seatback
Topic Author
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 3:00 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:52 pm

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?
 
caliboy78
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:06 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:04 pm

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.
 
seatback
Topic Author
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 3:00 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:15 pm

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.
 
deltaflyertoo
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 3:18 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:03 pm

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 avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4016
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:35 pm

"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
 
ORDJOE
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:27 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:39 pm

I am hoping after AA BK is resolved they will have the cost structure to become a strong force in NYC again.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24597
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:58 pm

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.
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:29 pm

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.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24597
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:36 pm

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.
 
klkla
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:51 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:50 pm

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.
 
mogandoCI
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:39 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:14 pm

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.
 
staralliance85
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 3:29 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:35 pm

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
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:49 pm

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.
It is what it is...
 
seatback
Topic Author
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 3:00 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:03 pm

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.
 
commavia
Posts: 9803
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:39 pm

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.

  
 
micstatic
Posts: 607
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:07 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:53 pm

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
 
jfk777
Posts: 5863
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 12:10 am

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.
 
usafret
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:29 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 12:47 am

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.
 
AAIL86
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:18 am

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.
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamim Franklin
 
runway23
Posts: 1926
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:38 am

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.
 
staralliance85
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 3:29 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:13 am

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
 
LipeGIG
Posts: 5050
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:30 am

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 !
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24597
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:35 am

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 avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 4764
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:38 am

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.
Coast to Coast and Border to Border, Ozark Flies YOUR Way!
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:15 am

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.
 
EddieDude
Posts: 6239
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:44 am

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 21):
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.

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 the MEX-NYC route and UA (formerly CO) and DL are those two carriers. AA can't do anything except for hoping that the bilateral will be amended.
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
HKG212
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:00 am

Quoting klkla (Reply 9):
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.

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 AA/B6 hub. The hassle of taking the airtrain and going through security again will make it a far less favorable experience for pax compared to UA at EWR or what DL will have at JFK once their T4 expansion project is completed. The need to drive transfer baggage around the airfield will also keep minimum connect times relatively high. Needless to say, even an expanded T8 could not accommodate both airlines.

Quoting commavia (Reply 14):
As New York is one of the nation's largest, but also thus most competitive, markets

Why say "one of" when NYC is clearly THE largest market in the nation, not just in terms of sheer numbers but the extent of premium traffic? Indeed this is the reason why AA cannot afford to lose further ground in NYC. I simply don't think it is possible to operate a business-oriented airline in America without a major presence in NYC, which is one reason UA was so keen on the linkup with CO.
 
AAplat4life
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:14 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:29 pm

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 is going to be a real challenge. And imagining that Delta will make inroads on routes to AA and UA hubs is going to be a strategy that is hard to see working. Their operations at ORD for example are pretty basic compared to what UA and AA have at T1 and T3 respectively. Delta seems to be thinking that NYC businesses travelers want to use it for their international service out of JFK, so they will stay with Delta for domestic service out of
LGA. This ignores the fact that UA has pretty good international service out of EWK and AA and oneworld will continue to coalece at some point out of JFK. Turning its JFK terminal into a true oneworld terminal is key to AA's survival there as well as reinvigorating its European operations and service quality.

It is service quality where AA continues to disappoint. When it does something like selecting new seats, over and over again AA contnues to make half-assed deisions. I am reminded of its last go around in business class on the 767 fleet and, more recently, the new seats on the 737-800 in coach. New management is needed, and this is where I find a possible merger with US Airways welcome news. AA needs new thinking and new blood. Its DFW fortress mentality is not working.

Since US would be in the driver's seat, the question is not whether AA could use US, but whether US could use AA? US could scale back PHL and beef up JFK, find some economy of scales between CLT and MIA into Latin America, drop RDU-LHR service in place of CLT-LHR, scale back PHX in place of DFW and, to a lesser extent ORD, and focus on having a respectable Asian pressence. The chances seem pretty good the US will make an offer, and then it will be up to the bankruptcy court to decide.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:57 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 27):

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 really is. Someone even suggested using after security buses to connect JFK and LGA...absurd and this is not Delta's intent. The pax that WERE connecting over LGA on US most likely will be split between having zero brand loyalty thus defecting to DL/UA/AA or staying with US. The LOCAL pax which is who DL is will "for the most part" fly AA or DL. They key is stimulating the market with more seats. THAT, will be the trick. It will be no different that what AA is doing now; only on a much larger scale or what US has beeen doing forever. The only different is they (DL) have an international operation up the way. The net amount of flights really haven't changed that much and arguably, because DL is using jets over props, departures and approaches will flow faster. A WHOLE BUNCH? No, but over the course of the day the numbers will add up.
What gets measured gets done.
 
