.

mjoelnir wrote:

The problem is brainwashed passengers. If you fly only a few flights a year, you should anyway stop thinking of status. If you fly a lot, a few flights on a different airline should not kill your status. If UA does not have a direct flight, why not use another airline, that does have a direct flight?

Sure, I would have been fine with an domestic flight- but I had a 4 leg UA trip which included EWR, DEN and MIA, and hundreds of dollars from an unused UA ticket. “Diana” at the 1k desk saw the itinerary I built on UA.com and said “let me call you in the morning, I’m going work on this when I get home tonight”- she called back as promised with a new itinerary, all in F, lower priced and waived the change fee. So status gets you way more than just miles or pre-boarding, personalized service means a lot.
I simply was surprised there were no DEN/MIA nonstops.
And it’s not just because Miami is a fabulous leasure city, but a huge business center too and the gateway to LATAM. (Not for flying- for businesses as many corporations have their LATAM HQ there)
Heck, what do I know - I was “assuming” that it could be opened with an E-175 or 73G, and eventually grown.

Depends on the type of traffic each airline is targeting and what overlaps with other hubs. For DEN-MIA, there's limited amount of O&D traffic on both carriers, so the rest of the traffic would be connecting passengers.

For UA, DEN, as a connection point, doesn't offer that much more than what's already covered by IAH/ORD, so UA would rather funnel connection traffic via IAH/ORD and forgo flying to DEN and the limited O&D passengers.
For AA, MIA, as a connection point, offers options to the Caribbean and Latin America so AA can tap into the DEN passengers going to those destinations.

Ironically, a Managing Director of Network Planning addressed DEN-Florida the other day. He said that DEN-Florida is especially challenging because of Frontier and American, which have a lower cost for those specific routes.

I gather from that that United needs leisure traffic to support the route, as the business community doesn’t support enough of the route, and United can’t charge more than Frontier on those routes.

mjoelnir wrote:

The problem is brainwashed passengers. If you fly only a few flights a year, you should anyway stop thinking of status. If you fly a lot, a few flights on a different airline should not kill your status. If UA does not have a direct flight, why not use another airline, that does have a direct flight?

May not affect my status, but it’s sure nice to use the perks of my status when I do fly.

I don’t care about my status on a MSP-GFK flight that is 45 minutes. For a DEN-MIA flight, the benefits become apparent.

axiom wrote:

77H wrote:

Perhaps the reason UA only provides limited service to FL from DEN is that origin pax prefer to travel to Mexico and Hawaii over Florida? DEN has nonstops to almost every vacation spot in Mexico and daily flights to each main airport in Hawaii.

UA provides 871 daily seats year-round but can’t offer even 76 seats to MIA?

77H

No way. DEN-Florida will have many more seats than Hawaii/Mexico.

Jetmatt summed it up pretty well I think.

Yep, DEN-Florida is a much, much, much bigger market than either DEN-Hawaii or DEN-Mexico in terms of number of seats. For example, today, October 11 DEN has 4,402 total seats operating to Florida broken down as:
-Pensacola (PNS): 1x F9 A320 (186 total seats)
-Jacksonville (JAX): 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (325 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739, 4x WN B738 (1,457 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 1x WN B738M, 2x WN B738, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (854 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320 (336 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x WN B738M, 1x UA B738, 1x NK A319, 1x NK A321 (714 total seats)
-Miami (MIA): 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Florida had 4,455 total seats broken down as:
-Jacksonville: 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (511 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x WN B738M, 1x WN B737, 2x WN B738, 2x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739 (1,655 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 3x WN B738, 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (1,040 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x UA A320 (150 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x UA B738, 1x WN B738, 1x NK A321 (569 total seats)
-Miami: 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Meanwhile, both on October 10 and October 11, DEN-Hawaii only had 871 total seats broken down as:
-Lihue (LIH): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Honolulu (HNL): 1x UA B772 (364 seats)
-Kahului (OGG): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Kailua/Kona (KOA): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)

Today, October 11, DEN-Mexico has 745 total seats broken down as:
-Guadalajara (GDL): 1x Y4 A320 (174 seats)
-Cancun (CUN): 1x F9 A321, 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738 (571 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Mexico had only 571 total seats broken down as:
-Cancun (CUN): 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738, 1x F9 A321

VC10er wrote:

Is it just not worth it for an airline like Delta trying harder to get to SFO for Atlantan’s? Not when UA is so dominant?

