Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA And Their Strategy In NYC  
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 754 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 14423 times:

I have to admit, I'm a little sad at the thought of AA taking such a back seat in the New York market, especially since it's been such a leader there in the past.

With DL's schedule release today, I pray that AA is developing a comprehensive NY strategy that goes beyond code sharing with B6 and one that addresses the needs of the business travellers.

We'll see if DL makes money flying regionals, but I'm afraid AA might never get back what they had.

How can they fight back right now?

85 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecaliboy78 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 14378 times:

I'm with you on that one. AA is a player in NYC but it seems to me that they are taking a slow approach to all this DL madness in NYC and UA in EWR. Granted from previous experience AA takes the back seat to watch from a distance then it pounces and makes it grand entrance but now a days AA or anyone has that priviledge anymore is either do or die. I hope they just don't give up and let others take the full pie instead of just a slice.


TAAke pride on what you do and do it well.
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 754 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 14319 times:

I've often wondered if US cut their noses off to spite their own face when they sold out on LGA. The LGA slots are some of the most valuable, attractive assets they have/had and part of what could have made them an attractive merger partner.

I haven't thought much of this in the past, but I wonder if they have grand plans for B6 during or after bk. They'd get NYC back and could emerge again as the top airline in the market. (Maybe they've known this all along).

However, we all know the cost structures don't match, but AFTER Ch. 11, they will.


User currently offlinedeltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 14118 times:

Quoting caliboy78 (Reply 1):
I hope they just don't give up and let others take the full pie instead of just a slice.

Sadly I think this is their only option. I can't imagine how much $$ and resources if they wanted to really capture a solid NYC following that rivals what DL, UA/CO and B6 all have. I'm thinking they are going to have to concede much of NYC and focus on MIA, DFW, ORD and LAX with the tolken transcon on narrowbody Airbuses or new 737s.

Quoting seatback (Reply 2):
I've often wondered if US cut their noses off to spite their own face when they sold out on LGA.

Ditto, I've always thought this too! People forget that back in the late 80s and through 90s US had boat loads of slots at DCA and LGA. They had everything Pan Am and TWA wanted on the domestic front and vice versa. I've always felt that instead of buying PSA and simultaneously building up PHL they should have instead used the $$/resources and gone in w/ a merger with either Pan Am or TWA and then they would have had JFK to compliment LGA and DCA along with solid hubs at CLT and PIT.


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3356 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13990 times:

"Granted from previous experience AA takes the back seat to watch from a distance then it pounces and makes it grand entrance"

That was the AA of 10 years ago. They haven't made a grand entrance or done anything ground breaking in a decade. That stuck-in-a-holding-pattern philosophy is a big part of their BK filing.


"However, we all know the cost structures don't match, but AFTER Ch. 11, they will."

They'll be leaner and meaner for sure. Will they match B6s structure...no. They are an old company with a lot of baggage.

B6 has 170 planes and a HQ in NYC with 1000 people that has held steady as they have grown. Compare that to the buildings upon buildings of people in Ft Worth, NYC, London and all the other places AA has an office around the globe.

Those are all costs and they may come down for AA, but not likely anywhere near the LCC level


User currently offlineordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13971 times:

I am hoping after AA BK is resolved they will have the cost structure to become a strong force in NYC again.

User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32572 posts, RR: 72
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13885 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 4):
Those are all costs and they may come down for AA, but not likely anywhere near the LCC level

AA's pilot pay scale for similar sized aircraft is already in line with JetBlue. Benefits is the cost that kills AA, and BK will slash that, bringing total costs very much near others.

AA might be in big trouble in NYC, especially if DL's capacity dump and dual hub concept works, which remains to be seen.

I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge. That's the best solution to fix up the stupid way AA let its NYC presence stagnate. In the short term, however, it can continue to find ways to work with JetBlue to acquire prime slots.



a.
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 13729 times:

And why would JetBlue be interested in such an arrangement? What good would it do for them? Don't forget- it takes two to tango

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 4):
Those are all costs and they may come down for AA, but not likely anywhere near the LCC level

AA's pilot pay scale for similar sized aircraft is already in line with JetBlue. Benefits is the cost that kills AA, and BK will slash that, bringing total costs very much near others.

AA might be in big trouble in NYC, especially if DL's capacity dump and dual hub concept works, which remains to be seen.