LipeGIG
Posts: 5050
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:59 pm

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):
Yes, with the current fleet. There's nothing wrong with it. It'll probably be getting new cabins in the near future, anyway.

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 Economy (higher fares). If AA tries it, it is very likely LH will introduce a new flight closer to the departure time.
New cabins ? Probably only in late 2013/early 2014 as they need to finalize the project, order and begin installation. They are already behind their 2 competitors (UA and DL) and can't compete with the Europeans with the 763 with very few exceptions, and there are routes where such upgrade is urgent, more than in a new route.
I'm AA customer, but if i need to travel to Europe, and it is not London, i go with LH or AF. When I travel to South America, i go with AA in general.

Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 24):
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?

Agree. Now AA is flying to mostly markets a daily flight while for some JetBlue runs up to 5x daily.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 25):
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 the MEX-NYC route and UA (formerly CO) and DL are those two carriers. AA can't do anything except for hoping that the bilateral will be amended.

Thanks Eddie, i always forgot this issue. They could push, however, to a more open agreement.

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 26):
Why say "one of" when NYC is clearly THE largest market in the nation, not just in terms of sheer numbers but the extent of premium traffic?

You're 100% right, New York is the largest market in the USA. Premium and Non Premium. No other city area airports deals more than 100 million passengers and there's no doubt New York is the main business center.
You may have one or more markets where the % of premium passengers is largest, but not the actual number.
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5485
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:03 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 27):
drop RDU-LHR service in place of CLT-LHR,

2 thoughts..

1. Dropping a subsidized guaranteed profitable flight for a flight that would require connection to work? CrAAzy
2. Delta would jump on RDU-LHR and the subsidy so quick, then get the CDG and FRA subsidies and compete with CLT on those routes from both ATL and RDU.. CLT would have the hub advantage but would feel it in the long run..
Aiming High and going far..
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3279
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:13 pm

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. 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.

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 really make money at DCA.
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:20 pm

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 25):
Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 21):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.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 the MEX-NYC route and UA (formerly CO) and DL are those two carriers. AA can't do anything except for hoping that the bilateral will be amended.

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 awarded IDL-MEX instead of AA, in the same route case that awarded AA MDW-MEX and WA was awarded LAX-MEX.

I believe EA's authority was "sold" to CO, then passed to UA with the merger, and DL's authority is ex-Pan Am. Can anyone verify?
Seaholm Maples are #1!
 
seatback
Topic Author
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 3:00 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:01 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 27):

Does anyone else but me find Delta's new LGA strategy hard to accept?

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 projected to post an $800M profit for the year.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:36 pm

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):
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.

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 LAX departure from JFK is at 7pm.

In about two weeks, the last LAX departure from JFK is expected to be 9:30pm.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:37 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 27):
New management is needed, and this is where I find a possible merger with US Airways welcome news.

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 type of meal in first class unless the flight is greater than 3 hours long and, at a time, tried charging coach pax for water?

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 29):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):
Yes, with the current fleet. There's nothing wrong with it. It'll probably be getting new cabins in the near future, anyway.

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 Economy (higher fares). If AA tries it, it is very likely LH will introduce a new flight closer to the departure time.

Your argument here though is an emotional one. Does AA need to refresh and update it's hard product to get it up to snuff with it's competitors? Absolutely. But at the moment, their 767's are just as good as DL's 763's (pre-upgrade) and, while I find them to be lacking as well, most non-a.net people don't care too much about the cabin unless it's abjectly just falling apart. AA uses their 767's on ORD-CDG up against a UA 763 and an AF airbus....and now we have AF down-grading ORD to seasonal with DL picking up the slack in between. There is just no market data indicating any type of significant attrition simply due to aircraft type or hard product.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 34):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):
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.

Just to be clear - and to avoid any possible misinterpretation that you are actually saying that LipeGIG was incorrect, which he was not:

He was indeed incorrect in inferring that 7pm being the latest LAX departure is the norm...it's not particularly his fault, but that assumption is incorrect nonetheless.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:57 pm

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 23):
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.

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 hands to be an everything to everyone type of carrier.

Flyby's plan:

AA+US merge post BK. AA dismantles the majority of US network and hands even more market share to B6 on the east coast (LGA and DCA in particular). CLT remains as a southeast hub for AA. AA focuses on international and select transcon service (maybe introduce something like United PS for transcon).

