Austin Growth Highlights Differences Between Cautious Delta and Frenzied American


Delta last week announced it would continue its slow growth of Austin as a focus city, adding three new destinations while cutting one as it looks to cement its position as a clear number two behind Southwest. This, of course, follows American’s failed efforts to do the same coming out of the pandemic. Having two airlines try to build up the same city so close together gives us a great opportunity to see just how differently these airlines run.

Austin looks like a microcosm of how both airlines have operated in general. Delta is careful and calculated while American was haphazard and reckless, at least at that time.

American Goes Fast and Breaks Things

American under Vasu Raja was something of a wild child. Vasu had big ideas and not many checks and balances. Some of his ideas, like the Northeat Alliance with JetBlue, were great. Others not so much. Austin, well, that fell somewhere in the middle.

At the time, Austin was a hot market that was gate-constrained. American saw an opportunity with the pandemic starting to let up for it to become the primary non-Southwest airline at the airport. Austin was in the airline’s backyard, and it already had a strong loyalty presence. So, the airline acted fast.

American Seats and Departures From Austin Over Time

Data via Cirium

As you can see from the above chart, the ramp-up was fast and furious. American went from shy of 66,000 seats in Dec 2020 to over 300,000 by the Dec 2021. Even comparing to before the pandemic, this was more than a doubling of seats. Before the pandemic, American served Austin from 8 destinations. It had 6 in Dec 2020 but that spiked to 37 by Dec 2021.

The growth was explosive and shocking, but there were problems quickly. The airline was the quickest to try to get back to normal in the US after the pandemic, and it stressed its — and its regional partner — systems. In 2022, only two months saw American fly on-time (arrivals within 14 minutes of schedule) more than 80 percent of the time. Four months didn’t even top 70 percent. Meanwhile, the completion factor tanked. Five months in 2022 saw more than 2 percen of flights canceled from Austin, on par with the whole system.

While the operation was under strain, American had other problems that it apparently hadn’t considered before it put this plan into motion. See, in American’s pilot deal, it is limited on where it can deploy regional jets. They need to be used primarily to feed the hubs, and there’s a formula to determine what counts as a hub. Spoiler alert: Austin did not count.

American’s ramp-up in Austin was hugely dependent upon regional capacity. At its peak, American had more than 45 daily flights on regional aircraft that were not connecting Austin with a recognized American hub. This created friction with the pilots who went to arbitration over the issue.

In the end, this adventure didn’t perform well enough to keep it going. That dismantling started in Jan 2024 and it was done by the time 2025 rolled around. Of course, American is different now. With Vasu gone, it has been trying to get back to status quo with no real inspired push to tackle new ground. But for a brief period, American was ready to move fast.

Now let’s contrast this with Delta.

Delta Plays the Turtle to American’s Hare

Delta is an airline that has long been methodical and ruthless in how it approaches a market it wants to win. You need to look no further than New York, Boston, and Los Angeles as prime examples of how Delta gets what it wants when it wants it.

Delta had designated focus cities before, but it had never really added a network component to that strategy. Hell, Austin was named a focus city well before the pandemic, but then nothing happened at all.

Once American decided to abandon its perch in Austin, Delta saw an opportunity, but it approached it very differently.

It started building in October 2023 when it went with big leisure destinations, Las Vegas and Orlando. In April 2024, it took advantage of Austin’s geography to connect smaller cities in Texas into the Delta network since those couldn’t reasonably be served from more distant hubs in Delta’s network. This year, it started building even further with a mix of leisure like New Orleans and Tampa alongside other useful cities like Indianapolis and San Francisco.

For this coming winter, the airline had already filed new leisure flying to Cancún, Los Cabos, and Palm Springs. And now it’s adding Denver twice daily in this latest announcement. But this latest release was more about next summer when it will not only boost San Francisco from 1 to 2x daily and Indianapolis from 1 to 3x daily, but it will also add new daily service to Columbus (OH) and double daily to Kansas City.

