Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Mon Jan 27, 2020 9:00 pm

airfrnt wrote:
On planes being in gates at DEN on arrival - I agree the frequency here is much greater then recently - I think this is mostly due to UA's recent decision to hold planes for connecting passengers, and some of the staffing complexities around the banks. I was infuriated a week ago in this exact situation, where they held us, even though a B gate a few bridges down was obviously open.


The only time that happens is if the other gate is being held open for something that cannot be parked on the other. For example if a 757 is planned for the open gate but cannot be parked on the gate you were planned to go to. If the two gates are compatible they will do an on the ground gate change.
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Mon Jan 27, 2020 10:46 pm

airfrnt wrote:
In terms of displacing ORD and ATL, I would say ATL probably not - but DEN being larger then ORD for UA? I think that's a safe bet. I share some skepticism about UA's and WN's ability to both grow at the clip they want to - but their cases are sound. UA views DEN as primarily a connecting target - it has the largest connecting passenger flow of any of it's hub(s). Their business plan therefore doesn't strictly depend on O&D target (which is a big reason they have opposed spending money on main terminal and parking fixes for the airport, as opposed to additional gates). WN on the other hand is dominated by O&D traffic, but has a huge amount of room to grow in terms of using DEN as a connecting airport when they are not doing P2P flying. UA can always shift traffic from HOU or ORD to DEN to fill gates, while WN can always shift traffic from LAS and PHX to fill gates.

F9 on the other hand is dependent on always absolutely being the lowest cost seat. They are quite likely to tip over in the next storm.

In terms of domestic versus international traffic - UA has made it plain that there will be international expansion - but only as the domestic traffic hits certain milestones.


I don’t think DEN will be UA’s largest hub long term. It could possibly overtake ORD temporarily until UA gets more gates there, but I think ORD will be UA’s largest hub long term, with DEN being the second largest.

I don’t see any problem with UA growing to 700 flights and WN growing to 300 flights, but I think that would be it for the foreseeable future. F9 will indeed be the loser here, they cannot match the frequency and schedule of UA/WN.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3630
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:23 am

airfrnt wrote:
enilria wrote:
Here's the problem. UA says they are going to 900 flights per day. WN says they are going to what? 400+? Frontier says 150+? Not happening. They would pass ORD/ATL. I don't see it. Also, they could just get bigger planes and save themselves from that and also have lower costs. If you look at ATL and ORD they are nearby to a lot of cities and they have 8-9 flights to each of them. DEN is essentially an island in the middle of the Mid-America Ocean. Where are all these cities with 9 RTs that are needed to get to ATL service levels? ABQ? COS? FSD? There just aren't that many and most will struggle with 5-6 flights. Sure there's LAX and SFO etc, but ATL has those too. I don't believe there are enough markets in the region that can support ATL/ORD level frequency to get to that many gates. Also, something has to give. WN/UA/F9 all can't grow like that. F9 is the weakest, but also has far lower costs so I wouldn't count them as the loser.


Your criticism of DEN over the years has been consistent - I would point out that the airport has flourished despite it.

In terms of displacing ORD and ATL, I would say ATL probably not - but DEN being larger then ORD for UA? I think that's a safe bet. I share some skepticism about UA's and WN's ability to both grow at the clip they want to - but their cases are sound. UA views DEN as primarily a connecting target - it has the largest connecting passenger flow of any of it's hub(s). Their business plan therefore doesn't strictly depend on O&D target (which is a big reason they have opposed spending money on main terminal and parking fixes for the airport, as opposed to additional gates). WN on the other hand is dominated by O&D traffic, but has a huge amount of room to grow in terms of using DEN as a connecting airport when they are not doing P2P flying. UA can always shift traffic from HOU or ORD to DEN to fill gates, while WN can always shift traffic from LAS and PHX to fill gates.

F9 on the other hand is dependent on always absolutely being the lowest cost seat. They are quite likely to tip over in the next storm.

In terms of domestic versus international traffic - UA has made it plain that there will be international expansion - but only as the domestic traffic hits certain milestones.

Enilria, can you share your source for them wanting "900 departures"? Would love to see it unless you're just being a smart aleck. Everything I've seen says 700...
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:08 am

700 departures by 2025 doesn't seem that far fetched. They're planning for 550 this summer. That would be 30 additional departures every year. Around the time of the merger they were at what, 350/400 or so? UA is in growth mode, and I don't think any of their other hubs are in a position to give UA two dozen additional gates anytime soon. Denver as a city is also growing, and because it's rather geographically isolated, that means its population is more likely to fly places. Funny how this site can talk so much about places like AUS, RDU, and BNA growing, yet DEN growing seems like a crazy idea to some people.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
DEN1895
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:34 am

While you can't predict the future, if you look into past however it gives some ideas as to what type of growth is possible. Comparing 2015 to 2019 we get a few stats.

- Flights increased by roughly 250 flights a day
- Passenger count increased by 15 million
- The airline passenger break down:
---2015: UA 43%...WN 30%...F9 13%
---2019: UA 45%..WN 28%...F9 12%

So using the past, in 5 more years it is very possible to see UA at 700 flights and WN at 300 flights, and with another 15 million passengers would put the airport close to 85 million pax.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:54 pm

GSP psgr wrote:
That doesn't even touch on transatlantic/transpacific possibilities.

