SFO: Worked good enough to maintain service on United for over a decade before the pandemic. United's transpacific hub took a complete gutting during the COVID crisis and still has not recovered. Under this same time frame tourism to the Bay Area plummeted upon negative press of homelessness -- now we are seeing a market correction of the tech space. This is no longer a good international market out of OKC, nor a domestic business or leisure market. UA no longer can ride on the "chugging along" of the pre-pandemic economy of the bay area which had tremendous Trans-pacific demand as well as healthy leisure and domestic business demand. Markets like OKC can no longer generate the traffic to SFO on those conditions to be worth 9 hours of aircraft and crew time in an extremely stretched thin resource pool.catch, not questioning you at all, just curious. What other domestic cities have lost their long-standing SFO service and still do not have it back like OKC has? There are obviously lots of cities that don't have SFO service (it was never as big a domestic hub as DEN or ORD). Did cities like MEM and SAT have service pre-Covid? They don't seem to have it now. Places like OMA and ABQ do have SFO service back. Just curiosity.

I know OMA did. ABQ. MCI and STL just got theirs back (on UA). I think DSM and ICT were announced to start before the pandemic and never materialized, and hasn’t ever started.

I don’t think MEM had SFO but SAT did.

It's not just about getting a city. You have to look at the bigger picture for how it benefits the airline.

SFO: Worked good enough to maintain service on United for over a decade before the pandemic. United's transpacific hub took a complete gutting during the COVID crisis and still has not recovered. Under this same time frame tourism to the Bay Area plummeted upon negative press of homelessness -- now we are seeing a market correction of the tech space. This is no longer a good international market out of OKC, nor a domestic business or leisure market. UA no longer can ride on the "chugging along" of the pre-pandemic economy of the bay area which had tremendous Trans-pacific demand as well as healthy leisure and domestic business demand. Markets like OKC can no longer generate the traffic to SFO on those conditions to be worth 9 hours of aircraft and crew time in an extremely stretched thin resource pool.

BOS: Everyone wants Delta to serve it but let's be realistic they have had bigger fish to fry forever in relation to the OKC market. They have had only a token presence in OKC for as long as I can remember. Service to the hubs on equipment and frequency that adequately serves the market. LGA is the only add they have had in OKC in more than 3 decades, and it's uncertain at this point how committed they are to that.

PDX: Diet San Francisco. A pre-pandemic strong market for Asian demand, and an attractive leisure station. Positioned close to SEA it has long been a relief valve for Alaska's Seattle hub operation. It suffers from all of the same issues as San Francisco but on a proportionate scale. Leisure traffic would be the prime driver of a PDX flight and it would only be likely to happen in lieu of a second SEA flight, or possibly at the expense of the mainline flight to Seattle. I don't see either as incredibly likely at this point in time as it is a long and thin route. Aircraft and crew time at all airlines is at a huge premium and a 9-10 hour chunk of a flight crew and airplane is a huge opportunity cost at any airline. Traffic on this route would consist of a large chunk of low-yield connections. If I am Alaska, do I send an E175 on this route to serve 40 local passengers a day, and fill the other 36 seats with junk fares on low-yield connections to Yakima? I can forget the route all together and use the airplane and crew to make 2 round trips to somewhere closer to PDX. It's a hard sell on the top floor. If the market environment were more favorable it would be a viable route.

JFK: Every airport wants these 3 letters in their portfolio. Servicing this route requires a VERY strong international demand for a certain partner airline or certain routes over the pond. This is a route where you bypass DFW or ATL to get on a partner airline to Rome, Moscow, or any number of European business destinations where club access and schedule are the only important factors. Price is no object. Not going to happen for OKC.

What else is really left? OKC is incredibly well serves to all of the major cities in the country. The equipment or times may not be 100% ideal but you can get to most of the major airports nonstop on a major air carrier. Things can always be better but I really fail to see any huge holes that aren't typical for an airport the size of OKC.

Personally I'd like to see:

1) SFO back but on Alaska for OneWorld options. Prob not on their radar but would be cool as an AA member.

2) AA add PHL back for more options going to Europe, esp if JFK isn't an option. Granted not having JFK doesn't bother me too much cause you can still fly into LGA and get to JFK. A little tedious but nothing overwhelming. Helps that the OKC to LGA flight is really early to give you time to get there. (side note, I did see in Sept that there are two nonstop flights to LGA now from OKC (6am & 4:15pm). I don't know if that's seasonal or not but a nice option if you don't want to wake up at dark thirty)

3) Either SWA, Frontier, or Allegiant add a flight to Cancun. 2 times a week service that's seasonal.

It's not just about getting a city. You have to look at the bigger picture for how it benefits the airline.

SFO: Worked good enough to maintain service on United for over a decade before the pandemic. United's transpacific hub took a complete gutting during the COVID crisis and still has not recovered. Under this same time frame tourism to the Bay Area plummeted upon negative press of homelessness -- now we are seeing a market correction of the tech space. This is no longer a good international market out of OKC, nor a domestic business or leisure market. UA no longer can ride on the "chugging along" of the pre-pandemic economy of the bay area which had tremendous Trans-pacific demand as well as healthy leisure and domestic business demand. Markets like OKC can no longer generate the traffic to SFO on those conditions to be worth 9 hours of aircraft and crew time in an extremely stretched thin resource pool.

