Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Retracting At BOS, Questions, Scenarios  
User currently offlineBAGoldEx From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 316 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7541 times:

The prospect of American retracting to a spoke city at Logan creates a few questions. Obviously American is retracting, it's undenaible but what most interests me is what will happen after. Will AA eventually shrink to a 20-25 flight per day operation serving just the main hubs of DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, STL and perhaps RDU? If so, will they stay in B or attempt to find some smaller quarters more suitable to a CO/UA sized operation? Could JetBlue take over the north side of Terminal B?

Who will attempt to pick up the slack? Obviously JetBlue will have the SAN route to themselves and UA will have a relative monopoly on SFO. LAX seems relatively important enough to AA that a flight or two to BOS might survive. I imagine BA will throw in another 777 though I cannot see anyone else entering the BOS-LHR market unless the much discussed DL BOS-Europe network were to come to fruition. I have dozens more questions about possible outcomes and such, but I'll leave it at that for now as to not overly complicate matters.

60 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7347 times:

Quoting BAGoldEx (Thread starter):
The prospect of American retracting to a spoke city at Logan creates a few questions. Obviously American is retracting, it's undenaible but what most interests me is what will happen after. Will AA eventually shrink to a 20-25 flight per day operation serving just the main hubs of DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, STL and perhaps RDU? If so, will they stay in B or attempt to find some smaller quarters more suitable to a CO/UA sized operation? Could JetBlue take over the north side of Terminal B?

To Answer the second part of your question first, they will never move out of Terminal B. They have pumped a lot of their own money into that facility in the past 15 years (Even though TSA still sucks there), and for them to move out won't happen because of that, but also, where would they move to? There aren't enough gates in any other terminal to accommodate their operation. Also, Terminal B has its own parking garage, and while I think that should be torn down, it does give business travelers who are time sensitive like DTWClipper (Although he exclusively flies NW), a much quicker journey to their gate, which is something that US and AA both benefit from that no one else currently does.

And I don't think they are going to shrink down that much. Boston is still a Cash Cow for them, and I believe they are one of the bigger players in BOS (Obviously B6 is now the biggest carrier, with DL and US being the other carriers with a strong presence). They still have the London flights, and the Paris Flight. So they have lots of profitable routes right now, and a good many of them have little competition (ORD has UA, but since these are both big business routes for the carriers, they still make money for them, DFW, MIA, STL, and SJU all have no competition, LHR has BA and VS, but BA is a oneworld partner, CDG only has Air France, LAX has UA and DL, again another business route with high yielding customers, plus AA has a capacity advantage with a 757 as opposed to Delta's 738's. SAN has no competition until B6 enters the market, (They may be there, but I am not sure), SFO has only UA, again a high yielding route, with only B6 in OAK competing. They tried LAS, but pulled out since there is no way they could be profitable with US, B6, and DL all flying the route. Simply put, I think they are just right sizing the market, but I wouldn't look for much more downsizing beyond what has already happened, unless they are short on equipment and need it in ORD and DFW (Which wouldn't surprise me either)


As far as why AA started downsizing BOS, I can point to three main reasons off the top of my head.

1. Massports refusal to allow customs outside of Terminal E (has it been renamed D yet?). AA had a project all lined up to add customs to B, and the Customs hall would have been shared with US, which would have probably allowed US to restart FRA (although its now obvious they lack the metal to do so now), and it was going to happen, then it got shelved after 9-11. I think this would have really helped AA a lot, but having to tow planes from E to B like they do given the environment of BOS, would be a lot.

2. JetBlue's entry into BOS and quick buildup. Naturally this was a yield killer on a lot of routes that they have pulled back from. So AA has had to focus more on the routes that they are strong out BOS on (ORD, DFW, MIA, SJU, etc.)

3. The financial problems of AA. This has forced AA to take a look at where they stand, and they have to keep their airplanes flying to make money. Since some other places need the metal more than BOS (ORD, MIA, DFW), naturally BOS is going to get the shaft. I think if they had more 757's and/or widebodies, BOS would see a bit more service. But MD-80's out of BOS are only going to work to ORD and DFW. And unfortunately for BOS, AA has a lot of those and not a lot of the other planes. (relatively speaking of course)

Quoting BAGoldEx (Thread starter):
Who will attempt to pick up the slack? Obviously JetBlue will have the SAN route to themselves and UA will have a relative monopoly on SFO. LAX seems relatively important enough to AA that a flight or two to BOS might survive. I imagine BA will throw in another 777 though I cannot see anyone else entering the BOS-LHR market unless the much discussed DL BOS-Europe network were to come to fruition. I have dozens more questions about possible outcomes and such, but I'll leave it at that for now as to not overly complicate matters.

Well they haven't fully retracted yet. But if it does happen, here is some things I could see playing out. B6 is going to have SAN to themselves for now, but remember that you have WN sitting at both PVD and MHT. They could decide to get in on the fun out of one of those places, more likely MHT. As for SFO, I don't think UA is going to get a monopoly on this route, because if you remember, a new airline called Virgin America will be starting up, and I think SFO-BOS for them is inevitable. (Remember that SFO beat out BOS for HQ, so they clearly have ambitions for BOS). So I could see Virgin America competing with UA, and I don't think AA is quite done on the route yet. As far as LHR goes, AA is flying two times a day, but if they stop flying, that would free up two LHR slots, and i don't think AA is going to give them up. I don't know where they would move the slots to though. So I doubt LHR is going anywhere. As for DL getting in on the fun to LHR, three airlines already fly the route, but also remember that they would need a slot for that. Plus the customs issue in BOS. I don't see it happening without an FIS in Terminal A. (Which I think would make a lot of sense since terminal E is overcrowded and you could move the skyteam airlines into A (Which was the original plan), so Air France, Air Jamaica, Aeromexico, and Alitalia would all move, not sure if NW would, since I think space is becoming an issue with CO moving back to A.)

