DeltaRules From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3623 posts, RR: 11 Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8439 times:
An article in The Columbus Dispatch today talked about cities not served directly from CMH, providing stats as to the biggest destinations without non-stop service from Columbus (though Houston has service with CO/UA, but is listed). Among them are SFO (118 pax/day) and SEA (99 pax/day), which has the airport actively pursuing Virgin America for service to SFO, as well as Alaska for "direct West Coast flights". Incentives of $50-75K (depending on number of daily passengers), plus a one-time $75K bonus, are being offered to anyone that fills the domestic gaps, as well as bonuses if anyone comes in and grows an existing market out of CMH.
Also, the airport is seeking trans-Atlantic service, which could come in "the spring or summer of 2013" according to the VP of business development for the airport authority. London or Paris are the most likely targets, with $800K-$1.1M incentives from the airport and more from local businesses and various government entities being dangled much like at PIT.
Anybody see VX or AS coming to CMH in the near future? VX may be a bit small at this point, but AS has added/will add AUS, STL, and MCI in recent memory. And who might the carrier willing to take on CMH-LHR/LGW or CMH-CDG/ORY be? Paris would sound like a DL idea given the PIT and RDU service they've played with.
SANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 4716 posts, RR: 15 Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8212 times:
Sorry, but those numbers don't sound to me like anything that will get much interest from anybody. About 100 people a day is nothing much really, and the incentives offered by CMH are pretty much the same as every other airport offers. So the Port has put themselves in the ballpark with a level playing field, but without healthy traffic volume, it doesn't look too good.
I'd also say that any intercontinental service is not in the cards unless the city, or state, or private industry does come up with a subsidy of large proportions. Those numbers are close to nothing.
CMH certainly might be on AS's list, but I'd guess it isn't very high on that list. Again, 100 PDEW, even with connecting pax over SEA, is pretty slim. And I would guess that CMH is not real high on VX's list either. And remember, with VX it's a two-fer -- they will start SFO and LAX, not just one of those 2 hubs...
Finally, there are probably at least a dozen other U.S. cities that are also "actively pursuing" airlines along with CMH. We see this same sort of article coming out of many other cities all the time. Usually, unless the market is there, nothing much results from the airports' efforts.
That being said, good luck to Columbus in their pursuit!
Boeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 320 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8150 times:
I think CMH needs to think about getting a mainline carrier(other than Southwest) in to their airport instead of worrying about getting service to LHR or CDG.
It would be nice, but I don't think the market would be big enough for the airline to support trans-atlantic flight.
The only way I would see this happening is if AA would operate a LHR flight, with great connections om BA they could pull it off. But I doubt this happening because there are only 54 daily passengers wanting the flight.
I could see UA taking an SFO flight though, on an A319 they could pull it off. But I don't think they want UA.
I do wish them luck on this challenging task......
B4REAL From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2595 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 8066 times:
I live in CMH and as a frequent traveller I'd likely see the DL LAX-CMH route go daily (currently 4x weekly, seasonally I believe). That's the most likely way for this to take off. Maybe UA add SFO-CMH, that would work. I fly frequently to the Bay area and it is tough from here. Lastly, AS SEA-CMH has a chance; but least likely of these three.
As for International routes, gee. No way. If the 757 or 739 could do CMH-AMS or CMH-CDG, *maybe*, like they'd try it. Then it would stop.
ssublyme From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 503 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 8034 times:
With VX in the top 7 of 10 largest cities in US and Columbus at #15 it might not be far off, atleast in the eyes of CMH.
izbtmnhd From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 241 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 8002 times:
boslax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 105 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7969 times:
With fuel costs rising once agian, airports across the U.S. should spend their marketing/air service development budgets on making sure they keep the service they have.
CargoLex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1153 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7936 times:
Republic pulled the E190 off of MCI-SEA in the recent past, and, I believe (I could be wrong) that there is no direct link now between SEA and MCI. I don't mention MCI because of that airport's relevance, although that market might be similar to CMH, but because of the equipment.
AC runs an E190 YYZ-SEA, and such an arrangement with an F9/Republic E190 could, maybe (and it's a big maybe) be a way to have a reliable load factor between CMH and SEA. Problem is, AS doesn't have an E190, B6 wouldn't be interested, and Republic and F9 are very up in the air. I'll go right ahead and admit that such a plan would be a real long shot. But I'd see F9 doing it before VX or AS.
ASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 889 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7839 times:
Quoting CargoLex (Reply 7): Republic pulled the E190 off of MCI-SEA in the recent past, and, I believe (I could be wrong) that there is no direct link now between SEA and MCI. I don't mention MCI because of that airport's relevance, although that market might be similar to CMH, but because of the equipment.