BOS: Everyone wants Delta to serve it but let's be realistic they have had bigger fish to fry forever in relation to the OKC market. They have had only a token presence in OKC for as long as I can remember. Service to the hubs on equipment and frequency that adequately serves the market. LGA is the only add they have had in OKC in more than 3 decades, and it's uncertain at this point how committed they are to that.

PDX: Diet San Francisco. A pre-pandemic strong market for Asian demand, and an attractive leisure station. Positioned close to SEA it has long been a relief valve for Alaska's Seattle hub operation. It suffers from all of the same issues as San Francisco but on a proportionate scale. Leisure traffic would be the prime driver of a PDX flight and it would only be likely to happen in lieu of a second SEA flight, or possibly at the expense of the mainline flight to Seattle. I don't see either as incredibly likely at this point in time as it is a long and thin route. Aircraft and crew time at all airlines is at a huge premium and a 9-10 hour chunk of a flight crew and airplane is a huge opportunity cost at any airline. Traffic on this route would consist of a large chunk of low-yield connections. If I am Alaska, do I send an E175 on this route to serve 40 local passengers a day, and fill the other 36 seats with junk fares on low-yield connections to Yakima? I can forget the route all together and use the airplane and crew to make 2 round trips to somewhere closer to PDX. It's a hard sell on the top floor. If the market environment were more favorable it would be a viable route.

JFK: Every airport wants these 3 letters in their portfolio. Servicing this route requires a VERY strong international demand for a certain partner airline or certain routes over the pond. This is a route where you bypass DFW or ATL to get on a partner airline to Rome, Moscow, or any number of European business destinations where club access and schedule are the only important factors. Price is no object. Not going to happen for OKC.

What else is really left? OKC is incredibly well serves to all of the major cities in the country. The equipment or times may not be 100% ideal but you can get to most of the major airports nonstop on a major air carrier. Things can always be better but I really fail to see any huge holes that aren't typical for an airport the size of OKC.

American serves Louisville - Boston and also Memphis - Boston. Similar markets. Maybe they would add that route if Delta wont.

American serves Louisville - Boston and also Memphis - Boston. Similar markets. Maybe they would add that route if Delta wont.

Fascinating that they serve BOS from those two similar-sized markets. However, I wonder if YUM Brands being in SDF and FedEx (both huge global companies) being in MEM have something to do with that--even though those metros are similar in size to OKC. Also, they are just that much closer (about 60 minutes of flight time) to BOS, and perhaps that falls more into line with aircraft/crew utilization criteria for AA. As I said upthread, if we were further east geographically, given our size, I bet we would have BOS already. Are there any metros to our east of similar size that DON'T have BOS service? Would be interesting to find out.

Fascinating that they serve BOS from those two similar-sized markets. However, I wonder if YUM Brands being in SDF and FedEx (both huge global companies) being in MEM have something to do with that--even though those metros are similar in size to OKC. Also, they are just that much closer (about 60 minutes of flight time) to BOS, and perhaps that falls more into line with aircraft/crew utilization criteria for AA. As I said upthread, if we were further east geographically, given our size, I bet we would have BOS already. Are there any metros to our east of similar size that DON'T have BOS service? Would be interesting to find out.

The distance is the likely factor. I don't think those companies are as massive, from a corporate standpoint, in Boston to make that a necessary flight.

Almost feels like Delta is piggy-backing off a bunch of these new American routes between smaller markets. They are adding a Little Rock - LGA nonstop to compete with American there. We have the same American non-stops as Louisville outside of Boston and Philly.

catch, I (and others) obviuosly appreciate your knowledge and insight into United and airline operations. By no means was I discounting your knowledge or expertise, I was only suggesting OKC could do to possibly incentivise route we used to have and possible new ones. This is what Wichita is doing, and while I dont think we have to go as far as them, it might be a good idea to incentivise for a short period to help restore what we had. That was my thought not discounting the economics or real realities going on at United.

One thing that irks me is that we have daily OKC-SEA on Alaska mainline (not a low-cost/uccc) and it is very successful/full (and was pre-pandemic as well, even had twice daily MAINLINE) in addition to daily UA to SFO but can not restore SFO - a much bigger market/hub/airport than SEA. Don'tt get me wrong, the OKC-SEA service benefits me personally since I live in Seattle and have expat ties to OKC, but I still don't get the SFO argument when smaller cities/markets have been restored/started. Even a united express flight would be a start, perhaps we could incentive for a period.

Anyway - just thoughts.

catch, I (and others) obviuosly appreciate your knowledge and insight into United and airline operations. By no means was I discounting your knowledge or expertise, I was only suggesting OKC could do to possibly incentivise route we used to have and possible new ones. This is what Wichita is doing, and while I dont think we have to go as far as them, it might be a good idea to incentivise for a short period to help restore what we had. That was my thought not discounting the economics or real realities going on at United.