One other thing to ponder. I know there was a wright amendment compromise, but I believe part of that is still being litigated. If B6 ever got access to DAL (Which isn't likely now, but who knows), I would look for a BOS-DAL route to be launched, and I could see a bloodbath between AA and B6 (I think BOS-ORD is also inevitable for B6 once the new 9L-27R opens), because AA is now competing with B6 on South Florida, the Bay Area, and Southern California. If you throw Dallas and Chicago into the mix, look out (And I also think UA needs to do the same too). But as I said, Dallas is unlikely, but Chicago I think is going to happen.


User currently offlineRobertS975 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 941 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7323 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Apodino, I think AeroMexico has quit BOS completely, and IIRC, Air Jamaica and DL have ended their codeshare agreements.

As for the OP, where do you hear that AA is cutting flights at BOS?


User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7266 times:

I think the LHR route for AA may hinge on if AA get ATI with BA. If that were the case then I'd imagine AA would drop one of the flights (most likely the daylight flight) in favour of code-sharing with BA, who is rumoured to be increasing BOS at some point when they have more aircraft.

I think the trunk routes would remain, plus a few of the Eagle flights, like RDU, ORF, LGA, JFK, and DCA.

I think in a few years AA will be down to ORD, DFW, MIA, SJU, RDU, LAX, STL, SFO, LGA, JFK, ORF, LHR and DCA. With around 12 flights to ORD (M80s), 10 flights to DFW (M80s, maybe a 757 or two), 4 flights to MIA (757s), 2 flights to SJU (757s), 3 flights to RDU (ER3), 3 flights to LAX (757s), 4 flights to STL(combo of ERJs and an M80), 1 flight to SFO (757), 7-10 flights to LGA (ER3), 5-7 flights to JFK(ER3 and maybe an M80) (mainly for European/Caribbean connections), 1 flight to LHR (777). That makes a rough total of around 50-60 daily flights, depending on day (Saturdays usually have reduced schedules) (roughly 35 mainline, and 15-20 Eagle).

I don't see AA reducing the hub routes. They may even possibly strengthen them at the expense of other routes, like SAN and instead route passengers through ORD and DFW. I don't see those routes shrinking much in traffic, that's why I estimate about 50-60 flights over the original poster's prediction of around 20-25. However, even if 50-60 seems like a lot, consider that back in the 90s when AA "[meant] business in Boston" and had just purchased Business Express Airlines, they had around 150 daily departures, including widebodies to LAX, SFO, MIA, SJU, LHR, and CDG and had announced an NRT flight (in 1998), so even at 50 flights, that's only one-third of AA's network a decade, and an even smaller fraction of destinations.

The one that kind of hangs in the balance now is SFO. With B6 now entering the market, AA may bow out. AA has decided it's not worth being agressive in BOS and is basically ceding the market to B6 and FL, so any routes with direct competition (outside of hub routes) are definitely on shaky ground.

Also, as AA continues to shrink, I do think they'll need to 'right-size' their terminal space. I definitely see them giving up the Eagle satellite terminal at some point, and probably the mainline gates that are not situated on the pier (gates 27, 28, and 29).

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7209 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
SJU all have no competition

BOS-SJU has B6 and US (do they still fly the route?). AA won't be going anywhere from BOS-SJU because, unlike B6 and US, they have the hub in SJU, and connections throughout the Caribbean that B6 and US can't offer.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
(Which I think would make a lot of sense since terminal E is overcrowded and you could move the skyteam airlines into A (Which was the original plan), so Air France, Air Jamaica, Aeromexico, and Alitalia would all move, not sure if NW would, since I think space is becoming an issue with CO moving back to A.)

Not to beat this dead horse again, but FIS is not going into Terminal A and DL are in the business of making money. If there's money to be made flying BOS-Europe, they're going to do it, even if that does mean they have to do tow a plane or two from Terminal A to E. As long as they add on an extra 30-45 minutes to taxi the plane, that's hardly a huge problem. If I recall correctly, don't all flights into ORD have to arrive at Terminal 5? That doesn't stop AA and UA from having large amounts of international flights. Of course it would MAKE sense for there to be FIS in Terminal A but Massport are greedy and want to keep those docking fees to help pay for the improvements at E and CBP are too understaffed to man another entry (for some reason they just can't attract enough people to fill in after Customs and Immigration merged and the immigration guys said "f-ck this, and quit and went on to other departments).

Also, JM and AM no longer fly to BOS and AZ is hanging on by their finger nails. NW won't move to A because they've got a cushy situation at Terminal E and a water-tight lease that they're keen on keeping. Also, with CO now in the mix and DL growing (though mostly on the DL Conx side of things), there is no room in Terminal A for NW.

