mbj-11
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 2:29 am

AA Too Large?

Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:41 pm

Is AA too large or getting to large? I mean they basically are the Walmart of the skies on this side of the globe and that may not be too good a sign. I know they've been having labour issues and the talk surrounding a/c replacement has been hovering around the place, but somehow when I see them today I am reminded of Pan Am in their heyday.
Should they probably cut their operations into subsidiaries and do a GM style operation? Or are they good to keep going?
Jesus is the Christ and he alone saves
 
aa757first
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:40 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:14 am

I'm not sure how an airline gets too large. AA only has a 15% market share for domestic flying. And what do you mean by "Wal-Mart of the skies"?
 
lrdc9
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:27 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:16 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
they basically are the Walmart of the skies

How so. They certainly aren't the cheapest airline out there for fares.
Just say NO to scabs.
 
sw733
Posts: 5298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:21 am

As long as they can get me there on time, on safe planes, and with nice people, I don't give a darn how big they are...just means they can get me more places. They aren't my favorite airline, not even in the USA, but they're a good airline, and no, I don't think they are too big at all...odd question.

The Wal-Mart thing intrigues me too...

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
Should they probably cut their operations into subsidiaries and do a GM style operation?

Yep...if there is ever a model of financial success in the USA, it's GM...
 
doug
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 1999 8:54 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:42 am

I have always kinda pegged Southwest as the Wal-Mart of airlines.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13174
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:55 am

I think AA needs to be leaner but that does not mean they are too large, I just think they need to trim their fleet types and eliminate some point to point flying. I would also totally eliminate the STL focus City/hub, I know the STL folks don't want to hear that but it's probably in AA's best interest.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Rbgso
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:15 pm

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:00 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
Is AA too large or getting to large?

Given the fact that most "experts" say the industry needs consolidation, I don't see how one can consider AA too large.

On the other hand, I personally don't agree that consolidation needs to happen. Once a company reaches a certain size, it becomes next to impossible to consistently manage successfully so that everyone is on the same page, so to that extent I do see the point of your question.
 
mbj-11
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 2:29 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:14 am

Quoting Aa757first (Reply 1):
I'm not sure how an airline gets too large. AA only has a 15% market share for domestic flying. And what do you mean by "Wal-Mart of the skies"?

In the sense that they have from what I understand the largest operations of any carrier this side of the globe. Am I wrong?
Correct me (without condition) if I am . Also, like Walmart they are able to stifle the competition while cornering the market.
Jesus is the Christ and he alone saves
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:19 am

AA has a good accounting department. They AREN'T as large in Capacity than Delta, they AREN'T as large in networking as UA, but they seem to utilize their aircraft well and offer more connections and connecting times than any other airline. Actually, I may be wrong about the capacity, but they are very comprehensive in what they do. They carefully pick out their routes and are generally VERY conservative with their future plans. They have a great partnership with BA and JL, so basically, you can get to any major city in the world with only one or two stops, transiting ORD, DFW, JFK, LAX, NRT or LHR.

They started the wave of having only twins in their fleet plan (other than WN, which is an entirely different airline) and they are trimming the subtypes in the fleet to only 3 or 4 types, as is their longterm plan.

Hardly the "Wal-Mart" of Airlines.

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
sw733
Posts: 5298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:22 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 7):
In the sense that they have from what I understand the largest operations of any carrier this side of the globe

Some airline somewhere in the world has to be the largest.
 
D328
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:50 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:51 am

WN in my opinon is the "Walmart of the skies".
 
1MillionFlyer
Posts: 1937
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:55 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:54 am

Quoting D328 (Reply 10):
WN in my opinon is the "Walmart of the skies".

It's funny that WN pays their employees better than AA yet they have a bad reputation on anet for being cheap LOL
Golf Foxtrot you are cleared for departure
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:54 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
I would also totally eliminate the STL focus City/hub, I know the STL folks don't want to hear that but it's probably in AA's best interest.

