AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

DL just gutted RDU.

The problem with AUS is that it's a lousy location for connections, except I guess to interior Mexico. That makes it had to see a BNA-type buildup there even though the local market is probably the strongest of the three.

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

AUS will likely grow, as more companies relocate there (e.g. ORACLE) and it emerges as a rising and growing business market, but it too will have its growth clipped and skew to leisure demand rather than business for some time.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

Was the DL focus city on the same level as the AA or JI hubs? That is what I was trying to get at when I said no one airline has dominated for a while.

None of those routes at business travel centric focus city operations like DL at CVG and RDU can sustain themselves in this low-tide demand environment during the COVID era and not when business travel is expected to be heavily depressed with 20-40% gone permanently, and the balance not coming back substantially at least until Spring/Summer 2022.
As I've posted in other threads, we are at about 15% volume of business travel and not likely to see much significantly growth off of that until sometime in Spring/Summer 2021 but even then realistic best case is probably somewhere around 40% of business travel volume by end of 2021.

Some of these were highly opportunistic ads, and could've even been loss-leaders to gain lucrative corporate contracts that were viable in other markets.
They are also the type of routes that could easily be resumed if/when demand comes back. No one other than DL is really in a position to ever fly CVG-BDL or RDU-CLE and that was at pre-pandemic level traffic volume, not the near-term environment we see.

There is a sizable segment of BNA & AUS demand that is generated by inbound passengers for tourism, festivals, entertainment, and conventions. A lot of that falls into the mass-travel category. Much of that segment isn't going to rebound until 2022 at this point but it will come back.

BNAMealer wrote:

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

My question has always been, Why does WN need a 200+ Southeast station? There are already a bunch of Southwest stations on the larger size down there (BNA/ATL/MCO/TPA/FLL) so is one really needed? From the southeast you can use DAL/HOU when going west and BWI isn't that far out of the way for going up and down the coast (or anywhere for that matter). From the southeast in general there are big stations on your way to anywhere with plenty of connections. No need to focus them all in one place so you can have different options incase weather strikes.

BNAMealer wrote:

Ait got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

Think minor role. These are not metros that are going to compete with the major hub airports for decades. Even as the CSAs grow the airports are going to have catchment proximity issues:

1. AUS is too close to DFW, IAH, and the WN ops at DAL and HOU.

2. Both BNA and RDU are too close to ATL and CLT. 200-flight hubs don't compete with 700/day and 900/day hubs.

Can they add more destinations? Sure - certainly at AUS where they have the pleasant combination of tech $, lobbyist $, state government money, and rapid population growth. (Don't even talk of Nashville or Raleigh as state capitals. TN/NC is sooo not TX in scale.)

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

RDU is the perfect place for another B6 focus city. Geographically, it works great for a southeast connection hub and it's a rapidly growing area with lots of jobs in education, research, and tech with plenty of NYC VFR traffic. I'm shocked B6 didn't jump on RDU earlier if I'm honest.

Regarding WN at BNA, I think long-term, a full base there is still on the cards. It's just going to be too large of a station for there to not be a base.

Probably the more contentious of these considerations is AUS. I like the idea of B6 having a focus city at AUS. At the moment, with the new adds, they're running BOS/CUN/EWR/FLL/JFK/LAX/MCO/RDU/SFO from AUS. Out of these, B6 competes on eight of these routes (RDU only has seasonal WN service at the moment). So what would a hypothetical focus city at AUS look like? Top 10 destinations from AUS: DFW, ATL, DEN, LAX, ORD, PHX, IAH, DAL, LAS, and SFO. B6 will only operate LAX/SFO out of the top 10. I think SJU is a good market to add from AUS. LAS is possible but would have heavy ULCC competition so it would probably be added strictly to build up a network from AUS. SAN is also possible but AS/F9/WN already fly there from AUS. But this also means B6 would have to get into really tough markets like AUS-DEN/ORD/PHX which have giant legacy hubs (and are places B6 tends to do very badly in) and they would have to return to IAD if B6 wants to serve DC from AUS. Add to that the fact that WN controls about 34% market share at AUS, compared to about 20% market share at RDU, and is by far and away the largest carrier at AUS, though not to the degree that WN dominates at BNA/STL. With that, I wouldn't say AUS shouldn't have a hub carrier in the future, but AUS doesn't currently have the physical capacity for a hub and WN's (relative) presence at AUS is about 70% larger than it is at RDU, which makes starting a focus city, never mind a hub, at AUS plenty more challenging than at RDU. By B6's calculations, they window for them is very much open at RDU whereas B6 would have to pry it open at AUS.