Not sure I understand this question... DL leaves UA in the dust on SFO-ATL (as well as SFO-MSP, SFO-DTW, and to a lesser degree SFO-SLC).

VC10er wrote:

I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!

AA has only two DEN-MIA on 10/12/18, and those are for Caribbean connections as well as MIA O&D. There's one Frontier flight. There's one WN DEN-FLL. DEN-MIA may be beyond the range of an E75... it's 319 or 737-700 territory, which are amply numerous in the United fleet.

Your argument is, implicitly, 'UA's not doing it right,' in the utter absence of data.

F9LASDEN wrote:

axiom wrote:

77H wrote:

Perhaps the reason UA only provides limited service to FL from DEN is that origin pax prefer to travel to Mexico and Hawaii over Florida? DEN has nonstops to almost every vacation spot in Mexico and daily flights to each main airport in Hawaii.

UA provides 871 daily seats year-round but can’t offer even 76 seats to MIA?

77H

No way. DEN-Florida will have many more seats than Hawaii/Mexico.

Jetmatt summed it up pretty well I think.

Yep, DEN-Florida is a much, much, much bigger market than either DEN-Hawaii or DEN-Mexico in terms of number of seats. For example, today, October 11 DEN has 4,402 total seats operating to Florida broken down as:
-Pensacola (PNS): 1x F9 A320 (186 total seats)
-Jacksonville (JAX): 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (325 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739, 4x WN B738 (1,457 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 1x WN B738M, 2x WN B738, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (854 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320 (336 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x WN B738M, 1x UA B738, 1x NK A319, 1x NK A321 (714 total seats)
-Miami (MIA): 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Florida had 4,455 total seats broken down as:
-Jacksonville: 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (511 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x WN B738M, 1x WN B737, 2x WN B738, 2x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739 (1,655 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 3x WN B738, 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (1,040 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x UA A320 (150 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x UA B738, 1x WN B738, 1x NK A321 (569 total seats)
-Miami: 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Meanwhile, both on October 10 and October 11, DEN-Hawaii only had 871 total seats broken down as:
-Lihue (LIH): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Honolulu (HNL): 1x UA B772 (364 seats)
-Kahului (OGG): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Kailua/Kona (KOA): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)

Today, October 11, DEN-Mexico has 745 total seats broken down as:
-Guadalajara (GDL): 1x Y4 A320 (174 seats)
-Cancun (CUN): 1x F9 A321, 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738 (571 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Mexico had only 571 total seats broken down as:
-Cancun (CUN): 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738, 1x F9 A321

The thread is about the majors which would exclude F9. Additionally, we were talking about UA specifically.

77H

77H wrote:

F9LASDEN wrote:

axiom wrote:

No way. DEN-Florida will have many more seats than Hawaii/Mexico.

Jetmatt summed it up pretty well I think.

Yep, DEN-Florida is a much, much, much bigger market than either DEN-Hawaii or DEN-Mexico in terms of number of seats. For example, today, October 11 DEN has 4,402 total seats operating to Florida broken down as:
-Pensacola (PNS): 1x F9 A320 (186 total seats)
-Jacksonville (JAX): 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (325 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739, 4x WN B738 (1,457 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 1x WN B738M, 2x WN B738, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (854 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320 (336 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x WN B738M, 1x UA B738, 1x NK A319, 1x NK A321 (714 total seats)
-Miami (MIA): 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Florida had 4,455 total seats broken down as:
-Jacksonville: 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x WN B738 (511 total seats)
-Orlando (MCO): 1x WN B738M, 1x WN B737, 2x WN B738, 2x F9 A321, 1x UA B752, 2x UA B739 (1,655 total seats)
-Tampa (TPA): 3x WN B738, 1x F9 A320, 1x UA A320, 1x UA B739 (1,040 total seats)
-Ft. Myers (RSW): 1x UA A320 (150 total seats)
-Ft. Lauderdale (FLL): 1x UA B738, 1x WN B738, 1x NK A321 (569 total seats)
-Miami: 2x AA B738M, 1x F9 A320 (530 total seats)

Meanwhile, both on October 10 and October 11, DEN-Hawaii only had 871 total seats broken down as:
-Lihue (LIH): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Honolulu (HNL): 1x UA B772 (364 seats)
-Kahului (OGG): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)
-Kailua/Kona (KOA): 1x UA B752 (169 seats)

Today, October 11, DEN-Mexico has 745 total seats broken down as:
-Guadalajara (GDL): 1x Y4 A320 (174 seats)
-Cancun (CUN): 1x F9 A321, 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738 (571 total seats)

Yesterday, October 10, DEN-Mexico had only 571 total seats broken down as:
-Cancun (CUN): 1x WN B738, 1x UA B738, 1x F9 A321

The thread is about the majors which would exclude F9. Additionally, we were talking about UA specifically.