Care to elaborate? STL just turned the biggest revenue increase(%) out of any of AA's hubs. STL does well for AA.
PHX based
 
Ryanair!!!
Posts: 4071
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 8:55 pm

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:24 am

There is nothing wrong with being the largest airline on the globe. If they expand, ground suport should theoratically expand relatively with the company. If they can support further growth, why not?
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 875
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:35 am

Quoting 1MillionFlyer (Reply 11):
It's funny that WN pays their employees better than AA yet they have a bad reputation on anet for being cheap

It is funny that WN pays well, but what's no funny is that WN employees are some of the most productive ($$/hour vs Work units per hour) in the industry... I don't doubt that AA would pay more if they could gain more flexible work rules and higher productivity... bottom line AA pilots want the pay without any added work... just not going to happen imho...

Quoting 777STL (Reply 12):
Care to elaborate? STL just turned the biggest revenue increase(%) out of any of AA's hubs. STL does well for AA.

your right.. from the Q3 conference call that is the case... the the question that was not posed or answered is where the base line was... for example, if ORD had base line RASM of 2.00 per ASM, but STL had base line RASM of 1.00 per ASM then STL would have to more than double the RASM per ASM just to keep pase with the system....


Is AA to Big? I'm not one to judge.. Personally I've always been impressed how diverse they are, and I think Arpey is right, that they need to evaluate each asset on an individual basis and it's NPV... while the stock holders may want immediate increase in stock price, perhaps they need to look forward at the fact that AMR is more diverse than any non government back airline in the world...
Why do I fly???
 
bok269
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 10:19 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:52 am

Quoting SW733 (Reply 9):

Some airline somewhere in the world has to be the largest.

AA is the largest in terms of fleet size and total passenger-miles. AF/KL is largest in terms of revenue.

Source:
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/american_airlines.htm As well as Aviation Week and Space Technology.
"Reality is wrong, dreams are for real." -Tupac
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:29 pm

Quoting 777STL (Reply 12):
Care to elaborate? STL just turned the biggest revenue increase(%) out of any of AA's hubs. STL does well for AA.

Additionally, they can use the STL hub as a reliever of sorts for the ORD hub, much like what CO does with CLE and EWR, respectively.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:14 pm

AA has managed so far to avoid filing chapter 11 bankruptcy which many large airlines have been unable to do. It seems to me if they were too large, they would not have remained solvent all this time.

[Edited 2007-10-19 16:15:16]
 
albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 12:17 am

AA although may be big in amount of aircraft they have, they dont serve that many destinations outside there side of the world. You look at BA for instance and they fly to nearly every major place in the world.
AA i dont think are like Pan Am yet and never will be but they are very cautious on there routes. I think actually a big hand needs to be given to AA who were one of the only major carriers in the USA to not file for chapter 11 and i think that they were actually one of the biggest hit by 9/11 (as along with UA it was their planes that were in the incident).
To be fair the other carriers actually used Chapter 11 as a springboard there to get new aircraft and open up new routes and a new buisness plan when AA stuck it through and made a lot of cutbacks (and management mad a foolish move) but they have actually plowed through and are slowly making a comeback
I do think though that now we are seeing the drawbacks of AA doing this and as soon as they can get all this pilot/ FA legal stuff over and done with, AA will flurish again and i wouldnt be suprised to see a better service on board.
 
lrdc9
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:27 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:26 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
I would also totally eliminate the STL focus City/hub

I think thats actually a great place to operate out of. Good connectivity.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 8):
Actually, I may be wrong about the capacity,

Bingo. You are. They have like 600+ a/c.
Just say NO to scabs.
 
SkyyMaster
Posts: 1082
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:34 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:21 am

Quoting 1MillionFlyer (Reply 11):
It's funny that WN pays their employees better than AA yet they have a bad reputation on anet for being cheap LOL

Exactly. And they generally have better service and their employees attitudes are MUCH better overall than AA's.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1968
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:21 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
Is AA too large or getting to large?

No.

Signed,

St. Louis.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
I know the STL folks don't want to hear that but it's probably in AA's best interest.

If it wasn't in "their best interest", they wouldn't have come in the first place.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 1932
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:41 pm

I think people say get rid of STL, becasue its "too close to ORD" really mean "its not true AA".

