Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
787fan8 wrote:DL will announce RDU-AMS at somepoint. Mark my words.
flyfresno wrote:CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.
ADrum23 wrote:flyfresno wrote:CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.
I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......
flyfresno wrote:ADrum23 wrote:flyfresno wrote:CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.
I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......
Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?
flyfresno wrote:CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.
msycajun wrote:I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.
ADrum23 wrote:flyfresno wrote:ADrum23 wrote:
I'd add BNA as well, but maybe it's too close of proximity to the main ATL hub.......
Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?
BNA is closer to ATL than RDU, so I don't know if DL would be keen on making Nashville a focus city. Especially since CVG is still a hub and it's fairly close to BNA as well.
ADrum23 wrote:msycajun wrote:I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.
Do you think Paris would be a successful destination from MSY? Isn't London and Frankfurt the top two destinations from MSY?
ADrum23 wrote:Speaking about Delta: "This is a result of Network turning their efforts to "focus" cities. These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors. The model for DL was RDU. In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR. Can't talk specifics on this open forum. Think of large cities, near competitor hubs that we currently have only 4x service each day to a couple of our hubs. Austin would fit that description and we have already announced increased service. There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."
Midwestindy then said: I think this might deserve a separate thread...
MIflyer12 wrote:ADrum23 wrote:Speaking about Delta: "This is a result of Network turning their efforts to "focus" cities. These are cities that are underserved and are not a hub for competitors. The model for DL was RDU. In short order, we add ~20 non-stops per peak day (often only 1 flight to many hubs) and a transatlantic flight to CDG, AMS or LHR. Can't talk specifics on this open forum. Think of large cities, near competitor hubs that we currently have only 4x service each day to a couple of our hubs. Austin would fit that description and we have already announced increased service. There are at least 6 others that are being considered. You will see AMS flights to new cities announced later this Fall."
Midwestindy then said: I think this might deserve a separate thread...
Who is being quoted?
Cubsrule wrote:ADrum23 wrote:flyfresno wrote:
Good point. Is it really that much closer than RDU to make a difference?
BNA is closer to ATL than RDU, so I don't know if DL would be keen on making Nashville a focus city. Especially since CVG is still a hub and it's fairly close to BNA as well.
The problem in BNA is more so the competitive environment (largely WN) than the geography. DL would be dealing with WN and somebody else on just about any focus city-type route.
klm617 wrote:Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect.
klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
ERJ170 wrote:Added flights to hubs doesn't equate to focus city but adding p2p does. So if we look at DL legacy special cities.. we get RDU, CMH, BDL, MCO, TPA... then you can add IND... each of the first 5 truly have P2P routes.. IND has a couple...
Midwestindy wrote:IND has more than TPA, CMH, BDL, and TPA
p2p flights by cities you mentioned:
TPA: 2 (RDU/CUN)
BDL:4 (CUN/RDU/CLE/MCO)
CMH: 5 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN)
IND: 6 (MIA/RSW/MCO/RDU/CUN/CDG)
MCO: 19
RDU: Already officially a focus city
klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
SunsetLimited wrote:I hope DL doesn't start MSY-Europe. I don't want to see BA and DE suffer, which I'm sure they would in some respect if DL starts a flight, granted BA moreso.
I'd like to see a MSY-CDG flight but not this soon. The nonstop European market needs time to mature. Let's revisit the idea in two years. Until then, quite happy with direct service to LHR and FRA!
Midwestindy wrote:
A DL 767 pilot
klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
RDUDDJI wrote:Midwestindy wrote:
A DL 767 pilot
...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.
Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.
jreuschl wrote:I also think MKE will get a Europe flight or two once the E terminal becomes a small international one. At the very least one of the ultra low cost carriers will come.
Midwestindy wrote:flyfresno wrote:CMH, RDU, AUS, MCO, LAS will likely be the main focus cities going forward. I could see one more west coast city becoming bigger as well, likely SJC or PDX. Some of these have AMS already, some don't, but I think they will all see more domestic growth for sure.
Since it was said that "and are not a hub for competitors" wouldn't that rule out PDX and to a lesser extent SJC.
Since it mentioned 6 six cities I'll add in IND, considering it just got the CDG flight, and the post was directly related to that news!
IND, CMH, RDU(Already a focus city, so might not count), AUS, MCO, and LAS are the six that make sense considering they have lots of p2p flying, but BNA might fit in there as well.
Oh and just to stir the pot a little, when IND was approving their new incentives this summer, they included a pretty hefty incentive to any carrier that planned on creating a "focus city " in IND.
Funny, this tweet from the middle of the summer had some truth to it: "https://twitter.com/GoldboxATL/status/893457158473486337
"Hearing #Delta will be announcing new international routes as early as today; some from focus cities. Let the guessing games begin."
ADrum23 wrote:msycajun wrote:I'd have to think that MSY would have to be on the radar, although with CDG, not AMS. AF officials made a rather public visit not long before BA announced and there have been rumors from higher up officials regarding a major DL expansion here. DL has been the top legacy carrier at MSY for a while, but is losing ground to AA and both Star and OneWorld have major international service, while DL has nothing more than a seasonal CUN.