77H

Alright, UA alone is offering 1,322 seats a day on DEN-Florida right now, compared to 871 seats a day on DEN-Hawaii and only 166 seats to Mexico (which does get a little higher on the weekends due to Saturday-only PVR flights and increased CUN frequencies), so it’s still wrong to claim that DEN-Hawaii and DEN-Mexico are larger markets than DEN-Florida even when ignoring the 4 other carriers in the various DEN-Florida markets, all 4 of which likely play a role in UA’s decisions regarding capacity and frequency of their own DEN-Florida markets.

Insisting LCCs and ULCCs not be discussed when wondering why UA does not have more seats on a route out of DEN (one which features a fair amount of low-yielding leisure traffic) where two ULCCs (plus WN) are offering multiple daily flights, surely lowering yields and fares and making it tougher to compete, especially when ULCC NK has the advantage of offering connections in FLL, is a terrible and somewhat ignorant way to look at it. You asked, “why doesn’t UA have more service on DEN-South Florida,” and I certainly don’t think it’s incorrect or irrelevant to point out that two ULCCs operating in the market, which, again, likely lowers fares and yields quite a bit, as a possible factor for UA’s relative lack of service in the market.

MIflyer12 wrote:

VC10er wrote:

I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!

AA has only two DEN-MIA on 10/12/18, and those are for Caribbean connections as well as MIA O&D. There's one Frontier flight. There's one WN DEN-FLL. DEN-MIA may be beyond the range of an E75... it's 319 or 737-700 territory, which are amply numerous in the United fleet.

Your argument is, implicitly, 'UA's not doing it right,' in the utter absence of data.

Plus two NK DEN-FLL flights

VC10er wrote:

Is there a strategy or formula that an airline uses to determine how many flight they should have flying from their hub to a competitor’s hub?

It's very simple. It's bank structure plus economics. The airline's hub probably only has a certain number of time schedules that will allow connections from the geography of a certain city. Since the other city is a hub it becomes even more important to have connections at your own hub, so you are less likely to be willing to fly "naked" flights that don't connect to anything. That sets the maximum schedule.

Then it's economics. If optimal profit and margin are 2 less than the maximum then it's 2 less than the maximum. It's that easy. It's not a dart board or a formula.

I've noticed that UA always seems to be weaker in their hubs to OA hubs than the OA. Never really understood why.

Some examples:

SFO-ATL (DL stronger)
ORD-ATL (DL stronger)
DEN-ATL (DL stronger)
EWR-ATL (DL stronger)
DFW-SFO (AA stronger)
DFW-DEN (AA stronger)

IAD and EWR seem to be the exceptions.

There are probably many more that others can cite

gwrudolph wrote:

I've noticed that UA always seems to be weaker in their hubs to OA hubs than the OA. Never really understood why.

Some examples:

SFO-ATL (DL stronger)
ORD-ATL (DL stronger)
DEN-ATL (DL stronger)
EWR-ATL (DL stronger)
DFW-SFO (AA stronger)
DFW-DEN (AA stronger)

IAD and EWR seem to be the exceptions.

There are probably many more that others can cite

Dl has the strongest hubs. The only one comparable to what dl has is clt.

In some cases like Mia, aa might have more flights because there is not as much direct traffic from msp or slc to south beach. Mia works well as a connection point to Latin America whereas msp or slc doesn’t work well as connection for traffic from Mia. As a whole, it’s hard to beat the dominance dl has at atl dtw and msp. That’s why they make so much money there.

gwrudolph wrote:

I've noticed that UA always seems to be weaker in their hubs to OA hubs than the OA. Never really understood why.

Some examples:

SFO-ATL (DL stronger)
ORD-ATL (DL stronger)
DEN-ATL (DL stronger)
EWR-ATL (DL stronger)
DFW-SFO (AA stronger)
DFW-DEN (AA stronger)

IAD and EWR seem to be the exceptions.