Point to point flying is, IMHO a very good idea. There is a better chance that delays will be less and yield will be higher, versus a one-stop via a hub, P2P is also likely to increase RASM, increase utilisation of both aircraft and gates. Funnelling all traffic through a hub is not always a good idea, remember LHR and BA last Christmas?

The American fleet is not all that diverse, MD80, 738, 757, 767, 777.. In a fleet of 600+ aircraft this is sustainable. Just becasue an aircraft is "old" does not mean costs will be significantly more, as the asset will be more ikely to be owned, haven been depreciated. Also MX have a better chance to find 3rd pary parts vendors or refurbished parts, again reducing costs. Look at SAS, they fly AvroRJ,, F50, DHC8, 733,735,736,73G,738, MD80, A319,A321, A330 &A340, in a fleet of 170 aircraft.

A lot of broad, sweeping statements are made about airlines, like "commonality" too many hubs" and "duplication". Some aspects of AA are not ideal, sure, but to make these statements smacks of ignorance about the reality. Employees looking for increases is aloso somewhat premature, IMHO, its only a $175 million profit, its not like AA is awash with cash. A lot of airlines make similar money with a fleet a fraction of the size. Im sure the people of American work hard for thier money, but the money might be better spent on building a product people will actaully pay for.
Target the people who would fly AA for the the product, not those who will fly someone else to save $5. You dont see BA or SQ giving away ipgrades like confetti, thus their product has value and exclusivity, is suitably presented and priced to reflect this.

Brian.
Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:52 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
but somehow when I see them today I am reminded of Pan Am in their heyday

Pan Am in its heyday was smaller than AA,UA,TW, and EA. AA is larger than any carrier has ever been with the exception of Aeroflot many years ago before it split up.
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:28 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
would also totally eliminate the STL focus City/hub, I know the STL folks don't want to hear that but it's probably in AA's best interest.

Actually I think STL makes a profit now that it has been downsized...the yields are mostly local with less connecting traffic than before Nov 2003
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:31 pm

I think if any airline risks being "too big" it is DL with all the new expansion into markets where they were otherwise unknown or weaker than the competition..namely JFK, BOS, LAX and some odd international routes like LAX-VFR Mexico routes.
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:15 pm

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 25):
I think if any airline risks being "too big" it is DL with all the new expansion into markets where they were otherwise unknown or weaker than the competition..namely JFK, BOS, LAX and some odd international routes like LAX-VFR Mexico routes.

What? DL is a major airline at JFK, BOS, and LAX and always has been. DL has, disputably the second largest FF base of any US airline after AA, and is one of the 4 largest airlines in all of the markets you mentioned, including the largest airline at BOS. It's not as if DL is like NW, strong at hubs weak everywhere else; DL has a huge customer loyalty in most of the US' biggest markets, excluding maybe San Fran, Chicago, and Philadelphia.

Jeremy
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:16 pm

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 26):
What? DL is a major airline at JFK, BOS, and LAX and always has been

DL has not always been a major player at LAX. Until recently they have been a bit player there for quite sometime.


Some of DL's growth has been quite risky
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:19 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 7):
Also, like Walmart they are able to stifle the competition while cornering the market.

As they do with DFW, going along with keeping the operating costs at that airport so high that they rank right up there with SEA, YYZ & MIA for being the most expensive in North America? No wonder why the city of Dallas has kept DAL (LUV) open all these years. That more than anything has kept WN from that airport even though WN will tell you congestion issues (that don't really exist) is what does it.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 14):
Is AA to Big? I'm not one to judge.. Personally I've always been impressed how diverse they are, and I think Arpey is right, that they need to evaluate each asset on an individual basis and it's NPV... while the stock holders may want immediate increase in stock price, perhaps they need to look forward at the fact that AMR is more diverse than any non government back airline in the world...

Perhaps the biggest asset Arpey and his management team needs to look at is spinning off Eagle. Most large carriers have done this with their regional subsidiaries; DL with EV and soon OH, AC with Jazz and UA with UAX. It's better to outsource this with the likes of an OO or a QX than to try and own and have outright control of such.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:26 pm

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 27):
DL has not always been a major player at LAX. Until recently they have been a bit player there for quite sometime.