AC runs an E190 YYZ-SEA, and such an arrangement with an F9/Republic E190 could, maybe (and it's a big maybe) be a way to have a reliable load factor between CMH and SEA. Problem is, AS doesn't have an E190, B6 wouldn't be interested, and Republic and F9 are very up in the air. I'll go right ahead and admit that such a plan would be a real long shot. But I'd see F9 doing it before VX or AS.
Alaska is starting nonstop SEA-MCI flights in March on a 737-800. I'm not saying I think CMH is likely for AS but if they're adding the likes of AUS, STL and MCI then why not? By the way, AUS is a very hard flight to get a seat on if you're non-revving. Who would have thought? Well, Alaska apparently. I wonder what the market between CMH-PDX/ANC/YVR/GEG... is. Obviously those cities won't support non-stop service at this time but could Alaska bump up that 99 PDEW figure with connections to their west coast network?
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4536 posts, RR: 28 Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7744 times:
Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 8): Alaska is starting nonstop SEA-MCI flights in March
And I believe WN decided to reinstate their SEA-MCI flight as well.
ATAIndy From United States of America, joined May 2004, 579 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7656 times:
Quoting SANFan (Reply 1): Finally, there are probably at least a dozen other U.S. cities that are also "actively pursuing" airlines along with CMH. We see this same sort of article coming out of many other cities all the time. Usually, unless the market is there, nothing much results from the airports' efforts.
I can vouch for IND as being one of those airports. The airport administration thought new flights would drop in once the midfield terminal was complete, but here we are three years later with nothing but reductions. IND, being just down the road from CMH along I-70 has also gone after SEA, SFO, and AMS/LHR service. Currently they have none of these destinations though so don't hold your breath CMH. SFO and SEA used to be non-stop seasonal flights on FL and NW respectively.
Of all the routes listed on the map in the linked article, IND had all but SNA and SAN as non-stops back when NW had IND as a focus city. Following Delta's takeover all have been discontinued except for SLC. The traffic just isn't there when airlines can use the hub and spoke method. Best of luck to CMH if they can pull it off without getting an airline to set up a focus city.
Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 8): By the way, AUS is a very hard flight to get a seat on if you're non-revving.
NW used to operate IND-AUS and it too apparently was always full. This was operated by a CRJ though.
SANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 4716 posts, RR: 15 Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7490 times:
Even though the OP didn't mention SAN -- although the article did, pointing out that it has the second largest PDEW figure, just a bit behind SFO -- I would love to see a nonstop between here and CMH. (The only n/s in the past has been the 'Bus; we did not have a n/s when HP had a hub in Ohio.) But again, with a PDEW of 106 (from the article), I'm afraid it's not at all likely. Further, there would be no connecting opportunities over SAN, as there would be at SFO and SEA...
Let's face it. The reason there are not nonstops today from CMH to these mentioned cities is precisely because there is not the market for them. The cities that have nonstops are obviously successful and profitable for the cx (otherwise they would be gone) and that is because there are enough pax to fill the planes. (And of course some of those planes are small. The problem with the west coast -- SAN, SFO and SEA -- from CMH is that you can't really use an RJ but probably need something with well over 100 seats. Non-daily service is an option but that can be kind of a tough sell.)
Despite these facts, airports want (and need) more airlines and more flights/routes to help pay the bills and attract more pax to the airport. Most larger airports these days hire people who's only job is to bring in new airlines (along with keeping the airlines they have!) Thus we see more and more of these stories that are trying to point out that those people are trying to do their jobs. Unfortunately, the results of all these efforts are usually not so good.
ASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 889 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7447 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 9): And I believe WN decided to reinstate their SEA-MCI flight as well.
I think it was only a seasonal reduction to begin with and a seasonal add for the summer.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4536 posts, RR: 28 Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7325 times:
Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 12): I think it was only a seasonal reduction to begin with and a seasonal add for the summer.
ORDJOE From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 581 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5448 times:
I would agree this money would be better spent keeping what they have versus sending out planes half full to destinations in sustainable without these give aways.
I suppose a 737 to LAX or SFO could get filled. if they wanted to TATL, then maybe a 757 to London?
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1436 posts, RR: 50 Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5333 times:
Quoting SANFan (Reply 11): Despite these facts, airports want (and need) more airlines and more flights/routes to help pay the bills and attract more pax to the airport.
I have always doubted that if routes are offered, demand to fly will be stimulated. Since driving to SAN/SFO/SEA/PDX etc. is an unattractive option, either you want to go to these destinations by air or you don't, and I doubt that the average leisure flier would suddenly say "Hey, let's take a vacation to San Diego because we don't have to transfer in Houston!" Alternately, I doubt most people say "You know, I would have taken a trip to San Diego instead of driving to Nashville, but I had to connect in Houston so I decided to skip the whole affair!"