B6 joins oneworld and goes on a merger spree. Merging with VX, NK and F9. VX SFO and LAX presence helps lock up the west coast. NK brings total domination to FLL for low cost domestic fares (AA keeps MIA as a high fare south america gateway) NK hub in ACY would be re-located to PHL which would have been drawn down by AA/US merger. F9 resources are moves to form an ORD hub, replacing the gads of AE RJs with E190s and A319/320/321s for domestic feed for AA int'l routes.

AA(+US) international and transcon premium service with hubs in:
JFK
PHL
CLT
MIA
ORD
DFW
LAX
SFO

B6(+VX/NK/F9) Domestic and Caribbean service focusing on leisure and high frequency business markets:
BOS
LGA/JFK
DCA
PHL
FLL
ORD
LAX
SFO

AE(+ the other US wholly owned carriers) Provide supporting CRJ700/900 (maybe ATR/Q400 as well) service to third tier markets mainly connecting midwest destinations to:
CLT
DFW
ORD
MIA

Delta has temporarily won LGA/JFK, UA/CO has EWR, but the AA/oneworld plan above would totally dominate the northeast in general.

[Edited 2011-12-17 13:24:21]
These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24597
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:32 pm

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 29):
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 Economy (higher fares). If AA tries it, it is very likely LH will introduce a new flight closer to the departure time.

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 seats, even on routes like JFKFRA and JFKMUC. But Delta has survived, and so would AA with its current 763 product. AA has done fairly well with JFK-Europe. It has yet to discontinue a single JFK-Europe route since 2000 except London Stansted, and has driven DL out of JFKMAN and JFKBUD.

And, IIRC, Los Angeles, not New York City, is the largest air travel market in the country, probably due to New York acity's location which makes travel by train, bus or car more viable to many nearby major cities.
a.
 
LipeGIG
Posts: 5050
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:24 am

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 37):
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 seats, even on routes like JFKFRA and JFKMUC. But Delta has survived, and so would AA with its current 763 product. AA has done fairly well with JFK-Europe. It has yet to discontinue a single JFK-Europe route since 2000 except London Stansted, and has driven DL out of JFKMAN and JFKBUD

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 such as MUC.
Now you come with DL... but they focused secondary markets, mostly, and further, DL had a lot of equipment (763) used on domestic routes that they want to take advantage on longer missions.
A 763 does very well on JFK-VCE or JFK-ATH for example.

But when they tried JFK-LHR, they introduced a better product.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 35):
Your argument here though is an emotional one. Does AA need to refresh and update it's hard product to get it up to snuff with it's competitors? Absolutely. But at the moment, their 767's are just as good as DL's 763's (pre-upgrade) and, while I find them to be lacking as well, most non-a.net people don't care too much about the cabin unless it's abjectly just falling apart. AA uses their 767's on ORD-CDG up against a UA 763 and an AF airbus....and now we have AF down-grading ORD to seasonal with DL picking up the slack in between. There is just no market data indicating any type of significant attrition simply due to aircraft type or hard product

As i said above, my point is about primary markets, not secondary, and about new markets.
All about the potential chances for success increases a lot if they do that in the near future.

I do not dispute your points as they seems very strong and correct.
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
N62NA
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:50 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 35):
Quoting N62NA (Reply 34):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):
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.

Just to be clear - and to avoid any possible misinterpretation that you are actually saying that LipeGIG was incorrect, which he was not:

He was indeed incorrect in inferring that 7pm being the latest LAX departure is the norm...it's not particularly his fault, but that assumption is incorrect nonetheless.

The inference is on the part of the reader.

What LipeGIG posted was factually correct.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:32 am

Quoting seatback (Reply 33):

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 20 years, not making any money? You mean like pulling widebody a/c off of sub 500 mile routes to FL when they could do 6000+ miles? You mean like finally doing something with you JFK 'hub' after sitting on your hide for 15 years? You mean like making game changine route start-ups at your largest hub, most that are still flying to this day? You mean like finally getting out of the silly 2nd tier focus city game in markets like CMH, FLL, and MCO? Seriously comitting to the LAX market like never before (2007 was a sham to squat on gates). Growing to the #2 spot in LGA organically and juping to a far #1 with an unprecedented slot swap that everyone was sure to fail. You mean like bringing back meals to flights under 1000 miles; real glass/tableware in F; linen; adding F to your large RJs. Completing wifi mods on over 550 a/c with 200+ by February 12.