One thing that irks me is that we have daily OKC-SEA on Alaska mainline (not a low-cost/uccc) and it is very successful/full (and was pre-pandemic as well, even had twice daily MAINLINE) in addition to daily UA to SFO but can not restore SFO - a much bigger market/hub/airport than SEA. Don'tt get me wrong, the OKC-SEA service benefits me personally since I live in Seattle and have expat ties to OKC, but I still don't get the SFO argument when smaller cities/markets have been restored/started. Even a united express flight would be a start, perhaps we could incentive for a period.

Anyway - just thoughts.

That is what OKC had, a United Express flight to SFO.

Question from an airline ignorant person: Assuming an airline sees steady traffic from one city to another (let's take AA OKC-LGA, for example), typically, what is their process for increasing the frequency of travel? Do they go to a larger plane? Pick another date? Increase number of routes? Any help would be appreciated.

EWR/IAD are massive holes for OKC United fliers. Would love to get one of those 2 back.

That is what OKC had, a United Express flight to SFO.

Alaska has no choice but to fly to their strongest hub (which they cater pretty highly to tourism and domestic connections to Alaska and the PNW) if they want to serve OKC. United can route SFO passengers and PNW connections through existing DEN flights. UA's presence in OKC is frustrating for sure. Believe me, there's plenty of criticism I can dish out too -- but for the most part, the reasons make business sense on the anemic presence.

Delta and United offer similar capacity and are targeting much the same travelers -- both are skewing towards a premium business traveler, which let's face it OKC has very few of relatively. (Granted their 50-seat offerings in OKC are subpar for any demographic). United targets south and west out of OKC, while Delta is targeting south and east. American has found a good balance of value for the OKC business and leisure traveler and seems to have found the market sweet spot for OKC based travelers. Their product is OK enough for the business traveler when considering their route map and nonstop offerings from OKC, and their budget product seem to offer enough value to the leisure market. I think that is why we have seen them expand at the expense of DL and UA. There's just not enough of a premium-pie to split between DL and UA when AA offers enough to capture a big share. Delta and United both seem uninterested in leisure travelers so they don't really offer too much except for some Mexico connections via IAH and Florida via ATL. They rather carry more business travelers in stronger business markets than fight for leisure travelers out of OKC.

In more United news, OKC is a new station for the pretty much non-reported ex-AA Mesa CRJ-900's coming onto the United property in a few weeks. These clapped out, worn down CRJ-900's will be replacing the very popular and comfortable E175 on OKC-IAH and OKC-DEN routes. Houston first, Denver summer. Not sure on exact frequencies but I saw a bulletin about OKC being one of the stations. Enjoy!

Alaska has no choice but to fly to their strongest hub (which they cater pretty highly to tourism and domestic connections to Alaska and the PNW) if they want to serve OKC. United can route SFO passengers and PNW connections through existing DEN flights. UA's presence in OKC is frustrating for sure. Believe me, there's plenty of criticism I can dish out too -- but for the most part, the reasons make business sense on the anemic presence.

Delta and United offer similar capacity and are targeting much the same travelers -- both are skewing towards a premium business traveler, which let's face it OKC has very few of relatively. (Granted their 50-seat offerings in OKC are subpar for any demographic). United targets south and west out of OKC, while Delta is targeting south and east. American has found a good balance of value for the OKC business and leisure traveler and seems to have found the market sweet spot for OKC based travelers. Their product is OK enough for the business traveler when considering their route map and nonstop offerings from OKC, and their budget product seem to offer enough value to the leisure market. I think that is why we have seen them expand at the expense of DL and UA. There's just not enough of a premium-pie to split between DL and UA when AA offers enough to capture a big share. Delta and United both seem uninterested in leisure travelers so they don't really offer too much except for some Mexico connections via IAH and Florida via ATL. They rather carry more business travelers in stronger business markets than fight for leisure travelers out of OKC.

In more United news, OKC is a new station for the pretty much non-reported ex-AA Mesa CRJ-900's coming onto the United property in a few weeks. These clapped out, worn down CRJ-900's will be replacing the very popular and comfortable E175 on OKC-IAH and OKC-DEN routes. Houston first, Denver summer. Not sure on exact frequencies but I saw a bulletin about OKC being one of the stations. Enjoy!catch, OKC continues its downgrade of United service with these CRJ-900s. On the flip side, United is very proud of how many new mainline aircraft they are adding to their fleet. What is your assessment of when or if this will ever trickle down to OKC? We used to have consistent mainline service to DEN and IAH, even if it was only once or twice a day. It was there-- year around. Now we are lucky if one market has a mainline part of the year. And it looks like E-175s (mainline-lite) will be hard to find. At least Delta flies mainline to ATL. You can count on it. And AA to DFW and CLT too.