If adding direct service on these routes lowered the price, then *perhaps* more people would fly since price is oftenthe only criterion by which fliers make a decision. I am severely skeptical that the price of directl flights would be lower than the current connection offerings.
I think the notion that more routes = more fliers is something that airport managers tell themselves, but I doubt it's true, especially in a place like the city in which I've lived for 22.5 years. The CRAA is already spending buku bucks on what I think are completely unnecessary improvements. Throwing more money to subsidize an airline or two for routes that won't stimulate much demand is just more of the same waste.
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
threeifbyair From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 509 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5310 times:
Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 8): Alaska is starting nonstop SEA-MCI flights in March on a 737-800. I'm not saying I think CMH is likely for AS but if they're adding the likes of AUS, STL and MCI then why not? By the way, AUS is a very hard flight to get a seat on if you're non-revving. Who would have thought? Well, Alaska apparently. I wonder what the market between CMH-PDX/ANC/YVR/GEG... is. Obviously those cities won't support non-stop service at this time but could Alaska bump up that 99 PDEW figure with connections to their west coast network?
I thought AUS would be very successful - so did many others. The tech sector in AUS is quite large. SEA-SAT (a decent ly-sized market in its own right) lacks nonstop service, which likely adds to traffic on SEA-AUS.
The key for AS is opportunity cost. Perhaps SEA-CMH could be profitable, but AS has to evaluate all growth options for a new aircraft (open a new station, start a new route between existing stations, or increase frequency on an existing route). As the A.net community has discussed in previous threads, AS has several other cities that could be good options. There is still some room in Hawaii. PIT, IND, RDU, TPA, SAT, MSY, etc. all lack nonstop flights to SEA.
44k From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 309 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4054 times:
As being someone who works @ CMH this is exciting news. I can certainly see a possibility of AS taking up CMHSEA service and AA/MQ being the partner airline doing the ground handling.
As for TATL service, the article implies that the port authority is fairly confident that it will happen. However, I have been hearing these rumours for years and nothing happened yet. LHR seems to be the most likely candidate, based on passenger demand, so I will continue to dream of AA CMHLHR 757 service one day...
SouthernDC9 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 263 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3968 times:
Oh dear heavens what is the world coming to when the overbooked-CRJ's-worth of passengers flying CMH-LHR each day have to change planes somewhere? And even if there was a non-stop flight, I would think you'd have to assume that at least some of those passengers would still choose a connecting flight if they had status on another carrier (or if the price was better).
I mean, I know every city has to look out for its own interests and promote itself, but this strikes me as a bit silly...
What does AA/US merger mean for CLT/JFK/PHX/North America/Southern Hemisphere/God's Plan for the Universe
peanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1307 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3856 times:
CMH VP of Business Development should be fired. All he is doing with this "int'l service" talk is pacifying his audience. He is trying to make his job appear "legit" with this utter nonsense. "Look at me, Look at me, look what I'm trying to do for us"
Fuel being this high and climbing? Forget it.
I'd hope he spends most his time doing realistic business stuff, on the taxpayers dime. Good grief.
Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
flyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1613 posts, RR: 9 Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3782 times:
Quoting DeltaRules (Thread starter): And who might the carrier willing to take on CMH-LHR/LGW or CMH-CDG/ORY be?
I don't really see a possibility of TATL service out of CMH. If CLE couldn't hack it to LON or CDG with a hub to prop them up, I seriously doubt there's any possibility of it happening to CMH. While not an Ohio airport, CVG is really the only airport in the area that could/does support TATL flights due to the Cincinnati area business community's strong TATL travel demand.
steeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 8802 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3609 times:
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 20): While not an Ohio airport, CVG is really the only airport in the area that could/does support TATL flights due to the Cincinnati area business community's strong TATL travel demand.
Throw in PIT as well, with some of its catchment serving parts of Eastern Ohio. At least there is enough demand here for seasonal TATL service.
Given that, yeah, I doubt there's enough demand out of CMH for tatl service or for the routes listed above...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
flyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1919 posts, RR: 11 Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3593 times:
Ok...since Jose hasn't thrown his 2 cents in yet, I will get mine in before him.
The Columbus area has a lot going for it and it will continue to grow. Companies are relocating there and adding jobs there. Columbus has deep ties to London via the insurance industry and has Asian ties with some tech firms and also a large Honda plant in Marysville. Don't forget, there are two very accredited and rather large universities with international ties that primarily use that airport.
I personally think CMH-SFO would be my first choice - probably on a UA 737-800 or a UA A320. UA does a great job of flowing planes to where they need to be when they need to be. I would think this service would be a no brainer in the next year or two when they finally get the merger completed and start to look at new opportunities.
I don't know much about the CMH-SEA market. I think it would be another good route to at least attempt. Getting AS into Ohio would be an awesome sight. With a strong AA frequent flier base in CMH, might be a strength.
