Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5015609/

Topic: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-12-20 12:45:20 and read 14173 times.

AA applied with the DOT today, to delay start up of its awarded JFK-HND service till March 31st 2011.

AA states the initial planned January start up is during a period of low demand and request the delay to allow the carrier to “more efficiently plan, market and implement the new service".

OST-2010-0018

Talk about a last minute change being basically only 30-days away from planned commencement of services. Were the bookings so weak??

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: rl757pvd
Posted 2010-12-20 12:49:39 and read 14166 times.

I seem to recall everyone jumping on Delta for requesting their delay.... at least Delta gave their customers better notice.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: gdg9
Posted 2010-12-20 12:50:15 and read 14148 times.

It seems AA has had trouble with several new Asian routes. I seem to recall trouble on the ORD-PEK route and now rumblings of trouble on and LAX-China route (Shanghai?)

Perhaps this should be taken into account in future route offerings - AA seems to bid on the routes and can't seem to get things together to operate them. I wonder if they aren't bidding on the routes solely to deny them to someone else, while not wanting to really operate them themselves.

Edit - LAX-PVG - reservations currently suspended.

[Edited 2010-12-20 12:52:49]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: DAL767400ER
Posted 2010-12-20 12:50:32 and read 14152 times.

Surprised it took AA so long to apply for this, as I would have expected AA to ask for a delayed start-up the day Delta had their delay granted. And now applying for a delay so shortly before the flight was to start just seems weird.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2010-12-20 13:04:52 and read 14001 times.

And where are those 6 other Euro routes from JFK??? Weren't they going to be announced in Oct?


Perhaps revenue management isn't expecting as robust an economy as they had hoped for.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-20 13:06:05 and read 13986 times.

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 2):
I wonder if they aren't bidding on the routes solely to deny them to someone else, while not wanting to really operate them themselves.

Well, we have to discount LAX-PVG, which is by all indications a slots issue. And if AA is guilty for JFK-HND, than both US (PHL-PEK, which never started) and DL (several routes) are worse offenders. There doesn't seem to be much point in singling AA out.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-20 13:11:19 and read 13946 times.

It's odd that AA waited this long. Makes me think something else other than just weak sales.

Also, I've heard that JFK-NRT will go to 4w sometime in 2011 and those three Narita slots used elsewhere.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 4):
And where are those 6 other Euro routes from JFK??? Weren't they going to be announced in Oct?

Four. One of them became ORD-HEL. As for the other three, who knows, they should have been announced by now if they were to launch. However, the June schedules and slot usage will not be finalized until next month (currently set through June 8th). I had heard British Airways wasn't very fond of expanding JFK capacity too much, and they are just as much BA's flights as they are AA's now.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: fun2fly
Posted 2010-12-20 13:12:21 and read 13919 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5):
Well, we have to discount LAX-PVG, which is by all indications a slots issue.

Why wouldn't UA have the same slot issue? Seems odd.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5):
And if AA is guilty for JFK-HND, than both US (PHL-PEK, which never started) and DL (several routes) are worse offenders. There doesn't seem to be much point in singling AA out.

Who was awarded secondary status on the route?

While this is true, and I fully agree, HND is a different story. Not to mention that AA shot itself in the foot w/a late request. UA and CO were both shut out of the awards and USDOT would certainly have to consider the EWR>HND application since AA is not able to hold up its end of the bargain and it is a like in kind replacement. I bet CO would certainly agree to start April 1 if given the opportunity that AA is asking for.

It will be interesting to follow.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-20 13:16:21 and read 13871 times.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 7):
While this is true, and I fully agree, HND is a different story.

Not really. If anyone opposes, AA will start it. It's not a PHL-PEK situation where they don't have an airplane capable of flying the route.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-20 13:16:32 and read 13875 times.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 7):
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5):
Well, we have to discount LAX-PVG, which is by all indications a slots issue.

Why wouldn't UA have the same slot issue? Seems odd.

We don't know if UA has the same slot issue. You don't need to have the slots to sell tickets on the flight; one just needs them to physically operate the flight. Seeing what happened with ORD-PEK, AA very well might have decided to suspend ticket sales for now until it is sorted out. In the meantime, passengers who are currently booked on the route are still booked on their original itineraries.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: crosswinds21
Posted 2010-12-20 13:35:19 and read 13731 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Talk about a last minute change being basically only 30-days away from planned commencement of services. Were the bookings so weak??

Yes, bookings on JFK-HND were horrendous. I have no idea why AA waited so long to ask for this delay. Maybe they seem to think that it's completely acceptable to have people book flights, make plans, and then re-route those people to different airliners and/or different airports at the last minute. I personally don't think that it's acceptable at all. Sure, if it's a one time thing for something beyond an airline's control, then it's understandable that these things happen. But now AA has had this happen with ORD-PEK (three times by the way, where AA was selling flights for daytime slots which were never received), LAX-PVG quite possibly, and now JFK-HND. While I didn't think that DL (or any airline for that matter) should have been granted the delay in starting up the service, at least they did this ahead of time.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AABB777
Posted 2010-12-20 13:41:03 and read 13669 times.

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 2):
Edit - LAX-PVG - reservations currently suspended.

This is a slots issue. The flight was being sold with the tag line "subject to government approval", but CAAC came back and asked AA to stop selling the flight until the slots are approved. AA agreed to it.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: mogandoCI
Posted 2010-12-20 13:50:21 and read 13569 times.

the DOT ****must**** set very strict guidelines (AND penalties) regarding commitment of starting date and equipment

you can't just lie on the bidding application to say you'll fly daily 744 then request to push back starting date 6 months later with nothing more than a 763 and downsized to 4x-weekly

we had too many incidents in which carriers over-promise on these valued slots then totally under-deliver, and in USAir's PHL-PEK case, not even deliver at all

meanwhile i also find it appalling that DL already carriers the most NRT traffic among any US carrier, and yet the DOT still awarded them 2 out of the 4 flights. Are they trying to help DL create a monopoly, or they think AA and UA already has a partner on the Japanese side so they don't need extra help ??

what's worse ? the arrival time of 10:15pm into HND, or the 6:40am departure time out of it ??

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: markboston
Posted 2010-12-20 14:09:54 and read 13443 times.

Quoting crosswinds21 (Reply 10):
Yes, bookings on JFK-HND were horrendous

I'm not surprised. I travel to NRT regularly and was initially excited when I heard that the HND flight was being introduced: a shorter trip in to Tokyo than NRT and access to a much wider range of domestic flights at HND.

However, the timing of these flights is HORRIBLE. The flight arrives in to HND late at night and leaves HND very early. Same day domestic connections are impossible (arriving or leaving) and the early departure requires getting up at 3 am. For me this negates the benefit of the shorter trip to the airport.

I realize that the flight timings were dictated by the Japanese government. However, until this is sorted out I question whether the JFK-HND flight is viable.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MPDPilot
Posted 2010-12-20 14:13:44 and read 13420 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):
the DOT ****must**** set very strict guidelines (AND penalties) regarding commitment of starting date and equipment

I would imagine if CO or Someone else was willing to start the route in January with a 747, AA would not get the approval to adjust the start time. But how does it make any sense to say to an airline if you don't use the way you asked for it you loose it, just to have it sit idle? AA is simply asking and I am sure that if another airline challenges AA will start it.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):
meanwhile i also find it appalling that DL already carriers the most NRT traffic among any US carrier, and yet the DOT still awarded them 2 out of the 4 flights. Are they trying to help DL create a monopoly, or they think AA and UA already has a partner on the Japanese side so they don't need extra help ??

UA and CO had a pretty weak case they wanted to fly 777s when DL wanted to fly 744, as it was discussed back when the routes were awarded, DOT give preference to offering the most seats into slot controlled ariports. Hence DL getting the west coast route, they were the only airline to request a midwest route and DL didn't ask for an east coast route. It isn't the DOT helping DL gain a monoply it is simply the DOT awarding the routes with the most merit. THey did also take into consideration that AA and UA both had future JV partners also appling for the routes.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: mogandoCI
Posted 2010-12-20 14:41:22 and read 13222 times.

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 14):
UA and CO had a pretty weak case they wanted to fly 777s when DL wanted to fly 744, as it was discussed back when the routes were awarded, DOT give preference to offering the most seats into slot controlled ariports. Hence DL getting the west coast route, they were the only airline to request a midwest route and DL didn't ask for an east coast route. It isn't the DOT helping DL gain a monoply it is simply the DOT awarding the routes with the most merit. THey did also take into consideration that AA and UA both had future JV partners also appling for the routes.

if you promise the 747, there should be a minimum commitment period. you can't claim the largest equipment on the app, then immediately bait-n-switch by blaming "weak bookings" and down-gauging when that was your plan all along. what prevents someone else from lying and claiming they'll lease the A388 just for the HND route ?? then they can even 1-up any 744 offerings.

i hardly consider DL's flights to be the most merit when (a) they already have the most NRT capacity, and (b) they have meaningless feed at the HND side, if any.

if AA can't fill their smaller 777 out of the largest aviation market in the US, i'd love to see how DL fill their 744 from DTW, esp considering they already have a billion gateways to Tokyo.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: OA412
Posted 2010-12-20 14:48:52 and read 13143 times.