This year's delivery schedule is something ridiculous like 3 new airplanes a week for most of the year. Of course, some airplanes will be leaving the fleet, some airplanes will be going into much-needed maintenance from running a stretched fleet for so long, and some airplanes will "go away" as schedules get padded a bit more. So not all of it is 100% growth metal. But that is still very significant. I would expect many routes across the network to get some attention. These days I will be working a flight and say to myself "we fly mainline there now?", a lot. So it's starting to happen...

In more United news, OKC is a new station for the pretty much non-reported ex-AA Mesa CRJ-900's coming onto the United property in a few weeks. These clapped out, worn down CRJ-900's will be replacing the very popular and comfortable E175 on OKC-IAH and OKC-DEN routes. Houston first, Denver summer. Not sure on exact frequencies but I saw a bulletin about OKC being one of the stations. Enjoy!

Replacing a CRJ-200 with a CRJ-900 - good. Replacing an E175 with a CRJ-900 bad. Crappy choice for OKC... https://onemileatatime.com/news/united-airlines-mesa-crj-900/

On your Delta comments - I wish Delta would care just a little bit more... a daily flight or two to LAX would be huge.

Kansas City's new terminal officially opened today. Pics here: https://thepointsguy.com/news/kansas-city-new-terminal-tour/

I'm flying Southwest from TUL to PIT in May and have a 1.5 hour layover in STL. With the new terminal I would much rather connect at MCI. Hoping once Southwest gets to around 100 daily departures that they add back some regional connections to OKC, TUL, LIT and DSM.

Kansas City's new terminal officially opened today. Pics here: https://thepointsguy.com/news/kansas-city-new-terminal-tour/

I'm flying Southwest from TUL to PIT in May and have a 1.5 hour layover in STL. With the new terminal I would much rather connect at MCI. Hoping once Southwest gets to around 100 daily departures that they add back some regional connections to OKC, TUL, LIT and DSM.

A much needed upgrade! When I lived there, I voted for it. I don't remember anyone in my groups that was against upgrading the airport. I am glad it is finally complete.

catch, OKC continues its downgrade of United service with these CRJ-900s. On the flip side, United is very proud of how many new mainline aircraft they are adding to their fleet. What is your assessment of when or if this will ever trickle down to OKC? We used to have consistent mainline service to DEN and IAH, even if it was only once or twice a day. It was there-- year around. Now we are lucky if one market has a mainline part of the year. And it looks like E-175s (mainline-lite) will be hard to find. At least Delta flies mainline to ATL. You can count on it. And AA to DFW and CLT too.

2A on a 175 was probably the best ride on United that wasn't Polaris.

Losing SFO and IAD ex-OKC was a killer for me, I moved to AA (and Alaska) and haven't looked back.

"Midsized and underserved cities
With the above in mind, we have looked at a sample of 34 midsized US cities with metro populations of roughly one to two million (and some other ones for fun).

While extraordinarily straightforward, for this article total seats at each airport last year were related to metro population, while GDP per capita was considered.

Some very fast-growing airports had very high seats to population, such as Charleston (7x more seats than population), Austin (9x), San Jose (10x), Nashville (11x), Raleigh Durham (12x), New Orleans (14x).

In contrast, multiple airports had just 3x to 4x seats to population, well below the average of 6x. These include the likes of Norfolk, Rochester, Providence, Albany, Tulsa, Birmingham, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, Grand Rapids, Louisville, Richmond, and Tulsa.

Others were 5x, including Memphis, San Antonio, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Omaha, Buffalo, Milwaukee, and Hartford.

All of these would have even lower scores – and therefore be even less served – if hub seats were removed.

Of course, airports may be underserved for a reason, but in most places globally they offer a good opportunity – with the right fares, capacity, timings, and promotions – to launch multiple new leisure-focused routes that are easy to stimulate."

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/07/breeze-sees-500-unserved-routes-we-explore-66-possibilities-from-4-underserved-midsized-us-cities/

Tulsa is apparently so underserved they listed them twice.

"Midsized and underserved cities
With the above in mind, we have looked at a sample of 34 midsized US cities with metro populations of roughly one to two million (and some other ones for fun).

While extraordinarily straightforward, for this article total seats at each airport last year were related to metro population, while GDP per capita was considered.

Some very fast-growing airports had very high seats to population, such as Charleston (7x more seats than population), Austin (9x), San Jose (10x), Nashville (11x), Raleigh Durham (12x), New Orleans (14x).

In contrast, multiple airports had just 3x to 4x seats to population, well below the average of 6x. These include the likes of Norfolk, Rochester, Providence, Albany, Tulsa, Birmingham, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, Grand Rapids, Louisville, Richmond, and Tulsa.

Others were 5x, including Memphis, San Antonio, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Omaha, Buffalo, Milwaukee, and Hartford.

All of these would have even lower scores – and therefore be even less served – if hub seats were removed.

Of course, airports may be underserved for a reason, but in most places globally they offer a good opportunity – with the right fares, capacity, timings, and promotions – to launch multiple new leisure-focused routes that are easy to stimulate."

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/07/breeze-sees-500-unserved-routes-we-explore-66-possibilities-from-4-underserved-midsized-us-cities/

Whoever from the city talks to these airlines must absolutely suck at marketing the city to them. It is criminal that OKC is in a class with those cities. At least be even with Omaha. Pathetic.

