 |
Austin Skyscraper Forum
austinforum.8.forumer.com
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mikey
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 8
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:56 pm Post subject: New airline at ABIA: Rumor |
 |
|
Having recently inked a regional jet service agreement with SkyWest, keep an eye on the news for new announced service to AUS on Midwest Connect.
Service would be nonstop to either Kansas City (most likely) or the major hub at Milwaukee on 50-seat Canadair regional jets.
An interesting wrinkle in all of this is the hostile takeover attempt of Midwest Airlines by AirTran Airways, who are on record as saying that this regional jet plan would not be part of the newly merged airline. With that said, however, AUS is one of the closer larger markets (to Atlanta) not yet served by AirTran, and with a sizable order of airplanes yet to be delivered combined with just Delta on the ATL-AUS routing, this might be in the cards in the next few years regardless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LoneStarMike
Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Location: Austin - 78704
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Talk about deja vu. I found an old press release on ABIA's website from November, 2002 that said Midwest Express (as they were formerly known) began serving Austin from Gate 25 with two daily roundtrips to Kansas City.
If I remember correctly, this was shortly after Vanguard Airlines, which also served Kansas City from Austin, filed for bankruptcy. Midwest must not have lasted very long that first time because I don't remember ever seing a plane or even their ticket counter.
Re: AirTran - I always thought they'd do well here and in San Anotnio, too. I got the impression that the reason they didn't come here in the past was because they had a gate issue (not enough gates) in Atlanta. I don't know if that's still the case or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikey
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LoneStarMike wrote: |
Talk about deja vu. I found an old press release on ABIA's website from November, 2002 that said Midwest Express (as they were formerly known) began serving Austin from Gate 25 with two daily roundtrips to Kansas City.
If I remember correctly, this was shortly after Vanguard Airlines, which also served Kansas City from Austin, filed for bankruptcy. Midwest must not have lasted very long that first time because I don't remember ever seing a plane or even their ticket counter.
Re: AirTran - I always thought they'd do well here and in San Anotnio, too. I got the impression that the reason they didn't come here in the past was because they had a gate issue (not enough gates) in Atlanta. I don't know if that's still the case or not. |
Hey LoneStarMike! Yeah, this rumor seems all but confirmed now, so I figured I'd post about it. I was wondering if/when YX had ever served AUS before. Thanks for the link.
Personally, I think that the merger is close to being finalized, and therefore this may become moot. But I've got to think that AUS or SAT would be near the top of FL's wishlist regardless of what happens with YX. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LoneStarMike
Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Location: Austin - 78704
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Mikey! (711MN?)
Truth be told, I want to be excited about a new airline at ABIA, (honest!) but it's hard for me to get too excited about regional jet service. Plus, we've had so many airlines come and go and others have made announcements and then not come at all.
Before ABIA even opened, we had the whole Aerolitoral saga.
Aerolitoral began flights between Austin and Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico on January 12, 1998 with Initial service of one flight each way Monday through Friday.
About a month later, they were temporarily put on hold, owing to lack of U.S. Customs staff coverage Aerolitoral said the facility had to be staffed after 5 p.m. and on weekends-when most passengers want to fly-or the international flights would not be viable.
Finally, after a four-month hiatus they resumed daily service on May 18 with two flights per day.
Then, they added a third flight August 1, 1998.
Those flights were all discontinued in October, 1998
Seven months later, ABIA officially opened.
Nect, there was Air Canada to Toronto in June 2000. They were gone in less than 5 months.
Then there was the already mentioned Vanguard with flights to Kansas City. They ended service on July 30, 2002 and filed for bankruptcy.
US Airways had plans to fly 3 daily roundtrips to Charlotte, NC beginning in December, 2001, but 9/11 put an end to those plans before they were able to start.
Maybe once they get the kinks worked out with their merger with America West, they'll return to AUS, although I'd rather see them offer flights to Philadelphia. It's a much stronger market out of AUS than CLT. BTW, I say "return" to AUS because they actually did serve AUS at one time from the old airport. They had one or two round-robin flights from Pittsburgh - San Antonio - Austin - Pittsburgh back in the mid to late 1990's
Great Plains was another carrier that had big plans for AUS that fizzled out before tey even started. They were supposed to start in March, 2003 with flights to Albuquerque, Colorado Springs, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. Then, they delayed the flights to OKC, TUL and ABQ and postponed COS indefinitely. In the end, I don't think they ever showed up at all.
