AUSTIN | ABIA Updates

[texastarkus]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Quite interesting. Turkish already flies to DFW and IAH. - so, it might be a while. But, we'll see how this partnership develops.

Also, it might be interesting to watch what Icelandair does. Maybe they look at Austin.

Condor coming back is an extremely low possibility. AUS services FRA with Lufthansa. Condor left AUS when Lufthansa announced they were coming.

...but as of now (and subject to change) Southwest flies to Dallas-Love and Houston-Hobby not DFW and IAH.

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by texastarkus

...but as of now (and subject to change) Southwest flies to Dallas-Love and Houston-Hobby not DFW and IAH.

Exactly. I think that gives Austin a big boost.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by texastarkus

...but as of now (and subject to change) Southwest flies to Dallas-Love and Houston-Hobby not DFW and IAH.

Very true. And, AUS may have a leg up on DFW with regard to Turkish - since Star Alliance connections are weak and there is no WN. However, IAH would have strong connections with Alliance founding member, United.

Real question is...how many actual WN customers are needing to connect to a TATL destination utilizing Turkish, Icelandair or Condor for that leg? I bet, not many right now (and for the near future).

[WesternSon]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Very true. And, AUS may have a leg up on DFW with regard to Turkish - since Star Alliance connections are weak and there is no WN. However, IAH would have strong connections with Alliance founding member, United.

Real question is...how many actual WN customers are needing to connect to a TATL destination utilizing Turkish, Icelandair or Condor for that leg? I bet, not many right now (and for the near future).

Turkish already flies to DFW?

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by WesternSon

Turkish already flies to DFW?

Yes.

[Croon]

Why has AUS ducked the unified city logo change/conversation?

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by Croon

Why has AUS ducked the unified city logo change/conversation?

Because it royally 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 and they know it.

In all seriousness, I believe airports, like AUS, SAT, DFW, IAH, ATL, etc. all have their own logos and do not utilize the logo of their respective city. Kind-of like a separate entity.

[Croon]

Yeah I get it in that sense. And I agree the new logo was a waste of money and air time. They could have run the old main city logo through city staff/department purview, spend half a day on a refresh and call it a day, rollout out low key at minimum cost.

But all the effort they had to do to explain away hundreds of thousands of dollars comes short when a major multi-project expansion for a huge economic facilitator for the Austin metro (expansion at AUS) doesn't carry or salute the new city logo.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Croon

Yeah I get it in that sense. And I agree the new logo was a waste of money and air time. They could have run the old main city logo through city staff/department purview, spend half a day on a refresh and call it a day, rollout out low key at minimum cost.

But all the effort they had to do to explain away hundreds of thousands of dollars comes short when a major multi-project expansion for a huge economic facilitator for the Austin metro (expansion at AUS) doesn't carry or salute the new city logo.

Few hundo sounds quaint compared to the $88m wasted on a 40 year lease that was signed just 4-5 years prior.

Fleeced!

[drummer]

I'm not in marketing, but I work somewhat kinda-sorta adjacently-ish (insofar as our Dir of Marketing works across the hall from me ). I can confidently say that I have never considered an airport logo for a single airport into which I've flown...and I've been to many in the U.S. and around the world. I do consider the optimization and aesthetics of the airport (especially as it relates to how it functions - am I spending a lot of time there for a layover or just passing through?). What restaurants/family options are there? What if I need to sit and work between flights or give my kids a chance to run around? The logo (or the larger brand, to some degree) makes no difference to me.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Croon

Yeah I get it in that sense. And I agree the new logo was a waste of money and air time. They could have run the old main city logo through city staff/department purview, spend half a day on a refresh and call it a day, rollout out low key at minimum cost.

But all the effort they had to do to explain away hundreds of thousands of dollars comes short when a major multi-project expansion for a huge economic facilitator for the Austin metro (expansion at AUS) doesn't carry or salute the new city logo.

They didn't have an old city logo, which was kind of the problem.

The need for the branding (more than just a logo) was explained as "need for a seamless, unified brand system to help all Austinites navigate essential City services"

ABIA, as an enterprise department, doesn't really fall within the realm of essential city services. In fact, I'd guess 99%+ of people neither know nor care that the airport is municipally owned (or could guess at which airports in the US are or are not). In addition, the majority of users of the airport (and presumably growing, with additional connecting flights) aren't city of Austin residents.

So I wouldn't be surprised if ABIA never adopts the City of Austin logo, and there's arguments against doing so.

[GoldenBoot]

As mentioned, AUS is a self-sustaining city department - using no tax funds to operate. So, it is a different entity than other city departments/services. Also, AUS has its own, independent, established brand. So, there is zero need to muddy the water by using a City logo that is also used for the waste management department (among others).

Austin's logo was a ridiculous waste of over $1 million in taxpayers money. I'm surprised jobs were not lost when the City spent that much money on a logo a four-year-old could have designed for free.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

Austin's logo was a ridiculous waste of over $1 million in taxpayers money. I'm surprised jobs were not lost when the City spent that much money on a logo a four-year-old could have designed for free.