Cubsrule wrote:

The problem with AUS is that it's a lousy location for connections, except I guess to interior Mexico. That makes it had to see a BNA-type buildup there even though the local market is probably the strongest of the three.

DFW and IAH are in the same geographic location and they make connections work pretty good. Problem with AUS is its' gate constrained. Out of the legacies I think DL has the most to gain since they lack a dominate airport in such a big state.

BNAMealer wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

Was the DL focus city on the same level as the AA or JI hubs? That is what I was trying to get at when I said no one airline has dominated for a while.

It was never the size of the AA or JI hubs, nor was it intended to be. AA and JI used RDU as a Southeast connecting bank, which in and of itself will increase the volume of flights.

RDU was never intended to be a true connecting hub for Delta - that's what Atlanta and Detroit are there for. It was primarily for the local O&D market, hence to focus on using RJs in basically all markets except to hubs and other major volume cities. If you're chasing the local population, then there's no need for near as many flights. A lot of AA's markets from RDU (such as CAE, GSO, ORF, GSP, etc.) would have extremely low local demand.

Boof02671 wrote:

DL just gutted RDU.

I see people saying that, but this was just an extension of the point-to-point cuts that have been in place since March.

Wacko55 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

The problem with AUS is that it's a lousy location for connections, except I guess to interior Mexico. That makes it had to see a BNA-type buildup there even though the local market is probably the strongest of the three.

DFW and IAH are in the same geographic location and they make connections work pretty good. Problem with AUS is its' gate constrained. Out of the legacies I think DL has the most to gain since they lack a dominate airport in such a big state.

That a legacy carrier with a multitude of sizes of aircraft and longhaul flights can make a hub work at DFW or IAH in no way suggests that a ~100 flight/day large focus city/small hub can work at AUS. But you are correct that the airport (still) needs more gates. I have no idea why they built it like they did when they had a literal blank canvas 25 years ago.

RDU has the largest share of international O&D passenger traffic (versus domestic) for any large or medium hub U.S. airport that isn't an airline hub. Given its narrowbody proximity to Northern Europe, strong South Asian traffic flows, and pharma traffic to Europe, I see RDU emerging as one of the first non-hub markets to see its Transatlantic service return.

The legacies all have their hubs carved out. Covid i think ruined their changes of being a real legacy focus city. The focus will certainly be on their hubs for the legacies both now and after demand comes back.

Things are definitely changing though with less business travel. I could see an airline like Frontier, Allegiant, Jetblue or southwest decide to really expand their flying at these airports. Doubt any of them ever see a true connection hub. Would be more point to point flying. Best example might be CVG. The ULCCs seem to have found more of an opportunity pre covid to operate to leisure routes. or Frontier and B6 at EWR. Not developing a hub but a larger station for leisure based travelers. Business travel will be slow to recover. A leisure based focus city would be my only guess by an ULCC. I think the legacies will be much less interested in those cities moving forward even after demand comes back. They wanted the business traffic and ability to pay a premium for a N/S flight at those cities. Those cities can only work for the legacies besides hubs with a large number of business travelers willing to pay a premium for a N.S. The legacies will be really focusing on hubs in the future. Really maximizing their flying thru hubs i see them doing less and less point to point stuff with fewer planes when demand comes back.

We might see some interesting adds come to these airports but i don't think it will be legacies. It will be southwest, allegiant, frontier, spirit or jetblue. The whole backup or overflow hub theories have never worked out. Financially its just cheaper to have one hub and deal with the delays etc. Delta never needed CVG for an overflow hub , united never needed CLE, AA/US never needed STL or PIT.

