Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5684406/

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Moderators
Posted 2013-02-08 01:30:25 and read 28012 times.

Dear All,

in order to consolidate the AA/US merger threads (and after input from users, which we highly appreciate) the moderators decided to start separate threads each discussing one aspect of the AA/US merger and its impact to both the industry and the two airlines involved.

Please continue discussing this hot news in their individual official threads:

AA/US Merger Impact: Fleet
AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (THIS THREAD ONLY)
AA/US Merger Impact: Employees
AA/US Merger Impact: HQ
AA/US Merger Impact: Livery
AA/US Merger Impact: Unions
AA/US Merger Impact: Routes
AA/US Merger Impact: Inflight Service

Enjoy & have a nice weekend!

The Airliners.net Moderator crew

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: apjung
Posted 2013-02-08 01:38:54 and read 28057 times.

Well, since PHX is a US hub that is about to be absorbed into AA, I hope AA would have the foresight to add the PHX-MSY route that HP abruptly canceled just before Hurricane Katrina made landfall and never resumed when they merged with US.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: southwest737500
Posted 2013-02-08 03:25:57 and read 27733 times.

I'm pretty sure BA will come back to CLT. That will be nice to see.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-08 03:38:38 and read 27713 times.

The Wall Street Journal has an article discussing AA/US's post merger hub network. They surmise that, unlike DL and UA who used their mergers to trim capacity, AA/US would keep their network intact. And that the purpose of the merger is to make AA bigger, again, and not to remove capacity. I tend to agree with their analysis.

To read the article type in "AMR stands to gain vast network" to Google news.

In the other merger discussion threads everyone keeps speculating the three US hubs, CLT, PHL and especially PHX would be slashed. I disagree, I think CLT will perhaps be reduced a little with the removal of some of the smaller regional flights but overall will continue to grow to the Caribbean and Latin America. PHL I took see getting a trim to some smaller communities but overall growing by adding routes like AUS, SAT and perhaps NRT long term on AA or JAL via a 787. And PHX keeps getting compared to CVG, STL, PIT, MEM etc.. It's not, PHX is a booming sunbelt city. It doesn't have the biggest business community, but it has tons of O&D. PHX might get realigned, but it's not going the way of PIT, CVG or STL. The local market is just too big, and unlike the rust belt hubs PHX is growing.

As for AA hubs, I don't see anything changing in ORD. I see MIA continue to grow and as for JFK/LGA, there's not going to be any to really spark any renewed growth. US doesn't have that large of a slot portfolio anymore, what I see is US A330s replacing AA 763s on routes from JFK.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 03:47:14 and read 27629 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 3):
And PHX keeps getting compared to CVG, STL, PIT, MEM etc.. It's not, PHX is a booming sunbelt city.

What your link says:

Quote:
There also are questions over whether the combined carrier could support eight hubs and, if not, which U.S. city might be on the chopping block. In most recent airline mergers, at least one hub has suffered deep cuts to its service, such as Cincinnati following the 2008 merger of Delta and Northwest Airlines.

In the expected American tie-up, analysts point to Phoenix as the likely target, partly because it is sandwiched between American hubs Los Angeles and Dallas.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 04:29:13 and read 27488 times.

Since we're treating this as if it's already happened, my predictions on the hubs ...

I suspect the higher costs (relative to either independent, post-bankruptcy AA or US) will lead to inevitable optimization and capacity rationalization in the domestic network. For the markets below specifically the (#, #) represents my approximate prediction for the overall net % change in departures followed by overall net % change in seats over a period of 2-3 years following the merger (all estimates pro forma to each carrier’s independent operations today):

CLT (-5, -10): reduction in both departures and capacity simply driven by higher costs of combined entity; CLT remains the prime north-south connecting hub for the eastern U.S., and the key gateway into the southeastern U.S.; loses some longhaul flying to MIA but otherwise retains key international linkages

DFW (+2, +3): relatively minor overall growth driven primarily by picking up some connections previously handled by PHX, and some current PHX-exclusive US (and former AA) destinations such as LGB and OAK; offset by somewhat reduced capacity to the southeastern U.S. where connections are shifted over CLT and DFW sees markets like SAV, CHS, CAE, GSO, etc. lose some frequency in favor of larger, 2-class RJs

LAX (unchanged, +1): little change as a result of the merger, with a potential for some targeted domestic additions (e.g., PIT) to take advantage of combined strength, increased capacity on hub routes (e.g. 767 on 1 LAX-PHL rotation), and rationalization on overlapping routes (e.g., ending current Eagle schedule LAX-PHX)

MIA (+2, +2): continual growth, with MIA picking up some international connections from CLT (Caribbean, South America, CLT-FCO shifting to MIA-MXP); MIA continues to add new domestic and international markets (e.g., AUS, MCI, SAN, MKE)

NYC (JFK/LGA) (unchanged, +2): with domestic and some international connections shifted to PHL, NYC (both JFK and LGA) operations freed to focus on utilizing slots more effectively for local O&D, taking advantage of stronger combined AA presence to expand AA NYC links to major domestic (MCI, IND, IAH, MSY, CVG, DEN 1-3x daily each) and international (FRA, TLV 1x daily each) O&D markets

ORD (+7, -5): increase in departures but decrease in seats driven by shifting more mainline flying to large regional jets; in addition, ORD gains back connectivity to markets in northeastern U.S. where it had either shrunk or lost AA connections entirely in the last decade (BDL, PVD, ROC, BUF, ALB, etc.) and in select western markets (PDX, possibly SMF) where it is a more convenient connecting point than PHX for some city-pairs/itineraries

PHL (-5, -3): relatively small reduction in capacity and seats, but nothing major as PHL becomes the singular AA hub for handling connections to/from the northeastern U.S., as well as AA’s primary gateway to continental Europe

PHX (-40, -50): gradual but substantial reduction, with PHX shifted to focus on the large PHX outbound/inbound O&D market; PHX retains connections to 40-50 major U.S. markets (including HNL and probably OGG) plus YYC and YVR in Canada and the major Mexican beach markets, but with a substantial amount of the intra-west flying either eliminated or shifted to smaller (likely non-mainline) aircraft; of the 50% of capacity eliminated, approximately 35% is simply exited altogether, with 10% shifted over DFW and 5% over ORD and/or other hubs

WAS (DCA) (-2, -1): slight reduction in both departures and seats driven largely by forced slot divestitures at DCA (focused primarily on overlapping RDU/BNA routes), but offset by expanded presence in key hub markets (near-hourly shuttle to ORD, increased capacity to DFW, etc.)

Other Markets/Point-to-Point: combined strength of AA supports (re)introduction of nonstop flying in select O&D markets (e.g., BOS-RDU, BOB-SFO, etc.)

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-02-08 04:55:42 and read 27370 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):

PHL (-5, -3): relatively small reduction in capacity and seats, but nothing major as PHL becomes the singular AA hub for handling connections to/from the northeastern U.S., as well as AA’s primary gateway to continental Europe

Do you really think AA is going to give up JFK in favor of PHL, as the primary gateway to Europe? I don't think so. PHL's problems are well known and documented and I'm certain that PHL will be the biggest loser in this deal. JFK will grow as a TATL hub, CLT will grow as a North-South hub, MIA will grow as a Caribbean/Americas hub and PHL will slowly shrink into a "focus city", over time.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-08 05:02:59 and read 27313 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
JFK will grow as a TATL hub

With what slots?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 05:14:35 and read 27244 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
Do you really think AA is going to give up JFK in favor of PHL, as the primary gateway to Europe?

It's not a matter of "giving up" one in favor of the other. It's the sheer reality of slots and competition. PHL has no slots, and virtually no competition. JFK has onerous slot constraints, and tons of competition. In that environment, and given that US already has a bigger transatlantic operation out of PHL than AA does out of JFK, why would they cut one in favor of the other? Both serve a viable purpose, and can nicely compliment each other.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
PHL's problems are well known and documented

True, although the "problems" one could ascribe to PHL could essentially be said of virtually every hub in the northeast.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
I'm certain that PHL will be the biggest loser in this deal.

I'm near certain you're wrong. If this merger happens, the biggest loser - from a hub standpoint - is almost certain to be PHX. Nearly everyone seems to be in agreement on that.

I still don't understand why people think PHL is due for massive cuts. It's a huge hub, serving a huge market, with little meaningful competition, and in a relatively good location. JFK would also be a great asset for a combined airline - great terminal, huge local market, (relatively) large holding of slots, etc. But JFK cannot ever be a hub for AA the way PHL is for US and may soon be for AA. It's simply not possible.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: seatback
Posted 2013-02-08 05:17:28 and read 27230 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
PHL becomes the singular AA hub for handling connections to/from the northeastern U.S., as well as AA’s primary gateway to continental Europe



JFK relies on O&D, whereas PHL would serve as the primary "connecting" hub to Europe.

I wouldn't expect AA to diminish the NYC market more than it already has.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 05:27:37 and read 27158 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):

If AA could have all the slots and gates they wanted at JFK, I might agree. But they can't really grow at JFK at all.

Shutting down PHL is a the equivalent of telling DL and UA, "Hey guys, we're not interested in making any money in the Northeast outside of NYC". Simply put, JFK cannot serve the same purpose PHL can. JFK cannot be the Northeast connector that PHL is. Not to mention, PHL itself is a very large market. Why give that up?

PHL probably will lose secondary destinations in Europe like ATH, GLA, and LIS. But I see PHL-NRT becoming a reality since that market can support it with connections on both ends.

Also disagree about CLT. It will be a key hub for the combined airline for sure, but it isn't going to grow.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-02-08 06:05:21 and read 26948 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
It's not a matter of "giving up" one in favor of the other. It's the sheer reality of slots and competition. PHL has no slots, and virtually no competition.

PHL has no competition because no one wants to go to PHL  Sorry that's the reality. If you think people in NYC are going to chose AA and fly NYC-PHL-Europe you are out of your mind. The reality is that NYC is the single biggest market to/from Europe and to leave NYC in favor of PHL is ludicrous. JFK's slot restrictions are artificial. No one has ever been denied access to JFK. A truely slot restricted airport wouldn't be able to close a runway for 4 months for repaving. B6 hasn't had any problems growing at JFK. They're even expanding their terminal. And So is DL. So the idea that AA can't grow at JFK doesn't pass the sniff test.

Quoting seatback (Reply 9):
JFK relies on O&D, whereas PHL would serve as the primary "connecting" hub to Europe.

Fair enough but why not do that thru CLT which is already US's biggest hub and it's a better airport than PHL in every category? To/From Europe, the northeast can connect via JFK while the southeast can connect via CLT. PHL is the third wheel in my opinion   For domestic connections, I can see PHL's usefulness because CLT is too far south but there's also DCA. So I really don't see PHL growing at all.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: HPRamper
Posted 2013-02-08 06:19:14 and read 26848 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
Sorry that's the reality. If you think people in NYC are going to chose AA and fly NYC-PHL-Europe you are out of your mind. The reality is that NYC is the single biggest market to/from Europe and to leave NYC in favor of PHL is ludicrous.

Nobody is suggesting that.

AA will retain NYC-Europe service. It will also retain PHL-Europe service for the majority of the country who will not be connecting at JFK.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 06:25:28 and read 26791 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
Sorry that's the reality.

Reality according to who?

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
If you think people in NYC are going to chose AA and fly NYC-PHL-Europe you are out of your mind. The reality is that NYC is the single biggest market to/from Europe and to leave NYC in favor of PHL is ludicrous.

Nobody said that. I'm not suggesting AA just leave NYC and route everything through PHL. I'm suggesting AA keep their already-robust JFK-Europe schedule - and actually expand it somewhat - alongside the already-robust PHL-Europe schedule. I continue to be fascinated that many - apparently including you - seem to think the two cannot coexist.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
JFK's slot restrictions are artificial. No one has ever been denied access to JFK.

  

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
So the idea that AA can't grow at JFK doesn't pass the sniff test.

Well I don't know what it is you're "sniffing."

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 12):
Nobody is suggesting that.

AA will retain NYC-Europe service. It will also retain PHL-Europe service for the majority of the country who will not be connecting at JFK.

  

Thank you.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 06:27:08 and read 26780 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
PHL has no competition because no one wants to go to PHL  Sorry that's the reality. If you think people in NYC are going to chose AA and fly NYC-PHL-Europe you are out of your mind. The reality is that NYC is the single biggest market to/from Europe and to leave NYC in favor of PHL is ludicrous. JFK's slot restrictions are artificial. No one has ever been denied access to JFK. A truely slot restricted airport wouldn't be able to close a runway for 4 months for repaving. B6 hasn't had any problems growing at JFK. They're even expanding their terminal. And So is DL. So the idea that AA can't grow at JFK doesn't pass the sniff test.

And even though PHL has no slots (although it probably should since it's always had delay issues), it's still a very, very congested airport with little room to grow. Can that airport handle more traffic with it's horrible runway configuration? Not really. And didn't US say they'd de-hub PHL if that new runway proposal goes through? Surprised nobody has mentioned that.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 06:30:34 and read 26725 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
And even though PHL has no slots (although it probably should since it's always had delay issues), it's still a very, very congested airport with little room to grow.

Welcome to doing business as an airline in the northeast U.S. Just about every northeast airport is congested, crowded, overtaxed, run down, etc. PHL is hardly unique.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
Can that airport handle more traffic with it's horrible runway configuration? Not really.

I don't think "more traffic" is really realistic. I think the PHL hub will shrink somewhat, both in terms of flights and capacity.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
And didn't US say they'd de-hub PHL if that new runway proposal goes through?

There's plenty of money involved. I suspect they'll work something out.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-02-08 06:34:11 and read 26686 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
PHX (-40, -50): gradual but substantial reduction,

You realize you are implying that AA will drop their west coast market share significantly? While DFW and ORD could be up some of that traffic, cutting PHX that much means a retreat Eastward that would cost AA revenue. It might be what has to happen... But I would not suspect that level of cuts. Not unless DFW cuts their costs more than I anticipate.

Lightsaber

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 06:35:32 and read 26691 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
And even though PHL has no slots (although it probably should since it's always had delay issues), it's still a very, very congested airport with little room to grow. Can that airport handle more traffic with it's horrible runway configuration? Not really. And didn't US say they'd de-hub PHL if that new runway proposal goes through? Surprised nobody has mentioned that.

It's a combination of a few things
-Poor terminal design with tight alley ways between terminals
-Average to Poor airport design that impedes aircraft movement
-Tight airspace stuck in between NYC and WAS

US is just throwing around some weight to negotiate the deal and I imagine the combined carrier will do the same. It is in the best interest of both US (AA) and PHL to improve (expand) the airport. That is why US and PHL just came to a short term agreement for improvements.

[Edited 2013-02-08 06:37:32]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-02-08 06:35:59 and read 26683 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):

Pretty good overall. Not sure that NYC loses anything though.

Will AA retain props? Props are very important to CLT and to a lesser degree PHL.

This tie up benefits ORD the most. Larger RJs, 319s and E90s for ORD are needed badly. Helps AA in the east as well.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2013-02-08 06:41:35 and read 26606 times.

How big is AA at DCA? That will certainly affect how many slots AA/US has to give up at DCA.

BOB-SFO-you mean BOS-SFO, right? A flight to Bora Bora woukd be awesome... 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 06:44:49 and read 26560 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 17):
It's a combination of a few things
-Poor terminal design with tight alley ways between terminals
-Average to Poor airport design that impedes aircraft movement

The main parallel runways are just too close together and they can’t be used independently. Even the proposed new runway will be too close to allow for simultaneous independent operations. Won’t increase capacity all that much, as US Air said. Not even with NextGen. Very big cost considering limited to no operational improvement.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 17):
-Tight airspace stuck in between NYC and WAS

Even with the tight airspace, PHL always had more operations than any of the NYC or DC airports. Just too many scheduled flights there.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-02-08 06:47:25 and read 26546 times.

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 2):

I'm pretty sure BA will come back to CLT. That will be nice to see.

No, they will be less likely to come back to CLT because of the relationship that AA has with BA outside of their alliance tie up. Now, in the future I think that may be say in 10 years if AA survives that long, you may see AA flying directly to LHR, but I doubt that.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 06:58:09 and read 26438 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 20):
Even with the tight airspace, PHL always had more operations than any of the NYC or DC airports. Just too many scheduled flights there.

I don't have specific numbers so anyone feel free to provide them but I suspect EWR has more movements than PHL and I suspect NYC (EWR/JFK/LGA/TEB) has almost triple the number of movements as PHL.

I suspect PHL does have more than the WAS airports individually but once again BWI/DCA/IAD probably have over double the number of movements than PHL. Don't forget about Dover AFB, Andrews AFB, Mcquire AFB, ACY, IST, etc.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jfidler
Posted 2013-02-08 06:58:29 and read 26447 times.

Didn't CLT recently announce plans for a large expansion of the airport? I wonder if this will affect their plans.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 07:04:56 and read 26708 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):
Do you really think AA is going to give up JFK in favor of PHL, as the primary gateway to Europe? I don't think so. PHL's problems are well known and documented and I'm certain that PHL will be the biggest loser in this deal. JFK will grow as a TATL hub, CLT will grow as a North-South hub, MIA will grow as a Caribbean/Americas hub and PHL will slowly shrink into a "focus city", over time.

I totally agree. I think PHL will be one of the most affected hubs. It is extremely close to NYC and Philadelphia is not an economic powerhouse or booming city in the States today... with little to absolutely no appeal for Europeans (which are most if not all of its long-haul routes). Also, for congestion and weather, PHL is not even a good airport to be as alternative to JFK, and even its layout can be annoying (for instance the connection for the international side to I think it is T5). If AA+US wants to keep an alternative airport to the West Coast, Midwest, they could keep CLT, which has no congestion or weather issues, and can probably compete more with the likes of ATL in terms of geography (of course I am not saying CLT is or is going to be ATL, but they can target some same secondary markets). For me PHL was an oddity that US Airways used to have access to the Northeast, and conveniently located between New York and Washington, keeping also a monopoly in Philadelphia.

I have even flown myself a couple of times Europe-PHL-LGA (since it was much cheaper than direct Europe-NYC) and every other person in the PHL-LGA seemed to be connecting from Europe (including half of my flight). Of course it doesn't mean PHL can retain some major hubs like LHR (like BA flies to BWI in addition to IAD).

Just look at who flies in addition to US to Europe: BA to LHR and LH to FRA... that is all.



[Edited 2013-02-08 07:08:43]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 07:10:12 and read 27079 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 23):
I don't have specific numbers so anyone feel free to provide them but I suspect EWR has more movements than PHL and I suspect NYC (EWR/JFK/LGA/TEB) has almost triple the number of movements as PHL.

Individually, PHL has more movements than any airport in the Northeast. This has been the case for many years. Even before EWR got slotted, PHL still had more movements. I don’t know the exact stats, but PHL handled something like 450K movements last year and EWR around 430K. PHL's operational traffic has been in decline for a few years and I remember when it handled over 500K in movements per year. You can find them on Airports.org, but I can’t check it out from my office.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 07:17:07 and read 27136 times.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 25):
Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):

What do you realistically propose the combined airline do in the Northeast? Keep in mind, as most of us learned from 2nd grade geography, North Carolina is not in the Northeast.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bizjet
Posted 2013-02-08 07:19:06 and read 27496 times.

I think the Philadelphia naysayers are forgetting that the metro area is the 6th largest in the country. Plenty of traffic that wants to move. I think its hub status is very safe.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 07:21:23 and read 27419 times.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
You realize you are implying that AA will drop their west coast market share significantly?

Not sure how "significantly" net-net, but yes. The west is generally the lowest-yielding part of the U.S. AA - at a post-merged cost level - will not be able to make money in many of the PHX-west markets.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
cutting PHX that much means a retreat Eastward that would cost AA revenue.

Wouldn't really mean a "retreat Eastward" at all. PHX today serves very little intra-west connections - it's mostly used for connections between the west and somewhere else. And for the vast majority of traffic PHX now handles, DFW and/or ORD can handle those some connections just as well, and in some cases even better.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 18):
Not sure that NYC loses anything though.

I see some shifting between the two, but net-net, I agree, NYC would not lose much if anything at all.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 18):
Will AA retain props? Props are very important to CLT and to a lesser degree PHL.

Yes. Props make lots of sense for many of the markets served out of CLT/PHL, and out of DFW/ORD/MIA. I think AMR post-merger would have the potential to do with props just what AA did with the 737/A320 - use the lure of a huge volume buy to get a great deal from either Bombardier or ATR.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 18):
This tie up benefits ORD the most. Larger RJs, 319s and E90s for ORD are needed badly.

Absolutely. ORD would stand to gain a lot, strategically, in a merger.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 21):
No, they will be less likely to come back to CLT because of the relationship that AA has with BA outside of their alliance tie up. Now, in the future I think that may be say in 10 years if AA survives that long, you may see AA flying directly to LHR, but I doubt that.

Huh? US was already planning on flying CLT-LHR this summer. AA, with a merger, would be flying it instantly. And I could definitely see BA coming back to CLT with a second daily CLT-LHR flight. The halo effect of the alliance would drive lots of traffic on CLT-LHR, which is part of why CLT-FRA would likely get cut back (my guess is to 1x daily 763).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 07:23:07 and read 27398 times.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 12):
AA will retain NYC-Europe service. It will also retain PHL-Europe service for the majority of the country who will not be connecting at JFK.
Quoting commavia (Reply 13):
Nobody said that. I'm not suggesting AA just leave NYC and route everything through PHL. I'm suggesting AA keep their already-robust JFK-Europe schedule - and actually expand it somewhat - alongside the already-robust PHL-Europe schedule. I continue to be fascinated that many - apparently including you - seem to think the two cannot coexist.

So... let me see if I understand you...

The combined AA/US will have two TATL hubs within 150 miles of each other, and they will STILL operate as TATL hubs?

JFK TATL ops will be enough just based on the local O&D, while PHL will need to rely on connecting passengers from a relatively small area of the US to justify a robust TATL ops.

Sorry but I just don't see it that way...

Anything south or west of PHL, passengers will connect via DFW or MIA to go to Europe or S. America. Anything north/west of PHL will connect via ORD or JFK. ORD, MIA, JFK and DFW have enough local O&D traffic to justify a robust international hub, and AA/US will add more passengers to those hubs... Where PHL will mostly rely on connecting traffic, the cost of maintaining two TATL/International hubs within that close proximity is not cost effective.

I can see PHL maintaining some TATL routes to cities such as LHR and CDG, and maybe 757/788 service to cities such as MAD, other than that, PHL's TATL ops will be absorbed by JFK or MIA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-02-08 07:26:42 and read 27404 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 13):
Reality according to who?

According to the Europe-PHL O&D numbers and the fact that US has the cheapest TATL fares around. The market is relatively small and low yield.

Quoting commavia (Reply 13):
Nobody said that. I'm not suggesting AA just leave NYC and route everything through PHL. I'm suggesting AA keep their already-robust JFK-Europe schedule - and actually expand it somewhat - alongside the already-robust PHL-Europe schedule. I continue to be fascinated that many - apparently including you - seem to think the two cannot coexist.

JFK isn't any worse than PHL as far as congestion. How can you suggest that JFK can't grow but PHL can?
More importantly, PHL and NYC airspace overlap and both are affected equally in bad weather because they are so close together. Operating your 2 TATL hubs less than 100miles apart in the most congested air space region of the country just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
And even though PHL has no slots (although it probably should since it's always had delay issues), it's still a very, very congested airport with little room to grow. Can that airport handle more traffic with it's horrible runway configuration? Not really. And didn't US say they'd de-hub PHL if that new runway proposal goes through? Surprised nobody has mentioned that.

  
Thank you.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 07:32:29 and read 27299 times.

Quoting bizjet (Reply 28):
I think the Philadelphia naysayers are forgetting that the metro area is the 6th largest in the country. Plenty of traffic that wants to move. I think its hub status is very safe.

I know some Philly yaysayer would come with that. PHL is the 7th in terms of GDP in 2010 according to the US Department of Commerce (I wouldn't be surprised it is now the 8th or 9th since San Francisco and Boston were very near behind).

The issue with Philadelphia is that is has no interest for anyone in Europe other than the business traffic they might have... you might forget that places like Miami, New York, San Francisco... or even Boston or Los Angeles have a huge amount of leisure traffic from Europe, in addition to businesses.

Another issue is that PHL is very close to New York and Washington metro areas, so passengers in their metro area easily go to EWR or IAD by train/car... that will hardly happen in other comparable metro areas like BOS, SFO or MIA (even if San Francisco or Miami have SJC, OAK or FLL... they don't have long-haul services to Europe).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: ckfred
Posted 2013-02-08 07:36:32 and read 27240 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 3):
As for AA hubs, I don't see anything changing in ORD.
Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
ORD (+7, -5): increase in departures but decrease in seats driven by shifting more mainline flying to large regional jets; in addition, ORD gains back connectivity to markets in northeastern U.S. where it had either shrunk or lost AA connections entirely in the last decade (BDL, PVD, ROC, BUF, ALB, etc.) and in select western markets (PDX, possibly SMF) where it is a more convenient connecting point than PHX for some city-pairs/itineraries

Apparently, there has been talk from US directed towards the employees at the ORD hub. Parker feels that management has downsized ORD too much, considering the amount of O&D traffic in the Chicago metro area, as well as the amount of traffic in and out of the upper Midwest.

AA has simply let too much business in Chicago and the upper Midwest slip to UA at ORD, WN at MDW, and to a lesser extent, DL at MSP and DTW.

Chicago is still a very, very large destination for business travelers. Chicago is trying to regain convention business that has been lost to Las Vegas and Orlando.

Further, it seems to me that AA would be shifting some of the RJ flying from the Embrear 135/140/145 and CRJ 700 to either larger Embrears and/or A319s. People have been saying for years that AA shot itself in the foot at ORD, when it returned the 717s and retired the F100s. Rather than fly half empty MD-80s and 738s, AA was running the RJs, often against UA and WN mainline aircraft. That just drove more people away from AA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: rwy04lga
Posted 2013-02-08 07:37:30 and read 27188 times.

What will happen at LGA? Who will go where? Who will trade gates with who?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 07:38:41 and read 27228 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 30):
Anything south or west of PHL, passengers will connect via DFW or MIA to go to Europe or S. America. Anything north/west of PHL will connect via ORD or JFK. ORD, MIA, JFK and DFW have enough local O&D traffic to justify a robust international hub, and AA/US will add more passengers to those hubs... Where PHL will mostly rely on connecting traffic, the cost of maintaining two TATL/International hubs within that close proximity is not cost effective.

I can see PHL maintaining some TATL routes to cities such as LHR and CDG, and maybe 757/788 service to cities such as MAD, other than that, PHL's TATL ops will be absorbed by JFK or MIA.

First the JFK AA domestic network is a shell of the PHL US domestic network and I think the consensus is AA/US do not have the slots to build JFK into a "megahub". They won't have the domestic network to use JFK as a European connection point.

Second UA makes IAD and EWR work and they are what ~225 miles away from each other. JFK and PHL will serve two different purposes. JFK focusing on the O&D markets, while PHL will focus on key markets and will serve as a connecting hub.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 26):
Individually, PHL has more movements than any airport in the Northeast. This has been the case for many years. Even before EWR got slotted, PHL still had more movements. I don’t know the exact stats, but PHL handled something like 450K movements last year and EWR around 430K. PHL's operational traffic has been in decline for a few years and I remember when it handled over 500K in movements per year. You can find them on Airports.org, but I can’t check it out from my office.

Ok, I was wrong

2010
EWR: 403K movements
PHL: 460K movements
JFK: 399K movements

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 07:40:26 and read 27233 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 30):
So... let me see if I understand you...

The combined AA/US will have two TATL hubs within 150 miles of each other, and they will STILL operate as TATL hubs?

JFK TATL ops will be enough just based on the local O&D, while PHL will need to rely on connecting passengers from a relatively small area of the US to justify a robust TATL ops.

No. You don't understand me.

The two transatlantic operations - at JFK and PHL - already coexist now, just for two different airlines. In a merger, I could see some shifting of capacity, with each market gaining or losing a limited number of flights. I don't think that's inconceivable. Beyond that, I did not say the JFK operation would be "just based on the local O&D." JFK would still handle connections, it just wouldn't be optimize for them quite as much as now, and as PHL would be.

What I'm suggesting is hardly unprecedented. This is to some extent what UA has done with EWR/IAD.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 31):
How can you suggest that JFK can't grow but PHL can?

I'm not suggesting either airport substantially grow. I think JFK will probably be about flat and PHL actually slightly down in a merger. No growth - just optimization.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 07:40:28 and read 27195 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 35):
Second UA makes IAD and EWR work and they are what ~225 miles away from each other. JFK and PHL will serve two different purposes. JFK focusing on the O&D markets, while PHL will focus on key markets and will serve as a connecting hub.

You cannot compare New York and Washington DC (which btw are already much further apart) with New York and Philadelphia in terms of traffic and I bet yields. It is like apples and oranges.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airliner371
Posted 2013-02-08 07:43:05 and read 27175 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 19):
How big is AA at DCA?

50 daily departures.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 19):
That will certainly affect how many slots AA/US has to give up at DCA.

I am thinking 20-30 daily departures.

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 34):
Who will trade gates with who?

I think it is a solid guess that AA/US will consolidate at Terminal B concourses C&D but there are so many options for who to put where at the other gates that its too much to guess.

[Edited 2013-02-08 08:09:03]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 07:54:05 and read 27015 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 35):
Second UA makes IAD and EWR work and they are what ~225 miles away from each other. JFK and PHL will serve two different purposes. JFK focusing on the O&D markets, while PHL will focus on key markets and will serve as a connecting hub.

EWR gets a lot of international traffic from local passengers. Same goes for IAD, so funneling passengers to those hubs makes sense and is cost effective.

I'd be interested to see what international traffic is generated from the PHL area. I suspect it is a fraction of JFK/EWR/IAD.

Say a flight out of JFK on a 77W to LHR is generally 75% full, do you think AA wouldn't want to funnel some traffic to JFK so that flight leaves with 90% capacity? Or would they rather funnel those connecting passengers to PHL and fly a 75% full A332 to LHR? (And that A332 is 75% full only because US funnels passengers to PHL from the rest of the country)

If they funnel international passengers from Mid West/North East to ORD/JFK, and SE to MIA/DFW, there wouldn't be enough passengers in the PHL area to justify maintaining an international hub at PHL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: HPRamper
Posted 2013-02-08 07:54:11 and read 27028 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 14):
And even though PHL has no slots (although it probably should since it's always had delay issues), it's still a very, very congested airport with little room to grow. Can that airport handle more traffic with it's horrible runway configuration? Not really. And didn't US say they'd de-hub PHL if that new runway proposal goes through? Surprised nobody has mentioned that.

Many if not most delay issues at PHL are caused by airspace congestion, not ground congestion. PHL has undergone major improvements and according to several pilots for US I've talked to, and one or two express pilots, they prefer PHL to CLT these days.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 30):
The combined AA/US will have two TATL hubs within 150 miles of each other, and they will STILL operate as TATL hubs?

JFK TATL ops will be enough just based on the local O&D, while PHL will need to rely on connecting passengers from a relatively small area of the US to justify a robust TATL ops.

Sorry but I just don't see it that way..

I wouldn't call the majority of the country minus NYC a relatively small area. Even taking into the consideration the (smaller number of) connections into JFK from elsewhere.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 30):
Where PHL will mostly rely on connecting traffic, the cost of maintaining two TATL/International hubs within that close proximity is not cost effective.

If they can both fill planes with a positive yield, then it's cost effective.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 07:54:51 and read 27046 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
What I'm suggesting is hardly unprecedented. This is to some extent what UA has done with EWR/IAD.

This was probably UAL's intention, but it hasn't turned out that way. EWR is roughly split in half between O&D and connecting traffic. According to the Port, it is a connecting hub...unless those stats are wrong.

EWR.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traffic/NOV2012_EWR.pdf

Not sure what IAD's numbers are, though, or where to find them.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 08:01:29 and read 26953 times.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 40):
I wouldn't call the majority of the country minus NYC a relatively small area. Even taking into the consideration the (smaller number of) connections into JFK from elsewhere.

I wish I have a map that I can draw here...

If there are already well established hubs in JFK, MIA and CLT on the east cost, ORD, DFW in the middle, where do you think PHL will draw international traffic from that would justify keeping PHL as a major international hub? Remember IAD for UA is just an hour down the interstate, and EWR is just 90 minutes north.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 08:09:21 and read 26883 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 42):
If there are already well established hubs in JFK

But that's the key - JFK isn't a "well established hub" now. It's a limited hub because of slot constraints and because it splits its local market with other airports that are, in some ways, more convenient and more popular. As such, JFK can never serve as a hub in the way PHL or EWR can. PHL and EWR are 2 of a kind in the Northeast, and cannot be replicated at JFK.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 42):
Remember IAD for UA is just an hour down the interstate, and EWR is just 90 minutes north.

Yes - and yet PHL manages to coexist with both of them, including being a larger hub than IAD, now.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 08:09:46 and read 26925 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 39):
Say a flight out of JFK on a 77W to LHR is generally 75% full, do you think AA wouldn't want to funnel some traffic to JFK so that flight leaves with 90% capacity? Or would they rather funnel those connecting passengers to PHL and fly a 75% full A332 to LHR? (And that A332 is 75% full only because US funnels passengers to PHL from the rest of the country)

If they funnel international passengers from Mid West/North East to ORD/JFK, and SE to MIA/DFW, there wouldn't be enough passengers in the PHL area to justify maintaining an international hub at PHL.

I think they would rather fly a 75% full 777 JFK-LHR made up predominantly of O&D and have the space for any last minute paxs that they will charge a high premium that only JFK-LHR can demand. Then route the connections through PHL to supplement the O&D that is high but not at the level of JFK.

You are proposing to turn JFK into a EWR type hub so they get the extra 15% capacity. Not only are there slot issues but JFK is a blood bath with B6 and DL already there as well as countless Foreign carriers that typically offer better products and service than the US carriers. And if you add the 200 flts to make it that type of hub JFK likely becomes just as bad as PHL is wrt delays.

I don't contest the NYC market is much larger than PHL and certainly commands a higher yeild but PHL can hold its own.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 08:24:25 and read 26733 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 43):
Yes - and yet PHL manages to coexist with both of them, including being a larger hub than IAD, now.

I partially agree. My argument all along is that PHL will continue to be a hub, but not for international flights. Most of the international flights out of PHL will be absorbed by JFK/ORD/MIA and maybe CLT.


Quoting usairways85 (Reply 44):
You are proposing to turn JFK into a EWR type hub so they get the extra 15% capacity. Not only are there slot issues but JFK is a blood bath with B6 and DL already there as well as countless Foreign carriers that typically offer better products and service than the US carriers. And if you add the 200 flts to make it that type of hub JFK likely becomes just as bad as PHL is wrt delays.

JFK is just a hub out of many that AA has already. It doesn't need to absorb that many flights.

If flying out of SYR to LHR, the merged AA/US will route that passenger to ORD, not PHL. Same goes for passenger out of PIT. Passenger flying out of MSY to Europe would route to DFW/MIA, and if CLT does not fly to NRT, they will fly connect via JFK or DFW. AA/US can route passengers outside of the immediate PHL to not only JFK, but MIA, ORD, DFW, so JFK will not absorb all of the connections that's currently made to PHL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2013-02-08 08:30:56 and read 26666 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 35):
They won't have the domestic network to use JFK as a European connection point.

But AA connects people everyday. And the flights do fine with O and D...no need for huge numbers of connectors.

I think that there will be a teething period where this all gets sorted out.

But much like Delta found out in the ATL, JFK tug of war that went on for most of the 90s, it is easier to serve one flight a day Euro cities, with strong ethnic ties to NYC from a place like NY then ATL. I suspect we will see a lot of that with PHL/JFK.

Also, no airline has successfully had 2 hubs this close in the past. They are always miserable failures.

B6 is trying it now with JFK and BOS. I guess AA will try it with PHL, JFK.

My thinking is, something will have to give down the road. It will likely be PHL focusing on domestic connections and JFK focusing on 1 to 2 banks of flights feeding international stuff. (Much like exists now)

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 08:33:19 and read 26691 times.

Comparing WAS VS PHL

Foreign carriers serving Washington DC: Aeroflot, Aeromexico, Air Canada, Air France, ANA, Austrian, Avianca, BA, Brussels, Cayman Islands, Copa, Emirates, Ethiopian, Etihad, Icelandair, KLM, Korean, Lufthansa, Porter, Qatar, Saudia, SAS, South African, Swiss, TACA, Turkish, Virgin Atlantic.

Foreign carriers serving Philadelphia: Air Canada, BA, Lufthansa.

The difference is appealing. DC is served by 27 foreign carriers, and PHL by only 3. That might give an idea of which is a more important international market (and the US Airways hub excuse is not valid, since United has a hub at IAD themselves with a lot of international routes too).

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 46):
B6 is trying it now with JFK and BOS. I guess AA will try it with PHL, JFK.

My thinking is, something will have to give down the road. It will likely be PHL focusing on domestic connections and JFK focusing on 1 to 2 banks of flights feeding international stuff. (Much like exists now)

BOS and JFK have little to no overlap... not the case for JFK/EWR and PHL. Also Boston is a more important international destination than Philadelphia hands down with a larger and wealthier catchment area that is not a hub for any major carrier (and probably B6 has lower costs than US, making routes profitable easier).

[Edited 2013-02-08 08:36:39]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MasseyBrown
Posted 2013-02-08 08:33:58 and read 26663 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 42):
Remember IAD for UA is just an hour down the interstate

No way - more like two to three hours, depending on time of day, EZ-Pass, and good weather. If it's raining/snowing, IAD is more than an hour from Washington.

Edit: I was thinking the merger makes the DL/US slot swap seem like a much better deal for US than it seemed at the time. Essentially they got an unassailable position at DCA and a bunch of cash; and now the merger restores their position at LGA, assuming they want it. DoT willl probably force them to shed some slots at both airports, but they still come out in good shape at both airports.

[Edited 2013-02-08 08:38:26]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 08:38:16 and read 26609 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 45):
If flying out of SYR to LHR, the merged AA/US will route that passenger to ORD, not PHL. Same goes for passenger out of PIT. Passenger flying out of MSY to Europe would route to DFW/MIA, and if CLT does not fly to NRT, they will fly connect via JFK or DFW. AA/US can route passengers outside of the immediate PHL to not only JFK, but MIA, ORD, DFW, so JFK will not absorb all of the connections that's currently made to PHL.

You are proposing a ton of "backtracking" connections there. AA/US will have to drop fares otherwise many of those paxs will all go to DL/UA through ATL/IAD/EWR.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 08:45:57 and read 26619 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 39):
Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 37):

PHL isnt NYC or BOS or DC. Im not going to pretend that it is. That doesnt mean there isnt a market and a sizable one at that. Below are the largest city pair from PHL to Europe in passengers per day:

Total PHL-Europe PDEW: 1,125

London: 209
Paris: 93
Rome: 91
Frankfurt: 89
Tel Aviv: 56
Dublin: 50
Manchester: 49
Madrid: 45
Barcelona: 40
Amsterdam: 36
Munich: 35

This is relatively smaller compared to NYC or BOS, but its still a pretty big European O&D base. Its about the same ATL-Europe and much larger than CLT-Europe.

Now, what I (and many others) are arguing is not that PHL will grow nor that PHL will keep all of its current European destinations. I think we can agree it wont. Right now, PHL has 12 daily departures to Europe all year and that number is 18 in the summer. That number will decrease for sure. What I am arguing is the notion that PHL will somehow be shut down. When you take the local markets listed below and couple them with connections, the market definately works. What is likely is that the number of European departures per day will probably go down to 7-8 year round and 12 during the summer. The destinations served from PHL will probably be limited to LHR, CDG, FCO, FRA, TLV, MAD, DUB (seasonal), and MAN. The rest will be moved to JFK or be terminated.

Remember, there are lots of midsized markets in the Northeast that offer lots of O&D to Europe that AA cannot feed through JFK. PHL will serve as the connector to Europe and JFK will served the O&D in NYC.

Now if we look at PHL-Asia, the current local market size is about 210 PDEW. That is not very large, however it is pretty well documented that the PHL area bleeds a lot of Asia traffic to EWR. I do not see PHL being able to support multiple flights to Asia, but with connections, a daily flight to NRT is well within reason. I suspect that local market size will jump from 210 to around 325-400.

Looking at PHL-Latin America, its almost all leisure. I dont see any need for flights to Latin America.

Now, lets look at PHL's domestic market. Below are the largest domestic markets to PHL by daily passengers:

Orlando: 3059
Chicago: 2412
Atlanta: 2061
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 2015
Los Angeles: 1751
Boston: 1569
San Francisco: 1546
Las Vegas: 1264
Denver: 1212
Dallas: 1156
Tampa: 958
Raleigh: 941
Houston: 925
Pittsburgh: 844
Minneapolis: 752
Seattle: 675
San Diego: 610
Charlotte: 601
Nashville: 583
Detroit: 545
Jacksonville: 493
Manchester, NH: 493
Indianapolis: 413
Fort Meyers: 389
Kansas City: 383
New Orleans: 381
Salt Lake City: 330

Bottom line, PHL is a viable hub. It is able to capture all the connecting traffic that JFK cannot and PHL is a decent sized local market. Will it shrink some? It probably will in the form of losing some smaller destinations in Europe. I cannot imagine that AA/US is dumb enough to get rid of it completely.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 08:52:47 and read 26453 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 49):
You are proposing a ton of "backtracking" connections there. AA/US will have to drop fares otherwise many of those paxs will all go to DL/UA through ATL/IAD/EWR.

AA (and many other airlines) do this today for some cities.... why wouldn't it work after the merger? If cities such as Syracuse has enough demand for European destinations, AA will establish a flight that connect them via JFK to better serve existing US passengers. But that's for another thread.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-08 09:02:08 and read 26306 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 50):
Total PHL-Europe PDEW: 1,125

London: 209
Paris: 93
Rome: 91
Frankfurt: 89
Tel Aviv: 56
Dublin: 50
Manchester: 49
Madrid: 45
Barcelona: 40
Amsterdam: 36
Munich: 35

How many of those passengers are connecting from other US flights? Or are they all O&D?

Even if they're all O&D, I can only see LHR justifying a daily flight, maybe CDG/FRA and FCO during the summer. The rest can easily be routed to JFK or MIA. I'm sure after AA/US merges, they will lose some passengers to UA.

I wonder what would the numbers look like if you remove connecting passengers...

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 50):
Bottom line, PHL is a viable hub. It is able to capture all the connecting traffic that JFK cannot and PHL is a decent sized local market. Will it shrink some? It probably will in the form of losing some smaller destinations in Europe. I cannot imagine that AA/US is dumb enough to get rid of it completely.

That is what I've been saying all along. I challenge the notion that PHL will take some connecting traffic from JFK, in fact, it will be the opposite.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 50):
What is likely is that the number of European departures per day will probably go down to 7-8 year round and 12 during the summer. The destinations served from PHL will probably be limited to LHR, CDG, FCO, FRA, TLV, MAD, DUB (seasonal), and MAN. The rest will be moved to JFK or be terminated.

I agree 110%

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 09:02:39 and read 26087 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 50):
The destinations served from PHL will probably be limited to LHR, CDG, FCO, FRA, TLV, MAD, DUB (seasonal), and MAN. The rest will be moved to JFK or be terminated.

I would add several more to your list.

Given the oneworld connections, I definitely see BCN staying from PHL - at least seasonally - along with DUB. I also think PHL-LIS may still stick around, at least seasonally, as I've heard it actually does fairly well.

Additionally, I think AMS and BRU are sufficiently large and important European business markets that AA needs to have a presence in them. With AA's current hubs, that is a challenge, but PHL provides a gateway with little or no competition. I think PHL-AMS/BRU could both stick around with 757s.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 50):
Now if we look at PHL-Asia, the current local market size is about 210 PDEW. That is not very large, however it is pretty well documented that the PHL area bleeds a lot of Asia traffic to EWR. I do not see PHL being able to support multiple flights to Asia, but with connections, a daily flight to NRT is well within reason. I suspect that local market size will jump from 210 to around 325-400.

  

To me, PHL-NRT seems like a perfect market for a JL 787.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 09:28:23 and read 25836 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 52):
I wonder what would the numbers look like if you remove connecting passengers...

Those are the numbers without connecting passengers. Those numbers are what the local PHL market generates in O&D. The numbers are per direction, so for London thats 209 passengers going from PHL to London and 209 passengers to go from London to PHL.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 52):
Even if they're all O&D, I can only see LHR justifying a daily flight, maybe CDG/FRA and FCO during the summer. The rest can easily be routed to JFK or MIA. I'm sure after AA/US merges, they will lose some passengers to UA.

Based on the O&D and connections:

LHR will be at least 3x daily year round between US and BA
CDG, FRA, MAN, and FCO will be year round. FCO may not be daily in the winter, but CDG and FRA will be daily year round. MAN will be daily year round, but probably with a smaller aircraft. A 757 in winter and a 763 in summer would be perfect.
TLV will stick. Ive heard multiple places and from reliable sources that this flight does very well. I dont see a reason to move it to NYC to compete with 3 other carriers.
MAD will be daily in summer and maybe 4-5x a week in winter. If the 757 can make PHL-MAD in winter, I see it used then and the 763 will work well in summer.
DUB makes a good seasonal route with the 757. The local market is decent and its not hard to make DUB work in summer.

By the way, if you guys are interested in having me do analysis on the other hubs in question, I will be happy to. Just ask.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: iFlyLOTs
Posted 2013-02-08 09:33:59 and read 25765 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
TLV will stick. Ive heard multiple places and from reliable sources that this flight does very well. I dont see a reason to move it to NYC to compete with 3 other carriers.

While I have heard that it does do very well, wouldn't the combined company assume all debts of both the previous ones? Which would keep AA (the new new one) from operating there without paying for it ($20mil I think?) or having their plane seized, correct?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-08 09:34:11 and read 25783 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
TLV will stick. Ive heard multiple places and from reliable sources that this flight does very well. I dont see a reason to move it to NYC to compete with 3 other carriers.



It doesn't matter how well the route does for US, AA cannot operate flights to Israel unless they:

A.) Pay a huge fine which they have refused for the past 13 years
B.) Send a plane and it gets confiscated.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2013-02-08 09:39:19 and read 25741 times.

Here's a thought outside the box...

Can BA or IB operate JFK/PHL-TLV for AA?

Just code it as an AA flight?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 09:40:01 and read 25755 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 56):
A.) Pay a huge fine which they have refused for the past 13 years

Anyone want to take a stab at how long it would take AA to earn $30 mil in profits on flights to TLV in order to recoup this debt if it was paid?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 09:40:39 and read 25722 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 56):

It doesn't matter how well the route does for US, AA cannot operate flights to Israel unless they:

A.) Pay a huge fine which they have refused for the past 13 years
B.) Send a plane and it gets confiscated.
Quoting iFlyLOTs (Reply 55):
While I have heard that it does do very well, wouldn't the combined company assume all debts of both the previous ones? Which would keep AA (the new new one) from operating there without paying for it ($20mil I think?) or having their plane seized, correct?

I should have clarified that assuming they are allowed to fly it, it will stick.

Yes, I assume the combined airline will be forced to settle up or leave.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 09:40:44 and read 25709 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
By the way, if you guys are interested in having me do analysis on the other hubs in question, I will be happy to. Just ask.

How do you get these stats? I was actually going top start a thread asking where I could find them. Is it public knowledge or you can only get them from an access-restricted site?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 09:51:42 and read 25569 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 53):
I would add several more to your list.

Given the oneworld connections, I definitely see BCN staying from PHL - at least seasonally - along with DUB. I also think PHL-LIS may still stick around, at least seasonally, as I've heard it actually does fairly well.

BCN is not a OW hub... VY is not in OW. Even DL cannot make ATL year round anymore.

Quoting commavia (Reply 53):
Additionally, I think AMS and BRU are sufficiently large and important European business markets that AA needs to have a presence in them. With AA's current hubs, that is a challenge, but PHL provides a gateway with little or no competition. I think PHL-AMS/BRU could both stick around with 757s.

Two perfect candidates to be dropped (specially BRU). Little O&D and plenty of options to and from NYC and WAS. AA even cancelled JFK-BRU from this winter and is not flying to Belgium anymore. So they don't even fly to hubs which arguely a far greater O&D base (JFK or MIA) and they are going to keep Philadelphia of all places...

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 09:53:09 and read 25519 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 60):
How do you get these stats? I was actually going top start a thread asking where I could find them. Is it public knowledge or you can only get them from an access-restricted site?

Its MIDT data. The international portion is restricted, but occasionally public website post pieces of it.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: apodino
Posted 2013-02-08 09:55:29 and read 25509 times.

All this talk of "easily" routing current PHL connections to other hubs has me giggling. As the point has been made, it is not so easy to route connecting traffic to JFK, especially from a lot of the close in cities that currently feed PHL. There are two reasons for this. One is obviously the slot situation and the near gridlock that would result from adding too much more lift to JFK. The other is a little airport called LaGuardia. The O and D traffic from these types of airports is much more likely to go to LGA for reasons that have been discussed to death in other threads. What this leaves is a bunch of RJ's operating flights to feed international flights with almost no O and D value. This doesn't seem economical in JFK to me.

Ok....so people have suggested Euro traffic can be routed to ORD. So you are telling me that people in places like BTV, SYR, ROC, BUF, SCE, PIT, ORF, RIC, etc are really going to fly all the way back to ORD to backtrack to Europe? Unless you are a budget traveler with a lot of time looking to get somewhere cheaply, this isn't going to fly with the people that make money for the airlines internationally. Not to mention that T5 is nearly saturated as it is, and with the amount of European destinations from PHL that is gained in a US merger, there is no way ORD can absorb all that without some infastructure changes.

Then people have suggested MIA. Same issues with ORD apply to MIA for european connections. For LA though, MIA is a no brainer. And don't forget that CLT can also take some people from the south to a few of the bigger European destinations as well.

PHL is the fifth largest O and D market in the country. If US was going to walk away from this, they would have done so a few years ago and built up PIT instead. There is no way they are going to walk away from what they have in PHL. The amount of connections and destinations served domestically is just not something that they can replicate at JFK. Granted there will be rightsizing of flights, especially when the 787's come online. But to say that everything will be shifted to JFK is hogwash. JFK will still be a very important station though, and you will see a couple of stations served by US that will likely get a frequency. AMS would be a strong possibilty.

Over on the other side of the pond. I was wondering, would BAA make them keep a split operation in LHR between T1 and T3, or are they just going to eventually combine in T3, which would finally give UA room to combine under one roof?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 09:56:48 and read 25487 times.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 61):
Two perfect candidates to be dropped (specially BRU). Little O&D and plenty of options to and from NYC and WAS. AA even cancelled JFK-BRU from this winter and is not flying to Belgium anymore. So they don't even fly to hubs which arguely a far greater O&D base (JFK or MIA) and they are going to keep Philadelphia of all places...

That I agree with. I dont see BRU or AMS maintining PHL service because the markets are so small.

PHL will have LHR, CDG, FCO, FRA, MAD, and MAN for sure. I think DUB will be seasonal and if they can get things straightend with Israel, TLV.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 10:10:23 and read 25291 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 64):
I dont see BRU or AMS maintining PHL service because the markets are so small.

I've never understood why AA has neglected the fourth-largest economic area within Europe, the The Randstad.

AA's new ORD-DUS flight has been retimed on its return from the announced schedule of around noon to around 10am to connect to the morning bank of flights into DUS on AB, making it inconvenient for connections via rail that the later departure time worked well with.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-08 10:42:03 and read 24881 times.

Quoting apodino (Reply 63):
Over on the other side of the pond. I was wondering, would BAA make them keep a split operation in LHR between T1 and T3, or are they just going to eventually combine in T3, which would finally give UA room to combine under one roof?

Are US's slots even theirs to keep in the event of a merger or are they leasing them from another Star carrier?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: seatback
Posted 2013-02-08 11:07:06 and read 24549 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 11):
Fair enough but why not do that thru CLT which is already US's biggest hub and it's a better airport than PHL in every category?

But CLT's O/D is a fraction of what PHL's is.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: seatback
Posted 2013-02-08 11:09:36 and read 24535 times.

With more than 60 percent of market share at DCA, would it be a good idea for AA to try some Europe out IAD (LHR) and maybe S. America?

I'm sure AA customers in the area would prefer a nonstop vs. connecting.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Alias1024
Posted 2013-02-08 11:44:06 and read 24171 times.

I don't think PHL will lose in a merger. It's a large city that would be absolutely dominated by the combined carrier, and as others have said, JFK is too constrained to ever move a significant portion of the operations. Besides, why mess with a good thing? PHL reminds me quite a bit of MSP, in that one airline totally dominates and can pretty much do whatever they want since there's fairly limited competition to keep them in check. That's a recipe for minting money. Why change it?

Quoting STT757 (Reply 56):
It doesn't matter how well the route does for US, AA cannot operate flights to Israel unless they:

A.) Pay a huge fine which they have refused for the past 13 years
B.) Send a plane and it gets confiscated.

I suppose that depends on how the merger is executed and the exact wording of the ruling. If it is found beneficial for US to be the acquiring carrier (but keeping the AA name) and the ruling does not apply to any successors, then it might get AA completely out paying the fine. Even if that isn't possible, there could always be some behind the scenes talks that greatly reduce or completely forgive the fine. I doubt TLV wants to lose the route and the revenue it brings, so I think there would be efforts on both sides to come to an agreement that preserves the route, and maybe even adds additional TLV service by the combined airline.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-08 11:49:15 and read 24106 times.

Quoting seatback (Reply 68):
With more than 60 percent of market share at DCA, would it be a good idea for AA to try some Europe out IAD (LHR) and maybe S. America?

I'm sure AA customers in the area would prefer a nonstop vs. connecting.

BA already serves LHR out of IAD. But it will be interesting to see how OW as a whole decides to play the DC/N. Virginia market.

Maybe an IB return ? LAN/TAM or AB entry? JAL or CX?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LDVAviation
Posted 2013-02-08 12:02:02 and read 23968 times.

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 38):
I am thinking 20-30 daily departures.

How many did Delta give up in the slot transaction with US? I would say that is the benchmark. Could be even lower if a smaller number of slots are involved.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-08 12:29:01 and read 23677 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
LHR will be at least 3x daily year round between US and BA
CDG, FRA, MAN, and FCO will be year round. FCO may not be daily in the winter, but CDG and FRA will be daily year round. MAN will be daily year round, but probably with a smaller aircraft. A 757 in winter and a 763 in summer would be perfect.
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
MAD will be daily in summer and maybe 4-5x a week in winter. If the 757 can make PHL-MAD in winter, I see it used then and the 763 will work well in summer.

I'm pretty sure US has several contracts above and below the wing on PHL-MAN which is why it sees such a large aircraft daily year round. Many airlines can't maintain this service from their respective hubs so there has to be a reason why US can. Assuming US/AA keep the contracts I don't see this dropping to a 752.

FCO likely less than daily in the winter.

But I digress because this is "Routes" talk.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-02-08 12:48:42 and read 23496 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 49):
You are proposing a ton of "backtracking" connections there. AA/US will have to drop fares otherwise many of those paxs will all go to DL/UA through ATL/IAD/EWR.

Youre correct. The idea of sending people from SYR-ORD-LHR is absurd.

What people are missing here is PHL yields to Europe are probably better than JFK, especially to nonbusiness destinations other than FRA, LHR and CDG. LIS will do better from PHL than from JFK and can be flown with a 757.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-08 12:55:01 and read 23419 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 58):
Anyone want to take a stab at how long it would take AA to earn $30 mil in profits on flights to TLV in order to recoup this debt if it was paid?

Well it's been what 12-13 years since they dropped the route. So obviously AA feels it was not worth the cost, 13 years later.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 69):
I suppose that depends on how the merger is executed and the exact wording of the ruling. If it is found beneficial for US to be the acquiring carrier (but keeping the AA name) and the ruling does not apply to any successors, then it might get AA completely out paying the fine.

Obviously it applies to the successors, the debt is TWA's not AA's. So even if it's US that takes AA over, and the name is US etc.. they are now stuck with the debt. Just as AA was stuck with it from TWA.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 69):
Even if that isn't possible, there could always be some behind the scenes talks that greatly reduce or completely forgive the fine.

Perhaps if it were possible wouldn't AA have tried in the past 13 years?

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 69):
I doubt TLV wants to lose the route and the revenue it brings, so I think there would be efforts on both sides to come to an agreement that preserves the route, and maybe even adds additional TLV service by the combined airline.

They had no problem losing TWA/AA, this was when Tower went belly up too. Leaving only El Al and CO in the market.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: United777ORD
Posted 2013-02-08 12:55:43 and read 23541 times.

American Airlines
Hub Airports Daily Departure Projections

Pre Merger / Post Merger

DFW: 764 / 790
CLT: 610 / 510
ORD: 501 / 525
PHL: 440 / 420
MIA: 294 / 340
PHX: 260 / 220
DCA: 220 / 250
LAX: 159 / 180
LGA: 102 / 170
JFK: 86 / 125

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 12:59:28 and read 23366 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 74):
Well it's been what 12-13 years since they dropped the route. So obviously AA feels it was not worth the cost, 13 years later.

Yes, understood. I'm just trying to get a feel for how long it might take AA to recoup the expense from TLV flight profits if it decided to pay the old TWA employees to get this obligation off the books. Obviously other airlines have been reaping the rewards.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: doug
Posted 2013-02-08 12:59:59 and read 23367 times.

MIA is at 348 now has been since November you are using old stats

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-08 13:01:28 and read 23352 times.

Here's a previous discussion regarding AA and TLV, it includes discussion about the judgement against AA which was originally around $20 Million upon which you have to add about 10 years worth of penalties and interest.

AA+TLV#ID5447121" target="_blank">http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...earchid=5447121&s=AA+TLV#ID5447121

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: southwest737500
Posted 2013-02-08 13:03:23 and read 23330 times.

Quoting United777ORD (Reply 75):

Really 100 flight reduction from CLT?!? That's crazy where do you pull that number

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 13:10:43 and read 23190 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 78):
Here's a previous discussion regarding AA and TLV

Yes, I'm aware of the reasons behind the debt. That wasn't what I was asking about. Since my question has obviously been misunderstood, it's okay, we can drop it.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Av8tor
Posted 2013-02-08 13:12:26 and read 23195 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 35):
First the JFK AA domestic network is a shell of the PHL US domestic network and I think the consensus is AA/US do not have the slots to build JFK into a "megahub". They won't have the domestic network to use JFK as a European connection point.

That's where B6 will come into play. Codeshare at first. Purchase will come later. Buy lots of B6 stock over the next year, it will pay big dividends later.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 13:14:01 and read 23194 times.

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 79):
Really 100 flight reduction from CLT?!? That's crazy where do you pull that number

I think thats too generous.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-08 13:16:56 and read 23204 times.

Quoting United777ORD (Reply 75):
CLT: 610 / 510
Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 79):
Really 100 flight reduction from CLT?!? That's crazy where do you pull that number

Not really wanting to be cynical or the likes here, but if CLT remains with 510 daily flights here...... I think that would be fantastic. My thinking is that flights could drop to around 400 daily and even with around 400 daily flights CLT is very well served considering the O&D. 510 daily flights is heaven-sent here.


 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: doug
Posted 2013-02-08 13:35:49 and read 22971 times.

Also if all (AA and US) current hubs stay the same as is Miami will be the number 2 hub for number of daily mainline flights.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-02-08 13:49:31 and read 22868 times.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 35):
2010
EWR: 403K movements
PHL: 460K movements
JFK: 399K movements

Proof enough that JFK's slot restrictions are artificial.

Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
The two transatlantic operations - at JFK and PHL - already coexist now, just for two different airlines.

But when they're the same airline it's called redundancy  
Quoting commavia (Reply 36):
I'm not suggesting either airport substantially grow. I think JFK will probably be about flat and PHL actually slightly down in a merger. No growth - just optimization.

Then we both share the same basic opinion  
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 40):
If they can both fill planes with a positive yield, then it's cost effective.

There's something to be said about reducing the offer in order to increase yields.

Quoting commavia (Reply 53):
I also think PHL-LIS may still stick around, at least seasonally, as I've heard it actually does fairly well.

That all depends on how much connecting traffic US is doing at LIS. I suspect that on the PHL side they attract a lot of VFR traffic from southern New Jersey but that's never very profitable. It's also true that US's route to LIS was subsidized by the Portuguese tourism board. I don't know if/when that subsidy will end.

Quoting seatback (Reply 67):
But CLT's O/D is a fraction of what PHL's is.

They're both equally poor but CLT has more feed. If you look at the numbers provided in reply 50, it's blatantly obvious that most European flights from PHL are possible only thanks to connections because there's simply not enough O&D traffic to sustain those flights. 35 PDEW to MUC, 36 to AMS, 40 to BCN, 45 to MAD?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 13:53:01 and read 22834 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 85):
They're both equally poor but CLT has more feed.

They are NOT both equally poor. Not even close. CLT-Europe is much, much smaller than PHL-Europe.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-02-08 13:57:55 and read 22801 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 83):
Not really wanting to be cynical or the likes here, but if CLT remains with 510 daily flights here...... I think that would be fantastic. My thinking is that flights could drop to around 400 daily and even with around 400 daily flights CLT is very well served considering the O&D. 510 daily flights is heaven-sent here.

If you think CLT will drop by 1/3, please start listing the cuts. Markets and frequencies.

Quoting doug (Reply 84):
Also if all (AA and US) current hubs stay the same as is Miami will be the number 2 hub for number of daily mainline flights.

Really??? More than CLT? What is CLT mainline?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 13:58:08 and read 22752 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 86):
They are NOT both equally poor. Not even close. CLT-Europe is much, much smaller than PHL-Europe.

What are CLT's numbers to Europe?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-08 14:08:55 and read 22767 times.

Quoting United777ORD (Reply 75):
American Airlines
Hub Airports Daily Departure Projections

Pre Merger / Post Merger

DFW: 764 / 790
CLT: 610 / 510
ORD: 501 / 525
PHL: 440 / 420
MIA: 294 / 340
PHX: 260 / 220
DCA: 220 / 250
LAX: 159 / 180
LGA: 102 / 170
JFK: 86 / 125

Nice ... I'll throw in my projections.

DFW: 764 / 1080
CLT: 610 / 425
ORD: 501 / 625
PHL: 440 / 520
MIA: 294 / 450
PHX: 260 / 120
DCA: 220 / 240
LAX: 159 / 220
LGA: 102 / 170
JFK: 86 / 145

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 14:11:25 and read 22676 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 54):
MAD will be daily in summer and maybe 4-5x a week in winter. If the 757 can make PHL-MAD in winter, I see it used then and the 763 will work well in summer.

I expect far more than that. US today - without the benefit of a huge partner hub on the Europe end - manages to fly PHL-MAD year-round with a daily A330. Sure, a combined airline would certainly have higher costs than US has now, but on the flip side revenue in these types of longhaul hub-hub markets would also surely improve. My guess is that PHL-MAD would be a minimum of a daily 767 in the winter, and a daily A330 in the summer.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 61):
BCN is not a OW hub... VY is not in OW.

No, BCN is not a oneworld hub, but oneworld does have a strong presence in BCN with IB and VY, both of which are part of the Avios FF program.

Quoting seatback (Reply 68):
With more than 60 percent of market share at DCA, would it be a good idea for AA to try some Europe out IAD (LHR) and maybe S. America?

I'm sure AA customers in the area would prefer a nonstop vs. connecting.

I have had the same thought. If AA and US merge, AA is overnight going to gain tons of new business and government FFs in the D.C. area, many of whom want to fly overseas and would love the opportunity to use their upgrades to Europe. While I don't necessarily expect it per se, I don't think it's totally unfathomable to think that AA/BA might shift one of the daily IAD-LHR flights to AA, and that AA might one day be flying a 757 - at least during the summer - IAD-MAD.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 85):
But when they're the same airline it's called redundancy

Or complementarity. It all depends on your perspective. When it comes to JFK and PHL, you seem to think it has to be either-or; I don't.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-08 14:15:57 and read 22588 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 62):
Its MIDT data. The international portion is restricted, but occasionally public website post pieces of it.

Specifically where do you get that? Can you provide a link? I'd pay if it was a reasonable price for it.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 31):
JFK isn't any worse than PHL as far as congestion. How can you suggest that JFK can't grow but PHL can?More importantly, PHL and NYC airspace overlap and both are affected equally in bad weather because they are so close together. Operating your 2 TATL hubs less than 100miles apart in the most congested air space region of the country just doesn't make a lot of sense.

It's also worth noting that AA has a new terminal at JFK and it appears to have plenty of room to expand east towards the JFK Expressway. That will help with AA's domestic flights. I think PHL will be reduced to a focus city over time, similar to what BOS was for AA, DL, and US before B6 took over. I have trouble seeing hubs at both JFK and PHL also.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 14:19:46 and read 22567 times.

Since we have people throwing around claims with nothing to back it up, Im going to break down CLT like I did PHL.

Below is the passengers per day per direction for CLT:

Total PDEW on CLT-Europe: 433

London: 82
Frankfurt: 43
Munich: 30
Paris: 29
Rome: 23
Dublin: 16
Manchester: 9

So as you can see CLT-Europe is 1/3 the size of PHL-Europe. Kudos to CLT in that it hits way above its weight on international O&D considering its a metro of only 1.8 million, but lets not go overboard.

CLT-Asia is out of the question and I dont see the need for there to be expansion on CLT-South/Central America.

Domestically, CLT looks like this:

New York: 2678
Boston: 1239
Washington DC: 1106
Chicago: 957
Los Angeles: 732
Dallas: 655
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 654
Orlando: 612
Philadelphia: 601
San Francisco: 557
Las Vegas: 542
Minneapolis: 475
Detroit: 392
Seattle: 383
Atlanta: 375
Tampa: 370
Houston: 359
Providence: 340
Phoenix: 300

I do not want this post to be taken incorrectly. I have said over and over I think CLT will play a valuable role in the combined airline. But comparing international O&D to Europe from Philly to Charlotte is moronic.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 14:20:31 and read 22559 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 91):
I think PHL will be reduced to a focus city over time, similar to what BOS was for AA, DL, and US before B6 took over. I have trouble seeing hubs at both JFK and PHL also.

I just do not understand this logic.

How do people think AA is going to serve the northeast without a hub in PHL? There is no alternative - JFK is not a viable northeast hub, and never can be. What it is, however, is a great airport to cater to the enormous longhaul demand from one of the largest local travel markets in the world.

Besides, United has hubs at EWR and IAD that seem to coexist just fine, and those two hubs are far closer in size to each other than JFK and PHL would be for AA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: futureorthopod
Posted 2013-02-08 14:50:30 and read 22300 times.

I lived in Philly for four years and regularly made the decision to fly out of BWI, IAD, EWR, and JFK b/c they were readily accessible by public transportation

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-08 14:51:51 and read 22334 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 93):
How do people think AA is going to serve the northeast without a hub in PHL? There is no alternative - JFK is not a viable northeast hub, and never can be. What it is, however, is a great airport to cater to the enormous longhaul demand from one of the largest local travel markets in the world.

That's where DCA comes in. Anyone in the northeast going to Europe can go to JFK. PHL will retain a few European flights. Back in the mid-2000s, BOS had AA service to LHR, CDG, SNN, and MAN and even today it gets a few flights from small cities like SYR, ROC, and MDT. PHL would probably be a little bigger than that.

[Edited 2013-02-08 14:53:54]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-08 14:55:55 and read 22258 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 93):
How do people think AA is going to serve the northeast without a hub in PHL? There is no alternative - JFK is not a viable northeast hub, and never can be. What it is, however, is a great airport to cater to the enormous longhaul demand from one of the largest local travel markets in the world.

Agreed !

Logistically and location wise, I think PHL is probably the second best hub for the Northeast US (behind EWR).

Quoting commavia (Reply 90):
I have had the same thought. If AA and US merge, AA is overnight going to gain tons of new business and government FFs in the D.C. area, many of whom want to fly overseas and would love the opportunity to use their upgrades to Europe. While I don't necessarily expect it per se, I don't think it's totally unfathomable to think that AA/BA might shift one of the daily IAD-LHR flights to AA, and that AA might one day be flying a 757 - at least during the summer - IAD-MAD.

BA would probably have to give AA a flight if they really wanted to compete with UA out of IAD. I've heard that some government employees are requried to use American carriers on international routes if there's a choice on the route.

IAD-MAD is now screaming for an AA 757.

JAL could add a 787 flight to compete with United and ANA.

LAN/TAM into GRU/LIM would be nice additions.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 14:57:46 and read 22235 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 95):
That's where DCA comes in. Anyone in the northeast going to Europe can go to JFK. PHL will retain a few European flights. Back in the mid-2000s, BOS had AA service to LHR, CDG, SNN, and MAN and even today it gets a few flights from small cities like SYR, ROC, and MDT. PHL would probably be a little bigger than that.

Frankly, I think that's highly unrealistic. A mix of JFK and DCA is not going to cut it - those two together will not be able to replicate the strenght of a single, unified, omni-directional, domestic-and-international, throughout-the-day hub. It just cannot happen. PHL is one of only two airports in the northeast (the other being EWR) that can serve that type of megahub role - I doubt AA would be stupid enough to throw that away.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-08 15:09:22 and read 22105 times.

I think this argument about how important is the Philadelphia market is tiring.

If PHL would be such an important market with no overlap with New York and Washington area airports, there would be more foreign carriers flying there, other than British and Lufthansa only. No connections to Asia, Latin America... no intentions from TK or Gulf carriers to start PHL. Just compare the number of foreign carriers in PHL with Houston, Dallas, Miami, Seattle, Boston, San Francisco, DC... the difference is appealing (I know that some samples like BOS are not "fair" because there is no hubbed airline). Something does not add to the "PHL is the fifth largest O and D market in the country", whether these are low yields, passengers lost to EWR or IAD, etc. PHL is the way US Airways has to access the Northeast... with AA and JFK this is no fundamental anymore.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jayunited
Posted 2013-02-08 15:09:51 and read 22100 times.

This thread looks really familiar to what was posted on this site when CO and UA merged. Many of you though IAD would be reduced in favor of EWR but United has managed to keep them both open and didn't cut any flights. In fact IAD gain a few flights to some smaller European cities as a result of the merger. I don't really know what will happen with JFK and PHL but I don't see PHL being reduce by much because that would leave a hole a very important market.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MCOflyer
Posted 2013-02-08 15:09:59 and read 22131 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 92):

I agree. I see CLT growing and PHL scaling down. However, I see JFK growing with flights coming from PHL being redeployed to JFK or CLT. Also, I see more of the upstate NY express route flights going to ORD.

KH

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: tommy767
Posted 2013-02-08 15:13:36 and read 22125 times.

It's been proven for US that CLT, DCA, and PHL make lots of cash. I'd say (for connection hub patterns) CLT might take a slight hit, but keep in mind that other than ATL, it's the second largest hub in the southeast and the 2nd biggest financial center aside NYC. Also keep in mind that you know AA execs have been envious of losing track of their S.E. pax over the years to US and DL. MIA is the best Latam gateway in the country, but AA hasn't been able to gauge the domestic flow properly as for the longest time fleet utilization out of MIA has been restricted to ATR, ERJ, 738, 757, 763, and 777. You wonder why routes like BUF-MIA, PVD-MIA, AUS-MIA, MCI-MIA, PWM-MIA have never started. The answer is AA never had the right aircraft for the smaller markets that warrant it. With a merger, you might see AA grow even more at MIA if/when E170, 319, and E190 make it there.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-08 15:23:44 and read 21960 times.

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 100):
I agree. I see CLT growing and PHL scaling down. However, I see JFK growing with flights coming from PHL being redeployed to JFK or CLT. Also, I see more of the upstate NY express route flights going to ORD.

Then you dont agree with me. I dont feel like going through my position again, but its on this thread in more than one place.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 98):
I think this argument about how important is the Philadelphia market is tiring.

Ive already presented data that shows what PHL is capable of and what it isnt. The whole "lets shut PHL down" notion has been shot down with data. No one is saying PHL wont lose 3 or 4 European destinations.

You dont have to argue anymore.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: GSPflyer
Posted 2013-02-08 15:48:42 and read 21879 times.

DFW - Little/No Change. AA runs that place, and will continue to.

CLT - Little/No Change. Maybe some minor capacity shifts to places like MIA or DFW, but US has a well established Southeastern hub there, and AA doesn't serve smaller Southeastern markets well. DFW is too far west for connections between the Southeast and anywhere West of the Mississippi. MIA is too far South, but great for connections to the Caribbean/South America. ORD is better for connections to the Northeast/Midwest, but many markets like GSP have lost AA flights to ORD. (Not many Southeastern markets like GSP, CAE, etc. have AA service to anywhere but DFW.) Also, Charlotte is a major financial hub (second largest in the U.S. after NYC, If I remember correctly,) so there is a fair amount of premium demand to CLT.

DCA - Minor cuts if they are required to give up slots, but can probably be made up with less frequency/larger equipment on routes that AA and US both operate.

JFK - Little/No change. Huge O&D market to Europe.

PHL - Increased frequency or larger equipment used to OW hubs in Europe like LHR, MAD, as PHL has something JFK doesnt: A large domestic network to feed the international flights, and little/no competition on it's European routes.

PHX - Probably a decent reduction in capacity, being between LAX and DFW, but it could have a place in their network if it is "right sized."

ORD - There's not much overlap in US and AA's midwest network, so I can't see much happening, other than equipment changes.

MIA - Possibly adding more to the Southeast, to take advantage of the customer base that US has.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: strfyr51
Posted 2013-02-08 16:44:49 and read 21454 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 4):

United is currently supporting 10 Hubs, I'm SURE American can find use for the 8 hubs it currently has and in my opinion they should be looking at a Pacific/Asian Hub to Build, KIX/NRT/HND etc. since it's unlikely anyone else is going to sell THEIRS anytime soon.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: futureorthopod
Posted 2013-02-08 16:45:57 and read 21404 times.

How will this impact slots/terminal space available at other airports, particularly LAX? Will Southwest have a little more breathing room in terminal 1

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-08 16:53:16 and read 21322 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 103):
United is currently supporting 10 Hubs, I'm SURE American can find use for the 8 hubs it currently has

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't see UA supporting a hub that is as far out of the way in relation to the major population centers of the region it's useful to serve as PHX is in the grand scheme of things. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on that.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-08 17:04:27 and read 21295 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 96):
Frankly, I think that's highly unrealistic. A mix of JFK and DCA is not going to cut it - those two together will not be able to replicate the strenght of a single, unified, omni-directional, domestic-and-international, throughout-the-day hub. It just cannot happen. PHL is one of only two airports in the northeast (the other being EWR) that can serve that type of megahub role - I doubt AA would be stupid enough to throw that away.
Quoting jayunited (Reply 98):
This thread looks really familiar to what was posted on this site when CO and UA merged. Many of you though IAD would be reduced in favor of EWR but United has managed to keep them both open and didn't cut any flights. In fact IAD gain a few flights to some smaller European cities as a result of the merger. I don't really know what will happen with JFK and PHL but I don't see PHL being reduce by much because that would leave a hole a very important market.

The problem with PHL is that it's not just against JFK, but DCA and to lesser extents CLT and ORD as well. Philadelphia is a large market in its own right, but it isn't as big or important as New York and Washington are. I think we can all agree that PHL will not be reduced to a spoke, but having three hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented. It might work, but it's risky.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 17:33:42 and read 21072 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 106):
The problem with PHL is that it's not just against JFK, but DCA and to lesser extents CLT and ORD as well. Philadelphia is a large market in its own right, but it isn't as big or important as New York and Washington are. I think we can all agree that PHL will not be reduced to a spoke, but having three hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented. It might work, but it's risky.

Well, again, I guess where we fundamentally disagree is the realistic appraisal of these three "hubs." I think your appraisal is just unrealistic. AA would, indeed, operate "hubs" at three northeast airports - JFK, PHL and DCA - but those three are all very different operations.

While it is true that both JFK and DCA ultimatly serve larger local population centers than PHL does, both have severe limitations that limit their capacity to replicate the hub that PHL is. For starters, both are severely capacity-constrained, both with slots and in the case of DCA also with gates. Both also compete heavily with other airports - DCA cannot handle any longhaul traffic, preventing it from being a domestic-to-international hub, while JFK competes with LGA and EWR across town, both of which are more conveniently-located to the urban core and preferred for high-yielding domestic traffic. And finally, the markets that JFK and DCA serve are both larger, but also far more competitive, with full-fledged network airline megahubs in the same market (UA at EWR in the case of JFK, UA at IAD in the case of DCA).

All of this is the long way of saying that JFK and DCA - either alone or together - can still not ever serve the same market that PHL does. PHL combines everything - omni-directional (north, south, east and westbound flows), domestic and international traffic, and steady demand throughout the day (not heavily peaked like at JFK) - into a single hub operation. JFK and DCA cannot, and never will be able to, do that. The only other northeast U.S. hub that can is EWR.

That is why - again - this is not the "either-or" choice that you and some others seem to be making it. It's an "all of the above." NYC, PHL and DCA can all coexist as huge operations in a combined AA network, catering to the different competitive and market realities of each of the different markets.



[Edited 2013-02-08 17:43:23]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: EricR
Posted 2013-02-08 17:43:48 and read 21013 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 103):
United is currently supporting 10 Hubs, I'm SURE American can find use for the 8 hubs it currently has and in my opinion they should be looking at a Pacific/Asian Hub to Build, KIX/NRT/HND etc. since it's unlikely anyone else is going to sell THEIRS anytime soon.



Yes, but to compare apples to apples, UA only has 8 hubs in the continental U.S. This would be the same number of hubs as AA/US.

Furthermore, UA is still young in their integrations process. It has only been slightly over a year since UA/CO merged and less than a year since they've merged reservation systems. They've cut a little from LAX and the fate of CLE is quite clear as soon as the retirement of their gas guzzling ERJs (which is the vast majority of the CLE flights) begins and their commitment to Ohio ends.

[Edited 2013-02-08 18:02:01]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jayunited
Posted 2013-02-08 17:51:39 and read 20909 times.

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 95):
BA would probably have to give AA a flight if they really wanted to compete with UA out of IAD. I've heard that some government employees are requried to use American carriers on international routes if there's a choice on the route.

IAD-MAD is now screaming for an AA 757.

JAL could add a 787 flight to compete with United and ANA.


Where are the aircraft coming from to operate these international flights on your wish list seeing that US Airways does not operate any international flight over the Atlantic out of the DC metro area? And why would BA need to give up a flight to AA just so AA can tap into government contracts and operate an international flight from IAD-LHR? If AA or US wanted to operate a flight from IAD-LHR they would be operating it already especially AA because they are the dominate U.S. airline in the LHR market from the U.S. so your assertion that now because of this merger the new AA will now operate international flights out of IAD is crazy and it would totally cannibalize their flights from CLT, JFK, and PHL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 18:08:02 and read 20784 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 107):
, while JFK competes with LGA and EWR across town, both of which are more conveniently-located to the urban core and preferred for high-yielding domestic traffic.

OK, can you qualify this statement? Do you even live in the Tri-state? I work in Midtown and I fly out of all three airports a lot. How is EWR better situated and more convenient to the "urban core" than JFK? I am scratching my head over that one. Both airports are about 15 miles from Midtown. Maybe EWR is closer to Lower Manhattan, but unless you are driving there, you will have to trek up to Penn Station to take the train and the distance from Penn to EWR is the same as to JFK. If anything, JFK is more convenient because the LIRR goes to Jamaica station more often than Jersey Transit goes to EWR. Oh, and even driving to EWR from the "urban core" of Manhattan is a pain in the ass. Jersey traffic is much worse than going through Brooklyn or Queens. Not to mention that cabs and car services are much more expensive to go cross state lines. And more people use the JFK airtrain than the EWR monorail. I guess that means they find it more convenient to get to.

And JFK handled about 49 million passengers last year, compared to 35 million for EWR and 25 million for LGA. More than 80% of those 49 million passengers were O&D passengers, vs 85+% for LGA and about half for EWR. For such an inconvenient airport, it isn't too shabby at attracting the locals!

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 18:11:15 and read 20749 times.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 109):
Where are the aircraft coming from to operate these international flights on your wish list seeing that US Airways does not operate any international flight over the Atlantic out of the DC metro area?

I suspect there would definitely be substantial slack in the combined carrier's widebody fleet, particularly considering that both carriers are in the process of, or soon will be, taking delivery of new widebodies.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 109):
And why would BA need to give up a flight to AA just so AA can tap into government contracts and operate an international flight from IAD-LHR?

BA wouldn't need to give up a flight "so AA can tap into government contracts." BA can already carry U.S. government traffic on its IAD-LHR flights because they carry the AA code. The reason it was suggested that BA might - theoretically - hand one flight to AA is so they don't dump extra capacity into the market. Replace, say, 1 BA 777 with 1 AA 777 for only a marginal net change in the overall number of joint seats offered in the market.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 109):
If AA or US wanted to operate a flight from IAD-LHR they would be operating it already especially AA because they are the dominate U.S. airline in the LHR market from the U.S. so your assertion that now because of this merger the new AA will now operate international flights out of IAD is crazy

Not necessarily. AA today is not a particularly large player in the WAS market compared to UA and US (who both, not incidentally, are in the same alliance these days). If AA and US merge, AA will instantly become a very strong #2 in the metro WAS market, and in that case the AA-BA JV may - I stress may - find it commercially advantageous with regards to attracting corporate contracts in the area, etc. to give WAS-area AAdvantage members the ability to use their free upgrades when heading to Europe, which today is not possible.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 109):
it would totally cannibalize their flights from CLT, JFK, and PHL.

No it wouldn't, especially if AA simpy replaced a BA flight with an AA flight.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-08 18:20:07 and read 20708 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 110):
How is EWR better situated and more convenient to the "urban core" than JFK? I am scratching my head over that one. Both airports are about 15 miles from Midtown. Maybe EWR is closer to Lower Manhattan, but unless you are driving there, you will have to trek up to Penn Station to take the train and the distance from Penn to EWR is the same as to JFK. If anything, JFK is more convenient because the LIRR goes to Jamaica station more often than Jersey Transit goes to EWR. Oh, and even driving to EWR from the "urban core" of Manhattan is a pain in the ass. Jersey traffic is much worse than going through Brooklyn or Queens. Not to mention that cabs and car services are much more expensive to go cross state lines. And more people use the JFK airtrain than the EWR monorail. I guess that means they find it more convenient to get to.

EWR is closer to downtown, and roughly equidistant to much of midtown. Although in my experience, if driving, the LIE to the Van Wyck to JFK is rarely if ever faster than the tunnels and highway to EWR. JFK is great if you're in Queens, or even Brooklyn, and certainly for the Island, but in my experience not as much so from the City. Sure, the LIRR is somewhat convenient, if suboptimal with the connection in Jamaica. Either way, the larger point I was making was not about JFK vs EWR - it was about JFK vs EWR and LGA. And generally speaking, for most domestic markets, EWR and/or LGA are the preferred airports for high-yielding business traffic from the city, not JFK. The prime exceptions are probably LAX/SFO, but I believe those are the exceptions, not the rule.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 110):
For such an inconvenient airport, it isn't too shabby at attracting the locals!

I didn't say it was "inconvenient." I said that EWR and LGA were considered more convenient - from a particular location. Big difference. And, furthermore, I never debated that JFK can attract locals (locals being defined as people from the city and the 4 outer buroughs, but also largely Nassau/Suffolk and even Westchester). But the type of local traffic JFK attracts is generally lower-yielding than comparable traffic out of EWr or LGA. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but all else being equal, when it comes specifically domestic markets, a flight out of JFK generally tends to be lower-yielding than a flight out of EWR or LGA to the same destination. That was the key point I was making.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: capitalflyer
Posted 2013-02-08 18:39:48 and read 20583 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
(DCA) (-2, -1): slight reduction in both departures and seats driven largely by forced slot divestitures at DCA

In addition, I would expect some of the regional flying/connections that happen at DCA to shift to PHL/CLT. DCA sucks if you have to connect. Focus should shift to maintaining profitable point to point routes, including state capitals (or whatever congressperson needs a nonstop flight).

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 19):
How big is AA at DCA? That will certainly affect how many slots AA/US has to give up at DCA

AA isn't huge, but they are probably #2 or 3 now behind US and maybe UA, especially since DL pulled out to a large extent. So the combined carrier will have to definitely get rid of some slots. My guess is a couple dozen. Especially slots with no service restrictions (like ESA airports, small cities, etc.). DOT would probably not mind getting a few more LCC flights in the mix, let WN and B6 duke it out. I don't see F9 getting in the fray as they have been noticeably absent from the last couple slot proceedings. (WN to MDW and Florida, B6 to SAN and Florida)

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-08 19:13:53 and read 20334 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 112):
EWR is closer to downtown, and roughly equidistant to much of midtown. Although in my experience, if driving, the LIE to the Van Wyck to JFK is rarely if ever faster than the tunnels and highway to EWR. JFK is great if you're in Queens, or even Brooklyn, and certainly for the Island, but in my experience not as much so from the City. Sure, the LIRR is somewhat conversatrsationient, if suboptimal with the connection in Jamaica. Either way, the larger point I was making was not about JFK vs EWR - it was about JFK vs EWR and LGA. And generally speaking, for most domestic markets, EWR and/or LGA are the preferred airports for high-yielding business traffic from the city, not JFK. The prime exceptions are probably LAX/SFO, but I believe those are the exceptions, not the rule

Maybe you had some pretty bad luck because as a local who goes to all three airports very frequently on many modes of transportation, I can't see how EWR is easier to get to from Manhattan. Traffic in Jersey is worse than traffic in Queens and Brooklyn, even when taking the LIE, which sucks, into account. I drive these roads often, so I experience this. And it's going to get worse in NJ once the Pulaski Skyway is closed for repairs for a year and a half in a few months, limiting the driving options in NJ even more.

And how is the Airtrain at Jamaica Station sub-optimal? It isn't that much if any further to walk from Jamaica Station to the JFK Airtrain than it is from Newark Airport Station to the Monorail. Aside from the Port Washington line, pretty much all LIRR trains go through Jamiaca station and stop there. Not every Jersey Transit train from Penn goes through Newark. Again, how is Jamaica Station is sub-optimal?

I don't know, if you're aware of some shortcuts to EWR from Manhattan that I am not aware of, let me know!

If you look at the Port's website, you will see that the average income of passengers going through JFK is about the same as those going through EWR. LGA attracts more higher income passengers for sure, but EWR and JFK aren't all that much different. And which airport attracts the higher yielding international passengers? Probably JFK.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-08 19:24:40 and read 20254 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 103):

United is currently supporting 10 Hubs, I'm SURE American can find use for the 8 hubs it currently has and in my opinion they should be looking at a Pacific/Asian Hub to Build, KIX/NRT/HND etc. since it's unlikely anyone else is going to sell THEIRS anytime soon.

United is still posting losses. They are hardly the poster child for airline mergers at this point in time.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SWALUV
Posted 2013-02-08 20:32:49 and read 19855 times.

Quoting GSPflyer (Reply 102):
DCA - Minor cuts if they are required to give up slots, but can probably be made up with less frequency/larger equipment on routes that AA and US both operate.

Just a random question but does this mean we could hope to see some more AA/US 757's going out of DCA      

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jayunited
Posted 2013-02-08 21:28:35 and read 19649 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 111):
I suspect there would definitely be substantial slack in the combined carrier's widebody fleet, particularly considering that both carriers are in the process of, or soon will be, taking delivery of new widebodies.
Quoting commavia (Reply 111):
BA wouldn't need to give up a flight "so AA can tap into government contracts." BA can already carry U.S. government traffic on its IAD-LHR flights because they carry the AA code. The reason it was suggested that BA might - theoretically - hand one flight to AA is so they don't dump extra capacity into the market. Replace, say, 1 BA 777 with 1 AA 777 for only a marginal net change in the overall number of joint seats offered in the market.

US Airways last A330-200 will be delivered sometime this year and they are not scheduled to take delivery of their A350's till 2016 and most of US Airways wide bodies are already being fully utilized they do not have a whole lot of slack. American will start taking delivery of 789 next year but most of those frames will serve as replacements for their aging 763 fleet. The only fleet that will see some slack is AA's 777 fleet with AA deploying some 773 on LHR and GRU routes this frees up some of their 772 that are currently flying those routes. But instead of duplicating routes over to Europe I think AA should use those freed up 772 to increase their presence in Asia or other parts of the world where AA is weak and US has nothing to offer in those regions.

For AA to take over one of BA routes on the IAD-LHR-IAD route would be a complete waste of AA metal especially since they are in a JV with BA and if BA can in fact carry U.S. government traffic due to the JV then it would be ridiculous for AA to waste its metal on this route when they could let BA operate it and still reap some of the profits. It is my opinion that any extra slack in the wide body fleet in the new combined AA should be use to expand either in Asia or, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Istanbul, there are a lot of places in the world where the new AA could use those spare aircraft and it is not replacing a BA flight on the IAD-LHR-IAD.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-09 04:24:10 and read 18868 times.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 114):
Maybe you had some pretty bad luck

Well then I've been having pretty bad luck consistently for pretty much my entire life. Coming from pretty much anywhere in the city, I've generally always found EWR or LGA easier to get to/from than JFK.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 117):
US Airways wide bodies are already being fully utilized they do not have a whole lot of slack.

Today. After a merger, and after network optimization and hub rationalization? Maybe not.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 117):
instead of duplicating routes over to Europe I think AA should use those freed up 772 to increase their presence in Asia or other parts of the world where AA is weak and US has nothing to offer in those regions.

AA should put the planes wherever they make the most money, whther it's IAD-LHR or somewhere else.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 117):
For AA to take over one of BA routes on the IAD-LHR-IAD route would be a complete waste of AA metal especially since they are in a JV with BA and if BA can in fact carry U.S. government traffic due to the JV then it would be ridiculous for AA to waste its metal on this route when they could let BA operate it and still reap some of the profits.

Well, it may not be a "complete waste." As I said, I could see it happening because while it's true that BA can carry U.S. government traffic under Fly America due to the codeshare, the inability for DC-area FFs to use their free upgrades on those flights might be somewhat less attractive compared to UA's FF offering in the area.

If this merger happens, AA will instantly become a very strong presence in the local WAS market, with the second best network out of DC and by far the most daily departures out of DC's preferred airport. Given that, I suggested that it might - might - make sense at some point down the road to switch one of the IAD-LHR flights to AA metal so that the huge AA FF base in DC had a means to use their free upgrades to Europe. The point I was trying to make was that doing that might help them attract new DC-area FFs.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 117):
any extra slack in the wide body fleet in the new combined AA should be use to expand either in Asia or, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Istanbul, there are a lot of places in the world where the new AA could use those spare aircraft

I just don't realistically see too many more longhaul opportunities for AA given its network and hub structure. AA's longhaul network is already strong, and the addition of the US Europe network would only enhance that.

With or without a merger, there really aren't too many more places in Asia that I think AA could grow, realistically, from where they are now. And that's largely fine - AA's network today is approaching where it needs to be to be competitive. The key Asia market missing is now HKG. I think it is plausible that AA could fly to HKG, and possibly expand somewhat in China somewhat if/when that market warrants. But beyond that, AA isn't likely to be flying its own metal to TPE, MNL, SIN or BKK anytime soon, nor does it need to be. Some have suggested AA - as part of the QANTAS JV - fly to Australia and/or New Zealand. Eh. Maybe, but maybe not.

As for the Mid East, too, I don't really see where AA could fly profitably. IST is low-yielding and dominated by an extremely strong competitor in TK who has low costs and a good product. DXB and AUH are dominated by their local carriers who, again, have lower costs and a great product (and, not incidentally, are both - at least as of now - AA's partners). India is notoriously low-yielding and very cost-intensive due to the stage length, and realistically probably only could work nonstop from the U.S. out of NYC. To me, that only leaves TLV, where I do think AA can and should expand - I could definitely see a JFK-TLV added alongside PHL-TLV.

Beyond Asia and the Mid East, Africa is a market AA should be in. With the 77Ws, I think MIA-JNB should happen. MIA-LOS and/or MIA-ACC might also work. But beyond that? There isn't much else, and as both DL and UA have proven, the market is no panacea.

And finally, South America. I think that one speaks for itself. AA is already so dominant there that at this point it's simply filling in the few remaining major cities on the continent it doesn't already serve with at least 1 if not more than 1 daily flight. There is some more growth potential left there for sure.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-02-09 05:26:20 and read 18765 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 118):
Beyond Asia and the Mid East, Africa is a market AA should be in. With the 77Ws, I think MIA-JNB should happen. MIA-LOS and/or MIA-ACC might also work. But beyond that? There isn't much else, and as both DL and UA have proven, the market is no panacea.

With AA finally finishing their Miami hub, its time to expand eyond Latin America and do something in the South Atlantic. With AA now having extra 777 available for new destinations, some will find new cities in Asia, Johannesburg would be a great start. Lagos culd be interesting too, but with no petroluim industry in Miami it may not work from there. DFW - Lagos could work, Continental flies Houston to Lagos.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: cjpmaestro
Posted 2013-02-09 06:07:25 and read 18667 times.

There is so much speculation on here about cuts and reductions, particularly to US hubs, and while I do see cuts at PHX I think it's proven the operations at PHL, CLT and DCA and profitable and have been. I'm not sure the same can be said at ORD, LAX and JFK (and really I don't know but US has been profitable for many quarters now and AA went into bankruptcy). I think AA's corner stone strategy looks good on paper but was it fiscally? I don't see cuts at DFW and MIA but what about the others?

Lastly, all the speculation on PHL is very interesting. This is an important hub in thee northeast and while it's 150 miles from NYC they are also all three hours from 60% of the US population. I think this is an interesting situation as with the other mega mergers I don't think there have been two hubs this close and this close to so much population. I think they both serve two different purposes and may have some slight right sizing but they will most certainly exist as hubs. Also the comments on here about Philadelphia are hysterical. This is a major US city with a diverse and relatively good economy.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-09 06:40:50 and read 18560 times.

With this merger AA will be in possession of much of the former Eastern air lines assets, except ATL:

Latin America routes
Northeast shuttle (via Trump)
Philadelphia hub assets (via Midway)
DCA (via NWA)
Eastern used to have a hub in CLT that complimented ATL up until the mid '80s.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AVLAirlineFreq
Posted 2013-02-09 07:01:00 and read 18467 times.

Quoting GSPflyer (Reply 102):
Also, Charlotte is a major financial hub (second largest in the U.S. after NYC, If I remember correctly

While it doesn't necessarily diminish its importance as a destination, I think Charlotte lost this ranking to San Francisco after the financial industry collapse.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-09 07:12:22 and read 18425 times.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 120):
Also the comments on here about Philadelphia are hysterical. This is a major US city with a diverse and relatively good economy.

I made some of those "histerical" comments. Never said Philadelphia was Duluth or Juneau... I just pointed that PHL is not such a major market as some (I assume) locals like to think.

Good economy? Philadelphia has one of the highest unemployment, poverty rates and lowest incomes among the major US urban areas:

http://articles.philly.com/2012-09-2...usehold-income-census-figures-show

Now you can talk me about a few Fortune 500 or universities we all know in the area... but I wouldn't expect less for a city its size (I mean, even Detroit has GM). Yet PHL is and has been in a downward trend. Now compare it to cities its size (or even smaller) like Boston (biotech, research, universities) or San Francisco and the Bay Area. Neither PHL has appeal to domestic or foreign tourists (how important is tourism for MIA or NYC?).

On top of that, access to EWR and IAD (with FAR more international options) is quite easy; hardly any other metro area its size has so many nearby international gateways. Again, then I assume that major European or Asian carriers like Air France, KLM, Swiss, JAL, Korean, Emirates, Qatar...many of whom serve similar sized markets in the US (even competing with local airlines with long-haul), are completely blind not having any intention to serve PHL and leaving that market to US Airways alone (along with BA and LH).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Ryefly
Posted 2013-02-09 07:41:33 and read 18317 times.

I suppose anything is possible with this industry, but its doubtful there will be many if any cuts to CLT. I think its more likely CLT will continue to grow. Their construction plans sure indicate that will be the case.

Sure CLT doesn't have the O&D that some of the other hubs do, but who cares if its profitable? CLT is one of if not the lowest cost major hub in the country. Eliminating efficient low cost service for more O&D in a congested high cost area doesn't make much sense to me. All it takes is a low fare airline or two with a better cost structure to start service on the same routes to erode any O&D advantage those hubs have. As long as CLT has a lot of traffic feeding into it, the O&D is the icing on the cake. Also, once the merger is complete, any major reduction is a huge win for Delta in ATL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-09 07:57:29 and read 18284 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 118):
Well then I've been having pretty bad luck consistently for pretty much my entire life. Coming from pretty much anywhere in the city, I've generally always found EWR or LGA easier to get to/from than JFK.

Well, like I said, I have lived in NYC for the last 13 years and you obviously don't live here. I most definitely use all three airports a lot more than you do. If you know a very quick secret way for me to get to EWR from Manhattan, I'm all ears. Until then, you really shouldn't make blanket statements like that unless you can back it up.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AA787
Posted 2013-02-09 08:15:44 and read 18192 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 118):
Quoting corinthians (Reply 114):
Maybe you had some pretty bad luck

Well then I've been having pretty bad luck consistently for pretty much my entire life. Coming from pretty much anywhere in the city, I've generally always found EWR or LGA easier to get to/from than JFK.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 125):
Well, like I said, I have lived in NYC for the last 13 years and you obviously don't live here. I most definitely use all three airports a lot more than you do. If you know a very quick secret way for me to get to EWR from Manhattan, I'm all ears. Until then, you really shouldn't make blanket statements like that unless you can back it up.

I think there might be a difference between how people get to the airport. From a mass transit perspective, EWR is far more convenient than JFK, particularly for those who live on the west side with easy access to the 1,2,3/ A,C,E. If you are driving, Van Wyck included, I do think JFK is still easier to get to than EWR (not to mention cheaper).

LGA is still the easiest one of all to get to from Manhattan based purely on how close it is. That is why the Shuttle has always been based out of LGA.

I think this conversation about convenience of airports in NYC is counterproductive to the discussion of AA/US hubs in the future.

Regarding JFK, I think that save one or two flights to PHX all US legacy flights will be cancelled in favor of more O&D traffic. AA has always had a strategy in Europe that when expanding they try to serve a foreign station from multiple hubs (compare AA's route network in Europe to say.... Continental). I think going forward you will see a flight to JFK coupled with a flight to another hub that offers connectiing opportunities (PHL, ORD, even MIA) for new destinations.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: corinthians
Posted 2013-02-09 08:33:29 and read 18161 times.

Quoting AA787 (Reply 126):
I think there might be a difference between how people get to the airport. From a mass transit perspective, EWR is far more convenient than JFK, particularly for those who live on the west side with easy access to the 1,2,3/ A,C,E. If you are driving, Van Wyck included, I do think JFK is still easier to get to than EWR (not to mention cheaper).

Working in Midtown West, I am curious how is it easier to get to EWR from there with the 1,2,3 and A,C,E. I take the E Train to and from Penn Station every day. To the best of my knowledge, the best mass transit option from Manhattan to EWR is via Jersey Transit to Newark Airport Station. You take that from Penn Station, same as taking the LIRR to Jamaica and then hopping on the Air Train to JFK. Sounds like they're the same. The train to Jamaica is actually quicker than the train to Newark since it's often direct where as the Newark train usually stops in Secaucus. Yes, I know you can take the PATH Downtown to Newark Penn Station, but how do you get to the airport from there? Cab? Bus? Transfer to a NJ Transit train?

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 123):
made some of those "histerical" comments. Never said Philadelphia was Duluth or Juneau... I just pointed that PHL is not such a major market as some (I assume) locals like to think.

Good economy? Philadelphia has one of the highest unemployment, poverty rates and lowest incomes among the major US urban areas:

http://articles.philly.com/2012-09-2...usehold-income-census-figures-show

Now you can talk me about a few Fortune 500 or universities we all know in the area... but I wouldn't expect less for a city its size (I mean, even Detroit has GM). Yet PHL is and has been in a downward trend. Now compare it to cities its size (or even smaller) like Boston (biotech, research, universities) or San Francisco and the Bay Area. Neither PHL has appeal to domestic or foreign tourists (how important is tourism for MIA or NYC?).

On top of that, access to EWR and IAD (with FAR more international options) is quite easy; hardly any other metro area its size has so many nearby international gateways. Again, then I assume that major European or Asian carriers like Air France, KLM, Swiss, JAL, Korean, Emirates, Qatar...many of whom serve similar sized markets in the US (even competing with local airlines with long-haul), are completely blind not having any intention to serve PHL and leaving that market to US Airways alone (along with BA and LH).

Good comments. I don't see foreign carriers rushing to go there.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: STT757
Posted 2013-02-09 08:38:03 and read 18157 times.

The fastest option is Amtrak from NY Penn station to EWR, 21 minutes cost $33. That's pretty darn good. Also the most comfortable.

[Edited 2013-02-09 08:40:13]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MasseyBrown
Posted 2013-02-09 10:20:49 and read 17922 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 106):
having three hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented.


Lufthansa, directly or through subsidiaries, operates BRU, FRA, MUC, ZHR, and VIE. AirFrance has AMS, ORY, and CDG (and may be in danger of adding MXP).

If the hubs have a big enough O&D market, capturing that O&D matters more than self-diversion of feed.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-09 10:24:33 and read 17909 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 119):
With AA finally finishing their Miami hub, its time to expand eyond Latin America and do something in the South Atlantic.

Agreed.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 119):
With AA now having extra 777 available for new destinations, some will find new cities in Asia, Johannesburg would be a great start.

JNB is a good start - it's a market I think AA could absolutely make work.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 119):
Lagos culd be interesting too, but with no petroluim industry in Miami it may not work from there. DFW - Lagos could work, Continental flies Houston to Lagos.

I think AA might be able to make LOS work, but probably with just a 767. I doubt DFW-LOS would ever work - IAH-LOS works largely because of the oil traffic, which is heavily concentrated in IAH.

Quoting cjpmaestro (Reply 120):
There is so much speculation on here about cuts and reductions, particularly to US hubs, and while I do see cuts at PHX I think it's proven the operations at PHL, CLT and DCA and profitable and have been. I'm not sure the same can be said at ORD, LAX and JFK (and really I don't know but US has been profitable for many quarters now and AA went into bankruptcy). I think AA's corner stone strategy looks good on paper but was it fiscally? I don't see cuts at DFW and MIA but what about the others?

The key is to stop comparing the two airlines as they independently exist and have performed up to now, and instead look at how a combined network would perform for a single unified airline in the future.

Sure, some of AA's hubs have been less profitable or unprofitable in the past, but that's because AA was structurally limited by a pre-bankruptcy cost structure and labor union restrictions that prohibited it from being competitive with its post-bankruptcy peers. Similarly, some of US hubs have been relatively more profitable up to now, but that's largely a function of the fact that most of US' employees are still working pretty much at bankruptcy-era compensation levels from 5+ years ago.

All of that will go away in a merger. The combined airline's costs will probably be slightly lower than AA's were pre-bankruptcy, and will absolutely be not-inconsequentially higher than US' costs are now. As such, all the old calculus of how profitable US hubs previously were is rendered somewhat meaningless. Thus why there is more of a focus on, and expectation of, dispraportionally more of the cuts coming from the pre-merger US network than the pre-merger AA network.

At the substantially higher cost levels - both labor costs and other costs - of a combined entity, much of the flying US previously did profitably will now become unprofitable, and likely be exited. This will likely be seen most vividly in CLT and PHX, with CLT seeing a fair reduction in flying/capacity and PHX seeing a drastic reduction in flying/capacity.

On the other hand, the relative change from the pre-merger (or no merger) to post-merger state is far less dramatic on the AA side simply because AA's hubs are generally higher-yielding, have already been progressively culled of some of their lowest-margin flying, and because many of the benefits of bankruptcy that those hubs needed in order to be (more) profitable - such as more competitive union contracts and more 70-100-seat jets - are still going to happen whether there is a merger or not.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 125):
Well, like I said, I have lived in NYC for the last 13 years and you obviously don't live here. I most definitely use all three airports a lot more than you do. If you know a very quick secret way for me to get to EWR from Manhattan, I'm all ears. Until then, you really shouldn't make blanket statements like that unless you can back it up.

I don't live in New York now, but I have before. You have your experiences, I have mine.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jayunited
Posted 2013-02-09 12:29:49 and read 17644 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 118):
Given that, I suggested that it might - might - make sense at some point down the road to switch one of the IAD-LHR flights to AA metal so that the huge AA FF base in DC had a means to use their free upgrades to Europe. The point I was trying to make was that doing that might help them attract new DC-area FFs.

This has to be one of the worst reasons I have ever heard for a airline to add a flight on its own metal, AA would not make any money. Switching a flight to ones own metal so that their FF base can use their free upgrades would cost AA money because if the percentage of people upgrading into business class from a coach class ticket is greater than the number of people who actually buy a business class ticket then AA is going to loss money on the route. Although this is the norm on flights from LAX-HNL-LAX there is no way AA would start a flight to LHR from IAD for this reason. If AA puts this route on their own metal it will be because they want to tap into their customer base and attract new customers who would actually buy a business class or first class ticket. I can't speak about BA but I to know a lot about UA and depending on the time of year it is nearly impossible for any one less than a GS passenger to get upgraded into first class and in some cases we can't even upgrade the GS passenger because first class is full and in business there may be 1 or 2 seats available for upgrades the rest are filled with passengers who actually bought a business class ticket. If AA starts this route it won't be because AA wants to award their huge FF base with free upgrades to business class on flights to LHR.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-09 12:49:30 and read 17586 times.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 131):
This has to be one of the worst reasons I have ever heard for a airline to add a flight on its own metal, AA would not make any money. Switching a flight to ones own metal so that their FF base can use their free upgrades would cost AA money because if the percentage of people upgrading into business class from a coach class ticket is greater than the number of people who actually buy a business class ticket then AA is going to loss money on the route.

First suggestion: take a deep breath.

Second suggestion: re-read my comments.

I never suggested AA start a flight simply to give free upgrades to people. A hypothetical AA flight IAD-LHR would be just like every single other flight AA operates, meaning revenue and yield management would attempt to maximize profit and sell as many revenue seats - in all cabins - as possible at the highest possible price. However, the benefit of one single AA flight IAD-LHR as opposed to three all on BA is that AAdvantage members don't have the chance of using free upgrades on BA. They do have that chance on AA. As such, the ability to offer top-tier AAdvantage members in the D.C. area the change - not the guarantee - of using their free upgrade might help AA attract those high-yielding, fare-paying frequent flyers to the AA/oneworld (as opposed to UA/Star) network.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 131):
If AA puts this route on their own metal it will be because they want to tap into their customer base and attract new customers who would actually buy a business class or first class ticket.

Obviously. Nobody was ever suggesting otherwise. Again, all I was suggesting is that giving U.S.-based frequent flyers the chance to use their free upgrades when headed to Europe might help with attracting those "new customers who would actually buy a business class or first class ticket."

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bagoldex
Posted 2013-02-09 13:51:01 and read 17469 times.

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 122):

While it doesn't necessarily diminish its importance as a destination, I think Charlotte lost this ranking to San Francisco after the financial industry collapse.

Not even close. Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Miami, DC, Houston, Los Angeles, Atlanta ...

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-09 16:36:46 and read 17100 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 86):
If you think CLT will drop by 1/3, please start listing the cuts. Markets and frequencies.

At first I though - oy vey, really - but then, I thought that if I could get a timetable that I could easily copy and paste onto my spreadsheet, I thought - why not, and spend a few minutes on this. Well, once I started it took me more than a few minutes, but once I started..... I kept going. Here is the link to the timetable that I used

http://www.trvlink.com/download/us/usschedules.pdf

With that..... I noticed that a lot of these destinations near CLT have about 8 or 9 frequencies with the 50 seat CRJs or props. Way too much considering the local O&D, which I posted from Q3 12 where I could. There's also some international O&D if I could find it, and posted both domestic and international O&D where I though applicable.

After looking at everything, I think CLT will be in for a huge massacre if this merger happens. I really don't think the new AA/US is going to be having 8 banks at CLT, and I reduced CLT to 3 banks, where in many cases it's still far too generous. Also, my total of current daily flights at CLT is around 665, and that may be because I included as daily a lot of frequencies that may not be available on week-ends, or other times. Nonetheless, I don't disagree that maybe there are a few too many flights that I listed..... fine.... but I also listed what I think a new CLT will look like with an AA/US merger. So here it is....... first the destination from CLT with miles, then the current number of flights, then what I would think will happen, and then any local passengers per day if relevant.....


Akron OH US (CAK) 394 miles …….. 5 ……… 3 …….
Albany NY US (ALB) 645 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 160 ppd
Allentown PA US (ABE) 480 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 64 ppd
Antigua AG (ANU) 1717 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Aruba AW (AUA) 1706 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 89 ppd
Asheville NC US (AVL) 92 miles ……. 10 ……. 3 ……. >10 ppd
Atlanta GA US (ATL) 227 miles ……. 9 ……. 6 …….
Augusta (Bush) GA US (AGS) 141 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
Austin TX US (AUS) 1033 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 200 ppd
Baltimore (Balt/Wash Intl) MD US (BWI) 360 miles ……. 9 ……. 6 …….
Baton Rouge LA US (BTR) 676 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 47 ppd
Belize City (Goldson) BZ (BZE) 1299 miles ……. 0.3 ……. 0.3 …….
Birmingham AL US (BHM) 351 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 161 ppd
Boston MA US (BOS) 727 miles ……. 9 ……. 8 …….
Bridgetown BB (BGI) 2029 miles ……. 0.1 ……. 0.1 …….
Buffalo NY US (BUF) 545 miles ……. 4 ……. 3 ……. 248 ppd
Burlington VT US (BTV) 760 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Cancun MX (CUN) 1041 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 114 ppd
Charleston SC US (CHS) 168 miles ……. 9 ……. 2 ……. 23 ppd
Charleston WV US (CRW) 220 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 16 ppd
Charlottesville VA US (CHO) 244 miles ……. 7 ……. 2 ……. 24 ppd
Chattanooga TN US (CHA) 242 miles ……. 6 ……. 2 ……. 42 ppd
Chicago (O’Hare) IL US (ORD) 599 miles ……. 8 ……. 9 …….
Cincinnati OH US (CVG) 335 miles ……. 5 ……. 3 ……. 154 ppd
Cleveland OH US (CLE) 430 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
Columbia SC US (CAE) 89 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
Columbus OH US (CMH) 346 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 160 ppd
Cozumel MX (CZM) 1076 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Dallas/Ft Worth TX US (DFW) 936 miles ……. 8 ……. 8 ……. 638 ppd
Daytona Beach FL US (DAB) 416 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 45 ppd
Dayton OH US (DAY) 370 miles ……. 6 ……. 3 ……. 99 ppd
Denver CO US (DEN) 1340 miles ……. 6 ……. 3 ……. 439 ppd
Detroit MI US (DTW) 500 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 363 ppd
Fayetteville NC US (FAY) 117 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 …….
Fayetteville (NW AR Rgl) AR US (XNA) 754 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 88 ppd
Florence SC US (FLO) 99 miles ……. 6 ……. 3 …….
Frankfurt DE (FRA) 4396 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Freeport BS (FPO) 611 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 11 ppd
Ft Lauderdale FL US (FLL) 632 miles ……. 8 ……. 4 …….
Ft Myers FL US (RSW) 600 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 120 ppd
Ft Walton Beach FL US (VPS) 460 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 …….
Gainesville FL US (GNV) 389 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 ……. 31 ppd
Grand Cayman Is. KY (GCM) 1097 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 66 ppd
Greensboro/High Pt NC US (GSO) 82 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 …….
Greenville NC US (PGV) 202 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 …….
Greenville-Spartanburg SC US (GSP) 75 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 …….
Gulfport MS US (GPT) 578 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 ……. 37 ppd
Harrisburg PA US (MDT) 412 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 105 ppd
Hartford CT US (BDL) 643 miles ……. 7 ……. 4 ……. 337 ppd
Hilton Head SC US (HHH) 207 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
Houston (Bush) TX US (IAH) 913 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 376 ppd
Huntington WV US (HTS) 235 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 …….
Huntsville AL US (HSV) 334 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 63 ppd
Indianapolis IN US (IND) 428 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 284 ppd
Jackson (Intl) MS US (JAN) 563 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 ……. 63 ppg
Jacksonville FL US (JAX) 329 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 145 ppd
Jacksonville NC US (OAJ) 190 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 …….
Johnson City (Tri-City Apt) TN US (TRI) 120 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
Kansas City MO US (MCI) 809 miles ……. 5 ……. 3 ……. 261 ppd
Key West FL US (EYW) 736 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 46 ppd
Knoxville TN US (TYS) 177 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 ……. 31 ppd
Las Vegas NV US (LAS) 1916 miles ……. 5 ……. 3 ……. 481 ppd
Lexington KY US (LEX) 282 miles ……. 6 ……. 3 ……. 48 ppd
Liberia CR (LIR) 1719 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Little Rock AR US (LIT) 642 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 85 ppd
London (Gatwick) GB (LGW) 4009 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Los Angeles CA US (LAX) 2125 miles ……. 6 ……. 4 ……. 868 ppd
Louisville KY US (SDF) 336 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 108 ppd
Lynchburg VA US (ston Glenn Field (Municipal) (LYH / KLYH), USA - Virginia">LYH) 175 miles ……. 6 ……. 2 ……. 11 ppd
Manchester NH US (MHT) 737 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 …….
Melbourne FL US (MLB) 491 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 39 ppd
Memphis TN US (MEM) 512 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 166 ppd
Mexico City MX (MEX) 1552 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 91 ppd
Miami FL US (MIA) 650 miles ……. 7 ……. 8 …….
Milwaukee WI US (MKE) 651 miles ……. 5 ……. 3 ……. 259 ppd
Minneapolis St Paul MN US (MSP) 930 miles ……. 4 ……. 4 ……. 445 ppd
Mobile AL US (MOB) 527 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 40 ppd
Montego Bay JM (MBJ) 1166 miles ……. 4 ……. 1 ……. 83 ppd
Montgomery AL US (MGM) 373 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 31 ppd
Montreal (P E Trudeau) QU CA (YUL) 801 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 55 ppd
Myrtle Beach SC US (MYR) 156 miles ……. 10 ……. 2 ……. 17 ppd
Nashville TN US (BNA) 329 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 234 ppd
Nassau BS (NAS) 731 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 72 ppd
New Bern NC US (EWN) 221 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
New Orleans LA US (MSY) 651 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 247 ppd
Newport News VA US (PHF) 281 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 …….
New York (JFK) NY US (JFK) 541 miles ……. 6 ……. 5 …….
New York (La Guardia) NY US (LGA) 543 miles ……. 14 ……. 12 …….
New York (Newark Liberty Intl) NY US (EWR) 528 miles ……. 8 ……. 5 …….
Norfolk VA US (ORF) 289 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 …….
Omaha NE US (OMA) 913 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 108 ppd
Orlando FL US (MCO) 468 miles ……. 9 ……. 5 ……. 583 ppd
Ottawa OT CA (FL US (PNS) 489 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 70 ppd
Philadelphia PA US (PHL) 448 miles ……. 10 ……. 6 ……. 548 ppd
Phoenix AZ US (PHX) 1774 miles ……. 9 ……. 4 ……. 321 ppd
Pittsburgh PA US (PIT) 366 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 ……. 297 ppd
Portland ME US (PWM) 812 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 155 ppd
Portland OR US (PDX) 2282 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Providence RI US (PVD) 683 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 …….
Providenciales TC (PLS) 1064 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 51 ppd
Punta Cana DO (PUJ) 1381 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 ……. 66 ppd
Raleigh/Durham NC US (RDU) 130 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 ……. 22 ppd
Richmond VA US (RIC) 256 miles ……. 8 ……. 3 ……. 110 ppd
Rio De Janeiro (Intl) RJ BR (GIG) 4693 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 19 ppd
Roanoke VA US (ROA) 155 miles ……. 9 ……. 2 ……. 10 ppd
Rochester NY US (ROC) 572 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Salisbury-Ocean City MD US (SBY) 370 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 …….
Salt Lake City UT US (Cont) ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
San Antonio TX US (SAT) 1095 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 210 ppd
San Diego CA US (SAN) 2077 miles ……. 2 ……. 2 ……. 232 ppd
San Francisco CA US (SFO) 2296 miles ……. 4 ……. 3 …….
San Jose CR (SJO) 1747 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 69 ppd
San Juan PR (SJU) 1474 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 …….
Sarasota FL US (SRQ) 547 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 68 ppd
Savannah GA US (SAV) 214 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 ……. 27 ppd
Seattle/Tacoma WA US (SEA) 2279 miles ……. 2 ……. 2 ……. 378 ppd
St Croix VI (STX) 1562 miles ……. 0.1 ……. 0.1 …….
St Louis MO US (STL) 575 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 288 ppd
St Lucia (Hewamorr) LC (UVF) 1933 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
St Maarten AN (SXM) 1611 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 …….
St Thomas VI (STT) 1520 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 …….
Syracuse NY US (SYR) 603 miles ……. 3 ……. 2 ……. 162 ppd
Tallahassee FL US (TLH) 387 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 …….
Tampa FL US (TPA) 508 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 349 ppd
Toronto (Pearson) OT CA (IAD) 321 miles ……. 8 ……. 5 …….
Washington (Reagan) DC US (DCA) 330 miles ……. 11 ……. 8 …….
West Palm Beach FL US (PBI) 590 miles ……. 7 ……. 3 ……. 159 ppd
White Plains NY US (HPN) 563 miles ……. 3 ……. 1 …….
Wilmington NC US (ILM) 185 miles ……. 9 ……. 3 ……. 25 ppd
Wilkes-Barre PA US (AVP) 508 miles ……. 2 ……. 1 …….

TOTAL ....... 664.......... 340


(pardon my sloppiness with the columns, but these just take too long to fix here)


So..... now in conclusion... I don't think there's going to be 6 or 7 or 8 flights per day to/from CLT and the destinations where the local O&D isn't there for that anymore, especially with the small CRJs. CLT will do quite well in handling its O&D, even with 3 banks.

And now since I've done this, sorry to say... but again... now I think CLT will be in for a big massacre.... and it will be more of a 50% reduction.....

edit added: this system is doing something I can't control when Canadian destinations are involved, e.g you see Ottawa and Pensacola together, and Toronto and the Washington DC area airports are getting mixed in together. When I look at it in edit..... it looks okay, so I don't know quite what to do, and the numbers with these aren't quite accurate. I'll attempt to fix this in a later post if I can.......

 

[Edited 2013-02-09 16:43:10]

[Edited 2013-02-09 17:12:51]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-09 17:06:20 and read 17014 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 91):
Domestically, CLT looks like this:

New York: 2678
Boston: 1239
Washington DC: 1106
Chicago: 957
Los Angeles: 732
Dallas: 655
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 654
Orlando: 612
Philadelphia: 601
San Francisco: 557
Las Vegas: 542
Minneapolis: 475
Detroit: 392
Seattle: 383
Atlanta: 375
Tampa: 370
Houston: 359
Providence: 340
Phoenix: 300

Where's Denver? The last four quarters of the T-100 show the pax numbers at 375, 353, 405 and 439.



 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-09 17:26:35 and read 16944 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 134):

At first I though - oy vey, really - but then, I thought that if I could get a timetable that I could easily copy and paste onto my spreadsheet, I thought - why not, and spend a few minutes on this. Well, once I started it took me more than a few minutes, but once I started..... I kept going. Here is the link to the timetable that I used

http://www.trvlink.com/download/us/usschedules.pdf


And now since I've done this, sorry to say... but again... now I think CLT will be in for a big massacre.... and it will be more of a 50% reduction.....

[Edited 2013-02-09 16:43:10]

where's Des Moines? Pensacola?

340 is too low....I still see CLT somewhere between 400-500 flights a day minimum, similar to what DL has at MSP and DTW. Cut back too much in the southeast and you start ceding traffic to DL/ATL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AVLAirlineFreq
Posted 2013-02-09 17:29:37 and read 16932 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 134):
After looking at everything, I think CLT will be in for a huge massacre if this merger happens. I really don't think the new AA/US is going to be having 8 banks at CLT, and I reduced CLT to 3 banks, where in many cases it's still far too generous. Also, my total of current daily flights at CLT is around 665, and that may be because I included as daily a lot of frequencies that may not be available on week-ends, or other times. Nonetheless, I don't disagree that maybe there are a few too many flights that I listed..... fine.... but I also listed what I think a new CLT will look like with an AA/US merger. So here it is....... first the destination from CLT with miles, then the current number of flights, then what I would think will happen, and then any local passengers per day if relevant.....


Asheville NC US (AVL) 92 miles ……. 10 ……. 3 ……. >10 ppd

Seriously? Where's all that connecting traffic going to go?

I applaud your effort, by the way, but what's the rationale behind taking a giant meat cleaver to what is perhaps the most profitable hub in the combined carrier?

[Edited 2013-02-09 17:32:23]

[Edited 2013-02-09 18:21:46]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-09 17:55:39 and read 16833 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 135):
Where's Denver? The last four quarters of the T-100 show the pax numbers at 375, 353, 405 and 439.

I missed it. My apologies.

Quoting corinthians (Reply 127):
Working in Midtown West, I am curious how is it easier to get to EWR from there with the 1,2,3 and A,C,E. I take the E Train to and from Penn Station every day. To the best of my knowledge, the best mass transit option from Manhattan to EWR is via Jersey Transit to Newark Airport Station. You take that from Penn Station, same as taking the LIRR to Jamaica and then hopping on the Air Train to JFK. Sounds like they're the same. The train to Jamaica is actually quicker than the train to Newark since it's often direct where as the Newark train usually stops in Secaucus. Yes, I know you can take the PATH Downtown to Newark Penn Station, but how do you get to the airport from there? Cab? Bus? Transfer to a NJ Transit train?

I prefer to use EWR as opposed to LGA or JFK if Im going to Lower Manhattan. The train to Penn station is perfect.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-09 18:03:39 and read 16803 times.

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 136):
where's Des Moines? Pensacola?

My apologies..... DSM I'll give and will say it'll stay with it's one daily. PSN and IAD somehow got next to the Canadian destinations of Ottawa and Toronto (as I explained in my edit above) and there's something in this system that's combining these that I can't control. So with that, I'll try to separate these here.....

Ottawa OT CA (YOW) 750 miles ……. 1 ……. 0 ……. 14 ppd

........ and.......
Pensacola FL US (PNS) 489 miles ……. 5 ……. 2 ……. 70 ppd

and now....

Toronto (Pearson) OT CA (YYZ) 588 miles ……. 4 ……. 2 ……. 172 ppd

unmixed with Dulles
Washington (Dulles) DC US (IAD) 321 miles ……. 8 ……. 5 …….


I know that my list probably isn't 100% accurate, and there may be some overstating of the schedule, or system limitation, or whatever...... The thing is that in the big picture (which I think that my list shows) here I don't think that the new AA/US is going to be allowing 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 daily CRJs to/from CLT with destinations where there isn't some O&D to support it, e.g. PNS is a perfect example above...... does anyone really thing that there are going to be 5 50 seat CRJs daily here with only 70 O&D pax per day? I personally don't think so, and if fares are raised to match costs, well, pax may decide to drive, or just stay home.........

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 137):
I applaud your effort, by the way, but what's the rationale behind taking a giant meat cleaver to what is perhaps the most profitable hub in the combined carrier?

Thank you

With new increased costs for the AA/US, I think that this traffic isn't going to be going anywhere, because frequencies will be cut to match CLT O&D, and fares will be increased, and therefore less pax will fly. I know this works as is now, and may very well continue working if US remains alone. But again, with a merger that will eventually increase costs..... well......?? And even with US standing alone, when (not IF, like maybe this year, next year, or 3 years from now) fuel costs rise, these 50 seat CRJs simply will not fly profitably, and that is something that I think that Doug Parker and crew have been losing sleep over, and I would think that they're aware what 5 daily CRJs to PNS (for example) will be costing them if there's only about 70 daily O&D pax.... and hence their anxiety to merge.

Anyway..... this is all still just my    everyone....

All the best.......

 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BHMNONREV
Posted 2013-02-09 18:04:24 and read 16785 times.

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 137):
I applaud your effort, by the way, but what's the rationale behind taking a giant meat cleaver to what is perhaps the most profitable hub in the combined carrier?


As others here have stated, once the combined operations come into play the increased costs of doing business will erode those advantages to/from CLT.

While I personally don't agree with point2point's projected cuts at CLT, I do believe a 20-25% reduction would be reasonable. The new combined carrier will have so many connecting opportunities available throughout the system, that elimination of some services is inevitable. IMHO the only thing CLT has going for it post-merger is their location. While CLT may be profitable for US does not mean it will be as much under AA/US.

Just my $.02..

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: crAAzy
Posted 2013-02-09 18:11:39 and read 16782 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 134):

Antigua AG (ANU) 1717 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Belize City (Goldson) BZ (BZE) 1299 miles ……. 0.3 ……. 0.3 …….
Bridgetown BB (BGI) 2029 miles ……. 0.1 ……. 0.1 …….
Cozumel MX (CZM) 1076 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Liberia CR (LIR) 1719 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….
Freeport BS (FPO) 611 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 11 ppd
Rio De Janeiro (Intl) RJ BR (GIG) 4693 miles ……. 1 ……. 1 ……. 19 ppd
St Lucia (Hewamorr) LC (UVF) 1933 miles ……. 0.2 ……. 0.2 …….

These routes definitely aren't going to stick around in CLT after a merger where MIA and DFW are in play for many of the same CLT feed.


Very nice work and your time is appreciated in putting this together .

I too think CLT will likely remain around the 400-450 flt/day level. Mainly because it really doesn't make much sense to have less than 3 connecting flights a day in most markets if you want to remain competitive, especially against DL in ATL.

[Edited 2013-02-09 18:14:02]

[Edited 2013-02-09 18:17:20]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: kngkyle
Posted 2013-02-09 18:19:20 and read 16733 times.

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 122):
Also, Charlotte is a major financial hub (second largest in the U.S. after NYC, If I remember correctly

Only if by 'finance' you mean exclusively banking. And that is only because the largest US bank (Bank of America) is headquartered there. Lose that, and you lose almost everything.

By every logical metric, Chicago is far and away the 2nd largest financial hub in the US, and in most metrics #4 in the world, after New York, London, and Tokyo. Hong Kong and Singapore are also up there. Boston and San Francisco are both above Charlotte in most lists as well.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AVLAirlineFreq
Posted 2013-02-09 18:26:23 and read 16693 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 139):
With new increased costs for the AA/US, I think that this traffic isn't going to be going anywhere, because frequencies will be cut to match CLT O&D, and fares will be increased, and therefore less pax will fly. I know this works as is now, and may very well continue working if US remains alone. But again, with a merger that will eventually increase costs..... well......?? And even with US standing alone, when (not IF, like maybe this year, next year, or 3 years from now) fuel costs rise, these 50 seat CRJs simply will not fly profitably, and that is something that I think that Doug Parker and crew have been losing sleep over, and I would think that they're aware what 5 daily CRJs to PNS (for example) will be costing them if there's only about 70 daily O&D pax.... and hence their anxiety to merge.

It would be interesting to do the same thing for the other hubs in the combined carrier, including both cuts and additions (including any adds to CLT).

Of course, you may also have a life.
 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-09 20:17:51 and read 16485 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 139):

Thank you

With new increased costs for the AA/US, I think that this traffic isn't going to be going anywhere, because frequencies will be cut to match CLT O&D, and fares will be increased, and therefore less pax will fly. I know this works as is now, and may very well continue working if US remains alone. But again, with a merger that will eventually increase costs..... well......?? And even with US standing alone, when (not IF, like maybe this year, next year, or 3 years from now) fuel costs rise, these 50 seat CRJs simply will not fly profitably, and that is something that I think that Doug Parker and crew have been losing sleep over, and I would think that they're aware what 5 daily CRJs to PNS (for example) will be costing them if there's only about 70 daily O&D pax.... and hence their anxiety to merge.

Anyway..... this is all still just my everyone....

All the best.......


that may be true...but back to PNS as an example... PNS-CLT is pretty much all CR9's...not to mention what is the O&D between PNS and ATL for example? They run something like 8 MD80's between the 2, sometimes a 757 is thrown in as well. I'm sure the seats outweigh the O&D between PNS and ATL. I realize O & D is importnant but its also important to have a good connection point as well. Back to our PNS example, DL is tops there because its just a quick jump up to ATL and you can go all points from there, west, east coast, northeast, midwest, europe etc. AA provides good service to the west and the upper mississippi valley midwest through DFW, sure you can go to the northeast on AA from PNS but only if you fly 600 miles southeast to MIA, definitely out of the way. You can also do that through DFW, but thats also out of the way. CLT opens up a huge gap in this area and will compete with DL now. This will be true for many cities in the southeast.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-02-09 20:31:47 and read 16493 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 28):
Huh? US was already planning on flying CLT-LHR this summer. AA, with a merger, would be flying it instantly. And I could definitely see BA coming back to CLT with a second daily CLT-LHR flight. The halo effect of the alliance would drive lots of traffic on CLT-LHR, which is part of why CLT-FRA would likely get cut back (my guess is to 1x daily 763).

I don't think that CLT would survive with RDU being only 130 miles from CLT. CLT would be treated just like AA treated STL and RDU.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-09 20:41:34 and read 16439 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 138):
I missed it. My apologies.

That's cool my friend...... easy to miss something when dealing with tons of numbers and I probably wouldn't have noticed had I not been looking at something in the numbers myself.......

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 141):
These routes definitely aren't going to stick around in CLT after a merger where MIA and DFW are in play for many of the same CLT feed.

Maybe other than the GIG route, I can see the others remaining. These once or twice weekly flights into the resorts are a less concern that I would have here than 9 some daily CRJs with RDU, CHS, TYS, ROA or SAV and others, or 8 some daily CRJs to MEM, RWS, GSP, RIC, BNA, etc., or those 7 dailies to EWN, PHF, etc., and the 6 dailies to .......... basically the high amount of CRJs used on these routes where there is virtually no O&D. Now...... I commend Parker and crew for how they've been able to get the most out of what they have, including probably best use of the CRJs and in developing this sub-market of Southeast U.S. air travel, but either some unexpected or even expected rise in fuel costs going too high at some point would with about a 95% chance collapse this whole operation. At least get in some bigger planes and reduce frequencies here where possible, I would think to start.

Quoting BHMNONREV (Reply 140):
While I personally don't agree with point2point's projected cuts at CLT, I do believe a 20-25% reduction would be reasonable.

I can see your outlook, and personally would extend all the best to the people in the Charlotte area with this, but if this merger happens, now that I sort of looked at what's really doing with CLT, well.... my sense of gloom ticked up a bit. Anyways...... IF (again IF, but I think most of us can agree that there now is a sorta, maybe, could be chance of this merger actually happening) AA and US get together...... we'll get back here on 2/9/16 (exactly three years from now) and we'll have our "I Told You So" Awards.........

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 143):
Of course, you may also have a life.

I actually do have a life..... and have to get away from this site for a few days at a time sometimes.........

As for doing all of the other hubs....... oy vey........

 

[Edited 2013-02-09 20:43:17]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AVLAirlineFreq
Posted 2013-02-09 20:44:20 and read 16435 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 145):
I don't think that CLT would survive with RDU being only 130 miles from CLT. CLT would be treated just like AA treated STL and RDU.

What does the proximity of CLT to RDU have to do with CLT's future?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: 9w748capt
Posted 2013-02-09 20:53:23 and read 16384 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 145):
I don't think that CLT would survive with RDU being only 130 miles from CLT. CLT would be treated just like AA treated STL and RDU.

Dude just .... no. Just curious did you read any of this thread? It's incredible the info that's being discussed.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-09 22:16:39 and read 16214 times.

Quoting 9w748capt (Reply 148):

Dude just .... no. Just curious did you read any of this thread? It's incredible the info that's being discussed.

Amen!!! I dont think brilondon has any sort of clue to CLT or how it will play an important role in AA's network. The thought of CLT ending up like RDU or STL is just plain ignorant. They may as well hand over the keys to DL and tell them to take all the traffic to the fastest growing part of the US. That would be extremely stupid on AA's part. UA would be moving in there faster than you can say Waffle House if they did. Not going to happen. CLT isnt going anywhere. It may not be as large as it is now but it will still be a significant hub. Geography is on its side. Its th reason UA wanted US back in 2000, and i'm sure a key reason for this merger. Brings in an entire new region where AA is weak to non existant.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-09 23:06:02 and read 16106 times.

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 129):
Lufthansa, directly or through subsidiaries, operates BRU, FRA, MUC, ZHR, and VIE. AirFrance has AMS, ORY, and CDG (and may be in danger of adding MXP).

If the hubs have a big enough O&D market, capturing that O&D matters more than self-diversion of feed.

Okay, I should have looked outside of the USA more than I did. But we don't have any airlines with a hub at two of the airports serving a city like AF does. FRA, MUC, and ZRH are the only hubs within 250 miles of each other, and they do work just fine. But in the USA, it hasn't been done before, at least not recently.

Quoting kngkyle (Reply 142):
Only if by 'finance' you mean exclusively banking. And that is only because the largest US bank (Bank of America) is headquartered there. Lose that, and you lose almost everything.

By every logical metric, Chicago is far and away the 2nd largest financial hub in the US, and in most metrics #4 in the world, after New York, London, and Tokyo. Hong Kong and Singapore are also up there. Boston and San Francisco are both above Charlotte in most lists as well.

This is true. Charlotte is good for banking, but Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, probably in that order, are second, third, fourth, and fifth respectively.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 05:01:37 and read 15907 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 150):
But in the USA, it hasn't been done before, at least not recently.

???

United - today - operates huge hubs in EWR and IAD, and those are less than 250 miles apart and in precisely the same geographic region. And both of those hubs are also far closer to each other in size - relatively - than JFK is to PHL.

Delta - today - operates hubs in DTW and CVG, and those are less than 250 miles apart. And, in terms of size (departures) relative to each other, they're about the same as AA would have with JFK and PHL - DTW and PHL each have about 4x the departures as CVG and JFK, respectively.

United also for years operated to substantial hubs in SFO and LAX, and those are less than 350 miles apart, also in the same region of the country.

Airlines operating two hubs close to each other is nothing new, in the U.S. or overseas. The key is whether those two hubs serve different roles that don't uneconomically overlap and compete with each other. In the case of JFK and PHL, they would not. The two "hubs" are already quite well optimized for different roles, and that would only intensify if a merger occurs.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SCQ83
Posted 2013-02-10 06:37:16 and read 15709 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 150):
Okay, I should have looked outside of the USA more than I did. But we don't have any airlines with a hub at two of the airports serving a city like AF does. FRA, MUC, and ZRH are the only hubs within 250 miles of each other, and they do work just fine. But in the USA, it hasn't been done before, at least not recently.

I don't think it is a good comparison anyway. In the US, airlines want to have as much as geographical scope as possible, so a corporate client can fly today to Oregon and tomorrow to South Carolina. That is why even a relatively small airline like US Airways has hubs in such diverse locations like PHX and PHL. In Europe, they want to be the dominant player in the country (and of course try to get more traffic from all over the continent for their long-haul).

For instance, even LH with its size and central location within Europe is losing many markets (i.e. UK-Spain, the largest pair of countries in Europe by passenger numbers). It is fine, their business is be the airline of reference for German companies and customers.

Just taking the model to the US, it would be like an airline stablishing hubs in LAX, SFO and SAN to be the "Californian" airline and serving as much as they can from there (and taking traffic East Coast - Asia if possible, for instance) the way that Lufthansa is the German airline. AA+US does not need 3 hubs so close because they don't need or can be the "airline" (with UA in IAD, DL, UA, B6 in NYC...) in the NYC-WAS corridor.

Then there are (even if the EU) national, lingustic and different regulations among the different countries.

[Edited 2013-02-10 06:38:55]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: a/c dxer
Posted 2013-02-10 07:21:37 and read 15562 times.

Will be interesting to see what the Justice Department will require. AA/USA might be required to give one hub up to get the merger approved.


On the CLT hub if they do downsize it another carrier will come due to location and infrastructure. Wouldnt be surprised if they had to downsize it that Jetblue or Southwest would try to take over.

[Edited 2013-02-10 07:23:56]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: DLPMMM
Posted 2013-02-10 07:59:29 and read 15416 times.

Why would the cut frequencies to HHH and SAV from CLT? There are no other airports in the AA/US system that are reasonable for connecting from these areas...I know as these are my home airports and I dropped AA from EXP to nothing because I could only get to MIA on an ATR or DFW on an ERJ and only a couple of times per day.

HHH is a little gold mine for US as they have no competition and an upscale population.

You seem to miss the whole point of having a southeast hub. If I want to go to CLT I will drive, but if I want to fly somewhere, I have to go through ATL, CLT, or IAD. MIA and DFW are worthless as southeast hubs.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AVLAirlineFreq
Posted 2013-02-10 09:07:55 and read 15212 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 139):
With new increased costs for the AA/US, I think that this traffic isn't going to be going anywhere, because frequencies will be cut to match CLT O&D, and fares will be increased, and therefore less pax will fly. I know this works as is now, and may very well continue working if US remains alone. But again, with a merger that will eventually increase costs..... well......?? And even with US standing alone, when (not IF, like maybe this year, next year, or 3 years from now) fuel costs rise, these 50 seat CRJs simply will not fly profitably, and that is something that I think that Doug Parker and crew have been losing sleep over, and I would think that they're aware what 5 daily CRJs to PNS (for example) will be costing them if there's only about 70 daily O&D pax.... and hence their anxiety to merge.

So let me ask a question...why, then, does it work for DL at ATL? Sure, ATL has larger O&D for almost all of the same markets served with such high frequency via CLT, but likely still not sufficient to justify 9x frequency from AVL or 9x daily from BHM (almost entirely on mainline) on O&D alone. And everything out of ATL is either RJ or mainline jet.

And if, for instance, US/AA did cut AVL-CLT to 3x daily (just using that as an example, not because it's my hometown airport, but it suffers the deepest cuts in frequency in your model), do you foresee that US/AA would add flights to other hubs to at least partially offset those cuts? Add more mainline capacity between CLT and those destinations? Or do they walk away from much of that traffic entirely?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-10 09:19:09 and read 15184 times.

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 155):

So let me ask a question...why, then, does it work for DL at ATL? Sure, ATL has larger O&D for almost all of the same markets served with such high frequency via CLT, but likely still not sufficient to justify 9x frequency from AVL or 9x daily from BHM (almost entirely on mainline) on O&D alone. And everything out of ATL is either RJ or mainline jet.

And if, for instance, US/AA did cut AVL-CLT to 3x daily (just using that as an example, not because it's my hometown airport, but it suffers the deepest cuts in frequency in your model), do you foresee that US/AA would add flights to other hubs to at least partially offset those cuts? Add more mainline capacity between CLT and those destinations? Or do they walk away from much of that traffic entirely?

Bingo!! I dont understand the logic of these people saying CLT will be cut drastically to the doomsday scenerios of it ending up like STL or RDU. MEM Iis one of the worst O&D traffic cities as a hub, but for years it worked for Northwest because they had no where else to hub to serve the southeast. Of course once they merged its redudant with Atlanta nearby. CLT would be the same for AA,except there isnt anywhere else to hub in the southeast with the infrastructure and hub history like CLT has....not to mention CLT is a thriving area with better demographics unlike MEM. People, CLT is going to have major role in the new AA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-10 10:55:27 and read 15000 times.

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 155):
So let me ask a question...why, then, does it work for DL at ATL?

1) DL's ATL hub operation is something like double the size of CLT.
2) DL doesn't have hubs in Dallas and Miami. Despite what people at trying to claim, DFW and MIA are not Southeast hubs, but they do share some connecting flows. Most importantly, MIA serves as a hub for Florida, and Florida is the most important feeder for CLT/ATL. Secondly, DFW serves as a major hub for Southeast traffic going West. Right there, CLT loses two important roles that account for a lot of volume.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-10 11:43:21 and read 14813 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 157):

1) DL's ATL hub operation is something like double the size of CLT.
2) DL doesn't have hubs in Dallas and Miami. Despite what people at trying to claim, DFW and MIA are not Southeast hubs, but they do share some connecting flows. Most importantly, MIA serves as a hub for Florida, and Florida is the most important feeder for CLT/ATL. Secondly, DFW serves as a major hub for Southeast traffic going West. Right there, CLT loses two important roles that account for a lot of volume.

a somewhat valid point...but how many interior mid sized/smaller cities in the northeast have service to MIA. Places like BUF/ROC/SYR/ALB/BTV/PVD/Harrisburg PA/Scranton PA/PWM etc etc the list could go on dont have MIA service and some of these dont even have AA service. Even MIA as a Florida hub has its weaknesses...If I am coming from Buffalo and want to go to somewhere like JAX, TLH or PNS it would be extremely out of the way to fly to MIA to connect and come back north. Perhaps a little more doable for MCO and TPA but still out of the way. DFW now does take away some western connecting traffic flows....but there are still alot of cities in the southeast and carolinas where service via CLT will still be more viable than DFW. Places like AGS, FAY etc that have been tried from DFW but have not worked out. Even places like CAE or CHS have fairly limited (i.e. 2-3 flts a day) to DFW, CLT will provide some more frequencies.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-10 11:48:28 and read 14821 times.

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 158):
Places like BUF/ROC/SYR/ALB/BTV/PVD/Harrisburg PA/Scranton PA/PWM etc etc the list could go on dont have MIA service and some of these dont even have AA service.

Right now, no, but AA is planning to connect some of these markets to MIA in the short term, merger or no merger.

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 158):
Even MIA as a Florida hub has its weaknesses...If I am coming from Buffalo and want to go to somewhere like JAX, TLH or PNS it would be extremely out of the way to fly to MIA to connect and come back north.

PNS/TLH, yes. The rest, it's not really much proud of the way at all. Extremely out of the way is a gross overstatement.


MIANYC can often be done in 2h30m and MIATPA in 40m. CLTNYC in 2h and CLTTPA in 1h15m. That's about even.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-02-10 11:49:05 and read 14820 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 3):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 157):
2) DL doesn't have hubs in Dallas and Miami. Despite what people at trying to claim, DFW and MIA are not Southeast hubs, but they do share some connecting flows. Most importantly, MIA serves as a hub for Florida, and Florida is the most important feeder for CLT/ATL. Secondly, DFW serves as a major hub for Southeast traffic going West. Right there, CLT loses two important roles that account for a lot of volume.

Ok I can now see your argument about PHX and DFW having some issues in terms of interlining.... but, I do want to offer this rebuttle for both CLT and PHX being cut:

1) PHX's unique location makes it a good connecting point for short hops from the west to the east, and vice versa. CLT offers a similar role for the eastern seaboard and the southeast.

DFW covers the center of the country and the southern part of the country, as well as being a great connecting point for Latin America.

2) I heard prices at DFW are quite high, if someone can confirm or deny this please tell me

3) CLT itself has its own pull, and if the hub there is slashed, then there really isn't much coverage on the eastern seaboard sans PHL, but PHL serves more of a TATL hub, right?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Vctony
Posted 2013-02-10 12:02:56 and read 14743 times.

I am going to go along with everyone here and I say that PHX is going to be severely cut. I live in the PHX area and the local media here are doing everyone a disservice by reporting that "experts" do not believe that there will be major cutbacks and some in the media are saying they see an increase in capacity. PHX is just geographically too far in the southwest corner of the country to be useful in the greater scheme of things. Also, much of the traffic is leisure traffic that can be served by WN, NK (I do think we'll see NK in PHX), G4 (I can see them coming to PHX as well). The merger also will be the death of T2 at PHX as UA and AS will end up moving to vacated US/AA Spaces in T3 or T4.

PHX will likely end up being gradually drawn down a la PIT for about 5 years post merger until we end up with AA flights to: CLT, DCA. DFW, JFK, LAX, MIA, ORD, and PHL. Less likely (but possible) are AA flights to BOS, LAS, and SFO. So, at most I see in 2017 about 60-75 departures a day from PHX to 8-11 destinations. I do believe that DL, UA, and WN (as well as other carriers will increase their presance, but the days of PHX being a hub for a major airline are essentially done).

As others have said, the big winner in this merger will be ORD (which will see an increase of mainline due to re-purposed PHX assets).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyguy89
Posted 2013-02-10 12:05:25 and read 14733 times.

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 158):
but there are still alot of cities in the southeast and carolinas where service via CLT will still be more viable than DFW.

Well sure, that is the point. Of course there are many markets that would remain more effectively served from CLT, thus it will continue to serve those markets and remain a major hub in the merged airlines' system. All of this, however, doesn't make it immune to the inevitable pruning that will occur when CLT is placed in a new network with additional hubs that poach some of the flows currently served over CLT.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 12:11:58 and read 14736 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 160):
PHX's unique location makes it a good connecting point for short hops from the west to the east, and vice versa. CLT offers a similar role for the eastern seaboard and the southeast.

CLT, yes - a great, centrally-located hub that perfectly handles connections up and down the east coast.

PHX, not so much. PHX's location is hardly unique - indeed, AA alone has two hubs/connecting centers that handle part or all of the role that PHX now handles for US, and Delta and United each have at least one hub that also precisely overlaps with the primary network role of PHX. The problem with PHX is that it is too far south to serve as a viable hub for the entire west coast - like DEN and SLC does - and it's too far west to be a major force for the Mountain or Central time zones. As such, it's essentially in the ideal location for one thing and one thing only - connections from California (and Hawaii) to the east. Beyond that, every single connection PHX now handles for US can be just as well - and in many cases better - served by other AA hubs (particularly DFW, but also LAX and/or ORD).

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 160):
DFW covers the center of the country and the southern part of the country, as well as being a great connecting point for Latin America.

DFW does very well cover the central U.S., and is indeed a convenient connecting point between Latin America and the central and western U.S. But DFW is also perfectly located to handle virtually the identical traffic flow that PHX today primarily handles - connections between the U.S. (in particular California) and the central and eastern U.S. Therein lies the major strategic problem for the PHX hub - it's primary function is superfluous.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 160):
CLT itself has its own pull, and if the hub there is slashed, then there really isn't much coverage on the eastern seaboard sans PHL, but PHL serves more of a TATL hub, right?

First off, CLT isn't getting "slashed." The CLT hub will almost certainly end up being smaller simply by virtue of the fact that the hub right now is relatively so large (third busiest hub in the country by departures, I believe) and that is based in part on US' substantially lower costs. When those costs go up, revenue will have to go up with it, and that will necessitate constraining supply (capacity). Nonetheless, CLT is not going to be getting "slashed" - it's far too valuable a hub for that in far too good a location - and it will continue to be the primary north-south hub.

Second, PHL is not primarily a transatlantic hub. PHL handles a grand total of less than 20 flights per day to Europe, out of well over 400 overall daily departures (i.e., less than 1/20 of total departures). PHL is a huge network airline megahub that happens to handle plenty of connections to/from Europe, but also is a powerhouse to the northeast, with frequent connections throughout the day to every major city of significance in the northeastern U.S.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: DarkSnowyNight
Posted 2013-02-10 12:16:39 and read 14665 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 160):
2) I heard prices at DFW are quite high, if someone can confirm or deny this please tell me

On AA you mean? Yea-oh yeah, they are. I lived there for about six years and the only times I flew w/ AA were either company business (and then only as our company bills all travel right back to our client airlines anyway, so price genuinely didn't matter there...), or when booked over to AA as a result of a canceled flight elsewhere.

I'm sure once in a great while there were cheap-ish fares available, but as a rule, AA really isn't worth your time if cost matters at all out of DFW, and I'm sure that's not about to change now.

In fairness, I do not believe that was the case because we're talking about AA, but rather because it was a fortress hub for them, and those really don't tend to be all that interested in O&D. I've heard life is very much the same for DL in MSP/DTW/SLC, UA at IAD, AA(again) at MIA, & I know US at PHL.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Vctony
Posted 2013-02-10 12:18:24 and read 14692 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 163):
Second, PHL is not primarily a transatlantic hub. PHL handles a grand total of less than 20 flights per day to Europe, out of well over 400 overall daily departures (i.e., less than 1/20 of total departures). PHL is a huge network airline megahub that happens to handle plenty of connections to/from Europe, but also is a powerhouse to the northeast, with frequent connections throughout the day to every major city of significance in the northeastern U.S

Essentially PHL is to US now what PIT was in the late 1990s. It just so happens that PHL has the European flights thrown in.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-02-10 12:27:06 and read 14649 times.

Here's something I just thought of after crunching some numbers: LAX is hardly a hub for AA. I see LAX being the one that gets pulled down to focus-city level. Hell, LAX ops for AA currently can't even compete with UA or DL. LAX is lacking in major aspects-
1) very few flights to Asia and those flights do poorly in comparison to DL and UA

2) despite the code-sharing with QF there's still no flights to Australia, and even then those flights are mostly O and D on QF

3) LAX is a pitiful location to make connections--- I know, I tried. Connected DL PHX-LAX-CVG once and it was god-awful. Overcrowded, horrible.

4) AA at LAX is mostly relied on O and D, is it not?

5) LAX does not need any more flights than it already has, and the resulting overlay could probably transfer more flights into PHX or DFW.

In short, AA at LAX cannot compete. UA, DL, and other airlines simply do a much better job with LAX than AA. AA is much better suited doing its east-coast-to-Latin-america thing than trying to make something out of LAX by moving flights from a successful hub at PHX.

And I want to challenge the notion of PHX being a low-yielding hub..... if it is not making money, then why hasn't DP slashed flights considerably already?

DL did that to CVG well before the merger with NW.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Vctony
Posted 2013-02-10 12:31:44 and read 14621 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
And I want to challenge the notion of PHX being a low-yielding hub..... if it is not making money, then why hasn't DP slashed flights considerably already?
DP slashed as much as he could but couldn't do much more cutting with the way the US network is structured. HP's PHX hub was larger than US's current PHX hub.

As to your post about LAX. LAX is the main airport for the second largest metropolitan area in the country. All 3 of the "mega-majors" AA, DL, and UA will maintain a significant presence there.

[Edited 2013-02-10 12:33:40]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 12:47:20 and read 14558 times.

Quoting Vctony (Reply 165):
Essentially PHL is to US now what PIT was in the late 1990s. It just so happens that PHL has the European flights thrown in.

Not at all.

There are two critical differences: first, PHL is a substantially larger local market than PIT, and with a substantially larger local corporate and high-yielding premium business travel market. Second, 10 years ago US had an alternative - US played PHL and PIT off against each other, and PIT lost. But US only had the freedom of motion to close PIT because they had PHL that could be used in its place to handle traffic flows in and out of the northeast. Today, US (and AA) have no such alternative. If they were to close PHL, they would essentially be closing access to the northeast outside of the largest markets. That is where AA is today, and it is not strategically competitive.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
Here's something I just thought of after crunching some numbers: LAX is hardly a hub for AA.

Okay, but that's largely meaningless. PHX may lose some traffic to LAX, but it will lose more to DFW, and to ORD. But most importantly, it will lose the most traffic simply to the unavoidable economics of higher unit operating costs post-merger. PHX works today for US for only two reasons: first, US today has no alternative to PHX to handle the traffic flows it handles. Second, US has the lowest costs of the legacy carriers. Both of those reasons evaporate in a merger, as will most of the economic rationale for a hub in PHX.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
I see LAX being the one that gets pulled down to focus-city level.

It's already largely there. AA calls LAX a hub, or more specifically a "cornerstone," but it's certainly no megahub. No argument there. But it also serves an enormous and extremely high-yielding local market, and one in which AA happens to compete extremely effectively.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
Hell, LAX ops for AA currently can't even compete with UA or DL. LAX is lacking in major aspects-
1) very few flights to Asia and those flights do poorly in comparison to DL and UA

I suggest you re-check the "facts" behind your arguments. AA's LAX operation competes quite well with UA and DL. AA today is virtually tied with UA for the largest airline brand at LAX, and post-merger may well surpass UA.

And excluding Australia, AA has precisely the same number of flights to Asia as both UA and DL - 2 per day.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
2) despite the code-sharing with QF there's still no flights to Australia, and even then those flights are mostly O and D on QF

On the contrary, AA and QF have a revenue-sharing JV on U.S.-Australia flights, so AA captures revenue from all of QF's U.S.-Australia flying, and the two exchange thousands of passengers each month between their flights at LAX. The connectivity between AA and QF over LAX is huge.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
And I want to challenge the notion of PHX being a low-yielding hub..... if it is not making money, then why hasn't DP slashed flights considerably already?

You're confusing "low-yielding" with "not making money." The key is that the PHX hub is both low-yielding and profitable today, but that's because US has such low costs. When AA's costs rise post-merger, the PHX hub will still be low-yielding, but it will no longer be profitable as it currently exists.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: DarkSnowyNight
Posted 2013-02-10 12:52:48 and read 14532 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):


Here's something I just thought of after crunching some numbers: LAX is hardly a hub for AA. I see LAX being the one that gets pulled down to focus-city level. Hell, LAX ops for AA currently can't even compete with UA or DL. LAX is lacking in major aspects-
1) very few flights to Asia and those flights do poorly in comparison to DL and UA

Not so sure about that one... AA doesn't have a lot of Asian presence Ex-LAX because AA doesn't have a lot of Asian presence period. That really hasn't much to do with it being LAX...

And how are we saying "can't compete" with UA & DL? They all leave about the same number of RONs every night (roughly 45 aircraft each), and operate similar capacities throughout the day there.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):

4) AA at LAX is mostly relied on O and D, is it not?

I also wouldn't bet on this one either. AMR operate a sizable MQ presence at LAX, and connect a lot of mainline PAX to other Oneworld carriers as well. QF operate at least six dailies, for example. Plus all the BA, CX, etc. I would be surprised if O&D were much over 60% there.

We do have a very high percentage of O&D as an airport, but we have a good deal of ops more geared toward that than AA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MasseyBrown
Posted 2013-02-10 13:42:24 and read 14382 times.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 152):
I don't think [LH's European hub cluster] is a good comparison anyway ....Just taking the model to the US, it would be like an airline establishing hubs in LAX, SFO and SAN to be the "Californian" airline and serving as much as they can from there ...

Isn't that almost exactly what Southwest did in California?

But we're drifting a bit from AA/US hubs. My point is that because of huge amount of O&D in NYC, Philadelphia, and Washington, the merged airline probably won't have any problem with DCA and PHL coexisting as hubs with LGA and JFK being "hubbish" (if there is such a word).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-10 14:01:18 and read 14355 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
Hell, LAX ops for AA currently can't even compete with UA or DL. LAX is lacking in major aspects-

AA is the largest mainline airline at LAX and has the largest revenue share at LAX. It is overall the second largest carrier at LAX, but is on track to be the largest as AA is growing but UA is shrinking. AA+US will be the largest airline at LAX.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
Asia and those flights do poorly in comparison to DL and UA

And how exactly do you know that?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 166):
2) despite the code-sharing with QF there's still no flights to Australia, and even then those flights are mostly O and D on QF

It's more than a codeshare. It is an antitrust JBA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 14:06:50 and read 14299 times.

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 170):
But we're drifting a bit from AA/US hubs. My point is that because of huge amount of O&D in NYC, Philadelphia, and Washington, the merged airline probably won't have any problem with DCA and PHL coexisting as hubs with LGA and JFK being "hubbish" (if there is such a word).

Precisely.

The operations all serve entirely different purposes.

The PHL operation is a hub - and a huge megahub at that. It does today, and in the future will continue to, handle a myriad of connections - domestic and international, in all directions, throughout the day. PHL will also instantly become AA's entry point into the northeastern U.S. And again - this is a great thing. PHL is one of only two airports in the entire northeastern U.S. population cluster that can effectively serve this role (the other is EWR). Every other competing hub is systemically limited in what it can become because of operational, economic and/or competitive dynamics.

The DCA operation will continue to function as it does today - handling connections when feasible, but primarily catering to the enormous amount of high-yielding business and business-of-government traffic moving in and out of D.C. on a daily basis, for which DCA is by far the region's preferred and most convenient airport.

The JFK/LGA operations - both already quite large - should be optimized primarily for the huge local NYC O&D market, both domestically and internationally. LGA can link NYC with AA's major hubs in DFW, ORD, CLT, PHL and MIA, plus other major domestic O&D markets, while JFK can link NYC with transcon and global gateways and other major international/longhaul O&D markets, plus handle some connections.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-02-10 14:15:23 and read 14270 times.

OK I have come to the conclusion that NONE of us (including me) have any idea what's going to happen here. We all are speculating too much, and here's why:

Quoting commavia (Reply 163):
Second, PHL is not primarily a transatlantic hub. PHL handles a grand total of less than 20 flights per day to Europe, out of well over 400 overall daily departures (i.e., less than 1/20 of total departures). PHL is a huge network airline megahub that happens to handle plenty of connections to/from Europe, but also is a powerhouse to the northeast, with frequent connections throughout the day to every major city of significance in the northeastern U.S.

In one of the previous threads someone said PHL was the biggest threat to CLT's existence as a hub between MIA and PHL, and now we're saying PHL is going to be cut (per the earlier PIT argument) and something like CLT is going to get downsized?

Quoting Vctony (Reply 167):
As to your post about LAX. LAX is the main airport for the second largest metropolitan area in the country. All 3 of the "mega-majors" AA, DL, and UA will maintain a significant presence there.

Yes but it doesn't mean PHX is going to lose service simply because of LAX being there. Look at UA having a hub at both SFO and (i guess) LAX. Works fine to me.

Quoting commavia (Reply 168):
It's already largely there. AA calls LAX a hub, or more specifically a "cornerstone," but it's certainly no megahub. No argument there. But it also serves an enormous and extremely high-yielding local market, and one in which AA happens to compete extremely effectively.

Yes but that competition is because of the presence of UA and DL. And there's plenty of DL and UA fanboys on this site which will tell you all the things that make DL or UA a better choice over AA. I'm only a DL flier because of CVG. I Fly DL out of PHX to go places because of my miles and because in the last few years I've largely been only flying back to CVG or to Japan. If US had a flight to Japan (or Asia for that matter, where I can catch a connection to Japan) from PHX, i would most likely take it over DL.

Quoting commavia (Reply 168):
Okay, but that's largely meaningless. PHX may lose some traffic to LAX, but it will lose more to DFW, and to ORD. But most importantly, it will lose the most traffic simply to the unavoidable economics of higher unit operating costs post-merger. PHX works today for US for only two reasons: first, US today has no alternative to PHX to handle the traffic flows it handles. Second, US has the lowest costs of the legacy carriers. Both of those reasons evaporate in a merger, as will most of the economic rationale for a hub in PHX.

IN a reference to my earlier comment about us not knowing squat about what's going to happen with this merger, all of a sudden people are throwing ORD into the mix. Hell until today, I never saw ONE THING about ORD being a reason for PHX to get cut. Seriously?! Are you guys seriously kidding me here? It's possibly one of the most eye-brow raising comments i've seen in a while. If US was to merge with UA and their presence at DEN, I'd be worried. If US was to merge with DL and their presence at SLC I'd be worried. I'm not worried because of AA's hub at DFW and ORD... it makes no sense to me. Each of these hubs serves their own purpose, including PHX's.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Lindberghflyer
Posted 2013-02-10 14:18:12 and read 14231 times.

Hi, this is my first post, so go easy on me. I figure I will add my two cents , as a southern cal frequent flyer, onto this whole "how much will they pull down phx?" Topic. My thought are:
1.) I question whether phx can survive as just a focus city, if AA pulls it down too fast it will reach a tipping point where swa simply pushes AAs operation down to a spoke.
2.) AA has shrunk a lot in southern cal, in Nevada, and the south west. it might be shortsighted to further drive away frequent flyers in the region by robbing them of the connectivity that Phoenix gives (mountain region, Mexico, Canada,and some better scheduling options than dfw on a number of east coast options). The Alaska code share is a big question mark here, but for my part I can say I'd rather connect in phx and stay on AA metal than take the bus from the 3rd world commuter terminal at lax to Alaska (where I also can't upgrade).
3.) there is no way that phx can replace lax on any of its premium routes. On the contrary , if dp is smart he will use phx traffic to feed lax-asia. While i don't think lax is anywhere near being AAs most profitable station it has some highly premium traffic that could never be moved to phx.
4.) although a lot of phx o&d is low yielding it is a growing region and California businesses are moving there like crazy. Given some time, this will include some high margin businesses with more premium traffic. If AA can stay the course and hold onto a small hub here (not focus city) it might pay off later.
5.) in the long term, keeping phx may make lax stronger as a transpacific hub. FFers in this region (think San, sna, lgb, psp, las, ont, tuc, abq) will be more willing to fly AA instead of ua or dl if they can get where they want domestically on AA metal.
6.) I think us actually has some decent yields on phx-Mexico flights
7.) so my prediction is that they will shrink phx significantly but not so to the point where it is no longer a hub. I f they do, they will be a marginal player on the whole west coast, and they will also be undermining their chances of having any kind of decent yielding feed to their lax-Asia growth. For a strategy in this part of the country aa will need both lax and phx. On the other hand, if dp wants to go for quick profits he could probably benefit from pulling both of them down significantly.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 14:36:30 and read 14171 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
In one of the previous threads someone said PHL was the biggest threat to CLT's existence as a hub between MIA and PHL, and now we're saying PHL is going to be cut (per the earlier PIT argument) and something like CLT is going to get downsized?

Well, I don't know who "we" is who are saying any of that. I, and many others, have been very consistent - and in my entirely baised opinion, very rational, in our assessment and predictions: both PHL and CLT are likely to perhaps see a bit of shrinkage driven purely by the higher costs of a combined airline rendering the economics of some of their flying unprofitable, but both are entirely safe as hubs because they are well-positioned and serve excellent roles that AA's present network cannot fill.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
Yes but that competition is because of the presence of UA and DL. And there's plenty of DL and UA fanboys on this site which will tell you all the things that make DL or UA a better choice over AA.

Well that's good for the DL and UA fanboys. The fact remains that AA is a huge and extremely strong competitive force at LAX, which serves the second largest population center in North America. I don't see any future CEO of AA being stupid enough to throw that away - and certainly not for PHX.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
all of a sudden people are throwing ORD into the mix.

No, not all of a sudden. I have been posting about it for at least a month, if I remember correctly. I think others have as well.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
Seriously?! Are you guys seriously kidding me here?

Yes, seriously. No, I'm not kidding you.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
It's possibly one of the most eye-brow raising comments i've seen in a while. If US was to merge with UA and their presence at DEN, I'd be worried. If US was to merge with DL and their presence at SLC I'd be worried. I'm not worried because of AA's hub at DFW and ORD... it makes no sense to me.

Just look at a map, and it becomes quite clear quite quickly why ORD may well pick up some of the connections now flowing over PHX. For traffic in/out of the Pacific Northwest that now flows over PHX to head east, ORD is in almost every case going to be a faster and more convenient connecting point. I could definitely see ORD picking up at least 1 daily flight to SEA and the return of at least 1 daily flight from PDX and YVR.

To be clear: I am not saying that AA would just move the PHX hub to ORD. Not at all. I continue to believe the same thing I have for the more than 1 year this has been discussed: any PHX connections shifted to other hubs would likely be shifted primarily to DFW, with a bit perhaps shifted over LAX and/or ORD, but the majority of the connections shifted away from PHX will simply be abandoned altogether as too low-yielding for the higher-cost airline to cater to.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
Each of these hubs serves their own purpose, including PHX's.

Therein, yet again, lies the problem. PHX doesn't serve its own purpose. In fact, it serves basically the exact same purpose as a combination of three other existing AA "cornerstones" - DFW, LAX and ORD. Again, there are only two reasons why PHX even is a hub for US today: (1) US has low costs that allow it to still make money in such a generally low-yielding market with such intense low-cost competition, and (2) US' structurally disadvantage network means that it has no attractive alternative to PHX for accessing traffic flows in/out of the western U.S. (particularly from California).

As another poster already said, I feel for you guys in PHX who are almost inevitably about to lose much of your network hub service. It sucks, I get it - just as it has sucked in PIT, STL, CVG and MEM. But economics are economics - in the long run, they are inescapable. And the inescapable reality is that the economics of a PHX hub - at least one in the form that PHX now has - are simply not going to work at the elevated cost levels of a merged airline, particularly when there are other, higher-yielding AA hubs more than capable of handling pretty much all of the connections PHX now handles for US.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-10 14:47:52 and read 14131 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 168):
On the contrary, AA and QF have a revenue-sharing JV on U.S.-Australia flights, so AA captures revenue from all of QF's U.S.-Australia flying, and the two exchange thousands of passengers each month between their flights at LAX.

I don't believe this is correct—a JV wouldn't be logical for QF to enter into if AA had no flights on their side to reciprocally share revenue and expenses with between the U.S. and Australia/New Zealand.

What AA and QF have instead is a JBA, where the two airlines are able to jointly plan and coordinate pricing and schedules, among other things, free from anti-trust concerns. It doesn't mean that AA receives a dollar for any tickets sold exclusively by QF on these routes, as AA would on a true JV.

Qantas, American Move to Deepen Commercial Ties

Feds approve American-Qantas JBA

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BOStonsox
Posted 2013-02-10 14:49:14 and read 14232 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 151):
Airlines operating two hubs close to each other is nothing new, in the U.S. or overseas. The key is whether those two hubs serve different roles that don't uneconomically overlap and compete with each other.

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I meant THREE hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented in the USA. IAD and EWR are obviously big enough to hold their own against each other. And B6 is doing great with BOS and JFK. But would JFK and DCA work combined with PHL? The northeast is the most populous part of the country, but I haven't seen anyone try 3 hubs here yet.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyguy89
Posted 2013-02-10 14:51:27 and read 14223 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
Quoting commavia (Reply 163):
Second, PHL is not primarily a transatlantic hub. PHL handles a grand total of less than 20 flights per day to Europe, out of well over 400 overall daily departures (i.e., less than 1/20 of total departures). PHL is a huge network airline megahub that happens to handle plenty of connections to/from Europe, but also is a powerhouse to the northeast, with frequent connections throughout the day to every major city of significance in the northeastern U.S.

In one of the previous threads someone said PHL was the biggest threat to CLT's existence as a hub between MIA and PHL, and now we're saying PHL is going to be cut (per the earlier PIT argument) and something like CLT is going to get downsized?

Well, let's be fair here, yeah there have been a few posters randomly dropping one-liner posts that CLT is the next MEM or STL with no argument to back it up, so that is at best the fringe viewpoint. The mainstream view that myself and others have laid out careful and thoughtful arguments for is that CLT will continue to be a large hub with an important role in the network, but that it will be simply paired down a bit in the context of new hubs being added to the network and reduced capacity system-wide.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 173):
Quoting commavia (Reply 168):
Okay, but that's largely meaningless. PHX may lose some traffic to LAX, but it will lose more to DFW, and to ORD. But most importantly, it will lose the most traffic simply to the unavoidable economics of higher unit operating costs post-merger. PHX works today for US for only two reasons: first, US today has no alternative to PHX to handle the traffic flows it handles. Second, US has the lowest costs of the legacy carriers. Both of those reasons evaporate in a merger, as will most of the economic rationale for a hub in PHX.

IN a reference to my earlier comment about us not knowing squat about what's going to happen with this merger, all of a sudden people are throwing ORD into the mix. Hell until today, I never saw ONE THING about ORD being a reason for PHX to get cut. Seriously?! Are you guys seriously kidding me here?

It's only part of the picture, but if you think about it, ORD serves East Coast-West Coast traffic flows which does eat into PHX's part of the pie.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-02-10 14:53:49 and read 14271 times.

Oh my god you're giving me a headache here  
Quoting commavia (Reply 175):
As another poster already said, I feel for you guys in PHX who are almost inevitably about to lose much of your network hub service. It sucks, I get it - just as it has sucked in PIT, STL, CVG and MEM. But economics are economics - in the long run, they are inescapable.

PHX is NOT a rust belt city with a declining population. We aren't a desolate wasteland of desert and dust storms. We are a LARGE city with our own pull and draw, quite independent from L.A. and DFW. We are going in circles here about how stupid it would be for AA to cut PHX. Honestly, it's pretty much not going to be as largely serious as people say. If you wanna go ahead and compare economics, then go right ahead- PHX is well ahead of Los Angeles economy wise. Sure there's more people, and Hollywood, but that's just it- the economy SUCKS in California. As I keep saying over and over and over again, this city is going to grow exponentially as soon as Congress gets its ass in gear and starts letting the economy grow again. Why would AA want to miss out on this great opportunity? If they want yields to grow then do something about it. Raising fares a bit won't drive away people loyal to US and/or AA out of here. As one poster above just stated, AA is already expensive to fly through at DFW, and if people would prefer a cheaper PHX option then people will fly through PHX. Honestly  
Quoting commavia (Reply 175):
Well that's good for the DL and UA fanboys. The fact remains that AA is a huge and extremely strong competitive force at LAX, which serves the second largest population center in North America. I don't see any future CEO of AA being stupid enough to throw that away - and certainly not for PHX.

They won't throw away LAX....they'll just keep it as it is at ~100 flights a day into LAX. LAX is not a connecting city. It is an O and D city and thats its only purpose.

Quoting commavia (Reply 175):
No, not all of a sudden. I have been posting about it for at least a month, if I remember correctly. I think others have as well.

Wtf I haven't seen any of it. Show me some quotes and numbers...but then again don't contradict yourself like you did below:

Quoting commavia (Reply 175):
Just look at a map, and it becomes quite clear quite quickly why ORD may well pick up some of the connections now flowing over PHX. For traffic in/out of the Pacific Northwest that now flows over PHX to head east, ORD is in almost every case going to be a faster and more convenient connecting point. I could definitely see ORD picking up at least 1 daily flight to SEA and the return of at least 1 daily flight from PDX and YVR.

That's fine and dandy but most people through Seattle and Portland fly AS, F9, DL, or UA. AA doesn't have a strong presence in those cities. There needs to be a strong inter-mountain hub to compete with DEN and SLC. SLC anyway is a weak hub for DL, last I checked.

Quoting commavia (Reply 175):
To be clear: I am not saying that AA would just move the PHX hub to ORD. Not at all. I continue to believe the same thing I have for the more than 1 year this has been discussed: any PHX connections shifted to other hubs would likely be shifted primarily to DFW, with a bit perhaps shifted over LAX and/or ORD, but the majority of the connections shifted away from PHX will simply be abandoned altogether as too low-yielding for the higher-cost airline to cater to.

Again you're making no sense. If they're not going to consolidate flights to ORD then they're doing nothing. It's like arguing that MSP is going to make DTW obsolete for DL when the two have run in tandem for years under NW.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: adamh8297
Posted 2013-02-10 15:12:39 and read 14180 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
They won't throw away LAX....they'll just keep it as it is at ~100 flights a day into LAX. LAX is not a connecting city. It is an O and D city and thats its only purpose.

As a primarily leisure traveller, I've connected from BOS to AKL, KOA and PVR (got an extra 1000 UA miles for that one)

I can connect to SBA, FAT, MRY, NRT, PVG, OGG, HNL, LIH, SMF, SAN, SJD through AA. I can also connect to MEL, SYD, and BNE on QF, a variety of destinations on AS, NAN with Air Pacific, PPT with Air Tahiti, HKG with CX.

I'm not even going to mention all of the interline possibilities with non-alliance/non partner airlines. Do you know SQ and CX have inked deals with VX to get feed on their transcontinental flights? There's business in creating connections at LAX.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 15:16:03 and read 14195 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 177):
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I meant THREE hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented in the USA.

It would be unprecedented, but that's not what's happening here.

Calling AA's JFK or US' DCA operation "hubs" is more marketing than reality. Both are "hubs" in the sense that they do handle connections, but both are minor hubs, hemmed in by facility constraints and slot controls, and neither is capable of ever being a true megahub because both spit their local markets with other airports. PHL, on the other hand, is a megahub, and it compliments quite nicely the more O&D-focused operations that AA will have at JFK, LGA and DCA.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 177):
But would JFK and DCA work combined with PHL?

Yes.

JFK and DCA are both operations that can and should be concentrated more on local O&D, and handle connections only secondarily, while PHL can and should be concentrated on connections and O&D.

They can all coexist together as they all serve different markets (and all huge local markets, as well).

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
PHX is NOT a rust belt city with a declining population. We aren't a desolate wasteland of desert and dust storms.

It's not a rust belt city with a declining population, nor a desolate wasteland. No need to get defensive - nobody is saying that. But what PHX is, in reality, if being honestly appraiased, is a large population center that is generally more leisure-oriented than other metro areas of similar size. PHX does generate substantial O&D demand, but much of it is PHX-destined, not PHX-originating, and low-yielding leisure, not high-yielding business.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
Raising fares a bit won't drive away people loyal to US and/or AA out of here.

It will just drive them right into the willing, open arms of WN.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
They won't throw away LAX....they'll just keep it as it is

I agree. I don't expect this merger to have much impact on LAX at all beyond LAX potentially picking up a little bit more Hawaii capacity from PHX, perhaps getting a nonstop AA flight to PIT, perhaps seeing 1 of the daily LAX-PHL flights upgraded to a 767, and of course seeing the exist Eagle flights removed from LAX-PHX.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
LAX is not a connecting city. It is an O and D city and thats its only purpose.

Really? Well you should be sure to tell that to the thousands of people every week who connect over LAX not only between AA/Eagle flights, but also between AA flights and flights operated by partners including, but not limited to, QANTAS, JAL, Cathay Pacific, British Airways, LAN and Alaska. They might be interested to know that "LAX is not a connecting city."

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
but then again don't contradict yourself like you did below

  

I'm still waiting for you to identify this alleged contradiction.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
That's fine and dandy but most people through Seattle and Portland fly AS, F9, DL, or UA. AA doesn't have a strong presence in those cities. There needs to be a strong inter-mountain hub to compete with DEN and SLC. SLC anyway is a weak hub for DL, last I checked.

Huh? I have absolutely not the slightest clue what you're talking about, nor what it has at all to do with what I said. What does a "strong inter-mountain hub" have to do with anything? AA doesn't have a "strong inter-mountain hub" today, and neither does US, and neither would a combined airline post-merger. PHX certainly isn't a "strong inter-mountain hub."

I was simply stating that for people who US has been routing SEA/PDX/YVR-PHX-Eastern U.S., ORD is likely in many cases a faster, more logical and more convenient connecting point. Again - simple consultation of Google Maps or Rand McNally would fairly quickly illustrate the point I'm making.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-10 15:19:59 and read 14215 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
SLC anyway is a weak hub for DL, last I checked.

SLC is not a weak hub.

Im sorry you think so because thats the hub PHX is going to most closely resemble post merger.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: klkla
Posted 2013-02-10 15:39:22 and read 14156 times.

At the end of the day there isn't likely to be a significant change at JFK, PHL, DCA, CLT, LAX or MIA because they're all unique in some way and all these stations are very profitable now.

The wild cards are ORD, DFW and PHX. I'm in agreement with some of the others that it would be more cost effective to concentrate domestic connections at ORD and DFW and reduce PHX to a much smaller hub or focus city.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-02-10 15:54:19 and read 14102 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 181):
Really? Well you should be sure to tell that to the thousands of people every week who connect over LAX not only between AA/Eagle flights, but also between AA flights and flights operated by partners including, but not limited to, QANTAS, JAL, Cathay Pacific, British Airways, LAN and Alaska. They might be interested to know that "LAX is not a connecting city."

Alright, that's good, and go tell your buddies over at UA and DL that their flights to all points eastward, along with NH, SQ, Asiana, Korean Air, that their flights are also pointless, because you're insinuating that LAX is therefore a genuine fortified Oneworld hub and not some general asian gateway/O and D market. Honestly i'm just done arguing with you because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 182):
SLC is not a weak hub.

Then again last I checked was last year in March or so when there was talk of the NRT route being cut (which it was) as well as a number of domestic flights getting slashed. I guess it's ok now, but it's weakest in comparison to, lets say DEN.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-10 16:06:02 and read 14055 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 184):
because you're insinuating that LAX is therefore a genuine fortified Oneworld hub and not some general asian gateway/O and D market.

I never insinuated any such thing. You're the one who stated - didn't insinuate, but simply stated - that "LAX is not a connecting city." I was simply responding to that baseless statement with facts to rebut that point. I never stated, insinuated or implied in any way that LAX was a "genuine fortified Oneworld hub."

However, while we're on the subject, it is a genuine, huge oneworld connecting point, with AA exchanging literally hundreds if not thousands of interline and codeshare customers with its alliance partners and other carriers daily. So, to the earlier point you apparently missed, LAX is, indeed, quite a large "connecting city."

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 184):
Honestly i'm just done arguing with you because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at.

Yikes. Again, I understand that you're emotionally attached to the outcome with regard to PHX. But with all due respect, I think you're simply attacking the points being made by other people because they don't fit into you preferred view, whether or not those arguments are valid or not.

You're "just done." Fine by me. But I will simply conclude with the same points I (and many others) have been making for months as to why the PHX hub is in for serious downsizing:

(1) it is a low-yielding market, almost certainly the lowest-yielding of US' current hubs and with a huge Southwest hub
(2) it is in a poor geographic location to be optimal for just about anything besides connections from California/Hawaii to points east
(3) in a merger a combined "new AA" would have something US has not had to date - alternatives to PHX that can handle the same traffic flows, albeit with less competition and likely at higher yield

When you can articulate a cogent rebuttal to any of those three points, I'll look forward to reading it.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: adamh8297
Posted 2013-02-10 16:14:15 and read 14025 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 184):
Alright, that's good, and go tell your buddies over at UA and DL that their flights to all points eastward, along with NH, SQ, Asiana, Korean Air, that their flights are also pointless, because you're insinuating that LAX is therefore a genuine fortified Oneworld hub and not some general asian gateway/O and D market. Honestly i'm just done arguing with you because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at.

I think you misunderstood the poster. He didn't say LAX is a fortress hub for AA. LAX is one of the biggest O&D Markets in the world but connections are big business.

1) You can fly routes such as ORD-LAX SYD on One World airlines QF/AA
2) You can fly routes such as SLC-LAX-ICN on Sky Team airlines KE/DL
3) You can fly routes such as DEN-LAX-HND on Star Alliance airlines UA/NH
4) You can fly a route such as SBA-LAX-NRT-SIN on two airlines in different alliance (SQ and AA in this example) if they have an interline agreement.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: 9w748capt
Posted 2013-02-10 16:15:04 and read 14028 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 181):

Really? Well you should be sure to tell that to the thousands of people every week who connect over LAX not only between AA/Eagle flights, but also between AA flights and flights operated by partners including, but not limited to, QANTAS, JAL, Cathay Pacific, British Airways, LAN and Alaska. They might be interested to know that "LAX is not a connecting city."

   Let me use myself as a textbook case of this - next week I'm flying OKC-LAX and connecting to CX. Yup that's right, connecting. At LAX. Let me also throw in that AA is increasing OKC-LAX to 3x/day later this year. This on a route that was just introduced a few years ago. As an OKC resident it's amazing to us that this is even an option. Sure I'd get a few more miles by double-connecting through DFW, but AA is showing that it can run a sizeable (if not anything close to fortress) hub at LAX. They're only increasing flights there. A US/AA tieup will inevitably lead to even more growth at DFW (which will be the new HQ by the way) due to AA's domestic dominance there and LAX - helped not least by the significant int'l presence there.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-10 17:19:09 and read 13935 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
They won't throw away LAX....they'll just keep it as it is at ~100 flights a day into LAX. LAX is not a connecting city. It is an O and D city and thats its only purpose.

What are you talking about? AA is around 160 daily flights at LAX and growing. Combined with US, it will be around 180 and the larger airline at LAX. You totally don't understand AA's presence at LAX.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-02-10 18:01:45 and read 13741 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 159):
MIANYC can often be done in 2h30m and MIATPA in 40m. CLTNYC in 2h and CLTTPA in 1h15m. That's about even.

It looks like your trying to make MIA a prime connecting spot for NE-FL traffic flows.

It does not take 2 hours to fly CLTNYC, more like an hour and fifteen minutes. NYCMIA is more than half of the distance than CLTJFK. Regardless of how you put it, CLT is superior for connecting from the Northeast to Florida, with the exception of EYW.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 159):
Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 158):Places like BUF/ROC/SYR/ALB/BTV/PVD/Harrisburg PA/Scranton PA/PWM etc etc the list could go on dont have MIA service and some of these dont even have AA service.
Right now, no, but AA is planning to connect some of these markets to MIA in the short term, merger or no merger.

Maybe, but that doesn't mean AA would push Florida connections through MIA over CLT. You don't go to united.com to book a MCOBOS flight, and the majority of connections are over IAH.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: sonomaflyer
Posted 2013-02-10 18:50:08 and read 13599 times.

LAX won't be pulled down on the number of flights. It's too important a jump-off point for Asia/Australia with a massive O/D market. It may not become a "fortress hub" either but I'm not sure how important that term is these days except on this board.

I just don't see how PHX will fit into the picture alongside DFW. They aren't that far apart and have overlap on service as it stands now. DFW is a bigger market than PHX plus a better E/W connection point so AA/US need to save money somewhere - that savings will come from shrinking PHX as a hub. It may not shrink to a focus city but I don't see the logic of maintaining PHX at the current level after the merger.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-10 19:22:37 and read 13514 times.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 189):

Maybe, but that doesn't mean AA would push Florida connections through MIA over CLT. You don't go to united.com to book a MCOBOS flight, and the majority of connections are over IAH.

  

exactly. Bottom line is MIA is an awesome hub for Caribbean, South and Latin America, but a poor domestic hub due to its location. CLT will fit the bill fine due to its great location. I still think anyone wanting to fly to JAX would find connecting in MIA out of the way. And I still dont think alot of those smaller cities I mentioned would be connected to MIA. Just not seeing that. Just my 2 cents

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PDX88
Posted 2013-02-10 22:07:30 and read 13284 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 184):

US would kill for what AA has in LAX right now. PHX will never see QF, CX, MH, KE, NZ, SQ, CA, CZ, CI, FJ (etc. etc.). AA depends quite a bit on conx from multiple TP carriers in LAX. Possibly, at best, the only Asia service PHX will ever see is a JL 787. To say that PHX will play a bigger role than LAX post-merger is crazy.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: N782NC
Posted 2013-02-11 00:22:21 and read 13136 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 188):

100% agree. All things being equal, PHX is slightly (and I stress slightly) better positioned for domestic connections to East Coast from the Pac NW. However, LAX is and will continue to be AA's Pacific gateway, with or without a merger. Solidifying further domestic routes, and add to that the absolute plethora of international connections available and you have yourself a well rounded "cornerstone" hub.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
If you wanna go ahead and compare economics, then go right ahead- PHX is well ahead of Los Angeles economy wise. Sure there's more people, and Hollywood, but that's just it- the economy SUCKS in California.

Please, let's compare economics....
Los Angeles MSA..... pop: 12,828,837.... .Total GDP: $780 billion.
Phoenix MSA..... pop: 4,263,236.... .Total GDP: $200 billion.

No matter how anyone looks at it, the Phoenix economy is still a small 1/4 that of Los Angeles. And looking at current economic growth rates, Hell will be completely frozen over before Phoenix even comes remotely near LA. Don't get me wrong, PHX is a growing metropolis in every metric, but current economic growth rates is not the be all end all in route planning, and the amount of service offered at LAX, as well as the O&D % at both airports reflect this.

I still believe PHX would have a role in a combined network. IMO, it's best attribute is it's ability to handle southern Intermountain connecting traffic that simply can't be routed efficiently through LAX or DFW.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: IcelandairMSP
Posted 2013-02-11 01:06:36 and read 13081 times.

Is there enough room for combined AA/US ops in terminal 4 at LAX? It seems tight as it is.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AAplat4life
Posted 2013-02-11 04:17:53 and read 12973 times.

Quoting IcelandairMSP (Reply 194):
Quoting IcelandairMSP (Reply 194):
s there enough room for combined AA/US ops in terminal 4 at LAX? It seems tight as it is.

Off hand, I would think that this is a pretty big challenge since US's flights currently go into T-1 and AA is not going to want to move from T-4 since it is so close to the international terminal. However, PHX flights could be moved to AE and then we're only talking about 10 to 12 flights a day to PHL and CLT. So I suspect that a solution will be found. DL apparently was able to consolidate NW flights into T-6.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
As one poster above just stated, AA is already expensive to fly through at DFW, and if people would prefer a cheaper PHX option then people will fly through PHX

That is certainly an advantage of PHX, but the mentality at AA is DFW, DFW, DFW. I could see, for example, AA dropping one of its daily flight to PSP and connecting passenger through PHX and a few other examples. However, soon AA is going to have to refocus its efforts at DFW due to competitive pressure from SW and Love Field. That may mean adding more flights, and the capacity will probably come from PHX.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: DarkSnowyNight
Posted 2013-02-11 04:53:59 and read 12916 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
they'll just keep it as it is at ~100 flights a day into LAX. LAX is not a connecting city. It is an O and D city and thats its only purpose.

Have you ever been here or at least bothered to look at the numbers? Like I said before, MQ wouldn't be here, let a lone in the numbers they are if AA's LAX station was all about the O&D.

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 180):

Absolutely. O&D is huge here, but so is connecting traffic. I don't know why people won't see that.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 182):
Im sorry you think so because thats the hub PHX is going to most closely resemble post merger.

That's what I would have guessed as well. I'd love to see PHX stay huge, but the reality is that there will be some pull down there. I'm just hoping it's not too much...

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 184):
Alright, that's good, and go tell your buddies over at UA and DL that their flights to all points eastward, along with NH, SQ, Asiana, Korean Air, that their flights are also pointless, because you're insinuating that LAX is therefore a genuine fortified Oneworld hub and not some general asian gateway/O and D market. Honestly i'm just done arguing with you because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at.

Well by all means, just what the hell are you getting at? That AA does all O&D at LAX, but somehow still flies to about a zillion non-hub destinations and relies heavily on regional and OneWorld traffic? For some reason?

Yes, UA & DL do the same thing. That's a huge part of what makes so much $$$ out here. All three major alliances do very well here, because frankly, you're not going to find very many other places that have anything like the number of carriers servicing. In the US, you're going to need to go to NY to find anything comparable.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
As one poster above just stated, AA is already expensive to fly through at DFW,

No, what I said was that DFW is very expensive to fly out of. And that remains true. Passing through DFW will not jump your intinerary costs any more than ORD. Whenever you have a fortress hub situation, the Dominant Carrier will charge for it to the locals to offset the the cheaper costs they pass to connecting traffic. Like I said, this is also a problem for MSP, DTW, SLC IAD, and a few others.

And in any case, DFW is only expensive to fly out of if you're doing it (wrong) on AA. Most anything out of Terminal E will save you a good deal.

edit spelling

[Edited 2013-02-11 04:54:46]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: apodino
Posted 2013-02-11 10:30:40 and read 12442 times.

Just wondering how much US may regret pulling down LAS. It has the same type of market that PHX does, but it is a much bigger convention site which tends to attract a lot of high yielding customers, plus there is more international service as well. In any event, is dehubbed, and now we are left with PHX. One disadvantage you have with not keeping a presence in PHX is if you suddenly route everything through DFW, then you have all your eggs in one basket and DFW is very prone to thunderstorms, so if you lose that airport, then you have a lot of angry customers, where PHX has clear weather most of the time and doesn't have the problems that a DFW or even an ORD run into. I know people will say if that was true than look at STL. Big difference. PHX has much more O and D than STL, which puts it in a better position.

So this prompts me to compare the existing AA-US hubs to other existing hubs to see what it will be like post merger.

JFK - This is probably going to end up being very similar to the Delta JFK operation on a smaller scale.
PHL - I see this as a cross between what UA has in IAD and what DL has in DTW. The european services of IAD combined with the connections and mainline service that DTW has.
DCA - This is going to resemble the DL operation in LGA.
CLT - Best comparison here would be DL in MSP or UA in DEN.
MIA - Probably will resemble the current AA hub in MIA without much change
ORD - Shouldn't be much different than now, but you will see fewer 50 seaters and I would not be surprised if E190's ended up here.
DFW - Will resemble the status quo. Keep an eye though on this hub after 2014 when Wright goes away.
PHX - Will probable resemble the DL SLC hub the most. Look for a lot of the Republic planes to end up here after the merger. Too much O and D for this to become the next CVG, STL, or MEM.
LAX - The big thing with LAX is constraints in T4. A US merger won't help the situation. You know they would like to add more, but constraints will make that tricky, not to mention NIMBY opposition if they want to add room for AA in T4. Overall, I see status quo, a slight reduction in domestic traffic, and also SYD, ICN, and HKG when the 787's come online.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 11:10:17 and read 12368 times.

Quoting apodino (Reply 197):
LAX - The big thing with LAX is constraints in T4. A US merger won't help the situation. You know they would like to add more, but constraints will make that tricky, not to mention NIMBY opposition if they want to add room for AA in T4. Overall, I see status quo, a slight reduction in domestic traffic, and also SYD, ICN, and HKG when the 787's come online.

AA is getting four gates in TBIT in 2014 (late 2014, I think). That will allow it to move all international ops to TBIT; focus T4 on domestic. And it can't beef up international and reduce domestic - it needs the feed.

Further, not sure why PHX hub discussion focuses so much on LAX. AA's LAX hub isn't the threat to PHX - DFW is.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-02-11 11:26:17 and read 12279 times.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 177):
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I meant THREE hubs within 250 miles of each other is unprecedented in the USA. IAD and EWR are obviously big enough to hold their own against each other. And B6 is doing great with BOS and JFK. But would JFK and DCA work combined with PHL? The northeast is the most populous part of the country, but I haven't seen anyone try 3 hubs here yet.

  
Forget 3 in 250. What about 2 in 90 miles? No airline in the world has ever tried 2 hubs 90 miles from eachother unless you consider ORY an AF hub, but just look at how well AF is doing financially  

I think I have already made my point quite clear and I see that you share the same opinion   I think that the days of PHL as a TATL hub are numbered.

EWR and IAD are far enough appart that they don't conflict with eachother, each have significant O&D traffic in their own right, and IAD is just fr enough to the south to offer an alternative to EWR in bad weather. Without connections, PHL would probably have 1 single daily TATL flight: LHR. I'm not saying that's what will happen but the volume of O&D traffic from PHL is so small that if it were to be absorbed by the JFK hub it would be hardly noticed. Add to it the proximity of the 2 and in one single snow storm or summer thunderstorm both PHL and JFK will be paralyzed. Why would any airline want their main TATL connections to flow thru those 2 hubs without redundancy? I guess only time will tell.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: apodino
Posted 2013-02-11 11:35:15 and read 12250 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 199):
I think I have already made my point quite clear and I see that you share the same opinion I think that the days of PHL as a TATL hub are numbered.

I mentioned this in another thread. Terminal A in PHL I believe has 26 gates capable of international arrivals that can be fed into the FIS in A West. I believe T8 in JFK only has 14 gates that can feed the FIS there, without expansion (Which will be shared with BA in the future I might add). PHL can handle more traffic than JFK, even though JFK has more O and D. They can shift some of that to JFK, but there isn't the room in T8 at the moment to handle all the existing PHL international traffic. This, coupled with the slot constraints, is why I think PHL as a TATL hub is here to stay for the foreseeable future.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 198):

AA is getting four gates in TBIT in 2014 (late 2014, I think). That will allow it to move all international ops to TBIT; focus T4 on domestic. And it can't beef up international and reduce domestic - it needs the feed.

Further, not sure why PHX hub discussion focuses so much on LAX. AA's LAX hub isn't the threat to PHX - DFW is.

I never suggested otherwise.  

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-11 11:41:24 and read 12241 times.

Quoting apodino (Reply 197):
Just wondering how much US may regret pulling down LAS.

I suspect the answer is: "not at all." Talk about low-yield. Sure, LAS is high-volume. But it's also low-yield. It only ever worked as pseudo-legacy airline hub when fuel was cheap. Today, it would never work. It's a market much better left to Spirit, Allegiant and Southwest.

Quoting apodino (Reply 197):
One disadvantage you have with not keeping a presence in PHX is if you suddenly route everything through DFW, then you have all your eggs in one basket and DFW is very prone to thunderstorms, so if you lose that airport, then you have a lot of angry customers, where PHX has clear weather most of the time and doesn't have the problems that a DFW or even an ORD run into.

... and yet that seems to have worked out fine for AA for the last 30 years.

Quoting apodino (Reply 197):
PHX has much more O and D than STL, which puts it in a better position.

Yes, but PHX also tends to have much more 'D' (destination) relative to 'O' (origin), and it's lower-yielding than many other hubs.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 198):
Further, not sure why PHX hub discussion focuses so much on LAX. AA's LAX hub isn't the threat to PHX - DFW is.

  

LAX may pick up a bit of any traffic shifted out of PHX, but much of the traffic shifted out of PHX is likely to get shifted to DFW, or a bit to ORD, or just dropped entirely as it will be uneconomic at the higher post-merger cost levels.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 199):
Forget 3 in 250. What about 2 in 90 miles? No airline in the world has ever tried 2 hubs 90 miles from eachother unless you consider ORY an AF hub, but just look at how well AF is doing financially

This again misses the point which is that JFK and PHL are both going to technically be called "hubs" but in reality JFK is likely to be optimized far more for O&D than connections. In practice, PHL will really be the megahub - for Europe and the northeast - while JFK will be NYC's gateway to the world via AA/oneworld. The two operations will compliment, not compete with, each other.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 199):
I think that the days of PHL as a TATL hub are numbered.

I'm still waiting to hear the explanation of how you anticipate AA having a transatlantic hub anywhere else besides PHL to compete with UA at IAD/EWR or DL at JFK. PHL is it - it's the only other alternative - AA can never have that kind of hub anywhere else. The same is true of the northeast. PHL is the "silver medal" of northeast hubs - if you can't have EWR, PHL is likely the next best alternative. It's certainly better than IAD or JFK/LGA as a hub for the northeast. There, too, PHL is AA's only choice - there is no alternative.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PSU.DTW.SCE
Posted 2013-02-11 11:45:25 and read 12284 times.

I'm in general agreement with what commavia posted way back in reply #5.
I'm going to add a few more thoughts for color commentary and discussion:

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
CLT (-5, -10): reduction in both departures and capacity simply driven by higher costs of combined entity; CLT remains the prime north-south connecting hub for the eastern U.S., and the key gateway into the southeastern U.S.; loses some longhaul flying to MIA but otherwise retains key international linkages

Agree, likely to keep the same breadth, but may lose some depth. CLT and MIA will be rebalanced to optimize flows that are headed to south Florida and points south. CLT will likely gain traffic flows on long/thin routes that AA tries to currently connect over DFW (e.g SAV, CHS, CAE, GSO).
You will most certainly see the combined entity beef-up capacity and gauge on hub/cornerstone routes like CLT-LAX, CLT-DFW, CLT-MIA.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
DFW (+2, +3): relatively minor overall growth driven primarily by picking up some connections previously handled by PHX, and some current PHX-exclusive US (and former AA) destinations such as LGB and OAK; offset by somewhat reduced capacity to the southeastern U.S. where connections are shifted over CLT and DFW sees markets like SAV, CHS, CAE, GSO, etc. lose some frequency in favor of larger, 2-class RJs

Will see gains from PHX connecting flows that can move over to DFW, will lose some of the long/thin connecting flows that currently go to the Southeast in favor of CLT. CLT may regain a few key markets in the Midwest that US abandon over the past decade to offset other reductions.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
LAX (unchanged, +1): little change as a result of the merger, with a potential for some targeted domestic additions (e.g., PIT) to take advantage of combined strength, increased capacity on hub routes (e.g. 767 on 1 LAX-PHL rotation), and rationalization on overlapping routes (e.g., ending current Eagle schedule LAX-PHX)

Yep, and likely capacity increases on near-transcons like LAX-PHL, LAX-CLT

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
MIA (+2, +2): continual growth, with MIA picking up some international connections from CLT (Caribbean, South America, CLT-FCO shifting to MIA-MXP); MIA continues to add new domestic and international markets (e.g., AUS, MCI, SAN, MKE)

It will be interesting to see what new nonstops MIA gains now with access to more larger RJs and the strength of the US network/brand in the Northeast. I think the % changes given are conservative, with now that the merger may finally enable the launch of service to places like ALB, MDT, BUF, PVD, ROC, etc. Although some of this stuff may be better served by connections over CLT due to the increased stage lengths of overflying down to MIA. I think that is a wildcard for MIA.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
NYC (JFK/LGA) (unchanged, +2): with domestic and some international connections shifted to PHL, NYC (both JFK and LGA) operations freed to focus on utilizing slots more effectively for local O&D, taking advantage of stronger combined AA presence to expand AA NYC links to major domestic (MCI, IND, IAH, MSY, CVG, DEN 1-3x daily each) and international (FRA, TLV 1x daily each) O&D markets

Unknown factor is how many slots they have to divest at LGA. However, in the end may look very similar to what DL is doing at both LGA and JFK.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
ORD (+7, -5): increase in departures but decrease in seats driven by shifting more mainline flying to large regional jets; in addition, ORD gains back connectivity to markets in northeastern U.S. where it had either shrunk or lost AA connections entirely in the last decade (BDL, PVD, ROC, BUF, ALB, etc.) and in select western markets (PDX, possibly SMF) where it is a more convenient connecting point than PHX for some city-pairs/itineraries

I think ORD is also a wildcard between staying nearly flat. The unknown factor being how much do they rebalance flow from the Northeast over ORD vs. PHL. How much ORD access will cities like BDL, PVD, ROC, BUF regain versus just flowing them over PHL?

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
PHL (-5, -3): relatively small reduction in capacity and seats, but nothing major as PHL becomes the singular AA hub for handling connections to/from the northeastern U.S., as well as AA’s primary gateway to continental Europe

Again, the wildcard being how much do they rebalance flows in/out of the Northeast and Midwest over ORD and PHL? US dropped many of these markets over the past decade. Doe they start a route like GRR-PHL? MSN-PHL? or just let them flow over ORD as-is? Do they start a route like ORD-PVD or just let it flow over PHL? I think there is a lot more rebalancing between ORD & PHL than there appears at first glance simply because AA pulled alot out of the Northeast and that US pulled a lot out of the Midwest.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
PHX (-40, -50): gradual but substantial reduction, with PHX shifted to focus on the large PHX outbound/inbound O&D market; PHX retains connections to 40-50 major U.S. markets (including HNL and probably OGG) plus YYC and YVR in Canada and the major Mexican beach markets, but with a substantial amount of the intra-west flying either eliminated or shifted to smaller (likely non-mainline) aircraft; of the 50% of capacity eliminated, approximately 35% is simply exited altogether, with 10% shifted over DFW and 5% over ORD and/or other hubs

Agreed. There is a lot of connecting flows currently over PHX can happen over DFW or ORD. They are not going to be walking away from the local market or strong O&D routes though.

Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
WAS (DCA) (-2, -1): slight reduction in both departures and seats driven largely by forced slot divestitures at DCA (focused primarily on overlapping RDU/BNA routes), but offset by expanded presence in key hub markets (near-hourly shuttle to ORD, increased capacity to DFW, etc.)

I'm likely to think that the DOT is going to push for more slot divestures here, that is going to look more like a 5%-10% net reduction.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: travelin man
Posted 2013-02-11 11:50:20 and read 12272 times.

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 195):
Off hand, I would think that this is a pretty big challenge since US's flights currently go into T-1 and AA is not going to want to move from T-4 since it is so close to the international terminal. However, PHX flights could be moved to AE and then we're only talking about 10 to 12 flights a day to PHL and CLT. So I suspect that a solution will be found. DL apparently was able to consolidate NW flights into T-6.

US is already planning on moving to T3 from T1. If a combined AA/US needed more "breathing room" at LAX, they could use Terminal 3, similar to the set-up AA used with TWA (who was a tenant in T3) after that acquisition. They bussed passengers between the two terminals inside security, until AA consolidated into T4.

AA may also get more breathing room in T4 after the new TBIT opens, but I'm a little unclear on the details of the agreement between AA and LAWA to use TBIT for its international flights....

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: phxa340
Posted 2013-02-11 12:18:17 and read 12166 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):

Your letting your emotional attachment to PHX blind the realistic and rational assessment that PHX will be negatively impacted. By making statements that PHX will be larger than LAX post merger torpedoes your credibility of any legit arguments you may bring up. PHX will be fine, while we may not have as many non stop destinations in the future, it will still be very well served.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-11 12:26:55 and read 12126 times.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 202):
Unknown factor is how many slots they have to divest at LGA.

I don't expect they will have to divest many, if any, LGA slots. DCA, though? That will obviously require some divestiture.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 202):
However, in the end may look very similar to what DL is doing at both LGA and JFK.

With one critical difference: DL needs to use LGA and JFK for connections, which AA won't have to worry about doing. LGA and JFK are suboptimal in that role. AA can perfectly optimize LGA for domestic O&D and JFK for transcon/international O&D.

In fact, I honestly would go as far as to say that with a merger AA would be in an overall better position in the northeast overall than DL - I honestly think a combination of ORD+PHL is better than a combination of DFW+LGA+JFK, not to mention that post-merger AA will also be a very large force in BOS, NYC and of course WAS/DCA.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 202):
I think ORD is also a wildcard between staying nearly flat. The unknown factor being how much do they rebalance flow from the Northeast over ORD vs. PHL. How much ORD access will cities like BDL, PVD, ROC, BUF regain versus just flowing them over PHL?

I definitely think ORD will pick up some incremental benefit - in the form of both new routes and additional capacity - in multiple northeast markets where AA alone was a rather weak or non-existent player but where US is rather large.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-11 12:30:33 and read 12106 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 199):
Forget 3 in 250. What about 2 in 90 miles? No airline in the world has ever tried 2 hubs 90 miles from eachother unless you consider ORY an AF hub, but just look at how well AF is doing financially

I think I have already made my point quite clear and I see that you share the same opinion I think that the days of PHL as a TATL hub are numbered.

EWR and IAD are far enough appart that they don't conflict with eachother, each have significant O&D traffic in their own right, and IAD is just fr enough to the south to offer an alternative to EWR in bad weather. Without connections, PHL would probably have 1 single daily TATL flight: LHR. I'm not saying that's what will happen but the volume of O&D traffic from PHL is so small that if it were to be absorbed by the JFK hub it would be hardly noticed. Add to it the proximity of the 2 and in one single snow storm or summer thunderstorm both PHL and JFK will be paralyzed. Why would any airline want their main TATL connections to flow thru those 2 hubs without redundancy? I guess only time will tell.



Yet, you completely ignored the facts that have been presented before you. You have been provided local market information and the reasons why PHL would be of value to the combined airline. You also tried to insinuate that CLT and PHL were similar local markets which is asinine.

Lets cut through the bull for a moment and Ill say something that is not going to be popular. JFK is not a hub (in the true sense of the word) for AA. It isnt. They can call it a hub (or cornerstone) until they are blue in the face, but its not a hub. Its a lot more of an O&D operation specifically targeting the huge NYC market. The international connections it get are from flights that exist to serve the local market anyway. Not to mention, there is zero room for expansion at JFK. Dont get me wrong, AA's presence at JFK and LGA is huge, but they are much more focuses on NYC O&D than any connections there.

PHL on the other hand is very much a hub. There are many markets in the Northeast, that when combined, result in large amounts of traffic to Europe and other parts of the US. JFK cannot serve those markets. Period. Doing away with PHL as a hub is akin to handing away the region to UA and DL which is moronic on every concievable level. Part of the reason AA would find this merger appealing in the first place is because of PHL (and CLT and DCA). Doing away with any one piece of that puzzle negates any benefit of the merger because they all provide pieces of the puzzle. PHL provides the Northeast, CLT provides the Southeast, and DCA provides the valuble DC piece. Not to be completely forgotten, having a loyal following in Arizona wont hurt.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PSU.DTW.SCE
Posted 2013-02-11 12:36:21 and read 12096 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 205):
With one critical difference: DL needs to use LGA and JFK for connections, which AA won't have to worry about doing. LGA and JFK are suboptimal in that role. AA can perfectly optimize LGA for domestic O&D and JFK for transcon/international O&D.

In fact, I honestly would go as far as to say that with a merger AA would be in an overall better position in the northeast overall than DL - I honestly think a combination of ORD+PHL is better than a combination of DFW+LGA+JFK, not to mention that post-merger AA will also be a very large force in BOS, NYC and of course WAS/DCA.

Let's not kid ourselves, DL likes to think that LGA is a connecting hub and even states that is it, but isn't. DL would be happy if they got even close to 20% connecting traffic over LGA. JFK, yes they rely on the connecting traffic to make some of the secondary markets work.

I agree that PHL is a huge differentiator for AA+US in the Northeast that provides a true connecting hub like EWR. Despite their flaws, delays, and weather issue both offer true global and domestic hubs. IAD does too. DL would be the only network carrier without such in the Northeast. However, they at least have DTW as a less-weather and delay prone alternate that handles connections very well out of the northeast to points in the midwest, west coast and Asia.

Quoting commavia (Reply 205):
I definitely think ORD will pick up some incremental benefit - in the form of both new routes and additional capacity - in multiple northeast markets where AA alone was a rather weak or non-existent player but where US is rather large.

What are your thoughts about AA relinking up PHL and CLT to the Midwest?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 12:38:26 and read 12094 times.

Quoting travelin man (Reply 203):
AA may also get more breathing room in T4 after the new TBIT opens, but I'm a little unclear on the details of the agreement between AA and LAWA to use TBIT for its international flights....

Priority use of four TBIT gates if the TBIT gate count is over 17 gates. TBIT will be at 18, so AA gets the priority gate use.

I might have those numbers wrong, but regardless, I believe that TBIT gate count is set to meet the criteria for AA to get the priority usage of gates. TBIT/T4 will be connected within security when construction is done, too, so the gates might prove to be very useful.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: bizjet
Posted 2013-02-11 15:38:20 and read 11786 times.

I totally agree with everyone who is arguing that PHL and JFK can very effectively co-exist with each other.

Clearly, all the major markets will be served out of both cities, with JFK focused on local traffic and PHL on connecting flows.

But where I see the challenge arising is making marginal European markets work — the type of markets that UA can support out of EWR because they have both the enormous NYC O&D catchment and powerful connecting flows.

Take something like ARN or CPH — will we ever see AA in those markets? If so, from PHL or JFK?

Or perhaps all the secondary markets will be just left to UA due to the strength of EWR.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 15:59:00 and read 11744 times.

Quoting bizjet (Reply 209):
Take something like ARN or CPH — will we ever see AA in those markets? If so, from PHL or JFK?

JFK makes the most sense to add niche markets.

And I fully expect GLA, MUC, LIS, ATH, BRU and AMS will move to JFK (assuming AA/US keep them).

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-11 16:21:01 and read 11654 times.

Quoting bizjet (Reply 209):
Clearly, all the major markets will be served out of both cities, with JFK focused on local traffic and PHL on connecting flows.

  

Again - it's not "either or," it's "both."

Quoting bizjet (Reply 209):
But where I see the challenge arising is making marginal European markets work — the type of markets that UA can support out of EWR because they have both the enormous NYC O&D catchment and powerful connecting flows.

Take something like ARN or CPH — will we ever see AA in those markets? If so, from PHL or JFK?

I think it depends. There are pros and cons to each.

JFK will obviously always win out on the local market - just as there is virtually no major U.S. city for which London is not the largest O&D market in Europe, there is virtually no major European city for which New York is not the largest O&D market in the U.S. That's just reality.

On the other hand, JFK (and really New York in general) has extremely intense competition. Not only does Delta have a huge European hub at JFK, and United have a huge European hub across town at EWR, but of course virtually every single major global carrier flies to one or both of those airports, as well.

PHL, on the other hand, is certainly nowhere near as large a local market to Europe (although it's not tiny, either), but AA will essentially have that market almost to themselves. Whereas all the European carriers generally have at least 2 - and in many cases 4, 6, or 8 daily flights out of JFK/EWR, PHL's largest European carrier is BA, and they will soon be an immunized joint venture partner on all AA PHL-Europe flights.

So what does that boil down to? For "niche" Europe markets where local demand is more critical, JFK will always necessarily win out as the gateway of choice. For "niche" Europe markets where local demand is relatively less important, and where connections may be coming in large part from places other than New York or Philadelphia, PHL may well win out. It will depend on the individual market, and the competitive dynamics thereof.

To your point specifically about ARN or CPH - those markets might be a challenge for AA no matter where they would be flown from simply because they are so dominated by Star (SAS/United). I do contend that AA does, at some point, need to have at least 1 nonstop flight to Scandinavia, and I think ARN probably is the right market - perhaps with a 757. From JFK or PHL, though? Not sure.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 210):
JFK makes the most sense to add niche markets.

And I fully expect GLA, MUC, LIS, ATH, BRU and AMS will move to JFK (assuming AA/US keep them).

I see it shaking out a bit differently than you do. Specifically:

Amsterdam: People seem to be bearish on this simply due to the obvious dominance of SkyTeam, but I contend that this market is so large and important in Europe that AA needs a nonstop presence there; despite the alliance disadvantage, US has made it work from PHL for years, and I don’t see that changing

Athens: already Summer-seasonal from PHL, and I suspect it will end completely with a merger as costs rise and Greece’s economy continues to stagnate

Barcelona: Summer-seasonal from PHL now, and year-round from JFK/MIA; I think all 3 routes can stick around, particular with the boost from IB on the BCN end

Brussels: see AMS - same story

Dublin: already flown from JFK, ORD and PHL; I think it’s a big enough market that it can operate from both JFK and PHL - in fact, I would not be surprised (unfortunately) to see AA exit ORD-DUB, and I definitely think AA will exit CLT-DUB

Frankfurt: major local market, not going anywhere; I could see 1 of the currently 2 daily PHL-FRA flights shifted up to JFK as a daily 757 (perhaps using the freed up JFK/FRA slots the EC has proposed to take from UA/LH in order to approve their JV)

Glasgow: currently Summer-seasonal from PHL; I could see it moving up to JFK just because the local market is larger and there actually is a bit of business (banking) demand

Lisbon: currently Summer-seasonal from PHL; if it stays at all I think it will stay at PHL, as JFK doesn’t really have much advantage on local market (EWR, not JFK, is the real O&D driver) and where AA has the market all to themselves

London-Heathrow: obviously not going anywhere; I could easily see it going to 4x daily (2x AA/2x BA) in the summer and 3x daily (1x AA/2x BA) in the Winter

Madrid: also not going anywhere from PHL, particularly now given the plethora of connections on the MAD end

Manchester: healthy local market from PHL; I see JFK and PHL both keeping MAN flights

Munich: I see MUC ending entirely given the lack of LH connections on the MUC end

Paris: huge local market, obviously not going anywhere from JFK or PHL

Rome: see MAN

Shannon: currently Summer-seasonal from PHL; I think it stays at PHL - JFK certainly caters to a larger local market, but this one is so leisure and so seasonal that if it sticks around at all I don’t think it will matter

Tel Aviv: not only does the apparently quite-successful PHL-TLV stick around, but I could realistically see JFK-TLV being added alongside it

Venice-Marco Polo: a tough one; JFK certainly has a larger local market, and is probably higher-yielding, too, but again, AA has PHL all to themselves - I think VCE sticks around, just not sure from where

Zürich: see MUC, only I do see JFK keeping ZRH due to the larger and higher-yielding local market

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-11 16:34:03 and read 11591 times.

Quoting Vctony (Reply 165):
Essentially PHL is to US now what PIT was in the late 1990s. It just so happens that PHL has the European flights thrown in.
Quoting commavia (Reply 211):
Amsterdam: People seem to be bearish on this simply due to the obvious dominance of SkyTeam, but I contend that this market is so large and important in Europe that AA needs a nonstop presence there; despite the alliance disadvantage, US has made it work from PHL for years, and I don’t see that changing

I'm not sure about AMS. I vaguely remember that PHL-AMS on US has been a mediocre preformer at best.

Also not sure about SNN. US canned it a few years ago and recently decided to bring it back this summer.

Note that PHL-VCE is being upgraded to a 332 from a 762 so they must be doing reasonably well on it.

So for PHL you could have
LHR
MAD
MAN
DUB
FCO
FRA
TLV
VCE
AMS
BCN
BRU
CDG

Even after several cuts that is still a reasonable TA gateway.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: EricR
Posted 2013-02-11 17:40:45 and read 11408 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 211):
Amsterdam: People seem to be bearish on this simply due to the obvious dominance of SkyTeam, but I contend that this market is so large and important in Europe that AA needs a nonstop presence there; despite the alliance disadvantage, US has made it work from PHL for years, and I don’t see that changing

Lisbon: currently Summer-seasonal from PHL; if it stays at all I think it will stay at PHL, as JFK doesn’t really have much advantage on local market (EWR, not JFK, is the real O&D driver) and where AA has the market all to themselves

Munich: I see MUC ending entirely given the lack of LH connections on the MUC end
.



Interesting that you foresee AA having such issues in MUC which is a solid market, yet you see weaker markets such as LIS or AMS as doable.

AA has, for whatever reason, a weak track record in Germany, but Germany is Europe's strongest economy. It will be a disappointment if AA cannot make more progress into Germany post BK, especially considering DL's success without any type of German carrier alliance.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 17:45:03 and read 11429 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 211):
Zürich: see MUC, only I do see JFK keeping ZRH due to the larger and higher-yielding local market

Keep the capacity; move it to Miami, like what I believe should be done with Charlotte-Rome. Not only is Miami-Zurich a huge local market (100,000+ local passengers annually; fourth busiest inter-continental route to/from Switzerland), the fares are also quite good.

And outside of Athens, I think AA would be foolish to drop any of the stations short-term. It should try them out, help OW build an important footprint to non-UK/Spain markets. And if developed properly, opens the door to further expand in those markets (i.e. MIAVCE - high fares, good demand).

[Edited 2013-02-11 17:50:24]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BigGSFO
Posted 2013-02-11 17:48:47 and read 11376 times.

Quoting EricR (Reply 213):
AA has, for whatever reason, a weak track record in Germany, but Germany is Europe's strongest economy. It will be a disappointment if AA cannot make more progress into Germany post BK, especially considering DL's success without any type of German carrier alliance.

Well there is the AB relationship and they are starting ORD-DUS, so perhaps they just need to find the right routes. Perhaps (presumably) Parker and company will be more aggressive and push harder into certain markets, specifically Germany. Also missing is a MIA-Germany route. I'd imagine AA could make this successful even without a German partner.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jlbmedia
Posted 2013-02-11 17:49:19 and read 11380 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 199):
Add to it the proximity of the 2 and in one single snow storm or summer thunderstorm both PHL and JFK will be paralyzed.

While a major snow storm may effect both PHL & JFK, It is not necessarily guaranteed. Predicting snow in the Northeast is not as simple as you have made it out to be. Notice last weeks Nor-easter snowstorm that hit NYC and New England but only dropped about 1 1/2 inches in Philadelphia.

Quoting commavia (Reply 201):
This again misses the point which is that JFK and PHL are both going to technically be called "hubs" but in reality JFK is likely to be optimized far more for O&D than connections. In practice, PHL will really be the megahub - for Europe and the northeast - while JFK will be NYC's gateway to the world via AA/oneworld. The two operations will compliment, not compete with, each other.

  

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 17:52:23 and read 11408 times.

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 215):
Also missing is a MIA-Germany route. I'd imagine AA could make this successful even without a German partner.

The problem is this market is insanely Germany-centric originating and weak yielding (especially outside of FRA). Let airBerlin handle this traffic. If AA wants to expand from Miami to German-speaking Europe, it should go to Zurich.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-11 17:54:42 and read 11405 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 214):
like what I believe should be done with Charlotte-Rome.

I think CLT-FCO should move to MIA-MXP.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 214):
Not only is Miami-Zurich a huge local market (100,000+ local passengers annually; fourth busiest inter-continental route to/from Switzerland), the fares are also quite good.

Is the market large and high-yielding enough to support an AA flight in addition to the LX flight?

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 214):
And outside of Athens, I think AA would be foolish to drop any of the stations short-term. It should try them out, help OW build an important footprint to non-UK/Spain markets. And if developed properly, opens the door to further expand in those markets (i.e. MIAVCE - high fares, good demand).

Perhaps.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SkedGuy
Posted 2013-02-11 17:56:25 and read 11390 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 179):
As I keep saying over and over and over again, this city is going to grow exponentially as soon as Congress gets its ass in gear and starts letting the economy grow again. Why would AA want to miss out on this great opportunity?

Perhaps, but cities like the DFW Metroplex are already booming again TODAY post-Recession -- even in the current environment and without the influence of Congressional involvement.

Look, I've spent plenty of time in the PHX area, and in a former life, I did network planning for one of the two major carriers with a large operational presence at Sky Harbor. I know the PHX O&D market, and I know that it's rich. However, you already have great O&D service on WN, which is both a blessing and a curse for folks like yourself who are fervently advocating the long-term sustainability of the AA/US hub there. PHX will always have great air service, but its future is probably comparable to what you see today in BWI: a robust local market with some European service, but ultimately tempered by WN’s large presence in the market. What people don’t always accept is that WN may lower the overall fare structure for an airport (a good thing), but it also ultimately limits consumer choices once it gets big enough at a given airport (a not so good thing). Even with its rising costs, WN is a force to be reckoned with, and the network carriers aren’t usually willing to compete with WN except to their hubs.

I believe that the new AA/US will maintain a hub in PHX, but it will be on a smaller scale than what you see today, and WN will be the primary carrier for most point-to-point O&D markets. It may not be what you want to hear, but I’ll go the bank on my prediction. With no disrespect at all towards your thoughtful posts on here, the end game is crystal clear for PHX.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BigGSFO
Posted 2013-02-11 17:56:30 and read 11388 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 217):
The problem is this market is insanely Germany-centric originating and weak yielding (especially outside of FRA). Let airBerlin handle this traffic. If AA wants to expand from Miami to German-speaking Europe, it should go to Zurich.

Well here's hoping Parker will take some more risks than the outgoing team did using Miami as a transatlantic gateway: MXP, JNB, CPT, etc.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-11 17:59:02 and read 11432 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 218):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 214):
Not only is Miami-Zurich a huge local market (100,000+ local passengers annually; fourth busiest inter-continental route to/from Switzerland), the fares are also quite good.

Is the market large and high-yielding enough to support an AA flight in addition to the LX flight?

At ~110,000 annual passengers and $1,100ish average one-way fare, absolutey, I think so. It's about 50% bigger than MIABCN; a little larger than MIAMIL, not much smaller than MIAROM.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: ckfred
Posted 2013-02-12 08:09:02 and read 10901 times.

Parker as said to employees in Chicago that he feels that AA has let the Chicago market get away from AA, with UA and WN gaining more traffic.

If the merger goes through, would we see the combined carrier start shifting larger RJs (Embrears 170s and 190s) and A319s into ORD? People have said, since the large narrowbody order was announced in July of 2011, that the A319 would be well suited for ORD, since a lot of routes need something bigger than a CRJ, but that they can't support all mainline, with the smallest plane being the MD-80 at 140 seats.

I'm not sure what the delivery rate will be for the A319s, but it seems that ORD could use some ASAP, as well as the larger Embrears.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: 9w748capt
Posted 2013-02-12 08:20:10 and read 10823 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 222):
Parker as said to employees in Chicago that he feels that AA has let the Chicago market get away from AA, with UA and WN gaining more traffic.

If the merger goes through, would we see the combined carrier start shifting larger RJs (Embrears 170s and 190s) and A319s into ORD? People have said, since the large narrowbody order was announced in July of 2011, that the A319 would be well suited for ORD, since a lot of routes need something bigger than a CRJ, but that they can't support all mainline, with the smallest plane being the MD-80 at 140 seats.

I'm not sure what the delivery rate will be for the A319s, but it seems that ORD could use some ASAP, as well as the larger Embrears.

Basically, yes to all. From what commavia and others have said - that's exactly correct - the scope clause has hamstrung AA in ORD, and they should finally be able to right-size the operation with the addition of 319s and E-jets.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: PSU.DTW.SCE
Posted 2013-02-12 08:23:35 and read 10853 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 222):
If the merger goes through, would we see the combined carrier start shifting larger RJs (Embrears 170s and 190s) and A319s into ORD? People have said, since the large narrowbody order was announced in July of 2011, that the A319 would be well suited for ORD, since a lot of routes need something bigger than a CRJ, but that they can't support all mainline, with the smallest plane being the MD-80 at 140 seats

AA has had challenges to get the capacity/frequency mix right on many markets out of ORD. The larger RJs help this moreso than the A319. The A319 isn't going to be all that much different in capacity than the MD-80s, slightly less but not by too much. AA needs to offer sufficient frequency in ORD throughout the day and offer good connections to Asia, Europe and domestic E-W flows. Some markets can't handle mainline on every flight throughout the day, and on the flip side aren't exactly the best with ERJs.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BigGSFO
Posted 2013-02-12 08:38:38 and read 10775 times.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 224):
The A319 isn't going to be all that much different in capacity than the MD-80s, slightly less but not by too much.

Maybe not in capacity, but definitely in lower costs.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-12 15:27:09 and read 10452 times.

I definitley see a lot of shifting of European routes between not only JFK and PHL; but ORD and MIA will get in the mix as well. When you look at how much larger the local markets are from Miami and Chicago (and, while not included, obviously NYC), it makes one wonder how long non-core PHL-Europe will last, especially if, as I suspect, the most important feeder markets for PHL-Europe are California, Florida and Chicago itself (along with probably D.C., which can redirect via JFK).

AMSMIA- 130 PDEW
AMSORD - 115 PDEW
AMSPHL - 35 PDEW

ATHMIA - 22 PDEW
ATHPHL - 26 PDEW
ATHORD - 55 PDEW

BCNMIA - 100 PDEW
BCNPHL - 40 PDEW
BCNORD - 65 PDEW

BRUMIA - 75 PDEW
BRUORD - 60 PDEW
BRUPHL - 25 PDEW

MIADUB - 30 PDEW
ORDDUB - 200 PDEW
PHLDUB - 50 PDEW

MIADUS - 100 PDEW
ORDDUS - 50 PDEW
PHLDUS - 10 PDEW

MIAFRA - 190 PDEW
ORDFRA - 170 PDEW
PHLFRA - 80 PDEW

MIAGLA - 15 PDEW
PHLGLA - 15 PDEW
ORDGLA - 10 PDEW

MIAHEL - 65 PDEW
ORDHEL - 25 PDEW
PHLHEL - 3 PDEW

MIALIS - 40 PDEW
ORDLIS - 15 PDEW
PHLLIS - 10 PDEW

MIALON - 650 PDEW
ORDLON - 515 PDEW
PHLLON - 210 PDEW

MIAMAD - 205 PDEW
ORDMAD - 90 PDEW
PHLMAD - 45 PDEW

MIAMAN - 60 PDEW
ORDMAN - 60 PDEW
PHLMAN - 50 PDEW

MIAMIL - 135 PDEW
ORDMIL - 50 PDEW
PHLMIL - 15 PDEW

MIAMUC - 80 PDEW
ORDMUC - 80 PDEW
PHLMUC - 35 PDEW

MIAPAR - 350 PDEW
ORDPAR - 240 PDEW
PHLPAR - 90 PDEW

MIAROM - 160 PDEW
ORDROM - 130 PDEW
PHLROM - 90 PDEW

MIASNN - 2 PDEW
ORDSNN - 10 PDEW
PHLSNN - 3 PDEW

MIATLV - 115 PDEW
ORDTLV - 80 PDEW
PHLTLV - 45 PDEW

MIAVCE - 45 PDEW
ORDVCE - 30 PDEW
PHLVCE - 22 PDEW

MIAZRH - 170 PDEW
ORDZRH - 80 PDEW
PHLZRH - 25 PDEW

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-12 15:45:21 and read 10493 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 226):

Which markets, in your opinion does PHL keep over the Atlantic?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-12 16:00:38 and read 10474 times.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 227):
Which markets, in your opinion does PHL keep over the Atlantic?

Long-term, FRA/CDG/LHR/MAD/FCO; maybe TLV/MAN.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: EricR
Posted 2013-02-12 16:08:00 and read 10392 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 226):
I definitley see a lot of shifting of European routes between not only JFK and PHL; but ORD and MIA will get in the mix as well. When you look at how much larger the local markets are from Miami and Chicago (and, while not included, obviously NYC), it makes one wonder how long non-core PHL-Europe will last, especially if, as I suspect, the most important feeder markets for PHL-Europe are California, Florida and Chicago itself (along with probably D.C., which can redirect via JFK).



Looking solely at total PDEWs is misleading without also factoring in the additional N/S competition at MIA & ORD that will eat away at the PDEW number left over for AA/US.

For example, at ORD & MIA you have to divide the PDEWs amongst multiple carriers that offer N/S service to Europe - some of whom have more than one daily N/S. The percentage of PDEWs AA/US will see at ORD & MIA will be much less than PHL where the lack of N/S competition to Europe means a much greater percentage of PDEWs will automatically fall to AA/US. Once you factor this in, the PDEW gap will decrease considerably in many markets or disappear all together.

In addition, revenue mix could also greatly alter the most ideal gateway for a particular route, especially on those routes where the PDEW numbers are close such as MAN. Therefore even though destination A may have more PDEWs, destination B may be the ideal gateway due to a better revenue mix.

Lastly, MIA is less than ideal for domestic connections to Europe.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: usairways85
Posted 2013-02-12 16:42:37 and read 10283 times.

Well as for the PDEW list I think there are already a number of destinations many of us believe could be cut from PHL. ATH, MUC, GLA, AMS, BRU, SNN come to mind.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 228):
TLV/MAN.

As mentioned before I'm pretty sure US has contracts above/below the wing on PHL-MAN. Assuming they keep them US would be foolish to get rid of this route.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: adamh8297
Posted 2013-02-12 16:45:00 and read 10287 times.

Quoting EricR (Reply 229):
Looking solely at total PDEWs is misleading without also factoring in the additional N/S competition at MIA & ORD that will eat away at the PDEW number left over for AA/US.

You are forgetting that some European destinations are hubs.

If you look at MIA-ZRH, there are people flying LX to connect in ZRH to get to destinations BOM, DXB, TLV, IST, LED, DME, etc and vice-versa.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-12 16:52:01 and read 10261 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 228):

For the most part, I agree though I would put MAN into the first one tha PHL keeps for sure. Even if its downgraded from a 330, it's not a bad sized local market, the fares are decent, and the connectivity is good.

I don't really see TLV moved either. I realize MIATLV is larger, but moving it there does nothing for the network as a whole outside Miami itself. MIA is not well suited for connections and that's the combined carriers only TLV flight. I don't see moving it to ORD either. You cut out the Northeast market doing that and that more than makes up for the PDEW difference.

The one flight I see moved to MIA is CLTFCO which should become MIAMXP. The secondary destinations from PHL could move to JFK. I don't see much shifting to ORD in terms of European flights.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: slcdeltarumd11
Posted 2013-02-12 17:03:59 and read 10238 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 228):
Long-term, FRA/CDG/LHR/MAD/FCO; maybe TLV/MAN.

The place where PHL shines IMHO is the smaller markets mostly connections to the 757 cities or high connection price sensative markets like ATH or TLV. PHL is still extremely valuable and has access to all the smaller cities they dont and wont from JFK sure theres only a few people headed there per day but you combined all of them and charge a premium to leave from the smaller airports. Combined all the PHL connection fire power and its alot to fill those 757s and less business routes profitably. Every hub will see shifting and im sure some will leave PHL but i dont see PHL taking a major hit heck it might make JAL fly PHL-NRT if/when this merger happens if/when the 787 is available. Id be more worried about CLT becoming more domestic focused with the merger and less international.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: ckfred
Posted 2013-02-13 08:28:19 and read 9636 times.

Quoting 9w748capt (Reply 223):
Basically, yes to all. From what commavia and others have said - that's exactly correct - the scope clause has hamstrung AA in ORD, and they should finally be able to right-size the operation with the addition of 319s and E-jets.

The scope clause had been an issue, along with the decision to first cancel TW's order for 717s and return the aircraft Boeing had already delivered, followed by the retirement of the Fokker fleet.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: ckfred
Posted 2013-02-13 10:43:33 and read 9391 times.

I just came across a Reuters report about the possible routes affected by the merger. DOJ would probably want some limits on flights between the former US hubs and current AA hubs, such as LGA-CLT or PHX-DFW.

The strange thing was a mention of limits on flights between DFW and ORD. Huh? That's hub to hub on AA, and UA flies the route. WN has one-stop service between MDW and DAL, which will probably become non-stop, when the Wright Amendment restrictions are fully removed.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-13 10:57:14 and read 9339 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 235):
I just came across a Reuters report about the possible routes affected by the merger. DOJ would probably want some limits on flights between the former US hubs and current AA hubs, such as LGA-CLT or PHX-DFW.

The strange thing was a mention of limits on flights between DFW and ORD. Huh? That's hub to hub on AA, and UA flies the route. WN has one-stop service between MDW and DAL, which will probably become non-stop, when the Wright Amendment restrictions are fully removed.

That article is typical "journalism" with regard to the airline industry - which is to say, idiotic.

They interviewed a bunch of alleged antitrust "experts" who obviously have no idea what they're talking about with specific regard to the airline industry who speak of AA/US have to make "divestitures" at DFW and CLT, and "sell some routes" with the domestic U.S.

DFW and CLT are both unrestricted markets with plenty of free market access, and AA cannot "sell routes" within the domestic U.S.

Ridiculous.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: ckfred
Posted 2013-02-13 11:15:22 and read 9284 times.

Quoting commavia (Reply 236):
That article is typical "journalism" with regard to the airline industry - which is to say, idiotic.

They interviewed a bunch of alleged antitrust "experts" who obviously have no idea what they're talking about with specific regard to the airline industry who speak of AA/US have to make "divestitures" at DFW and CLT, and "sell some routes" with the domestic U.S.

DFW and CLT are both unrestricted markets with plenty of free market access, and AA cannot "sell routes" within the domestic U.S.

You're right that both DFW and CLT lack any sort of slot restrictions. But, that doesn't mean that DOJ might require some limits on the number of flights or seats that the combined AA/US can schedule on hub to hub flying.

DFW presents some issues, because of the constraints that WN has at DAL, both in terms of current flying under the Wright Amendment, as well as the hard cap on operations. When the Wright Amendment restrictions disappear, flights to new destinations will mean some cuts in flights to current destinations.

ORD isn't an issue, since UA has a larger hub than AA, and WN still has some room for growth at MDW. Further, WN already flies to PHL and PHX. It wouldn't be a problem for Southwest and Air Tran to add service to MDW, or FLL for that matter.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-13 11:22:33 and read 9236 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 237):
But, that doesn't mean that DOJ might require some limits on the number of flights or seats that the combined AA/US can schedule on hub to hub flying.

I believe that would be unprecedented, not to mention rather useless. The only thing I can fathom the DOJ requiring the combined airline sell or give up would be DCA slots, and perhaps some primetime JFK slots (far outside chance, I believe).

My money is actually on putting a few DCA out-of-perimeter slots up for sale. That would benefit other carriers the most.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: commavia
Posted 2013-02-13 11:33:57 and read 9202 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 237):
But, that doesn't mean that DOJ might require some limits on the number of flights or seats that the combined AA/US can schedule on hub to hub flying.

As already stated - that would likely be without precedent in airline merger history, and would be absolutely ridiculous considering the markets in question are entirely open and unrestricted access - any airline could enter any market out of DFW or CLT they want assuming the destination on the other end of the route is open-access or it isn't and they have available slots.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 237):
DFW presents some issues, because of the constraints that WN has at DAL, both in terms of current flying under the Wright Amendment, as well as the hard cap on operations. When the Wright Amendment restrictions disappear, flights to new destinations will mean some cuts in flights to current destinations.

No, DFW presents no issues. The market is entirely open. Any airline could schedule 100 departures out of DFW tomorrow without restriction.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: HPRamper
Posted 2013-02-13 11:39:50 and read 9165 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 238):
My money is actually on putting a few DCA out-of-perimeter slots up for sale. That would benefit other carriers the most.

But at the detriment of those markets that already landed the services. I think some slots will have to be divested at DCA but I believe it will be left up to the carrier to decide which ones. I also believe the airline will petition for a change in one or two of the out-of-perimeter slots. Namely, PHX to LAX. I think SAN stays.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-13 11:46:24 and read 9156 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 235):
I just came across a Reuters report about the possible routes affected by the merger.

And you can file that article under the heading "Clueless Journalism".

Quoting ckfred (Reply 237):
DFW presents some issues, because of the constraints that WN has at DAL, both in terms of current flying under the Wright Amendment, as well as the hard cap on operations. When the Wright Amendment restrictions disappear, flights to new destinations will mean some cuts in flights to current destinations.

Are you joking? DFW has no restrictions. DAL doesnt apply. Even then, the market will be entirely open in a year.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-02-13 20:51:10 and read 8701 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 238):
My money is actually on putting a few DCA out-of-perimeter slots up for sale. That would benefit other carriers the most.

I don't think US/AA can sell any of the beyond-perimeter slots. One would have to go back and look at the various Bills that authorized the routes but I believe sale of any of them is not permited. If the merger agreement requires some of them to be divested, their reassignment would probably require a new Congress-authorized DOT hearing like we went through last year.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 240):
But at the detriment of those markets that already landed the services. I think some slots will have to be divested at DCA but I believe it will be left up to the carrier to decide which ones. I also believe the airline will petition for a change in one or two of the out-of-perimeter slots. Namely, PHX to LAX. I think SAN stays.

The combined beyond-perimeter slots for US and AA are 6 (12 actually, as they exist in pairs):
3x PHX (US)
1x LAX (AA)
1x LAS (US)
1x SAN (US)
As far as other cx, AS has 4, F9 has 3, UA and DL have 2 each, and B6, WN, and VX each have 1.
I could certainly see PHX being reduced to 1 or 2 and the "extra" slots simply being eliminated until there is another DOT hearing to determine the assignment of those, plus perhaps a few additional ones.

I could see the new AA ending up with 4 DCA Beyond-Perimeter slots and most would think that is not way out of line. (Well, except for about 4 or 5 other airlines...) Especially if the new AA were required to surrender some of it's Within-Perimter slots.

In a related question, has Senator McCain weighed in on this whole merger-thing yet? I can bet he will have some very strong opinions about what happens to the PHX hub as part of the merger agreement...

bb

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-02-13 21:12:49 and read 8633 times.

I checked the text of the Bill authorizing last years Beyond-Perimeter hearing and award of 16 exemptions. Here is an important clarification:

Quote:
The Secretary shall prohibit the transfer of exemptions except through an air carrier merger or acquisition.

Can the DOT simply change this as part of the merger approval? I have no idea but I would think it would be difficult to do and probably very involved. PHX was not part of last years hearing and I don't know how the Bill was written that gave exemptions to PHX, but to remove some of those exemptions would probably be equally difficult.

bb

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-13 21:31:35 and read 8579 times.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 243):
PHX was not part of last years hearing and I don't know how the Bill was written that gave exemptions to PHX, but to remove some of those exemptions would probably be equally difficult.

I asked that question in another thread, regarding the different tranches of authorizations which came about, such as DEN being a grandfathered route, and no one answered. I'm sure it'll come up in the merger news as it progresses.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Caryjack
Posted 2013-02-13 21:48:52 and read 8538 times.

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 196):
Whenever you have a fortress hub situation, the Dominant Carrier will charge for it to the locals to offset the the cheaper costs they pass to connecting traffic.

Are you saying that the largest carrier at a hub, the DC, has some control over that airports costs which can be passed on to other carriers thereby cutting costs to the DCs passengers? Or is it as simple as the DC passing along a volume discount?

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 196):
And in any case, DFW is only expensive to fly out of if you're doing it (wrong) on AA. Most anything out of Terminal E will save you a good deal

I'm in SEA so if I understand your post, this does not apply to me...but how do you do it right on AA?

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 206):
Lets cut through the bull for a moment and Ill say something that is not going to be popular. JFK is not a hub (in the true sense of the word) for AA.

This looks like an opportunity to define some terms. I've seen hub, mega hub and focus city, to name 3. Any others and how are they defined?
Passengers have classifications also. O & D looks like originating and departing which refers to people who live near the airport, I think. Business and leisure are clear but VFR looks like visitors family and friends. Any others? I don't know what PDEW is.
Up thread I believe you offered to analyze any requested airport. If true, what impact will this merger have on SEA? I typically fly to MAD through ORD (IB) or JFK, and to Central and South America through DFW and MIA.
Thanks,   
Cary

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: gigneil
Posted 2013-02-13 23:13:59 and read 8452 times.

So, I'll just say this.

US carries more passengers to Europe from Philly now than AA does from JFK, and offers service to - what, twice? - as many domestic cities.

CLT offers service to 50 more cities than Miami. Connecting traffic?

NS

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: flyguy89
Posted 2013-02-14 08:40:03 and read 8051 times.

Quoting gigneil (Reply 246):
So, I'll just say this.

US carries more passengers to Europe from Philly now than AA does from JFK, and offers service to - what, twice? - as many domestic cities.

CLT offers service to 50 more cities than Miami. Connecting traffic?

What's your point?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: doug
Posted 2013-02-14 09:22:56 and read 7961 times.

Quoting gigneil (Reply 246):

CLT 130 to 135 nonstop cities served

MIA 115 cities where did you get 50 from?Also AA'S Miami hub offers more mainline flights than CLT with U.S only by 5 though, the regional feed is a different story way in CLT's favor.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-14 13:28:58 and read 7624 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 244):
I asked that question in another thread, regarding the different tranches of authorizations which came about, such as DEN being a grandfathered route, and no one answered.

I would think that DEN is a godfathered route with LGA, but not with DCA.

This is the case with LGA. In 1984, to further combat overcrowding at LGA, the Port Authority instituted a Sunday-thru-Friday "perimeter rule" banning nonstop flights from LaGuardia to cities more than 1,500 miles (2,400 km) away; at the time, Denver was the only such city with nonstop flights, and it became the only exception to the rule. This perimeter I believe was the effort to shift close destinations to NYC to fly into LGA, and the further destinations from NYC to fly into JFK. Thus, it is here that DEN is considered godfathered, and there can be as many nonstop flights between DEN-LGA by any airline so long as the airline has slots. Currently on DEN-LGA, I believe that UA has about 5 nonstop flights per day here, F9 has 2-3 (depending on season) and recently both DL and WN added a couple of daily flights each here. So there is about 11-12 daily flights on this route. This would obviously make DEN an important connection point out west into NYC. Of course, the perimeter rule only limits the carries to weekdays, so sometimes there can be weekend flights to destinations past the 1500 mile limit.

Now, as for DEN-DCA, DCA is subject to a federally-mandated perimeter limitation and may not accommodate nonstop flights to or from cities beyond a 1,250-statute mile (2,010 km) radius, with limited exceptions. The U.S. Department of Transportation has issued "beyond-perimeter slot exemptions" which allow specified carriers to currently operate 20 daily round-trip flights to cities outside the perimeter. This was done initially in order to get airlines to use IAD (sorta like LGA and JFK I believe) At present, DEN has 3 daily F9 nonstop flights into DCA, and 1 daily UA nonstop flight into DCA, for a total of 4 nonstops DEN-DCA. This isn't considered godfathered., but rather awarded. And slots from DCA past the perimeter required acts of the U.S. Congress, so much more difficult for airlines at DCA than LGA.

Maybe this answers your question?

 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-02-14 13:32:25 and read 7610 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 249):
I would think that DEN is a godfathered route with LGA, but not with DCA.

Good catch, when I was typing that post I used a bad example, and confused LGA/DCA for a moment.

[Edited 2013-02-14 13:36:16]

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Maverick623
Posted 2013-02-14 14:54:35 and read 7462 times.

Quoting point2point (Reply 249):
godfathered

Point of note: the correct term is grandfather.  
Quoting ckfred (Reply 235):
I just came across a Reuters report about the possible routes affected by the merger. DOJ would probably want some limits on flights between the former US hubs and current AA hubs, such as LGA-CLT or PHX-DFW.

As was said, typical crappy journalism by people who know nothing about aviation asking people who think they know something but actually know less that the reporter... I think that came out right....

We'll probably see some DCA slots given up, maybe a few LGA but not many.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 242):
I could certainly see PHX being reduced to 1 or 2 and the "extra" slots simply being eliminated until there is another DOT hearing to determine the assignment of those, plus perhaps a few additional ones.

I would think if anything, the LAS slot pair would go.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Darksnowynight
Posted 2013-02-14 15:13:18 and read 7486 times.

Quoting Caryjack (Reply 245):

Are you saying that the largest carrier at a hub, the DC, has some control over that airports costs which can be passed on to other carriers thereby cutting costs to the DCs passengers? Or is it as simple as the DC passing along a volume discount?

No, they do not, although in some cases they can negotiate better gate lease rates, but that really wouldn't be significant.

What I meant is that some routes, namely those connecting through (let's say DFW in this case), will be operated at or below cost, generally to be determined based on competition. The DC in this case, then charges more for O&D flights involving that hub to offset this. They can get away with this as they have a captive market, which they do not have for connecting traffic.

Quoting Caryjack (Reply 245):
I'm in SEA so if I understand your post, this does not apply to me...but how do you do it right on AA?

Right, AFAIK, a flight you book from SEA, connecting through DFW will have a cost based on competition, which very likely would be less per mile (by quite a bit) than a flight on the same airline originating from DFW. Such is the nature of fortress hubs.

I was mainly being tongue in cheek on the last bit. AA is notoriously pricey out of DFW, so to do it "right" would either involve flying someone else, or have your company pay for it,  

There are a few exceptions; notably AA's price-dumping along routes like DFW - LAX whenever someone new enters the market, as VX did not so long ago. But that's really the exception more than anything else...


None of this is a slam on AA in particular; all legacies do this at the fortress hubs, DL & UA are little better (if any) in this way.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: point2point
Posted 2013-02-14 16:01:32 and read 7388 times.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 251):
Point of note: the correct term is grandfather.

LOL...... typing out the whole response I only thought of the technical issues of the airports involved..... and not the term itself.......

And you are correct.... it is grandfathered........ using godfathered...... I guess we would expect to see Marlon Brando as Vito Corleone somewhere in the picture, eh?


 

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Philly65
Posted 2013-02-14 17:03:50 and read 7303 times.

I am amazed at the amount of PHL bashing and pontificating as though everyone has some inside knowledge of what changes will occur once the two airlines are integrated. AA and US have both given up on the NYC market long ago; neither one nor both combined are in a position to regain preeminent status in NYC. UA and DL have long secured the top spots in NY and lets not forget B6 building up as the 3rd premier airline in NYC. US has traded a good chunk of their slot portfolio to DL and AA is a mere shadow of it what it once was at all 3 NYC airports. Didn't AA just sublease slots at EWR to VX? I can't tell you how many times I was at JFK and saw the AA terminal as vacant as any lot in Detroit. How can the combined carrier buy back share in NYC? Can someone explain? I am all ears...

Nevertheless, I will chime in as well. There will no doubt be some shifting of routes and frequencies over the long term. PHX will be the immediate loser. How much? We don't know yet. CLT will also see a good % of flights eliminated. Most of that service will shift via DFW or MIA. How big will CLT be? TBD, but it won't be as big as it is today. ORD, not so sure what will become of this hub as well. So much has been eliminated or replaced by RJs let alone WN building up MDW as their largest hub (or one of) which replaced a lot of service that AA once operated. So again, what becomes of ORD? TBD. PHL, yes I will defend it. You might not like the city (nor know a lot about the place) but the airport is not only the best geographically positioned in the Mid-Atlantic. Also the the facility is not that bad either. Better to connect there than any of the NY airports that is for sure. Although DL's investment at JFK is something to watch out for. Yeah, PHL has ATC issues but nothing like the NYC airports. Playing devils advocate here, can you imagine if US shifted all flights to JFK. LOL! What a fuster cluck that would be. JFK will remain a top focus city with minimal int'l service and west coast to keep the loyal customers/corporate accounts happy, but it will not be the mega gateway a few here are suggesting. What routes if any are transferred or added to JFK? TBD.

I copied the above over from the Routes discussion. I also wanted to add PHL is one of the few facilities where you can connect under one roof between multiple carriers without clearing security again and again. That will be a huge appeal to keep the airport as the main hub in the NE USA. In addition the shopping at airport also is tax free for clothing and has very decent food other than normal fast food chains. Hello, Chicky & Pete's!!

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AAplat4life
Posted 2013-02-15 04:14:11 and read 6907 times.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 254):
I also wanted to add PHL is one of the few facilities where you can connect under one roof between multiple carriers without clearing security again and again.

I'm not sure why that is such an advantage for AA. Other than international flights, that is also true for most of its other hubs.

However, I think PHL will do well along with ORD. I wouldn't be surprised to see 10 to 12 flights a day between the two hubs and more mainline service. If the EU routes are profitable out of PHL, passengers can be funneled from ORD connections where AA's EU routes have been decimated (either due to costs or bad management decisions depending on one's point of view). Conversely, connections from PHL could feed AA routes out of ORD to the west coast and Asia. We might see some slight reductions of PHL flights to some west coast markets that can be connected through ORD, but certainly not eliminations.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Philly65
Posted 2013-02-15 09:52:55 and read 6564 times.

Quoting Moderators (Thread starter):
I'm not sure why that is such an advantage for AA. Other than international flights, that is also true for most of its other hubs.

I was referring to connections across carriers (alliance or non-alliance related). And yes,exactly regarding int'l to domestic flights...that is done under one roof, which is a disadvantage for ORD amongst other airports. There may be exceptions (CLT/DFW/IAD) but comparing PHL as a connecting gateway versus BOS/EWR/JFK, PHL is a much better facility to connect thru be it a single carrier, alliance partners or between non-alliance carriers.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-02-15 10:01:09 and read 6536 times.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 256):
There may be exceptions (CLT/DFW/IAD) but comparing PHL as a connecting gateway versus BOS/EWR/JFK, PHL is a much better facility to connect thru be it a single carrier, alliance partners or between non-alliance carriers.

For single carrier connections, what's the difference between PHL and EWR/JFK? In PHL, you take the bus from A to F. In EWR, you take the train from B to C (inbound international) or the bus from A to C. Two of the three single carrier "hubs" at JFK are under one roof.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Philly65
Posted 2013-02-15 10:24:39 and read 6452 times.

Quoting Moderators (Thread starter):
For single carrier connections, what's the difference between PHL and EWR/JFK? In PHL, you take the bus from A to F. In EWR, you take the train from B to C (inbound international) or the bus from A to C. Two of the three single carrier "hubs" at JFK are under one roof.

You can take the bus from A to F but they also have moving sidewalks. Aren't the trains at EWR pre-security? It has been a while since I have connected there. Connections at JFK require terminal changes and reentering security.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-02-15 10:29:41 and read 6438 times.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 258):
You can take the bus from A to F but they also have moving sidewalks.

Sure, but it's a long walk; it's probably longer than C to L at ORD, and no one is arguing that's an easy connection.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 258):
Aren't the trains at EWR pre-security?

The bus is within security, the train is outside.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Philly65
Posted 2013-02-15 10:52:51 and read 6373 times.

Quoting Moderators (Thread starter):
The bus is within security, the train is outside.

Didn't realize EWR had bus service between terminals A & C but the point I am making is that although the trains are convenient you do have to exit and re-enter security, which is a drag and hassle.

Quoting Moderators (Thread starter):
Sure, but it's a long walk; it's probably longer than C to L at ORD, and no one is arguing that's an easy connection.

Don't forget the moving sidewalks. The bulk of connections made are between terminals A thru D at PHL, which ins't too bad of a walk. In addition, the marketplace offers better food options than quite a few US airports in addition to tax-free shopping on clothes and other items, which is rare in the NE USA.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2013-02-15 11:04:31 and read 6356 times.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 260):
but the point I am making is that although the trains are convenient you do have to exit and re-enter security, which is a drag and hassle.

The only reason to take the train is if you are arriving on an international flight and outside security anywhere.

My point isn't that PHL is a bad place to connect. It's not, and I'd probably pick it over IAD and DL/JFK. But to pretend that PHL is vastly superior to EWR, AA/JFK or B6/JFK is silly.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: Philly65
Posted 2013-02-15 11:37:53 and read 6289 times.

Quoting Moderators (Thread starter):
My point isn't that PHL is a bad place to connect. It's not, and I'd probably pick it over IAD and DL/JFK. But to pretend that PHL is vastly superior to EWR, AA/JFK or B6/JFK is silly.

I didn't say it was superior and not giving that impression, but as you note is not a bad place to connect and it is a better facility than IAD and others. Yes, PHL has its advantages and disadvantages, but I think it is a better connecting hub than many may realize.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: AAIL86
Posted 2013-02-15 11:57:08 and read 6234 times.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 237):
DFW presents some issues, because of the constraints that WN has at DAL, both in terms of current flying under the Wright Amendment, as well as the hard cap on operations. When the Wright Amendment restrictions disappear, flights to new destinations will mean some cuts in flights to current destinations.

DFW presents no issues that haven't already been hammered out in prior mergers. It was a fortress hub before the merger and will will continue to be one after.

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 252):
I was mainly being tongue in cheek on the last bit. AA is notoriously pricey out of DFW, so to do it "right" would either involve flying someone else, or have your company pay for it,

IAH actually has the highest average fares in the country. DFW certainly isn't cheap, but having lived in both cities I find AA from DFW a bargin compared to UA at IAH.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 241):
And you can file that article under the heading "Clueless Journalism".

     

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2013-02-15 12:25:57 and read 6159 times.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 263):
IAH actually has the highest average fares in the country. DFW certainly isn't cheap, but having lived in both cities I find AA from DFW a bargin compared to UA at IAH.

Unless youre flying from DFW to CID.  

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: chexp77w
Posted 2013-02-15 16:11:43 and read 5885 times.

So is CLT gong to be bigger then ORD? As a Hub. Right now its DFW and ORD in second place. with the merger will it be DFW, CLT & then ORD?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: jonathanxxxx
Posted 2013-02-15 16:17:35 and read 5866 times.

Quoting chexp77w (Reply 265):

It depends on your view. I personally believe that CLT will be reduced (Not dehubbed as some say on here) and right-sized to be able to compliment MIA and DFW. I personally see it being around a total amount of flights around 400-450 which is pretty generous. To answer your question, no it will not as AA will probably be expanding at ORD with the addition of E175's and A319's.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2013-02-15 16:28:56 and read 5837 times.

[

Quoting chexp77w (Reply 265):

So is CLT gong to be bigger then ORD? As a Hub. Right now its DFW and ORD in second place. with the merger will it be DFW, CLT & then ORD?


Yes, but MIA is AA's second largest hub, not ORD.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: deltaflyertoo
Posted 2013-02-15 17:26:16 and read 5704 times.

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 254):
AA and US have both given up on the NYC market long ago; neither one nor both combined are in a position to regain preeminent status in NYC. UA and DL have long secured the top spots in NY and lets not forget B6 building up as the 3rd premier airline in NYC.

Agree w/ everything except I argue AA never gave up on NYC. I've seen all the numbers for US hubs and how they pace, but I'd love to see what AA REALLY does at JFK. I suspect they lose there. It will be interesting turning point, w/out JFK but all of PHL I think they'll be just fine in long run-but will the ego of the Hollywood contracts from LA to JFK and whatever random high profile mogul they manage to fly to LHR now and then be worth keeping what they have now at JFK (or as peeps here suggest growing it). It will be interesting to see what Parker really thinks.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2013-02-15 17:37:57 and read 5685 times.

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 268):
Agree w/ everything except I argue AA never gave up on NYC. I've seen all the numbers for US hubs and how they pace, but I'd love to see what AA REALLY does at JFK. I suspect they lose there. It will be interesting turning point, w/out JFK but all of PHL I think they'll be just fine in long run-but will the ego of the Hollywood contracts from LA to JFK and whatever random high profile mogul they manage to fly to LHR now and then be worth keeping what they have now at JFK (or as peeps here suggest growing it). It will be interesting to see what Parker really thinks.

AA has the highest average fares of any airline at JFK and second highest proportion of O&D after B6. Those "ego" contracts are exactly what DL has been desperately trying to get - still to little avail (although DL did grab one big customer from AA two weeks ago). I don't think AA is too worried about JFK, especially now that PHL will act as a reliever for feed to markets like ORF that AA can drop.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: chexp77w
Posted 2013-02-15 18:07:11 and read 5607 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 267):

Really I didn't know that I was told ORD was at 500+ flights a day and MIA was around 300+ so my apologies if I was incorrect In this maybe someone might know the numbers to this ?

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2013-02-15 18:10:39 and read 5597 times.

Quoting chexp77w (Reply 270):

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 267):

Really I didn't know that I was told ORD was at 500+ flights a day and MIA was around 300+ so my apologies if I was incorrect In this maybe someone might know the numbers to this ?


But MIA is mostly mainline jets and ORD largely regional jets, so MIA is a larger operation, with less daily flights.

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-02-15 19:16:47 and read 5450 times.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 271):
But MIA is mostly mainline jets and ORD largely regional jets, so MIA is a larger operation, with less daily flights.

And how do the hub operations compare as far as number of domestic routes from each? (And intl as well if that data is handy.) I know I've seen the numbers recently but I can't locate them right now.

bb

Topic: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: BDL757
Posted 2013-02-15 22:33:50 and read 5219 times.

I don't think CLT is going to be as drastically cut as some people say. I think it will get a haircut thought. I see it being like DL's MSP hub: lots of domestic flights and connecting opportunities and a few international flights to partner/joint venture hubs like LHR, MAD, BCN (seasonal), and perhaps something in Germany. I could also see flights to the popular destinations in the Caribbean. It won't be as large as it is now but still big and valuable to the new company.

Topic: RE: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 1)
Username: moderators
Posted 2013-02-16 02:01:22 and read 5073 times.

As this thread has become quite long and in some cases difficult to follow, it will now be locked for further contributions. Any posts added after the thread lock will be removed for housekeeping purposes only.

Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 2 which is available here: AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs (Part 2)

Enjoy the forums.

The Moderators


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/