jrkmsp
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:33 am

MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 5:59 pm

The MSP chamber and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the government body that runs the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, formed an air service development partnership to try and bolster the international presence. I think it's interesting to see how successful they've been, and look at the destinations they're still working on.

The partnership surveyed the business community and made a list of the top 10 wishes for international air travel from Minneapolis. In 2018, carriers announced service to the No. 1, 2, 4 and 10 destinations on the wishlist:

ICN
MEX (Technically pending government approval, but that's a formality because of a quirk in the US-Mexico air service treaty)
DUB
PVG (In 2020, pending allotment of 7 US-China frequencies)

That's pretty remarkable progress in just a year's time, especially when the international air service climate from MSP had been relatively static for several years.

Here's a look at what else is on the business community's wishlist, which might give us some indication of what might be to come next year for MSP:

Europe:
GVA
DUS
MUC
BRU

South America:
GRU

Asia:
SIN
BLR

North America:
Improved service to YYZ
Improved service to YUL

Most of these seem like real long shots, but if you'd asked me last year I would have told you PVG service was many years away. So it's possible that one or more of these might emerge in the next year.
 
blockski
Posts: 503
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:16 pm

Some of these are rather odd asks - there are what, a handful of flights from DUS to the US?

Likewise, SIN has a handful of non-stop flights; to markets much larger than Minneapolis. And no one flies from the US to BLR at all - I don't think MSP is going to be the market that opens up that route.

I'd think they'd be interested in opening up additional hub connections to extend the reach for business travelers. GRU makes a lot of sense, as would MUC (or more regular service to FRA)...
Last edited by blockski on Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
NCAD95
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:11 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:22 pm

I have to agree they have done a great job attracting new service.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:23 pm

The next targets for MSP are year-round FRA and PTY.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:53 pm

usflyer msp wrote:
The next targets for MSP are year-round FRA and PTY.

FRA would do far better with LH than with DE. I believe that SY tried something in Panama, not sure if it was PTY, but never went through with it. FCO could have worked, it started off slow, but DL pulled it pretty quick, didn't allow a chance to grow.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:02 pm

Indeed MSP has had, by its standards, a blockbuster year. PVG, ICN and DUB

Oh, and JetBlue service
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7268
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:06 pm

How much success can be attributed to the partnership or is a result of the next natural additions for DL as a part of their JV relationships?

I'd argue that ICN, PVG, and MEX fall into that category.
 
Antoli0794
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:09 pm

Flighty wrote:
Indeed MSP has had, by its standards, a blockbuster year. PVG, ICN and DUB

Oh, and JetBlue service




And now MEX
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:15 pm

jrkmsp wrote:
The MSP chamber and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the government body that runs the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, formed an air service development partnership to try and bolster the international presence. I think it's interesting to see how successful they've been, and look at the destinations they're still working on.

The partnership surveyed the business community and made a list of the top 10 wishes for international air travel from Minneapolis. In 2018, carriers announced service to the No. 1, 2, 4 and 10 destinations on the wishlist:

ICN
MEX (Technically pending government approval, but that's a formality because of a quirk in the US-Mexico air service treaty)
DUB
PVG (In 2020, pending allotment of 7 US-China frequencies)

That's pretty remarkable progress in just a year's time, especially when the international air service climate from MSP had been relatively static for several years.

Here's a look at what else is on the business community's wishlist, which might give us some indication of what might be to come next year for MSP:

Europe:
GVA
DUS
MUC
BRU

South America:
GRU

Asia:
SIN
BLR

North America:
Improved service to YYZ
Improved service to YUL

Most of these seem like real long shots, but if you'd asked me last year I would have told you PVG service was many years away. So it's possible that one or more of these might emerge in the next year.


It's pretty clear which employers have requested some of these routes.

If a MSP-MUC route were added, it would be mainly for Allianz.

MSP-GVA would be mainly for Cargill. Cargill also has large offices in SIN and GRU.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5420
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:20 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
How much success can be attributed to the partnership or is a result of the next natural additions for DL as a part of their JV relationships?

I'd argue that ICN, PVG, and MEX fall into that category.


You may lack the art of self-promotion for those in quasi-public organizations. As it has been said, Victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan.
 
Antoli0794
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:29 pm

Maybe NBO, 28 PDEW
 
klakzky123
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:05 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:33 pm

Antoli0794 wrote:
Maybe NBO, 28 PDEW


Somali VFR traffic to Kenya isn't going to attract a direct flight. Realistically, MSP might get something new from Canada with the upcoming Delta/Westjet joint venture but beyond that I'm not sure what else will show up. I think airlines will get a little conservative with new routes in 2019 with the current economic uncertainty.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:41 pm

I'm surprised that YQT hasn't started. There used to be service between MSP-YQT for years. And it has a decent sized population and as it is now Canadians have to connect in YWG or YYZ. I think MSP could give them decent options.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 13853
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:57 pm

klakzky123 wrote:
Antoli0794 wrote:
Maybe NBO, 28 PDEW


Somali VFR traffic to Kenya isn't going to attract a direct flight. Realistically, MSP might get something new from Canada with the upcoming Delta/Westjet joint venture but beyond that I'm not sure what else will show up. I think airlines will get a little conservative with new routes in 2019 with the current economic uncertainty.


