I disagree with this. I think that, if anything, CLE generates less traffic than should be reasonably expected. Consider the following:

1) CLE is the 40th largest city in the US (link). It is the 24th largest metro area in the US (link).
2) In terms of passengers boarded, CLE is 36th (link).

Now, compare this to Kansas City:
1) Kansas City is the 39th largest city in the US. It is the 28th largest metro area in the US.
2) In terms of passengers boarded, MCI is 35th.

In other words, for cities of similar size, we see similar #'s of passengers boarded, with both having rankings on the pax list consistent with their relative position on the population list. So, I would say that CLE generates no more (though probably no less) traffic than one should expect.

What is interesting is that CLE's status as a hub, and the increased options for the pax, does not seem to provide a boost. This contrasts with CVG, which has the 25th largest metro area, behind CLE. Yet, it sees 47% more passengers board than CLE.

Even more damning for CLE's prospects is that it doesn't generate large amounts of international traffic, which is the high-yield stuff that it would seem these mergers are about.

Except that times change. As noted above, CLE is not that big of a market, and the days of numerous hubs scattered all over the country are gone. Even AA, which is as close in size as we have to any of these mergers, sees fit to only have 3 to 5 US hubs (depending if one includes JFK and/or STL), plus San Juan. For UA/CO, they would have 8 hubs, which I would expect to be trimmed to 5, and CLE seems the most likely to get the axe. Indeed, of the 8 hubs, 6 (SFO, LAX, ORD, IAH, IAD, EWR) rank in the top-12 largest metro areas, all with roughly double the population of CLE, and with only slightly less of an advantage over DEN. CLE likely falls behind DEN because DEN lies in a more isolated spot than CLE, which is less than 500 miles from EWR, ORD, and IAD.

I guess you mean ORD. (DEN-CLE = 1200 miles) @:-)

I did, and have corrected. Thanks.

Hey, that's my co. Duck brands has been sold, or in the process. I forget who bought them (ex-Manco).

That will change with additional connecting traffic pushed to CLE from EWR and, to a lesser extent, IAH.

UA scaled back its quasi-hub operation at CLE in the early 1980's, long before CO built up a substantial presence there, which was not until the very early 1990's. There was never any sort of competition between the two, and CO did not "beat" UA in any manner for dominance at CLE - UA had long since decided to develop ORD as a hub before CO was even thinking about developing CLE.

But that is a decidedly different argument from claims that CLE produces more traffic on its own than one would think, which was what I was responding to. Indeed, despite its hub status (no matter how secondary), CLE only manages traffic similar to a non-hub airport in a similar market. Now, If you think a combined UA-CO will choose to operate 8 hubs or that they would choose CLE over EWR, ORD, or IAD, for some other reason, like traffic flow or geography, that is fine, but I just don't see how one can suggest that they will choose CLE because it is an above-average market.

A more logical statistic to use would be CLE CSA (Combined Statistical Area), because this is the true area that CLE draws O/D passengers from.

Here are the 15 largest CSA's primary airports in the nation. Note that all 15 are hubs.

1. NYC (CO, B6, DL, AA)
2. LAX (UA)
3. ORD (AA, UA)
4. WAS (UA, WN)
5. BOS (AA)
6. SFO (UA)
7. PHL (US)
8. DFW (AA)
9. IAH (CO)
10. ATL (DL, FL)
11. DTW (NW)
12. SEA (AS)
13. MSP (NW)
14. DEN (F9, UA)
15. CLE (CO)

LAX is actually UA/AA and to some extent DL/AS.

And if we're tossing BWI/WAS together to add WN, we should probably put OAK/SJC in with the Bay Area and note WN (OAK) and AA (SJC).

Each stat has its downside; Since Miami isn't included in the list of CSAs, MIA isn't included on your list, even though its MSA is ranked seventh between Houston and DC.

Why did I expect LAS in that list? Should be way more important than CLE for example.

Sure, but that only reinforces my point. If CLE is the 15th biggest market, yet only the 35th busiest airport, then CLE draws less traffic than it should, and looks even worse as a hub.

Not that the list was meant to be comprehensive, but I only listed the primary airport in the CSA except for NYC and WAS.
Is there such a code for SFO/OAK/SJC?

Does LAX really qualify as an AA hub?

It also means that there is a lot of room for O/D growth.

Also I'd be curious to know where CLE fell in the 2007 rank of airport boardings.

LAS is a distant 25.