Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
flyerexp99 wrote:SLC likely does not have the international O&D to support a long haul hub, so it would need to be a domestic hub.
JetBlue would probably be the best candidate for SLC. They’ve got ZERO hubs that are not on a coast with LAX as their sole west coast operation. SLC could help them to connect more markets out west that don’t involve a connection at LAX.
LASVegan wrote:flyerexp99 wrote:SLC likely does not have the international O&D to support a long haul hub, so it would need to be a domestic hub.
JetBlue would probably be the best candidate for SLC. They’ve got ZERO hubs that are not on a coast with LAX as their sole west coast operation. SLC could help them to connect more markets out west that don’t involve a connection at LAX.
I agree that B6 could make sense. I believe David Neelman had a connection to SLC and SLC was one of their first cities out west.
alohashirts wrote:Salt Lake City is a growing market with a strong economy, fast growing population, centrally located out west, and has the 22nd largest CSA population in the country. With that could SLC potentially become a hub or focus city for another airline? I look at B6 and AS as airlines that could build SLC. There have been rumors that UA might build a United Club at the airport and expand SLC to more than just the UA hubs. Curious to what other people thoughts are.
LASVegan wrote:flyerexp99 wrote:SLC likely does not have the international O&D to support a long haul hub, so it would need to be a domestic hub.
JetBlue would probably be the best candidate for SLC. They’ve got ZERO hubs that are not on a coast with LAX as their sole west coast operation. SLC could help them to connect more markets out west that don’t involve a connection at LAX.
I agree that B6 could make sense. I believe David Neelman had a connection to SLC and SLC was one of their first cities out west.
SurlyBonds wrote:These "one airport as a hub for two airlines" strategies almost always fail: witness TWA in Atlanta, Delta at DFW, Continental at Denver, and various entrants at MIA. Hubs needs some O&D demand; most cities tap that demand with one carrier. Moreover, it's easy for the incumbent to push out the challenger.
The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America, and located smack-dab in the middle of the country, making it a practical hub geographically. You really need to be a global Alpha+ city to pull this strategy off, and in the US, that means New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. Moreover, the former two are not particularly centrally located, and in the case of New York, the city has two viable global airports and a decent domestic airport. That leaves Chicago as sui generis. (WN has had some success with Denver, but WN doesn't have megahubs in the classic sense; it's more like focus cities.)
If B6 really wants an interior hub -- and I'm not convinced it needs one -- it would need to look at places like KCI, STL, maybe ABQ or TUS, although non of those cities are really ideal hubs size- and economy-wise. Perhaps AUS/SAT, but those aren't quite as centrally located.
SurlyBonds wrote:These "one airport as a hub for two airlines" strategies almost always fail: witness TWA in Atlanta, Delta at DFW, Continental at Denver, and various entrants at MIA. Hubs needs some O&D demand; most cities tap that demand with one carrier. Moreover, it's easy for the incumbent to push out the challenger.
The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America, and located smack-dab in the middle of the country, making it a practical hub geographically. You really need to be a global Alpha+ city to pull this strategy off, and in the US, that means New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. Moreover, the former two are not particularly centrally located, and in the case of New York, the city has two viable global airports and a decent domestic airport. That leaves Chicago as sui generis. (WN has had some success with Denver, but WN doesn't have megahubs in the classic sense; it's more like focus cities.)
If B6 really wants an interior hub -- and I'm not convinced it needs one -- it would need to look at places like KCI, STL, maybe ABQ or TUS, although non of those cities are really ideal hubs size- and economy-wise. Perhaps AUS/SAT, but those aren't quite as centrally located.
SurlyBonds wrote:The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America,
LAX772LR wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America,
...huh?
Chicago isn't even close to being the 2nd largest city (nor metro) in America; that'd be Los Angeles in both cases.
Nor is it the only multi-hub city. Heck, it's not even the metro with the highest nor second highest number of hubs.
PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
LASVegan wrote:flyerexp99 wrote:SLC likely does not have the international O&D to support a long haul hub, so it would need to be a domestic hub.
JetBlue would probably be the best candidate for SLC. They’ve got ZERO hubs that are not on a coast with LAX as their sole west coast operation. SLC could help them to connect more markets out west that don’t involve a connection at LAX.
I agree that B6 could make sense. I believe David Neelman had a connection to SLC and SLC was one of their first cities out west.
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:Airlines have tried a SLC focus city most recently as, b6 in the past and southwest. Delta's has protected slc pretty well. I just don't see it happening tbh. Having one full legacy hub is really enough.
SurlyBonds wrote:The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America, and located smack-dab in the middle of the country, making it a practical hub geographically. You really need to be a global Alpha+ city to pull this strategy off, and in the US, that means New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. Moreover, the former two are not particularly centrally located, and in the case of New York, the city has two viable global airports and a decent domestic airport. That leaves Chicago as sui generis. (WN has had some success with Denver, but WN doesn't have megahubs in the classic sense; it's more like focus cities.)
pmanni1 wrote:PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
They've probably avoided it because of the low O&D. SLC is hugely overserved already for a metro it's size.
PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
SESGDL wrote:pmanni1 wrote:PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
They've probably avoided it because of the low O&D. SLC is hugely overserved already for a metro it's size.
No, it isn't. SLC is a majority O&D operation, contrary to popular belief.
Jeremy
Tokushima wrote:LASVegan wrote:flyerexp99 wrote:SLC likely does not have the international O&D to support a long haul hub, so it would need to be a domestic hub.
JetBlue would probably be the best candidate for SLC. They’ve got ZERO hubs that are not on a coast with LAX as their sole west coast operation. SLC could help them to connect more markets out west that don’t involve a connection at LAX.
I agree that B6 could make sense. I believe David Neelman had a connection to SLC and SLC was one of their first cities out west.
That connection came from Morris Air which he owned (and sold to WN). Morris Air was based in SLC.http://www.departedflights.com/KNsummer92.html
smithbs wrote:PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
Those go out of Provo, or Allegiant at least.
FluidFlow wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:These "one airport as a hub for two airlines" strategies almost always fail: witness TWA in Atlanta, Delta at DFW, Continental at Denver, and various entrants at MIA. Hubs needs some O&D demand; most cities tap that demand with one carrier. Moreover, it's easy for the incumbent to push out the challenger.
The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America, and located smack-dab in the middle of the country, making it a practical hub geographically. You really need to be a global Alpha+ city to pull this strategy off, and in the US, that means New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. Moreover, the former two are not particularly centrally located, and in the case of New York, the city has two viable global airports and a decent domestic airport. That leaves Chicago as sui generis. (WN has had some success with Denver, but WN doesn't have megahubs in the classic sense; it's more like focus cities.)
If B6 really wants an interior hub -- and I'm not convinced it needs one -- it would need to look at places like KCI, STL, maybe ABQ or TUS, although non of those cities are really ideal hubs size- and economy-wise. Perhaps AUS/SAT, but those aren't quite as centrally located.
DFW might be big enough in theory to have one airport as a hub for two airlines, but UA is at IAH (which is just around the corner) and for DL it would just undermine ATL. So yeah, I can't really see where you could put more than one airline into the same airport in between the coasts.
pmanni1 wrote:PatrickZ80 wrote:What about a low-cost airline? I'm surprised Salt Lake City has neither Spirit, nor Allegiant, and only very little Frontier. it seems to be full service airlines only. I can totally see Spirit or Frontier make Salt Lake City work for them.
They've probably avoided it because of the low O&D. SLC is hugely overserved already for a metro it's size.