Very surprising that AA waited so long to request a delay. IIRC the flights are set to start on January 19, correct?

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):
you can't just lie on the bidding application to say you'll fly daily 744 then request to push back starting date 6 months later with nothing more than a 763 and downsized to 4x-weekly

What in the world are you talking about? AA proposed to fly JFK-HND with a 777 starting in January. They are now asking that startup be delayed by 2 months. The flight will still be daily on a 777.

DL was awarded DTW and LAX-HND, both on 744s. They requested a startup delay of less than one month. They still plan to operate daily DTW and LAX-HND on 744s beginning in February.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):
meanwhile i also find it appalling that DL already carriers the most NRT traffic among any US carrier, and yet the DOT still awarded them 2 out of the 4 flights.

Why? When you take into account that AA and UA/CO will have ATI and a JV with their Japanese partner, they actually end up with as many, or in the case of Oneworld more, flights than DL. I don't see who that's appalling.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):
Are they trying to help DL create a monopoly, or they think AA and UA already has a partner on the Japanese side so they don't need extra help ??

Do you honestly believe that a US government agency would willingly facilitate the creation of a monopoly by any airline? As you suggest, I'm fairly certain that alliances were taken into account. When you do that, Skyteam ended up with 2 slots, Star with 2, and Oneworld with 3. Sounds pretty fair to me.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 15):
and (b) they have meaningless feed at the HND side, if any.

Since when does DOT take into account the amount of feed on the other end of a flight when making a route decision?

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 15):
if AA can't fill their smaller 777 out of the largest aviation market in the US, i'd love to see how DL fill their 744 from DTW, esp considering they already have a billion gateways to Tokyo.

Perhaps how they fill their Asia flights from DTW now? With the large amount of Asia traffic that to/from DTW as well as all of those people who connect in DTW to onward points in Asia. Did you forget about DTW being DL's 2nd largest hub?

Oh and on a side note, where are all those who lambasted DL and tore them to shreds for requesting a delayed startup of their HND service?

[Edited 2010-12-20 14:55:43]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: crosswinds21
Posted 2010-12-20 15:03:33 and read 13045 times.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 16):
Oh and on a side note, where are all those who lambasted DL and tore them to shreds for requesting a delayed startup of their HND service?

Well, I was one of those people. I don't think that either DL or AA should be granted the delay. But if the DOT gave DL the delay, then of course AA should get it as well.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: OA412
Posted 2010-12-20 15:05:35 and read 13032 times.

Quoting crosswinds21 (Reply 17):
Well, I was one of those people. I don't think that either DL or AA should be granted the delay. But if the DOT gave DL the delay, then of course AA should get it as well.

Well I think the problem here is that the DOT set precedent by granting the first delayed startup, whenever that was, so they've sort of backed themselves up into a corner.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MSPNWA
Posted 2010-12-20 15:46:12 and read 12810 times.

AA joins the appalling behavior wagon with HND. This ices the cake with waiting so long to delay it.

The DOT needed to show some teeth with DL and now AA. This is ridiculous.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-20 18:13:57 and read 12455 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 19):
The DOT needed to show some teeth with DL and now AA. This is ridiculous.

...and do what, give HA 4 slots? They are the only carrier even conceivably interested in a January start.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MSPNWA
Posted 2010-12-20 18:23:44 and read 12403 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20):
...and do what, give HA 4 slots? They are the only carrier even conceivably interested in a January start.

If you put it that way, giving HA two slots looks like it would have been the right move. HA would have been able to make both work.

But no, all the DOT needed to do was show some teeth and not give in to the airlines wishing further delays. Make them hold their end of the bargain. The DOT has been working harder for the airlines than for the passengers that pay taxes for their existence.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: OA412
Posted 2010-12-20 18:31:03 and read 12351 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):
If you put it that way, giving HA two slots looks like it would have been the right move. HA would have been able to make both work.

But who does that benefit? One of the DOT's goals in awarding slots is to consider the benefits of said award. While HNL-TYO is a huge market, it benefits only a very small portion of the US public. Let's be honest, there aren't very many travellers who are going to fly XXX-HNL-HND when there are nonstop options to HND available from the mainland. Additionally, Mainland US-HNL-HND is an extremely indirect route.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MSPNWA
Posted 2010-12-20 18:43:25 and read 12285 times.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 22):
But who does that benefit?

Reply to Cubs about that. I'm not throwing out exaggerated hypothetical scenarios.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-20 19:07:12 and read 12194 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23):
Reply to Cubs about that. I'm not throwing out exaggerated hypothetical scenarios.

Well, who else besides HA was interested in a January start? You conveniently ignore the fact that NO CARRIER was; all would have started the routes in October - when DoT initially said they'd be available - had DoT made the awards in a timely fashion. AA (and DL) made the best of a bad situation and are cutting their losses a bit by delaying the starts.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: FutureUScapt
Posted 2010-12-20 20:06:00 and read 12303 times.

Just a minor correction to LAXIntl's post - AA has requested to delay the start-up date to March 1, 2011, not March 31, 2011. So just to put that into perspective, AA is asking for a whopping 28-day delay in starting service - not a big deal at all. Time to move along folks.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: qqflyboy
Posted 2010-12-20 21:05:14 and read 11900 times.

AA's start date was to be 20Jan11, and they asked for a delay just over a month to 1Mar11. Not that big of a deal, and if you saw the bookings, you'd understand why. Very few people will be inconvenienced by the delay.

Funny enough we received several emails today detailing the start of the new route, including service changes from NRT and hotel/layover/immigration informaiton. All for not, I guess, or least a lilttle premature.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: hnl-jack
Posted 2010-12-20 21:31:40 and read 11882 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20):
and do what, give HA 4 slots? They are the only carrier even conceivably interested in a January start.
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):
you put it that way, giving HA two slots looks like it would have been the right move. HA would have been able to make both work.

HA requested two slots based on their experience and knowledge of the market. They launched service with the one slot awarded, the flights are full and the second slot is needed. While HND offers extensive connections within Japan, NRT still offers more throughout Asia. HND/USA is primarily an O&D market. Other than LAX, I suspect that HND- NYC or DTW service will not produce the traffic that either AA or DL projected. What's hard to understand is why it has taken them so long to figure it out. HND's position in the Japan marketplace, who uses it and why was no secret.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AADC10
Posted 2010-12-20 23:33:30 and read 11381 times.

AA's fumbling around with all of its Asia flights seems to show what a 2nd tier player it is in the region and possibly a lack of commitment. Most passengers that want to take a U.S. flagged carrier to Asia think of DL and UA.

Quoting markboston (Reply 13):
However, the timing of these flights is HORRIBLE. The flight arrives in to HND late at night and leaves HND very early. Same day domestic connections are impossible (arriving or leaving) and the early departure requires getting up at 3 am. For me this negates the benefit of the shorter trip to the airport.

That is not AA's fault. The rules for the slots was that they could only be outside a window that covered most of the day. The only slots for Transpacific international flights by foreign carriers were late at night and early in the morning. All of the carriers received similar slots.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: ocracoke
Posted 2010-12-20 23:38:08 and read 11353 times.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 27):
HA requested two slots based on their experience and knowledge of the market.

How long has HA been flying the Hawaii-Tokyo market to gain that experience and knowledge?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: HNLPointShoot
Posted 2010-12-21 00:54:56 and read 11165 times.

Quoting ocracoke (Reply 29):
How long has HA been flying the Hawaii-Tokyo market to gain that experience and knowledge?

Hawaii, by nature of being a prime international destination for Japanese tourists, is filled with people who have insight on how the business works. HA itself might not have much first-hand knowledge of catering to Japanese tourists flying to Hawaii, but it's not hard for them to find people who would know.

Furthermore, HA has had a better-than-usual opportunity to enter the Hawaii-Japan market as both JL and NH have been reducing capacity on their flights to Hawaii, giving HA room to step in.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-21 05:24:55 and read 10489 times.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 27):
HA requested two slots based on their experience and knowledge of the market. They launched
service with the one slot awarded, the flights are full and the second slot is needed.

That sort of misses the point, though, doesn't it? Couldn't MS fly HNL-TYO in the winter and fill it?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AirNZ
Posted 2010-12-21 05:38:21 and read 10398 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 9):
You don't need to have the slots to sell tickets on the flight; one just needs them to physically operate the flight.

In which case common sense would tell you (read as intelligence) not to sell the tickets until you know you can physically operate the flight......it doesn't really take much intelligence, does it?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: hnl-jack
Posted 2010-12-21 06:50:14 and read 10067 times.

Quoting ocracoke (Reply 29):
How long has HA been flying the Hawaii-Tokyo market to gain that experience and knowledge?

HA has been doing business in Japan for decades. It knows the people in the business, the wholesalers such as JTB and others probably as good as any other U.S. airline. It could make a success of a second flight at HND because of its relationships and its brand. HA is well established in Japan.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: bobnwa
Posted 2010-12-21 06:51:59 and read 10061 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 19):
The DOT needed to show some teeth with DL and now AA. This is ridiculous.





Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things if AA and DL are granted delays in the start up?
Looks like folks are getting all worked up over trivial matters. What is wrong with trying to arrange matters to facilitate earning a profit on these new routes. It is not a monopoly type board game.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: mogandoCI
Posted 2010-12-21 07:08:20 and read 9999 times.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 16):
Perhaps how they fill their Asia flights from DTW now? With the large amount of Asia traffic that to/from DTW as well as all of those people who connect in DTW to onward points in Asia. Did you forget about DTW being DL's 2nd largest hub?

DTW-NRT is hub-to-hub on DL's network - how hard is it to fill

but DTW-HND is a whole different animal - relying strictly on Tokyo O&D. And it's not like the US-Japan just exploded overnight just because these 4 HND slots were awarded - some flights have to be shrunk in order not to have over-capacity

the equivalent analogy would be UA all of a sudden deciding to launch ORD to Frankfurt Hahn Airport

but i do consistently notice that DL is usually the cheapest quote on any US-Asia itinerary i attempt to search, so i guess that's their strategy of filling planes

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: hnl-jack
Posted 2010-12-21 08:11:27 and read 9673 times.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 34):
Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things if AA and DL are granted delays in the start up?
Looks like folks are getting all worked up over trivial matters. What is wrong with trying to arrange matters to facilitate earning a profit on these new routes. It is not a monopoly type board game.

As Vince Lombardi once said, "the best offense is a good defense." AA & DL both knew what the slots were and that authorization would be granted for an October, 2010 start when they applied. Nowhere in their applications did they note they would like the award, but would delay start of service until better slot times were available. AA and DL both applied in an attempt to insure their competition wouldn't get them, not because they really had intent to launch service on the date allowed or for that matter, in the case of DL with the equipment promised. Indeed, it is a game and this case AA and DL won, the DOT will do little about it and the public looses.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-21 08:14:49 and read 9648 times.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 36):
AA & DL both knew what the slots were and that authorization would be granted for an October, 2010 start when they applied.

I'd agree that they "knew" this, but keep in mind that an October start wasn't really pratical - which is the whole reason AA and DL are asking for the delay.

I'd be interested to see month-by-month demand numbers on HNL; I'd guess without seeing them that January might have actually been a better time for HA to start the service.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 36):
Indeed, it is a game and this case AA and DL won, the DOT will do little about it and the public looses.

DoT caused 2/3 of the public losses with its dilatory processing of the applications.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: ckfred
Posted 2010-12-21 08:34:52 and read 9575 times.

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 2):
I seem to recall trouble on the ORD-PEK route and now rumblings of trouble on and LAX-China route (Shanghai?)

ORD-PEK was also a slot issue. AA wanted the PEK flight to have times similar to the ORD-PVG flight. Yet local airport authorites had the turnaround for the flight in the middle of the night (similar to what AA does at DEL on its round trip from ORD).

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 09:36:42 and read 9293 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 12):


meanwhile i also find it appalling that DL already carriers the most NRT traffic among any US carrier, and yet the DOT still awarded them 2 out of the 4 flights. Are they trying to help DL create a monopoly, or they think AA and UA already has a partner on the Japanese side so they don't need extra help ??

Ok, NRT is meaningless. That is kind of like saying AA should not get at LGW slot because they have 20 slots a LHR.
Look at the slot break down,
AA-3 slots, HNL(JL), SFO(JL) JFK(AA)
UA-2 slots, LAX(NK), HNL(NK)
DL-2 slots, LAX, DTW
HA-1 slots HNL.
That is a pretty fair break down to me.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):

But no, all the DOT needed to do was show some teeth and not give in to the airlines wishing further delays. Make them hold their end of the bargain. The DOT has been working harder for the airlines than for the passengers that pay taxes for their existence.

That is just stupid. The DOT was asking for this when the thought it would be a grand idea to A) start the flight in Oct with pretty much zero time to sell the flight, or be start in Jan, low season. IMHO if AA/DL/NK/JL/HA wanted to wait till APR/MAY to start the flights they should be able to.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: laca773
Posted 2010-12-21 09:40:48 and read 9276 times.

I feel DL's DTW & AA's flights to HND will not last long at all unless, the Japanese Aviation Authority re-issue time slots.

I don't see DL's LAX service to HND staying daily especially since NH is flying the route already with a 77E. I also don't see DL keeping a 744 on the route for long, maybe downgauging it before they start to a 76W. Way too much capacity given their large presence @ NRT and the majority of their customers go via NRT and transit onward.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2010-12-21 10:09:31 and read 9143 times.

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 1):
I seem to recall everyone jumping on Delta for requesting their delay

Delta is hardly the only other U.S. airline to pull the same stunt. This is becoming a same-old same same-old worn out story: 1) U.S. airline eager to obtain new authority; 2) is awarded authority; 3) promptly applies to delay service...and then (often) seeks to extend the delay of service startup.

That airlines can get away with having their cake (new route authority) and eating it too (choose to delay startup without risk of losing their 'prized' authority) is sheer nonsense, to say nothing of a travesty. If only the same types of penalties applied to U.S. airlines who 'no show' for specified route startup dates as those imposed by the very same airlines on their passengers who no show for flights...

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-21 10:54:39 and read 8949 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 41):
That airlines can get away with having their cake (new route authority) and eating it too (choose to delay startup without risk of losing their 'prized' authority) is sheer nonsense, to say nothing of a travesty.

How can you be sure that AA (and DL, for that matter) would not have started the route in October had it been awarded in a timely fashion?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: DFWEagle
Posted 2010-12-21 11:05:21 and read 8952 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 38):
Yet local airport authorites had the turnaround for the flight in the middle of the night (similar to what AA does at DEL on its round trip from ORD).

ORD-DEL is having a schedule change next summer to depart a few hours earlier and arrive in Delhi at 17:45 instead of late at night. AA expects the Kingfisher code-share to be implemented by then and this re-timing will allow same-day connections to other points in India including Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad. The return flight will still leave very late at night so unfortunately ground-time will be increased to 6hr45 in Delhi.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: EnviroTO
Posted 2010-12-21 12:00:41 and read 8685 times.

I'm not sure why there are so many people surprised that AA waited so long. There is no measure of the demand for a poorly timed HND flight so the only way to find out if it will work is to start selling it. Obviously sales have not been as good as they need them to be. No loss. Move the people onto an AA flight to NRT, keep the bulk of the revenue since most wouldn't switch airlines, and try again in a busier period. Makes sense to me. No point flying a money loosing plane.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MSPNWA
Posted 2010-12-21 12:10:29 and read 8629 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 24):

Well, who else besides HA was interested in a January start? You conveniently ignore the fact that NO CARRIER was; all would have started the routes in October - when DoT initially said they'd be available - had DoT made the awards in a timely fashion. AA (and DL) made the best of a bad situation and are cutting their losses a bit by delaying the starts.

That's an easy answer. Every airline that applied *was* interested for a start no later than January, that's who. "No carrier was"? Come on. Read their news statements when the tentative awards were handed out last May. No complaining then. They knew the rules about when they had to start. Two of the three carriers aren't interested now in a January start because their desired routes' performance weren't looking good early. That's not the DOT's problem. It shouldn't be the job of the DOT to further bend and break for airline profits at the expense of a highly restricted service to the flying public.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 34):
Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things if AA and DL are granted delays in the start up?
Looks like folks are getting all worked up over trivial matters. What is wrong with trying to arrange matters to facilitate earning a profit on these new routes. It is not a monopoly type board game.

Of course it matters. For starters, in these cases we have thousands of booked passengers affected by no fault of their own. And most importantly, this precedent of allowing the airlines to game the system continues unabated. Take away the airlines ability to delay, cancel, downsize, etc. awarded routes without significant penalty, and suddenly you'll see the airlines' award applications become more realistic. This isn't a board game.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 36):
Indeed, it is a game and this case AA and DL won, the DOT will do little about it and the public loses.

  

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 37):

DoT caused 2/3 of the public losses with its dilatory processing of the applications.

Go back and read the timelines. The tentative awards came out when people expected them too, and nobody was saying it was late then. The DOT window to delay till January was in place with the tentative awards too. DOT delays are not the problem. It's handing out an excuse to the airlines. The real problem is that the airlines requested dubious routes.

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 39):
That is just stupid. The DOT was asking for this when the thought it would be a grand idea to A) start the flight in Oct with pretty much zero time to sell the flight, or be start in Jan, low season. IMHO if AA/DL/NK/JL/HA wanted to wait till APR/MAY to start the flights they should be able to.

No, it's responsible. The DOT should be working for the public, not corporations. The DOT wasn't in charge of when the new runway opened. They even gave the airlines three months to choose when to start. The problem isn't a "low-season" start; it's a "no-season" start. Two airlines bit off more than they can chew, and they should have to eat it, or give it back up. I'm sure that UA or HA wouldn't mind taking a slot.

[Edited 2010-12-21 12:15:08]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-21 12:29:20 and read 8553 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 45):
It shouldn't be the job of the DOT to further bend and break for airline profits at the expense of a highly restricted service to the flying public.