I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge. That's the best solution to fix up the stupid way AA let its NYC presence stagnate. In the short term, however, it can continue to find ways to work with JetBlue to acquire prime slots.


User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32572 posts, RR: 72
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 13682 times:

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 7):
And why would JetBlue be interested in such an arrangement? What good would it do for them? Don't forget- it takes two to tango

For many, many reasons. Firstly, JetBlue has exhausted many of its options in NYC in terms of growth opportunities. Secondly, AA and B6 are fierce competitors, and it eliminates competition on many routes for both, making them much, much stronger - if not dominating - on key markets from New York to California, Florida and the Caribbean. Thirdly, it provides B6 an opportunity to roll its product out into a much wider network, as a combined entity would no doubt use the B6 coach product. Fourthly, it extends the reach of JetBlue in New York to smaller and long-haul markets, allowing it to more effectively compete for business travel in NYC.



a.
User currently offlineklkla From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 927 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 13615 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge.

I don't know if I see the 'eventuality' of it but I will agree the best hope for AA becoming a major factor in NYC again would be a merger with B6. They would have great facilities for both domestic and international flights all in one airport. They would have what UA has at EWR but with better & newer terminals.

The trick is putting a deal together that would make it worthwhile for B6. But, If they do that and overpay, as they have done in the past with previous acquisitions, then they will once again be saddled with too much debt and inadequate return on investment which is one of the many reasons that has landed them where they are now.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13451 times:

Any AA/B6 merger would dismantle LGB/FLL and be forced to divest large amounts of slots at JFK. DL may benefit *again*

That's before we start counting jetBlue's FF program is rev-based, which is bad for the customer but good for the income statement. Switching it to distance-based (AAdvantage) would definitely increase the cost. There are no status tiers at B6, so there's no added customer service and perks cost.

B6 offers minimum 34" seats on their A320 fleet (one of the major selling points). Is AA willing to match that across all their 738/752, or will AA shift the B6 fleet back to 31/32" ?

The merger would regain BOS/SJU, but AA purposely dismantled them the last time because it didn't fit into the cornerstone strategy. What's different now?

It must been a while I've seen a successful merger between a legacy and a LCC, anywhere in the world.


User currently offlinestaralliance85 From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 201 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13342 times:

AA is in Big Trouble in the NYC Market. DL is going to cut AA out of the equation as much as possible. The most valuable things that AA has from the NYC area are their LHR, GRU, EZE and NRT routes. Everything else is up for grabs. At this point in time an AA/B6 merger would Not work because AA would destroy a great airline. AA needs to be a more customer friendly airline. For example, by reintroducing their "More Room in Coach" campaign that was really great and had to scrap right after 9/11.


brad Fitzpatrick
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7480 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13287 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
to divest large amounts of slots at JFK

Before the DL/US slot swap, I might agree. However, given the precident I dont think the divesture would be significant.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 754 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13226 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge. That's the best solution to fix up the stupid way AA let its NYC presence stagnate. In the short term, however, it can continue to find ways to work with JetBlue to acquire prime slots.



I agree that both will eventually happen.

Quoting klkla (Reply 9):
The trick is putting a deal together that would make it worthwhile for B6. But, If they do that and overpay, as they have done in the past with previous acquisitions, then they will once again be saddled with too much debt and inadequate return on investment which is one of the many reasons that has landed them where they are now.



Part of the deal would be to let B6 run the show, including occupying the c-suite, product and marketing.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
The merger would regain BOS/SJU, but AA purposely dismantled them the last time because it didn't fit into the cornerstone strategy. What's different now?



Who says AA can't add to their cornerstone strategy? Both BOS and SJU have loads of loyal AA customers. What is different is a soon-to-be much more competitive cost structure. With its cost inline, AA could capture back what it lost in markets like BOS, SJU and even SFO/SJC.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11387 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 13102 times:

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 3):
I'm thinking they are going to have to concede much of NYC and focus on MIA, DFW, ORD and LAX with the tolken transcon on narrowbody Airbuses or new 737s.

Well, I suppose the AA doom and gloom is par for the course here on A.net, but I suspect - as in the past - likely wildly overstated. AA is not going to end up flying from New York to just hubs. AA's franchise in New York is still huge - far broader than just hubs plus "token transcon on narrowbod[ies]," and I strongly suspect it will remain that way.