Next, was AeroCaribe who offered service on behalf of Mexicana. They operated a few flights a week to Mexico City and also served Cancun starting in March, 2003. That service ended in Feb. 2004.
For what it's worth, I do think Frontier and JetBlue are here to stay, and hopefully the new Aero Mexico service will survive.
Now about the AirTran merger with Midwest. I've seen reports of it in the paper, but haven't really kept up with the particulars. I was under the impression that Midwest was against it and they thought AirTran's offer wasn't good enough, but I'm getting the impression that you think the merger might go through.
What have you read or heard that makes you feel this way? I could probably get a lot more excited about AirTran coming to Austin simply because, as you say, they don't use regional jets like Midwest Connection would. Plus they're bigger than Midwest and could offer connecting opportunities.
On the other hand, I do know that Midwest has served San Antonio for a few years now and they seem to be doing well there. I can't remember if they offer mainline service or regional jet service from there. I'm thinking mainline, but I'm not positive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikey
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LoneStarMike wrote: |
| Hey Mikey! (711MN?) |
Yep! For the record, I used to live in Minnesota and this was the best I could come up with at the time. 
Thanks for the history lesson on ABIA...very interesting, and the lion's share of which was before my time here in Austin. (moved here in mid-2005) Congrats on being the go-to guy for info on all things Austin-aviation related. (although you were probably that already)
| LoneStarMike wrote: |
Now about the AirTran merger with Midwest. I've seen reports of it in the paper, but haven't really kept up with the particulars. I was under the impression that Midwest was against it and they thought AirTran's offer wasn't good enough, but I'm getting the impression that you think the merger might go through.
What have you read or heard that makes you feel this way? I could probably get a lot more excited about AirTran coming to Austin simply because, as you say, they don't use regional jets like Midwest Connection would. Plus they're bigger than Midwest and could offer connecting opportunities.
On the other hand, I do know that Midwest has served San Antonio for a few years now and they seem to be doing well there. I can't remember if they offer mainline service or regional jet service from there. I'm thinking mainline, but I'm not positive. |
As a matter of fact, I grew up in Milwaukee, and thus much of my aviation interest and exposure started with Midwest Airlines, nee Express. I've kept pretty close tabs on their situation as (1) I've hoped they would gather enough momentum and expand their services first to MSP (where they eventually did) and then here to AUS (which apparently they once did) and (2) much of my family and friends think that they're the only game in town "back home", not unlike most people who live in a hub city, I suppose.
I personally think that there are a number of factors that lead me to believe that that deal will go through: (this is, of course, my own opinion)
1. YX stock has never been this high and investors could really care less about how nice the seats are and whatever else they offer as a niche. They're looking for a nice ROI, and no matter what their expansion plans are (I shudder at the concept of much of it lately being with relatively high-cost RJ's), I don't see anything on paper that leads me to believe that YX will organically grow the stock beyond what FL offered. To that end, some stockholders already have filed a class-action suit against the Board, which will only put pressure on them to act with fudiciary responsibility towards those who hold the stock.
2. FL's cash shopping in the last year piqued my interest, and only affirmed in my mind that they can go a long way in getting this deal done if not eventually in a leveraged fashion. YX is a paper airline IMO, selling-and-leasing-back nearly everything to stay out of BK back in '03 IIRC. FL's failure to obtain TZ assets in MDW likely focused their attention to MKE and a buyout of YX as the Midwest region is really the last frontier where there is no significant LCC presence. But they know they need to make a big splash to compete where big boys like NW and UA will fight vigorously for market share, which leads me to...
3. Buying YX and offering a reasonably good product at a high perceived value will not only give them a leg in the door (not just a foot), but also a very frugal yet loyal customer base and their subsequent continual revenue source. If there's anything Milwaukeans are, they're frugal...sure, the cookies are nice, but the Midwest is almost identified by its penchant for utility, not luxury, which makes MKE's persistent support for an airline like YX almost paradoxical. IMO, if FL can prove to this market that it can provide them a valuable service, they'll succeed in their venture to operate and expand in the midwest as if their future relies upon it. Because I think that it does...