How about installing direct aisle access full flat-beds in your entire widebody fleet, on schedule for completion by 2013 with your 777s and 764s complete with 744s and 763s getting complete interior refurbs as we speak. Investing in next-gen reservations/checkin technology with testing in hubs for months and full roll-out starting next year. Scraping your website platform for again, next-gen technology, scheduled for launch in Q2 2012. Recognized industry leader in smart/user technology; Fly Delta App avail across all devices, @Delta Assist Twitter: 100% responce rate estimated at 24 minutes during normal ops. Bag tracking technology. Automated service recovery: no need to see an agent; everything spits out at a rebooking kiosk, hotel vouchers, cab, meals, etc.

Which is it?

[Edited 2011-12-17 19:50:08]

I'm sorry I really didn't intend to go on a rant but the time and work we've all invested post bk is nothing short of fenominal considering where we were just 3 years ago.


[Edited 2011-12-17 20:00:50]
What gets measured gets done.
 
HKG212
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:27 am

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 37):
And, IIRC, Los Angeles, not New York City, is the largest air travel market in the country, probably due to New York acity's location which makes travel by train, bus or car more viable to many nearby major cities.

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.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:26 pm

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 32):
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 awarded IDL-MEX instead of AA, in the same route case that awarded AA MDW-MEX and WA was awarded LAX-MEX.

I believe EA's authority was "sold" to CO, then passed to UA with the merger, and DL's authority is ex-Pan Am. Can anyone verify?



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 operated JFK-MEX for a short period but then moved the flight to their EWR hub. DL acquired Pan Am's JFK-MEX flight during Pan Am's collapse in 1991.

AA acquired EA's MIA-MEX route authorities when they purchased their Latin American routes in 1990, UA's acquired Pan Am's LAX-MEX, MIA-MEX and MCO-MEX during Pan Am's liquidation. Today only AA is on MIA-MEX, so theoretically if another US airline wished to launch MIA-MEX they could do so.

And in what had to be the bonehead move of the decade DL stopped flying LAX-MEX (which they acquired from Western), thus giving up the route authority and allowing AS to launch LAX-MEX. I don't know how DL was ever expected to be taken seriously in LAX when they drop one of the hardest route authorities to acquire without any compensation.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24597
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:55 pm

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 38):
Now you come with DL... but they focused secondary markets, mostly, and further, DL had a lot of equipment (763) used on domestic routes that they want to take advantage on longer missions.

Since when are JFKBRU, JFKMUC, JFKMAD, JFKMXP, JFKFCO, and JFKFRA secondary markets? Delta has been doing just fine serving them with a subpar product for well over a decade.

Quoting HKG212,reply=41Quoting mah4546 (Reply 37):
And, IIRC, Los Angeles, not New York City, is the largest air travel market in the country, probably due to New York acity's location which makes travel by train, bus or car more viable to many nearby major cities.

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.

:

It's based on O&D data, which I believe shows Los Angeles, not New York, is the largest air travel market in the country. New York airports see far more connecting traffic than LA airports. EWR and JFK are busy airports, but also major connecting hubs with more than one-thirds connecting traffic.
a.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4016
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:48 pm

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 population. So I would imagine NYC (which has a majority of the top 20 routes in the country for traffic) is the larger air market even with connectors out.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:50 pm

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 43):

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.
It is what it is...
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:47 pm

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. What replaces the ER3? Much of AA's LGA flying is with ER3s.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
flyby519
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:51 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 46):
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. What replaces the ER3? Much of AA's LGA flying is with ER3s.


jetblue

Kidding! (sort of)

I am guessing they will switch around some E145s/CRJ700s to keep the LGA slots in use.
These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:14 pm

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 47):
jetblue

Kidding! (sort of)

I am guessing they will switch around some E145s/CRJ700s to keep the LGA slots in use.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 46):
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. What replaces the ER3? Much of AA's LGA flying is with ER3s.

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 about pay. This will be a hugh sticking point for UA moving forward and I don't see APA giving on the issue wither... Long term, they will need more large RJs in my opinion. Some UA, DL, US has and uses to their advantage.
What gets measured gets done.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

RE: AA And Their Strategy In NYC

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:22 pm

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.centreforaviation.com/ima...s/stories/2010/march/12/scope4.png

I would say a lot more 70seaters are a sure thing, and a limited number of 71+ seat a/c like CRJ900s or E170s.
These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.