The article is a year and a half old. Breeze's strategy was to serve these "underserved" markets such as OKC. Well they tried and didn't last, which starts to tell you something about the market -- it might not be profitable to add a bunch of seats in OKC.

The article is a year and a half old. Breeze's strategy was to serve these "underserved" markets such as OKC. Well they tried and didn't last, which starts to tell you something about the market -- it might not be profitable to add a bunch of seats in OKC.

Then OKC needs to be more aggressive in subsidizing routes. Perception is reality. And the perception is that OKCs airport is small potatoes (which it is). But they also are struggling to get routes back from pre-Covid. SFO, EWR, Detroit, Dulles, etc. And having all their routes basically be on tiny planes is an even worse look. Profitability, sure. But that shifts all the blame off the airport director, and OKC was booming under the last one. Now? I know I am in the minority, but they have 4 new gates, and the airport now has more gates than it needs, with no prospects at improving it (losing more routes than they are gaining).

Bash away.

I am going to introduce you to my 4 years old. He does like to repeat himself over and over too.

I am going to introduce you to my 4 years old. He does like to repeat himself over and over too.

You're right. It is the definition of insanity to expect improvement from this middling, fledgling airport.

The article is a year and a half old. Breeze's strategy was to serve these "underserved" markets such as OKC. Well they tried and didn't last, which starts to tell you something about the market -- it might not be profitable to add a bunch of seats in OKC.

Though in that case incumbent airlines added basically all those same routes, which it looks like New Orleans is the only one that is not still an option.

I'm not sure if you missed it but there was a global pandemic that shut down air travel demand and decimated airline fleets and staffing. This has resulted in a major shift of strategy in how the airlines are deploying their assets and utilizing their hubs. Some routes may never come back. The industry post-2020 is nothing like 2019 and prior. The entire business is different. Notice how the routes that have yet to return were international gateways?

SFO - Primary #1 UA hub for Asian and Transpacific demand -- that demand is still near the bottom of the toilet bowl. At least the water has stopped swirling and may even start rising.
EWR - United's strategy shifted for Newark in the post-pandemic world. This hub will shift to a near 100% O&D base for NYC travel and they are on record saying it will be primarily a mainline only hub going forward. In other words, if you can't profitably fill a 737 or Airbus to Newark without relying on connections you aren't going to see service. There will be exceptions, but that is United's baseline for entry into EWR now. You need extremely strong O&D demand to NY. They don't want to connect you in EWR. It costs a lot of money and the missed connection rate is very expensive. They seem content to allow AA and DL fight it out in LGA with smaller airplanes.
DTW - This was a large International gateway for Delta. They seem to have shifted their strategy in the post-pandemic world by consolidating their smaller airline size (they shed a lot of airplanes during the pandemic) to ATL. The other hubs are all secondary to ATL. Their smaller size has forced them to retreat and consolidate into their main fortress.
IAD - Guess what? Another large international station for United.
PHL - Guess what? Another large international station for American. They seem content to consolidate their international and east coast out of CLT and DFW.

I think we can see a trend growing. International demand out of OKC can't support service to these hubs any longer. That can always change, and if it does the airlines LOVE making money. They will sniff out the fares and service as they did in the past.

United's revenue management software evaluates every click on the screen you make when picking a flight, and even searches competitor schedules, equipment, and pricing in the background when you do your search. The AI evaluates every possible option available to you and uses it to figure out why you picked the flight you did. The first few hours they turned this software on it filled up several Terabytes of storage. They aggregate the data now to save space, and of course, it is stripped of any personal data. They use it to evaluate trends into why they are gaining business or losing business in certain markets. Believe me when I say if the airline thinks a route is worth trying, they already have an insane amount of data to make that decision. The airport director does not need to call United and tell them what they are missing. It's like calling an oil company and telling them you are pretty certain you have a huge untapped oil reserve under your house. They will laugh and say OK we'll keep an eye on it. They already have the geological surveys for the whole country. They know where the oil is and at what price they can get it and sell it. You calling them doesn't really do anything to change it.

This subject is turning into the tragic beating of a dead horse.

It seems that American is adding a second daily flight to LGA in NYC for the summer. Having a morning and evening option to the northeast will definitely be an upgrade from just the late night in and early morning out situation right now.

I'm not sure if you missed it but there was a global pandemic that shut down air travel demand and decimated airline fleets and staffing. This has resulted in a major shift of strategy in how the airlines are deploying their assets and utilizing their hubs. Some routes may never come back. The industry post-2020 is nothing like 2019 and prior. The entire business is different. Notice how the routes that have yet to return were international gateways?