LH423

[Edited 2007-07-24 00:56:59]


« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4471 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7185 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
As far as LHR goes, AA is flying two times a day, but if they stop flying, that would free up two LHR slots, and i don't think AA is going to give them up. I don't know where they would move the slots to though.



Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
I think the LHR route for AA may hinge on if AA get ATI with BA. If that were the case then I'd imagine AA would drop one of the flights (most likely the daylight flight)

I can only hope that they would use that slot for a daylight from MIA-LHR. Would be a great addition to their MIA hub.

(OK, and also I would like to see it because I hate taking overnight flights to Europe and currently fly up from MIA to BOS the night before just to take the daylight BOS-LHR flight whenever I have to go to Europe).


User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9211 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7175 times:

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
I think in a few years AA will be down to ORD, DFW, MIA, SJU, RDU, LAX, STL, SFO, LGA, JFK, ORF, LHR and DCA. With around 12 flights to ORD (M80s), 10 flights to DFW (M80s, maybe a 757 or two), 4 flights to MIA (757s), 2 flights to SJU (757s), 3 flights to RDU (ER3), 3 flights to LAX (757s), 4 flights to STL(combo of ERJs and an M80), 1 flight to SFO (757), 7-10 flights to LGA (ER3), 5-7 flights to JFK(ER3 and maybe an M80) (mainly for European/Caribbean connections), 1 flight to LHR (777). That makes a rough total of around 50-60 daily flights, depending on day (Saturdays usually have reduced schedules) (roughly 35 mainline, and 15-20 Eagle).

Wow... and just when I thought that US' 125 flight focus city at PIT was puny, insignificant, weak, (sorry, I ran out of Anne Robinson lingo...)  Smile



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7134 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
(Obviously B6 is now the biggest carrier, with DL and US being the other carriers with a strong presence).

...B6, AA and DL all basically "neck-to-neck" at BOS with US nipping at the heels......however, I don't know how much AA has retracted at BOS and how much B6 (as well as DL) has expanded in BOS...but they are still very close in terms of % points....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6764 posts, RR: 32
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7134 times:

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
I think the trunk routes would remain, plus a few of the Eagle flights, like RDU, ORF, LGA, JFK, and DCA.

ORF is already gone.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
4 flights to STL(combo of ERJs and an M80)

STL drops to two daily in September.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
3 flights to RDU (ER3)

I suspect there would still be 5-6 on this route, simply because the traffic numbers justify it.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
1 flight to SFO (757)

There's no point in keeping only one; that schedule would be uncompetitive for business travelers. Two is the bare minimum. I agree with your other numbers.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
I definitely see them giving up the Eagle satellite terminal at some point, and probably the mainline gates that are not situated on the pier (gates 27, 28, and 29).

I don't think the Eagle satellite terminal has been used in quite a while (I'm assuming you're talking about the former General Aviation terminal near runway 14-32). I don't see gates 27-29 being given up, as they are adjacent to the relocated security checkpoint, but I can certainly imagine them shedding the gates currently used for Eagle -- 22-26.

Quoting BAGoldEx (Thread starter):
Will AA eventually shrink to a 20-25 flight per day operation serving just the main hubs of DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, STL and perhaps RDU?

For the most part, I agree with LH423. I think LAX & SFO on mainline, as well as LGA & DCA on Eagle, stay for the corporate contracts. I think JFK would be reduced to focus primarily on international connections. There has been speculation that one or more LHR slots used for service to/from BOS might be repurposed to LHR-DFW and LHR-RDU once the restrictions of Bermuda II go away. I would not be at all surprised to see BOS-YYZ and BOS-CMH both discontinued, along with BOS-SAN. I do agree that the scope of the AA+Eagle operation would be 40-60 daily departures.

Quoting BAGoldEx (Thread starter):
If so, will they stay in B or attempt to find some smaller quarters more suitable to a CO/UA sized operation? Could JetBlue take over the north side of Terminal B?

There's no other location of sufficient size available at Logan for AA to move its operation, even if it were reduced to around 50 daily departures. JetBlue isn't really growing at BOS right now.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4116 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7112 times:

AA has certainly been treading water at BOS; in fact, just about all the legacy carriers have. No, BOS is not New York...but in terms of profitable stations, Logan is way closer to the top of the list than to the bottom. So while it's obvious that AA isn't adding anything at Logan, I don't see wholesale cuts there either from the status quo. As for the jetBlue 'cause-and-effect,' Massport may regret what they wished for in getting that LCC. Could it be said that B6 has caused this stagnation by AA and the other legacy carriers? On one hand, yes. On the other hand, it hasn't caused those carriers to 'stagnate' at JFK...JetBlue's 'Home Court.' But Massport had better hope that jetBlue lasts a good long time, because I personally agree that they have caused the others to plateau at Logan.

It is a paradox, to me, that Logan was at its zenith when the Big Dig was a Big Mess and getting to and from Logan was slightly simpler than getting to Neptune via the Big Dipper. But now that the Big Dig is done and surface traffic breezes to and from Logan, the legacy carriers have a big 'Ehhh' for Logan. No new flights from any of them, and small planes have replaced the widebodies.

The 'next frontier' for Boston was going to be Asian service, but AA never launched its MD-11 nonstop to Narita, and Korean Air's 747-400 went 'bye-bye' a long time ago. The next (only?) Asian service for Boston, most would agree, will come from an international carrier, not a U.S.-based one.