There are probably many more that others can cite

Not all hubs are created equal, and that matters for things like this. Delta is almost always going to be stronger on flights to/from ATL because it has such an insanely high percentage of the departures from ATL (somewhere around 80% market share at a huge-capacity airport with 4 parallel runways). That means they have more flights and a huge amount of feed.

Other hub airports are more constrained in terms of both the raw number of flights that can be offered overall and also by particular airlines (usually due to gate space), so there's a lot less feed coming off that carrier's hub end of the route. Just to take the first one off the list, UA at SFO has less than a 50% market share (although it'd be a few more percent if you included the rest of *A as potential feed).

It's not always apples to apples due to the relative size of O&D markets, FF bases, etc., but you can't just assume that one airline "hub" on one end of a route is remotely the same creature as another carrier's "hub" on the other end.

And right on cue is the A220 route announcement from DL. They're practically basing these brand-new aircraft in their competitors' hubs. 5 destinations out of DFW (LGA, JFK, MSP, DTW, SLC) and 4 out of IAH (LGA, DTW, MSP, JFK). Also included is LGA-BOS.

Will certainly be interested to see the response.

gwrudolph wrote:

I've noticed that UA always seems to be weaker in their hubs to OA hubs than the OA. Never really understood why.

Some examples:

SFO-ATL (DL stronger)
ORD-ATL (DL stronger)
DEN-ATL (DL stronger)
EWR-ATL (DL stronger)
DFW-SFO (AA stronger)
DFW-DEN (AA stronger)

IAD and EWR seem to be the exceptions.

There are probably many more that others can cite

ATL & DFW are stronger than any hub that UA offers so you'll find that DL tends to lead all ATL markets and AA tends to lead all DFW markets. If you look at something like PHX-SFO for example, UA is 2x739, 2x320, 1x 319 for Sunday while AA is 4x 321, 1x 738. AA has a bit more seat count but both still offer a solid 5x daily. Looking PHX-DEN, UA offers 2x739, 2x320 and 1x 319 versus AA offers 3x321 and 1x319. Does that added frequency really mean anything when UA @ DEN is bigger than AA @ PHX so it makes since that UA should offer a smidge more capacity.

MIflyer12 wrote:

VC10er wrote:

I didn’t want to add AA to my itinerary either. So, I couldn’t help but to think of the massive UA FF base in DEN, and the size of Miami as a city not working with at least a 73G or E-175. But, clearly UA does not see it that way!

AA has only two DEN-MIA on 10/12/18, and those are for Caribbean connections as well as MIA O&D. There's one Frontier flight. There's one WN DEN-FLL. DEN-MIA may be beyond the range of an E75... it's 319 or 737-700 territory, which are amply numerous in the United fleet.

Your argument is, implicitly, 'UA's not doing it right,' in the utter absence of data.

Not “argument”- curious, idea, head scratcher or “suggestion” perhaps, but I’m not making an argument

What I find interesting is the type of aircraft majors fly from one airline's fortress hub to another airline's.

IAH-ATL DL is all mainline, UA is all RJ.
DFW-IAH AA is 75% mainline (albeit with a few MadDogs) and UA is about 60% RJ.
DFW-ATL both 100% mainline.
DFW-DEN AA 100% mainline UA 80% mainline
IAH-CLT AA 100% Mainline UA 100% RJ

IADCA wrote:

gwrudolph wrote:

I've noticed that UA always seems to be weaker in their hubs to OA hubs than the OA. Never really understood why.

Some examples:

SFO-ATL (DL stronger)
ORD-ATL (DL stronger)
DEN-ATL (DL stronger)
EWR-ATL (DL stronger)
DFW-SFO (AA stronger)
DFW-DEN (AA stronger)

IAD and EWR seem to be the exceptions.

There are probably many more that others can cite

Not all hubs are created equal, and that matters for things like this. Delta is almost always going to be stronger on flights to/from ATL because it has such an insanely high percentage of the departures from ATL (somewhere around 80% market share at a huge-capacity airport with 4 parallel runways). That means they have more flights and a huge amount of feed.

Other hub airports are more constrained in terms of both the raw number of flights that can be offered overall and also by particular airlines (usually due to gate space), so there's a lot less feed coming off that carrier's hub end of the route. Just to take the first one off the list, UA at SFO has less than a 50% market share (although it'd be a few more percent if you included the rest of *A as potential feed).

It's not always apples to apples due to the relative size of O&D markets, FF bases, etc., but you can't just assume that one airline "hub" on one end of a route is remotely the same creature as another carrier's "hub" on the other end.

