travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 9:16 am

In the ongoing battle with United (and desire to have United Shuttle-type coverage), AA has announced new non-stop service to:
Denver (3 flts/day) (UA is probably pissed)
Oakland (4 flts/day)
Phoenix (5 flts/day)

In addition, it will increase service to Las Vegas (8 flts), San Jose (10 flts), and San Francisco (9 flts). This will throw it into direct competition with United Shuttle (and Southwest).

I think TWA will be even more annoyed with AA establishing 2 new non-stops to St. Louis.

In any case, I hope all these new routes from LAX mean lower fares!
 
HyperMike
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 1999 7:03 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 9:32 am

It's called competition. With fuel prices still sky high, airlines are going to start competing in the service arena. This will be very interesting.
 
HyperMike
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 1999 7:03 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 9:42 am

It's called competition. With fuel prices still sky high, airlines are going to start competing in the service arena. This will be very interesting.
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 10:42 am

That's pretty bold of AA.

Well, good luck...they sure as hell will need it!

FLY777UAL
 
HyperMike
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 1999 7:03 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 11:47 am

You know, it's nice to see the big guys going head to head for once. It seems like it's usually David vs. Goliath.
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 11:55 am

I agree. This time, too, no airline can cry "foul play"...

FLY777UAL
 
Guest

A Question!

Wed Apr 12, 2000 11:59 am

what does means "non-stop"


 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 12:43 pm

Don't forget the 4 new nonstops to Denver and 3 new nonstops to Phoenix from San Jose. Hub Warfare! It will be interesting to watch this story...AA's last foray from SJC nonstop to United's IAD hub didn't work too well.
 
Pilot1113
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:42 pm

RE: A Question!

Wed Apr 12, 2000 1:12 pm

I see that you're from PR... so I'll see if I can translate it.

non-stop = directo o con no layover al aeropuerto.

For example:

Si diseas ir a Indianapolis de Boston con American Airlines tu tienes que para en Miami y subes otros aeroplano a Indianapolis.

Al menos, en un directo vuelo es no layover. Vas directo a un destinación.

Espero que mi traducción sea tan bueno que mi español sea pobre.

Tenía un poco ayuda de Babel Fish de Altavista !  

- Neil Harrison
 
unitedchicago
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2000 1:44 pm

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 2:43 pm

United owns California.
 
Guest

RE: Pilot1113

Wed Apr 12, 2000 3:00 pm

An A+ for effort but the term is - sin escalas -
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 3:33 pm

As to United ‘owning’ California… I’m a native California resident and can attest to Uniteds poor service in the area. It is precisely Uniteds lack of competition on CA routes, particularly in San Francisco (where choice is limited) that United has run up legions of dissatisfied customers (I’m one of them!). AA will get my business before United.
 
The777Man
Posts: 5924
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 1999 4:54 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Wed Apr 12, 2000 6:14 pm

I was surprised that AA will not fly LAX-SEA or LAX-PDX. Otherwise this makes a lot of sense for them. They really had no need for a hub in RNO (sorry, RNO-folks). The777man
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777
 
Guest

RE:

Wed Apr 12, 2000 6:31 pm

AA code shares the LAX-SEA and LAX-PDX routes with Alaska Airlines.
 
Guest

A Question!...Thanks

Wed Apr 12, 2000 8:38 pm

Thanks...
I understand now.
a non-stop(sin parar)..
OK..
 
UNITED777ORD
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 12:54 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:02 am

American is going to hurt itself. They are a day late and a dollar short. United dominates the West Coast market. It is too bad that American Airlines seats are going to be empty at least 50% of the time on these flights!!!!!!!!!!!!
GET A CLUE AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
rominato
Posts: 258
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 1999 12:18 pm

Portland Could Use It...

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:34 am



The777Man wrote:
-------------------------------
I was surprised that AA will not fly LAX-SEA or LAX-PDX. Otherwise this makes a lot of sense for them. They really had no need for a hub in RNO (sorry, RNO-folks). The777man

PDX would love to have the increased competition I'm sure. I think thaat everyone here is looking for a major to have a "presence" in PDX. I believe Alaska is the biggest airline here, and United has a number of daily flights, but everyone else seems kind of sporadic. There's a little joke with my flight instructors about why we never do approaches at PDX around noon because that's the Delta rush. Seemingly all there flights go in and out at that time. If American were to make LAX a hub and increase daily service to Portland, I'm quite sure the people of Portland would appreciate it.
 