SFO - Primary #1 UA hub for Asian and Transpacific demand -- that demand is still near the bottom of the toilet bowl. At least the water has stopped swirling and may even start rising.
EWR - United's strategy shifted for Newark in the post-pandemic world. This hub will shift to a near 100% O&D base for NYC travel and they are on record saying it will be primarily a mainline only hub going forward. In other words, if you can't profitably fill a 737 or Airbus to Newark without relying on connections you aren't going to see service. There will be exceptions, but that is United's baseline for entry into EWR now. You need extremely strong O&D demand to NY. They don't want to connect you in EWR. It costs a lot of money and the missed connection rate is very expensive. They seem content to allow AA and DL fight it out in LGA with smaller airplanes.
DTW - This was a large International gateway for Delta. They seem to have shifted their strategy in the post-pandemic world by consolidating their smaller airline size (they shed a lot of airplanes during the pandemic) to ATL. The other hubs are all secondary to ATL. Their smaller size has forced them to retreat and consolidate into their main fortress.
IAD - Guess what? Another large international station for United.
PHL - Guess what? Another large international station for American. They seem content to consolidate their international and east coast out of CLT and DFW.

I think we can see a trend growing. International demand out of OKC can't support service to these hubs any longer. That can always change, and if it does the airlines LOVE making money. They will sniff out the fares and service as they did in the past.

United's revenue management software evaluates every click on the screen you make when picking a flight, and even searches competitor schedules, equipment, and pricing in the background when you do your search. The AI evaluates every possible option available to you and uses it to figure out why you picked the flight you did. The first few hours they turned this software on it filled up several Terabytes of storage. They aggregate the data now to save space, and of course, it is stripped of any personal data. They use it to evaluate trends into why they are gaining business or losing business in certain markets. Believe me when I say if the airline thinks a route is worth trying, they already have an insane amount of data to make that decision. The airport director does not need to call United and tell them what they are missing. It's like calling an oil company and telling them you are pretty certain you have a huge untapped oil reserve under your house. They will laugh and say OK we'll keep an eye on it. They already have the geological surveys for the whole country. They know where the oil is and at what price they can get it and sell it. You calling them doesn't really do anything to change it.

This subject is turning into the tragic beating of a dead horse.

But should OKC get more aggressive with subsidies? lol kidding.

It seems that American is adding a second daily flight to LGA in NYC for the summer. Having a morning and evening option to the northeast will definitely be an upgrade from just the late night in and early morning out situation right now.

Growth in OKC is going to be through AA. Both frequency and routes.

You want more routes in OKC? Fly AA, they've been very aggressive.

I am going to introduce you to my 4 years old. He does like to repeat himself over and over too.

There is absolutley no economic validity in 2023 to subsidize commercial air service at OKC.

Growth in OKC is going to be through AA. Both frequency and routes.

You want more routes in OKC? Fly AA, they've been very aggressive.

That has shown itself to be the best option for OKC. Same with TUL which also has a unique loyalty to AA with the 6k employees at the maintenance base and ability to rotate aircraft. I know I just switched from a United card to AA for this reason.

Cool article. Reiterates a lot of what Catch said.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-airlines-newark-update/

Cool article. Reiterates a lot of what Catch said.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-airlines-newark-update/

Interesting, maybe EWR will be resumed when they open up the other terminal. But by then there will also be 2-3 nonstops to LGA where previously it was just OKC-EWR to NYC

Growth in OKC is going to be through AA. Both frequency and routes.

You want more routes in OKC? Fly AA, they've been very aggressive.

And to provide some more proof of it being nothing personal against OKC, but just where OKC falls within each airline's networks:

The current head of network planning at AA (which has resulted in tremendous growth in OKC) was the former head of Network Planning at United when UA began to shrink and stagnate in OKC and similar markets. They make decisions on the financials. While at UA he did nothing positive for OKC from a route planning perspective and you'd assume he hates Oklahoma, at AA you would think he was an Oklahoma City native looking out for his hometown.

I met with Brian Znotins when he was at UA, I emailed him and he invited me to Chicago Willis Tower to have lunch with him and meet his team that makes all of these decisions. We discussed many of these topics over several hours as we ate and he showed me around his floor. He's a total airplane geek. He told me if it was purely up to him and not the financials he would be flying mainline on every route the airline flies. He even canceled a route he already had hotel reservations for and bought plane tickets on to take his wife for their anniversary because it kept failing to meet the financial goals of the company. Ultimately, he is bound to the equipment and staffing the airline provides him, and his job is to meet the financial targets and overall capacity discipline that the board requires. At UA that meant being stagnant in many OKC-like markets, at AA that means growing midsize markets and being the legacy airline of choice in those markets

And to provide some more proof of it being nothing personal against OKC, but just where OKC falls within each airline's networks:

The current head of network planning at AA (which has resulted in tremendous growth in OKC) was the former head of Network Planning at United when UA began to shrink and stagnate in OKC and similar markets. They make decisions on the financials. While at UA he did nothing positive for OKC from a route planning perspective and you'd assume he hates Oklahoma, at AA you would think he was an Oklahoma City native looking out for his hometown.