WidebodyPTV wrote:alohashirts wrote:Salt Lake City is a growing market with a strong economy, fast growing population, centrally located out west, and has the 22nd largest CSA population in the country. With that could SLC potentially become a hub or focus city for another airline? I look at B6 and AS as airlines that could build SLC. There have been rumors that UA might build a United Club at the airport and expand SLC to more than just the UA hubs. Curious to what other people thoughts are.
SLC is not going to become a UA focus city, nor are there any credible rumors suggesting such. SLC has the second-lowest O/D traffic of any trunk hub - there simply isn't enough traffic to warrant a focus city, let alone another hub.
NCAD95 wrote:WidebodyPTV wrote:alohashirts wrote:Salt Lake City is a growing market with a strong economy, fast growing population, centrally located out west, and has the 22nd largest CSA population in the country. With that could SLC potentially become a hub or focus city for another airline? I look at B6 and AS as airlines that could build SLC. There have been rumors that UA might build a United Club at the airport and expand SLC to more than just the UA hubs. Curious to what other people thoughts are.
SLC is not going to become a UA focus city, nor are there any credible rumors suggesting such. SLC has the second-lowest O/D traffic of any trunk hub - there simply isn't enough traffic to warrant a focus city, let alone another hub.
Just out of curiosity which hub has the lowest O/D.
USAirALB wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America, and located smack-dab in the middle of the country, making it a practical hub geographically. You really need to be a global Alpha+ city to pull this strategy off, and in the US, that means New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. Moreover, the former two are not particularly centrally located, and in the case of New York, the city has two viable global airports and a decent domestic airport. That leaves Chicago as sui generis. (WN has had some success with Denver, but WN doesn't have megahubs in the classic sense; it's more like focus cities.)
Chicago isn't the second largest city anymore, LA is. It is the third largest CSA, although that is likely to be eclipsed by the BWI metro area in the next one or two years.
The Washington DC metro area is a multi-hub city. I can almost guarantee you that if legally possible AA would absolutely have long-haul flights out of DCA.
WidebodyPTV wrote:alohashirts wrote:Salt Lake City is a growing market with a strong economy, fast growing population, centrally located out west, and has the 22nd largest CSA population in the country. With that could SLC potentially become a hub or focus city for another airline? I look at B6 and AS as airlines that could build SLC. There have been rumors that UA might build a United Club at the airport and expand SLC to more than just the UA hubs. Curious to what other people thoughts are.
SLC is not going to become a UA focus city, nor are there any credible rumors suggesting such. SLC has the second-lowest O/D traffic of any trunk hub - there simply isn't enough traffic to warrant a focus city, let alone another hub.
tphuang wrote:I don't see how SLC has enough O&D for a second hub or even a successful focus city. Any hub would also have to battle connections at DEN. A tall order to say the least.
Maybe with DN connection, Breeze can try something at SLC. You'd need really low cost to have a focus city next to Delta hub.
Runway765 wrote:The only reason it is a hub is because of geography.
LAX772LR wrote:Runway765 wrote:The only reason it is a hub is because of geography.
You pretty much just described EVERY hub.
There's few exceptions to that; notably LAX, JFK, and YYZ which became default gateways to the Pacific and Atlantic due to their massive O&D more so than their location (taking those distinctions from SFO, BOS, and YUL respectively, which had them mostly due to location)..... but they are outliers.
flyoregon wrote:NCAD95 wrote:WidebodyPTV wrote:
SLC is not going to become a UA focus city, nor are there any credible rumors suggesting such. SLC has the second-lowest O/D traffic of any trunk hub - there simply isn't enough traffic to warrant a focus city, let alone another hub.
Just out of curiosity which hub has the lowest O/D.
According to the graph in post #22, CLT does at 30.1%. Amongst DL it’s ATL at 38.7%
LAX772LR wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:The only exception -- Chicago with both UA and AA -- is the second-largest city in America,
...huh?
Chicago isn't even close to being the 2nd largest city (nor metro) in America; that'd be Los Angeles in both cases.
