FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2121 times:
To be fair, AA does still serve LEX via DFW....admitted though this isn't convenient for those coming from the East/South.
I wouldn't hold my breath on it returning. UA already flies it and with higher fuel prices, I don't know if AA is really willing to fight for small markets to ORD.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21215 posts, RR: 19 Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2016 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 1): UA already flies it and with higher fuel prices, I don't know if AA is really willing to fight for small markets to ORD.
With the cuts at STL, AA is really leaving itself vulnerable in the midwest and east (northeast particularly) when it cuts ORD service. AA is really uncompetitive to a lot of those smaller markets because DFW connections aren't convenient for the entire eastern half of the country.
There's a separate question, too: Can the ORD hub survive without the smaller markets in those places? Beyond a certain point, I feel like it cannot.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1927 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2): AA is really uncompetitive to a lot of those smaller markets because DFW connections aren't convenient for the entire eastern half of the country.
I agree with you. I've said it before and I'll say it again, AA isn't doing so hot at ORD these days and STL is down to be just a large focus city.
And it appears UA might be noticing too. We're now seeing UA add routes like ELP-ORD and HSV-ORD. UA might not survive on these routes, but if they do, there's a good chance they can knock AA out. Granted, AA only flies these 1x a day, but as these secondary routes go down, the overall hub becomes weaker.
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1892 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2): AA is really uncompetitive to a lot of those smaller markets because DFW connections aren't convenient for the entire eastern half of the country.
What AA or any airline does is to fly what makes more money as opposed to whats convenient. AA does very well on smaller markets out of DFW but struggles on some at ORD (given the competition mostly). So admitedly for those traveling East or to the Upper Midwest, DFW isnt really in the way, but DFW works great for those going west and northwest. I guess AA finds enough of that traffic to do well on DFW-LEX. Although Ive been puzzled why AA drops certain routes at ORD (DAY was one). As close as DAY and LEX are to ORD, I cant figure out why they couldnt make them work.
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3): AA isn't doing so hot at ORD these days
Internationally theyre doing fine, on domestic markets they struggle more. It seems more like ORD's domestic flights are there to serve the international flights more so than to connect them to other domestic flights. AA prefers routeing people through DFW for domestic to doemstic. In my mind they need both. DFW isnt always a convenient connection and niether is ORD.
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
VIflyer From US Virgin Islands, joined May 1999, 493 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1829 times:
I wouldn't put much hope into MQ returning to LEX anytime soon for the for mentioned reasons and without some sort of local compensation from local business/city/etc. Of recent MQ s ops out of ORD has been limited to any thing that is either 1. High yield or 2. Supplementing AA s domestic routes that feed international or long domestic. Since 9/11 the routes that MQ has left while high load factors have been low yield due to competition or general ticket sales. ALB (comp with WN and UA), PWM (comp with UA and low tix yields), SWF (low yields), JAX (comp with WN and low yields), to name a few.
Like said earlier AA/MQ tends of recent to route a majority of the domestic feed if it can through DFW as apposed to ORD. Also there is a aircraft crunch when it comes to spare aircraft for expanding routes, pretty much all the CR7s are tied up with current routes, some of the EMB-135s being parked, the taking over of AX s routes out of STL and (speculative rumor running around) RP looking into trying to cancel out of the American Connection contract. There in no free aircraft sitting around without taking one off of another route.
With LEX being served currently to DFW the only possible way MQ would return in this current economic climate would have to involve some sort of revenue guaretee and even then it would have to preform well to keep it (ala XNA-LAX going away even with a gurantee).
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21215 posts, RR: 19 Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1792 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 4): What AA or any airline does is to fly what makes more money as opposed to whats convenient.
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 4): In my mind they need both. DFW isnt always a convenient connection and niether is ORD.
It seems like you can't have both...
You're right that AA doesn't exist to conveniently serve me (or anyone else in the eastern half of the country). They exist to make money. What I'm wondering, though, is whether they are undermining the ORD hub (and thus making it harder to make money) by cutting back on flights to many destinations (some of them-- like BDL or JAX-- not really that small). You seemingly suggest that ORD can work as a purely domestic-international hub, but I'm not so sure.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, RR: 25 Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1785 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6): You seemingly suggest that ORD can work as a purely domestic-international hub, but I'm not so sure.
Can ORD work as a domestic-international hub? Yes. Is that the best thing for AA to do with ORD? I dont think so. Is that what AA seems to be gearing toward with ORD? Possibly.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6): What I'm wondering, though, is whether they are undermining the ORD hub
AA isnt an airline that seems to tolerate anything that underpreforms. For example, AA cut ORD-DAY/JAX/LEX despite the fact that it meant, giving up a portion of that market, cutting off whatever connections those flights provided to other flights (international and domestic). Those flights might have been horrible money losers on their own (Im not saying they were, just hypothetically), but maybe AA should have kept them around for the contribution to the ORD hub.
Flights to small and midsized markets preform much better from DFW for AA, so AA always seems to stick with them for that.
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1710 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 7): Can ORD work as a domestic-international hub? Yes.
I'm not so sure it can work. AA doesn't have enough international flights to sustain that much international traffic. AA is going to need a decent amount of domestic O+D and domestic-domestic connections to keep ORD going.
Of course, it's tough to sustain a domestic hub when you have two other competitors with domestic hubs as well (UA and WN). Not to mention that WN's plans have it slowly picking off some of the high yield domestic routes (MSP, BOS, LGA).
And in LEX's case, AA actually had an advantage in that they were offering both ORD and DFW versus UA with only ORD. But apparently, it wasn't enough.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21215 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1611 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 7): Those flights might have been horrible money losers on their own (Im not saying they were, just hypothetically), but maybe AA should have kept them around for the contribution to the ORD hub.
Right. As they cut more routes, I wonder whether we might see some of them come back because of their contribution to the hub. Put another way, the routes that ought to be cut with $150 oil and 150 destinations (that 150 number might not be right, but you'll get my drift) are not necessarily the routes that ought to get cut with $75 oil and 125 destinations. In the latter case, network connectivity might matter more than pure profitability, and the lower oil price obviously affects the profitability picture-- while the least profitable route at $150 is unlikely to make a ton of money at $75, relative profitability may change more subtly.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
AAAL From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 121 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1477 times:
AA originally made the cuts for ORD-DAY/JAX/LEX or to the gulf, back when fuel was at $150. AA was in the talks about bringing it back but because of the economy going south they did not. They were not really making money on them. I remember revenue management saying this was a route just to fill in slots.
As for them coming back maybe. But it's a very small market with low yields. When the economy picks up again and better fuel prices. It will help lower the cost of LEX as a station for eagle.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 489 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, 
From US Virgin Islands, joined May 1999, 493 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