AC183
Posts: 1496
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 1999 10:52 am

RE: Portland Could Use It...

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:43 am

Could AA be trying to steal half of UA's LAX hub the way they did at ORD?
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

Question About AA Going To STL

Thu Apr 13, 2000 1:08 am

Now if I heard the original person right that AA is starting some non-stops to STL from LAX then my question is, what type of aircraft will AA be using on these flights? if they are using MD-80's then that may be a problem because TWA uses there brand new 757's and 767's on these flights. Now obviously people may like AA better than TWA, or TWA better than AA, but if you ask me, if AA uses something smaller on these routes like an MD-80 I sure hell would rather fly on a TWA 757 or 767 with in-flight entertainment and because they are larger to begin with.
Thanks for any input,
James
 
rominato
Posts: 258
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 1999 12:18 pm

RE: Question About AA Going To STL

Thu Apr 13, 2000 1:13 am


TrnsWrld wrote:
-------------------------------
if AA uses something smaller on these routes like an MD-80 I sure hell would rather fly on a TWA 757 or 767 with in-flight entertainment and because they are larger to begin with.

I seriously doubt that the average consumer goes so far as to find out what kind of plane they'd be flying, so it probably won't make much difference... My guess would be that if the customer is from St. Louis, they'll probably fly TWA. From anywhere else, it could be either...
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

RE: Question About AA Going To STL

Thu Apr 13, 2000 1:21 am

Yeah great point you made Rominato. I really didnt think about that, I guess I was thinking more like us that really care what we would be flying on. Another point is that I guess it would also come down to who has the better fair. And im also sure TWA has more flights to LAX anyway.
 
Pilot1113
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:42 pm

RE: Pilot1113

Thu Apr 13, 2000 5:20 am

Thanks!  

I've got family down in PR and I know fluently Spanish is spoken down there. I'm sad to say that I've only taken the 4 required years of Spanish in high school.

- Neil Harrison
 
flyaa757
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 1999 7:12 am

AA A/c On Ops

Thu Apr 13, 2000 6:20 am

While the scheds aren't in the computer yet, I'm betting on the following.

The intra-Cal flights, as well as PHX will be ex-QQ MD80s.

The DEN flights will be mainline MD80s and the STL will be a mix of M80/738.
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 6:39 am

So when the hell are the ex-QQ a/c going to get out of the "toothpaste" livery and into bare metal AA colors if ever?

I know they want to dump the M87/M90, but why not put the M82/83's into bare metal?
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 6:55 am

I also wish they would upgrade the ex-QQ planes' first class cabins to the standards of their regular mainline MD-80 first class cabins. Last time I was in it (LAX-SFO), the seats weren't that great. Maybe they've upgraded the cabins in the past 3 months...

In any case, it is interesting to see huge airlines attack each other's hubs. UAL started flying LAX-DFW and LAX-ATL, so maybe AA's response is to start flying to Denver... I wonder if Delta will do the same????

Of course, I hope LAX doesn't become like ORD, where 2 big airlines control most of the traffic (and the fares). I doubt that will happen though...
 
CannedSpam
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 8:18 am

RE: AA A/c On Ops

Thu Apr 13, 2000 7:00 am

Close....except for your thoughts on DEN and STL. Guess you will see on Sunday won't you?
 
flyf15
Posts: 6633
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:10 am

Den?

Thu Apr 13, 2000 10:49 am

Let me get this straight, American is going to fly LAX-DEN and SJC-DEN? What aircraft will be on the flights?
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 10:58 am

i can understand DEN and San Jose, and the other cities but St.Louis? the only reason i can think of that is just to piss off TWA. but lets see how twa responds
 
AACrew Chief
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 2:48 pm

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 11:15 am

The STL-LAX use to be in the route system several yrs ago and now it time to start it up again...Also look for more changes and more flt for LAX soon....
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 11:20 am

AAcrewchief,
More AA flights from LAX than have already been announced???