Nor is it the only multi-hub city. Heck, it's not even the metro with the highest nor second highest number of hubs.
SurlyBonds wrote:What are the others?
USAirALB wrote:
The Washington DC metro area is a multi-hub city. I can almost guarantee you that if legally possible AA would absolutely have long-haul flights out of DCA.
SurlyBonds wrote:But the point is that it's not possible; DCA is not a true fortress hub in the way that ATL, ORD, DEN, MIA, and other air.
LAX772LR wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:What are the others?
Depends on whether or not you wish to count WN focii as hubs (in this case, it would add to the point, as they're often highly O&D dependent).
In terms of CSA areas, then easily:
- NYC........(DL, UA, B6)
- LAX.........(AA, DL, UA, AS, B6)
- SFO........(UA, AS)
- SEA........(AS, DL)
- MIA/FLL...(AA, F9, B6)
- etc
Counting large WN operations, you can add WAS, DEN, DAL, HOU, and PHX to that as well.
SurlyBonds wrote:First off, you're counting different airports in the same city, or even region, as a single hub; I don't think that's a fair comparison.
SurlyBonds wrote:Second, my main point is that there are only three cities in the country that could *really* support two airlines in a single massive hub: New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Those are the only Alpha-or-higher cities in the US. By and large, your list is consistent with that theory. As for SFO, that example illustrates my point, rather than refuting it: Alaska tried, and failed, to make it a true nationwide hub.
SurlyBonds wrote:Your strongest counterpoint is Seattle, but that leads my to my third point: I don't think of hubbing for low-cost carriers, or even B6/AS, in the same way I do for legacies.
LAX772LR wrote:Metropolitan and Combined Statistical Areas are far and away the most accurate means of assessment for hub catchment, because hubs are not dependent on static traffic from a single city location...That you feel the need to keep using moderators like "really" or "true" should be something of a wake-up call, as to the fallacious nature of your claim.
SurlyBonds wrote:I think of a hub as a connecting point (1) where arrivals and departures are generally timed in banks, and (2) that has a nationwide footprint, or at least a huge regional footprint.
SurlyBonds wrote:As for what constitutes a "legacy carrier," I was always taught that it was the old "seven sisters" and their progeny:
leftcoast8 wrote:Considering how many tech companies have set up shop in SLC/Provo, why isn't there more international demand? I can see PVG working out. Delta has a Skyteam partner in China Eastern, and PVG is a great jumping off point to reach Singapore, HK/SZ or Hangzhou. SZ is only a short ferry ride away from HKIA.
Speaking of Hanghzou, I wonder when Shanghai East station station be completed. It will give PVG a direct link to the HSR network. Before the pandemic, the best option to get to Hangzhou, Wenzhou, Suzhou, etc. was to take the shuttle bus from Terminal 2 to Hongqiao railway station, but that was prone to getting stuck in traffic on the Middle/Outer Ring Road.
Subway required a change at Guanglan Road (only 4-car trains ran between Guanglan and the airport) and the maglev only runs to Longyang Road, which is pretty far from Hongqiao in the western portion of the city. Both options require a long trek on Line 2. You'd think that a city so important to China as Shanghai would get a proper HSR line serving its biggest airport. It's not like how the Narita Shinkansen was scrapped due to landowner opposition, I don't think the CCP would struggle to get land for a railway. So what's the hold up?
LAX772LR wrote:SurlyBonds wrote:What are the others?
Depends on whether or not you wish to count WN focii as hubs (in this case, it would add to the point, as they're often highly O&D dependent).
In terms of CSA areas, then easily:
- NYC........(DL, UA, B6)
- LAX.........(AA, DL, UA, AS, B6)
- SFO........(UA, AS)
- SEA........(AS, DL)
- MIA/FLL...(AA, F9, B6)
- etc
Counting large WN operations, you can add WAS, DEN, DAL, HOU, and PHX to that as well.