The "problem" with your Canada observation is that DL actually has MSP-Canada pretty well covered. YYC would be a sensible WS add, but DL already serves it, including with year-round mainline IINM. WS isn't going to add stuff like YQR or YOW, which are about the largest markets without service.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
jrkmsp
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:33 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:58 pm

usflyer msp wrote:
The next targets for MSP are year-round FRA and PTY.


Those make tons of sense to me, but it's interesting that they weren't on the list mentioned by Rick King this week. He's the co-chair of the RASP.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3306
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:21 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
How much success can be attributed to the partnership or is a result of the next natural additions for DL as a part of their JV relationships?

I'd argue that ICN, PVG, and MEX fall into that category.


I'd say those three are directly the result of JV agreements. Without a JV they are not flown.

The airport commission itself has done a poor job of bringing in strong international competition. Even in a time of booming international carriers to the US, Aer Lingus is the only feather in their cap worth mentioning, and it's not a bright one considering EI has expanded to virtually every other comparable US market.
 
peanuts
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:17 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:35 pm

The wish list looks more extreme and unrealistic than my kids Christmas wish list.

Basically this group is taking credit of DL mining through their JV relationships. Dublin is the only exception.

The only reasonable one is GVA but DL would fly it out of JFK or ATL anyway.
Sorry MSP. Stop pandering to your local audience.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 803
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:37 pm

Just an opinion on routes thrown out:
PTY: Would have to be COPA, which only serves a handful of non-Star/UA hub cities in the US (LAS, JFK, FLL, MIA, MCO, MSY, TPA). While I don’t think it’s conpletely out of the question, the long stage length and low Panamanian population in the Cities leads me to believe it would only be served if COPA went to SkyTeam.
DUS/GVA: Agreed with other posters here: neither of these cities have a lot of US routes. Maybe DUS in Air Berlin’s hay day, but now...nah.
BLR: Keep dreaming.
SIN: Until ORD happens, I wouldn’t even start talking about it.
BRU: Seems unlikely, but more likely than DUS or GVA.
MUC: Probably the most likely of the list, on LH. I would expect year-round FRA first, though.
GRU: The end of MCO and DTW don’t bode well for this wish.
Other possible int’l cities, I would guess: Random Caribbean “beach” cities (SY), FCO (again), CPH (huge Scandinavian population...seasonal on Norshuttle or SAS?), an ME3 hub.
 
User avatar
SteveXC500
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:38 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:40 pm

WA707atMSP wrote:
jrkmsp wrote:
The MSP chamber and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the government body that runs the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, formed an air service development partnership to try and bolster the international presence. I think it's interesting to see how successful they've been, and look at the destinations they're still working on.

The partnership surveyed the business community and made a list of the top 10 wishes for international air travel from Minneapolis. In 2018, carriers announced service to the No. 1, 2, 4 and 10 destinations on the wishlist:

ICN
MEX (Technically pending government approval, but that's a formality because of a quirk in the US-Mexico air service treaty)
DUB
PVG (In 2020, pending allotment of 7 US-China frequencies)

That's pretty remarkable progress in just a year's time, especially when the international air service climate from MSP had been relatively static for several years.

Here's a look at what else is on the business community's wishlist, which might give us some indication of what might be to come next year for MSP:

Europe:
GVA
DUS
MUC
BRU

South America:
GRU

Asia:
SIN
BLR

North America:
Improved service to YYZ
Improved service to YUL

Most of these seem like real long shots, but if you'd asked me last year I would have told you PVG service was many years away. So it's possible that one or more of these might emerge in the next year.


It's pretty clear which employers have requested some of these routes.

If a MSP-MUC route were added, it would be mainly for Allianz.

MSP-GVA would be mainly for Cargill. Cargill also has large offices in SIN and GRU.


I think it's funny to make attempts to tie specific companies to these. They would largely be 1% of the seats, if that. Cargill, Allianz, and whomever else won't make big enough dents in any air service to warrant daily service being added. Additionally, if companies are smart, they are limiting travel and using more technology to hold meetings.
Does a non-stop flight help corporations who do utilize travel abroad? Obviously, but I just don't think it's the deciding factor here.
 
af773atmsp
Posts: 2357
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:37 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:41 pm

Antoli0794 wrote:
Maybe NBO, 28 PDEW


Take this with a massive grain of salt, but supposedly a decade ago KQ was considering NBO-AMS/CDG-MSP. Whether this is actually true or not I have no idea.

I'd like to see non-stop service to a Scandinavian city (OSL, CPH, or ARN) and DXB in at least a few years.
DC10-40,MD88,A319,A320,A332,717,722,733,737,738,752,ATR-72,736,788
SY,DL,FI,FL,BA,EI,NW,MG,DY,EZY,F9,WN,SN,ET,SK
Too many airports to fit in signature.
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:01 am

SteveXC500 wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
jrkmsp wrote:
The MSP chamber and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the government body that runs the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, formed an air service development partnership to try and bolster the international presence. I think it's interesting to see how successful they've been, and look at the destinations they're still working on.

The partnership surveyed the business community and made a list of the top 10 wishes for international air travel from Minneapolis. In 2018, carriers announced service to the No. 1, 2, 4 and 10 destinations on the wishlist:

ICN
MEX (Technically pending government approval, but that's a formality because of a quirk in the US-Mexico air service treaty)
DUB
PVG (In 2020, pending allotment of 7 US-China frequencies)

That's pretty remarkable progress in just a year's time, especially when the international air service climate from MSP had been relatively static for several years.