Jshank83 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

My question has always been, Why does WN need a 200+ Southeast station? There are already a bunch of Southwest stations on the larger size down there (BNA/ATL/MCO/TPA/FLL) so is one really needed? From the southeast you can use DAL/HOU when going west and BWI isn't that far out of the way for going up and down the coast (or anywhere for that matter). From the southeast in general there are big stations on your way to anywhere with plenty of connections. No need to focus them all in one place so you can have different options incase weather strikes.

It’s the most populous area of the country and is very economically important. It’s also much closer than the airports you mentioned. DAL/HOU can’t grow much bigger, BWI is delay prone in prone in the winter and the other SE airports with big stations all face significant competition compared to BNA. O&D only continues to grow, and with the ongoing BNA renovations, it only makes sense.

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

We might see some interesting adds come to these airports but i don't think it will be legacies. It will be southwest, allegiant, frontier, spirit or jetblue. The whole backup or overflow hub theories have never worked out. Financially its just cheaper to have one hub and deal with the delays etc. Delta never needed CVG for an overflow hub , united never needed CLE, AA/US never needed STL or PIT.

Clearly you did not live through the summer of 2000 in Chicago as I did. If you had, you'd understand STL completely. But that was a very different time with very different infrastructure at a number of mega hubs. You're correct that reliever hubs are pretty much a dead concept other than arguably for WN at MDW, which is pretty maxed out.

Murdoughnut wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

DL just gutted RDU.

I see people saying that, but this was just an extension of the point-to-point cuts that have been in place since March.

Time will tell but I don't think so, most of delta extension cuts were thru march at this point. They extended alot of the RDU and CVG cuts what looks like permanent. You are correct they "could" come back in October but really seems like they won't. Seems like delta knows they wont be flying these routes again so they don't want to be stuck with people to reroute/refund deal with ticket sales. I think delta is focusing on hubs and getting those profitable with a much smaller fleet when demand comes back.


DL CHA-DTW MAR 1.9>0[1.4]
**DL CLE-RDU MAR 0.8>0[0.8] APR 0.9>0[0.9] MAY 0.8>0[0.0] JUN 0.9>0[0] JUL 0.8>0[0] AUG 0.9>0[0] SEP 0.9>0[0]
DL CLE-SLC MAR 1.0>0[0.7]
**DL CMH-RDU MAR 1.6>0[0.7] APR 1.9>0[1.5] MAY 1.8>0[0.0] JUN 1.9>0[0] JUL 1.8>0[0] AUG 1.9>0[0] SEP 1.9>0[0]
DL CMH-SLC MAR 1.0>0[0]

Cubsrule wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

The problem with AUS is that it's a lousy location for connections, except I guess to interior Mexico. That makes it had to see a BNA-type buildup there even though the local market is probably the strongest of the three.

DFW and IAH are in the same geographic location and they make connections work pretty good. Problem with AUS is its' gate constrained. Out of the legacies I think DL has the most to gain since they lack a dominate airport in such a big state.

That a legacy carrier with a multitude of sizes of aircraft and longhaul flights can make a hub work at DFW or IAH in no way suggests that a ~100 flight/day large focus city/small hub can work at AUS. But you are correct that the airport (still) needs more gates. I have no idea why they built it like they did when they had a literal blank canvas 25 years ago.

I don’t think they saw just how important AUS would become. Furthermore, AUS has plenty of space for a midfield linear concourse style design. Pre-COVID, they we’re planning a 32 gate satellite IIRC.

BNAMealer wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

Was the DL focus city on the same level as the AA or JI hubs? That is what I was trying to get at when I said no one airline has dominated for a while.

No. AA's RDU hub was around 200+ flights a day at it peak and operated as a connector hub, not an O&D station which is what DL leveraged RDU for. DL at RDU was about catering to local businesses and markets that send business travelers to RDU. Mainline was limited to ATL and the major hubs + Paris. Much of DL at RDU is/was RJs (CRJs and E-170 type traffic).

BNAMealer wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

Was the DL focus city on the same level as the AA or JI hubs? That is what I was trying to get at when I said no one airline has dominated for a while.

No. AA's RDU hub was around 200+ flights a day at it peak and operated as a connector hub, not an O&D station which is what DL leveraged RDU for. DL at RDU was about catering to local businesses and markets that send business travelers to RDU. Mainline was limited to ATL and the major hubs + Paris. Much of DL at RDU is/was RJs (CRJs and E-170 type traffic).