That's a handful of flights. Not a driver of getting to 900 flights.
GSP psgr wrote:
I can come up with a 20 city expansion plan for UA at DEN without thinking too hard: Albany, Buffalo, Greensboro, Fort Wayne, Flint, Pullman, Springfield (IL), Peoria, South Bend, Bellingham, Harrisburg, Ottawa, Regina, Saskatoon, Long Beach, Akron/Canton, Rochester, Providence, Manchester (NH), McAllen/Harlingen/Brownsville.....

Some of those are pretty crazy. YOW for example struggles with major East Coast markets on small RJs.
airfrnt wrote:
Your criticism of DEN over the years has been consistent - I would point out that the airport has flourished despite it.

Eye roll. What criticism? Of what? The landside project that the airport has now bailed out of and is reassessing? Not sure what you refer to.

It's a vibrant and growing market. My concern is that UA is going to try to grab all the gates to keep others from growing, because that is what legacy airlines do. Not sure how that's an anti-Denver comment.

airfrnt wrote:
but DEN being larger then ORD for UA? I think that's a safe bet.
airfrnt wrote:
F9 on the other hand is dependent on always absolutely being the lowest cost seat. They are quite likely to tip over in the next storm.

You say I am always criticizing DEN, but I'd say you are always criticizing F9 despite your username. According to F41 they made an 87m net profit on 370m in revenue in 3Q which is a margin of 23.5%. Their 4Q margin is 11.6% for the year ended 3Q2019. Those numbers are not out of step with the industry. What is the source of your info that this profitable airline is at risk of shutting down?
blockski wrote:
Where has UA said they'd get to 900 flights per day?

Rdh3e wrote:
Enilria, can you share your source for them wanting "900 departures"? Would love to see it unless you're just being a smart aleck. Everything I've seen says 700...

I saw a quote where one of the execs said they think they can get to 900. I don't have a link. They will have 90 gates. Good utilization would be 800-900 flights.

"700 departures by 2025 doesn't seem that far fetched. They're planning for 550 this summer."
If United is adding 24 gates that means they now have 66? 550 flights/66 gates = 8.33 uses. If the additional 24 add 150 flights that's only about 6 uses per gate. My point was that they will utilize them the minimum to keep them from going to other airlines. Sounds about right...
 
Caspian27
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:48 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 4:22 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
airfrnt wrote:
On planes being in gates at DEN on arrival - I agree the frequency here is much greater then recently - I think this is mostly due to UA's recent decision to hold planes for connecting passengers, and some of the staffing complexities around the banks. I was infuriated a week ago in this exact situation, where they held us, even though a B gate a few bridges down was obviously open.


The only time that happens is if the other gate is being held open for something that cannot be parked on the other. For example if a 757 is planned for the open gate but cannot be parked on the gate you were planned to go to. If the two gates are compatible they will do an on the ground gate change.


There’s also a logistical challenge with the fact that bag carts and such for the outbound flight will need to be moved to the new gate and that also takes time possibly causing further delays down line.
Meanwhile, somewhere 35,000 ft above your head...
 
blockski
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 4:34 pm

enilria wrote:
[
blockski wrote:
Where has UA said they'd get to 900 flights per day?

Rdh3e wrote:
Enilria, can you share your source for them wanting "900 departures"? Would love to see it unless you're just being a smart aleck. Everything I've seen says 700...

I saw a quote where one of the execs said they think they can get to 900. I don't have a link. They will have 90 gates. Good utilization would be 800-900 flights.

"700 departures by 2025 doesn't seem that far fetched. They're planning for 550 this summer."
If United is adding 24 gates that means they now have 66? 550 flights/66 gates = 8.33 uses. If the additional 24 add 150 flights that's only about 6 uses per gate. My point was that they will utilize them the minimum to keep them from going to other airlines. Sounds about right...


Well, as I understand it, the growth to 700 flights is targeted for 2025. The lease runs through 2035; so adding an additional 200 daily flights over the following 10 years seems entirely reasonable.

I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless. Argue that the minimum use requirements aren't high enough, if that's what you want (note - 'only' six turns per gate is still a large increase in traffic for UA!). Or that the airport should have more expansion plans (which they apparently do - they've said they'll be able to accommodate all requests). But they're clearly planning on using the gates to meet both immediate and future growth plans.
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 5:23 pm

700 or so flights isn’t at all unreasonable with 90 gates, that’s roughly 8 turns per day.

I can’t see UA doing much more than that though, certainly not 900. DEN isn’t exactly in a hugely populated area in the country so there are only so many frequencies that can be done. Plus, I still think they’d like ORD as their largest hub.

One thing they will have to do is to improve the transfer situation between A & B. Perhaps it’s time to reconsider this proposal from 2000?


https://extras.denverpost.com/business/biz0504c.htm
 
codc10
Posts: 2897
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 5:31 pm

UA frequency growth would probably come by way of adding banks to the schedule, not extensive new city adds. Also, the 24 additional gates are added in several waves... it's not as though United will have two dozen new gates to play with for the upcoming summer schedule. 700 flights over 90 gates is reasonably good utilization, plus gives room for future growth. It would be silly for United to sign on to new space it would fully utilize in the short to intermediate term, given current growth plans.
Last edited by codc10 on Tue Jan 28, 2020 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 5:34 pm

Caspian27 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
airfrnt wrote:
On planes being in gates at DEN on arrival - I agree the frequency here is much greater then recently - I think this is mostly due to UA's recent decision to hold planes for connecting passengers, and some of the staffing complexities around the banks. I was infuriated a week ago in this exact situation, where they held us, even though a B gate a few bridges down was obviously open.


