ContinentalEWR
Topic Author
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 10:59 am

While United Airlines has completed the introduction of "p.s" service on its JFK-LAX/SFO routes, and with Delta replacing mainline with Song on the same markets, and to Seattle, and increased competition from jetBlue with its new service to Burbank from JFK, what is American Airlines going to do with its transcontinental flights? They are operated for the most part, from JFK with 767-200ER's to LAX/SFO. Will AA resort to 757's as well? If so, in 3 class cabins or 2 class?

ContinentalEWR
 
N62NA
Posts: 3998
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:00 am

Well, I was on AA flight 4 LAX-JFK last week. The plane was in great shape and the 3 cabins make even coach seem quite intimate without seeming cramped (I was in coach).
 
miaskies
Posts: 1231
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 3:08 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:37 am

JFK is preety much the only airport serving LAX and SFO with 762's on AA.
MIA has 763 & 752 service to both LAX & SFO. Although in Feb my SFO-MIA 763 flight was replaced by 762 for that day, nice treat!
Nothing better than making love at 35K Feet!
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:40 am

i've flown AA MIA-LAX before last november. The aircraft was a 763 in excellent shape. From what I've heard, the AA 762s are in terrific shape as compared to the recently retired UAL 762s (Then again they are also a few years younger.) AA still has a few years with the 762s on transcons and after that, the 777 is a possibility.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
miaskies
Posts: 1231
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 3:08 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:44 am

HMMMM or possibly 787's for transcon? makes sense!
Nothing better than making love at 35K Feet!
 
deltaflyertoo
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 3:18 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:53 am

I've wondered this same question too. Especially since the 762s are getting up there in age. ANd for the most part that is the only route they are good for in the AA system, JFK-LAX/SFO. So from an efficieny case its not the best. I don't know why they don't just get rid of the 767-200s and go w/ the 763 and cut frequency.
 
nwcoflyer
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:55 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:58 am

AA is not in shape to buy 787s, however, I think it would be a good 3 class plane for transcon runs.
The New American is arriving.
 
padcrasher
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:17 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:59 am

I'm betting on a reduction in capacity, whether it be less frequency or lower gauge. Jetblue in Burbank is going to be big drain on market share. How many flights will they have 5? Many of these NYC flyers come to/from the Valley and would not go to LGB for Jetblue, but BUR is another matter. Then you have Song offering a better coach product and actually more coach seats than AA. A huge boost in Delta's capacity here.
 
N62NA
Posts: 3998
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:08 pm

Quoting Deltaflyertoo (Reply 5):
ANd for the most part that is the only route they are good for in the AA system, JFK-LAX/SFO.

Well, I am still hoping against all hope that AA will someday upgrade EWR-LAX to "Premium Transcon" (or whatever they call it) service with the 762!
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13174
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:12 pm

Interesting this topic comes up, today's NY Times has an interesting article about Trans-Cons and the LCC effect.

"From the NY Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/03/business/yourmoney/03airline.html

Budget Airlines Set Off on a Cross-Country

Joy Ride
By MICHELINE MAYNARD

Published: April 3, 2005


FIVE years ago, flying across the United States was much the same as it had been throughout much of the jet age. Passengers booked a ticket on one of the big airlines, like United or American, and paid an average of $600 round-trip in coach class unless they snagged a discount.

As recently as 2000, major airlines had a lock on 85 percent of transcontinental business, defined as trips of 2,000 miles or more within the 48 contiguous states. Most offered at least two classes of service, sometimes three, with hot meals and all the other amenities customers came to expect on long flights.

"It was really a market that the big legacy carriers had all to themselves," said Darin Lee, a senior economist with LECG, an economics forecasting and consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass.

Not any more. Low-fare airlines have been gobbling market share throughout the industry, and they are now focusing on the transcontinental market with a vengeance. Cross-country flights account for almost half the business that the low-fare companies have added during this decade, LECG estimates."
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13174
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:18 pm

Quoting Padcrasher (Reply 7):
m betting on a reduction in capacity, whether it be less frequency or lower gauge.