Some of DL's growth has been quite risky

Not at all. DL's XE contract is at-risk for XE, not Delta. And DL has always been one of the 4 largest airlines at LAX ever since their takeover of Western in 1987. Despite the recent growth to places like CMH, MSY, JAX, RDU, BDL, Mexico, and others, DL still has had LAX service to SLC, CVG, ATL, MCO, TPA, FLL, JFK, HNL, GDL, and BOS for quite some time, as well as DFW service which ended with the closing of the DFW hub.

Jeremy
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:28 pm

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 21):
If it wasn't in "their best interest", they wouldn't have come in the first place.

Although they never really "came" to STL, it was just part of the package with TW.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 28):
MIA for being the most expensive in North America?

Well, that's not AA as much as the fact that they're reconstructing the entire airport.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 28):
Perhaps the biggest asset Arpey and his management team needs to look at is spinning off Eagle. Most large carriers have done this with their regional subsidiaries; DL with EV and soon OH, AC with Jazz and UA with UAX. It's better to outsource this with the likes of an OO or a QX than to try and own and have outright control of such.

They'd run the risk of wreaking havoc on the consistency of the MQ product and smearing the AA name (look at any airline that works with YV, for instance). I'd rather that they keep Eagle in-house where they have tighter control over the airline and its operations.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:32 pm

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 8):
They AREN'T as large in Capacity than Delta

They took the #1 spot from DL quite some time ago, so far as pax carried and capacity offered.

Quoting ER757 (Reply 17):
AA has managed so far to avoid filing chapter 11 bankruptcy which many large airlines have been unable to do.

Ironically, that may be what's hurting them most now-- as those formerly bankruptcy-protected carriers now sport dramatically lower cost bases than does AA, who still has to compete against them.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 25):
markets where they were otherwise unknown or weaker than the competition..namely JFK, BOS, LAX

..."unknown"?
Um, exactly whom of any importance, in any of the markets you mentioned; isn't well-familiar with DL?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
LambertMan
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:26 pm

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:40 pm

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 24):

Actually I think STL makes a profit now that it has been downsized...the yields are mostly local with less connecting traffic than before Nov 2003

Yields for the most part are terrific. Consider the following routes have no other non-stop competition on them:

-Seattle
-LaGuardia
-Boston
-Reagan
-Miami
-Jacksonville
-San Francisco
-Dallas Ft Worth

If St. Louis wasn't making a profit, it would be gone in so fast it would make your head spin. In fact, there's some local confusion as to why it isn't any bigger than it is, especially considering the results that it supposedly turns out each year.
 
aa757first
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:40 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:43 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 7):
Also, like Walmart they are able to stifle the competition while cornering the market.

Not really. No airline can anymore. They face at least some degree of competition on almost every route, some having quite a lot. For example, NYC to LAX/SFO has CO, UA, DL, B6 and now Virgin America is entering the market. Domestically, they probably only have a stronghold in a few small cities in Texas and maybe the Midwest. The domestic flying from MIA has a lot of competition, especially from low-fare carriers like Spirit, B6, FL and WN. The West Coast flights have competition from F9 and WN, SFO/OAK has WN and now Virgin America and it seems like a lot of major carriers, especially DL, are building up Southern California.

Internationally, DL and CO have expanded drastically into Mexico and the Carribean over the past few years. They still have a large part of the market share into Central and South America, but more carriers are moving in, including low-fare competition from Spirit. They're only just starting to gain a major Asian presence and it can't compare with UA and NW. The European network isn't that large either, with CO and DL having much more extensive networks.

AA be the largest carrier, but now with airfares being such a commodity, significant amounts of pricing power is hard to come by, especially domestically. They only have 15% of the market share and the industry is talking consolidation, not more carriers.
 
brilondon
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:32 pm

Quoting Doug (Reply 4):
I have always kinda pegged Southwest as the Wal-Mart of airlines.

And Skybus is the thrift shop of the sky.  laughing 
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
Flighty
Posts: 7651
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:35 pm

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 22):
Some aspects of AA are not ideal, sure, but to make these statements smacks of ignorance about the reality.

True enough. Too many fleet types? Are these a.net people on crack?

AA is big enough to have 8 to 10 fleet types, and 4 or 5 hubs, with no penalty in efficiency. In fact, it might be perfect efficiency.