Here's a look at what else is on the business community's wishlist, which might give us some indication of what might be to come next year for MSP:

Europe:
GVA
DUS
MUC
BRU

South America:
GRU

Asia:
SIN
BLR

North America:
Improved service to YYZ
Improved service to YUL

Most of these seem like real long shots, but if you'd asked me last year I would have told you PVG service was many years away. So it's possible that one or more of these might emerge in the next year.


It's pretty clear which employers have requested some of these routes.

If a MSP-MUC route were added, it would be mainly for Allianz.

MSP-GVA would be mainly for Cargill. Cargill also has large offices in SIN and GRU.


I think it's funny to make attempts to tie specific companies to these. They would largely be 1% of the seats, if that. Cargill, Allianz, and whomever else won't make big enough dents in any air service to warrant daily service being added. Additionally, if companies are smart, they are limiting travel and using more technology to hold meetings.
Does a non-stop flight help corporations who do utilize travel abroad? Obviously, but I just don't think it's the deciding factor here.


The list of "most wanted" routes was prepared by a group of large employers in the Twin Cities. Allianz definitely will not generate enough PDEW to justify MSP-MUC, but when they were asked "what routes would you like to see added from MSP?", they almost certainly said they wanted MUC nonstops.

This is just a "wish list" for companies, so companies can ask for anything. However, things will get more interesting if companies are asked to support their desired routes through a revenue guarantee. That's when many of these wishes will go bye-bye.
 
NCAD95
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:11 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:45 am

Sorry but you all are not giving the airport authority nearly enough credit for the brilliant job it has done in bring in new flight options to the MSP market . Let us also not forget KLM which was added to the list of international airline that serve MSP. AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market. Also the airport authority was able to get incentive funding together for the DUB, ICN and PVG flights so let us not say they did nothing they were proactive in facilitating these new flights.
 
User avatar
SteveXC500
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:38 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:39 pm

NCAD95 wrote:
Sorry but you all are not giving the airport authority nearly enough credit for the brilliant job it has done in bring in new flight options to the MSP market . Let us also not forget KLM which was added to the list of international airline that serve MSP. AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market. Also the airport authority was able to get incentive funding together for the DUB, ICN and PVG flights so let us not say they did nothing they were proactive in facilitating these new flights.


When KLM came back to MSP, didn't DL adjust its schedule a bit so it was not like an entire new flight was added? Now, KL has increased but because of the JV, they really aren't coming in here on their own accord. If BA shows up, that will be a big deal.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:16 pm

SteveXC500 wrote:
NCAD95 wrote:
Sorry but you all are not giving the airport authority nearly enough credit for the brilliant job it has done in bring in new flight options to the MSP market . Let us also not forget KLM which was added to the list of international airline that serve MSP. AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market. Also the airport authority was able to get incentive funding together for the DUB, ICN and PVG flights so let us not say they did nothing they were proactive in facilitating these new flights.


When KLM came back to MSP, didn't DL adjust its schedule a bit so it was not like an entire new flight was added? Now, KL has increased but because of the JV, they really aren't coming in here on their own accord. If BA shows up, that will be a big deal.


Exactly, and this is why EI announcing a flight was a big deal. That's a new competitor between MSP and Europe. Otherwise the longhaul international service MSP gets is DL and the LCC competitors Condor and Icelandair (not sure if missing anything). Star Alliance and Oneworld do not serve MSP to Europe or Asia. There are obviously Toronto flights. AF and KL flights fall under the DL joint venture; they are not separate airlines visiting MSP. They are synonymous with Delta Atlantic flying.
 
User avatar
MSPSXMFLIER
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:37 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:37 pm

Flighty wrote:
Indeed MSP has had, by its standards, a blockbuster year. PVG, ICN and DUB

Oh, and JetBlue service


Very happy about JetBlue entering the market and hoping for some expansion of routes from MSP in 2019.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3306
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:47 pm

NCAD95 wrote:
AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market.


SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.

DL/AF/KL are different colors, but they're the same airline for competition purposes.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2493
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 5:00 pm

I think the best options to pursue would be LH on MSP-FRA or MSP-MUC on a year round basis, and/or BA on MSP-LHR. Any of those options would add competition to the Transatlantic market, and would open up a plethora of new one-stop connecting itineraries.

East Asia will be well covered by DL/KE via SEA, ICN, and (hopefully) PVG, even if MSP-HND does eventually get cut. BLR is connected one stop via CDG/AMS, and that's about as good as MSP can hope for on that one... Looking South, MSP just doesn't have a good geographic location to support service to Latin America outside of the large winter leisure demand to beach markets, so I don't see GRU being a good add for any airline. And I agree with others upthread that any airline looking to expand nonstop from the U.S. to BRU, DUS, or GVA likely has bigger fish to fry than MSP-XXX.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 5:12 pm

FSDan wrote:
I think the best options to pursue would be LH on MSP-FRA or MSP-MUC on a year round basis, and/or BA on MSP-LHR. Any of those options would add competition to the Transatlantic market, and would open up a plethora of new one-stop connecting itineraries.