Not everything has worked. It’s not mentioned in the gushing press release, but Delta did file an exit on Midland/Odessa, and it will halve New Orleans from 2x to 1x daily, but there is still net growth. The end result is a much more measured and steady increase that has required tinkering:

Delta Seats and Departures From Austin Over Time

Data via Cirium

Does this mean Delta will be more successful? Probably. It isn’t trying to do as much, and it’s presumably closely watching performance before tweaking the last round of flying and adding more. If we look at domestic DB1B data in Cirium, Delta has been getting a significant unit revenue premium over American in Austin even after adjusting for average stage length.

Austin SLA PRASM for Delta Compared to American

DB1B data via Cirium

Now we wait to see how market leader Southwest responds, if at all. The airport remains heavily constrained until the new terminal opens several years down the line. At that point, it’s likely that Delta and Southwest will still be numbers one and two, because Delta doesn’t go in and out of markets quickly the way American did here before.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

34 responses to “Austin Growth Highlights Differences Between Cautious Delta and Frenzied American”

  1. Angry Bob Crandall Avatar
    Angry Bob Crandall

    Cranky,
    Why is the hub in Austin different than the hub that they used to have at DFW?

    1. dave Avatar
      dave

      because they don’t have a gorilla fortress hub keeper to compete against (AA @ DFW)

      1. Angry Bob Crandall Avatar
        Angry Bob Crandall

        Dave,
        Now that you have used the words “gorilla fortress” does that mean that Cranky might do some artwork with Godzilla at ABIA? :-)

        1. Ian L Avatar
          Ian L

          Godzilla, but make it an armadillo.

    2. southbay flier Avatar
      southbay flier

      They aren’t losing tons of money and about ready to file bankruptcy right now. I remember flying SAV-DFW-SFO on Delta back in 2004 with SAV-DFW on a CRJ-200 while taking off from SAV on the edge of a hurricane. That sucked.

    3. Brett Avatar

      Angry Bob – Dave took the words out of my mouth. AA was too powerful of a competitor and there was no real way for Delta to make that hub work in the long run.

      And, hmm, godzilla with a cowboy hat?

  2. Tim Dunn Avatar
    Tim Dunn

    DL announced before covid that it was designating AUS a focus city. AA pulled down resources in its northern tier hubs during covid to build up AUS and lost share in those hubs which it has not recovered on top of having to pull down AUS.

    Yes, DL plays the long game and is slowing growing AUS until it can get its hands on enough gates to make it a hub when a new terminal/concourse opens in perhaps 5 years. DL is getting enough gates to build to a 100 flight/day operation until then.

    Competitively, WN is still trying to make the rest of its network profitable; AUS, like parts of its network, is heavily built on short-haul point to point traffic that is not as profitable or strategically necessary as building strong true hubs. The 737-800/MAX 8 is too big for much of that traffic.

    DL is reaching the size it can be in its existing hubs although gates in terminal B in BOS are likely. AUS would help fill the gap not just in Texas but in DL’s need to be able to flow traffic across the southern tier of the US which was lost w/ the closure of the DFW hub.

  3. Emil Denamark Avatar
    Emil Denamark

    I spoke with an agent in the AUS SkyClub and she said that they are expecting Korean Air to start flying as well as more KLM (not necessarily Schiphol)

    1. JAXBA Avatar
      JAXBA

      KL only have one hub: https://www.flightconnections.com/route-map-klm-kl

      Where would KL go if not Schiphol? To AUA or SXM?

      1. vasukiv Avatar
        vasukiv

        KL is owned by Air France. It could fly to Paris, or it could fly to Copenhagen (since SAS is now part of Skyteam and partially owned by Air France).