It wasn't and the city didn't.

Was that four year old going to personally and alone run a bunch of public research and outreach meetings? Do IP clearance research and register trademarks with the feds? Personally update a bunch of city websites? Write new design software so that the city didn't have to license it?

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by Novacek

It wasn't and the city didn't.

Was that four year old going to personally and alone run a bunch of public research and outreach meetings? Do IP clearance research and register trademarks with the feds? Personally update a bunch of city websites? Write new design software so that the city didn't have to license it?

Wow! Did you design it? That's one heck of a venomous response to someone's opinion.

You should well know that there was quite a bit of backlash over how much was spent on the rebranding project and its overall, lackluster outcome. If I'm not mistaken, the overall budget for the project was $1.1 million - of which, roughly $200,000 was specifically for design.

[Scuba]

Originally Posted by Novacek

It wasn't and the city didn't.

Was that four year old going to personally and alone run a bunch of public research and outreach meetings? Do IP clearance research and register trademarks with the feds? Personally update a bunch of city websites? Write new design software so that the city didn't have to license it?

I didn't realize the logo designer was among us posters LOL

Originally Posted by Novacek

ABIA, as an enterprise department, doesn't really fall within the realm of essential city services. In fact, I'd guess 99%+ of people neither know nor care that the airport is municipally owned (or could guess at which airports in the US are or are not). In addition, the majority of users of the airport (and presumably growing, with additional connecting flights) aren't city of Austin residents.

To this person's point, it's true, many airports are run by airport authorities and some are run as city/county (or state) departments of aviation. Three guesses which are the best run LOL. There's a valid reason that the reputation is legendarily bad for airport management and employee culture at Atlanta, Fort Lauderdale, Miami, Cleveland, Houston, Providence, and Denver, and Los Angeles (among others). None of them are independent airport authorities, they're all part of the government. and they're awful.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Wow! Did you design it? That's one heck of a venomous response to someone's opinion.

Nope, but I've been quite impressed with the volume and consistency of _just_ the visual branding design guidelines that were the result.

Trivializing that huge amount of work as "just a logo from a four year old" pisses me off.

And "Austin's logo was a ridiculous waste of over $1 million in taxpayers money." isn't "someone's opinion". It's a false statement. The city didn't spend that much on a logo. They didn't spend 1M. They didn't spend 200k. They spent 200k on a logo and much more.

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

You should well know that there was quite a bit of backlash over how much was spent on the rebranding project and its overall, lackluster outcome. If I'm not mistaken, the overall budget for the project was $1.1 million - of which, roughly $200,000 was specifically for design.

I'm well aware, a lot of it egged on by the same peanut gallery fighting all progress in the city (rezonings, transit investment, etc.) with that same false characterization of "1.1M for a logo"

[texastarkus]

Cayman Airways Limited (CAL) announces Austin as new summer route for Cayman
Cayman Airways Limited (CAL) is pleased to announce that new seasonal nonstop service between Grand Cayman and Austin, Texas, will commence this summer, expanding the airline’s U.S. network and strengthening airlift to the Cayman Islands from one of the fastest-growing metropolitan markets in the United States.

https://www.caymanairways.com/cal-announces-austin-as-new-route

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by texastarkus

Cayman Airways Limited (CAL) announces Austin as new summer route for Cayman
Cayman Airways Limited (CAL) is pleased to announce that new seasonal nonstop service between Grand Cayman and Austin, Texas, will commence this summer, expanding the airline’s U.S. network and strengthening airlift to the Cayman Islands from one of the fastest-growing metropolitan markets in the United States.

https://www.caymanairways.com/cal-announces-austin-as-new-route

I guess ABIA is waiting on US approval of the route before posting anything on their website?!? They have yet to make an announcement. I also found it interesting that nobody from AUS (or the US, for that matter) was quoted in Cayman's press release. Makes me question the route's authenticity.

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

IMakes me question the route's authenticity.

Especially considering this was announced back in August and that time it turned out to be false.

Cayman Airways Weighs New U.S. Service

However, a spokesperson from Cayman Airways said that this addition was an oversight as part of a broader batch of "hypothetical" routes.

In this week’s Cirium Diio schedule update, the Cayman Islands’ flag carrier loaded once-weekly flights between Grand Cayman and Austin, Texas. However, a spokesperson from Cayman Airways said that this addition was an oversight as part of a broader batch of “hypothetical” routes.

“No decision has been made on Austin,” the spokesperson added. “We have not filed for Austin with any regulatory authority and it remains simply one of several markets that are future possibilities only.”

Flights between Grand Cayman and Austin were scheduled to begin on May 30, operating once per week with a Boeing 737 MAX 8.

[GoldenBoot]

ABIA posted a news release about Cayman today...

https://www.austintexas.gov/news/austin-...airways-new-nonstop-service-grand-cayman