East Asia will be well covered by DL/KE via SEA, ICN, and (hopefully) PVG, even if MSP-HND does eventually get cut. BLR is connected one stop via CDG/AMS, and that's about as good as MSP can hope for on that one... Looking South, MSP just doesn't have a good geographic location to support service to Latin America outside of the large winter leisure demand to beach markets, so I don't see GRU being a good add for any airline. And I agree with others upthread that any airline looking to expand nonstop from the U.S. to BRU, DUS, or GVA likely has bigger fish to fry than MSP-XXX.

IF HND gets cut look for service to be shifted back to NRT. If that doesn't happen ANA or JAL could step in.

I can't see anything happening with South America, there are a few destinations in Mexico and Central America which could happen, but probably more as a tourist destination and not business.

As far as Europe possibly ARN, MAD. I don't see FCO happening again, but I suppose anything is possible. FRA would do much better with a reliable air carrier. DE just hasn't been all that reliable.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2493
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:16 pm

lavalampluva wrote:
FSDan wrote:
I think the best options to pursue would be LH on MSP-FRA or MSP-MUC on a year round basis, and/or BA on MSP-LHR. Any of those options would add competition to the Transatlantic market, and would open up a plethora of new one-stop connecting itineraries.

East Asia will be well covered by DL/KE via SEA, ICN, and (hopefully) PVG, even if MSP-HND does eventually get cut. BLR is connected one stop via CDG/AMS, and that's about as good as MSP can hope for on that one... Looking South, MSP just doesn't have a good geographic location to support service to Latin America outside of the large winter leisure demand to beach markets, so I don't see GRU being a good add for any airline. And I agree with others upthread that any airline looking to expand nonstop from the U.S. to BRU, DUS, or GVA likely has bigger fish to fry than MSP-XXX.

IF HND gets cut look for service to be shifted back to NRT. If that doesn't happen ANA or JAL could step in.


I don't know about that. I don't see DL serving 3 East Asia markets nonstop from MSP simultaneously, and I'm not convinced the MSP-TYO market is big enough for NH or JL to want to step in (not to mention that I'd expect them to be comparing TYO-MSP to other opportunities like TYO-LAS, TYO-MIA, TYO-PHL, TYO-PDX, and TYO-PHX that might end up being better fits for their networks and JVs). The reason MSP has had a link to Tokyo for so long is because NW pushed all their Asia traffic through there, not because it's a huge local market (it's something like 30 PDEW, if I remember correctly).
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:27 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
NCAD95 wrote:
AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market.


SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.

DL/AF/KL are different colors, but they're the same airline for competition purposes.


I would argue SEA should be compared to BOS, not to MSP. MSP without DL hub would otherwise be similar to STL. It is probably most similar to CLT and DTW, with CLT a bigger hub and MSP a bigger town. But pretty similar.

Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 7:05 pm

FSDan wrote:
lavalampluva wrote:
FSDan wrote:
I think the best options to pursue would be LH on MSP-FRA or MSP-MUC on a year round basis, and/or BA on MSP-LHR. Any of those options would add competition to the Transatlantic market, and would open up a plethora of new one-stop connecting itineraries.

East Asia will be well covered by DL/KE via SEA, ICN, and (hopefully) PVG, even if MSP-HND does eventually get cut. BLR is connected one stop via CDG/AMS, and that's about as good as MSP can hope for on that one... Looking South, MSP just doesn't have a good geographic location to support service to Latin America outside of the large winter leisure demand to beach markets, so I don't see GRU being a good add for any airline. And I agree with others upthread that any airline looking to expand nonstop from the U.S. to BRU, DUS, or GVA likely has bigger fish to fry than MSP-XXX.

IF HND gets cut look for service to be shifted back to NRT. If that doesn't happen ANA or JAL could step in.


I don't know about that. I don't see DL serving 3 East Asia markets nonstop from MSP simultaneously, and I'm not convinced the MSP-TYO market is big enough for NH or JL to want to step in (not to mention that I'd expect them to be comparing TYO-MSP to other opportunities like TYO-LAS, TYO-MIA, TYO-PHL, TYO-PDX, and TYO-PHX that might end up being better fits for their networks and JVs). The reason MSP has had a link to Tokyo for so long is because NW pushed all their Asia traffic through there, not because it's a huge local market (it's something like 30 PDEW, if I remember correctly).

Interesting how that works out. MSP used to have 10 flights a week to NRT with 744. Now they can fill an 777 Friday-Sunday, but struggle to get over 60% the rest of the week. IMO DL is slowly looking to vacate NRT for HND, but needs slots to do it.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 7:16 pm

Flighty wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
NCAD95 wrote:
AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market.


SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.

DL/AF/KL are different colors, but they're the same airline for competition purposes.


I would argue SEA should be compared to BOS, not to MSP. MSP without DL hub would otherwise be similar to STL. It is probably most similar to CLT and DTW, with CLT a bigger hub and MSP a bigger town. But pretty similar.

Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.

SEA has the advantage of geography. Airports on the West Coast are more likely to get TPAC service, just as airports on the East Coast are to get TATL.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2493
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:53 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.


Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.