Why not:
LAX-ATL (to get under Delta's skin)
LAX-MSP (piss off Northwest)
LAX-DTW (why stop at Minneapolis?)
LAX-PIT (get rid of US Airways in the west)

They've already started LAX-HOU (Continental is probably thrilled).
 
AACrew Chief
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 2:48 pm

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 11:29 am

Yes Travelin man


I have heard up to as many as 25 more flt to service old and new market's
 
HyperMike
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 1999 7:03 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:14 pm

I hate to say this, folks, but United doesn't own California. The tax payers do. :-)

The carrier that does the most intra-California flights, and I need to find the facts to back myself up here, but I know they're out there, is Southwest. Yes, Southwest.
 
UNITED777ORD
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 12:54 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:21 pm

Where is American going to put all these flights? From what I've seen, the American terminal @ LAX isn't very big. The American Airlines terminal is going to be very congested at LAX because of all the new flights they're adding @ LAX. American is growing too fast out of LAX and they are going to hurt themselves!!
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:44 pm

Like United, AA uses parts of other terminals for its flights. Terminal 4 (which they recently expanded) is the AA terminal. They also use Terminal 3 for the ex-Reno Air flights (to San Jose and San Francisco). There is room for expansion in that terminal. They use part of Delta's terminal 5 for int'l flights. They also built an American Eagle remote terminal to free up additional gates in terminal 4.

They have the room.
 
Guest

RE: Travellin' Dope

Thu Apr 13, 2000 1:27 pm

LAX-STL is revenge for TWA's success in Puerto Rico/Caribbean eroding AA's SJU "hub".

LAX-DEN will fall on its face, as would LAX-MSP, LAX-ATL, LAX-DTW, and LAX-PIT.

Honestly folks, LAX-PIT?!?!?!???

Get a grip. AA is playing with fire by delving into others fortress hubs.

 
ryu2
Posts: 1546
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 8:18 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 2:09 pm

I believe that the main point of these flights is not so they can go head-to-head with UA, but rather to provide connections to AA's OneWorld partners CX and QF for the rest of the country.

Without the partners, establishing these new flights would make little sense.
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Thu Apr 13, 2000 2:24 pm

>>>I believe that the main point of these flights is not so they can go head-to-head with UA, but rather to
provide connections to AA's OneWorld partners CX and QF for the rest of the country. <<

Well, that's the theory anyway. AA would also love to get a crack at the intra-Cal shuttle scene.

>>> Without the partners, establishing these new flights would make little sense.<<<

I'd put it this way: The new flights make little sense, so let's talk about the partners for good measure.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: Barnaby

Fri Apr 14, 2000 2:25 am

Thank you for calling me "travellin dope". You have obviously been on this board much too long, as you have decided to resort to name-calling.

My tongue was planted firmly in cheek when suggesting AA's new flights to other airlines' fortress hubs. You say that it is folly for AA to consider these flights.

You seem to ignore the fact that United did exactly the same thing when establishing non-stop flights to DFW and Atlanta from LAX. So why not AA establish flights to Denver and St. Louis? I was also pointing out that AA has made room to expand at LAX.

Of course logic cannot win a battle with someone intelligent enough to call me "dope".

 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 2:44 am

Its called a joke Travellin man. Lighten up a bit.

>>>You seem to ignore the fact that United did exactly the same thing when establishing non-stop flights
to DFW and Atlanta from LAX. So why not AA establish flights to Denver and St. Louis? I was also
pointing out that AA has made room to expand at LAX. <<

Yes but United is United, and could justify such operations because of the LAX hub and their dominance in Cal. AA has neither, just a few overseas flights out of LAX and nowhere near the loyalty/recognition of UAL in Cal. They aren't just doing this for West Coast feed, they would genuinely like to compete in the intra-West market. That was the whole point of buying Reno, a quick Western expansion without significant risk or having to buy new aircraft. I think its folly because others have tried and failed to go head to head with UA. Granted the two are in good position to slug it out for a long while, but still seems dumb.
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 4:18 am

I suggest you have a careful look at http://www.untied.com/ if you want a true state of the difficulties that UAL are facing. They are not so impervious as you would seem to suggest. Also note AMR’s position as to UAL’s at http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fortune500/ of the Fortune 500, it would seem AMR has a bit more cash to vs. UAL to spend on upgrading terminals planes etc.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 5:55 am

>> AA has nowhere near the loyalty/recognition in Cal <<

Speaking as a resident of Southern California, an Aadvantage Gold Member, AND a United Premier Executive member, I can assure you that both airlines command respect and loyalty in California. I happen to know far more AA Platinum Executive members than United Premier Exec members, so I don't think your basis for saying AA doesn't have the loyalty of Californians is correct.