I met with Brian Znotins when he was at UA, I emailed him and he invited me to Chicago Willis Tower to have lunch with him and meet his team that makes all of these decisions. We discussed many of these topics over several hours as we ate and he showed me around his floor. He's a total airplane geek. He told me if it was purely up to him and not the financials he would be flying mainline on every route the airline flies. He even canceled a route he already had hotel reservations for and bought plane tickets on to take his wife for their anniversary because it kept failing to meet the financial goals of the company. Ultimately, he is bound to the equipment and staffing the airline provides him, and his job is to meet the financial targets and overall capacity discipline that the board requires. At UA that meant being stagnant in many OKC-like markets, at AA that means growing midsize markets and being the legacy airline of choice in those markets

Awesome story, thanks for sharing.

AA have 8(?) dailies to DFW helps okc so much. Those routes are always full. AA then notices things like, hey OKC can support a Miami route.

Those 8 dailies to dfw are so critical because it makes for quick layovers, boosting traffic and gives AA better data.

Whoever from the city talks to these airlines must absolutely suck at marketing the city to them. It is criminal that OKC is in a class with those cities. At least be even with Omaha. Pathetic.

You do know that Providence and Norfolk are larger metros than OKC, right?

You do know that Providence and Norfolk are larger metros than OKC, right?

Well, OKC likes to market itself as a top 20 city...except for its top 70 airport. Just wanting consistency.

You do know that Providence and Norfolk are larger metros than OKC, right?

ha, just barely. They are Less bigger than what OKC is larger than Tulsa metro.

Good for AA, but I still want choice and a variety of time tables out of OKC. I don't care so much of who is flying when, I just seem to not have any good flight times out or in. Of course, this is all subjective to me and I am most definitely not the majority of travellers. I just haven't gotten used to the current times after COVID. Has AA improved their quality since 2019 and prior? I remember not being overly impressed with their quality when I flew them last in 2016/2017ish. And for Delta, they seemed to have older planes but we never had issues with their customer service both domestically and abroad.

Good for AA, but I still want choice and a variety of time tables out of OKC. I don't care so much of who is flying when, I just seem to not have any good flight times out or in. Of course, this is all subjective to me and I am most definitely not the majority of travellers. I just haven't gotten used to the current times after COVID. Has AA improved their quality since 2019 and prior? I remember not being overly impressed with their quality when I flew them last in 2016/2017ish. And for Delta, they seemed to have older planes but we never had issues with their customer service both domestically and abroad.

Its definitely better. Is it as good as Delta? Probably not.

Good for AA, but I still want choice and a variety of time tables out of OKC. I don't care so much of who is flying when, I just seem to not have any good flight times out or in. Of course, this is all subjective to me and I am most definitely not the majority of travellers. I just haven't gotten used to the current times after COVID. Has AA improved their quality since 2019 and prior? I remember not being overly impressed with their quality when I flew them last in 2016/2017ish. And for Delta, they seemed to have older planes but we never had issues with their customer service both domestically and abroad.AA's quality is perfectly fine. I fly them most often. It's better than 2016-17. I find all 3 legacy carriers roughly equal right now, which is generally fair, with an occasional excellent or poor crew or staff member. Everyone gushes about Delta but I just don't see why. They're fine, but I can't for the life of me figure out how they're any better than the other two legacy carriers. I appreciate when I get a screen on Delta or United, but on American I almost always get a holder for my iPad/iPhone, which is nice. I find the OKC staffs of all 3 legacy carriers to be helpful and friendly. I believe that United's is the only one that is contract, but I still think they are nice and helpful. AA's has been very proactive and helpful to me several times, providing the type of service I typically only get in the Admiral's Club.

Not necessarily OKC related but in light of the recent posts comparing Delta and AA it is interesting that DFW made it in the list and ATL didn't. I prefer Delta so haven't spent anytime in the DFW airport so not sure the amenities they have.

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/best-airports-airport-service-quality-awards-aci/index.html

Not necessarily OKC related but in light of the recent posts comparing Delta and AA it is interesting that DFW made it in the list and ATL didn't. I prefer Delta so haven't spent anytime in the DFW airport so not sure the amenities they have.

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/best-airports-airport-service-quality-awards-aci/index.html

William P. Hobby Airport; Houston, Texas, USA is a "Most Enjoyable" airport?

AA's quality is perfectly fine. I fly them most often. It's better than 2016-17. I find all 3 legacy carriers roughly equal right now, which is generally fair, with an occasional excellent or poor crew or staff member. Everyone gushes about Delta but I just don't see why. They're fine, but I can't for the life of me figure out how they're any better than the other two legacy carriers. I appreciate when I get a screen on Delta or United, but on American I almost always get a holder for my iPad/iPhone, which is nice. I find the OKC staffs of all 3 legacy carriers to be helpful and friendly. I believe that United's is the only one that is contract, but I still think they are nice and helpful. AA's has been very proactive and helpful to me several times, providing the type of service I typically only get in the Admiral's Club.


I have to agree with that. Delta was better but the others step up too. I put AA back in my rotation. I am fine with UA but you can hardly use them from OKC.
The only thing I don't like with Delta is the massive use of old B 717 out of OKC. Can't wait for the new A 220 to replace this old gas guzzler.