If anything, I think AA might be too conservative with its fleet types and hubs. Maybe it should have more routes, and more fleet types, than it does to tap into more revenue streams. But one has to respect AA's consistent methods and stability.
 
catdaddy63
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:27 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:51 pm

I don't think AA is too big. They will be buying new aircraft soon and will grow more new markets as they modernize. They desperately need something in the 100 seat range for markets where the MD80 and the 738 are too much aircraft and the RJ's are too small. Having more fleet flexibility will become more important down the road.
 
AASTEW
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:47 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:53 pm

Pre 2001

F100
MD-80
B727
B737
B757
B767
B777
DC-10
A300

Now 2007

MD-80
B737
B757
B767
B777
A300

How many more need to go according to the experts at A.net? Also, remember AA has more Super 80's than most airlines have in there total fleet. Also, another thing too remember it seems AA doesn't like to operate used airplanes from other carriers, besides the ex-TWA super80's and B757's.

AASTEW
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:02 pm

Quoting AASTEW (Reply 37):
Pre 2001

F100
MD-80
B727
B737
B757
B767
B777
DC-10
A300

Don't forget the MD-11. The 717s are gone, too. Incidentally, aren't AA the only airline to have ever flown the entire Boeing series of jetliners, from the 707 to 777?

[Edited 2007-10-20 14:03:54]
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:43 pm

Quoting AASTEW (Reply 37):
Pre 2001
F100
MD-80
B727
B737
B757
B767
B777
DC-10
A300

...add the M11 to that
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
SkyyMaster
Posts: 1082
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:34 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:52 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 23):
Pan Am in its heyday was smaller than AA,UA,TW, and EA. AA is larger than any carrier has ever been with the exception of Aeroflot many years ago before it split up.

 checkmark 

Good point, and good comparison with Aeroflot. Now if I ever board an AA flight and get seated next to a woman holding a live chicken, then I know they've gotten too big.  duck 
 
elmothehobo
Posts: 965
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:25 pm

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 24):
Actually I think STL makes a profit now that it has been downsized...the yields are mostly local with less connecting traffic than before Nov 2003

St. Louis and Miami were profitable by Q1 2004.

Quoting Lrdc9 (Reply 19):
Bingo. You are. They have like 600 a/c.

And that's only mainline.

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 38):
Don't forget the MD-11. The 717s are gone, too. Incidentally, aren't AA the only airline to have ever flown the entire Boeing series of jetliners, from the 707 to 777?

The 717s were TWA birds, I wouldn't count them as part of the AA fleet, otherwise you'd also have to count TWA's DC-9s

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 38):
Incidentally, aren't AA the only airline to have ever flown the entire Boeing series of jetliners, from the 707 to 777?

Again, it depends if you count the TWA 717s as AA birds or TWA birds. Based on that assumption, American has flown every model DC jet. (American Cargo flew leased DC-8s, TWA flew DC-9s while part of AA, DC-10, MD-80, MD-90).
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 12:10 am

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 30):
They'd run the risk of wreaking havoc on the consistency of the MQ product and smearing the AA name (look at any airline that works with YV, for instance). I'd rather that they keep Eagle in-house where they have tighter control over the airline and its operations.

That might have been the conventional thinking during the 1990s, but OO has been a highly effective regional partner for both DL and UA, and I'm sure they would do well if they acquired MQ from AA, the same with QX for AS. Look at the mess that OH has been for DL. I can't rule out MQ producing the same disastrous results for AA in the years ahead. YV will shoot themselves time and again, and the only partner they will have in the end will be the real big mess that is HP+US.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
Tango-Bravo
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:04 am

AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:16 am

Quoting 1MillionFlyer (Reply 11):
It's funny that WN pays their employees better than AA yet they have a bad reputation on anet for being cheap

In this respect and others, WN can be much better compared with Costco. Besides both paying their employees well and management treating them with genuine walk-the-talk respect from the CEO down...

1) Both WN and Costco both have upper management, including CEOs, who are not driven by self-serving greed. In fact, very much the opposite of the U.S. legacy airlines and Wal-Mart.

2) Both provide a basic, reliable product that is of consistently high quality at very reasonable prices.