While your points are true, to be fair, I'm not making any assumption that they are all the same creatures. My observation is that in almost all cases of UA to OA hub, UA is weaker. Not just in the ATL and DFW to UA hubs. One can add PHL to the list as well. Why does AA offer 5 flights PHLSFO (many of which are in 321s) and UA offers 2 (most of the time in 319s). DENPHX, CLT to UA hubs, etc. I tend to believe UA is passive sometimes, even where they have (or should have) relative advantage or parity.

BN727227Ultra wrote:

What I find interesting is the type of aircraft majors fly from one airline's fortress hub to another airline's.

IAH-ATL DL is all mainline, UA is all RJ.
DFW-IAH AA is 75% mainline (albeit with a few MadDogs) and UA is about 60% RJ.
DFW-ATL both 100% mainline.
DFW-DEN AA 100% mainline UA 80% mainline
IAH-CLT AA 100% Mainline UA 100% RJ

Would this have more to do with the amount of UA RJ’s, or is it really about offering UA HUB FF’s the chance to continue to stay on UA- earn the status vs switching?

If you’ve flown UA long and hard enough- you do come to realize and feel everything getting better as you climb UuA’s status ladder.

Which makes me wonder if in 2+ years we will see MP really get watered down?

SCQ83 wrote:

What would offer UA via DEN to PAX to/from Miami?...

Continuing service to Aspen/Vail, etc.

I remember a few months ago a UA executive said they wanted to get to their ‘natural marketshare’ back. I think this thread shows examples of where UA can upgauge some routes and it would look logical to most on here.

It’s not so simple as just upgauging. They need to be able to fill the planes. Ua is weaker at its hubs than dl and aa are at theirs, that’s why they fly more regional. On a counterpoint, their hubs are also at places more o&d so they can get high premium to more neutral airports. For example at sfo, while they have lower market share to atl dtw and phl, they manage to generate huge premium on all the other transcon and mid con routes.

COSPN wrote:

UA has DEN-FLL it’s the preferred airport for most of the customers.. 25 miles north of MIA

So the shortest route from downtown Denver to DEN International is 25.5 miles & your coplaining that FLL is 25 miles from Miami.
Also FLL is showing 28.6 miles /31 min to miami, DEN is 25.5 miles & 36 min shortest route to Denver.
So it's less time FLL-Miami than DEN to Denver.
Just fly into FLL.

Airlines have their areas in the country where they have a pretty big hole. For the majors, it's WN & AA in the Northwest, UA in the Southeast, and DL in Texas.

rbavfan wrote:

COSPN wrote:

UA has DEN-FLL it’s the preferred airport for most of the customers.. 25 miles north of MIA

So the shortest route from downtown Denver to DEN International is 25.5 miles & your coplaining that FLL is 25 miles from Miami.
Also FLL is showing 28.6 miles /31 min to miami, DEN is 25.5 miles & 36 min shortest route to Denver.
So it's less time FLL-Miami than DEN to Denver.
Just fly into FLL.

I get your point about distances, but its 25+ miles on both ends, (without traffic) Denver doesn’t have an airport 5 miles away. I for one would not want to arrive at FLL (although the airport is nicer) at 10pm and drive an hour+ to my SoBe hotel, or business hotel in or near Brickel Key and pay a lot for an Uber.
I never, ever thought DEN/MIA was a BIG IDEA, I was just was suggesting opening it with an E-175 (which is equally as good as a 737 to me) - start with 1 or 2 flights a day and go bigger “if” it worked. (And why UA doesn’t have it already- simple curiosity)
The United flight MIA/SFO I believe is 1x a day nonstop on a 737- I have never done that flight, but if had to, I think I’d fly up to DC and get a bed seat. Another whacko idea I have would be UA using a 752 on that flight!
I fly a ****load for business and have since 1991- I am tired almost all the time. Domestically it’s my shot at a solid 3/4 hour deep sleep before/after meetings. I look for lie flat seats and pay the premium (client pays for Economy, my company pays for the upgrade) - I actually sleep better on planes than my own bed. I often wish I could mount a small jet engine outside my bedroom window! In fact Monday I’m flying a 752 RT from EWR/DEN as it’s my 4th time in 5 weeks- then Bogata the week after! (I chose the 752 with a stop at IAH vs nonstop)

I honestly stick with UA given my status and how close EWR is to my home in NYC. Does DL or AA have more lie flat seats on domestic flights than UA?