Anyway, steering back to AUS and new service, we have a situation where YX appears to be restarting service on RJ's to probably MCI, as that's where the majority of Skywest's operations are headed. I agree that a teetering YX will not last here--and they've certainly shown a history of pulling out very early if bookings aren't there ala the MKE-HOU service--but a strong FL might just stick it out. And they're on record as shunning regional jets as part of their offering, which only means more mainline service for us.
Well, if anything, it's something to keep an eye on. ;)
As for those other enhancements you mentioned, I think at least a AUS-CLT or AUS-PHL service is overdue once US and HP are more aligned, but whether they'd be on mainline aircraft is a big question I'd have.
The bottom line is that this area is growing and prospering, and airlines will take a good look at that in their own expansion plans. Let's hope as a market that we can support it all.
Good to see you here and in a.net, LoneStarMike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LoneStarMike
Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Location: Austin - 78704
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the Midwest/AirTran merger analysis. I need to be paying more attention. I did see somewhere that Midwest was planning on adding at least 6 new cities in 2007, so hopefully Austin will be one of them. In your opinion, how soon do you think we might expect an announcement?
| Mikey wrote: |
| Anyway, steering back to AUS and new service, we have a situation where YX appears to be restarting service on RJ's to probably MCI, as that's where the majority of Skywest's operations are headed. |
Yeah, that and the fact Kansas City is a stronger market for AUS (190 daily passengers in Q2 2006) than Milwaukee (50 passengers per day.)
Strangely enough, many more folks travel to these two cities from San Antonio. SAT - MCI was 283 daily passengers and SAT - MKE was 168.
| Mikey wrote: |
| As for those other enhancements you mentioned, I think at least a AUS-CLT or AUS-PHL service is overdue once US and HP are more aligned, but whether they'd be on mainline aircraft is a big question I'd have. |
The reason I think maybe PHL is because after AA starts it's nonstop to SEA, PHL will be the biggest market out of AUS that currently offers no nonstop service.
Being the geek that I am, I looked at 2Q 2006 O&D statistics for AUS and compiled a list of every market that has over 20 people per day. Here's the data:
Rank/City/Avg. daily passengers
01. Dallas/Fort Worth, TX - 1653
02. New York, NY - 1192
03. Chicago, IL - 886
04. Los Angeles, CA - 731
05. San Jose, CA - 676
06. Las Vegas, NV - 624
07. Houston, TX - 595
08. Phoenix, AZ - 535
09. Denver, CO - 521
10. Baltimore, MD - 473
11. Boston, MA - 431
12. Washington, DC - 420
13. Atlanta, GA - 405
14. Seattle, WA - 358
15. El Paso, TX - 391
16. San Diego, CA - 354
17. Nashville, TN - 287
18. Lubbock, TX - 284
19. Raleigh/Durham, NC - 244
20. Orlando, FL - 243
21. Philadelphia, PA - 236
22. Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN - 233
23. San Francisco, CA - 208
24. Tampa, FL- 197
25. Portland, OR - 194
26. Kansas City, MO - 190
27. Albuquerque, NM - 185 (tie)
27. Oakland, CA - 185 (tie)
29. Harlingen, TX - 181
30. Detroit, MI - 178
31. Fort Lauderdale, FL - 177
32. Sacramento, CA - 169
33. New Orleans, LA - 166
34. Midland/Odessa, TX - 156
35. Santa Ana, CA - 153
36. Amarillo, TX - 148 (tie)
36. Salt Lake City, UT - 148 (tie)
38. Cleveland - 143
39. Oklahoma City, OK - 133 (tie)
39. St. Louis, MO - 133 (tie)
41. Ontario, CA - 132
42. Indianapolis, IN - 121
43. Columbus, OH - 120
44. Tulsa, OK - 119
45. Little Rock, AR - 106
46. Hartford, CT - 100
47. Pittsburgh, PA - 99