Massport is in a fine position to bully the legacy carrier around. The legacy carriers have 'shown their hands' by retrenching from Manchester (MHT) and Providence (PVD) and favoring Boston instead. Why wouldn't Massport put the screws to DL, AA, UA, NW when they know they've got cuckholded tenants? DL and AA want FIS in their own space? Massport can afford to say 'Tough nuggets' to them because these carriers have admitted they favor Boston over MHT/PVD. What a way to keep a greedy landlord 'honest.' By telling him how much you love it there! Talk about tossing away your leverage!

Chris in NH


User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9211 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7083 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 8):
For the most part, I agree with LH423. I think LAX & SFO on mainline, as well as LGA & DCA on Eagle, stay for the corporate contracts. I think JFK would be reduced to focus primarily on international connections. There has been speculation that one or more LHR slots used for service to/from BOS might be repurposed to LHR-DFW and LHR-RDU once the restrictions of Bermuda II go away. I would not be at all surprised to see BOS-YYZ and BOS-CMH both discontinued, along with BOS-SAN. I do agree that the scope of the AA+Eagle operation would be 40-60 daily departures.

I also agree with LH423's statements regarding AA at BOS, and I admit that I know little about AA, at least until the thread, "AA won't expand?" They're essentially trying to right-size their markets regarding their business models/approach. They've been more about the business traveler, so they're going to hold onto the business routes, apparently, at their focus cities in BOS, JFK, and RDU, while their hubs at ORD, DFW, SFO and LAX remain about the same. (they are only a focus city in JFK, right? I am not wrong on that, am I?)



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32789 posts, RR: 72
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7057 times:

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
4 flights to MIA (757s),

MIA will go to six or seven daily flights before it's down to four. In fact, it if it were not for limited aircraft, MIA-BOS would be 7x daily. It is really surprising this route is only 5x daily. LaGuardia gets ten flights, Washington/DCA gets eight, Los Angeles gets seven dailies. Even Charlotte has six daily flights from MIA.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 5):

I can only hope that they would use that slot for a daylight from MIA-LHR. Would be a great addition to their MIA hub.

(OK, and also I would like to see it because I hate taking overnight flights to Europe and currently fly up from MIA to BOS the night before just to take the daylight BOS-LHR flight whenever I have to go to Europe).

Moving the daylight BOS-LHR flight to MIA is being looked at very, very closely, but does largely hinge on ATI with BA/IB.



a.
User currently offlineBAGoldEx From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6985 times:

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 2):
As for the OP, where do you hear that AA is cutting flights at BOS?

There has been talk of it on this board and it may surprise you greatly to know that AA has cut at least 15 destinations over the past few years, among them SJC, SEA, AUS, MCO, PBI, LAS, BNA, PHL, BWI, EWR, PLS, BDA, SNN, BGR and others that escape me in addition to substantial cuts on remaining routes such as the aforementioned STL and CMH. Several people have also speculated on the demise of one or both LHR flights plus the other seasonal Europe routes.

As for the part about them moving, that was contingent to scaling down to the minimal operation I laid out of 20-25, maybe 30 flights and a suitable exchange of gates, perhaps JetBlue moving into B North and AA going into C with the other minor carriers.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
They have pumped a lot of their own money into that facility in the past 15 years (Even though TSA still sucks there)

What are these so-called improvements that AA has made in the past 15 years? I actually haven't flown AA out of BOS since 2004 and have been in that terminal five times at the most since then but it constantly looks like crap aside from the decent AC.

Also, this would be a rather large favor, but does anyone have the routes and frequencies that AA had at its peak. Equipment would be a bonus.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 6):
Wow... and just when I thought that US' 125 flight focus city at PIT was puny, insignificant, weak, (sorry, I ran out of Anne Robinson lingo...)

Congratulations on having more flights than by one carrier, but you failed to remember that BOS still has three other airlines with focus city operations, so unlike PIT, all is not yet lost.


User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6914 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
Well they haven't fully retracted yet. But if it does happen, here is some things I could see playing out. B6 is going to have SAN to themselves for now, but remember that you have WN sitting at both PVD and MHT. They could decide to get in on the fun out of one of those places, more likely MHT. As for SFO, I don't think UA is going to get a monopoly on this route, because if you remember, a new airline called Virgin America will be starting up, and I think SFO-BOS for them is inevitable. (Remember that SFO beat out BOS for HQ, so they clearly have ambitions for BOS). So I could see Virgin America competing with UA, and I don't think AA is quite done on the route yet. As far as LHR goes, AA is flying two times a day, but if they stop flying, that would free up two LHR slots, and i don't think AA is going to give them up. I don't know where they would move the slots to though. So I doubt LHR is going anywhere. As for DL getting in on the fun to LHR, three airlines already fly the route, but also remember that they would need a slot for that. Plus the customs issue in BOS. I don't see it happening without an FIS in Terminal A. (Which I think would make a lot of sense since terminal E is overcrowded and you could move the skyteam airlines into A (Which was the original plan), so Air France, Air Jamaica, Aeromexico, and Alitalia would all move, not sure if NW would, since I think space is becoming an issue with CO moving back to A.)

I doubt WN would ever start MHT-SAN. UA does not have a monopoly on the BOS-SFO market. They currently fly 5 daily flights, mostly with 752s, but AA also sends 2 daily 752s and B6 just started 1 x daily flight. BOS has a ton of O&D to and from SFO add in all the connections UA has to Asia makes it no problem to have all that capacity. AA won't give up their LHR slots, they will continue to fly 13x weekly non peak, 14 x peak to LHR out of BOS. I have talked to several crew when I fly the route and they say both flights do just fine for AA.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 8):
I suspect there would still be 5-6 on this route, simply because the traffic numbers justify it.

Currently their are 8 x daily BOS-RDU flights.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 3):
I think in a few years AA will be down to ORD, DFW, MIA, SJU, RDU, LAX, STL, SFO, LGA, JFK, ORF, LHR and DCA. With around 12 flights to ORD (M80s), 10 flights to DFW (M80s, maybe a 757 or two), 4 flights to MIA (757s), 2 flights to SJU (757s), 3 flights to RDU (ER3), 3 flights to LAX (757s), 4 flights to STL(combo of ERJs and an M80), 1 flight to SFO (757), 7-10 flights to LGA (ER3), 5-7 flights to JFK(ER3 and maybe an M80) (mainly for European/Caribbean connections), 1 flight to LHR (777). That makes a rough total of around 50-60 daily flights, depending on day (Saturdays usually have reduced schedules) (roughly 35 mainline, and 15-20 Eagle).

LAX is 4 x daily, MIA is 5 x daily, I believe SJU is peak 3 x daily 752. AA has already shrunk their network enough, I really don't see them making any major cuts, we here in BOS have already seen AA cut too much.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 11):
MIA will go to six or seven daily flights before it's down to four. In fact, it if it were not for limited aircraft, MIA-BOS would be 7x daily. It is really surprising this route is only 5x daily. LaGuardia gets ten flights, Washington/DCA gets eight, Los Angeles gets seven dailies. Even Charlotte has six daily flights from MIA.

I was always surprised that BOS-MIA was not 6 or 7 daily, given the pretty good O&D and all the Latin America traffic that connects through MIA.


User currently offlineCloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 828 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6892 times:

Well, for one AA is about to open a whole new shopping and food service area in their half of the terminal. they actually have done quite a bit of change, although I am not sure how much is AA and how much is Massport. They have changed security checkpoints, have essentially opened up several extra gates over the past ten years, and have done a lot of remodeling.

I think people are missing one huge factor here, though - the Boston travel market isn't too strong right now. Yes, you are seeing improving numbers in some cases, but the economy of Boston is a little stagnant. The big businesses have been quietly cutting back, and the really small guys are being overwhelmed by new issues, for instance the insurance bit, which is driving a lot of contractors out of the state and meaning that fewer people are willing to work for the small shops. Right now I think Boston itself is in a bit of a reevaluation, and I don't think the airlines are really ready to change much until they now how things are going to shake out. It will be interesting to see how things look a year from now - I have a feeling a LOT of plans are going to change.



"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9211 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6869 times:

Quoting BAGoldEx (Reply 12):
but you failed to remember that BOS still has three other airlines with focus city operations, so unlike PIT, all is not yet lost.

Somewhat true. I forgot to include that with that post you quoted me on... D'OH!  banghead 

Quoting Cloudboy (Reply 14):

Cloudboy, I will openly admit that I had no idea about Boston's economy being stagnant. Then again, name one Northeastern city, sans New York, whose economy IS growing any... The Pittsburgh economy is ever so slowly trying to make a comeback, but the air service at PIT is not a strong reflection of that...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineBAGoldEx From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 6749 times:

Actually cloudboy's pretty much dead wrong about the Boston economy being "stagnant." The term I would use is evolving, sure JH, B of B, Gillette and Fleet have been absorbed but nowhere else in the US is there such a thriving biotech sector except for maybe California, and that's all of California, not just a 30 mile radius around a single city as in Boston. Stagnant is the word of the day for Detroit and Pittsburgh, but Boston is doing quite alright in comparison. There was a statistic out a few months ago that the Massachusetts economy was growing at four times the national rate. We still have a huge financial services sector even with the few losses. That's the problem, a few consumer companies disappear and all of a sudden Boston is in stagnation, let's talk stagnation when Fidelity, State Street, Wellington, Eaton Vance, Mellon/B of NY, Boston Consulting Group, Bain Consulting, Bain Capital, Thomas H. Lee & Partners, New Balance, Genzyme, Boston Scientific, EMC and Raytheon all fold. As for the strength of the travel market, I can't speak specifically to that as I'm in the investment biz, but I do know that our conventions are at a record high and for the first time Boston is a top ten city for conventions.

User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9211 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 6645 times:

Quoting BAGoldEx (Reply 16):
Stagnant is the word of the day for Detroit and Pittsburgh

Damn!!! Well, I actually think that the Pittsburgh economy is starting to evolve as we speak. It's gaining an international presence in the biotech field (slowly anyway). Why else would companies in China, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan be showing interest in expanding there? It looks like construction for One International Plaza on the Southside is about to begin. It's actually ranked among the top cities for biotechnology, but especially for robotics. I give it a few years at least. Pittsburgh should boom like a firecracker...

If y'all want a source for this stuff, it's actually been in the local newspapers on multiple occasions over the years...

As far as the companies mentioned above, did the hqs ultimately get relocated?



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6582 times:

Quoting BAGoldEx (Reply 12):
What are these so-called improvements that AA has made in the past 15 years? I actually haven't flown AA out of BOS since 2004 and have been in that terminal five times at the most since then but it constantly looks like crap aside from the decent AC.

Well I am glad you asked. Back in 1992, American only operated from the six gates on the finger (Which were numbered 22-27 at the time, in fact the Hammerhead on the end hadn't been built, the end of the terminal is right where gates 31 and 35 (Which were 22 and 26 at the time) are now. Where gates 27-29 are now, was only a single gate, 21, which was used by America West. The current gates 22-25, were gates 17-20 back then, this is where Pan Am had operated from when they were in Boston, and Midway 1 (The DC-9 carrier who hubbed in the airport with the same name), operated from here as well. A couple of years later, that midway had gone out of business, and America West moved into gate 17, which was the old Midway Gate. Delta Shuttle operated from here as well after Delta acquired them from Pan Am.

After America West moved into 17, the first American Renovation project started, this took out the security checkpoint associated with gate 21, as well as gate 21 itself, added three new gates to the area, added the "Hammerhaed" to the end of the finger, added a new food court past Security, modernized the security checkpoint, added all new carpeting and added the tile to the gate areas and the ticket counter, and the baggage claim area, modernized baggage claim 4, (Which was Midway), and added all new signage to the terminal. IIRC this was completed around 1996 or so. When it was finished, American gained three new gates to work with, 21-22-23 I believe, plus they still had the old gates, which were renumbered 24-29. The RDU version of Midway, JI, also started serving boston at the same time, and were handled by AA in the new gates.

Flash Forward to about 1998 or so. A few more things happened. One, Eagle acquired Business Express, and the RJ revolution happened about the same time. Two, TWA and United basically traded places in Terminal C, which gave United more gates, and Virgin had been sharing a gate in B with United (They used it sparingly, but it was used every now and then, which was a nightmare walk for passengers). Massport wanted Virgin to relocate to E, and so they did. At the same time America West moved into the gates that Virgin had been using, Delta Shuttle Relocated to terminal A, and this is what started American Renovation project number 2. Eagle needed more room, and so did American for their growing presence in BOS. They then renovated the old Pan Am area primarily for use of Eagle, but I believe they also ran ORD flights from here as well. They also acquired the Earhardt terminal for Eagle as well. The AA gates had been renumbered at the same time, this was brought on by a US renovation project of their own, that added more gates.

Flash Forward to post 9-11. The security Checkpoint no longer became adequate to handle the volume of passengers, and in fact the terminal design with the lines for TSA made the waiting room at HPN look roomy. They had no room to expand the checkpoint, except in the former exit only portion of the secured area down by the secondary counter, so they renovated that into a makeshift TSA checkpoint with more points. And thats pretty much where the terminal stands today. I do remember reading plans not too long ago that American is going to embark on yet another renovation project, and pump even more money into Terminal B. My opinion is, the best thing they can do is knock the garage down, and rebuild that into one central facility for US and AA (And actually AS, NK, and AC, since they are also tenants) with segregated lanes for pick ups, drop offs, and to keep the buses and cabs separate from the cars (If you have ever tried to pick up a friend here or even tried to catch a bus, you know what I am talking about), and one mega TSA checkpoint for everybody. Of course, that means everyone has to walk over from central parking, and so the airlines would never go along with it. But I really think it would help a great deal.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23023 posts, RR: 20
Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6497 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
(I think BOS-ORD is also inevitable for B6 once the new 9L-27R opens),

I'm not so sure. B6 would love to fly it (and could probably get the slots for it today if they were so inclined), but there is a gate space issue.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 4):
Of course it would MAKE sense for there to be FIS in Terminal A but Massport are greedy and want to keep those docking fees to help pay for the improvements at E

It's not just an issue of whether or not Massport will allow FIS outside of E. If they are not going to, E needs a lot of work. It's pretty much maxed out in the afternoons, and it's perhaps the dreariest international terminal in this country. Expanding and modernizing E would serve many of the same ends as opening a second FIS facility.

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 9):
The next (only?) Asian service for Boston, most would agree, will come from an international carrier, not a U.S.-based one.

I wouldn't be so quick to count out NW once the 787s arrive.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6443 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 5):
I can only hope that they would use that slot for a daylight from MIA-LHR. Would be a great addition to their MIA hub.

Is a daylight MIA-LHR feasible? I guess when I first thought whether it would be possible, I was looking at it from an ex-British Airways employee stand point where an early enough arrival still makes connections to JNB, SIN/SYD, MAN, and DXB possible, but I guess that's not really the case with AA in Terminal 3. But even connecting with other airlines, a daylight MIA-LHR would arrive too late, even with an ungodly 7am departure. I suppose the O&D is there though.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 11):
Even Charlotte has six daily flights from MIA.

Is this more because the only aircraft in AAs fleet that can fly BOS-MIA are the 757, 767, and 777? BOS can't receive the 737 and A300 and MIA can't accept the MD-80s. So, that really only leaves the 757 and possibly a 767 (as they've done in years past) to fly the route. Maybe that's why frequency is so low on BOS-MIA in comparison to other routes. Because load factors on the route are pretty up there.

Quoting BAGoldEx (Reply 12):
What are these so-called improvements that AA has made in the past 15 years? I actually haven't flown AA out of BOS since 2004 and have been in that terminal five times at the most since then but it constantly looks like crap aside from the decent AC.

AA just finished work on a new, larger food court. I don't have any photos but if anyone is ever on the south side of Terminal C (in the C food court area) you can see the addition.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 19):
It's not just an issue of whether or not Massport will allow FIS outside of E. If they are not going to, E needs a lot of work. It's pretty much maxed out in the afternoons, and it's perhaps the dreariest international terminal in this country. Expanding and modernizing E would serve many of the same ends as opening a second FIS facility.

This is true. But this is Massport genius at work. Force all airlines to use your terminal, while simutaneously attracting new services, yet not expand your gate offerings. The check-in hall is beautiful but it's already at near capacity during the afternoons. Now with Iberia and flyGlobespan, I'd say there's room for one more airline and your check-in counters will be maxed out, unless NW can be coaxed into giving up some of the counters they're not using at present.

When Terminal E was being expanded, the artists' renderings showed a 'west wing' addition, with something like 3-5 additional gates built in the direction of the AA hangar. I'm not sure if that's still in the works but something needs to be done because gate space between 15:00 and 18:45 is at a premium.

The arrivals facilities, while not architecturally stunning, are a vast improvement. Only problem: Massport built a new immigration hall with 40 immigration booths, yet on a good day you're lucky if half of them are in use.

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23023 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6408 times:

Quoting LH423 (Reply 20):
BOS can't receive the 737 and A300 and MIA can't accept the MD-80s.

I think BOS is small enough now that this point is largely moot (with respect to the 738 and A300). BOS sees other widebodies, so in both cases, it would largely be an issue of towbars and pavement marking, neither one a huge barrier.

Quoting LH423 (Reply 20):
The arrivals facilities, while not architecturally stunning, are a vast improvement.

 checkmark 



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineElmoTheHobo From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1540 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6393 times:

American will not shrink that much. Los Angeles and San Francisco are both important marketsfor American, and unless yield and loads tanked because of another LCC or an aggressive push by B6, American will continue flying these routes.

As for Heathrow, I have read on this board that the BOS-LHR will drop to a daily flight to add a second daily MIA-LHR flight. Dropping the route entirely is a bit extreme.

American has said goodbye to BOS-CDG a couple of times, and each summer it comes back. As some has expressed here, the route may finally come to an end in the coming years.

Other business routes, including New York, Washington, Raleigh/Durham will remain, these routes connect American Airlines Focus cities to Boston, and there will always be demand for these routes.

Unless more frequencies are added to destinations like Columbus, these routes will be dropped, as their schedules and frequencies are not favorable to business travelers.

Expecting American's Boston operation to shrink to 20-25 daily flights is extreme, though I do think that we will see a few more cuts to right size the operation. Around 75 daily flights on Eagle and Mainline, about the same number of frequencies as Raleigh/Durham with a bit more capacity.


User currently offlineBAGoldEx From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6337 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 17):
As far as the companies mentioned above, did the hqs ultimately get relocated?

Bank of Boston merged with Fleet creating FleetBoston Financial which was bought by B of A. John Hancock was bought and restructured into the US division of Manulife of Canada whila maintaining the JH name and Gillette was acquired by P & G. As for the other companies, all are based in or within 15 miles of Boston. Don't worry about the stats for Pittsburgh, I have read all about the supposed tech surge which compared to two dozen other markets remains minimal.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 18):

Very interesting. I appreciate it thoroughly.

Seeing as the other carriers here have been slow to expand in the recent past, I was really kind of hoping for a massive pulldown just to see what kind of response comes from the other carriers, plus on a personal note, I don't really care much for AA but that's for another debate.


User currently offlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4920 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5944 times:

Quoting BAGoldEx (Thread starter):
though I cannot see anyone else entering the BOS-LHR market unless the much discussed DL BOS-Europe network were to come to fruition

bmi - they may come on regardless of what AA do

Quoting Apodino (Reply 1):
As far as LHR goes, AA is flying two times a day, but if they stop flying, that would free up two LHR slots, and i don't think AA is going to give them up. I don't know where they would move the slots to though. So I doubt LHR is going anywhere.

More MIA, as already mentioned, or maybe more DFW/JFK

Would AA ever (re?)start BOS-AUS with their current gradual AUS expansion



Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
25 MAH4546 : BOS-LHR is not being dropped, but once AA/BA have ATI, it will be reduced to 1x daily. There is no longer a need for AAto offer 2x daily service when
26 Airbazar : No. Boston is just too important and profitable of a market to be reduced to a spoke city. What you're seeing is a slight restructuring of routes to
27 Boeing767mech : Towbars are not a issue. The 757 shares the same towbar as the A300. The 767 and the 777 share the same towbars. I have seen a 737 towbar around from
28 EXAAUADL : Has AA dropped BOS-SFO already. That would be surprising. The problem with daylight MIA-LHR (looks good cuz of latin conenctions) is that what time do
29 MAH4546 : To use the current BOS-LHR daylight slot, it would need to depart MIA between approx. 7AM and 730AM, which is perfect because the flight is being pro
30 ChrisNH : I was checking the new PDF version of the AA schedule and it showed only TWO daily non-stops from Boston to San Juan after Labor Day: Flights 1010 and
31 MAH4546 : AA heavily cuts back leisure flying between Labour Day and Halloween to allow aircraft to go into heavy mx checks.
32 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..they still serve 2x/daily B752's... ....its been B752's for years now.....I call it "operational adjustment"...
33 Post contains images Flyingchoirboy : I've always thought it would be good for NW to start a service to NRT, either non-stop or direct (via Portland, OR, or Seattle, maybe?). Maybe it wou
34 B752OS : One thing to point out, AA does not operate out of terminal C at BOS, they have the south side of terminal B. I just flew through there this past wee
35 Post contains images ScottB : I am well aware of how many flights AA runs between BOS and RDU; I was responding to the suggestion that it might be cut to three daily. My assertion
36 Tommy767 : Actually, this doesn't surprise me at all. SJU as you point out in the past had multiple nonstops from BOS and on A300s. Even in post 9/11 EWR, BWI,
37 Zoom530 : Even in smaller regional airports, AA has altered their service. For instance, as you might know, Stewart/Newburgh (SWF) has been named by the NY/NJ P
38 MAH4546 : What is surprising? Would you rather AA continue to fly a money losing route? Because that is what their Stewart operation is: a money loser.
39 Flyby519 : AA has been in SWF for 20 years, that means most employees at that station have 20yrs seniority. This causes the cost for the flight to be a lot high
40 Post contains links N62NA : If you look at AA.com for flights GRU-LHR or EZE-LHR, that's exactly what you get right now. You fly to JFK overnight, then hop their morning flight
41 MAH4546 : A few reasons: 1) While the visa requirements still stands, the effects are now being less felt. People are getting used to it, transit traffic is up
42 VS11 : This is very true. In the first quarter of the year, MASS economy grew 4% vs. 0.2%-0.3% (in that range) nationally. I believe competition has to do w
43 Post contains images Jetboy319 : You obviously haven't been through the International Arrivals hall in SEA
44 Airbazar : For all intents and purposes, D (not E), is a brand spankin' new facility. You must have not been out much if you think it is the "dreariest internat
45 Cubsrule : You are correct. I'm wondering, though, if BOS is now small enough that AA will treat it like a spoke city and fly whatever aircraft type happens to
46 Airbazar : And does that make BOS "the dreariest international terminal in this country"? I can think or a lot worse. By the way NW uses the same exact terminal
47 Cloudboy : For all of those who think the Massachusetts economy is doing so well, perhaps you can help those of us who have been stung by it to regain our feet a
48 Cubsrule : It's clearly not a 'brand spankin new facility.' There's far more natural light at the NW end of the terminal, primarily because the windows are not
49 LH423 : Yes. AA restructured their fleet scheduling a couple of years ago as a way to save money on parts and airport equipment. For instance, MIA is not equ
50 Beeski : Its a seasonal adjustment. Sept-Nov is the very low season as far as Caribbean tourism goes. There are very few cruise ships out of SJU. Its not a lo
51 ChrisNH : Maybe a stupid question, by why is Heathrow the only airport served from Boston on daylight flights? In other words, why wouldn't someone like Lufthan
52 Bobnwa : You answered your own question.
53 BAGoldEx : That's basically it, the lack of demand. Though I cannot be certain, I don't think even JFK or IAD have morning flights to FRA. Also, while the O & D
54 SJUSXM : AA in BOS--JULY 2001 Albany 4x SF3 (2 on saturday 3 on sunday) Aruba 1x 757 (saturday only) Austin 1x M80 Bermuda 1x 757 Bangor 11x SF3 (13 on sundays
55 Airbazar : That and the fact that Germany is 1 extra hour ahead making connections at FRA virtually impossible with a decent departure time. BA's and AA's morni
56 Cloudboy : well, it IS New England, after all.
57 BOS2LAF : Amen! The arrivals level of terminal B is a mess. When I was getting picked up on US once, my ride got to the airport entrance at 11:00pm, but didnt
58 BAGoldEx : With the 762 to Orlando, was that sold as a three class service? As for the rest of the schedule, some of those frequencies seem a bit ridiculous, pri
59 MAH4546 : No, 2-class, as with all of AA's widebody domestic routes that were not trans-con.
60 Flyingchoirboy : Thanks! Scott
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA Jets Almost Collide At BOS! posted Sat Oct 8 2005 01:53:18 by SkyHigh777
XJet At BFL Questions posted Mon Jul 16 2007 18:55:09 by PanAm747
AA's Future At Gatwick posted Sun Jul 15 2007 11:41:12 by AQ737
How Is AA Doing At Dallas Love Field? posted Fri Jul 13 2007 15:45:37 by Ghillier
Any Hint Of AA Order At 787 Launch? posted Wed Jul 11 2007 03:48:35 by JAM747
AA 105 At YQX posted Sat Jun 30 2007 19:08:59 by BA84
AA 763 At MCI This Morning posted Tue Jun 26 2007 02:42:43 by Md94
AA 763 At DTW! posted Mon Jun 25 2007 03:03:29 by San747
Eagle Flight Having Probs Landing At BOS posted Wed Jun 20 2007 15:25:42 by Cpos
Unusal AA Bird At SJU posted Mon Jun 18 2007 21:17:23 by LVHGEL