What awards would have better served the flying public? I'd say - based on what was awarded and not what was applied for - that AA should have gotten LAX and DL JFK, but I don't think that makes a lick of difference to this discussion.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 45):
Two of the three carriers aren't interested now in a January start because their desired routes' performance weren't looking good early.

What evidence do you have that any carrier besides HA was ever interested in a January start?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-12-21 12:34:32 and read 8524 times.

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 25):
Just a minor correction to LAXIntl's post - AA has requested to delay the start-up date to March 1, 2011, not March 31, 2011.

You are right.
Bit odd as the first notice I got listed March 31, and now it shows March 1. Wonder if it changed at the last minute?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 13:32:06 and read 8328 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 45):

No, it's responsible. The DOT should be working for the public, not corporations. The DOT wasn't in charge of when the new runway opened. They even gave the airlines three months to choose when to start. The problem isn't a "low-season" start; it's a "no-season" start. Two airlines bit off more than they can chew, and they should have to eat it, or give it back up. I'm sure that UA or HA wouldn't mind taking a slot.

Then why hasn't UA or HA asked for the slot? See I kinda think you have a blind hate for Delta and don't really know what is going on.
1) IF HA/US/UA/VX/B6/WN/FL/YX/OO/EV/RP/S5 or any US carrier wanted AA or DL's slots and could strt on time all they have to do is ask the DOT. Now It's likely they wouldn't get the slot because AA/DL would just start the flight on Jan 31 and take the loses but they could at least ask (and no one did. I'm pretty sure i have been over this before)
2) The DOT dragged ass and took much much much longer than the other countrys to give out the HND slots.
3) again UA/HA don't want the slots because they haven't asked for them. No the DOT wont give away Delta's slots because your mad at them. Sorry don't work that way.
4) Yes it is the low season, TYO traffic peaks in the summer. Why do you think they are asking to hold off for 20-30 days and not months/going to 5 weekly/downgrading flights. Unless you have data that proves other wise....you don't.....you are wrong.
5)how is the DOT not working for the public? what should they do? take the slots, no one will take them, then DL and AA will get them back. HA doesn't want them....get that out of your head, UA doesn't want them....get that out of your head.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-21 13:48:33 and read 8325 times.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 32):
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 9):
You don't need to have the slots to sell tickets on the flight; one just needs them to physically operate the flight.

In which case common sense would tell you (read as intelligence) not to sell the tickets until you know you can physically operate the flight......it doesn't really take much intelligence, does it?

Then the entire industry operates without much intelligence, because all airlines do it, since 99.99% of the time, the slot requested is the slot received.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 13:51:37 and read 8283 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 49):

Then the entire industry operates without much intelligence, because all airlines do it, since 99.99% of the time, the slot requested is the slot received.

           
unless it PEK   

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-12-21 14:35:15 and read 8208 times.

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 48):
3) again UA/HA don't want the slots because they haven't asked for them.

Hawaiian certainly does.

HA filed a response to Delta's delay restating their interest in additional slot pair, and matter of fact did so today also for American's proposed delays.

Hawaiian does not oppose the 28-day extension of the startup deadline requested by
American. However, should any protracted delays arise, Hawaiian stands ready and
willing to fully utilize a second slot pair through second-daily Honolulu-Haneda service.


Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 49):
because all airlines do it, since 99.99% of the time, the slot requested is the slot received.

I guess you have never attended the IATA slot conferences and watched the horse trading.

At one global carrier I worked at we would have to go through 4-5 reiterations of schedules(esp new non-grandfathered flights), including slot trades with other airlines to land the appropriate timings. This could be especially challanging if both the origin and destination airport are slot restricted. Talk about trying to hit two moving targets.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 14:53:30 and read 8128 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 51):

HA filed a response to Delta's delay restating their interest in additional slot pair, and matter of fact did so today also for American's proposed delays.

Hawaiian does not oppose the 28-day extension of the startup deadline requested by
American. However, should any protracted delays arise, Hawaiian stands ready and
willing to fully utilize a second slot pair through second-daily Honolulu-Haneda service.

No. HA is saying well if they keep pushing it off then they want the slot. (see "Hawaiian does not oppose the 28-day extension")

If HA really really really wanted the slot they would ask for it and oppose any extension. So again HA or UA really don't want the slot.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2010-12-21 15:30:50 and read 8073 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 45):
Of course it matters. For starters, in these cases we have thousands of booked passengers affected by no fault of their own. And most importantly, this precedent of allowing the airlines to game the system continues unabated. Take away the airlines ability to delay, cancel, downsize, etc. awarded routes without significant penalty, and suddenly you'll see the airlines' award applications become more realistic. This isn't a board game.

  In a word: Thankyouverymuch! Couldn't have said it better myself!

Since 9/11/01 especially, it seems the U.S. airlines can pull whatever shenanigans they choose, with impunity... save for shelling out a few $100k or million$ here and there in fines (that seem, in reality IMHO, to actually amount more to 'protection' money than fines for violations) to create an appearance that airlines are being held accountable for compliance with regulations. In exchange, airlines are allowed to engage in legalized collusion, predatory business practices, form legal anti-competitive trusts, disregard contractual commitments...and to 'sit' on route authority long beyond specified startup dates without consequence, to the exclusion of competitors who might have happily started the new service on time per the schedule to which both parties (DOT and airlines) mutually agreed when applications were submitted.

What is so wrong with sending a message to the airlines to "start up service on your newly awarded route(s) per the timeline specified or, at the very least, lose it" ...no ifs ands or buts...or delays... it's not as if the airlines who seem to believe they are entitled to delay startup dates as they see fit were blindsided by the startup date to which they agreed by applying for new authority.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 15:39:43 and read 8041 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 53):
to the exclusion of competitors who might have happily started the new service on time per the schedule to which both parties (DOT and airlines) mutually agreed when applications were submitted.

Please list the cases since 9/11 that this has happened....with the DOT docket # please.

[Edited 2010-12-21 15:44:38]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-12-21 15:54:39 and read 8006 times.

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 52):
No. HA is saying well if they keep pushing it off then they want the slot. (see "Hawaiian does not oppose the 28-day extension")

If HA really really really wanted the slot they would ask for it and oppose any extension. So again HA or UA really don't want the slot.

Its all semantics. Arguing against the delay is pointless as unfortunately there is well established precedence for granting delays.

However Hawaiian Air clearly would be happy to have the slots as per its original route request. While others like DL and AA dilly dally around, HA is ready to put metal in the air to Japan.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 16:11:50 and read 7963 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 55):

However Hawaiian Air clearly would be happy to have the slots as per its original route request. While others like DL and AA dilly dally around, HA is ready to put metal in the air to Japan.

you can't use the original route request.....don't see DL waiting for that 2-3x weekly CVG-PEK anymore.....
If the carrier(s) don't ask then you can't expect the DOT just to give it to them. AFAIK that has never happened.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 55):
. Arguing against the delay is pointless as unfortunately there is well established precedence for granting delays.

that i agree with. but for 28 days i don't really get why everyone gets upset.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MSPNWA
Posted 2010-12-21 17:24:04 and read 7876 times.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 46):
What awards would have better served the flying public? I'd say - based on what was awarded and not what was applied for - that AA should have gotten LAX and DL JFK, but I don't think that makes a lick of difference to this discussion.

They could have given out awards that had a better perceived chance of success. But should we really demand the DOT to award based on that? I don't think so. The airlines are the ones applying; they should be the ones accountable for the financial aspect. The DOT clearly made a choice to award slots to carriers based significantly on increasing competition and overall capacity. That's the right strategy to benefit the flying public. The problem with that is the increased "competition" and "capacity" is equating to routes that are questionable to succeed with the tough slot times. But that shouldn't be the DOT's problem to fix.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 46):
What evidence do you have that any carrier besides HA was ever interested in a January start?

There's a difference between "interested" and "desired". Obviously every carrier that applied knew that the starting window would be sometime in October or later, depending on the runway completion. By the time the tentative awards were out, they knew the rules were January at the latest. Was that "desired"? Maybe not, but the airlines were still "interested", since HND starting in the winter was better to them than no HND at all.

And I wouldn't throw HA in the January group. They didn't desire a January start. That was too late!

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 48):

Then why hasn't UA or HA asked for the slot? See I kinda think you have a blind hate for Delta and don't really know what is going on.
1) IF HA/US/UA/VX/B6/WN/FL/YX/OO/EV/RP/S5 or any US carrier wanted AA or DL's slots and could strt on time all they have to do is ask the DOT. Now It's likely they wouldn't get the slot because AA/DL would just start the flight on Jan 31 and take the loses but they could at least ask (and no one did. I'm pretty sure i have been over this before)
2) The DOT dragged ass and took much much much longer than the other countrys to give out the HND slots.
3) again UA/HA don't want the slots because they haven't asked for them. No the DOT wont give away Delta's slots because your mad at them. Sorry don't work that way.
4) Yes it is the low season, TYO traffic peaks in the summer. Why do you think they are asking to hold off for 20-30 days and not months/going to 5 weekly/downgrading flights. Unless you have data that proves other wise....you don't.....you are wrong.
5)how is the DOT not working for the public? what should they do? take the slots, no one will take them, then DL and AA will get them back. HA doesn't want them....get that out of your head, UA doesn't want them....get that out of your head.