Has AA lost ground - relatively speaking - to competitors in New York in the last decade? Absolutely. That came from a lack of focus on the market, particularly after 9/11, that allowed an emergent post-bankruptcy Delta to come in with the exact opposite - laser focus - and build.

As New York is one of the nation's largest, but also thus most competitive, markets, it serves an amplified microcosm of AA's problems: AA needs to get its cost structure in line, which it is doing. After it does that, it should regain the focus on New York and build its presence back there selectively and organically, if not - as has been suggested - pursue some form of deeper relationship, perhaps up to and including a merger, with JetBlue. A combined AA-JetBlue would be on nearly-equally footing with Delta in New York in terms of market potential, and not far behind United across town at Newark.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
AA might be in big trouble in NYC, especially if DL's capacity dump and dual hub concept works, which remains to be seen.

The "dual hub" thing seems quite far fetched - it reminds me of the other Delta PR slogans of the last few years ("end-to-end networks," etc.). The reality, as I see it, is that LGA will continue to be a primarily O&D-focused operation that will cater near entirely to local passengers, and handle a few connections here and there to pick up slack from the prime Delta hubs in and out of the Northeast - Atlanta and Detroit. JFK will continue to be optimized for connections, particularly of the longer-haul variety.

As for the capacity dump - yeah - it is going to be interesting to watch how Delta performs financially in these markets. They are obviously counting on the ability to charge higher fares and drive higher unit revenues in these markets based on the 'halo effect' of their overall stronger presence in the region and attracting corporate contracts. We'll see. Some of these will no doubt be sure winners. Others, I have my doubts, personally.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge. That's the best solution to fix up the stupid way AA let its NYC presence stagnate.

It does check a lot of boxes. It would address much of the competitive challenge AA now faces in the market. It also, of course, comes with some major challenges, though.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
Any AA/B6 merger would dismantle LGB/FLL and be forced to divest large amounts of slots at JFK. DL may benefit *again*

LGB would be drawn down - probably to the delight of a new competitive like Allegiant, or Southwest, etc. FLL would also be pared considerably, again with a likely backfill of much of the capacity from other carriers including Spirit.

I doubt there would be too heavy a slot divestiture penalty to pay at JFK, and even there was, Delta most certainly wouldn't "benefit," as they would surely be precluded from bidding on the slots directly, and any divested slots would almost certainly end up in the hands of lower-cost carriers that would serve to drive down yields in the market.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
That's before we start counting jetBlue's FF program is rev-based, which is bad for the customer but good for the income statement. Switching it to distance-based (AAdvantage) would definitely increase the cost. There are no status tiers at B6, so there's no added customer service and perks cost.

The increased cost of the frequent flyer program is minuscule in the scheme of things, and it would like drive revenue to at least partially compensate for the added cost. AAdvantage makes money for AA now.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
B6 offers minimum 34" seats on their A320 fleet (one of the major selling points). Is AA willing to match that across all their 738/752, or will AA shift the B6 fleet back to 31/32" ?

Again, in the scheme of things, that integration - what the Coach seat pitch would be - is just about meaningless.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
The merger would regain BOS/SJU, but AA purposely dismantled them the last time because it didn't fit into the cornerstone strategy. What's different now?

What would - hypothetically - be different is AA's cost structure. AA's costs today are far too high for large segments of the domestic U.S. market. Post-bankruptcy, AA's costs are likely to be considerably lower - not to the levels JetBlue is at now, but much lower than AA's currently.

And with some strong revenue management and smart scheduling, I believe AA could, indeed, optimize the combined AA-JetBlue network to drive additional revenue that offsets the increased cost.

Quoting staralliance85 (Reply 11):
At this point in time an AA/B6 merger would Not work because AA would destroy a great airline.

   As if that has ever stopped an airline merger from occurring in the past.

Quoting staralliance85 (Reply 11):
For example, by reintroducing their "More Room in Coach" campaign that was really great and had to scrap right after 9/11.

Sounds nice, but didn't work in reality. People weren't willing to pay extra for the added comfort. Besides, good service and a strong product offering don't require More Room Throughout Coach. AA has some work to do in order to make their product and service offering competitive, but More Room Throughout Coach need not be part of it.

And, if - as was earlier suggested - AA and JetBlue were to merge, I agree that the combined entity would likely adopt JetBlue's domestic Coach product, which is easily one of the best in the U.S.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
Before the DL/US slot swap, I might agree. However, given the precident I dont think the divesture would be significant.

  


User currently offlinemicstatic From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 13045 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
I've said it before and will say it again: AA and B6 will eventually merge. That's the best solution to fix up the stupid way AA let its NYC presence stagnate. In the short term, however, it can continue to find ways to work with JetBlue to acquire prime slots.

It would be such a shame to see Jetblue go away and become American. I like Jetblue's product and story, and would hate to see a merger between the two. Jetblue and Virgin America I'd be ok with



S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8249 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 12993 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The Main problem AA has in New York is the invasion by the LCC airline into the LAX/SFO to JFK markets. Virgin America has AA's number with the celebrity crowd and its biggest domestic routes. JB doesn't help either.

User currently offlineusafret From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12769 times:

AA has renovated their main concourse at LGA and are renovating the Admiral's Club which should be finished soon, so I think they are trying. New aircraft will help for sure with fuel costs and overall product improvement. I like the idea of bringing back more room in coach and perhaps a small prepared snack for coach passengers like they used to have with the Bistro Bag. Of course I'm a loyal EXP with them.

User currently offlineAAIL86 From Finland, joined Feb 2011, 408 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 12512 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
B6 offers minimum 34" seats on their A320 fleet (one of the major selling points). Is AA willing to match that across all their 738/752, or will AA shift the B6 fleet back to 31/32" ?

The merger would regain BOS/SJU, but AA purposely dismantled them the last time because it didn't fit into the cornerstone strategy. What's different now?

For once, I agree with something you posted. Very good points and a big reason why I don't see an AA/B6 shotgun wedding as desirable or likely.



Next
User currently onlinerunway23 From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Jan 2005, 2173 posts, RR: 36
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 12370 times:

AA needs to grow their coverage ex JFK on the European front long-term (2012 obviously isn't the right year to do this). There are a number of markets they need to serve ex-JFK that they currently do not. I think the following destinations particularly spring to mind in terms of attracting corporate contracts and of importance in Europe that are left to the hands of other carriers: AMS, FRA, GVA, MUC, VIE.

User currently offlinestaralliance85 From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 201 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11725 times:

Quoting runway23 (Reply 19):

AA needs to grow their coverage ex JFK on the European front long-term (2012 obviously isn't the right year to do this)

Agreed. AA just increased their frequencies to LHR and relied on BA to pick up the slack for connections throughout Europe. AA needs to be competitive and add more non stops on planes that are not antiques. The AA 767-300 is probably the most uncomfortable ride to Europe. I hope AA adds JFK-AMS, JFK-TLV, JFK-DUB, JFK-IST and JFK-MUC.



brad Fitzpatrick
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11406 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11275 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting runway23 (Reply 19):
AA needs to grow their coverage ex JFK on the European front long-term (2012 obviously isn't the right year to do this). There are a number of markets they need to serve ex-JFK that they currently do not. I think the following destinations particularly spring to mind in terms of attracting corporate contracts and of importance in Europe that are left to the hands of other carriers: AMS, FRA, GVA, MUC, VIE

With the current 763 fleet ?
Lets be realistic, AA have two main issues in NYC: they can't feed an extensive network of destinations, specially the ones that enjoy superior coverage from many USA entry points such as FRA, AMS and MUC.
The chance that AA will develop a good and profitable operation on such markets with the current equipment available is very limited.

AA shall try to consolidate and improve the yields on the current operations, with larger O&D, such as CDG, or take advantage of secondary markets with good revenue/yield, such as MAN. But they need to use 772 on such markets or they will offer nothing different from competition.

I keep saying the 77W is the only short term competitive advantage AA may use and it seems they will do that (using the 77W on LHR routes, releasing some 772 for the better yielding 763 routes)

Quoting seatback (Thread starter):
I have to admit, I'm a little sad at the thought of AA taking such a back seat in the New York market, especially since it's been such a leader there in the past.

They still can add flights at night if they want, but we all know they will not at this time.
I boarded two times from T8 this past 7 days around 9 PM and the feeling is that it is a waste of resources... besides EZE/GIG/GRU/LHR/CDG, there's just a few domestic services. For example...Why not MEX, LAS PUA, SDQ and others late night ?
Even LAX last service departs 7 PM.



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32572 posts, RR: 72
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11248 times:

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 21):
Even LAX last service departs 7 PM.

Last LAX departure is 930pm. Not operating temporarily because of pilot issues; resumes in about two weeks.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 21):
With the current 763 fleet ?

Yes, with the current fleet. There's nothing wrong with it. It'll probably be getting new cabins in the near future, anyway.



a.
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4975 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11230 times:

The best near-term solution for AA's NYC "problem" (which I feel is a bit exaggerated but real nonetheless) would be to get a code-share in place with B6 or better yet, woo them into oneworld. No need for a messy merger. It works for AA and AS on the west coast, and would work well for AA and B6 on the east.

The tricky part is the larger amount of overlap AA/B6 has vs. AA/AS. They would certainly need to form some form of Gentleman's Agreement regarding spheres of influence, although given AA's draw down of NYC-Caribbean this is already happening. As far as the transcons go, that's a whole other situation.



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineJasonCRH From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 11049 times:

Um, yeah, again. These are all reasons why AA would want to merge. I really dont see anything in it for B6. They're doing just fine in the Caribbean. There's nothing AA could offer them there that would help them. They've eaten AA's lunch in the Caribbean. Why would JetBlue want that?
Merging with JetBlue might erase one competitor for American, but it that would do nothing to erase the competition that Delta offers. Or that Virgin offers. Or that UA offers out of EWR. I dont think that it would make them dominant at all to California.
Your third point below makes no sense. You're assuming that the B6 product as it stands today would be rolled out system wide. i doubt that.
Your fourth point doesnt really hold much water either - where does it extend JetBlue's market that it's not in today? Maybe Dallas, and maybe Miami. Okay. There you go. But honestly, overall, I think JetBlue is doing just fine and I dont see any reason that from their perspective they should merge with AA. Maybe it would be good for AA, but that's nothing that JetBlue should be worrying about.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 8):
For many, many reasons. Firstly, JetBlue has exhausted many of its options in NYC in terms of growth opportunities. Secondly, AA and B6 are fierce competitors, and it eliminates competition on many routes for both, making them much, much stronger - if not dominating - on key markets from New York to California, Florida and the Caribbean. Thirdly, it provides B6 an opportunity to roll its product out into a much wider network, as a combined entity would no doubt use the B6 coach product. Fourthly, it extends the reach of JetBlue in New York to smaller and long-haul markets, allowing it to more effectively compete for business travel in NYC.


25 EddieDude : Well, for one they cannot add MEX, neither in the morning, nor in the afternoon, nor late at night. The bilateral only allows for 2 U.S. carriers on
26 HKG212 : I would argue that operating out of two separate terminals on opposite sides of the airport will be one of the biggest hurdles in turning JFK into an
27 AAplat4life : Does anyone else but me find Delta's new LGA strategy hard to accept? This an airport with a lot of delays, so turning it into a true connecting hub i
28 FlyASAGuy2005 : There will be limited connection opportunities and Delta knows this. Its only the members here that his trying to make this a hair more than what it
29 LipeGIG : Nothing wrong, just will not work. Try to compete LH A380 JFK-MUC and AA B763 and compare who gets First (easy, the 763 do not offer), Business and E
30 ERJ170 : 2 thoughts.. 1. Dropping a subsidized guaranteed profitable flight for a flight that would require connection to work? CrAAzy 2. Delta would jump on
31 slcdeltarumd11 : the swap was great for US. It allowed them to become THE National airline in the future. I think US is the real winner here and has a chance to reall
32 WA707atMSP : American has wanted to add NYC-MEX since the 1950s, but bilateral restrictions have stymied them for more than half a century. In 1957, EA was awarde
33 seatback : I'm with you. However, I've found their post bk strategy baffling and difficult to understand. That said, they're doing something right when they are
34 N62NA : Just to be clear - and to avoid any possible misinterpretation that you are actually saying that LipeGIG was incorrect, which he was not: The last LA
35 flyguy89 : Let me get this straight, you find AA's service levels disappointing at present....so you want them to merge with an airline that doesn't serve any t
36 flyby519 : I believe this (above) is the best solution to the problem. AA will never be the same as B6 in terms of cost or product. They have too much on their
37 mah4546 : Using that logic, Delta wouldn't have survived on any JFK route for the past decade, considering they have been using two-class planes with recliner
38 LipeGIG : Mark, to be honest, you seems not to understand my point. I was just replying to another member about the fact AA shall not focus on primary markets
39 N62NA : The inference is on the part of the reader. What LipeGIG posted was factually correct.
40 FlyASAGuy2005 : What's so baffling and hard to understand? Do you have some specifics? You mean like finally pulling out of a hub where you've been a distant #2 for
41 HKG212 : What is that based on? All Los Angeles area airports by my count do around 80 million pax a year, vs. more than 105 million in NYC.
42 STT757 : As you mentioned the NYC-MEX route authorities were originally awarded to Eastern and Pan Am, in 1987 or '88 CO took over EA's JFK-MEX flight. CO ope
43 mah4546 : Since when are JFKBRU, JFKMUC, JFKMAD, JFKMXP, JFKFCO, and JFKFRA secondary markets? Delta has been doing just fine serving them with a subpar produc
44 jfklganyc : LAX is the number 1 O and D airport in the world. But JFK LGA EWR HPN ISP and SWF serve the largest Metro area in the country. LA is a distant # 2 in
45 LAXdude1023 : NYC is the largest o&d market as a city and area in the US. However LAX produces the most o&d by single airport.
46 STT757 : Here's the first question I have with regards to AA's strategy in NYC, with their CH-11 filling I'm of the thinking that the ER3s are gone and soon. W
47 flyby519 : jetblue Kidding! (sort of) I am guessing they will switch around some E145s/CRJ700s to keep the LGA slots in use.
48 FlyASAGuy2005 : AA's first hurdle is to renegotiate contracts on the regional stuff. With the way things are going, it's getting to be more about scope and less abou
49 Post contains links flyby519 : I dont think APA has an option considering it will be done in BK court. Here is a graphic of legacy carriers scope clauses: http://www.centreforaviati
50 FlyASAGuy2005 : fully understand, which is why I said they're currently at a disadvantage to everyone else. We have to remember though, that before the judge can imp
51 LipeGIG : Now we are over a decade ? DL post Ch11 happens after 2001 AFAIK, and we're talking about potential future developments for AA and their strategy for
52 mah4546 : We are comparing it! You claim AA can't compete with its 763 product on key markets. Yet Delta has been competing effectively on these routes with a
53 DFWEagle : AA will add back the fifth JFK-LHR starting this summer, numbered AA138/139. AA142 JFK 09:40 LHR 21:30 777 daily AA100 JFK 18:15 LHR 06:25+ 777 daily
54 aajfksjubklyn : AA is still my hometown airline here in NYC. They offer a great product on most routes they fly (less their clunker 75's). Curious to see where this
55 FlyPNS1 : I think doing fine is an overstatement. Most of these routes on DL have struggled...only doing well for a few months in the summer. And DL has routin
56 N757ST : Delta is making billions of dollars, while American is losing hundreds of millions of dollars. Delta has also not grown except in the new York market
57 mogandoCI : AA went from #1 in NYC to #4 exactly because of slow-and-steady : they sat on their *** in JFK thinking everyone else was absolutely no threat (esp a
58 peanuts : Let's not forget though. Chapter 11 is not "just a formality" before everything will be dandy again. There is some pain involved. The more pain they g
59 seatback : This is why I was hoping that if/when Arpey would step down, an outsider would come in with fresh ideas and new ways of thinking. I think Horton is a
60 seatback : Examples? Isn't it a little too early to determine this?
61 LAXdude1023 : This I agree with. AA has to bite the bullet and suffer the pain, then the healing can begin. AA will no doubt exit smaller. How much smaller is anyo
62 seatback : Did DL/UA and NW emerge smaller?
63 American 767 : One of them will soon be a 773. That includes EWR-LHR right? BA flies EWR-LHR 2x daily. Ben Soriano
64 AeroWesty : BA's schedule for Summer 2012 is 8x JFK-LHR and 3x EWR-LHR plus 2x JFK-LCY. With AA's 5 to LHR this summer, that will make it a combined 13 for JFK-L
65 elmothehobo : Yes, they both did. Delta and Northwest entered Chapter 11 at the same time as separate airlines back in 2005. Delta is bigger now than it was in Cha
66 DFWEagle : No, the figure I gave does not include the EWR-LHR flights. BA will have 8x daily flights on LHR-JFK alone (7x744, 1x77W). Their LHR-EWR flights are
67 mah4546 : I'm in the minority, but I strongly disagree. Mainline will emerge barely smaller (I estimate a barely noticeable capacity drop, maybe ~5%), but quic
68 elmothehobo : You're probably spot on. They streamlined so much over the past decade (retiring the A300s, ex-TW 757s & 767s, Saab 340s and F100s; closing/downs
69 American 767 : 727s, MD-11s, ex-TWA 717s, ex-Reno MD-87/90s also. Look how many different types they had 10 years ago compared to what they have now. You forgot BNA
70 LipeGIG : And it could become 4 daily B77W in the future instead. What about a potential new route to LHR ? Ok i got your point but i never said JFK-FRA... i s
71 peanuts : Aren't AA pilots commanding more wages? How would this work for AA's bottom line? This is an interesting topic actually. Does anyone have figures on
72 mah4546 : Lufthansa uses angled lie flat seats in business, just like AA, even on the A380. You seem to be under the false impression that European carriers ar
73 jfk777 : Does AA have enough 777-300ER to have 4 JFK to LHR flights ? NO way.
74 mah4546 : AA will take delivery of 10 77W between OCT12 and OCT13, so, eventually, yes.
75 mogandoCI : Iberia is only 170 degrees, according to Seatguru.com. That's only angled lie-flat not true flat bed. Can't lump that together with BA or VS.
76 Post contains links AeroWesty : Old info. IB took out some seats to allow a 180° lie-flat in BusinessPlus with the current seat. The correct seat count and angle is here (in German
77 AsianDude : Why is it so many here on a.net are insistent that AA must merge to maintain any sort of profitability, ROI, relevance, or profits? Just because you'
78 rojo : And is the only premium route from a cornerstone station where they need only 1 plane to operate the roundtrip.
79 mogandoCI : The picture still shows angled lie-flat, not flat bed. The seat itself may be 180 from head to toe, but it's not flat bed when measured against the h
80 AeroWesty : One of the photos on the page is old, but the data is correct. Lots of data points on the interwebs to check it out if you're a non-believer. Now bac
81 Post contains links mogandoCI : Does this photo depict the latest seat ? http://en.flyerwiki.net/images/e/ee/Iberia-business-class-02.jpg If so, it's not true flat bed.
82 LONGisland89 : If you adjust flight times accordingly, not only JFK, but MIA, DFW, and ORD cornerstones can operate a LHR roundtrip with one airframe.
83 Post contains images mogandoCI : The Apple analogy only works if AA is much more premium than the rest of the airlines. But other than offering First Class (soon to be matched by UA@
84 jfk777 : IS AA going to use half its 77W fleet between JFK and LHR ? probably not. They will go to NRT and Sout America too, MIA to GRU and EZE will see a big
85 mah4546 : Iberia is 100% true lay flat. It removed one row of C from every plane, spaced the seats farther apart, and they go true lie flat. And now, IIRC, Ibe
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...
Cool New AA Ad -- An NYC Subway Car posted Mon Jan 3 2011 15:02:11 by qqflyboy
AA...Weird Cancellations Out Of NYC Tomorrow 10/27 posted Tue Oct 26 2010 18:52:16 by AAExecPlat
New AA Ads In NYC- Non-stop To RIO posted Sat Oct 23 2010 17:00:05 by VC10er
AA Testing Anti-missle Tech. On NYC- Flights. posted Wed Dec 19 2007 12:17:24 by BoeingFever777
AA Launches NYC Growth Initiative posted Thu Feb 22 2007 14:33:10 by Commavia
AA's New Advertising Campaign For CHI And NYC. posted Fri Sep 15 2006 08:52:53 by BALAX
2 Air Giants In Dogfight - AA Vs B6 - NYC posted Wed Feb 22 2006 03:44:43 by ChiGB1973
B6, HP, AA, UA, CO, DL In NYC-CA Game posted Tue Mar 16 2004 21:37:49 by Jetbluefan1
AA Flt.167 Returns To NYC Shortly After Take-off! posted Mon Feb 23 2004 18:52:25 by UA777222
Did AA Ever Fly NYC-Madrid? posted Mon May 26 2003 09:47:14 by Flyboy36y