3) Both have employees who are genuinely commited to positive customer experience -- which flows from the top down and reflects upper management who are commited firstly to making their employees their most important customers which translates to both management and employees taking quality customer service seriously.

4) Unlike the U.S. legacy airlines and Wal-Mart, neither WN nor Costco have a CEO and upper management who pander to the greed-driven element of their shareholders at the expense of their employees.

5) Both WN and Costco maintain a less extensive and less convoluted product line that does not attempt to be all things to all people and yet manages quite nicely and profitibly, thank you, to offer products that are adequate to satisfy a growing customer base. Both offer fewer choices than their competitors but do what they do consistently well rather than trying to please all of the people all of the time while creating many dissatisfied customers in the process.
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 875
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:23 am

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 43):
Both WN and Costco maintain a less extensive and less convoluted product line that does not attempt to be all things to all people and yet manages quite nicely and profitibly, thank you, to offer products that are adequate to satisfy a growing customer base. Both offer fewer choices than their competitors but do what they do consistently well rather than trying to please all of the people all of the time while creating many dissatisfied customers in the process.

your right... but Walmart once had a more simplified line.. however due to the need do continue increases in same store sales and appease investors, there was diversification... eventually, WN and Costco could have a similar demand... while it works now, doesn't mean it will in the long term..
Why do I fly???
 
Tango-Bravo
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:04 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:35 am

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 44):
however due to the need do continue increases in same store sales and appease investors, there was diversification... eventually, WN and Costco could have a similar demand... while it works now, doesn't mean it will in the long term..

Are you (or anyone) able to name any example(s) of where the "all things to all people" approach has resulted in improved overall customer satisfaction? Or conversely, where it has not increased the level of customer dissatisfaction?

Your namesake airline (HP) seemed to be a customer favorite rivaling WN in satisfaction ratings in its early days of simplicity and a straightforward no-nonsense -- and profitable -- business model. Only after HP discovered an "urgent need" to become all things to all people did their fortunes take a dive, exacerbated by the looting of HP by Michael Conman and Ed Bovine and later Cranky Franke and accomplices.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:08 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
I think AA needs to be leaner but that does not mean they are too large, I just think they need to trim their fleet types and eliminate some point to point flying. I would also totally eliminate the STL focus City/hub, I know the STL folks don't want to hear that but it's probably in AA's best interest.

See, I doubt it. In ORD they are head to head with UA, who has always had the upper hand in that market, and where there are wicked delays and terrible congestion. STL is a market where they reign supreme, have no congestion, and even if Lambert is a run-down facility, their facilities at ORD are run down too. STL is a solution to AA's ORD problem.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:12 am

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 41):
The 717s were TWA birds, I wouldn't count them as part of the AA fleet, otherwise you'd also have to count TWA's DC-9s

Well, they were repainted into a version of the AA livery while the DC-9s were not, which is why I counted them:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Abbott

 
HPAEAA
Posts: 875
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:20 am

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 45):
Are you (or anyone) able to name any example(s) of where the "all things to all people" approach has resulted in improved overall customer satisfaction? Or conversely, where it has not increased the level of customer dissatisfaction?

Dell, HP, SQ, Apple.. take your pick.. Dell, HP and Apple offer customizable products to customers based on the level that they want to pay... and yes, while they are not airlines, I felt it necessary to point out SQ, who has developed different products for different markets arguably, SQ has one of the highest satisfaction ratings in the world...

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 45):
Only after HP discovered an "urgent need" to become all things to all people did their fortunes take a dive, exacerbated by the looting of HP by Michael Conman and Ed Bovine and later Cranky Franke and accomplices.

Not necessarily... they simply saw the opportunity to create a revenue premium for the first class offerings, which some years pays out, and some years did not... As long as over time it pays.. it's worth it..
Why do I fly???
 
elmothehobo
Posts: 965
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:10 am

RE: AA Too Large?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:20 am

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 47):
Well, they were repainted into a version of the AA livery while the DC-9s were not, which is why I counted them:

They were painted in the hybrid scheme and carried American Airlines registrations, but I don't think they were ever on American's certificate.

We'll agree to disagree.