Specifically looking at TATL, MSP has significantly more capacity to AMS, MSP and SEA have pretty equivalent capacity to KEF and CDG (and DUB will be close once EI starts their daily MSP-DUB vs SEA's 5x weekly on a larger aircraft), and then SEA has significantly more capacity to the UK and Germany. SEA definitely comes out ahead overall (mostly because of the difference in capacity to the UK), but I wouldn't say it's in the realm of being disproportionately ahead given the local markets...

Taking a quick look at other regions, SEA definitely does kick MSP's butt in TPAC capacity in a major way. But that's not surprising given SEA's geography, and it's stronger cultural and economic ties to East Asia. On the other hand, I'd argue that MSP kicks SEA's butt in terms of winter beach market capacity - also not surprising given the climate difference. That leaves SEA's ME3 link that MSP lacks. That's attributable to the larger South Asian population in Seattle.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:14 pm

jrkmsp wrote:

Here's a look at what else is on the business community's wishlist, which might give us some indication of what might be to come next year for MSP:

Europe:
GVA
DUS
MUC
BRU

South America:
GRU

Asia:
SIN
BLR

.


These are going to be tough. Most are marginal at best from ORD

If DL exits MSP-TYO, i dont see JAL or ANA stepping in. There isnt that much beyond TYO from MSP and what does exists should go via ICN
Last edited by Bobloblaw on Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
rainaviation
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:28 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:17 pm

FSDan wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.


Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.



Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...
 
EarlyLateORD
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:34 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:18 pm

Flighty wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
NCAD95 wrote:
AF, DE, DL, EI, FI, KL that is a pretty impressive list of airlines offering international service out of an airport the size of MSP no other airport can match that amount of international diversity in the same size market.


SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.

DL/AF/KL are different colors, but they're the same airline for competition purposes.


I would argue SEA should be compared to BOS, not to MSP. MSP without DL hub would otherwise be similar to STL. It is probably most similar to CLT and DTW, with CLT a bigger hub and MSP a bigger town. But pretty similar.

Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.


One thing to consider is that the population isn't everything, consider the percentage of the population that can afford air travel and regularly travels. Consider geography, STL and CLT are a days drive from a beach, MSP and DTW arent. MSP is a long distance from most major cities except Chicago and KC. MSP is also a vastly wealthier Metro than STL or CLT. MSP is the 7th wealthiest metro area in the US compared to 31st for CLT and 45th for STL.

FRA (on LH) and PTY are the logical missing pieces. Perhaps BOG could be interchanged for PTY. I really can't see anything else being viable especially if we have an economic downtown.

SY did attempt Panama, but not PTY, which is one of the reasons the project failed. https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/ ... polis.html

Adam
 
JetBlueCLT
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:55 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:57 pm

EarlyLateORD wrote:
Flighty wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:

SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.

DL/AF/KL are different colors, but they're the same airline for competition purposes.


I would argue SEA should be compared to BOS, not to MSP. MSP without DL hub would otherwise be similar to STL. It is probably most similar to CLT and DTW, with CLT a bigger hub and MSP a bigger town. But pretty similar.

Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.


One thing to consider is that the population isn't everything, consider the percentage of the population that can afford air travel and regularly travels. Consider geography, STL and CLT are a days drive from a beach, MSP and DTW arent. MSP is a long distance from most major cities except Chicago and KC. MSP is also a vastly wealthier Metro than STL or CLT. MSP is the 7th wealthiest metro area in the US compared to 31st for CLT and 45th for STL.

FRA (on LH) and PTY are the logical missing pieces. Perhaps BOG could be interchanged for PTY. I really can't see anything else being viable especially if we have an economic downtown.

SY did attempt Panama, but not PTY, which is one of the reasons the project failed. https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/ ... polis.html

Adam


Either you weren’t clear on your remarks on “STL and CLT are a days drive from a beach”. Or I’m just totally interpreting that incorrectly. If so, you might want to brush up on your geography. CLT is 3 hours away from a beach depending on traffic.

Good day.
Pittsburgh Penguins, Steelers, Pirates and Charlotte Hornets Fan
 
EarlyLateORD
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:34 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:30 pm

JetBlueCLT wrote:
EarlyLateORD wrote:
Flighty wrote:

I would argue SEA should be compared to BOS, not to MSP. MSP without DL hub would otherwise be similar to STL. It is probably most similar to CLT and DTW, with CLT a bigger hub and MSP a bigger town. But pretty similar.

Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.


One thing to consider is that the population isn't everything, consider the percentage of the population that can afford air travel and regularly travels. Consider geography, STL and CLT are a days drive from a beach, MSP and DTW arent. MSP is a long distance from most major cities except Chicago and KC. MSP is also a vastly wealthier Metro than STL or CLT. MSP is the 7th wealthiest metro area in the US compared to 31st for CLT and 45th for STL.

FRA (on LH) and PTY are the logical missing pieces. P
erhaps BOG could be interchanged for PTY. I really can't see anything else being viable especially if we have an economic downtown.

SY did attempt Panama, but not PTY, which is one of the reasons the project failed. https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/ ... polis.html

Adam


Either you weren’t clear on your remarks on “STL and CLT are a days drive from a beach”. Or I’m just totally interpreting that incorrectly. If so, you might want to brush up on your geography. CLT is 3 hours away from a beach depending on traffic.

Good day.


I should have added, "within a days drive."
 
