Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Applies To Delay JFK-HND Startup  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24312 posts, RR: 47
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13967 times:

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

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

OST-2010-0018

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


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
101 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinerl757pvd From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4630 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13960 times:

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


Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlinegdg9 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 599 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13942 times:

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

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

Edit - LAX-PVG - reservations currently suspended.

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

User currently offlineDAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13946 times:

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

User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3171 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13795 times:

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


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


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22299 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13780 times:

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

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



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32175 posts, RR: 72
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13740 times:

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

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

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

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



a.
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1000 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13713 times:

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

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

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

Who was awarded secondary status on the route?

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

It will be interesting to follow.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22299 posts, RR: 20
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13665 times:

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

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



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32175 posts, RR: 72
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 13669 times:

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

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

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



a.
User currently offlinecrosswinds21 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 698 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13525 times:

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

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


User currently onlineAABB777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 505 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13463 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

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

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


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13363 times:

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

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

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

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

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


User currently offlinemarkboston From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13237 times:

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

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

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

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


User currently offlineMPDPilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 986 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13214 times:

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

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

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

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



One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 13016 times:

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

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

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

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


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12937 times:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlinecrosswinds21 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 698 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12839 times:

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

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


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12826 times:

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

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



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1824 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12604 times:

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

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


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22299 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 12249 times:

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

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



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1824 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 12197 times:

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

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

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


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 12145 times:

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

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



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1824 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 12079 times:

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

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


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22299 posts, RR: 20
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11988 times:

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

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



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
25 FutureUScapt : Just a minor correction to LAXIntl's post - AA has requested to delay the start-up date to March 1, 2011, not March 31, 2011. So just to put that into
26 qqflyboy : AA's start date was to be 20Jan11, and they asked for a delay just over a month to 1Mar11. Not that big of a deal, and if you saw the bookings, you'd
27 hnl-jack : HA requested two slots based on their experience and knowledge of the market. They launched service with the one slot awarded, the flights are full a
28 AADC10 : AA's fumbling around with all of its Asia flights seems to show what a 2nd tier player it is in the region and possibly a lack of commitment. Most pas
29 ocracoke : How long has HA been flying the Hawaii-Tokyo market to gain that experience and knowledge?
30 HNLPointShoot : Hawaii, by nature of being a prime international destination for Japanese tourists, is filled with people who have insight on how the business works.
31 Cubsrule : That sort of misses the point, though, doesn't it? Couldn't MS fly HNL-TYO in the winter and fill it?
32 AirNZ : In which case common sense would tell you (read as intelligence) not to sell the tickets until you know you can physically operate the flight......it
33 hnl-jack : HA has been doing business in Japan for decades. It knows the people in the business, the wholesalers such as JTB and others probably as good as any
34 bobnwa : Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things if AA and DL are granted delays in the start up? Looks like folks are getting all worked up over
35 mogandoCI : DTW-NRT is hub-to-hub on DL's network - how hard is it to fill but DTW-HND is a whole different animal - relying strictly on Tokyo O&D. And it's
36 hnl-jack : As Vince Lombardi once said, "the best offense is a good defense." AA & DL both knew what the slots were and that authorization would be granted
37 Cubsrule : I'd agree that they "knew" this, but keep in mind that an October start wasn't really pratical - which is the whole reason AA and DL are asking for t
38 ckfred : ORD-PEK was also a slot issue. AA wanted the PEK flight to have times similar to the ORD-PVG flight. Yet local airport authorites had the turnaround
39 deltal1011man : Ok, NRT is meaningless. That is kind of like saying AA should not get at LGW slot because they have 20 slots a LHR. Look at the slot break down, AA-3
40 laca773 : I feel DL's DTW & AA's flights to HND will not last long at all unless, the Japanese Aviation Authority re-issue time slots. I don't see DL's LAX
41 Tango-Bravo : Delta is hardly the only other U.S. airline to pull the same stunt. This is becoming a same-old same same-old worn out story: 1) U.S. airline eager t
42 Cubsrule : How can you be sure that AA (and DL, for that matter) would not have started the route in October had it been awarded in a timely fashion?
43 DFWEagle : ORD-DEL is having a schedule change next summer to depart a few hours earlier and arrive in Delhi at 17:45 instead of late at night. AA expects the K
44 EnviroTO : I'm not sure why there are so many people surprised that AA waited so long. There is no measure of the demand for a poorly timed HND flight so the onl
45 Post contains images MSPNWA : That's an easy answer. Every airline that applied *was* interested for a start no later than January, that's who. "No carrier was"? Come on. Read the
46 Cubsrule : What awards would have better served the flying public? I'd say - based on what was awarded and not what was applied for - that AA should have gotten
47 LAXintl : You are right. Bit odd as the first notice I got listed March 31, and now it shows March 1. Wonder if it changed at the last minute?
48 deltal1011man : Then why hasn't UA or HA asked for the slot? See I kinda think you have a blind hate for Delta and don't really know what is going on. 1) IF HA/US/UA
49 MAH4546 : Then the entire industry operates without much intelligence, because all airlines do it, since 99.99% of the time, the slot requested is the slot rec
50 Post contains images deltal1011man : unless it PEK
51 LAXintl : Hawaiian certainly does. HA filed a response to Delta's delay restating their interest in additional slot pair, and matter of fact did so today also
52 deltal1011man : No. HA is saying well if they keep pushing it off then they want the slot. (see "Hawaiian does not oppose the 28-day extension") If HA really really
53 Post contains images Tango-Bravo : In a word: Thankyouverymuch! Couldn't have said it better myself! Since 9/11/01 especially, it seems the U.S. airlines can pull whatever shenanigans
54 deltal1011man : Please list the cases since 9/11 that this has happened....with the DOT docket # please.[Edited 2010-12-21 15:44:38]
55 LAXintl : Its all semantics. Arguing against the delay is pointless as unfortunately there is well established precedence for granting delays. However Hawaiian
56 deltal1011man : you can't use the original route request.....don't see DL waiting for that 2-3x weekly CVG-PEK anymore..... If the carrier(s) don't ask then you can'
57 MSPNWA : They could have given out awards that had a better perceived chance of success. But should we really demand the DOT to award based on that? I don't t
58 deltal1011man : No, HA is not "poking" around. They haven't asked for any ones slots. period, end of story. Again, you don't see Delta waiting around for CVG-PEK the
59 avionpg : Its official JFK-HND flight is postponed I was on it in February now I am on JFK-NRT
60 Post contains images SESGDL : It's outrageous that AA postponing the start of JFK-HND a little over a month before it was scheduled to start has elicited such a subdued response. W
61 JFKPurser : I posted this rumor here about 3 weeks ago. The other version of it is that JFK-NRT will be completely transferred to MIA and JFK will only have HND.
62 MAH4546 : I heard that it will be either be 3w LAX-NRT or 3w MIA-NRT. Either way, the slots will find use. Or, maybe AA would do 4w LAX-NRT and 3w MIA-NRT (or
63 SESGDL : 15 77Ws in one year is simply not happening. Where on earth could they possibly deploy this much ULH equipment without absolutely decimating yields?
64 MAH4546 : Here, I'll place 13.5 for you: MIA-GRUx4 MIA-EZEx4 MIA-SCLx2 MIA-LHRx1 MIA-MADx1 DFW-NRTx1.5 Not saying its happening - I doubt it - but AA can easil
65 deltal1011man : JL has 5 77Ws on order... no possible way. the only way AA will get any 777s fairly quick is if they lease them from someone, but I don't believe any
66 LipeGIG : It could not decimate yields on top of season but for some routes its just too much for off season. Not feasible to put 4 frames on the same routes.
67 MAH4546 : 12w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th. Plus 7w IB 346. 11w effective April 5th; 2x daily effective June 9th. The 763 is almost always
68 SESGDL : I don't believe that a 77W would be justified 4x daily on routes like MIA-GRU or MIA-EZE. The 77W in many cases holds as many as 100 more passengers
69 LipeGIG : Now with the partnership for sure the demand and potential for MAD will increase, but not only MIA. If AA wants a bigger plane, they could deploy the
70 MAH4546 : It's not four times daily - its four frames, because of scheduling. 2x 77W on MIA-EZE/GRU is easily justified. Nobody knows what the 77W will be. AA
71 legacyins : With JL doing the SFO-HND route. Would it be possible for AA to think outside the box and start a SFO-NRT route? I know they are focusing most of the
72 LipeGIG : Agree with you. AA focus in certain key cities and this also prevents them to take full advantage of current market conditions. A few markets demands
73 MAH4546 : We get it. You hate AA. But please, start using facts. You seem to ignore them often with AA. AA is profitable. It under-performs compared to its pee
74 Cubsrule : Isn't starting when the market peaks ideal? Sure, and starting in March is better than starting in January. If no one opposes, what's the problem? Lo
75 SESGDL : I do not hate AA by any means. And I also get it, you love AA, and therefore will give them the benefit of the doubt in any situation where their per
76 AABB777 : Are you privy to internal discussions AA may have had regarding fleet renewal and fleet expansion? AA may not have made any desire public re: 77Ws, b
77 SESGDL : No, but these rumors are no different than those about DL obtaining additional 744s. It isn't conceivable than an airline so conservative about openi
78 BoeingGuy : Hey I know. Maybe AA wants to start SJC-HND flights to replace the dearly departed SJC-NRT flights 128/129. Ha, that's funny. It's not even April Fool
79 Post contains images commavia : If true, that seems fairly advanced. I have now heard this rumor from more than a dozen people across the system at various levels. Should be interes
80 GlobalCabotage : The HND flights from JFK are as bad as if not worse than the ORD-PEK flights, without connecting traffic. ORD-PEK on AA is hanging on, hoping for bett
81 MAH4546 : I'm told it is actually doing surprisingly well, despite the poor timings. Much more than just "hanging on." Of course, AA still is hoping that it wi
82 LAXintl : No surprise the DOT granted the delay for AA. In its actions, the DOT however did note that Hawaiian Airlines was prepared to operate a second HNL-HND
83 goldenargosy : You're not the first to assume the JFK-HND flights are poorly timed. However, as a New Yorker, they are actually decent times. Departing JFK at 6:10p
84 Carfield : Just want to give another example: My cousin needs to go to Singapore for a wedding and wants to fly AA metal if possible! She really does not want to
85 AAExecPlat : Some seem to think AA can't make use of 77Ws...biggest non-sense I've ever heard. So UA and DL can fly 744s and all European airlines can fly 77Ws, 74
86 SESGDL : It's perfect logic. AA has expressed no desire for 77Ws before. Sure, they could put 77Ws on many routes, but at what cost? UA and DL have one thing
87 AAExecPlat : Explain to me how they would build a competing TPAC network without the proper equipment?
88 jfk777 : AA needs more 777 soon until the 787-9 arrives, 2015 ? The 777-300ER with 60 J class seats would be great for AA. AA has been more aggressive recentl
89 AAExecPlat : So by that logic, no airline that's ever announced interest in an airplane prior to ordering has any business buying those airplanes, right? And how
90 SESGDL : It's far less simple than that. AA has never even had options for 77Ws, or specified "publicly" any interest in the aircraft. I can guarantee you tha
91 mogandoCI : Yield management only works if you have yield to generate. AA is the only one among the Big 4 (UA, CO, DL, AA) to NOT have a true flat bed and no AVO
92 LAXtoATL : First Class! I am sure part of the reason they have been reluctant to offer flat beds in business class is to maintain a significant distinction betw
93 MAH4546 : AA has 16 true flat beds in every 777 and it has AVOD in international business class, so you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. AA - u
94 IrishAyes : Yes, but AA's problems do not stem from revenue - they're largely associated with high costs. I can see the logic behind why taking on an additional
95 AAExecPlat : Really? 1) AA actually is the highest yielding legacy of them all (at least according to the recent reports I saw). 2) As far as lie-flat, what would
96 Post contains images MarcoPoloWorld : Why would she "not want to deal" with Cathay, a five-star airline? And besides, AA is leaving most of the trans-pacific flying to CX anyways.
97 NewYorkCityBoi : From AA Website, this JFK-HND route still will start on Feb 18th, not Mar 31st. Can someone clarify this? Which is the exact date they delay until? be
98 Post contains images Pellegrine : No matter about the delay. Truth is January-March/April is the low period for USJapan travel. Seems like it anyway based on the ticket prices and book
99 laca773 : LAX-LHR/NRT would be good routes for the 77W. What are AA's top ten highest yielding F/J international routes? That's only on the 772s and the only r
100 jfk777 : AA most profitable route with 2 777 daily is Miami to Buenos Aires where they sell mny F/J seats. JFK & DFW to EZE do very well too.
101 laca773 : Thanks, jfk777, thanks for the information. I have wondered for a long time if one of the top three was a route to deep South America and sure enough
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, DL To Continue JFK Expansion posted Fri Feb 23 2007 02:57:27 by HVNandrew
AA Applies For MIA-BSB And JFK-GIG posted Thu Apr 8 2010 12:57:35 by mah4546
AA To Start JFK-GIG posted Fri Sep 19 2008 22:55:55 by MAH4546
AA Diversion To EWR From JFK posted Mon Dec 10 2007 12:26:55 by Apodino
AA To Start JFK-BCN, JFK-MXP posted Mon Aug 27 2007 17:56:55 by MAH4546
AA To Begin JFK-UVF posted Fri May 4 2007 01:01:47 by AJMIA
AA To Start JFK-SKB posted Fri Apr 27 2007 18:43:02 by MAH4546
AA Applies Codeshare To Beirut And Damascus posted Tue Jan 9 2007 07:25:04 by Jimyvr
AA To Start JFK-SJD posted Wed Jul 26 2006 18:50:18 by BigGSFO
AA Upgrades MIA And JFK To EZE posted Thu Jul 6 2006 02:45:09 by ContinentalEWR
AA Diversion To EWR From JFK posted Mon Dec 10 2007 12:26:55 by Apodino
AA To Start JFK-BCN, JFK-MXP posted Mon Aug 27 2007 17:56:55 by MAH4546