I would say that's a safe bet, NYC-California is turning into another NYC-Florida market. The airlines that will fly the routes will make little to no money, and they will only offer the service because so many people want to travel those routes.

Look for more 757s and 737NG (700s, 800s etc), with SONG in LAX and SFO and B6 in Burbank I would say the glory days of premium trans-con flying is over.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:22 pm

Look for more 757s and 737NG (700s, 800s etc), with SONG in LAX and SFO and B6 in Burbank I would say the glory days of premium trans-con flying is over.

Yet, it is still one of the only markets left in the US where there is a high demand for premium seats. The problem is that there isn't room for United and AA to make the hefty profits they are used to making on these routes. Hence, the competition to offer the best product.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13174
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:28 pm

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 11):
Hence, the competition to offer the best product.

Hard for AA and UAL to compete with each other with their premium offerings when it's B6 winning all the awards for their basic economy offerings.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:29 pm

Quoting NWcoflyer (Reply 6):
AA is not in shape to buy 787s, however, I think it would be a good 3 class plane for transcon runs.

AA has the cash to buy new planes, but they also have priorities to deal with before new planes. I would not at all be surprised to see them order the 787 within 18 months. Though they wasted on transcons.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 8):

Well, I am still hoping against all hope that AA will someday upgrade EWR-LAX to "Premium Transcon" (or whatever they call it) service with the 762!

I wouldn't count on that ever happening.
a.
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5467
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:30 pm

Well perhaps they will add some East-West coast flights from somewhere other than Florida and New York.. like a RDU-Los Angeles area flight.. I'm still flabbergasted why there isn't one with such a good O&D value (444 daily pax).

And I would not look to AA for that route anymore...
Aiming High and going far..
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:46 pm

Quoting Deltaflyertoo (Reply 5):
I don't know why they don't just get rid of the 767-200s and go w/ the 763 and cut frequency.

Well, one, business travelers and vacationers alike prefer frequency. As it is, they have to compete with more than 15 (after BUR) area flights per day from B6, many from DL, UA and even a flight from HP. AA needs to keep frequency on the route. The 762 allows this. AA owns what is left of the premium market on the LAX-JFK run, which is why UA had to introduce p.s., to try to hang on to some sort of market share. A 787 would be perfect for this run, and at some point, AA is likely to have them
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
ckfred
Posts: 4694
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:04 pm

MAH4546:

A friend of mine is a 757/767 F/O. He keeps hearing rumors that AA will put in an order for 787s at some point. If it happened tomorrow, it would not surprise him, altough he thinks it's still a few months off, and it will be for deliveries in 2010 or later.

The talk among pilots is whether AA buys any of the -3 model. The 767-200s have a few years left in them. And he doesn't expect the situation at ORD to get better for a number of years. Residents around ORD will try to tie up expansion in court, and it will take 4 east-west runways to start adding capacity.

So, there is a belief that AA might use -3s out of ORD to the West Coast, just so that it can use some of those slots for other routes. Then, once ORD loses its restrictions, they could be used on transcons.

But again, it's a lot of speculation.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:06 pm

I definitley think AA will go for both 788s and 783s. The 783s are perfect for short/medium haul international flights from Miami and NYC. Putting them on ORD-West Coast is a complete waste of resources.
a.
 
aa777flyer
Posts: 1017
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:45 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:15 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 13):
AA has the cash to buy new planes, but they also have priorities to deal with before new planes. I would not at all be surprised to see them order the 787 within 18 months. Though they wasted on transcons.

They do???? Where???? With oil prices spiking, yeilds declining and a forcast loss this year of around $2B? Dont get me wrong, I dont want to see it. I really dont think AA will avoid CH11 this time around. They are already hinting of more pay cuts which the TWU, APA, APFA will NEVER give. It will take a judges order in CH11 to happen.
The TSA was created to make the post office look efficient!
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:28 pm

My guess is that AA may be looking at upgrading their later-production 767-200's into something designed for better premium class service than what UA is offering on their p.s. configured 757-200's. After all, there's still quite a lot of premium traffic between LAX and JFK, and many premium passengers would like to fly in a roomier widebody jet!  bigthumbsup 
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Tue Apr 05, 2005 11:58 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 10):
I would say that's a safe bet, NYC-California is turning into another NYC-Florida market.

I think you're reading the market wrong. A large percentage of the premium market between NYC-LAX/SFO is driven by corporate/entertainment sectors, with the passengers themselves having few options within corporate contracts with the airlines. Corporate travel agents have lists of who flies in what class based upon their ranking within the company. The dynamics of the market are completely different from that of NYC-Florida.

AA has always dominated the LAX-JFK sector, even running up to 7 or 8 747's per day each way in the early 80's. They absorbed the #3 performer on the route, TWA, in 2001. I wouldn't think they'll sit idle for too long if UA's p.s. service begins to draw premium passengers away from their frequent service, and upgrade it appropriately.
International Homo of Mystery
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 12:03 am

Quoting Aa777flyer (Reply 18):

They do???? Where???? With oil prices spiking, yeilds declining and a forcast loss this year of around $2B? Dont get me wrong, I dont want to see it. I really dont think AA will avoid CH11 this time around. They are already hinting of more pay cuts which the TWU, APA, APFA will NEVER give. It will take a judges order in CH11 to happen.

It is called cash reserves, and AA has more cash in hand than any other cartel carrier.
a.
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 12:58 am

Hard for AA and UAL to compete with each other with their premium offerings when it's B6 winning all the awards for their basic economy offerings.

Please, STT. You know as well as I do that it doesn't matter how many awards B6 wins for their service. The real money is in the premium product--AA and UA compete there.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 1:11 am

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 22):
You know as well as I do that it doesn't matter how many awards B6 wins for their service. The real money is in the premium product--AA and UA compete there.

Real money huh? B6 is making real money while AA and UA are losing real money. Still, I agree on the premium market point, and AA currently has that by the short and curlies
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
UnitedStarGold
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:51 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:15 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23):
Real money huh? B6 is making real money while AA and UA are losing real money.

Are you referring to the JFK-LAX/SFO routes in particular, or the companies in general?
"The education of a man is never completed until he dies." - Gen. R.E. Lee
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 5:03 am

Real money huh? B6 is making real money while AA and UA are losing real money.

American and United and all the majors have their fair share of problems. JFK-LAX/SFO is (was for Delta, and becoming that way for American) one of the few brightspots remaining.

Still, I agree on the premium market point, and AA currently has that by the short and curlies

Proof please. We've heard nothing except that PS has been a success. If PS is a success, then presumably AA has taken a cut on those routes.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
padcrasher
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:17 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 5:09 am

Once again people are overstating the premium revenue in these markets. By in large they are a shadow of what they once were. The revenue that has fallen the most is the F/C products. It is not like it was before guys.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1615
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:22 am

AA can do well keeping the 762s in these markets. They can cater to the cost-conscious business and leisure travelers in coach while still offering an excellent first and business class product.

And it appears this is what AA is doing, as the transcons were among the last domestic flights to lose hot meal service in coach. Now you can purchase a meal in coach, a sign that AA is catering to the cost conscious and competing with the likes of B6 and Song, while still offering that revenue generating premium service in first and business.

It must be working. AA dropped some frequencies post 9/11 between LAX and JFK, but those flights are back, plus some. LAX-JFK is up to 12 flights a day, all on 762s. SFO has five flights a day to JFK, three on 762s and two on 763s.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:33 am

Quoting UnitedStarGold (Reply 24):
Are you referring to the JFK-LAX/SFO routes in particular, or the companies in general?

A little of both. UA had to downgauge and go with p.s. because of pressure on their lower end by B6, who have the costs and structure to make money in Y. Also, B6 does not only sell $200 roundtrips, they sell a range of fares. What they did end is the $1,500 walkup in Y

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 25):
Still, I agree on the premium market point, and AA currently has that by the short and curlies

Proof please. We've heard nothing except that PS has been a success. If PS is a success, then presumably AA has taken a cut on those routes.

The reason p.s. was created is because UA needed to hold what premium demand they had left. AA holds almost all of the corporate contracts that will still buy the forward cabin out of LAX, as well as having its traditionally stronger presence at JFK. Any success p.s. is having means UA is protecting their position, not getting stronger as p.s. is a major cut in capacity for them. As it is, a 757 with less that 160-170 seats is a CASM monster and UA is only flying with around 110. That means they need to actually sell (not upgrade) the forward cabin and should be commanding a premium they are not in the back (you can fly Y+ on p.s. for the same price as any other airline).
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
laca773
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 8:58 am

I have taken UA p.s. with my Mother both in Y and J and it was excellent, well beyond our expectations and the only other comparable carrier on this transcon is CO but they do EWR and not JFK. The new p.s. aircraft are very nice and the Y product is upgraded. Hats off to UA for taking a huge risk with this. The service is much better than it ever was and that's saying a lot considering what their financial situation is and all the horrid labor problems. DL used to have a great product but it's horrible now, like AA's.

Considering what AA has done with their LAX/SFO-JFK-LAX/SFO service, I'll take UA then, Song if I want a low cost ticket at the last minute. Song's product is excellent and out beats AA's in a long shot with IFE and decent, BOB program compared to AA. Otherwise, I'd take B6 if traffic wasn't an issue from where I live in the Santa Monica area. For those who live in the San Fernando Valley, and the Northern parts of the San Gabriel Valley, I feel B6 will make a killing in the transcon market as they'll get a better product, overall. Why bother driving to LAX when their's an excellent and better offering out of BUR on B6.

In regards to AA's other transcons to BOS, IAD, MIA, FLL, MCO, TPA, UA wins again with a much better inflight product where they're still serving meals with the exception of MIA [only carrier on that route from what I know is AA]. It's true it's not as great as their p.s. product but it still beats AA's inflight service offerings.

I hope AA will reconsider their BOB program on flights of 4.5+ hours as I feel they'll lose out over UA for premium passengers on the JFK runs on B6/Song for the low fare leisure travelers and then the other transcons, UA still has a better product.

Have a great day, everyone.
LACA773
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13174
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:05 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 20):
A large percentage of the premium market between NYC-LAX/SFO is driven by corporate/entertainment sectors

A-listers fly Teterboro-Van Nuys, Burbank or Santa Monica, B-listers fly commercial.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 22):
The real money is in the premium product--AA and UA compete there.



Quoting RJpieces (Reply 25):
We've heard nothing except that PS has been a success. If PS is a success, then presumably AA has taken a cut on those routes.

MRTC was supposedly equally as successful, people were always bragging that they would only fly AA because of the leg room. The problem was that AA taking out seats on their aircraft were not compensated with higher air fares, their CASMS on their aircraft skyrocketed while airfares plummeted.

MRTC was very popular with travelers, but business wise for AA it exasperated their situation in an already depressed market.

Taking 70 seats out of a 757 means you really have got to be raking people over the coals for those First Class and Business Seats to compensate, you almost have to sell every seat for the highest possible price everytime.

The high end Domestic First Class of UAL's PS and AA's (what ever their call it) on trans-cons is being eaten away from below by LCCs like Jetblue and soon Song, as well as Corporations and wealthy individuals investing in fractional jet ownership.

Netjets and Jetaviation are poaching the high end Trans-Con traffic and the LCC's are poaching the low end, if a Company like for example Sony (used for an example) wants to send 4 executives from NY to LA for a meeting they could book them all on AA or UAL or use a Netjets Falcon aircraft from Teterboro to Burbank for nearly the same amount of money. If they have fractional ownership with other companies (Sony BTW owns their own aircraft) their costs are spread out.

I think UAL's PS will not last too long because there's no way (IMO) that they can make money flying a 757 with 100 seats, between people using mileage upgrades , corporate discounts etc I don't see where they are going to generate enough premium fares to offset their huge CASM to fly the aircraft. They are going to be flying a 757 3,000 miles with the same amount of seats as a 737-500 or DC-9-30.

In two years it's likely AA will be the only full service carrier on the JFK-LAX and JFK-SFO markets, however they will not have the same levels of service. Definetly gone within the next fews years are dedicated 767-200s soley for Trans-Cons, instead I would expect them to switch to International 767-300s which they will try to get extra turns out of instead of sitting on the ground at JFK. And I would not be surprised if in a year or two JFK-LAX for AA was not soley widebodies (mostly though, 5/7), JFK-SFO I really expect to go almost all narrowbodies in the next two years. Perhaps 5 or 6 daily flights with 2 767-300s and 4 757s.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
american762
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:05 am

I will be taking the JFK-LAX/LAX-LAS/LAS-DFW/DFW-JFK route in late April aboard my beloved AA 767-200. I've flown on the aircraft so many times that it's become one of my favorite to fly. (Hence my username!). The 762's are in wonderful shape, and they bring back something special to flying non-international again. The 3 classes deffinately offer an intimate setting, given I've only flown in F once...once in Y...and about 6 roundtrips in J aboard these aircraft. Everyone always gets down on American because they still use "old" 767's. Give me a 20 year old widebody in excellent condition over a brand new 738-NG any day. I'd much rather fly in the comfort of a widebody, than the cramped cabin of a 737 or 757, for any period over 3 hours.

Sincerely,
American762
Pan Am has a place of its' own. You call it the world, we call it home.
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 12:22 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 21):
It is called cash reserves, and AA has more cash in hand than any other cartel carrier.

So what, with losses in excess of $500 million a year, those reserves are dwindling. Especially considering that a 20+ aircraft order would cost AA over $2.5 billion, they would be in Ch. 11 afterward. Despite the fact that they have the most cash of the majors, they are still loosing hefty amounts of money, so no aircraft order will be likely in the next few years. If there is, it will be small, maybe a 10-aircraft 787 order, but nothing more.

Jeremy
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1615
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:36 pm

American calls their premium transcon service AFS, or American Flagship Service.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
User avatar
American 767
Posts: 3924
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:30 pm

American762,welcome to airliners.net
I'm like you, I fly American Airlines all the time and for the same reason as you, my username is American 767. But I fly mostly on the 300 Series, because the 200's no longer fly across the pond (unless there is a subsitute equipment, but if normal operations are maintained as scheduled then you'll see all 300's on intercontinental flights). The 200's, 16 of which are left at American, are seen only on the JFK-LAX-JFK and JFK-SFO-JFK routes, I would definitely prefer to fly on that one instead of a 737 or a 757 narrowbody aircraft. I used to fly on 762's on transatlantic routes for many years. I haven't been on a 200 for over two years.
Yes I think so too, that the next aircraft type American will order is the 787 to replace the 767. First the 200ER's (the non ER are retired already) on transcons, those are 18 years old already, then in the long run the 300ER's on international flights. An order for 787's is probably two, three or four years from now, but you'll see 767-300ER's till at least late next decade.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium
Ben Soriano
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: The Future Of AA Trancons

Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:41 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 30):
A-listers fly Teterboro-Van Nuys, Burbank or Santa Monica, B-listers fly commercial.

If you're going to quote me, at least do it right.  talktothehand 
International Homo of Mystery