Also, UAL only recently began heavy intra-Cal service. Why do you not think that it can be duplicated???
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 7:15 am

>>>Speaking as a resident of Southern California, an
Aadvantage Gold Member, AND a United Premier Executive
member, I can assure you that both airlines command
respect and loyalty in California. I happen to know far
more AA Platinum Executive members than United Premier
Exec members, so I don't think your basis for saying AA
doesn't have the loyalty of Californians is correct.<<<

Wow! How much do you make a year?  

History has shown that the intra-Cal services will stand up on their own, provided the service comes from an airline with deep pockets and big-time name recognition. AA obviously fits the bill and will fill up those planes even if it means poor profit margins, which it invariably will. The Cal market is notorious for high-yield, low profit.

UA Shuttle can hardly be called a success...it fills up aircraft for sure, but rarely makes a profit on its own. It stands to prevent SWA, et al from stealing UA market share but more importantly to provide feed for UA's trans/inter cons services. AA's raiding others hubs is not just providing feed, it is an attempt to supplant UA's long haul services with AA's own. LAX-STL, LAX-DEN is an attempt to steal away TWA and UA pax that would otherwise continue on to with those airlines to overseas destinations. Given AA's pithy international network out of LAX (when compared to UA) these flights will not really be able to stand alone and will be gone by Christmas.

There is no real risk here for AA. How could there be with billions in the bank and the ex-Reno craft to play with?
 
UA744Flagship
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 1999 1:55 pm

Travelin Man

Fri Apr 14, 2000 7:22 am

What have you been smokin? UAL has been flying intra-cali since their SFO hub, est. in the early 60s or so. Speaking as a resident of *Northern* California, UA commands far more loyalty here than American. I hardly know any AA premiums. In fact, the SF Bay Area is home to the largest concentration of UA Elite in the *world*. Also, I travel down to LAX frequently and agree that both command loyalty and respect in *Southern* California. However, UA commands far more. It's simple: UA has 213 flts/per day (mainline) vs. 127 for AA. Simple economic impact proportion, yo.
Plus, the UA shuttle network in the west, and in California, is vast together with Skywests feed. Overall, it is unarguable that UA is the dominant airline in the west overall. (Remember the DEN hub, too?)
no wire hangers!
 
flyaa757
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 1999 7:12 am

AA A/c On Ops/Canned Spam

Fri Apr 14, 2000 7:42 am

Ok, so we have LAX-DEN/STL that I am wrong about.

The only logical choices are:
AA MD80
QQ MD80
QQ MD90
AA 738
AA 757s.

First of all, I've heard that the MD90's(which are needed for SNA anyway) will be gone by next year, so I'll bet those are out.

LAX-STL: Taking into account what others have said about TW competition, I'll now say AA uses 738s or 757s into STL. These a/c are more comfy than the Super 80s and have IFE. I'm pretty sure these will be silver a/c though.

LAX/SJC-DEN: Since I'm wrong about the mainline S80s, I guess I'll revise to either QQ MD80s or 757s. I don't see 738s being used into Denver from LAX since all ORD flights are M80/757s. I could always be wrong though.


 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: Travelin Man

Fri Apr 14, 2000 7:47 am

I don't argue that UAL is dominant in CA (although Southwest could have something to say about that). Believe me, many of my miles have been accrued flying the LAX-SFO Shuttle route.

The United Shuttle has only been around for about 6 years, I believe. Before that, Southwest was king, and before that, PSA and Aircal were dominant. I don't think it is unreasonable that AA would be able to take away some of the marketshare from both Southwest and UAL.

When I first started my job, I was only an Aadvantage member. However, when I started flying btwn northern and southern california, I started accruing UA miles, since AA had no service. Since AA began their service, I have used both airlines (although I've still used UA more).

AA was getting killed by not having intra-California/ West coast flights. The same people that buy those tix are the same people that buy transcon and int'l tix (duh). UAL realized this and built the Shuttle network.