Flew through Salt Lake City for the first time recently. I couldn't get over how busy it was and how big it is. They're also in the process of significantly expanding the terminal. I'm assuming this is due to their fairly isolated location and being a Delta hub. Considering OKC's metro population is about 300k, I was surprised to see such a difference.

Flew through Salt Lake City for the first time recently. I couldn't get over how busy it was and how big it is. They're also in the process of significantly expanding the terminal. I'm assuming this is due to their fairly isolated location and being a Delta hub. Considering OKC's metro population is about 300k, I was surprised to see such a difference.


I hope their terminal expansion will alleviate a situation I faced on my last flight there from OKC. After landing we went to a remote area where we got off the plane with steps that were rolled up to the plane. We then had to wait for a shuttle to take us to a satellite terminal. After a considerable walk up outdoor ramps I got inside of the satellite terminal. Then there was a considerable walk to get from the satellite terminal to the main terminal. It was quite a workout.

I hope their terminal expansion will alleviate a situation I faced on my last flight there from OKC. After landing we went to a remote area where we got off the plane with steps that were rolled up to the plane. We then had to wait for a shuttle to take us to a satellite terminal. After a considerable walk up outdoor ramps I got inside of the satellite terminal. Then there was a considerable walk to get from the satellite terminal to the main terminal. It was quite a workout.
It will. That is a temporary setup while they build out the new buildings. It’s not fun, especially if it’s cold out or you are lugging around luggage/kids.

Flew through Salt Lake City for the first time recently. I couldn't get over how busy it was and how big it is. They're also in the process of significantly expanding the terminal. I'm assuming this is due to their fairly isolated location and being a Delta hub. Considering OKC's metro population is about 300k, I was surprised to see such a difference.

300 thousand ??? Where did this come from ?

Edit - I think this is 300 k. less population ?

Yep, they've still got the bus system going. Was a good mile plus walk from the plane to baggage claim.

Yes - mistake on my end. I meant to say that OKC's metro pop is about 300k more.

Flew through Salt Lake City for the first time recently. I couldn't get over how busy it was and how big it is. They're also in the process of significantly expanding the terminal. I'm assuming this is due to their fairly isolated location and being a Delta hub. Considering OKC's metro population is about 300k, I was surprised to see such a difference.

try closer to 680k

try closer to 680k

OKC metro is almost 1.5 mil

SLC benefitted from Delta purchasing Western Air Lines 40 years ago. They are an outlier for hubs. But, most hubs are carried forward due to an acquisition (see Charlotte and Philly with American). Not many airports growing organically into a hub. Heck, I can't think of any current hubs like that for legacy carriers. They are all older or acquired hubs.

OKC metro is almost 1.5 mil

right, my bad, i just looked at the OKC population, not the whole metro

SLC has a ton of tourism with the nearby mountains. and the Greater SLC region in that state has over 2.7 million in the catchment area. And its kind of in no mans land which is great for connections for delta to serve the western US.

https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-salt-lake-city-slc

does Utah even have that many people? I've driven throughout the state and with the exception of the I-15 Wasatch region there were hardly any people to speak of or any great number of towns (like we have in OK). I suppose SLC catchment goes into NV and to a lesser extent ID, but even then there aren't many people. ...

But I agree, SLC airport is large due to its isolation, relative large consolidated metro areas in the Wasatch front, and the high number of small airports where SLC can provide connecting access. OKC can't really compete on any of these other than population but there are numerous mid-size airports and one top-10 world airport within a 200-mile radius of downtown OKC to provide the 1.5m OKC metro residences choices beyond Will Rogers World Airport.

does Utah even have that many people? I've driven throughout the state and with the exception of the I-15 Wasatch region there were hardly any people to speak of or any great number of towns (like we have in OK). I suppose SLC catchment goes into NV and to a lesser extent ID, but even then there aren't many people. ...

But I agree, SLC airport is large due to its isolation, relative large consolidated metro areas in the Wasatch front, and the high number of small airports where SLC can provide connecting access. OKC can't really compete on any of these other than population but there are numerous mid-size airports and one top-10 world airport within a 200-mile radius of downtown OKC to provide the 1.5m OKC metro residences choices beyond Will Rogers World Airport.

Salt Lake City's consolidated metro area (with Ogden and Provo) has 2.7 million people. More than Kansas City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_statistical_area#List_of_combined_statist ical_areas

Salt Lake City's consolidated metro area (with Ogden and Provo) has 2.7 million people. More than Kansas City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_statistical_area#List_of_combined_statist ical_areas

The irony in that OKC to Tulsa are only 25 miles further than Ogden to Provo.

The irony in that OKC to Tulsa are only 25 miles further than Ogden to Provo.
True, and if our nearby surround included Heavenly, Tahoe, Jackson Hole, Sun Valley ID, and Whitefish, MT the airport would reflect that clientele.
Plus Park City and Sundance are in the airport parking lot practically.

And Tulsa and OKC's CSAs also combine for 2.7 million people. But Stroud only has 2,000 people instead of the SLC MSA of 1.3 million.