CMH-LHR would probably be marginal, unless there were subsidies or guarantees from the community itself. There are other ties other then the insurance industry - fashion. Of course, Limited does have their own BBJ If anyone were to try it, I would think AA would be it and I wouldn't even mind seeing it 4x weekly, why would it need to be daily if you have a plethora of connections through other hubs?
CMH has a lot going for it, that's for sure, but I don't think they will see much in the way of expansion of routes for at least a year or two. I would suggest maybe getting IAH, DEN, and MIA to all mainline if the new cities don't pan out.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2289 posts, RR: 7 Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3543 times:
Quoting threeifbyair (Reply 16): The key for AS is opportunity cost. Perhaps SEA-CMH could be profitable, but AS has to evaluate all growth options for a new aircraft (open a new station, start a new route between existing stations, or increase frequency on an existing route). As the A.net community has discussed in previous threads, AS has several other cities that could be good options. There is still some room in Hawaii. PIT, IND, RDU, TPA, SAT, MSY, etc. all lack nonstop flights to SEA.
As you know there have been other threads speculating on AS's next destinations from SEA. It's always hard to predict. I don't think anyone keeled over in shock when AS announced PHL, but I never would have guessed MCI. Nor would I have expected some other of their new routes which seem to be doing well (SMF-GDL; SJC-LIH; BLI-HNL, SEA-FLL, etc).
Moral of the story is that, while CMH is not highest on my speculative list of AS's next destination from SEA, I sure wouldn't rule it out either based on recent history. We shall see.
bjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2776 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3516 times:
Quoting DeltaRules (Thread starter): Also, the airport is seeking trans-Atlantic service, which could come in "the spring or summer of 2013" according to the VP of business development for the airport authority
Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 2): It would be nice, but I don't think the market would be big enough for the airline to support trans-atlantic flight.
Quoting ORDJOE (Reply 14): if they wanted to TATL, then maybe a 757 to London?
Almost all pax would be O&D since CHM isn't even a focus city for any airline. Maybe I can lease a A319LR and take their money.
Quoting ContnlEliteCMH (Reply 15): I am severely skeptical that the price of directl flights would be lower than the current connection offerings.
Most n/s are more expensive than connex.
"An idea has to be incredibly absurd to have any reasonable chance of succeeding" --A. Einstein
25 joeman: A lot more to that story than not being able to hack it with a so called hub to prop them up.....
26 Indy: $800k to $1.1M? That is far from what PIT offered. If memory serves me correct the incentives to DL were something like $9 mil. The dollar amounts re
27 izbtmnhd: Ohio is an underserved TATL area as a whole. If CMH can market a LHR flight to either NE Ohio or SW Ohio businesses effectively they should be able to
28 flyguy89: That may be so but it still doesn't belie the fact the flights are no longer there with no plans to return. CLE would get TATL service before CMH IMH
29 izbtmnhd: I'm getting tired of Pittsburgh and Cincinnati people trying to use Cleveland as crutch to prop their operations up especially on a thread about prop
30 flyguy89: This has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make or trying to flourish any kind of "primacy", you're being way too thin-skinned about the i
31 izbtmnhd: I'm not being "thin skinned" just noticing the same patterns watching a.net over the past 10+ years. The issue of TATL in NE Ohio is a more complex i
32 LHCVG: One caveat there - doesn't CMH have a rather large catchment area though? Clearly the Columbus MSA is smaller than both Cleveland and Cincinnati. How
33 flyguy89: That's all well and fine except that it's a flimsy strategy given that a non-stop would be more expensive than connecting options. The overlaps in ca
34 LHCVG: They will, but doesn't CMH have pretty competitive fares overall? From what I've seen booking DCA-Ohio flights, CMH is always MUCH cheaper than eithe
35 flyguy89: It does, but what does that say about yields in Columbus? The same effect could happen at either of the surrounding airports, it's just a matter of w
36 STT757: This is what I don't understand, I thought the Trans-Atlantic Joint venture between AA and BA would allow the carriers to consolidate where they compe
37 point2point: That's the theory given by the carriers as to why the JVs were going to be good. However, the reality is that the airlines are going to put the fligh
38 LHCVG: Yields are low indeed. I am personally more optimistic about domestic options than TATL.
39 steeler83: I could not have worded that better myself if I tried. I'm all for being creative and constructive, but I'm also one to be practical. Just adding fli
40 MAH4546: We have yet to see a strong enough travel market, nor a strong enough AA, for this to happen. I absolutely do think AA/BA will pursue this. Summer 20
41 September11: on side note, a new 3rd runway is under construction at CMH
42 PITrules: The 3rd runway will actually still be a second runway. The current south runway will be turned into a taxiway. The relocated runway will allow for par
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3623 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1307 posts, 
From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2776 posts, 
Most n/s are more expensive than connex.
Printer friendly format 