The only time that happens is if the other gate is being held open for something that cannot be parked on the other. For example if a 757 is planned for the open gate but cannot be parked on the gate you were planned to go to. If the two gates are compatible they will do an on the ground gate change.


There’s also a logistical challenge with the fact that bag carts and such for the outbound flight will need to be moved to the new gate and that also takes time possibly causing further delays down line.


We don't stage outbound bags at the gate until the aircraft arrives. There are exceptions, but generally bags are not planeside on the arrival. The person taking arriving bags to the terminal picks up outbound bags up on their way back.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:50 pm

blockski wrote:
I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless.

It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.
 
GSP psgr
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:09 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:53 pm

I will say this; I could see United at Denver maybe being not the biggest national hub in the country, but the broadest in terms of coverage, being able to support connections from even second (like PIT, BDL, JAX) and third tier (GSP, ORF, SYR) Eastern destinations to the entire Western US in a way that Atlanta and even Dallas/Ft. Worth or Chicago/O'Hare cannot really do. Atlanta's too far east, and DFW is a bit too far South to be as efficient as a true national hub.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2603
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:09 pm

If WN only wants 8 gates, that in theory leaves 8 other gates up for grabs in C; could we see F9 move to C and have AS/NK move to A in order to give F9 their 10 gates as well as not force DL to move out of A? Seems like everyone at that point would get more or less what they want; I highly doubt being in A is that important to F9.

jetmatt777 wrote:
airfrnt wrote:
On planes being in gates at DEN on arrival - I agree the frequency here is much greater then recently - I think this is mostly due to UA's recent decision to hold planes for connecting passengers, and some of the staffing complexities around the banks. I was infuriated a week ago in this exact situation, where they held us, even though a B gate a few bridges down was obviously open.


The only time that happens is if the other gate is being held open for something that cannot be parked on the other. For example if a 757 is planned for the open gate but cannot be parked on the gate you were planned to go to. If the two gates are compatible they will do an on the ground gate change.


That isn't always true, there are also staffing limitations (i.e. same team being used for both flights and no spare team available) as well as desire to avoid making an on the ground change if the aircraft is still expected to make it into the gate on time. I know you know that from the operational standpoint; there are always times that gate changes don't happen for a variety of reasons despite the gate being capable.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
blockski
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:12 pm

enilria wrote:
blockski wrote:
I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless.

It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


I'm not disputing the fact of the behavior, but I'm afraid you've got a higher bar to clear with the allegation that United is 'denying competition' here. They're planning to massively expand their service - that's hardly denying competition. Likewise. DEN has plenty of room to grow and plans to do so. I'd expect UA to try and block gates, too - but I don't agree that this is what UA is actually going to accomplish here.

You note that WN does this too, but this isn't DAL we're talking about, this is an airport with huge expansion plans on the books. They'll be able to provide gates to anyone looking to add service and agree to the requisite costs.

Anyway, you make it seem like they're leasing the gates and won't add any service at all, and that's clearly not the case. Likewise, you can't call it competition if UA isn't allowed to respond to their competitors and add service of their own.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:22 pm

Not being intimately familiar with DIA? Dies anybody have the layout of the existing and proposed NEW United gates? From what I'm reading? They seem to be spread out over Hell's Half Acre. I'm wondering what this will actually mean for connecting passengers. And are the international flights going to an internationally segregated terminal like SFO or ORD? Or are they going to be segregated on the domestic terminal? United has tried that before and it got shot down both times that I know of. Also? Where would the other Star Alliance Carriers Arrive and depart? Are any of these NEW 0gates going to be used by Alliance partners?
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:02 pm

enilria wrote:
blockski wrote:
I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless.

It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


It is baseless because United can't even fit their current operation on their existing leased gates.

United already operates domestic turns on 5 mainline gates on the A Concourse up until noon and 1 gate on the C Concourse through the entire day. You would have a point if United had a dozen gates on B that sat empty all day but they don't. United has maxed out their current leased gates as well as paying daily rent on 6 CUTE gates.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:35 pm

Not to mention the fact that Kim Day told city council that every airline asking for more gates will get their requests accommodated. We still don’t know exactly how they’ll do that, but Southwest is asking for 16 gates. Presumably WN will get almost all of C and the airport will announce another expansion plan to accommodate F9 and DL.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:21 pm

blockski wrote:
enilria wrote:
blockski wrote:
I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless.

It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


I'm not disputing the fact of the behavior, but I'm afraid you've got a higher bar to clear with the allegation that United is 'denying competition' here. They're planning to massively expand their service - that's hardly denying competition. Likewise. DEN has plenty of room to grow and plans to do so. I'd expect UA to try and block gates, too - but I don't agree that this is what UA is actually going to accomplish here.

You note that WN does this too, but this isn't DAL we're talking about, this is an airport with huge expansion plans on the books. They'll be able to provide gates to anyone looking to add service and agree to the requisite costs.

Anyway, you make it seem like they're leasing the gates and won't add any service at all, and that's clearly not the case. Likewise, you can't call it competition if UA isn't allowed to respond to their competitors and add service of their own.

The largest carrier in the market has all the incentive to block gates, so WN does not have an incentive to do that in DEN to the extent that UA does. WN has the incentive to do it in other places like BNA and DAL, however.
intotheair wrote:
Not to mention the fact that Kim Day told city council that every airline asking for more gates will get their requests accommodated. We still don’t know exactly how they’ll do that, but Southwest is asking for 16 gates. Presumably WN will get almost all of C and the airport will announce another expansion plan to accommodate F9 and DL.