        1. Brett Avatar

          KLM will not fly anywhere but Amsterdam from the US. The closest it gets to doing anything else was when Air France lent KLM an airplane to fly JFK – Amsterdam. Otherwise, these brands stay in their own hubs.
          https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/156258-klm-debuts-long-haul-flights-with-air-france-pilots

          1. Ian L Avatar
            Ian L

            Only rational explanation here is SAS to CPH. That’s close enough to KL/AF group to count and we’ve had SAS one-offs for SXSW more often than not. AMS for western Europe and CPH for central/eastern would provide a solid alternative to LH, though double-daily to LHR on BA is tough to compete against.

    2. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      Well if an agent at the SkyClub said it, it’s obviously true. We all know that frontline employees are let in on all of the company’s confidential and proprietary information.

    3. Ian L Avatar
      Ian L

      Yep, I’ve predicted here that ICN will be our next new intercontinental destination, and it actually has a solid chunk of net-new connectivity, compared to the failed experiment that was VS to LHR (don’t get me wrong, I was a fan of that flight, but those 787s I flew on were *empty*).

  4. DL Avatar
    DL

    For Delta to have any success in Austin, it will need to be a large regional hub type of operation. I’m wondering what the pilot group has to say about that? Also, isn’t Midland a perfect example of how this strategy can’t work and compete against DFW and IAH? Unless you fly frequently to a Delta hub, why would you give DL your business when AA and UA provide a much better schedule through their mammoth hubs?

    1. Bill from DC Avatar
      Bill from DC

      Delta doesn’t see it as a connecting hub, their focus (see what i did there) is to capture more Austin passengers by flying nonstop to the destinations they want to go to, both business and leisure, and converting flyers with Southwest and American loyalties to worship at the altar of the widget. Free Biscoffs for all of Travis County!

      They only need the Midlands of the world if people from Austin want to fly there, not to compete for the business in each outpost. As you noted, those will be far better served with multiple connections over DFW and IAH.

      1. Tim Dunn Avatar
        Tim Dunn

        DL does need to carry some connections esp. to/from southern tier cities west of ATL where it does not compete w/o a backtrack to ATL.

        They are going to carry enough local traffic to/from larger Midwest and coastal markets to create enough connections between those markets while knowing it will take time to develop short haul/intra TX and smaller medium sized markets like JAN and ELP.

        DL could have been simply throwing in some short RJ flights to incrementally gain access to more gates at AUS and/or it could have been starting flights just to start getting information on demand which can be used to model how well that and other routes might work.

        DL is getting large enough in AUS that it should be possible to start analyzing segments for the amount of local vs. connecting traffic.

        1. Ian L Avatar
          Ian L

          I expect DL will announce (not fly) ELP-AUS before the year is up. Probably just 1x daily, but connectivity eastward without going all the way to ATL would work well there.

          I doubt they’ll hit any other intra-Texas routes this year though.

    2. Brett Avatar

      DL – Yes, Delta seems to have hoped that Austin could be a way to serve those smaller Texas points that can not be served from elsewhere, but so far, that’s not going well. But as a focus city that cares more about nonstop traffic anyway, it is presumably having more luck or it wouldn’t keep growing.

  5. SEAN Avatar
    SEAN

    This is slightly off topic, but I need to add some outside context. The frenzied growth the Austin metro area experienced post pandemic has not only slowed, but in certain industries has been somewhat reversing with many people returning to California or other states as work from home policies get rescinded. You’re seeing this in the real estate sector where home prices & rents are starting to take a hit.

    On the aviation side, American rushed in around the same time adding flights to cities all over believing that Austin was the new hip city. However, they too fell into the same trap believing the hype & now they needed to pull back.

    Delta OTOH has been moving slowly as Brett pointed out & the population growth has been moving in a similar fashion.

  6. southbay flier Avatar
    southbay flier

    It seems like the story of Delta and how they became one of the survivors of the deregulation era. Most of their history seems to be very measured growth which has allowed for them be around as opposed to many other airlines.

    Also, I wonder if the legacies will start to go after Southwest now that they are mimicking legacy airlines (assigned seats, bag fees, etc…) without having any first class product, lounges, or other luxuries the legacies have.