This is the AA thread. They and the DOT are getting the same criticism I gave Delta. I'll give praise or criticism where I believe it's due.

Points 1 and 3 are just not good reasons to give excuses. HA has been poking the DOT to remind them that they are ready to receive another slot. And for United, have they said anything since May that says they're not willing to fly their requested routes? It's unreasonable to think that somehow they would not try their hand at it just because, to my knowledge, they haven't been begging the DOT to hand the AA/DL slots over. I'm not getting facts out of my head, thank you very much.

Points 2 and 4 are interesting, but all they do is weakly run around the fact that the delayed routes are dubious. Take the seasonal point for example. It might be easier to give that excuse if the airlines had been treating NRT like a seasonal route all these years. But they just haven't, so low season for TYO must still be pretty good. And don't be shocked if this isn't the last time the DL or AA went to the DOT to beg for HND mercy. I'd expect it at this point. Those few weeks may turn into months with less capacity to boot. We'll see.

5) The DOT is not working hard for the public because they are working harder adjusting for airline profits than enforcing their rules as to when the public can enjoy flying to HND. Ask yourself the simple question as to how these delays benefit the general public. They just don't; it's as simple as that. So instead of always giving in to the airline's request, enforce your rules and hand out penalties if the airlines don't follow through. And yes, one possible penalty may be to take the slots away and hand them to another applying airline that will deliver. That's sounds fair.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 17:38:08 and read 7862 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 57):
Points 1 and 3 are just not good reasons to give excuses. HA has been poking the DOT to remind them that they are ready to receive another slot. And for United, have they said anything since May that says they're not willing to fly their requested routes? It's unreasonable to think that somehow they would not try their hand at it just because, to my knowledge, they haven't been begging the DOT to hand the AA/DL slots over. I'm not getting facts out of my head, thank you very much.

No, HA is not "poking" around. They haven't asked for any ones slots. period, end of story.
Again, you don't see Delta waiting around for CVG-PEK they asked for a few years ago....The DOT has always made you re-ask. They don't go "oh UA asked for XXX a year a go so here thats what you get". If UA wanted the HND slots they would ask for AAs and or DL.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 57):


5) The DOT is not working hard for the public because they are working harder adjusting for airline profits than enforcing their rules as to when the public can enjoy flying to HND. Ask yourself the simple question as to how these delays benefit the general public. They just don't; it's as simple as that. So instead of always giving in to the airline's request, enforce your rules and hand out penalties if the airlines don't follow through. And yes, one possible penalty may be to take the slots away and hand them to another applying airline that will deliver. That's sounds fair.

once again. WHO WILL FLY THE ROUTES IF THEY TAKE THEM FROM DELTA AND OR AMERICAN? No one wants them so what is the point of taking them?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: avionpg
Posted 2010-12-21 18:22:35 and read 7829 times.

Its official JFK-HND flight is postponed I was on it in February now I am on JFK-NRT

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-21 20:21:05 and read 7658 times.

It's outrageous that AA postponing the start of JFK-HND a little over a month before it was scheduled to start has elicited such a subdued response. Where is the uproar that greeted DL when they announced their rolling back of the start date of service to HND, months in advance?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 45):

Of course it matters. For starters, in these cases we have thousands of booked passengers affected by no fault of their own.

Oh please. Because being rebooked on a flight to NRT instead of HND is so adversely going to affect people's travel plans. How is this any different for some than an itinerary changing with equipment or flight times? It isn't as if people aren't going to be able to get to their final destinations, as both DL and AA serve the Tokyo area already.  

Jeremy

[Edited 2010-12-21 20:22:00]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: JFKPurser
Posted 2010-12-21 21:26:05 and read 7574 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 6):
Also, I've heard that JFK-NRT will go to 4w sometime in 2011 and those three Narita slots used elsewhere.

I posted this rumor here about 3 weeks ago. The other version of it is that JFK-NRT will be completely transferred to MIA and JFK will only have HND.

Here's another one for you -- although not really a rumor -- a follow-up on something that has been floating around the system a while now (I suppose this belongs in a separate thread)...

Today a coworker informed me he flew with a 777 FO recently who produced hard evidence (in the form of a printed internal company email) outlining AA's plans for acquisition of the 777-300ER. Mentioned 3-5 frames by early summer, then 15 more in 2012. The alleged document also indicated three possible interior configs and included schematic drawings of each. One of the configurations features a 70 seat J class cabin - all were 3 class configs, so F is not going anywhere. Something like 250 in Y class. Still no mention of where these frames are coming from -- but the assumption that they are JAL's undelivered frames is starting to make more and more sense.

It must have been in the works for a while now since lead time for interiors is substantial, unless AA plans to take them with whatever interiors were already going to be installed for whomever (JAL?).

Take that and run with it...

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-21 21:35:25 and read 7597 times.

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 61):
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 6):
Also, I've heard that JFK-NRT will go to 4w sometime in 2011 and those three Narita slots used elsewhere.

I posted this rumor here about 3 weeks ago. The other version of it is that JFK-NRT will be completely transferred to MIA and JFK will only have HND.

I heard that it will be either be 3w LAX-NRT or 3w MIA-NRT. Either way, the slots will find use.

Or, maybe AA would do 4w LAX-NRT and 3w MIA-NRT (or the reverse?) .

I just don't see AA launching MIA-NRT at daily, but I do think AA/JL will launch MIA-NRT by summer 2012.

[Edited 2010-12-21 21:41:03]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-21 21:46:31 and read 7547 times.

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 61):

Today a coworker informed me he flew with a 777 FO recently who produced hard evidence (in the form of a printed internal company email) outlining AA's plans for acquisition of the 777-300ER. Mentioned 3-5 frames by early summer, then 15 more in 2012.

15 77Ws in one year is simply not happening. Where on earth could they possibly deploy this much ULH equipment without absolutely decimating yields? I can think of just a few routes where a giant aircraft like the 77W would be warranted, certainly not enough for 18 frames.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-21 21:58:42 and read 7560 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 63):
Where on earth could they possibly deploy this much ULH equipment without absolutely decimating yields?

Here, I'll place 13.5 for you:

MIA-GRUx4
MIA-EZEx4
MIA-SCLx2
MIA-LHRx1
MIA-MADx1
DFW-NRTx1.5

Not saying its happening - I doubt it - but AA can easily find the routes to place 77Ws without "decimating" yields. Just like any large airline could.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: deltal1011man
Posted 2010-12-21 22:23:40 and read 7480 times.

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 61):
-- but the assumption that they are JAL's undelivered frames is starting to make more and more sense.

JL has 5 77Ws on order...

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 61):
Mentioned 3-5 frames by early summer, then 15 more in 2012.

no possible way.


the only way AA will get any 777s fairly quick is if they lease them from someone, but I don't believe anyone is sitting on 77Ws.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2010-12-21 22:51:28 and read 7399 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 64):
Here, I'll place 13.5 for you:

MIA-GRUx4
MIA-EZEx4
MIA-SCLx2
MIA-LHRx1
MIA-MADx1
DFW-NRTx1.5

It could not decimate yields on top of season but for some routes its just too much for off season. Not feasible to put 4 frames on the same routes. Better to allocate on other routes and do a mix of 77W + 772. 2 daily 77W means around 220 extra seats or an extra flight. Better to do something as reduce 1 JFK-LHR flight in favor of 2 77W.
Also, do not work well to go from 763 with 225 seats to a 325-340 seats 77W. The 772 could have a 2nd config with just 8F 37C and some additional Y rows.

MIA-GRU x2
MIA-EZE x2
MIA-LHR x1
JFK-LHR x2 + 2 daily 772
DFW-LHR x1
ORD-LHR x1
DFW-NRT
JFK-CDG 1 77W and less 1 flight
DFW-EZE x2

MIA-MAD is a daily 763, better to think about a 772 on MIA-MAD (1) and JFK-MAD (1).
MIA-SCL (x2) is a daily 763, with additional service on peak season. Same as MIA-GIG (x2), better to use a 772.
JFK-FRA could be finally upgraded to 772, JFK-BCN could have seasonal upgrade to 772.
BOS-LHR allowing more competition against DL could become 772 also.

The good side on the 77W potential acquisition is that it could allow AA to deploy 772's also on routes where the 763 is not enough.

Quoting crosswinds21 (Reply 10):
Yes, bookings on JFK-HND were horrendous. I have no idea why AA waited so long to ask for this delay

When the flights become available for bookings ?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-21 22:59:55 and read 7427 times.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 66):
MIA-MAD is a daily 763

12w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th. Plus 7w IB 346.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 66):
JFK-BCN could have seasonal upgrade to 772.

11w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th.


Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 66):
The good side on the 77W potential acquisition is that it could allow AA to deploy 772's also on routes where the 763 is not enough.

The 763 is almost always enough. It actually has a bigger Y cabin (195Y vs. 194Y). The 772 is used when more premium seats are needed.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 66):
BOS-LHR allowing more competition against DL could become 772 also.

BOS-LHR is already 6x daily this coming summer (3x AA/3x BA). It doesn't need more. All three AA flights are on the 75L.

[Edited 2010-12-21 23:02:58]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-21 23:08:56 and read 7386 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 64):
Here, I'll place 13.5 for you:

MIA-GRUx4
MIA-EZEx4
MIA-SCLx2
MIA-LHRx1
MIA-MADx1
DFW-NRTx1.5

Not saying its happening - I doubt it - but AA can easily find the routes to place 77Ws without "decimating" yields. Just like any large airline could.

I don't believe that a 77W would be justified 4x daily on routes like MIA-GRU or MIA-EZE. The 77W in many cases holds as many as 100 more passengers than 772s in many airline's configurations. Being conservative, say that AA 77Ws would seat 306 instead of the 235 the 772s hold, that would be a roughly 23% increase in the number of seats offered. On many routes that's simply too much, that's nearly the equivalent of another flight altogether. We all know how low load factors on many of AA's routes from MIA-GRU and other places in South America. Not to mention, where does AA deploy the 13.5 772s that are being replaced on the routes you mention? For an airline that is pushing back service starts and is deciding to not start supposed new routes from places like JFK, it simply isn't realistic to believe an already unprofitable airline is willing to add even more seats on routes, which would undoubtedly lower yields.

Jeremy

[Edited 2010-12-21 23:10:07]

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2010-12-21 23:14:59 and read 7364 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 67):
12w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th. Plus 7w IB 346.

Now with the partnership for sure the demand and potential for MAD will increase, but not only MIA. If AA wants a bigger plane, they could deploy the 772 but it seems they rather focus on more options to travellers. And there will be the BCN-MIA service.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 67):
11w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th.

Thanks, another reason to have a 772. BCN for sure would have good F sales on summer season.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 67):
The 763 is almost always enough. It actually has a bigger Y cabin (195Y vs. 194Y). The 772 is used when more premium seats are needed.

Another reason not to come from 763 to 77W using your comment. The 77W is expected to be premium. Many times 772 are not deployed to some markets because of the limited fleet. As we discussed before, F demand is limited, F supply should be limited. Y and C demand are stronger and more elastic than F.
Today i issued a First FF ticket for a trip 4 days ahead with 62,500 points on EZE-JFK and i could also select GRU-JFK. Why ? Too much offer on F but still, It asks me 60,000 for Y.
First demand is not elastic, specially on winter.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 67):
BOS-LHR is already 6x daily this coming summer (3x AA/3x BA). It doesn't need more. All three AA flights are on the 75L.

Well i don't know the dynamics of the market but it seems that they can try to reduce to 2x daily using a 772 + 763. With the 3 752, they can introduce 3 new flights to Europe to smaller markets.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-21 23:20:05 and read 7386 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 68):
I don't believe that a 77W would be justified 4x daily on routes like MIA-GRU or MIA-EZE.

It's not four times daily - its four frames, because of scheduling. 2x 77W on MIA-EZE/GRU is easily justified.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 69):
The 77W is expected to be premium.

Nobody knows what the 77W will be. AA doesn't even have plans for the 77W, its just rampant pilot and crew rumors. Hypothetically, if AA got the 77W, I actually don't think it will be that much more premium than the 772. I wouldn't be surprised if it had an even smaller F cabin than the 772. The reason why AA needs the 772, IMO, is because it needs planes with bigger coach cabins. It's biggest coach cabin is 194 seats on the 763. That's too small.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: legacyins
Posted 2010-12-21 23:43:34 and read 7338 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 62):
I heard that it will be either be 3w LAX-NRT or 3w MIA-NRT. Either way, the slots will find use.

Or, maybe AA would do 4w LAX-NRT and 3w MIA-NRT (or the reverse?) .

I just don't see AA launching MIA-NRT at daily, but I do think AA/JL will launch MIA-NRT by summer 2012.

With JL doing the SFO-HND route. Would it be possible for AA to think outside the box and start a SFO-NRT route?
I know they are focusing most of their routes around their hubs but capturing the HND/NRT traffic would be a benefit, IMO.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2010-12-22 00:43:07 and read 7296 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 68):
We all know how low load factors on many of AA's routes from MIA-GRU and other places in South America. Not to mention, where does AA deploy the 13.5 772s that are being replaced on the routes you mention? For an airline that is pushing back service starts and is deciding to not start supposed new routes from places like JFK, it simply isn't realistic to believe an already unprofitable airline is willing to add even more seats on routes, which would undoubtedly lower yields
Quoting SESGDL (Reply 68):
I don't believe that a 77W would be justified 4x daily on routes like MIA-GRU or MIA-EZE. The 77W in many cases holds as many as 100 more passengers than 772s in many airline's configurations. Being conservative, say that AA 77Ws would seat 306 instead of the 235 the 772s hold, that would be a roughly 23% increase in the number of seats offered. On many routes that's simply too much, that's nearly the equivalent of another flight altogether. We all know how low load factors on many of AA's routes from MIA-GRU and other places in South America. Not to mention, where does AA deploy the 13.5 772s that are being replaced on the routes you mention? For an airline that is pushing back service starts and is deciding to not start supposed new routes from places like JFK, it simply isn't realistic to believe an already unprofitable airline is willing to add even more seats on routes, which would undoubtedly lower yields.

Jeremy

Agree with you. AA focus in certain key cities and this also prevents them to take full advantage of current market conditions. A few markets demands 772 service, and many days, AA loses sales due to the lack of available seats while in others there's lots of availability.
The 772 could be deployed, with less F seats, in routes such as JFK-MAD, MIA-SCL, MIA-GIG, MIA-MAD, DFW-MAD, JFK-CDG (if not 77W), JFK-FRA as well as to be a better competitive product in order AA can enter new markets.
Then you have 763's that could be used on MIA-SSA-REC, BOS-LHR, MIA-BSB, JFK-MAN, as well as to further expand services to Europe or upgauge destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 70):
Nobody knows what the 77W will be. AA doesn't even have plans for the 77W, its just rampant pilot and crew rumors. Hypothetically, if AA got the 77W, I actually don't think it will be that much more premium than the 772. I wouldn't be surprised if it had an even smaller F cabin than the 772. The reason why AA needs the 772, IMO, is because it needs planes with bigger coach cabins. It's biggest coach cabin is 194 seats on the 763. That's too small.

The J cabin many times is a worst issue than having more Y. But in some parts i agree with you and i do believe the current 772 is too premium. A 8F 45J 221Y or even 8F 37J 239Y seems better.
I would say the 77W would not need to be much more premium. But 8F 45J seems enough with a bigger supply of Y.

I believe the 77W is a very good addition, anytime, to AA. As you mentioned, they need seats on restricted markets, and the 77W also can be used to decrease costs. I even imagine they will be able to use up to 20 B77W

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-22 00:48:45 and read 7339 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 68):
it simply isn't realistic to believe an already unprofitable airline is willing to add even more seats on routes, which would undoubtedly lower yields.

We get it. You hate AA.

But please, start using facts. You seem to ignore them often with AA.

AA is profitable. It under-performs compared to its peers, but in the most recent quarter, it posted a $143M profit.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2010-12-22 05:53:14 and read 7140 times.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 57):
And I wouldn't throw HA in the January group. They didn't desire a January start. That was too late!

Isn't starting when the market peaks ideal?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 57):
Was that "desired"? Maybe not, but the airlines were still "interested", since HND starting in the winter was better to them than no HND at all.

Sure, and starting in March is better than starting in January. If no one opposes, what's the problem? Look, if some carrier had said to Delta "we want to fly the route starting in January and will take your slot to do it," this would be an entirely different conversation. But that's not what happened.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-22 08:28:25 and read 7020 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 73):

We get it. You hate AA.

But please, start using facts. You seem to ignore them often with AA.

AA is profitable. It under-performs compared to its peers, but in the most recent quarter, it posted a $143M profit.

I do not hate AA by any means. And I also get it, you love AA, and therefore will give them the benefit of the doubt in any situation where their performance is less than stellar. And AA is not profitable, one quarter of profits out of four, which happens to also be the quarter where profits are most easy to produce doesn't signify a profitable airline. Those are facts.

I'd like to know how each of those routes you mentioned warrants a 77W yet AA has made no desire to purchase these aircraft, let alone evaluate having a fleet of less-premium 772s for increased capacity? You have a history of being arrogant about any subject regarding AA, I'm not the only one who's pointed it out. You are not an authority of any sort on AA, although you may believe that. I can disagree with you on subjects without it being a disregarding of facts. I simply don't believe that AA could profitably fly a large fleet of 77Ws on its current network. And if you believe that adding a ton of capacity to already crowded routes where load factors are already low wouldn't lower yields then we are living on a different planet altogether.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AABB777
Posted 2010-12-22 08:38:02 and read 6993 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 75):
I'd like to know how each of those routes you mentioned warrants a 77W yet AA has made no desire to purchase these aircraft, let alone evaluate having a fleet of less-premium 772s for increased capacity?

Are you privy to internal discussions AA may have had regarding fleet renewal and fleet expansion? AA may not have made any desire public re: 77Ws, but that doesn't mean it's not something discussed internally.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 75):
I simply don't believe that AA could profitably fly a large fleet of 77Ws on its current network.

I have to disagree. As others have stated, AA could use these birds on some of their business-heavy routes such as LHR, GRU, NRT, EZE, etc.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 73):
AA is profitable. It under-performs compared to its peers, but in the most recent quarter, it posted a $143M profit.

Improved yields and right-sizing the AA fleet and route network has allowed AA to be cash flow positive.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-22 08:49:28 and read 7026 times.

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 76):

Are you privy to internal discussions AA may have had regarding fleet renewal and fleet expansion? AA may not have made any desire public re: 77Ws, but that doesn't mean it's not something discussed internally.

No, but these rumors are no different than those about DL obtaining additional 744s. It isn't conceivable than an airline so conservative about opening routes and competition would choose to deploy assets to purchase ULH aircraft, aircraft that are larger than any aircraft AA's operated since the 1970s.

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 76):

I have to disagree. As others have stated, AA could use these birds on some of their business-heavy routes such as LHR, GRU, NRT, EZE, etc.

Yes they could, but they could also continue to operate the routes as is. Other airlines are pulling back capacity from forecasted numbers for 2011, yet AA's going to the opposite and add a bunch of huge 77Ws? I doubt it.

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 76):

Improved yields and right-sizing the AA fleet and route network has allowed AA to be cash flow positive.

Which is not what was said. AA is cash flow positive, but unprofitable on a revenue/profit basis.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2010-12-22 10:18:08 and read 6943 times.

Hey I know. Maybe AA wants to start SJC-HND flights to replace the dearly departed SJC-NRT flights 128/129.

Ha, that's funny. It's not even April Fools. Even the thought of AA doing anything at SJC other than slashing flights is humorous.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: commavia
Posted 2010-12-22 15:53:09 and read 6758 times.

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 61):
Here's another one for you -- although not really a rumor -- a follow-up on something that has been floating around the system a while now (I suppose this belongs in a separate thread)...

Today a coworker informed me he flew with a 777 FO recently who produced hard evidence (in the form of a printed internal company email) outlining AA's plans for acquisition of the 777-300ER. Mentioned 3-5 frames by early summer, then 15 more in 2012. The alleged document also indicated three possible interior configs and included schematic drawings of each. One of the configurations features a 70 seat J class cabin - all were 3 class configs, so F is not going anywhere. Something like 250 in Y class. Still no mention of where these frames are coming from -- but the assumption that they are JAL's undelivered frames is starting to make more and more sense.

If true, that seems fairly advanced. I have now heard this rumor from more than a dozen people across the system at various levels. Should be interesting to watch ...

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 75):
I'd like to know how each of those routes you mentioned warrants a 77W yet AA has made no desire to purchase these aircraft, let alone evaluate having a fleet of less-premium 772s for increased capacity?

I don't think that these 77Ws would by and large be used on existing routes. I agree that a few select markets - like DFW-NRT, MIA-EZE, and possibly DFW-GRU, etc. could justify the 77W on a regular basis.

But, generally speaking, I would submit that if - if - AA really were to get 77Ws, I suspect that they would be used more primarily for their long range, which could open up for AA some new markets that are not presently viable with existing equipment. I'm talking about markets like MIA-JNB, ORD-HKG (I know, I know, CX is launching in 2011), and maybe even DFW-HKG or ORD-BOM. Could a 77W do DFW-SYD?

I doubt we'd be talking about all that big of a fleet here - probably no more than 10-15 frames. And that would be just enough to handle a few new long-haul international markets, and up-gauging a few select high-density existing markets.

It is hard to imagine an airline as conservatively-run as AA trying some of those more "exotic" (by AA standards) markets, or operating such a small sub-fleet, and I myself have been dismissive of such suggestions in the past. But, I suppose one never knows.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 77):
It isn't conceivable than an airline so conservative about opening routes and competition would choose to deploy assets to purchase ULH aircraft, aircraft that are larger than any aircraft AA's operated since the 1970s.

Again - one never knows. Things could change ...  

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: GlobalCabotage
Posted 2010-12-22 18:14:27 and read 6622 times.

The HND flights from JFK are as bad as if not worse than the ORD-PEK flights, without connecting traffic.

ORD-PEK on AA is hanging on, hoping for better slots, but the loads are not as horrific as JFK-HND.

If HND had NRT times to/from the US, AA would easily move 1 DFW flight to HND and try to add an ORD-HND flight to compliment NRT.

This forum justs hAAtes AA AAnd ORD(cAAn't tie the AAnti AA into ORD as easily as other cornerstone markets).

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-22 18:21:28 and read 6642 times.

Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 80):
ORD-PEK on AA is hanging on, hoping for better slots, but the loads are not as horrific as JFK-HND.

I'm told it is actually doing surprisingly well, despite the poor timings. Much more than just "hanging on."

Of course, AA still is hoping that it will be confirmed for new slots starting April, but so far, so good considering the circumstances. The loads are not horrific, period.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-12-29 12:56:05 and read 6191 times.

No surprise the DOT granted the delay for AA.

In its actions, the DOT however did note that Hawaiian Airlines was prepared to operate a second HNL-HND service should any delays arise with American's startup.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: goldenargosy
Posted 2010-12-29 14:29:31 and read 6028 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 81):
I'm told it is actually doing surprisingly well, despite the poor timings. Much more than just "hanging on."

You're not the first to assume the JFK-HND flights are poorly timed. However, as a New Yorker, they are actually decent times. Departing JFK at 6:10pm allows me to get just over half a day in at the office. The return flight getting in at 5:15am allows me a full day back at the office. It may not work in other cities and with other cultures, but it just may work for NYC.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Carfield
Posted 2010-12-29 16:42:21 and read 5840 times.

Just want to give another example:

My cousin needs to go to Singapore for a wedding and wants to fly AA metal if possible! She really does not want to deal with Cathay Pacific and she can upgrade on the over-water segment using her AA miles.

The new flight came in just on time for her March departure... you can still work most of the day (working early that am), and then just go straight from her Manhattan office to catch the 6pm flight, and then her flight will arrive in the evening and she will connect to the redeye flight to Singapore on JAL. It makes quite a convenient schedule.

Haneda is really convenient and it may work out for some of the folks!

Carfield

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AAExecPlat
Posted 2010-12-30 07:23:10 and read 5468 times.

Some seem to think AA can't make use of 77Ws...biggest non-sense I've ever heard.

So UA and DL can fly 744s and all European airlines can fly 77Ws, 744s and A380 but AA can't make 10 77Ws work? That's laughable.

The 77W would be ideal for new long haul destinations, for relieving payload restrictions on current routes like ORD-DEL etc, and to add capacity (especially up-front) in markets that are very F/J heavy. AA just cut a JFK-LHR flight. Why couldn't they replace a frequency or two with 77Ws? Or how about DFW-FRA? That flight is always jam-packed and the ORD-FRA flight was removed in November...another flight that could justify a 77W.

Just because you hope AA doesn't get to catch up with its competitors doesn't mean they won't simply because of the malevolence and repetition on untruths by some on this board.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-30 08:45:44 and read 5344 times.

Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 85):
Some seem to think AA can't make use of 77Ws...biggest non-sense I've ever heard.

It's perfect logic. AA has expressed no desire for 77Ws before. Sure, they could put 77Ws on many routes, but at what cost? UA and DL have one thing in common that AA, CO, and US, do not: a large transpacific network.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AAExecPlat
Posted 2010-12-30 10:40:11 and read 5216 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 86):
It's perfect logic. AA has expressed no desire for 77Ws before. Sure, they could put 77Ws on many routes, but at what cost? UA and DL have one thing in common that AA, CO, and US, do not: a large transpacific network.

Explain to me how they would build a competing TPAC network without the proper equipment?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: jfk777
Posted 2010-12-30 10:56:22 and read 5173 times.

Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 87):
Explain to me how they would build a competing TPAC network without the proper equipment?

AA needs more 777 soon until the 787-9 arrives, 2015 ? The 777-300ER with 60 J class seats would be great for AA. AA has been more aggressive recently with flights from Chicago to Shanghai and Peking & LAX to Shanghai. After 9/11 when DL abandoned LAX and JFK to NRT, AA saw their value and qucikly grabbed those routes which today provide AA with Tokyo routes from the biggest markets on each coast.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AAExecPlat
Posted 2010-12-30 10:59:27 and read 5164 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 86):
It's perfect logic. AA has expressed no desire for 77Ws before.

So by that logic, no airline that's ever announced interest in an airplane prior to ordering has any business buying those airplanes, right? And how do you know AA has not expressed in interest in the 77W before? Because they didn't email you personally or hold a big press release?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2010-12-30 11:05:06 and read 5152 times.

Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 89):
So by that logic, no airline that's ever announced interest in an airplane prior to ordering has any business buying those airplanes, right? And how do you know AA has not expressed in interest in the 77W before? Because they didn't email you personally or hold a big press release?

It's far less simple than that. AA has never even had options for 77Ws, or specified "publicly" any interest in the aircraft. I can guarantee you that every airline has routes that they fill up consistently, with the aforementioned JFK-LHR, MIA-GRU, etc. coming up. So does that mean that DL and UA should buy A380s as well, since their routes to Asia with 747s run consistently full? Not at all. Yield management is a corner stone in AA's strategy and has been successful for a very long time, adding the 77W would place an extra strain on an already struggling airline, who'll only struggle more in the coming year with fuel prices once again on the rise. AA could first buy more 77Es or reconfigure some of them to have a greater Y/F ratio rather than ordering an expensive new aircraft.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: mogandoCI
Posted 2010-12-30 11:27:22 and read 5122 times.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 90):
Yield management is a corner stone in AA's strategy and has been successful for a very long time, adding the 77W would place an extra strain on an already struggling airline, who'll only struggle more in the coming year with fuel prices once again on the rise. AA could first buy more 77Es or reconfigure some of them to have a greater Y/F ratio rather than ordering an expensive new aircraft.

Yield management only works if you have yield to generate. AA is the only one among the Big 4 (UA, CO, DL, AA) to NOT have a true flat bed and no AVOD in International business class.

Are they still left behind in the 90's ?

AA is also the only large player on LHR-NYC that doesn't offer flat bed - someone give me a reason to fly them over VS/CO/DL except for AAdvantage status ?

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: LAXtoATL
Posted 2010-12-30 11:36:23 and read 5107 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):

AA is also the only large player on LHR-NYC that doesn't offer flat bed - someone give me a reason to fly them over VS/CO/DL except for AAdvantage status ?

First Class!

I am sure part of the reason they have been reluctant to offer flat beds in business class is to maintain a significant distinction between Business and First allowing them to generate greater yields in F class. Now that they have a TATL JV in place, I think their partners will be encouraging them to update there J class offering sooner than later.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2010-12-30 11:49:24 and read 5086 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
Yield management only works if you have yield to generate. AA is the only one among the Big 4 (UA, CO, DL, AA) to NOT have a true flat bed and no AVOD in International business class.

AA has 16 true flat beds in every 777 and it has AVOD in international business class, so you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

AA - until UA is done with 777 conversions - is also the only one among the Big 4 to have a flat bed in every single business class long-haul flight, on every single equipment type. But let's just ignore that fact.

It's funny people love to hate on AA's seats, but ignore Air France's similar product which was even installed on the A380, or the fact that Delta continues to offer recliner seats of all things on flights as long as JFK-ABV. The fact remains AA's product is competitive with the industry.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 92):
Now that they have a TATL JV in place, I think their partners will be encouraging them to update there J class offering sooner than later.

A new J product is in the works and supposedly BA is putting in significant input. Now that all the other airlines have unveiled their second generation J products, AA is ready to top them all with its third generation J product, which hopefully will be unveiled sometime in 2011. It was originally rumored to be unveiled this fall to start rolling out in the 763s in late '11, so maybe we might see it sooner than later.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: IrishAyes
Posted 2010-12-30 12:01:40 and read 5033 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
Yield management only works if you have yield to generate. AA is the only one among the Big 4 (UA, CO, DL, AA) to NOT have a true flat bed and no AVOD in International business class.

Yes, but AA's problems do not stem from revenue - they're largely associated with high costs. I can see the logic behind why taking on an additional fleet type would burden those costs even more. I highly doubt AA has dismissed the 77W option; I'm fairly certain that when making the decision of Y vs. N it came down to nuts and bolts.

In a wants vs. needs situation we all know AA has very little wiggle room.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: AAExecPlat
Posted 2010-12-30 12:29:55 and read 4986 times.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
Yield management only works if you have yield to generate. AA is the only one among the Big 4 (UA, CO, DL, AA) to NOT have a true flat bed and no AVOD in International business class.



Really?

1) AA actually is the highest yielding legacy of them all (at least according to the recent reports I saw).
2) As far as lie-flat, what would you call the suites in F on AA's 772s?
3) I believe the 772s do have AVOD.

Have you flown AA J TATL or TPAC? On a 772? HAve you flown J on any of the other carriers you cite?

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
Are they still left behind in the 90's ?

No. They only introduced a new J class BEFORE all the others came out with true lie-flat. And now they are developing the next gen J with BA's input. I suspect it'll be quite good.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 91):
AA is also the only large player on LHR-NYC that doesn't offer flat bed - someone give me a reason to fly them over VS/CO/DL except for AAdvantage status ?

Like LAXtoATL said...F Class.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 92):
First Class!

Thanks. Good to see someone posting who actually knows what they are talking about.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 92):
I am sure part of the reason they have been reluctant to offer flat beds in business class is to maintain a significant distinction between Business and First allowing them to generate greater yields in F class. Now that they have a TATL JV in place, I think their partners will be encouraging them to update there J class offering sooner than later.

Already in the works.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: MarcoPoloWorld
Posted 2010-12-30 20:47:45 and read 4821 times.

Quoting Carfield (Reply 84):
My cousin needs to go to Singapore for a wedding and wants to fly AA metal if possible! She really does not want to deal with Cathay Pacific

Why would she "not want to deal" with Cathay, a five-star airline?

And besides, AA is leaving most of the trans-pacific flying to CX anyways.  

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: NewYorkCityBoi
Posted 2011-01-14 01:07:00 and read 4369 times.

From AA Website, this JFK-HND route still will start on Feb 18th, not Mar 31st. Can someone clarify this? Which is the exact date they delay until? because I want to buy this flight in March.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: Pellegrine
Posted 2011-01-14 01:52:47 and read 4317 times.

No matter about the delay. Truth is January-March/April is the low period for USJapan travel. Seems like it anyway based on the ticket prices and bookings..... I myself would like to sample this flight on AA in Business, even though I stay with *A.

Quoting NewYorkCityBoi (Reply 97):
From AA Website, this JFK-HND route still will start on Feb 18th, not Mar 31st. Can someone clarify this? Which is the exact date they delay until? because I want to buy this flight in March.

I wonder if AA knows themselves, on page on their site says 2/18/11, another page says 3/1/11.      
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 93):
AA - until UA is done with 777 conversions - is also the only one among the Big 4 to have a flat bed in every single business class long-haul flight, on every single equipment type. But let's just ignore that fact.

It's funny people love to hate on AA's seats, but ignore Air France's similar product which was even installed on the A380, or the fact that Delta continues to offer recliner seats of all things on flights as long as JFK-ABV. The fact remains AA's product is competitive with the industry.

AA's seats aren't 'flat-bed' in J, they are 'lie-flat'...big difference. They're sloped and short on legroom for tall people. Also, AF's product was out way, way before AA's "Next-Gen Business Class". No, AF hasn't been renowned in years for their quality and forwardness of seating. Not really a hater here, I don't care, I don't usually fly them.

Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 95):
No. They only introduced a new J class BEFORE all the others came out with true lie-flat. And now they are developing the next gen J with BA's input. I suspect it'll be quite good.

BA's input would be very welcome in this matter since they have an excellent seat IMO. AA's next-gen J class was a very disappointing introduction for quite a few FFs, not just my opinion...

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: laca773
Posted 2011-01-14 04:03:11 and read 4229 times.

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 76):
AA could use these birds on some of their business-heavy routes such as LHR, GRU, NRT, EZE, etc.
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 88):

AA needs more 777 soon until the 787-9 arrives, 2015 ? The 777-300ER with 60 J class seats would be great for AA. AA has been more aggressive recently with flights from Chicago to Shanghai and Peking & LAX to Shanghai. After 9/11 when DL abandoned LAX and JFK to NRT, AA saw their value and qucikly grabbed those routes which today provide AA with Tokyo routes from the biggest markets on each coast.

US

LAX-LHR/NRT would be good routes for the 77W.

What are AA's top ten highest yielding F/J international routes?

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 92):

I am sure part of the reason they have been reluctant to offer flat beds in business class is to maintain a significant distinction between Business and First allowing them to generate greater yields in F class. Now that they have a TATL JV in place, I think their partners will be encouraging them to update there J class offering sooner than later.

That's only on the 772s and the only real distinction. Has AA changed their catering in F & J so they are distinctively different or are they basically the same with the exception of the starter and one less main in J? Amenity kids were identical as well but I heard those were being re-done.

It's exciting BA is helping AA with a new re-vamped J cabin. They will offer great advice to them on all aspects of what's offered and how to make, clear and marked differences between F & J as BA's P & J are completely different products across the board.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: jfk777
Posted 2011-01-14 05:09:28 and read 4158 times.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 99):
What are AA's top ten highest yielding F/J international routes?

AA most profitable route with 2 777 daily is Miami to Buenos Aires where they sell mny F/J seats. JFK & DFW to EZE do very well too.

Topic: RE: AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup
Username: laca773
Posted 2011-01-14 08:25:44 and read 4021 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 100):

AA most profitable route with 2 777 daily is Miami to Buenos Aires where they sell mny F/J seats. JFK & DFW to EZE do very well too.

Thanks, jfk777, thanks for the information. I have wondered for a long time if one of the top three was a route to deep South America and sure enough, MIA-EZE. I wonder what else is on the top 10 list? DFW-NRT, LAX-NRT?


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/