WN has an AUS satellite base. ABQ, BNA and TPA are their next satellite bases once the 737 Max returns and clearly post COVID.

Cointrin330 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

Was the DL focus city on the same level as the AA or JI hubs? That is what I was trying to get at when I said no one airline has dominated for a while.

No. AA's RDU hub was around 200+ flights a day at it peak and operated as a connector hub, not an O&D station which is what DL leveraged RDU for. DL at RDU was about catering to local businesses and markets that send business travelers to RDU. Mainline was limited to ATL and the major hubs + Paris. Much of DL at RDU is/was RJs (CRJs and E-170 type traffic).

I’m sorry, I meant this in terms of market share. My earlier point was because DL wasn’t as dominate as a mere focus city compared to AA/JI, the market is more fragmented.

[quote="Murdoughnut"][quote="Boof02671"]DL just gutted RDU.[/quote]

I see people saying that, but this was just an extension of the point-to-point cuts that have been in place since March.[/quote]
From what I’ve gathered, it looks like only AUS, CLE, CMH and PIT are permanent and the rest are just extensions of the suspensions... for now.

BNAMealer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

My question has always been, Why does WN need a 200+ Southeast station? There are already a bunch of Southwest stations on the larger size down there (BNA/ATL/MCO/TPA/FLL) so is one really needed? From the southeast you can use DAL/HOU when going west and BWI isn't that far out of the way for going up and down the coast (or anywhere for that matter). From the southeast in general there are big stations on your way to anywhere with plenty of connections. No need to focus them all in one place so you can have different options incase weather strikes.

It’s the most populous area of the country and is very economically important. It’s also much closer than the airports you mentioned. DAL/HOU can’t grow much bigger, BWI is delay prone in prone in the winter and the other SE airports with big stations all face significant competition compared to BNA. O&D only continues to grow, and with the ongoing BNA renovations, it only makes sense.

WN will face more competition as BNA grows. Other airlines have been and will continue to add flights there. It isn't just WN interested in growing at BNA. This idea that WN should have whatever they want to themselves at BNA is nonsense.

Also, closer doesn't matter if the other airports are on your way. If you are flying for example JAX to SFO. It doesn't matter if your layover is in ATL/BNA/STL/DEN/etc. There will be some places that XXX-BNA-XXX works better than other big WN stations but it isn't a huge amount unless they scale back ATL, which they obviously have no intention of doing. Again, WN does a good job of casting a net instead of mega hubs for the most part to be able to switch passengers if needed in the case of weather. With all the population density east of the Mississippi it probably a good plan to have to have multiple larger stations instead of a couple mega hubs.

AA keeps tabs on Austin. More than once I have been on a DC-10, 767, 777, 787 out of Austin for the short 30 something minute flight to DFW. If there is something going on in Austin, AA will sub in Large Aircraft. Once I flew to DFW on a DC-10 and we had 2 missed approaches at DFW. Nothing like Rear Tires hitting the pavement and hearing the engines spool up for a go around.

Jshank83 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

My question has always been, Why does WN need a 200+ Southeast station? There are already a bunch of Southwest stations on the larger size down there (BNA/ATL/MCO/TPA/FLL) so is one really needed? From the southeast you can use DAL/HOU when going west and BWI isn't that far out of the way for going up and down the coast (or anywhere for that matter). From the southeast in general there are big stations on your way to anywhere with plenty of connections. No need to focus them all in one place so you can have different options incase weather strikes.

It’s the most populous area of the country and is very economically important. It’s also much closer than the airports you mentioned. DAL/HOU can’t grow much bigger, BWI is delay prone in prone in the winter and the other SE airports with big stations all face significant competition compared to BNA. O&D only continues to grow, and with the ongoing BNA renovations, it only makes sense.

WN will face more competition as BNA grows. Other airlines have been and will continue to add flights there. It isn't just WN interested in growing at BNA. This idea that WN should have whatever they want to themselves at BNA is nonsense.