We'll see.
jetmatt777 wrote:
enilria wrote:
blockski wrote:
I guess my point is that the allegation that United is solely doing this to keep gates from going to other airlines is baseless.

It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


It is baseless because United can't even fit their current operation on their existing leased gates.

United already operates domestic turns on 5 mainline gates on the A Concourse up until noon and 1 gate on the C Concourse through the entire day. You would have a point if United had a dozen gates on B that sat empty all day but they don't. United has maxed out their current leased gates as well as paying daily rent on 6 CUTE gates.

Sure you can have a 1 bank operation with 300 flights and use 300 gates. It doesn't mean you "need" 300 gates. There is always a balance between optimal use of facilities and optimal revenue. Unfortunately "optimal use of facilities" can involved "gate squatting" as it is called in the industry. UA could split a full bank into two. If DL had as few banks in ATL as UA has in DEN imagine how many gates they would need?
 
DEN1895
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:48 am

alasizon wrote:
If WN only wants 8 gates, that in theory leaves 8 other gates up for grabs in C; could we see F9 move to C and have AS/NK move to A in order to give F9 their 10 gates as well as not force DL to move out of A? Seems like everyone at that point would get more or less what they want; I highly doubt being in A is that important to F9.

That isn't always true, there are also staffing limitations (i.e. same team being used for both flights and no spare team available) as well as desire to avoid making an on the ground change if the aircraft is still expected to make it into the gate on time. I know you know that from the operational standpoint; there are always times that gate changes don't happen for a variety of reasons despite the gate being capable.


The biggest issue with moving F9 rather than DL to C is that F9 is mostly likely moving to the ground load gates on the East end of A. I don’t think DL would want to do ground load operations, where as F9 tried dual boarding at the ground load facility before UA moved in and it seemed to work really well and cut down on turnaround time. WN has stated they want all 16 gates and moving DL would allow for WN to take more gates.
 
bigb
Posts: 1128
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:28 am

enilria wrote:
blockski wrote:
enilria wrote:
It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


I'm not disputing the fact of the behavior, but I'm afraid you've got a higher bar to clear with the allegation that United is 'denying competition' here. They're planning to massively expand their service - that's hardly denying competition. Likewise. DEN has plenty of room to grow and plans to do so. I'd expect UA to try and block gates, too - but I don't agree that this is what UA is actually going to accomplish here.

You note that WN does this too, but this isn't DAL we're talking about, this is an airport with huge expansion plans on the books. They'll be able to provide gates to anyone looking to add service and agree to the requisite costs.

Anyway, you make it seem like they're leasing the gates and won't add any service at all, and that's clearly not the case. Likewise, you can't call it competition if UA isn't allowed to respond to their competitors and add service of their own.

The largest carrier in the market has all the incentive to block gates, so WN does not have an incentive to do that in DEN to the extent that UA does. WN has the incentive to do it in other places like BNA and DAL, however.
intotheair wrote:
Not to mention the fact that Kim Day told city council that every airline asking for more gates will get their requests accommodated. We still don’t know exactly how they’ll do that, but Southwest is asking for 16 gates. Presumably WN will get almost all of C and the airport will announce another expansion plan to accommodate F9 and DL.

We'll see.
jetmatt777 wrote:
enilria wrote:
It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


It is baseless because United can't even fit their current operation on their existing leased gates.

United already operates domestic turns on 5 mainline gates on the A Concourse up until noon and 1 gate on the C Concourse through the entire day. You would have a point if United had a dozen gates on B that sat empty all day but they don't. United has maxed out their current leased gates as well as paying daily rent on 6 CUTE gates.

Sure you can have a 1 bank operation with 300 flights and use 300 gates. It doesn't mean you "need" 300 gates. There is always a balance between optimal use of facilities and optimal revenue. Unfortunately "optimal use of facilities" can involved "gate squatting" as it is called in the industry. UA could split a full bank into two. If DL had as few banks in ATL as UA has in DEN imagine how many gates they would need?


The biggest void in your argument is that Denver isn’t slot limited or expansion limited in regards of United ability to gate squat and lock competition out. The airport authority already has come said that airlines will get the gates that they want. Your argument would hold true if we were talking love field, or EWR, DCA SAN where there isn’t ability to add gates or slots....
 
zthomas
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:02 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:50 am

Hey guys — first time poster here. Before the UA announcement, I was trying to piece together what the expansion may look like across A, B, and C for myself just to get a better idea visually. I've found that the gate map that's provided by the airport (https://www.flydenver.com/sites/default ... nfoMap.pdf) isn't necessarily the most up-to-date (though it was just updated recently) and has conflicting information with their own interactive map as well.

So being the visual person that I am, I decided to try to design/plot out a map for myself of both the pre- and post-expansion DEN. Like I said, I found conflicting information between the materials provided by the airport, so I tried my best sleuthing between the forums here and Google Maps to try to paint a bit more accurate picture. Someone posted in the general DEN discussion last year a link to the construction/blueprint maps for each of the concourse expansions, so I pulled those out of the PDF and resized and laid them over the existing PDF map design to get an accurate scale of the finalized new gate construction on each concourse.

Long story short, here are a set of before and after diagrams that I put together — obviously the post-expansion map is just a best guess at where each airline could live when this is all said and done. By moving Delta up to C, but Alaska and Spirit back down to A, things seem to balance out pretty well and still give WN a net of +12 gates on C (short of the 16 they wanted, but which could be addressed by the further expansion of A East). Delta could even gain a gate or two as incentive for relocating? I've moved F9 to the temp ground gates on A since, as others have said, that seems to be a fine fit for their operations. I also kept A42 and A44 open as city gates as I know those are FIS-connected and could be used for narrow-body int'l arrivals, so it didn't make sense to assign them to anyone other than F9 who owns them now.

Again, I'm not 100% on exact pre-expansion gate locations/numbers, so if anyone has greater insight into that I'd love to be able to fix these for my records and to get a better idea. I figured seeing things laid out may be helpful for people, especially since there's no post-expansion map that's been made publicly available that I'm aware of. Definitely open to any feedback/suggestions on these, too. Thanks!

Image

Image
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:18 am

One other thing I’ll say, it’s interesting to see how things have a way of coming full circle. CO was originally going to lease 20-25 or so gates on A for their hub in the early 90s before shuttering it before DIA opens. Years later, UA and CO merge and have now grown the hub to the point where they need 23 gates on A in addition to all of B.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2960
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:27 pm

enilria wrote:
It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


What competitor is looking to operate 10 mainline turns? Besided WN who else has announced plans for major aggressive expansion at DEN like UA and WN?

For the sake of argument lets say the city of Denver rejected UA's request and instead decided to give each airlines UA, WN, F9 and NK 9 gates each and the remaining 3 gates would either go to AA and DL or become common use gates. Do you believe this would result in a better use of the cities resources? Denver will be looking for a return on their investment who besides UA and WN is in the best position to capitalize and fully utilize the additional gates?

Another question is this, are you just looking at gate utilization only or are you looking at concourse utilization? An empty concourse cost the city money because the concession stands aren't bringing in enough tax revenue. If the revenue isn't coming in those concession stands at some point they will close because they will no longer be able to afford their monthly rent. Denver just like any other major hub is an economic engine but the city has to consider which airlines have the ability to bring in large volumes of passengers. Passengers who undoubtedly will be tempted to spend money in the airport, that money again contributes to the cities revenue.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8152
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:50 pm

One thing that impacts operations at DEN is in part to its geographic location and time zone difference. This can result in a highly banked operation. Late afternoon / early evenings are insanely busy at DEN since across all airlines there is a huge push between 5-7pm for many of the last eastbound departures to the Midwest & East Coast. In additional international flights and also a popular time for departures to other destinations in the west coast at the end of the work day. Unlike hubs in ATL, ORD, CLT that have a significant number of departures between 9-11pm, DEN generally does not except to intra-mountain west and west coast destinations.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3287
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:57 pm

zthomas wrote:
Hey guys — first time poster here. Before the UA announcement, I was trying to piece together what the expansion may look like across A, B, and C for myself just to get a better idea visually. I've found that the gate map that's provided by the airport (https://www.flydenver.com/sites/default ... nfoMap.pdf) isn't necessarily the most up-to-date (though it was just updated recently) and has conflicting information with their own interactive map as well.

So being the visual person that I am, I decided to try to design/plot out a map for myself of both the pre- and post-expansion DEN. Like I said, I found conflicting information between the materials provided by the airport, so I tried my best sleuthing between the forums here and Google Maps to try to paint a bit more accurate picture. Someone posted in the general DEN discussion last year a link to the construction/blueprint maps for each of the concourse expansions, so I pulled those out of the PDF and resized and laid them over the existing PDF map design to get an accurate scale of the finalized new gate construction on each concourse.

Long story short, here are a set of before and after diagrams that I put together — obviously the post-expansion map is just a best guess at where each airline could live when this is all said and done. By moving Delta up to C, but Alaska and Spirit back down to A, things seem to balance out pretty well and still give WN a net of +12 gates on C (short of the 16 they wanted, but which could be addressed by the further expansion of A East). Delta could even gain a gate or two as incentive for relocating? I've moved F9 to the temp ground gates on A since, as others have said, that seems to be a fine fit for their operations. I also kept A42 and A44 open as city gates as I know those are FIS-connected and could be used for narrow-body int'l arrivals, so it didn't make sense to assign them to anyone other than F9 who owns them now.

Again, I'm not 100% on exact pre-expansion gate locations/numbers, so if anyone has greater insight into that I'd love to be able to fix these for my records and to get a better idea. I figured seeing things laid out may be helpful for people, especially since there's no post-expansion map that's been made publicly available that I'm aware of. Definitely open to any feedback/suggestions on these, too. Thanks!

Image

Image



i can't imagine F9 giving up all their gates. also, there needs to be more common wide-body gates. as it stands now, the 18:00 timeframe is full with no room for any new flights. I think the drawings from the city are additional widebody to the NW on A that you show as UA.
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:51 pm

zthomas wrote:
Hey guys — first time poster here. Before the UA announcement, I was trying to piece together what the expansion may look like across A, B, and C for myself just to get a better idea visually. I've found that the gate map that's provided by the airport (https://www.flydenver.com/sites/default ... nfoMap.pdf) isn't necessarily the most up-to-date (though it was just updated recently) and has conflicting information with their own interactive map as well.

So being the visual person that I am, I decided to try to design/plot out a map for myself of both the pre- and post-expansion DEN. Like I said, I found conflicting information between the materials provided by the airport, so I tried my best sleuthing between the forums here and Google Maps to try to paint a bit more accurate picture. Someone posted in the general DEN discussion last year a link to the construction/blueprint maps for each of the concourse expansions, so I pulled those out of the PDF and resized and laid them over the existing PDF map design to get an accurate scale of the finalized new gate construction on each concourse.

Long story short, here are a set of before and after diagrams that I put together — obviously the post-expansion map is just a best guess at where each airline could live when this is all said and done. By moving Delta up to C, but Alaska and Spirit back down to A, things seem to balance out pretty well and still give WN a net of +12 gates on C (short of the 16 they wanted, but which could be addressed by the further expansion of A East). Delta could even gain a gate or two as incentive for relocating? I've moved F9 to the temp ground gates on A since, as others have said, that seems to be a fine fit for their operations. I also kept A42 and A44 open as city gates as I know those are FIS-connected and could be used for narrow-body int'l arrivals, so it didn't make sense to assign them to anyone other than F9 who owns them now.

Again, I'm not 100% on exact pre-expansion gate locations/numbers, so if anyone has greater insight into that I'd love to be able to fix these for my records and to get a better idea. I figured seeing things laid out may be helpful for people, especially since there's no post-expansion map that's been made publicly available that I'm aware of. Definitely open to any feedback/suggestions on these, too. Thanks!

Image

Image


Thank you so much for this! I was trying to figure out what the layout was pre and post. I would agree that F9 won't likely agree to the ground gates. In addition, I am not sure they will fit as these gates are spaced for RJs and not A320s. I don't know their schedule so don't know if this would be an issue, but they won't be able have more than 5 aircraft on the ground at any one time. So this would in practice reduce them to 5 gates I think.

Can United sublease gates to Copa and Lufthansa to cover their needs? Some of the city gates are going to need to go to F9 I believe, which is probably preferrable for the city.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:52 pm

jayunited wrote:
enilria wrote:
It's not baseless because again, this is standard behavior for all the legacies and WN now too. I'm not saying that UA won't grow at all, but what I'm telling is that denying competition access to gates is a bigger factor than the cost of the gates in UA's decision of how many gates to take.

Put another way, if they legitimately want to add 200 flights they will try to take as many gates as possible from the pool to do that with the only limiting factor being a minimum gate usage. The cost of a gate is likely way less than $1m per year. If a competitor gets the gate and operates 10 turns on a mainline aircraft, those 10 turns will generate $90m to $150m per year in revenue for that airline. The impact to UA from that gate going to a competitor is at least 20-25% of that revenue with the rest coming from other airlines (UA is more because they have the most DEN share). The $1m/yr or less rent on a poorly used gate is much less than the revenue loss of $18-35m that gates represents in the hands of a competitor. Those are the economics. United is well aware of the economics. Frankly, I would expect them to try to block gates. To not do it would not be maxing out shareholder value. Having said that, as a consumer and not a shareholder I don't like it at all. It is extremely common for legacies to use gates to the minimum to block them and LCCs to fly the maximum from gates at prime airports.


What competitor is looking to operate 10 mainline turns? Besided WN who else has announced plans for major aggressive expansion at DEN like UA and WN?

For the sake of argument lets say the city of Denver rejected UA's request and instead decided to give each airlines UA, WN, F9 and NK 9 gates each and the remaining 3 gates would either go to AA and DL or become common use gates. Do you believe this would result in a better use of the cities resources? Denver will be looking for a return on their investment who besides UA and WN is in the best position to capitalize and fully utilize the additional gates?

Another question is this, are you just looking at gate utilization only or are you looking at concourse utilization? An empty concourse cost the city money because the concession stands aren't bringing in enough tax revenue. If the revenue isn't coming in those concession stands at some point they will close because they will no longer be able to afford their monthly rent. Denver just like any other major hub is an economic engine but the city has to consider which airlines have the ability to bring in large volumes of passengers. Passengers who undoubtedly will be tempted to spend money in the airport, that money again contributes to the cities revenue.

It appears that the math does not allow for DL and F9 to get the gates they requested, despite comments that everybody will get the gates they need. I also get the impression that F9 is being pushed off concourse A. Is that the case? If they are building gates for future expansion, there are two best practices. Either hold some gates back as common use until a carrier demonstrates sufficient usage to get a preferential lease, or structure the leases so that the airport can take back gates as needed if usage does not meet a reasonable level. I have seen no evidence that either of those things is happening.

On another note, as you know the USA is fairly rare in its propensity for government owned and managed airports, while Europe for example is primarily privatized. Even Russia has privatized airports. Hand in hand with that, the USA is rare in its extreme use of preferential gate leases. Those are very uncommon among privatized airports. Most airports in the world use common use gate assignment with grandfathering. Further, you never hear about airlines giving back gates for anti-trust reasons in foreign mergers because preferential gate leases are so rare outside the USA.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6193
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:08 pm

GSP psgr wrote:
I will say this; I could see United at Denver maybe being not the biggest national hub in the country, but the broadest in terms of coverage, being able to support connections from even second (like PIT, BDL, JAX) and third tier (GSP, ORF, SYR) Eastern destinations to the entire Western US in a way that Atlanta and even Dallas/Ft. Worth or Chicago/O'Hare cannot really do. Atlanta's too far east, and DFW is a bit too far South to be as efficient as a true national hub.


Thats a pretty crazy assertion IMO. DFW serves more domestic destinations than any other airport in the US. ATL has the most domestic capacity. DEN isnt going to turn into either of those airports. DEN is a domestic powerhouse but DFW and ATL have very significant international networks. DEN may get another destination or two internationally but its not going to rival either of those. Not when UA has SFO for Asia, IAH for Latin America, and EWR for Europe. IAD and ORD are massive sources of international O&D so they dont have to be primary hubs to a specific region to work. DEN doesnt have that.

ATL and DFW have to be their carriers end all be all on most international routes because they dont have as many alternatives as UA does.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5716
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 5:15 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:

ATL and DFW have to be their carriers end all be all on most international routes because they dont have as many alternatives as UA does.


You lost me on that one.

UA hubs (US Mainland): DEN ORD SFO LAX IAH IAD EWR. Total of 7.
AA hubs: LAX PHX DFW ORD CLT MIA PHL: Total 7. I excluded LGA/DCA because of international restrictions and JFK because of it's current operational footprint for AA.
DL hubs: SEA LAX SLC MSP DTW ATL JFK BOS (small but growing). Total of 8.

So in what way are AA and DL hampered on future international routes compared to UA? Looks like a pretty level playing field to me.
Next up: STL DEN PSP DEN STL
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Wed Jan 29, 2020 8:38 pm

enilria wrote:
It appears that the math does not allow for DL and F9 to get the gates they requested, despite comments that everybody will get the gates they need. I also get the impression that F9 is being pushed off concourse A. Is that the case?


A number for how many gates F9 and DL want has not been publicly stated. F9 currently has ~9 gates and I imagine they’ll want a handful more. A few of their gates will be displaced with the UA deal, but not all. DL’s six gates will be completely displaced by UA, but I’m sure the airport will find a solution. I doubt DL is asking for very many more gates, if any. If they move back to C, they’ll have to close their club in A that opened not too long ago, but it’s not a great one (it doesn’t even have bathrooms).


structure the leases so that the airport can take back gates as needed if usage does not meet a reasonable level. I have seen no evidence that either of those things is happening.


That’s exactly what’s happening. It’s in UA’s amended lease. People have linked to it in here and you can go read it. Gates must be utilized, and the lease stipulates exactly how much they need to be used based on number of seats per plane.

Also, at least a dozen gates (if not more) will be common use. UA is currently using the common use gates in A and C when they can even for domestic-domestic turns. So UA getting more dedicated gates in theory should open up more capacity for other airlines in the city-owned gates.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Thu Jan 30, 2020 1:45 am

intotheair wrote:
structure the leases so that the airport can take back gates as needed if usage does not meet a reasonable level. I have seen no evidence that either of those things is happening.


That’s exactly what’s happening. It’s in UA’s amended lease. People have linked to it in here and you can go read it. Gates must be utilized, and the lease stipulates exactly how much they need to be used based on number of seats per plane.

Also, at least a dozen gates (if not more) will be common use. UA is currently using the common use gates in A and C when they can even for domestic-domestic turns. So UA getting more dedicated gates in theory should open up more capacity for other airlines in the city-owned gates.

In this thread there was a number of F9 and DL. I thought F9 wanted 6 and I don't remember DL. It's fair to say there will not be an increase in common use gates. Perhaps a decrease is how they will keep people happy. I know UA has wanted F9 off of A forever. I wonder if they finally got their wish.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:35 am

enilria wrote:
In this thread there was a number of F9 and DL. I thought F9 wanted 6 and I don't remember DL. It's fair to say there will not be an increase in common use gates. Perhaps a decrease is how they will keep people happy. I know UA has wanted F9 off of A forever. I wonder if they finally got their wish.


I still haven't seen a number yet for F9 anywhere in the press, and the only thing I see so far is one unsourced post in page 1 of this thread. Six sounds about right though. That's how many F9 gave up in A not even five years ago. You know who won that time around? DL, NK, and an additional common use gate in C. F9 even paid DL to move from C to A. Funny how things can change in a short amount of time.

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news ... es-at.html
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
DEN1895
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:00 am

zthomas wrote:
Hey guys — first time poster here. Before the UA announcement, I was trying to piece together what the expansion may look like across A, B, and C for myself just to get a better idea visually. I've found that the gate map that's provided by the airport (https://www.flydenver.com/sites/default ... nfoMap.pdf) isn't necessarily the most up-to-date (though it was just updated recently) and has conflicting information with their own interactive map as well.

So being the visual person that I am, I decided to try to design/plot out a map for myself of both the pre- and post-expansion DEN. Like I said, I found conflicting information between the materials provided by the airport, so I tried my best sleuthing between the forums here and Google Maps to try to paint a bit more accurate picture. Someone posted in the general DEN discussion last year a link to the construction/blueprint maps for each of the concourse expansions, so I pulled those out of the PDF and resized and laid them over the existing PDF map design to get an accurate scale of the finalized new gate construction on each concourse.

Long story short, here are a set of before and after diagrams that I put together — obviously the post-expansion map is just a best guess at where each airline could live when this is all said and done. By moving Delta up to C, but Alaska and Spirit back down to A, things seem to balance out pretty well and still give WN a net of +12 gates on C (short of the 16 they wanted, but which could be addressed by the further expansion of A East). Delta could even gain a gate or two as incentive for relocating? I've moved F9 to the temp ground gates on A since, as others have said, that seems to be a fine fit for their operations. I also kept A42 and A44 open as city gates as I know those are FIS-connected and could be used for narrow-body int'l arrivals, so it didn't make sense to assign them to anyone other than F9 who owns them now.

Again, I'm not 100% on exact pre-expansion gate locations/numbers, so if anyone has greater insight into that I'd love to be able to fix these for my records and to get a better idea. I figured seeing things laid out may be helpful for people, especially since there's no post-expansion map that's been made publicly available that I'm aware of. Definitely open to any feedback/suggestions on these, too. Thanks!

Image

Image


First off those are awesome maps that look very professional but here are a few minor things that need updating:

Existing Conditions
-B33 does not exists, similar to B19 there is a spot for it but the gate is currently not usable.
-A54 is no longer a ground load gate and now has a jet bridge connecting next to A52, it is F9's gate, so that is correct.
-A63 and A66 don't exists either, Boutique uses A62 and A64, Denver Air Connection uses A64 and A60. A60 is technically a common use gate, F9 uses it for RON aircraft and DAC uses it through out the day.

Post Expansion
- Eliminate B33, A63, and A66
- Where F9 is located there is only room for 6 narrow bodies, UA has 9 gates there as they are using only RJs. This means that F9 needs 3 of their gate back.
-Spirit can't use A62 as their aircraft would not fit, they could try to share A60 like F9 does currently but they could probably only get one or two flights a day out of it.
 
DEN1895
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:21 am

Re: UA to Potentially Gain 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:14 am

jayunited wrote:
What competitor is looking to operate 10 mainline turns? Besided WN who else has announced plans for major aggressive expansion at DEN like UA and WN?

For the sake of argument lets say the city of Denver rejected UA's request and instead decided to give each airlines UA, WN, F9 and NK 9 gates each and the remaining 3 gates would either go to AA and DL or become common use gates. Do you believe this would result in a better use of the cities resources? Denver will be looking for a return on their investment who besides UA and WN is in the best position to capitalize and fully utilize the additional gates?

Another question is this, are you just looking at gate utilization only or are you looking at concourse utilization? An empty concourse cost the city money because the concession stands aren't bringing in enough tax revenue. If the revenue isn't coming in those concession stands at some point they will close because they will no longer be able to afford their monthly rent. Denver just like any other major hub is an economic engine but the city has to consider which airlines have the ability to bring in large volumes of passengers. Passengers who undoubtedly will be tempted to spend money in the airport, that money again contributes to the cities revenue.


What I wonder is what if UA only received 20 gates, this would still allow them to expand dramatically, 8x20=160 more flights a day. This would allow F9 and DL to stay on A, F9 could move to the ground load facility, DL would move to the center of the concourse and take the one non-international city gate. At this point the airport could work on expanding A to the East, if the project was similar to the current project, it should take about 3 years. If the airport started next January the new gates would be ready by Jan 2024, at that point DL and F9 would make their final moves and UA would get at least 4 more gates. By giving UA just 4 less gates now there is much less inconvenience for every airline besides UA, but I guess it is a little late now.
 
zthomas
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:02 am

Re: OFFICIAL: UA Gains 24 of 39 New DEN Gates

Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:48 am

DEN1895 wrote:
zthomas wrote:
Hey guys — first time poster here. Before the UA announcement, I was trying to piece together what the expansion may look like across A, B, and C for myself just to get a better idea visually. I've found that the gate map that's provided by the airport (https://www.flydenver.com/sites/default ... nfoMap.pdf) isn't necessarily the most up-to-date (though it was just updated recently) and has conflicting information with their own interactive map as well.

So being the visual person that I am, I decided to try to design/plot out a map for myself of both the pre- and post-expansion DEN. Like I said, I found conflicting information between the materials provided by the airport, so I tried my best sleuthing between the forums here and Google Maps to try to paint a bit more accurate picture. Someone posted in the general DEN discussion last year a link to the construction/blueprint maps for each of the concourse expansions, so I pulled those out of the PDF and resized and laid them over the existing PDF map design to get an accurate scale of the finalized new gate construction on each concourse.

Long story short, here are a set of before and after diagrams that I put together — obviously the post-expansion map is just a best guess at where each airline could live when this is all said and done. By moving Delta up to C, but Alaska and Spirit back down to A, things seem to balance out pretty well and still give WN a net of +12 gates on C (short of the 16 they wanted, but which could be addressed by the further expansion of A East). Delta could even gain a gate or two as incentive for relocating? I've moved F9 to the temp ground gates on A since, as others have said, that seems to be a fine fit for their operations. I also kept A42 and A44 open as city gates as I know those are FIS-connected and could be used for narrow-body int'l arrivals, so it didn't make sense to assign them to anyone other than F9 who owns them now.

Again, I'm not 100% on exact pre-expansion gate locations/numbers, so if anyone has greater insight into that I'd love to be able to fix these for my records and to get a better idea. I figured seeing things laid out may be helpful for people, especially since there's no post-expansion map that's been made publicly available that I'm aware of. Definitely open to any feedback/suggestions on these, too. Thanks!

Image

Image


First off those are awesome maps that look very professional but here are a few minor things that need updating:

Existing Conditions
-B33 does not exists, similar to B19 there is a spot for it but the gate is currently not usable.
-A54 is no longer a ground load gate and now has a jet bridge connecting next to A52, it is F9's gate, so that is correct.
-A63 and A66 don't exists either, Boutique uses A62 and A64, Denver Air Connection uses A64 and A60. A60 is technically a common use gate, F9 uses it for RON aircraft and DAC uses it through out the day.

Post Expansion
- Eliminate B33, A63, and A66
- Where F9 is located there is only room for 6 narrow bodies, UA has 9 gates there as they are using only RJs. This means that F9 needs 3 of their gate back.
-Spirit can't use A62 as their aircraft would not fit, they could try to share A60 like F9 does currently but they could probably only get one or two flights a day out of it.


This is exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I really appreciate it! Coincidentally, the satellite image on Google Maps must've been recently updated as well as it shows a lot of the new construction going on which definitely gives me a bit better picture of how things function, especially on the East end of A. I'll have to toy with my future allocation possibilities now... thanks again!

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