FSDan
Posts: 2493
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 11:32 pm

rainaviation wrote:
FSDan wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.


Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.



Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...


Oh, I understand that there are plenty of major companies in the Minneapolis area (and I did call that out - see highlighting in my original post). I'm just saying that I'd be surprised if MSP sees more international business travelers than SEA does. And the same for leisure travel. I know firsthand that the Minneapolis area is a great place to live and to visit (I have more family there than anywhere else in the U.S.), but I just don't think it's as high on international travelers' lists as the Pacific Northwest is. If the MSP nightlife scene is "world famous", that's news to me, and I've lived within a 4 hour drive most of my life... And while the Mall of America and the Guthrie Theater are big draws, I'd bet the vast majority of visitors are from within the States.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3306
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Thu Dec 20, 2018 11:43 pm

Flighty wrote:
Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.


In per capita income by metro, SEA is #2 and MSP is #5. Not a large gap. It flips on the cost side, with Seattle being the more expensive city to live in. Money-wise SEA and MSP are in the same class. Both are wealthy per capita.

FSDan wrote:
Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.

Specifically looking at TATL, MSP has significantly more capacity to AMS, MSP and SEA have pretty equivalent capacity to KEF and CDG (and DUB will be close once EI starts their daily MSP-DUB vs SEA's 5x weekly on a larger aircraft), and then SEA has significantly more capacity to the UK and Germany. SEA definitely comes out ahead overall (mostly because of the difference in capacity to the UK), but I wouldn't say it's in the realm of being disproportionately ahead given the local markets...


1) Metro/CSA sizes are very close, with SEA being slightly larger, but MSP having significant catchment from non-CSA regions due to a lack of alternate air service in the region.
2) MSP bats near the top of the U.S. in business activity per capita. Both are similarly wealthy cities, with SEA being a bit more but also having a higher cost of living. The MSP metro visitor is 30% business related instead of the 20% U.S. average. In Fortune 500 rankings per capita, MSP is far ahead of SEA. SEA is comparatively low in that comparison. Starbucks and Amazon are buzzword companies, but think for a minute. Do they drive international business traffic?
3) Geography - SEA is farther away from Europe and poorly located for connections to most of the U.S. MSP is closer to Europe and is ideally-placed for European connecting traffic from a large portion of the U.S. This should drive more destinations/capacity from either the hub carrier or foreign competitors. That has not been the case.
4) MSP has a large global hub carrier unlike SEA's fractured system, but as we see, without competition this is a negative
5) MSP doesn't have the Pacific Northwest to attract people, but it isn't the empty desert either.

Competition lower fares and increases demand. It's a chicken or the egg situation. Is SEA TATL demand truly twice that of MSP? That doesn't pass the smell test. Is SEA twice as large TATL in part because of more competition, lower fares, and more flight options? Undoubtedly. MSP is 2nd-largest metro and 2nd-busiest airport to have only one of the big three alliances (AA/BA, UA/LH, DL/AF/KL) crossing the Atlantic TATL (PHX is largest). That's a striking visualization of how far behind MSP is in that area.

P.S. TPA and MSY have cruise ports as large as SEA. Does that drive them batting above average with European flights?
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4015
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:05 am

rainaviation wrote:
FSDan wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
SEA kicks the behind of MSP even to Europe. It has no business being that much larger TATL. It speaks to the gross incompetency of the airport commission. They operate in fear of the hub airline, and the MSP traveler literally pays the price.


Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.



Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...


To compare the corporate portfolio of MSP to SEA is quite unfair to Seattle:

https://www.businesstravelnews.com/Corp ... l-100/2018
The Seattle area is home to the major operations of 3 of the top 12 of the largest corporate travel spending companies in America

Microsoft alone, basically spends more on travel than all of those companies you mentioned combined, and that's without even including Boeing, Amazon, Starbucks, Costco, e.t.c.

Plus, Mall of America is very much a regional draw

This isn't even factoring in the huge international population of SEA, so I think it is much better to compare MSP and CLT than MSP and SEA.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
FSDan
Posts: 2493
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:52 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Starbucks and Amazon are buzzword companies, but think for a minute. Do they drive international business traffic?


Starbucks operates in 76 countries and largely sells products made from crops that can't be grown anywhere in the U.S. except Hawai'i, so yes, I think they drive international business traffic. And Microsoft and Boeing certainly do too.

MSPNWA wrote:
Is SEA TATL demand truly twice that of MSP? That doesn't pass the smell test. Is SEA twice as large TATL in part because of more competition, lower fares, and more flight options? Undoubtedly.


Is SEA's TATL capacity truly twice that of MSP? I don't think so...

Looking at next July:
SEA - 2x daily KEF, 5x weekly DUB, 3x weekly MAN, 3x daily LHR, 4x weekly LGW, 2x daily CDG, 2x daily AMS, 2x daily FRA
MSP - 2x daily + 3x weekly KEF, 1x daily DUB, 1x daily LHR, 2x daily CDG, 3x daily + 4x weekly AMS, 4x weekly FRA
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:03 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Flighty wrote:
Once upon a time, SEA was in that class, but it has moved up. I am not talking population, just the thing that matters, money.


In per capita income by metro, SEA is #2 and MSP is #5. Not a large gap. It flips on the cost side, with Seattle being the more expensive city to live in. Money-wise SEA and MSP are in the same class. Both are wealthy per capita.