AA is only belatedly realizing this. Will it be enough to recapture a lot of Californian passengers? I don't know. But it would be short-sighted to assume that people will stick with United just because they are United.

I don't favor one over the other, and as long as I remain elite with both, they can add all the service they want at LAX. (I do wish AA would expand its int'l presence to Latin America and Asia from LAX).
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 7:52 am

I don't see how AA is going to get rid of the MD90's. Reno was leasing them and when American bought Reno they simply took over the lease. But for some reason they can't be returned to the lessor.

This is bad news since nobody, and I mean nobody, will touch the -90.
 
CannedSpam
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 8:18 am

FLYAA757

Fri Apr 14, 2000 8:10 am

The MD-90 will only be flying two markets SNA-SF0 and SNA-SJC effective with the July second. SNA is where the MX base for the MD-90 is located and the only aircraft qualified to use the "E" slots at SNA on a daily basis. However, there has not been any definite plans to get rid of them yet. Although I would personally like to see them go away tomorrow, the lease on some of them is a little binding.

The LAX-STL trip is a MD80 and will begin June 1. But, you are correct that they will be silver aircraft. AA does not want the ex-QQ MD80/7 or MD90 flying anything other than west coast cities like SEA, PDX, RNO, SJC, LAX, SFO, PHX, DEN, SAN, COS, and the RNO-ORD trip if absolutely needed. AA prefers not to have the white aircraft to mix in with the rest of the system therefore, you won't see them on any trip other than a west coast city to one of the "west coast" cities listed above. However, AA does not mind (obviously) to mix the white and silver on the west coast. I think you will see that this is the case this coming Sunday.

 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 8:18 am

Though you may not see as many of AA planes in the intra-Cal network, often overlooked by is the extensive code sharing that AA that does with it’s partners Alaska Airlines and international One World partners British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Quantas, and soon to be Aer Linges. There is significant enough traffic on these carriers to match UAL out of LAX in this matter. Internationally these partner notably Cathay Pacific in Asia that scores notably higher in customer satisfaction than United. I think UAL could be overestimating the competition.
 
Guest

RE: AA Attacks UA/TWA @ LAX

Fri Apr 14, 2000 8:22 am

: ) Silly me : )

Overestimating should be underestimating, also what about the rest of the SoCal network such as Orange County, Ontario, San Diego, Burbank, etc etc etc..? Oh and there is Hawaiian Airlines.
 
UA744Flagship
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 1999 1:55 pm

Agreed (Travelin Man) & Touchee (LBSteve)

Fri Apr 14, 2000 9:58 am

Travelin Man:
Ah, thanks for clarifying some of my misinformation. I thought that UA had been in Cali since the 60s, but I guess only since the 80s? (They must have expanded the service to capitalize on the demises of PSA and Aircal. Today we see SW and UA in the former two airlines shoes, I guess). It was my understanding that UAL had some intra-CA routes before Sh*ttle though (Sh*i*ttle sucks, BTW). I thought that to create the shuttle they specifically converted the semi-new (~10 years?) intra-CA/west routes that were bleeding to SW?

LBSteve:
Yes, I do believe UA underestimates the competition. But -- keep in mind that UALs 213 flts exists as of today and AA's 127 will exist *after* all the expansion. Also, consider Skywests 150 flts or so daily compared to AA Eagles. (I don't know how much AA Eagle has, but surely it's less than 100 -- *total* intra-CA flights even taken into account).
Concerning AA's codeshare partners: yes, AA does have a lot of major codeshares at LAX, but UA has a not-too-shabby codeshare network also. After all, most Star Alliance carriers fly into LAX and transfer connecting passengers to UA (LH. NH, TG, AN, ANZ, MX, etc.)

But wait -- there's more I have to say!
Playing Devil's advocate, I flew AA to LAX and back two days ago and must say they offer a much superior service to Sh*ttle at the same price. The Super 80s are nice equipment, although they have no IFE. Comfy planes -- better suited than UA's cramped config on the 737 shuttles. I also enjoyed AA's new interiors and seats very much. I thought the interior decor was very tasteful, but the seats both in coach and First (though aesthetically pleasing and comfortable) seemed shabbily constructed and were already falling apart. Nice seats, but how long will they last?
no wire hangers!