I have actually heard rumors from several sources regarding PVD-MIA. AA probably wont do PVD-DFW untill the demand literally breaks the door down ( I.E. a full MD80 to ORD in continuing to DFW). MIA can be done since there are no low fare connections to be made form MIA, where as DFW a pax can connect to LAS PHX LAX, OAK, SAN etc when AA matches SW's $99 fare. AA being a large airline, they sure do like to run from SW. They tend to have negetive reactions to SW markets. PVD they added some service, but only becuase the demand form the 120% increase in pax over 2 years literally forced them to. Simmilarly, MHT will not get AA service untill the demand literally breaks the door down. At BDL AA has added a seasonal to SJu and a seasonal to MIA, non-low fare cities, while at the same time, they will drop a BDL-STL flight. AA tends to be like the big German shepherd running from the little yapping chihuahua. While i can understand being cautious with these markets for financial reasons, i think there are many cases where the majors loose money. If we look at 9/11, i dont beleive any of those flights had over 100 people on them and they were all comming from major non-SW airports, where the majors at PVD and MHT often poster well over 80% loads on the majority of flights. Seems to me like they will put a flight on a city where they know they will ahve 10 high paying passengers and hope that it will fill, which in most cases they do not, rather than fill every seat at a lower fare, and make more $$. Its one of those things that has arguments for both sides, yet i think AA tends to take it too far sometimes. Can anyone think of an Airport where AA mainline ( not RDU, thats AAE) and SW both have large presences 9 other than LAX, cuz every airline does)....i couldnt think of any.
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!