48. Jacksonville, FL - 98
49. Charlotte, NC - 92
50. Norfolk, VA - 84
51. Miami, FL - 78
52. Buffalo, NY - 75
53. Burbank, CA - 74
54. Reno, NV - 72
55. Manchester, NH - 70
56. Cincinnatti, OH - 67
57. Birmingham, AL - 65 (tie)
57. Providence, RI - 65 (tie)
59. Richmond, VA - 63
60. Albany, NY - 58 (tie)
60. Tucson, AZ - 58 (tie)
62. Omaha,NE - 56
63. Fort Meyers, FL - 53
64. West Palm Beach, FL - 51
65. Milwaukee, WI - 50
66. Jackson, MS - 49
67. Boise, ID - 45
68. Colorado Springs, CO - 41 (tie)
68. Lexington, KY - 41 (tie)
70. Spokane, WA - 38
71. Syracuse, NY - 37
72. Baton Rouge, LA - 36
73. Fayetteville, AR - 35 (tie)
73. Rochester, NY - 35 (tie)
75. Greensboro/High Point, NC - 34
76. Louisiville, KY - 30 (tie)
76. Savannah, GA - 30 (tie)
78. Burlington, VT - 29 (tie)
78. McAllen, TX - 29 (tie)
80. Billings, MT - 27
81. Knoxville, TN - 26
82. Huntsville, AL - 25 (tie)
82. Memphis, TN - 25 (tie)
84. Des Moines, IA - 24 (tie)
84. Fresno, CA - 24 (tie)
84. Islip/Long Island, NY - 24 (tie)
87. Cedar Rapids, IA - 23 (tie)
87. Charleston, SC - 23 (tie)
89. Grand Rapids, MI - 22 (tie)
89. Madison, WI - 22 (tie)
91. Portland, ME 21
92. Wichita, KS - 20
| Mikey wrote: |
| The bottom line is that this area is growing and prospering, and airlines will take a good look at that in their own expansion plans. Let's hope as a market that we can support it all. |
I think something else that the low cost carriers take into consideration when determining where to go next is what other airlines they'd be competing with and how strong a hold they have on the local market.
Our biggest carrier is Southwest and Y-T-D (through November) they account for just under 36% of all passengers flying into and out of ABIA
In that respect, I think both AUS and SAT are better choices for a low cost carrier than somewhere like DFW where American has a 85% market share (and AirTran has struggled.)
I'm looking forward to future growth at ABIA in 2007. Thanks again for sharing your insight, Mikey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikey
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LoneStarMike wrote: |
Being the geek that I am, I looked at 2Q 2006 O&D statistics for AUS and compiled a list of every market that has over 20 people per day. Here's the data:
Rank/City/Avg. daily passengers
01. Dallas/Fort Worth, TX - 1653
02. New York, NY - 1192
03. Chicago, IL - 886
04. Los Angeles, CA - 731
05. San Jose, CA - 676
06. Las Vegas, NV - 624
07. Houston, TX - 595
08. Phoenix, AZ - 535
09. Denver, CO - 521
10. Baltimore, MD - 473
11. Boston, MA - 431
12. Washington, DC - 420
13. Atlanta, GA - 405
14. Seattle, WA - 358
15. El Paso, TX - 391
16. San Diego, CA - 354
17. Nashville, TN - 287
18. Lubbock, TX - 284
19. Raleigh/Durham, NC - 244
20. Orlando, FL - 243
21. Philadelphia, PA - 236
22. Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN - 233
23. San Francisco, CA - 208
24. Tampa, FL- 197
25. Portland, OR - 194
26. Kansas City, MO - 190
27. Albuquerque, NM - 185 (tie)
27. Oakland, CA - 185 (tie)
29. Harlingen, TX - 181
30. Detroit, MI - 178
31. Fort Lauderdale, FL - 177
32. Sacramento, CA - 169
33. New Orleans, LA - 166
34. Midland/Odessa, TX - 156
35. Santa Ana, CA - 153
36. Amarillo, TX - 148 (tie)
36. Salt Lake City, UT - 148 (tie)
38. Cleveland - 143
39. Oklahoma City, OK - 133 (tie)
39. St. Louis, MO - 133 (tie)
41. Ontario, CA - 132
42. Indianapolis, IN - 121
43. Columbus, OH - 120
44. Tulsa, OK - 119
45. Little Rock, AR - 106
46. Hartford, CT - 100
47. Pittsburgh, PA - 99
48. Jacksonville, FL - 98
49. Charlotte, NC - 92
50. Norfolk, VA - 84
51. Miami, FL - 78
52. Buffalo, NY - 75
53. Burbank, CA - 74
54. Reno, NV - 72
55. Manchester, NH - 70
56. Cincinnatti, OH - 67
57. Birmingham, AL - 65 (tie)
57. Providence, RI - 65 (tie)