  7. John G Avatar
    John G

    Some people not understanding the goals of these airlines.

    The biggest hole in Deltas network is in Texas. Their nearest hibs are all two hours flying time away, and they desperately want to find a way to fix that.

    American never intended to make a go of Austin as more than a focus city. Not worth it to them since they have the DFW megalith there.

    That effort was always an attempt to block DL. But they finally decided the losses were not worth it and they pulled back.

    DL will face some of the same problems. A hub doesn’t really work with a small number of gates, and they are stuck until the airport can be expanded. Even then, with only two runways they will have to deal with traffic delays also.

    This is a long play, but I’m not sure it’s going to work out for them. Austin is a hip destination but it already has tons of service, and they are also competing with DFW and IAH, as well as to a lesser extent DAL and HOU.

    Not sure it’s well suited to be a decent profitable hub for them.

    1. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      AUS is nowhere near having traffic issues. The runway arrival rate is 32 and they barely crack 20 most hours. The airport could virtually double its flight volume without running into GDPs.

      1. Concession Geek Avatar
        Concession Geek

        The runways may be able to handle the traffic, But the Barbara Jordan Terminal cannot. There is not enough of anything. Not enough seats, not enough concessions, not enough seats in the concessions, security, and more or less everything else. It is analogous to 20 lbs. of stuff in a 5 lbs. bag. Airport management tries hard, but it faces an almost impossible problem that won’t be fixed until they expand the BJT into the new Terminal A and build the new Terminal B. They have great plans. All it takes is time and money.

  8. DesertGhost Avatar
    DesertGhost

    As Howard Cosell observed, “Hindsight is always 20/20.”

  9. Mark Avatar
    Mark

    Interesting analysis Brett. I enjoyed the comments and agree with several regarding DL’s need to fill the gap it has in Texas vs. UA, AA and WN. Austin is a very logical place to do it.

    Brett, you indicated AA was looking to become top dog behind WN with their “frenzied” expansion. Unless I’m mistaken, that was already the case. AA started service to AUS in 1981 and became number 2 after BN went bankrupt and has held that position since then until DL passed them in June. AA’s high frequency service to DFW and multiple frequencies to their hubs at ORD, CLT and MIA in addition to direct flights to other destinations like LAX kept AA well ahead of DL and UA in Austin. Back when AA had a hub in SJC, they had multiple daily nonstops between AUS and SJC as well, supported by the strong tech market business traffic. Their AAdvantage loyalty base is very strong.

    I believe AA’s rapid expansion in Austin was based on their belief that post pandemic, their loyalty strength combined with the high demand for leisure travel, eventual return of business travel, and OneWorld ties to AS nonstops to the west coast and BA and their nonstop to London positioned them best to become Austin’s largest airline. As you correctly pointed out, I think the miss on the RJ flying limitations is likely the major reason the initiative failed.

    1. Brett Avatar

      Mark – Fair point. I think the idea was to cement itself as the top dog. Yeah, it’s always had a larger presence than others thanks to its network. I think the idea was to corner the market. But it wasn’t worth the price.

  10. David C Avatar
    David C

    Delta has a chance to connect a lot of the MidSouth that has no reasonable westbound Delta coonection. Moreover, there is a big connection of oilfield workers and suppliers in Louisiana that get flown places all of the time. There is the potential to get business related traffic. I think they will be wise and measured as they have been.

  11. Ian L Avatar
    Ian L

    AA’s headlong rush into AUS basically lasted 2021-2023, complete with competing with WN on similar timings in some markets. Running half-full Envoy flights was fun while it lasted for pax, but wasn’t a great use of gate space. And this was with AA pushing cross-promotion in town pretty hard (sponsoring startup events and such).