FSDan wrote:
Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.

Specifically looking at TATL, MSP has significantly more capacity to AMS, MSP and SEA have pretty equivalent capacity to KEF and CDG (and DUB will be close once EI starts their daily MSP-DUB vs SEA's 5x weekly on a larger aircraft), and then SEA has significantly more capacity to the UK and Germany. SEA definitely comes out ahead overall (mostly because of the difference in capacity to the UK), but I wouldn't say it's in the realm of being disproportionately ahead given the local markets...


1) Metro/CSA sizes are very close, with SEA being slightly larger, but MSP having significant catchment from non-CSA regions due to a lack of alternate air service in the region.
2) MSP bats near the top of the U.S. in business activity per capita. Both are similarly wealthy cities, with SEA being a bit more but also having a higher cost of living. The MSP metro visitor is 30% business related instead of the 20% U.S. average. In Fortune 500 rankings per capita, MSP is far ahead of SEA. SEA is comparatively low in that comparison. Starbucks and Amazon are buzzword companies, but think for a minute. Do they drive international business traffic?
3) Geography - SEA is farther away from Europe and poorly located for connections to most of the U.S. MSP is closer to Europe and is ideally-placed for European connecting traffic from a large portion of the U.S. This should drive more destinations/capacity from either the hub carrier or foreign competitors. That has not been the case.
4) MSP has a large global hub carrier unlike SEA's fractured system, but as we see, without competition this is a negative
5) MSP doesn't have the Pacific Northwest to attract people, but it isn't the empty desert either.

Competition lower fares and increases demand. It's a chicken or the egg situation. Is SEA TATL demand truly twice that of MSP? That doesn't pass the smell test. Is SEA twice as large TATL in part because of more competition, lower fares, and more flight options? Undoubtedly. MSP is 2nd-largest metro and 2nd-busiest airport to have only one of the big three alliances (AA/BA, UA/LH, DL/AF/KL) crossing the Atlantic TATL (PHX is largest). That's a striking visualization of how far behind MSP is in that area.

P.S. TPA and MSY have cruise ports as large as SEA. Does that drive them batting above average with European flights?


You always have to consider that SEA is the alpha-city in the NW region while MSP will always secondary to ORD in the Midwest. Plus, every TATL carrier at SEA except DY and LH are partners with AS or DL - kinda like the situation at MSP.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:11 am

Cubsrule wrote:
klakzky123 wrote:
Antoli0794 wrote:
Maybe NBO, 28 PDEW


Somali VFR traffic to Kenya isn't going to attract a direct flight. Realistically, MSP might get something new from Canada with the upcoming Delta/Westjet joint venture but beyond that I'm not sure what else will show up. I think airlines will get a little conservative with new routes in 2019 with the current economic uncertainty.


The "problem" with your Canada observation is that DL actually has MSP-Canada pretty well covered. YYC would be a sensible WS add, but DL already serves it, including with year-round mainline IINM. WS isn't going to add stuff like YQR or YOW, which are about the largest markets without service.


Now that over the past year the US3 are finally starting to add back transborder capacity to non-hub Canadian airports after years of cutbacks, DL bringing back YQR would seem to make sense on a daily E75, even summer seasonally, ditto for YQT on a daily CRJ. NW back in 2006 announced YOW-MSP daily but it never started.
 
Antoli0794
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:24 am

Dominion301 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
klakzky123 wrote:

Somali VFR traffic to Kenya isn't going to attract a direct flight. Realistically, MSP might get something new from Canada with the upcoming Delta/Westjet joint venture but beyond that I'm not sure what else will show up. I think airlines will get a little conservative with new routes in 2019 with the current economic uncertainty.


The "problem" with your Canada observation is that DL actually has MSP-Canada pretty well covered. YYC would be a sensible WS add, but DL already serves it, including with year-round mainline IINM. WS isn't going to add stuff like YQR or YOW, which are about the largest markets without service.


Now that over the past year the US3 are finally starting to add back transborder capacity to non-hub Canadian airports after years of cutbacks, DL bringing back YQR would seem to make sense on a daily E75, even summer seasonally, ditto for YQT on a daily CRJ. NW back in 2006 announced YOW-MSP daily but it never started.




Surprised that there was service to that many cities and now nothing.
viewtopic.php?t=254217
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:33 am

Antoli0794 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

The "problem" with your Canada observation is that DL actually has MSP-Canada pretty well covered. YYC would be a sensible WS add, but DL already serves it, including with year-round mainline IINM. WS isn't going to add stuff like YQR or YOW, which are about the largest markets without service.


Now that over the past year the US3 are finally starting to add back transborder capacity to non-hub Canadian airports after years of cutbacks, DL bringing back YQR would seem to make sense on a daily E75, even summer seasonally, ditto for YQT on a daily CRJ. NW back in 2006 announced YOW-MSP daily but it never started.




Surprised that there was service to that many cities and now nothing.
viewtopic.php?t=254217


Oh that’s right. YOW-MSP operated on Saturdays for a couple of summers. Was supposed to be upped to daily but it never happened and then never came back.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 13853
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:51 am

Dominion301 wrote:
Antoli0794 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:

Now that over the past year the US3 are finally starting to add back transborder capacity to non-hub Canadian airports after years of cutbacks, DL bringing back YQR would seem to make sense on a daily E75, even summer seasonally, ditto for YQT on a daily CRJ. NW back in 2006 announced YOW-MSP daily but it never started.