59. Richmond, VA - 63
60. Albany, NY - 58 (tie)
60. Tucson, AZ - 58 (tie)
62. Omaha,NE - 56
63. Fort Meyers, FL - 53
64. West Palm Beach, FL - 51
65. Milwaukee, WI - 50
66. Jackson, MS - 49
67. Boise, ID - 45
68. Colorado Springs, CO - 41 (tie)
68. Lexington, KY - 41 (tie)
70. Spokane, WA - 38
71. Syracuse, NY - 37
72. Baton Rouge, LA - 36
73. Fayetteville, AR - 35 (tie)
73. Rochester, NY - 35 (tie)
75. Greensboro/High Point, NC - 34
76. Louisiville, KY - 30 (tie)
76. Savannah, GA - 30 (tie)
78. Burlington, VT - 29 (tie)
78. McAllen, TX - 29 (tie)
80. Billings, MT - 27
81. Knoxville, TN - 26
82. Huntsville, AL - 25 (tie)
82. Memphis, TN - 25 (tie)
84. Des Moines, IA - 24 (tie)
84. Fresno, CA - 24 (tie)
84. Islip/Long Island, NY - 24 (tie)
87. Cedar Rapids, IA - 23 (tie)
87. Charleston, SC - 23 (tie)
89. Grand Rapids, MI - 22 (tie)
89. Madison, WI - 22 (tie)
91. Portland, ME 21
92. Wichita, KS - 20
|
An interesting tidbit brought up recently is the advent of ExpressJet starting operations independent of CO since they are now beginning to be served by a second regional carrier. From the ExpressJet jobs postings, particular attention is to be paid to cities hiring atation supervisors and GMs--including Austin and San Antonio--which I have highlighted in your list above.
Many are trying to claim that this is doomed based on the Independence Air debacle, but I've heard nor would I even understand how they'd willingly go down that path, i.e. charge obscenely low fares that don't cover the cost of the planes. But a P2P network flying 50-seaters in the southwest serving city pairs that WN couldn't touch makes for at least an interesting business model. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikey
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikey wrote: |
An interesting tidbit brought up recently is the advent of ExpressJet starting operations independent of CO since they are now beginning to be served by a second regional carrier. From the ExpressJet jobs postings, particular attention is to be paid to cities hiring atation supervisors and GMs--including Austin and San Antonio--which I have highlighted in your list above.
Many are trying to claim that this is doomed based on the Independence Air debacle, but I've heard nor would I even understand how they'd willingly go down that path, i.e. charge obscenely low fares that don't cover the cost of the planes. But a P2P network flying 50-seaters in the southwest serving city pairs that WN couldn't touch makes for at least an interesting business model. |
According to ExpressJet's recently-released route map, Austin scores a resounding 9 new routes: ONT, TUS, ABQ, OKC, TUL, CRP, MCI, MSY, and JAX. Expect an announcement in the coming days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LoneStarMike
Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Location: Austin - 78704
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^ And when you add the 9 new nonstop destination to be served by ExpressJet to the 35 current available nonstop domestic airports served from AUS (including Seattle which starts in April) we'll now have 44 domestic airports served nonstop from AUS. Sweet. And that's not including Mexico City which brings the total destinations served to 45.
Also worthy of note is that although Ontario, CA will be Expressjet's busiest city with 14 nonstop destinations, Austin and San Diego are tied for second place with 9 nonstop ExpressJet destination apiece.
I'm assuming ExpressJet will want to use jetways which would mean they'd be using Gates 24 and/or 25.
I do wonder, though, if ExpressJet's plan to serve Kansas City will put a crimp in Midwest Connect's plans to come to AUS as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