    DL’s more measured approach should let them stick around longer, such that they should be able to go toe to toe with WN 2024-2028 as a focus city. They’ll lose some money along the way, but betting the area under that curve will be less than for AA, and scope shouldn’t be too much of an issue as once they hit 2x-3x daily on RJs they can start swapping in A220s, followed by A319s, to match capacity with demand.

    DL’s also going to have an easier time competing with post-Elliot WN in a market where WN likes flying 737-700s to keep frequency where they want it. We’re slowly getting more -800/MAX-8s in rotation but you really only see those to other focus cities (and only on some frequencies), plus maybe ORD.

    I will say that with WN’s new Basic product this will suck all of the air out of the room for ULCCs, so I expect Frontier to contract at AUS, and NK/B6 to exit entirely sooner rather than later. G4 may keep AUS as a spoke, but only because they only have a few flights per week to fill, and AUS can be a destination for them.

    WN has said they want to be an anchor tenant for AUS, potentially providing a better opportunity for tham than HOU or DAL, so DL would probably be foolish to try for #1 here. But net of squeezing out smaller carriers there’s enough gate space right now for AUS to be a focus city for two airlines, and with the new concourse it’ll be large enough to be a small hub for two, and by all accounts those two will be DL/WN.

    One entertaining thing is that through all this BA is going fully double-daily to LHR, which has got to help folks’ loyalty to AA even though we’re 100% back to being an AA spoke at this point.

  12. El Tejano Gordo Avatar
    El Tejano Gordo

    When discussing AA in the Austin metroplex or Greater Austin, one has to take GRK into consideration. Envoy runs five flights a day up to DFW on E170/75’s. They’re the only player at GRK since the departure of UA. If connecting via DFW, I will choose GRK every time over AUS. Same drive time/distance from the northern suburbs, cheaper and substantially closer parking, no TSA lines…
    DL is not even on my radar, not since I left SLC 25 years ago.
    I usually go AA, WN and occasionally UA.
    AA/OneWorld gets me where I want to go, and with lifetime PL status, it’s hard to wrap my head around paying for seats and bags on DL or UA.
    On a side note, I did try the new VB flight to MTY back in June. Even with all the “nickel and diming” it ended up about $250USD less than AA or UA.
    I may not fly DL, but wish them success, as good competition helps keeps fares reasonable.

    1. Jason Avatar
      Jason

      There’s no such thing as an “Austin metroplex”. “Metroplex” was a term created by people in Dallas and Fort Worth in the 1950s to make the area sound larger and more important than it was at the time. Never use that term- it’s stupid and made up.

      1. jd Avatar
        jd

        Hater. The Metroplex is an awesome nickname for the DFW area. No different than Chicagoland or the Bay Area or the DMV or South Florida.

        That said—whenever someone uses the lowercase-m “metroplex” to describe any generic metropolitan area, I usually just assume they’re from Dallas and aren’t that familiar with urban geography :)

    2. Sandy Avatar
      Sandy

      A midday search shows a 44 vs 37 minute drive time from Georgetown to GRK vs AUS. With I-35 stuck in widening for the next decade, I can see appeal for driving to GRK, but I am not entirely convinced if the appeal is as strong for people living south of Domain – I could, however, be just wrong, since as a former AUS flyer, I have taken the first 20 bus to the airport of the morning several times, and don’t claim to represent any average case.

      On a separate note, I am curious if Allegiant can potentially move its AUS operation to GRK – they can enjoy all the gate and crew base space they want there, presumably at a lower airport fee too.

      1. jd Avatar
        jd

        I can’t imagine any appeal for anyone south of toll 45, let alone the domain, to drive longer to pay more for fewer flights to fewer destinations.

        The far northern suburbs… maybe. If the prospect of driving through the whole of Austin for a flight that still requires a connection is that daunting.

        The original comments point, I suppose, is that *as an airline* AA has less skin in the game at AUS than Delta and Southwest, because AA still captures a (very) small bit of Austin’s metropolitan market without AUS.

Leave a Reply to Anthony Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier