Why can't Denver hold down more transatlantic service

[rohank4284]

Hello,

Ever since the airport was built in Denver, it has always had a major lack of international flights. For instance, it wasn't until two years after the airport opened before British Airways started flying to LGW, later to LHR in 2001, Lufthansa also started flying to Frankfurt in 2001. Last year the airport benefited from the introduction of Lufthansa's new service to Munich and UA's service to LHR. However, in the past month both of those flights were cancelled and it appears unlikely that they will come back. So Denver now only has two transatlantic flights, BA to LHR, and LH to FRA.

United Ailines always has seemingly scorned the airport by making it into a massive domestic hub, but the airlie prefers to give international service to its other hubs. Lufthansa claims that the "low number of business and first class" sold on the DEN-MUC flight was the main cause for the cancelation. Denver has always aggressively pursued other international destinations, such as Amsterdam or Paris, but nothing seems to ever happen. There are talks that ANA upon recieving the 787, may start a service to Tokoyo, but that also seems doubtful.

Basically, I am just wondering why an airport like Denver can't sustain transatlantic service.

Here are the links to the flight cancellations:
LH DEN-MUC
story # 1: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...munich-flight/
story #2:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/28/dia-loses-lufthansas-munich-flight/

Thank you,

Rohan

[Dmmoore]

The demographics of the Denver area is the reason. In other words, the demand isn't there.

[HalcyonDays]

As Don says, it's the demographics. But it's a bit more than that. Of course, there is always going to be some demand but not enough to make flights commercially successful. But the overall catchment area is too small. Also, I imagine United funnels their transatlantic traffic from the western US into Chicago or Dulles since the economies of scale are greater by using these hubs and more use of narrow bodies can be made within the US per flight hour. You also can't fly Denver to Europe in 757s, which has made certain east coast to Europe flights more economical. To be honest, I am actually quite surprised to see British Airways still on the route in the current climate, given their cutbacks elsewhere around the world recently. Finally, it's not a time for airlines to take on new routes (despite the thread about Delta from Pittsburgh and Raleigh) : I can think of several transatlantic routes that have been axed in recent weeks.

[shaq]

Hello,

Ever since the airport was built in Denver, it has always had a major lack of international flights. For instance, it wasn't until two years after the airport opened before British Airways started flying to LGW, later to LHR in 2001, Lufthansa also started flying to Frankfurt in 2001. Last year the airport benefited from the introduction of Lufthansa's new service to Munich and UA's service to LHR. However, in the past month both of those flights were cancelled and it appears unlikely that they will come back. So Denver now only has two transatlantic flights, BA to LHR, and LH to FRA.

United Ailines always has seemingly scorned the airport by making it into a massive domestic hub, but the airlie prefers to give international service to its other hubs. Lufthansa claims that the "low number of business and first class" sold on the DEN-MUC flight was the main cause for the cancelation. Denver has always aggressively pursued other international destinations, such as Amsterdam or Paris, but nothing seems to ever happen. There are talks that ANA upon recieving the 787, may start a service to Tokoyo, but that also seems doubtful.

Basically, I am just wondering why an airport like Denver can't sustain transatlantic service.

Here are the links to the flight cancellations:
LH DEN-MUC
story # 1: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...munich-flight/
story #2:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/28/dia-loses-lufthansas-munich-flight/

Thank you,

Rohan

DEN can't sustain trasatlantic because , is no demand , and also , no matter the airport , the important thing is that airlines can make $ flying to DEN , if they can't make money , the won't fly to DEN.

[rohank4284]

Hello,

Thank you for replying and I agree with the fact the international demand isn't really that strong in Denver, but I think Denver has a few other factors, which hinder its ability to attract international flights.

1. The airport used to be "American Centered:" Denver has always been a great airport for Americans, but the staff and the design of the airport hasn't always been so friendly to people from abroad. Although in recent years the airport has dramatically improved in this regard.

2. Slow Customs: Customs in Denver tends to be a mixed bag, they are often slower than other US airports, but the agents are definitely much more friendly than other US airports. For instance, after arriving from LHR on BA, there were only 3-4 customs agents, they have 20-25 desks, to process over 250 people, on top of that 2 Frontier Airlines flights arrived from Mexico. So in all, there were 4 agents to process nearly 400-500 people! I stood in line for about 40 minutes and waited for my bags for another 15-20 minutes. Overall, it took an hour to pass customs. At SFO or ORD, for instance, you can be out in under 30 minutes.

3. The Airport is UA, Frontier, and Southwest dominated: Those three airlines make up 90% of the traffic into Denver. UA doesn't seem interested in having international flights out of DEN, so other airlines don't want to either. Other UA hubs face competition from AA, DL, and CO, this is not the case at Denver. Also, in the case of BA, its oneworld Alliance partner, American Airlines, only flies to ORD and LAX from Denver. In this case, why would anyone fly to Denver on BA, when you could fly BA straight to those destinations. Same applies for SkyTeam. Thus, only the airline where it would be convieient to connect from an international to a domestic flight at DEN, is UA.

4. Airlines have to use large jets:

True I agree with the fact that DEN being out of the range of a transpacific 757 flight really hurts the airport because any airline that wants to fly international from Denver has to use a large jet. However, once the new Boeing 787 or Airbus A350 come out, it could allow for more international flights out of Denver.

I am not really surprised that the BA flight has survived. Remember this flight has been taking place for 10 years and has had really strong demand even in bad economic times. Same for the LH flight to FRA.

I think Denver may not be the best place for service to secondary hubs, such as Munich, but flights to large European or Asian Hubs, such as NRT, CDG, or even AMS could do well.

[JordanD]

Because Anthony Carmello has his hand in the pop!

[shaq]

I agree with you rohank

[rohank4284]

Hello,

Well this form is kind of old, but according to an article in the Rocky Mountain News, due to the lower fuel prices, United Airlines is planning on reviving the Denver-LHR service next spring. Overall, this a big positive for Denver because if UA can sustain international flights there, it might attract other airlines.

Here's the article: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...ver-to-london/

Checking UA's website the flights (UA 948 [DEN-LHR] and UA 939 [LHR-DEN] are for sale)

UA 948: Depart Denver 8:00 pm, arrive LHR: 12:15 pm
UA 939: Depart LHR: 1:05 pm, arrive DEN: 4:01 pm

Rohan