Also, closer doesn't matter if the other airports are on your way. If you are flying for example JAX to SFO. It doesn't matter if your layover is in ATL/BNA/STL/DEN/etc. There will be some places that XXX-BNA-XXX works better than other big WN stations but it isn't a huge amount unless they scale back ATL, which they obviously have no intention of doing. Again, WN does a good job of casting a net instead of mega hubs for the most part to be able to switch passengers if needed in the case of weather. With all the population density east of the Mississippi it probably a good plan to have to have multiple larger stations instead of a couple mega hubs.

No other airline will get to 100+ flights at BNA.

Furthermore, for WN, anywhere in the southeast makes more sense over BNA compared to ATL because it’s a less congested airport (during normal times) and they don’t face the 800 lb gorilla in DL on every route.

I think all three airports will benefit in the future from P2P route growth or, in the case of RDU, a return to its P2P operations. But, it may be two years before we start to see that full recovery. BNA, however, will continue to benefit from its status as a WN focus city even before then.

In Austin Airport's 2040 Master Plan, they anticipated adding a nonstop to San Juan by late-2020 (but on a United 737-800).

I wouldn't be surprised if JetBlue launches SJU-AUS. To be honest, AUS is probably continuing some form of an incentives program for these new flights, such as Hawaiian to HNL.

Ishrion wrote:

In Austin Airport's 2040 Master Plan, they anticipated adding a nonstop to San Juan by late-2020 (but on a United 737-800).

I wouldn't be surprised if JetBlue launches SJU-AUS. To be honest, AUS is probably continuing some form of an incentives program for these new flights, such as Hawaiian to HNL.

WN has actually been sniffing around SJU expansion lately; they announced BNA-SJU for this summer before the pandemic but did not operate it. I think they may also have announced STL-SJU. There are some geographically sensible connecting opportunities to the west coast at AUS and I wonder whether WN might give AUS-SJU a shot if they grow SJU anymore.

Cointrin330 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

AUS will likely grow, as more companies relocate there (e.g. ORACLE) and it emerges as a rising and growing business market, but it too will have its growth clipped and skew to leisure demand rather than business for some time.

RE: Oracle.
How much less is HQ location going to mean in the post-COVID world? Definitely less. I can imagine in the future a Fortune 500 company moving its HQ and less than 100 jobs actually moving because so many people are telecommuting.

Not everyone will or wants to telecommute, especially when you get into the younger, techie, urban seeking, hipster mindset of the under 35 crowd.

Increased flexibility yes. But young, upwardly mobile, recent college grads are not looking at 100% remote jobs. A year ago employers were in an arms race for the amount of amenities they could offer in these workspaces.

I'd agree these are airports to watch, but they each have their own dynamic.

I think WN is established enough in BNA to hold first place there, but everyone else might fight to be the second largest airline with a small focus city.

RDU will be interesting because the market probably can't support more than one large focus city, and it's not at all clear which airline will win that.

AUS is going to be a mess. Every airline is going to want a piece of expansion in the fastest growing city, and the market there will probably be able sustain 2 or 3 or 4 airlines battling it out with competing focus cities like we've recently seen in BOS and SEA.

Putting things into perspective, domestic O&D out of AUS and BNA were about the same last Q3. RDU was about 16% less than those 2.

Just to underscore WN's dominance in BNA, they run close to twice the number of flights as they do in AUS, despite being the largest carrier in both airport. So, AUS is a more fragmented airport despite WN's size there. It's hard for me to see WN doing well in the coastal transplants to AUS when they don't fly to JFK, EWR, BOS, SFO and SEA. It's also hard for me to see any single airline dominating AUS too much. RDU is a little bit different. If DL feels that it wants to move away from small RJ and business demand is permanently down, it would be hard for them to stick around in some of these big business markets. Which is why B6 is making the move now.

Happytycho wrote:

AUS is going to be a mess. Every airline is going to want a piece of expansion in the fastest growing city, and the market there will probably be able sustain 2 or 3 or 4 airlines battling it out with competing focus cities like we've recently seen in BOS and SEA.

So basically a smaller scale version of BOS?

BNAMealer wrote:

Happytycho wrote:

AUS is going to be a mess. Every airline is going to want a piece of expansion in the fastest growing city, and the market there will probably be able sustain 2 or 3 or 4 airlines battling it out with competing focus cities like we've recently seen in BOS and SEA.

So basically a smaller scale version of BOS?

Looking 10 to 20 years out, I expect AUS to host at least 2 focus cities, and possibly some large spokes as well. I'm not going to guess which airlines, however.

enilria wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

AUS will likely grow, as more companies relocate there (e.g. ORACLE) and it emerges as a rising and growing business market, but it too will have its growth clipped and skew to leisure demand rather than business for some time.

RE: Oracle.
How much less is HQ location going to mean in the post-COVID world? Definitely less. I can imagine in the future a Fortune 500 company moving its HQ and less than 100 jobs actually moving because so many people are telecommuting.

In this example, Oracle expects to grow Austin to around 10k employees, or quadruple what they are at now.

I don't think telecommuting is going to be implemented to the levels you are suggesting 5-10 years from now

I think all of these will be southwest as the largest carrier and a focus city for each of them. Then maybe one other airline with a focus city too. Maybe kind of a mini Boston setup but with southwest as a major player instead of JetBlue

enilria wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

RE: Oracle.
How much less is HQ location going to mean in the post-COVID world? Definitely less. I can imagine in the future a Fortune 500 company moving its HQ and less than 100 jobs actually moving because so many people are telecommuting.

In this example, Oracle expects to grow Austin to around 10k employees, or quadruple what they are at now.

I don't think telecommuting is going to be implemented to the levels you are suggesting 5-10 years from now

I don't know where in Austin Oracle is going to go but it better not be anywhere near downtown if they want people to commute to the office. Austin traffic is horrendous to downtown and they are not proposing anything meaningful to be added to I-35 (just a expensive project that they want to look as meaningful). Oracle and any other companies would probably be best to build it near TX130 (currently tolled). They also need to be convenient to the airport which is on the edge of Austin. So a workforce in Austin may not be the lock you think it is. But then again Texas is slowly turning into California so who knows.

Yeah but most companies are saying 2 days a week work from home could be totally fine permanently. That could have a real reduction on the amount of traffic on the roads. We have such technology now, I think alot of people would want more like a hybrid model and that's what we are gonna see people do.

The real thing thats gonna take a hit is business travel. Companies have saved way too much money here and seen the savings. My company use to send all new employees to a 2-3 week orientation/learning session for example. That has been totally elimination and will be all remote now. Lots of travel like that will never come back, its purely about money. Even in sales, Pitching a sale on a go to meeting or zoom or email would have been laughable in March! Now, i really just want to see your prices and offer and do it as quickly as possible. Don't think i will ever do that in person again, huge time saver for me. i know I'm not alone on that at all. The travel for the sake of travel part will be gone, its gonna need more approvals and a real reason. Cities like AUS/RDU/BNA i think will become more reliant on the hubs for the legacies. They could put better more comfortable equipment on those routes if there are alot of FFs. Routes that once could support service to cities like CMH or CLE might now just be better thru a hub for the legacies. The numbers of business travelers willing to pay a premium for a N/S might be alot less at least for a while as business travel is being slashed from budgets.

Cubsrule wrote:

The problem with AUS is that it's a lousy location for connections, except I guess to interior Mexico.

IAH, HOU, DAL, and especially DFW... would disagree.

Jshank83 wrote:

My question has always been, Why does WN need a 200+ Southeast station?

Every southeastern gateway they serve is connected to some combination of HOU, DAL, MSY, BNA, MCO, FLL, and/or TPA.

Those airports form a perfect ring around the southeast.... barring a complete shift in their business model (e.g. acquisition of a 2nd fleet type for far smaller markets), what would WN really need some mega-connector in that area for?

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

As someone working at BNA I can tell you there is NO WAY we can do 200 flights a day.

737MAX7 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

As someone working at BNA I can tell you there is NO WAY we can do 200 flights a day.

I’m not talking about right now, I’m talking down the road when Concourse A is replaced and WN can take the rest of the C gates.

Midwestindy wrote:

enilria wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

AUS will likely grow, as more companies relocate there (e.g. ORACLE) and it emerges as a rising and growing business market, but it too will have its growth clipped and skew to leisure demand rather than business for some time.

RE: Oracle.
How much less is HQ location going to mean in the post-COVID world? Definitely less. I can imagine in the future a Fortune 500 company moving its HQ and less than 100 jobs actually moving because so many people are telecommuting.

In this example, Oracle expects to grow Austin to around 10k employees, or quadruple what they are at now.

I don't think telecommuting is going to be implemented to the levels you are suggesting 5-10 years from now

Exactly. Even the largest companies like Google have only extended WFH to Fall 2021. The expectation is that eventually, people will migrate back to offices, and as far as Austin goes, it is a thriving, growing city and has been a tech hub for some time. I wouldn't think it will entirely displace Silicon Valley for a number of reasons, but it will continue to grow fast, and with it, demand for destinations that traditionally have not been served from there. The extent to which that growth will occur depends on whether or not business travel recovers and I suspect US Domestic will recover much faster than international. Outside of big business hubs in Europe (notably, London, Amsterdam, Paris, etc...) and a select number in Asia, global business is likely to bypass sending droves of workers to places like China, Hong Kong, and so forth for quite some time. The scale of business travel that existed pre COVID is likely done for years.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... r-BB1bVzsj

Google has said eyes permanent change to part-remote. San Francisco social media firm Twitter said in May that employees whose jobs allow remote work could continue working from home “forever.” Also in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said over the next five to 10 years, half of the social media titan’s employees could be working remotely. Lots of companies are eyeing a hybrid model for the future

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/coronavirus-google-delays-office-return-eyes-permanent-change-to-part-remote/ar-BB1bVzsj

Google has said eyes permanent change to part-remote. San Francisco social media firm Twitter said in May that employees whose jobs allow remote work could continue working from home “forever.” Also in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said over the next five to 10 years, half of the social media titan’s employees could be working remotely. Lots of companies are eyeing a hybrid model for the future

Except I don't know if that's what the masses want.

I was dying to go back into the office, and my company recently allowed those who want to come in, can come in. Working from home isn't for everyone.

AUS, RDU and BNA are numbers 33, 34 and 35 respectively in the below table, but one of these three is not like the other - AUS's growth rate is massively greater, plus, the proximity of San Antonio matters for at least some air service purposes.

Rank Primary Statistical Area 2019 Pop (mm) Change over 2010
1 NY 22.6 1.50%
2 LA 18.7 4.67%
3 Chicago 9.8 -0.16%
4 DC-Baltimore 9.8 8.45%
5 SF Bay Area 9.7 8.31%
6 Boston 8.3 5.00%
7 DFW Metroplex 8.1 18.36%
8 Houston 7.3 18.91%
9 Philly 7.2 2.01%
10 S. Florida 6.9 11.13%
11 Atlanta 6.9 13.19%
12 Detroit 5.3 0.44%
13 Phoenix 5.0 17.80%
14 Seattle 4.9 14.71%
15 Orlando 4.2 20.67%
16 Minneapolis 4.0 8.68%
17 Denver 3.6 17.05%
18 Cleveland 3.6 -1.19%
19 San Diego 3.3 7.85%
20 Portland, OR 3.3 11.58%
21 Tampa 3.2 14.79%
22 St Louis 2.9 0.52%
23 Charlotte 2.8 16.44%
24 SLC 2.6 16.26%
25 Sacramento 2.6 9.29%
26 Pittsburgh 2.6 -2.16%
27 San Antonio 2.6 19.06%
28 Columbus, OH 2.5 9.41%
29 Kansas City 2.5 6.75%
30 Indy 2.5 8.41%
31 Las Vegas 2.3 15.94%
32 Cinci 2.3 3.78%
33 Austin 2.2 29.76%
34 Raleigh 2.1 19.51%
35 Nashville 2.1 16.94%
36 Milwaukee 2.0 1.08%
37 Norfolk 1.9 3.09%
38 Greensboro 1.7 6.29%
39 Jacksonville 1.7 14.84%
40 New Orleans 1.5 6.58%

Murdoughnut wrote:

RDU has the largest share of international O&D passenger traffic (versus domestic) for any large or medium hub U.S. airport that isn't an airline hub. Given its narrowbody proximity to Northern Europe, strong South Asian traffic flows, and pharma traffic to Europe, I see RDU emerging as one of the first non-hub markets to see its Transatlantic service return.

RDU and BNA both have the potential to be hubs, but not for the legacies. Perfect though for new startup, though, especially in an era of cheap airplanes and even cheaper pilots for the next decade or so.

BNA has become dominated by WN, but RDU is wide open at this point. Though BNA would be the better choice for North-South, and West to NE/SE connections. RDU limits it to mainly N/S, which means leisure.

jscottwomack wrote:

AA keeps tabs on Austin. More than once I have been on a DC-10, 767, 777, 787 out of Austin for the short 30 something minute flight to DFW. If there is something going on in Austin, AA will sub in Large Aircraft. Once I flew to DFW on a DC-10 and we had 2 missed approaches at DFW. Nothing like Rear Tires hitting the pavement and hearing the engines spool up for a go around.

I buy the DC-10, since they even flew those DFW-ELP-DFW back in the day, but when did AA run 777 and 787's from DFW-AUS-DFW?

enilria wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

AUS, BNA and RDU have to be the most interesting mid-sized airports in the United States right now. They were pre-COVID and they will continue to be going forward given the ongoing economic and demographic trends. All three are rapidly growing markets with a good mixture of tourism and business, and as of now, none of its peers can really match the enthusiasm they have.

In light of the recent adds by B6 in AUS/RDU and the WN adds in BNA, it got me thinking about the future of these airports and what role they could play in the nations air system going forward when the recovery happens.

1. RDU is a very fragmented market and has not had a truly dominant airline in sometime now. These adds by B6 could be the beginning of changing that if they play their cards right. However, DL still has a large presence and may not go down without a fight. Will we see a southeastern BOS/FLL-type situation at RDU someday, or will this effort by B6 die out and the market remain fragmented?

2. WN has added a lot of new cities to BNA in the last few months. It was long rumored pre-COVID a full base was around the corner for BNA. WN lacks a 200+ flight station in the southeastern US, and there is nowhere else to put one. BNA could and should become a southeastern BWI for WN, but the continued presence of ATL/STL in their current states may make that difficult, even though BNA serves different traffic flows than the latter.

3. AUS is an interesting situation in of itself. Like RDU, it is very fragmented (even more so) and has never had a dominant hub-like airline. Economically and population-wise, it probably has great upside than BNA/RDU combined. I had argued that B6 would also do well to build up here, but users such as Midwestindy and tphuang have brought up some good points. Will we ever see the emergence of an 100+ flight "hub" carrier here, or will the market forever be super fragmented?

Your assessment on RDU is not entirely accurate. DL, has, in fact, at least until yesterday's announcements and schedule changes, been the dominant airline there for the last few years and had built up a rather impressive focus city. It is a high yielding, business market, but it can't escape COVID19 and the changing landscape for air travel, and is expendable in a downturn and that's exactly what has happened. It will take years for business travel to rebound to pre-COVID19 levels. Many of the changes to business travel demand are likely permanent and RDU doesn't fit into that framework. It's also too close to CLT and thrives as a P2P operation, not a connector.

AUS will likely grow, as more companies relocate there (e.g. ORACLE) and it emerges as a rising and growing business market, but it too will have its growth clipped and skew to leisure demand rather than business for some time.

RE: Oracle.
How much less is HQ location going to mean in the post-COVID world? Definitely less. I can imagine in the future a Fortune 500 company moving its HQ and less than 100 jobs actually moving because so many people are telecommuting.

I see RDU being a winner in the new economy given the local Universities and already knowledge workers in the area assuming the NC government doesn't follow the lead of NY, CA and MD and treat business as an unwelcome intruder. However, as pointed out above what will a HQ look like now? If a company moves, certain critical employee will need to move or new workers will need to be hired. But a sizable segment can remain where they are and WFH. Sure from time to time a company would be wise to bring people together in person but I'd imagine that would be far cheaper in the long run than trying to relocate or rehire for thousands of jobs.

Also, what will the mix of travel be? Airlines might be more dependent upon leisure demand to fill planes and that means places like Florida will benefit while places like RDU not so much. But then the legacies will need to change their business model to live with lower yields and that should be interesting.