Do you think Paris would be a successful destination from MSY? Isn't London and Frankfurt the top two destinations from MSY?
Midwestindy wrote:RDUDDJI wrote:Midwestindy wrote:
A DL 767 pilot
...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.
Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.
I might agree with you, but this isn't the first time this has come up, this "rumor" was talked about in the summer and since then MCO-AMS and IND-CDG were announced. So, with that in mind, and the fact that it came from a 767 pilot(which many of these potential flights would be run on) it holds more merit.
msycajun wrote:klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.
MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.
rbavfan wrote:Midwestindy wrote:RDUDDJI wrote:
...who isn't an official spokesperson (I'm assuming) and likely has no knowledge of DL's future focus city plans.
Don't get me wrong, I love "Expansion" type threads, but starting them off using hearsay from another forum isn't a best practice.
I might agree with you, but this isn't the first time this has come up, this "rumor" was talked about in the summer and since then MCO-AMS and IND-CDG were announced. So, with that in mind, and the fact that it came from a 767 pilot(which many of these potential flights would be run on) it holds more merit.
Yes but who talked about "this rumor" more than once. This is the second time I've seen it and this post is based on his comment on the other post. Don't oversell it!
klm617 wrote:msycajun wrote:klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.
MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.
First of all when traveling from IND to europe most flights require a double connect even over DTW. The only places you could reach one stop over DTW are LHR, AMS, CDG, and FRA year rounf and FCO and MUC in the summer. The only hubs that offer onestop connections to most of Europe in the US are JFK and ATL so any for city around those hubs it would be pointless to waste a frame if they can connect at either JFK or ATL that is unless a city is offering big money.
Cubsrule wrote:klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.
klm617 wrote:Cubsrule wrote:klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.
If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam
Cubsrule wrote:klm617 wrote:msycajun wrote:
That's a tired and outdated argument. That's like saying why would DL run IND-CDG when it could connect over DTW. Why does BA fly MSY/AUS-LHR when it could connect over DFW/CLT/PHL/ORD? Because passengers pay a premium for the nonstop and making itineraries to secondary Europe/Middle East/Africa one stop instead of two. Proximity to a hub becomes much less of a factor when your competitors are willing to provide nonstops to Europe.
MEM doesn't make any sense because it is a tiny market - not even in the top 60, but I do see DEN as a possibility for a ST flight to Europe.
First of all when traveling from IND to europe most flights require a double connect even over DTW. The only places you could reach one stop over DTW are LHR, AMS, CDG, and FRA year rounf and FCO and MUC in the summer. The only hubs that offer onestop connections to most of Europe in the US are JFK and ATL so any for city around those hubs it would be pointless to waste a frame if they can connect at either JFK or ATL that is unless a city is offering big money.
Ninety percent or more of the IND-Europe O&D can connect one-stop over DTW, ORD and/or PHL, and I'm not sure why you assume ATL is uncompetitive.
klm617 wrote:Cubsrule wrote:klm617 wrote:I disagree about any cities that would use ATL to connect to Europe as there are already many one stop connections over that hub that one can make and makes a Nonstop to Europe kind of pointless. Don't know why any of you fail to mention MKE as it had a very large NW presence for years and most flights from MKE to Europe now require 2 stops unless you fly AA or UA over ORD. According to what they are saying MKE makes perfect sense. To further back up my argument about the ATL hub if what I am saying was not true don't you think MEM would have already been reconnected to CDG or AMS. Another that perfectly fits would be DEN to either AMS or CDG because there again traveling from DEN to Europe on DL in most cases will force you to double connect. I would expect these adds to be in the upper Midwest or great plains and not in the deep South unless it's a huge market like MCO. You can cross AUS off that list to those passengers have direct access over ATL to most of Europe with one stop.
I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.
If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam
cvgComair wrote:I will be interested to see where this goes, DL has really stepped up PTP routes in recent years and I think it is a really exciting strategy. DL has a pretty interesting hub/focus city structure, which is quite unique:
Large Hubs: ATL, MSP, DTW, LGA/JFK, SLC
Small Hubs: LAX, SEA, CVG, BOS
International Hubs: NRT, CDG, AMS, LHR
Focus Cities: RDU, MCO
DL has already been expanding aggressively in their small hub category, I think focus cities are the next logical step. I could see IND/AUS/BNA/CMH/MSY/MKE all being good cities for expansion.
Cubsrule wrote:klm617 wrote:Cubsrule wrote:
I'm not sure where this idea about MKE-Europe requiring two stops comes from. Regardless, though, MKE has always bled a tremendous amount of TATL traffic to ORD, and if anything the problem is more acute now that the Tri-State widening is complete. In the NW focus city days, it was not all uncommon to run in to highly loyal Worldperks members who used ORD exclusively or close to exclusively for longhaul travel.
If you are flying Delta out of MKE other than FRA, AMS, LHR and CDG year round or FCO and MUC summer only you have to make 2 stops to get to anywhere else in europe from MKE on skyteam
I'm not sure if you have heard, but Delta's two largest TATL hubs are ATL and JFK, and MKE has plenty of service to both.