Surprised that there was service to that many cities and now nothing.
viewtopic.php?t=254217


Oh that’s right. YOW-MSP operated on Saturdays for a couple of summers. Was supposed to be upped to daily but it never happened and then never came back.


Those were the days of too many CRJs and not enough good opportunities. MSP-ELP was the longest CRJ route in the world at the time IINM.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
rainaviation
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:28 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:31 am

FSDan wrote:
rainaviation wrote:
FSDan wrote:

Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.



Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...


Oh, I understand that there are plenty of major companies in the Minneapolis area (and I did call that out - see highlighting in my original post). I'm just saying that I'd be surprised if MSP sees more international business travelers than SEA does. And the same for leisure travel. I know firsthand that the Minneapolis area is a great place to live and to visit (I have more family there than anywhere else in the U.S.), but I just don't think it's as high on international travelers' lists as the Pacific Northwest is. If the MSP nightlife scene is "world famous", that's news to me, and I've lived within a 4 hour drive most of my life... And while the Mall of America and the Guthrie Theater are big draws, I'd bet the vast majority of visitors are from within the States.


Yes, I agree. I wonder what the actual numbers for the Minneapolis region are for international visitors?
 
rainaviation
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:28 pm

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:42 am

Midwestindy wrote:
rainaviation wrote:
FSDan wrote:

Why does SEA have no business being that much larger? Sure, the two metro areas are comparable in size (with Seattle being slightly larger), but Seattle and the Pacific Northwest are much larger destinations for international tourism than Minnesota is, especially factoring in travelers who are going on Alaska cruises and starting their journeys in Seattle. Both metros have very strong business communities with large, global corporations, but I'd guess SEA has the edge there too with the likes of Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, and T-Mobile. Add in the fact that the Seattle metro area is very wealthy and has a high propensity to travel, and I'd guess the Seattle area has more international traffic on both ends.



Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...


To compare the corporate portfolio of MSP to SEA is quite unfair to Seattle:

https://www.businesstravelnews.com/Corp ... l-100/2018
The Seattle area is home to the major operations of 3 of the top 12 of the largest corporate travel spending companies in America

Microsoft alone, basically spends more on travel than all of those companies you mentioned combined, and that's without even including Boeing, Amazon, Starbucks, Costco, e.t.c.


I would like to see the numbers behind this... The Mayo Clinic brought in more than 1 million international patients alone last year; from 136 countries. Medtronic is the largest global medical device company. Minneapolis alone has 19 fortune 500 companies and all of Washington state only has 15. It is very fair to compare Minneapolis to Seattle.

Also, Minneapolis has a very large international population. The city has the largest concentration of Hmong peoples and Somali peoples outside of their respective countries...
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4015
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: MSP's regional air service partnership success

Fri Dec 21, 2018 2:26 pm

rainaviation wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
rainaviation wrote:

Meet the Mayo Clinic, 3M, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cargill, US Bank, Target, United Health and Best Buy. All multi-national corporations that are based in Minnesota. As far as international traffic, the Mall of America, world famous theater and night-life and the #1 city for recreation in America and these businesses I think MSP is covered and can handle getting people on international flights...


To compare the corporate portfolio of MSP to SEA is quite unfair to Seattle:

https://www.businesstravelnews.com/Corp ... l-100/2018
The Seattle area is home to the major operations of 3 of the top 12 of the largest corporate travel spending companies in America

Microsoft alone, basically spends more on travel than all of those companies you mentioned combined, and that's without even including Boeing, Amazon, Starbucks, Costco, e.t.c.


I would like to see the numbers behind this... The Mayo Clinic brought in more than 1 million international patients alone last year; from 136 countries. Medtronic is the largest global medical device company. Minneapolis alone has 19 fortune 500 companies and all of Washington state only has 15. It is very fair to compare Minneapolis to Seattle.

Also, Minneapolis has a very large international population. The city has the largest concentration of Hmong peoples and Somali peoples outside of their respective countries...


1. The Mayo Clinic is in Rochester, so its unfair to include all of those visitors into the MSP numbers, definitely a lot fly through MSP but definitely not all

2. Fortune 500 companies do not all generate an equal amount in Travel Expenditures

2a. Microsoft alone spent $430 million on Air Travel in 2017, compared to 3M's $93.1 million + UnitedHealth Groups +$71 million + I'll even throw in Boston Scientific's + $50.6 million and Medtronic's $175 million, and all those companies combined still don't match Microsoft's Air Travel expenditures. This is without including Boeing's $227 million and Amazon's $200 million, plus the fact that Google, Facebook, Apple, e.t.c each have 1,000s of employees in Seattle. It really isn't even that close in terms of the Corporate Portfolio of both metros, despite Minneapolis having many Fortune 500 companies.

3. The Seattle Metro has a $356,572 million dollar GDP compared to the $260,106 million dollar GDP of Minneapolis, plus Seattle is one of the fastest growing economies in America therefore this gap will widen.

4. Washington's population is 14% immigrant compared to Minnesota which is 8%
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. ... washington
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. ... -minnesota

So, let's step away from comparing MSP and SEA
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos