Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Cornerstone Strategy Vs Delta/US LGA Slot Swap  
User currently offlineskygypsy From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 25 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9383 times:

American has been preaching their "cornerstone" strategy for a while now. New York is one of the selected "corners". With the pending Delta/USAirways slot swap at LGA, what do you think will be American's response be to this?

Delta will have a huge presence at LGA, plus JFK. While United/ Continental will have EWR.....

Where does this leave American? Do they have a strategy for this? Any guesses?

Thanks!

108 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineflyby519 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9327 times:

They have said repeatedly that NYC is one of the most important markets of the cornerstone strategy. LGA is an infrastructure nightmare at the moment and I dont think there is much room for AA expansion even if they had more slots. I think over time when DL/US get things settled down in LGA there will be an opportunity for new gates for AA. (1-3yrs from now). They seem to have a decent number of slots being used by Eagle that could be converted into mainline if the demand was there.

I think their short-term goal is to get all OW parties under 1 roof at JFK. I could see this happening in the next few years as well. Beyond that, they will need more comprehensive domestic connection opportunities from JFK.



These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9296 times:

I think we already saw their response to this, which was to partner with B6. While DL/US just got approval this deal was actually announced before AA announced its partnership with B6. I fully expect them to continue to broaden that relationship as much as they can.

Outside of that I am not sure AA can do much else, with their cost disadvantage to everybody they really can't do much on their own. A lot of people think that AA is close to reaching an agreement with pilots on a new contract, however I do not expect the new contract to lower their costs. We have to wait and see, the contract could lead to a lot of changes at AA depending on the terms of the contract.


User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9209 times:

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 1):
They have said repeatedly that NYC is one of the most important markets of the cornerstone strategy.

I have actually heard them say the same thing about all of 5 cornerstone markets at one time or the other. Considering that they have cut just about every flight from their network that doesn't touch one of those cornerstone markets (I think 95% of their flights either originate or terminate in one of those markets), they don't have much room to grow any of the cornerstone markets without cutting one of the others. I know I am in the minority, but I think they will eventually be forced to abandon one of those cornerstone markets and ultimately end up with 4 (I think DFW and MIA are completely safe)


User currently offlinecubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22681 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9158 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 3):
they don't have much room to grow any of the cornerstone markets without cutting one of the others. I know I am in the minority, but I think they will eventually be forced to abandon one of those cornerstone markets and ultimately end up with 4 (I think DFW and MIA are completely safe)

MD80 retirement, which can be sped up or slowed down as conditions warrant, does give them some flexibility on the narrowbody side in the short- to medium-term.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11388 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 9118 times:

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
American has been preaching their "cornerstone" strategy for a while now. New York is one of the selected "corners".

It is one of those key markets - for AA, and every major U.S. airline. It's the largest market in the U.S., so that makes sense.

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
With the pending Delta/USAirways slot swap at LGA, what do you think will be American's response be to this?

Not much - there isn't much they can do.

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
Delta will have a huge presence at LGA, plus JFK. While United/ Continental will have EWR.....

A few points there: first, the only true domestic and international network hub in the New York area will remain United at EWR. Delta is big at JFK, and will also be big at LGA, but neither - independently or together - functions like anything close to the hub that United has at EWR. In my mind, United/EWR is still without question the operation to beat in the region.

Second, I think the Delta foray at LGA is still very much a question mark. To me, Delta's own public statements on their intentions there - keep every existing city, add new cities, upgauge to larger RJs - does not square with economic reality. I find it very hard to believe that Delta will be able to make RJs (even 70-seaters) work in markets that US is today struggling with using lower-cost turboprops. Thus, I'm left to conclude - much like with the other post-merger buzz words like "end-to-end networks" and meaningless statements at CVG/MEM, etc. - this is just P.R. More likely, I see Delta heavily reducing or eliminating much of the shorter-haul LGA flying - which is also mostly the Northeast markets that would sort of make LGA function as a hub - and instead shifting those precious slots to longer-haul, New York O&D-focused markets. In so doing, Delta will then be bumping more and more up against United, JetBlue, and yes, even AA. We'll see how that goes for them.

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
Where does this leave American? Do they have a strategy for this? Any guesses?

Again, they can't really do all that much given the inherent limitations of the airports in question. In short: AA can't just add flights to any of these airports to bolster their presence, like they have done, for example, at LAX.

I think, realistically, AA has a few options, but not many.

For starters, AA does still have a meaningful slot portfolio at LGA which I don't believe is being used to its full potential today, and could hold value in one of two ways for AA. Either AA can use more 70-seat flying (tied in with the regional/Eagle changes, of course) to diversify LGA flying by cutting frequency in some markets and adding a few other important, mid-haul important O&D markets to the schedule there. Or, failing that, AA could also "monetize" the superfluous LGA slots by trying to work out another trade with JetBlue for more peak JFK slots a la the DCA deal.

Either way, there is only one other airport in the New York area that could ever possibly support a hub even close to what United has at EWR - and that's JFK, and at present with slots basically split three ways between AA, Delta and JetBlue, no one airline can ever have that true network hub. So, for AA, if - down the road - they really wanted a real New York hub, the only way to get it would be to in some way leverage JetBlue's slots at JFK, either through even further deepened cooperation (which may be on the way anyway) all the way up to an all-out merger (which, to be clear, I'm not advocating nor predicting).

Short of that, I don't see many options for AA at the moment.


User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 9015 times:

Quoting cubsrule (Reply 4):
MD80 retirement, which can be sped up or slowed down as conditions warrant, does give them some flexibility on the narrowbody side in the short- to medium-term.

Not if they are serious about retiring them as soon as possible because because of the huge operational costs and maintenance costs this fleet is burdening them with. So, yes you are right technically they can use these planes to grow but it would be growth at a loss (since AA mgmt is citing those aircraft as one of the factors they are losing so much money). Considering the huge obligation they made to bringing on new aircraft, I will assume that AA is serious about retiring the MD80 fleet, I highly doubt they want to spend so much on a new more efficient fleet type only to keep another gas guzzling maintenance headache fleet type around. That aircraft order is about lowering costs and streamlining the fleet, I do not expect to change course with respect to the MD80s at this point, if they decide they want additional capacity for growth (they will accomplish that with the massive amount options they built into that deal).


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11388 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8962 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 6):
Not if they are serious about retiring them as soon as possible because because of the huge operational costs and maintenance costs this fleet is burdening them with. So, yes you are right technically they can use these planes to grow but it would be growth at a loss (since AA mgmt is citing those aircraft as one of the factors they are losing so much money). Considering the huge obligation they made to bringing on new aircraft, I will assume that AA is serious about retiring the MD80 fleet, I highly doubt they want to spend so much on a new more efficient fleet type only to keep another gas guzzling maintenance headache fleet type around. That aircraft order is about lowering costs and streamlining the fleet, I do not expect to change course with respect to the MD80s at this point, if they decide they want additional capacity for growth (they will accomplish that with the massive amount options they built into that deal).

Yes, to an extent.

But, if AA truly felt that there was a major opportunity to generate material ROIC with the existing assets they have at their disposal - even if they are old and costly - for a short, time-limited window of opportunity, I suspect they would do it. In fact, if history is any guide, they absolutely will, since that is precisely what AA did between the two oil spikes around 2008 and 2010: they slowed down the pace of MD80 retirement, kept new 737 deliveries as scheduled, and used the small, incremental MD80 capacity not parked to maintain capacity.

The other point here is that the new 737s and A320s being delivered will not be replacing MD80s on a 1:1 basis. My suspicion is that it's probably going to be on more of a .9-.95:1 basis, since AA's low MD80 fleet reliability has necessitated more operational spares, more maintenance downtime, and thus less fleet flexibility given the current set of aircraft. If AA replaced the MD80s with new planes flying the exact same schedule, that would quite possibly end up with perhaps 10+ additional airframes worth of capacity just from aircraft availability alone.

There is some room for incremental growth in the short- to medium-term - not much, true, but it is there.


User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8842 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 7):
There is some room for incremental growth in the short- to medium-term - not much, true, but it is there.

I believe my original statement said they don't have much room for growth. So we are saying the same thing. All airlines have flexibility for limited growth, heck they can pull aircraft out of the desert if need be (but they can squeeze limited growth out of the existing fleet without the need to pull from the desert). My point was that AA will not have the ability to make any large moves in NYC (or any other cornerstone market for that matter) on their own without cutting from another cornerstone city, not sure why that was even challenged (I know it wasn't by you since you are basically saying the same thing I did).


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8748 times:

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
Delta will have a huge presence at LGA, plus JFK. While United/ Continental will have EWR.....

Where does this leave American? Do they have a strategy for this? Any guesses?

I think this leaves AA and DL in the same place as before......split ops over two airports which is terribly inefficient, both operationally and financially, when trying to operate a hub from NYC.

UA/CO has the benefit of:
1.) An airport close to downtown Manhattan
2.) Concentrating on one NYC airport to serve as their NYC hub

LGA while convenient to downtown, has limitations due to the flight perimeter rules. JFK while further from downtown, has much more flexibilty in the number of destinations that they can serve.

AA / DL will always be at a disadvantage as long as they have their operations split over these two airports.


User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2061 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8610 times:

The strategy is that AA have flights to the places their passengers want to go. Chasing market share is pointless. They still dominate the important JFK-LHR route and allegedly lead in business contracts. New York will always be a divided market along with Los Angeles. The market is so large and the majors have established themselves at a level where even the smallest cannot really be squeezed out. UA has long been a secondary player in New York but the CO merger puts them up with AA and DL. DL has definitely increased its presence but not enough to crush the others.

User currently offlineskygypsy From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 8426 times:

Quoting skygypsy (Thread starter):
Quoting flyby519 (Reply 1):
Quoting commavia (Reply 5):
Either way, there is only one other airport in the New York area that could ever possibly support a hub even close to what United has at EWR - and that's JFK, and at present with slots basically split three ways between AA, Delta and JetBlue, no one airline can ever have that true network hub. So, for AA, if - down the road - they really wanted a real New York hub, the only way to get it would be to in some way leverage JetBlue's slots at JFK, either through even further deepened cooperation (which may be on the way anyway) all the way up to an all-out merger (which, to be clear, I'm not advocating nor predicting).

This seems like the most probable. I don't see an all out merger, but a very deep alliance/cooperation may be in the works.

If Delta has to divest slot pairs to lcc's as previously required by the DOT at LGA, maybe AA is waiting for B6 to get some of those on their own, before making any moves.....

AA may be playing their cards closer to the chest....finally a wise move after Delta recruited Chuck Imhoff, a former AA vp, to help lure corporate contracts away...


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3358 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8276 times:

"AA / DL will always be at a disadvantage as long as they have their operations split over these two airports."

You know, as a lifelong NYer, I can tell you that this is really only an issue on a.net.

My whole life living in Queens, shorter flights were from LGA and longer flights from JFK. It is just a way of life here and it isn't a big deal.

What is a big deal for most New Yorkers is driving to Newark.

You can not compare New York to a midwest hub reliant on connections to work. NYC is an O&D market. It is nice if connections work (and they do for both DL and AA at both JFK and LGA) but most of these flights survive just fine on New Yorkers travelling and people travelling to New York.

The business person (with higher fares) wants to land at LGA . . . not JFK and not Newark, and in this respect AA and DL are way ahead of CO (now UA). It has been that way since JFK opened in 1949 . . . and I think it will work out just fine for both AA and DL going forward.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8235 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 12):
My whole life living in Queens, shorter flights were from LGA and longer flights from JFK. It is just a way of life here and it isn't a big deal.

What is a big deal for most New Yorkers is driving to Newark.

it's a big deal when one takes public transportation (tons of NYers dont drive) or cab to LGA during rush hour - good luck with the traffic jam

if i were flying somewhere for a multi-million/billion dollar deal, i'd hate to miss the meeting and screw up the deal just because some accident on BQE or GCP. With EWR and NJ Transit, i have much better estimates of time.


User currently offlinecokepopper From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1173 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8212 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 13):
if i were flying somewhere for a multi-million/billion dollar deal, i'd hate to miss the meeting and screw up the deal just because some accident on BQE or GCP. With EWR and NJ Transit, i have much better estimates of time.

You would probably miss the meeting if you were to fly out of EWR due to the constant gate holds/weather/ or someone sneezing in the tower.


User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4977 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8212 times:

Maybe it's time for AA to add another cornerstone. Of course they've dropped as many cornerstones (BOS/BNA/STL/RDU/SJC) as they have left.


Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8167 times:

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 15):
Maybe it's time for AA to add another cornerstone. Of course they've dropped as many cornerstones (BOS/BNA/STL/RDU/SJC) as they have left.

depends on how you want to count it, there's also Reno NV


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3358 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8130 times:

"if i were flying somewhere for a multi-million/billion dollar deal, i'd hate to miss the meeting and screw up the deal just because some accident on BQE or GCP. With EWR and NJ Transit, i have much better estimates of time."


If yours were the prevailing attitude, LGA wouldn't be New York's business airport. But it isn't the prevailing attitude, so it is.

I don't want to be the poster that starts a JFK/LGA/EWR thing again . . . I am just looking at facts. LGA is the business persons preferred airport for travel into or out of NYC because it is 8 short miles from the city. Didn't say ALL business people, didn't say your business travels.

"if i were flying somewhere for a multi-million/billion dollar deal, i'd hate to miss the meeting and screw up the deal just because some accident on BQE or GCP. With EWR and NJ Transit, i have much better estimates of time."

And if you were flying in for that deal . . . you would have a town car meeting you at whatever airport you landed in. You wouldn't be getting on a rail link.

That is how most business firms do business in NYC; hence the lines of black sedans when you walk out of the terminal.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11388 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8077 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 12):
My whole life living in Queens, shorter flights were from LGA and longer flights from JFK. It is just a way of life here and it isn't a big deal.

The point is that you can't have a hub split over both airports - Delta (or at least the Delta A.net P.R. division) has floated out this fantasy concept of a "dual hub," which is impossible.

Newark is a true network hub - lots of flights, throughout the day, to lots of places, both domestically and internationally. For a variety of regulatory, financial, facility and slot reasons, there is no way that LGA can ever function in that capacity, and while JFK can, it can't if its slots are split across three different airlines.

Newark is one airport, close to Manhattan, where one airline holds virtually all of the slots. LGA/JFK cannot match that.


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17286 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8021 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 12):
You know, as a lifelong NYer, I can tell you that this is really only an issue on a.net.
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 12):
My whole life living in Queens, shorter flights were from LGA and longer flights from JFK. It is just a way of life here and it isn't a big deal.

It's not an issue for local NYC passengers; it's an issue for flow passengers, who prop up and fill out the schedule that appeals to the local passengers.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinecubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22681 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7971 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 17):
If yours were the prevailing attitude, LGA wouldn't be New York's business airport. But it isn't the prevailing attitude, so it is.

It depends on where in Manhattan you are, doesn't it? LGA is probably the business airport of the folks at 79th and Lexington. It probably is not the business airport of the folks at Houston and 6th.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 534 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7935 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
Newark is a true network hub - lots of flights, throughout the day, to lots of places, both domestically and internationally. For a variety of regulatory, financial, facility and slot reasons, there is no way that LGA can ever function in that capacity, and while JFK can, it can't if its slots are split across three different airlines.

As a counterpoint, this is equally a fantasy of the UA/CO a.net PR machine that having a connecting hub (other than for Star Alliance international operations) in the NYC area is a good idea. It isn't. Connecting someone through NYC and using precious slots and not focusing on O&D traffic is a bad business model. Period. That is why in the future you will see less and less UA connections through EWR. It worked well for CO because their next largest station was IAH, but when you have ORD and IAD, it simply doesn't make sense to connect a large number of people the EWR. While DL will work to make T4 into a quasi-"hub" for international operations, DL's move at LGA was aimed at O&D traffic. That is it.

AA, similarly, needs to remain focused on it's JV operations with IAG and O&D NY traffic.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32579 posts, RR: 72
Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7915 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 3):
I know I am in the minority, but I think they will eventually be forced to abandon one of those cornerstone markets and ultimately end up with 4 (I think DFW and MIA are completely safe)

None of them will close. None.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 3):
they don't have much room to grow any of the cornerstone markets without cutting one of the others.

Yes, it does. Are you forgetting about how many planes AA has on order? AA can adjust delivery and retirement schedules for growth, if it so chooses.

The divestment of Eagle also means strong potential for regional growth as AA partners with regional airlines for capacity.



a.
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7903 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 17):
And if you were flying in for that deal . . . you would have a town car meeting you at whatever airport you landed in. You wouldn't be getting on a rail link.

and if you're stuck on the BQE during rush hour, that towncar of yours won't go far.

ps : your screename plus your stated location of Queens clearly indicate you favor those 2 airports regardless of the pros and cons of those in Manhattan - where actual business is conducted


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7875 times:

Quoting TeamInTheSky (Reply 21):
As a counterpoint, this is equally a fantasy of the UA/CO a.net PR machine that having a connecting hub (other than for Star Alliance international operations) in the NYC area is a good idea. It isn't. Connecting someone through NYC and using precious slots and not focusing on O&D traffic is a bad business model. Period. That is why in the future you will see less and less UA connections through EWR. It worked well for CO because their next largest station was IAH, but when you have ORD and IAD, it simply doesn't make sense to connect a large number of people the EWR. While DL will work to make T4 into a quasi-"hub" for international operations, DL's move at LGA was aimed at O&D traffic. That is it.

EWR is for domestic-to-international connections, not domestic-to-domestic. That's ORD's job. NYC's location is terrible for domestic-to-domestic anyway. With so much competition among domestic and 1st tier international carriers, one needs more than O&D to sustain a full TATL hub at JFK.

There's a reason why CO is largest among NYC hub carriers - a consolidated hub beats a split hub model, all else being equal. (The equivalent analogy would be telling AA to put their Chicago domestic flights at MDW but keep the LHR/MAD/NRT at ORD)


25 mogandoCI : yup - THAT business-preferred airport that can't get me to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, London, Tokyo.....
26 TeamInTheSky : I would argue that even domestic to international (outside of Star connections) it still makes more sense to do domestic-international for a large nu
27 MaverickM11 : Regardless of what makes "sense", it's pretty tough to fill each and every flight with 100% local traffic, even in NYC, and that's why airlines in th
28 TeamInTheSky : Lol, I never said that in a years time no one would be connecting anyone through an NY airport. But airlines are in the business to make "sense" or b
29 MaverickM11 : Perhaps, but DL/AA with a "split hub" have roughly twice the fixed/operating costs but half the flow potential, so it's a whole additional layer of c
30 Post contains images commavia : I don't think AA really needs more "cornerstones," but my plan if I were running AA (I know, I know, you can all start laughing now ) would entail mo
31 EricR : What benefit would there be to adding AUS and STL as key markets? I could think of a number of markets such as ATL, DEN, SEA, PHL, IAH as key markets
32 commavia : Those last markets are reasonably large, reasonably high-yielding (if you target the right customers and the right routes), and places where AA natur
33 delta2ual : You may see some of this when the new aircraft come in. I think AA should take the top 10 O&D markets from each of those cities (BOS/SFO/DCA/AUS/
34 DFWEagle : Seems a solid strategy to me. What do you think about SJU going forwards? I wonder if AA should try and maintain SJU as a kind of focus/key city or c
35 N62NA : Which is why I now take Amtrak whenever I need to be in NYC.
36 flyby519 : I think it is more likely to see AA partner with a B6-type company to cover the non-cornerstone markets.
37 EricR : Agreed, but there are a lot of mid sized markets with no dominant carrier, so I wanted to know the rationale behind his statement. Also, while STL an
38 cubsrule : You can't connect passengers to TXL or BFS over ORD/IAD. The local market just isn't there. But he's not advocating flying STL-XNA or STL-CID (or eve
39 MAH4546 : WASBER is a good sized local market.
40 slcdeltarumd11 : The split operations are fine for o&d but they will never get the connection power than United has at EWR
41 jetlanta : And UA will never get the connection power that DL has in ATL. DL doesn't need to use JFK for the same purpose as UA uses EWR.
42 EricR : Doesn't the fact that AA did not keep STL as a focus city give you an indication of how it would perform? I realize that he did not mean STL-XNA/JAX,
43 cubsrule : I have no way of knowing. They never really tried it as a focus city.
44 EricR : Over the past several years it operated more like a focus city than a hub or spoke.
45 cubsrule : How so? They flew all kinds of routes with little or no local market - MSN, CID, SGF, XNA, etc.[Edited 2011-08-01 19:39:01]
46 slcdeltarumd11 : This is clearly about the NYC metro market Do you literally have to make every discussion into Delta and Atlanta? Have you ever not defended Delta or
47 EricR : And what flights to STL were feeding the markets you listed above? If your answer is DFW, ORD, MIA, NYC, DCA, then you get my point.
48 STT757 : On the contrary, EWR's balance of strong O&D and connecting traffic through CO's EWR hub allows CO/UA to enjoy the highest fares in the Nation. A
49 jetlanta : LOL, stunningly mature response. If it is clearly about the NYC metro market, why the concern over the connecting opportunities? That is entirely my
50 commavia : That was my thinking. It wasn't necessarily about making AUS/STL/BNA/RDU into focus cities - in the connecting complex sense - and certainly not hubs
51 indiansbucs : I definitively see your point and agree with you. DL isnt looking for pax to connect at LGA. They already have DTW, MSP, ATL mostly and JFK doing tha
52 DFWEagle : AA still has a very large operation in STL relative the market size and to other similar markets. It is still one of their top domestic stations and
53 mogandoCI : the number of European destinations offered by ORD/IAD is NOTHING compared to EWR - count it yourself
54 nyc2theworld : Which with this merger will make a lot of those routes more O&D/higher yielding focused. Low yield passengers can be routed through the hubs XXX-
55 STT757 : The assumption is that only the O&D traffic is higher yielding, that's not the case. EWR has the highest airfares in the Nation because of it's m
56 Post contains images jfklganyc : "ps : your screename plus your stated location of Queens clearly indicate you favor those 2 airports regardless of the pros and cons of those in Manha
57 cubsrule : . . . or they fly smaller airplanes and don't fill or fly the unsold seats. That has certainly been DL's JFK strategy at times (see the long time sin
58 mogandoCI : no airline hubs at all 3 of NYC's airport. flying a single EWR-DFW once a year doesn't really count.
59 mogandoCI : exactly - DL's fares out of NYC have been shown to be the lowest among NY-hubbed carriers, after equalizing for distance. AA's fares are occasionally
60 jetlanta : STT, I think there are a lot of reasons why CO average fares are higher at EWR than AA or DL enjoy at LGA & JFK. The impact of LCC's at the other
61 jetlanta : Fair enough, but I think that Cubs addresses this pretty will below... At the end of the day CO/UA's advantage isn't the "hub", its the monopoly.
62 delta2ual : I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that EWR is not as important to the new UA as it was to CO. Will it still be important? Absolutely. However
63 dfwexecplat : Well, if you take a look at yesterday's route update, it shows AA dropping all 7 daily BOS-LGA r/t...so perhaps that's an early indication of their p
64 washingtonian : I disagree. JFK can never be a EWR-style hub because EWR warrants multiple daily flights to key business cities such as ORD, ATL, DFW, IAH, etc. This
65 TeamInTheSky : I went and looked, big whoop that EWR serves Birmingham, Manchester, Belfast, Paris-Orly and the like, the same main markest are generally served out
66 STT757 : Exactly, JFK will never realize it's potential unless LGA is closed or coneverted to a TEB type of FBO. Not only that but DL operates many of their J
67 delimit : That's not what he said though, is it. He said he was based in NYC and flew out of all three airports. JFK will never reach that potential regardless
68 nwaesc : "Based at" =/= an employer having a hub at all three. Kinda like being based at SFO may mean flying out of SFO and/or SJC, being based at IAD may mea
69 panamair : Well, maybe except for B6, which has shown that it can be profitable flying domestic out of JFK to the same cities that are served out of LGA. But I
70 EricR : Maybe we are getting hung up on symantics here, but I am not sure how you can say that AA "still has a very large operation in STL". They have 31 fli
71 DFWEagle : That's only half of the sentence I wrote, I said AA's operation in STL was very large relative the size of the market and compared to AA's presence i
72 Post contains images jetlanta : Of course you can. CO doesn't, but they could. The NYC market is more than big enough to support it. It might require smaller gauge aircraft and diff
73 MaverickM11 : It really hasn't had much luck in the way of driving domestic volume outside of Florida and arguably upstate NY. ORD is only 3 daily, primarily RJ tr
74 EricR : Ok, so let's look at similar sized markets. DEN: 21 flights TPA: 17 flights SAN: 26 flights MSP: 19 flights I still do not find STL's 31 flights to b
75 mogandoCI : Probably a function of loyalty programs. People flying out of LGA tend to be already linked to one of the big 3 alliances, so in their mind, flying j
76 DFWEagle : Well, that's not surprising if you are simply taking the number of daily flights as a measure. It's a pretty much useless measure when equipment type
77 jonathanxxxx : Extremely overserved by other carriers domestically. No use for AA to do much over there. Overshadowed by the MIA hub and at a lesser extent MCO. Onl
78 EricR : [quote=jonathanxxxx,reply=77] I was not advocating for AA to do add any additional service to DEN, MSP, SAN, TPA. I was providing this information to
79 TOMMY767 : Very true. DL at LGA when it gets up and running will likely be a huge cash cow. JFK is going to be for international as well as some connections. UA
80 washingtonian : I'm not so sure of that. I guess I just don't understand how US could have had some of the most profitable assets in the country and squander them to
81 delimit : DL has a much larger FF base in NYC then US ever did. I am not sure about "cash cow," but DL should face far fewer challenges than US.
82 Post contains images jonathanxxxx : It is still up around 10 mainline departures from the cities listed. Whether it's not "very large" it's still larger than those stations. Enough for
83 EricR : Yes, and I notated that as such. See reply 74.
84 jetlanta : Yeah. Even B6 will tell you that JFK simply doesn't work for business markets inside the Perimeter. You will see Delta add all of those markets, and
85 Post contains images jonathanxxxx : Yes but your making it seem like its nothing. Like DFWEagle said. AA is running 757's and MD-80's and has much more seats on the market. If most of t
86 STT757 : But your changing a winning (for UA) formula at EWR, they are getting the highest fares in the Nation at EWR doing what they are doing now. Why is ev
87 EricR : Because STL is NOT a "very large operation". You even acknowledge it above. I've never debated the fact that STL was one of the larger spokes....but
88 jetlanta : The winning formula is the monopoly they enjoy, not the connecting hub. I don't see any benefit of changing what they do until market growth outpaces
89 Post contains images MaverickM11 : I just don't see how money losing operation + higher costs than US + lots of capacity + small revenue premium b/c of JFK operation + aggressive compe
90 STT757 : It's not going to be a "cash cow", what they will do imo is that they will start a lobbying effort to get the LGA perimeter either lifted entirely or
91 commavia : I tend to agree in general. I just don't see how this LGA operation is going to be a "cash cow" for Delta - especially if they stick to their earlier
92 DFWEagle : I don’t see why you are so intent on continuing this rather silly debate in the first place, but your whole “argument” is based entirely on hig
93 apodino : One thing I don't get about LGA is the fact that LGA is much more delay proned than JFK due to the fact that it is severly overscheduled even with the
94 commavia : The bottom line is that there is enough demand in the New York area to go around among all three airports. For some, LGA will always be the preferenc
95 STT757 : The Port Authority is going to fund a Regional Planning Agency study for expansion of EWR and JFK, their preliminary results indicated that a runway
96 EricR : Interesting comment considering you are just as much of a factor in continuing this silly little debate as I am. The markets I selected were based on
97 DFWEagle : No, I wouldn't have told you to use population because it is not really relevant in determining market size. You could have a huge population but if
98 TOMMY767 : Because there are other hubs in the UA network: IAD and ORD most specifically that are just as important as EWR is to CO. Things COULD end up changin
99 STT757 : EWR is way ahead of IAD in terms of passengers, flights aircraft and revenues. IAD only has something like 75 mainline flights per day compared 220 a
100 STT757 : Airside Terminal C trumps anything at the other NYC airports, landside I agree is not great. Living in Hoboken I hope your familiar with Crumbs, whic
101 panamair : Not really...IMO, AA's T8 at JFK is a far more spacious and inviting terminal than anything at EWR...
102 Post contains links STT757 : I guess we'll have to disagree, while T8 is nice it's severely lacking good restaurants and concessions compared to Terminal C; http://shopnewarkterm
103 aajfksjubklyn : I would disagree on the severe adjective here. There are many options to eat in Termainl 8, it just so happens that they are spread out and it doesn'
104 Post contains images jfklganyc : "So I agree that the current model is fine. My point is that their clear revenue advantage at EWR is more related to the fact that they don't experien
105 TOMMY767 : Not a fan of crumbs but I'm not surprised they are there. AA's T8 and B6's T5 at JFK are both better than Terminal C. C-1 and C-2 aren't all that gre
106 Post contains images MaverickM11 : Probably because there are so few passengers going through it . AA has a great facility at JFK; unfortunately its slot holdings don't match the poten
107 TOMMY767 : Not sure if NK is a competitor to DTW. Delta kind of owns NYC-DTW.
108 STT757 : It's beautiful, I wouldn't use the word "huge". Giant's stadium (new Meadowlands stadium) is huge. When they first started building the new Terminal
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...
Effect Of Delta/US LGA/DCA Deal On Shuttle posted Sat Oct 31 2009 12:17:15 by RJpieces
AA-TWA-AAEAGLE VS UA-US. Which One Is Bigger? posted Wed Apr 11 2001 11:52:00 by United Airline
Delta/US Drop Planned Slot Swap posted Fri Jul 2 2010 10:32:20 by cokepopper
US And DL To Ask DOT To Reconsider Slot Swap posted Wed Sep 29 2010 13:19:01 by PSU.DTW.SCE
DL/US Back On For Slot Swap After WN EWR Deal? posted Tue Aug 31 2010 20:43:52 by smoot4208
LGA To Vienna Charter (US-RUS Spy Swap) posted Thu Jul 8 2010 20:31:50 by KITH
DL/US Slot Swap Rejected posted Tue May 4 2010 12:29:14 by mah4546
LGA/DCA Slot Swap News & Updates? posted Mon Apr 12 2010 09:22:56 by RamerinianAir
DL/US LGA-DCA Slot Transaction Update posted Mon Feb 8 2010 21:11:39 by apodino
Slot Swap At LGA? posted Thu Nov 12 2009 21:45:40 by Blueman87