Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
chrisp390
Topic Author
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 6:37 pm

JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:17 pm

So it seems the DFW - HKG flight and LAX - HKG flight have been very successful for American Airlines to date with strong load factors and fares that seem to be above average.

I would imagine a lot of the success is due to the alliance with CX along with all the SE Asia destinations that passengers can connect to via HKG. With that in mind, I know AA planned ORD - HKG before 9/11, do you think there is any chance we see them look at launching that again to complement the west coast flights? What about JFK - HKG instead?
 
mhkansan
Posts: 874
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:02 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:32 pm

CX already fly to Chicago and New York. Adding LAX was very contentious with CX - I really doubt we'll see any more HKG overlap from AA. Maybe a MIA, PHL, or PHX flight but nothing more directly competing with Cathay.
 
YouGeeElWhy
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:15 pm

If AA opened up JFK (possible) or ORD (very doubtful) to HKG then CX might do something contentious like open up DFW.
 
DFW789ER
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:20 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:16 pm

Counting the EWR nonstop and the YVR one stop,CX has five daily flights from the New York area. Add in the daily EWR-HKG by UA, my guess is the market is served quite well.
 
ahj2000
Posts: 1235
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:34 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:25 pm

Didn't AA pretty much swear off NY-Asia a few years ago?
-Andrés Juánez
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:49 pm

I would love Cathay to add DFW-HKG. AA's flight is always extremely full in my experiences.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24829
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:24 pm

I am far from sold on notion that AA has had great success to HKG, atleast from LAX.

I consistently see AA biz class $2k less than CX in the market.

Also from knowledge of local consolidators, AA net fares on local HKG segment are lower than what CX offers most agencies. CX actually sells HKG at premium to virtually all airlines instead choosing to discounting connecting markets like Philippines and Vietnam instead,
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
globalcabotage
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:39 am

PHL and PHX on CX is not gonna happen. They don't have NRT and HKG is not likely. ORD won't happen either. CX has this daily and failed miserably when the tried the overnight flight (Chicago is not into that or flying to AMS to get to SIN). I can't imagine BR is doing well to TPE with the night flight.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15317
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:57 am

737max8 wrote:
I would love Cathay to add DFW-HKG. AA's flight is always extremely full in my experiences.


Would be perfect for the A350.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
DeSpringbokke
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 3:27 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:46 am

JFK-HKG not happening. AA only had NRT and later HND and dropped TYO flying altogether as they were burning through cash on night time HND flights. They're not going to magically restart an Asia flight from JFK to HKG. ORD-HKG is a long shot, but there's a chance, especially with UA continuing to fly a 777-200ER on the route. If UA were to upgauge the route to a 777-300ER, then forget about AA metal on ORD-HKG. If AA were to do this, better do a late morning departure from ORD, quick turnaround in HKG, and evening arrival in ORD, but not too late to miss connecting traffic.
 
phlwok
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 11:41 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:10 am

From ORD, with both CX and UA on the route already, and needing to commit two widebodies (likely 787 or 77W) to operate a daily schedule on a long - and therefore higher cost - route, AA would need to think there was still significant untapped opportunity. I just think AA can probably find higher margin ways to use those assets.
 
blacksoviet
Posts: 1784
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:22 am

mhkansan wrote:
Maybe a MIA, PHL, or PHX flight but nothing more directly competing with Cathay.

Does the 77W have the range to fly from MIA to HKG? What about the 77E?
 
uberflieger
Posts: 1573
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:22 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 3:36 am

ahj2000 wrote:
Didn't AA pretty much swear off NY-Asia a few years ago?

Nope, American has not 'sworn off' Asia from NYC, currently serves TYO, it's a metal neutral route completely handed over to JAL, because of the still not completed inadequate 772 configuration / fleet. I very much expect them back on NRT with their own equipment. HKG is a possibility once A350s arrive, IMHO. :airplane:
 
winginit
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:44 am

uberflieger wrote:
ahj2000 wrote:
Didn't AA pretty much swear off NY-Asia a few years ago?

Nope, American has not 'sworn off' Asia from NYC, currently serves TYO, it's a metal neutral route completely handed over to JAL, because of the still not completed inadequate 772 configuration / fleet. I very much expect them back on NRT with their own equipment. HKG is a possibility once A350s arrive, IMHO. :airplane:


AA's JFKHND was a bloodbath, and would have been even with a reconfigured frame. You won't see AA metal between NYC and Asia for years.
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 6:18 am

zeke wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I would love Cathay to add DFW-HKG. AA's flight is always extremely full in my experiences.


Would be perfect for the A350.


The A350 is even better sounding :D

I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4086
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:07 am

737max8 wrote:
I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:35 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:49 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



You weren't kidding about the price difference! Just checked MIA to HKG and CX is 2-3 times as much as AA in Business/First
 
AAplat4life
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:13 pm

If AA had a deeper code-share with CX, it might be able to be successful with an ORD route. Connections to other cities in Asia via NRT and JL can be limited, and will probably remain so given that the focus in Tokyo is more on HND right now. So this route could attract travelers who want to fly on to other cities, such as SIN, and actually help strengthen AA's reach from ORD, particularly given that HGK is a much better airport than either HND or NRT. Also, AA has a much better premium product right now than UA and overall traffic volume is up at ORD. So this is a potential opportunity. UA could respond by cutting fares on this route, but a coordinated effort between AA and CX could put UA at a disadvantage.

So what's holding AA back? An ORD-HKG route would put pressure on its routes from DFW and LAX given the reports that AA is doing its own discount pricing to keep those flights full. Since AA's international expansion focus right now remains primarily on LAX and DFW, I cannot see it starting other routes that would make existing ones less successful--even if their success is not proven yet. So another missed opportunity here.
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 3:00 pm

Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
CPDC10-30
Posts: 4688
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 4:30 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 3:59 pm

CX is going 3-4-3 in Y on the 77W in 2018. Enjoy it while it lasts.

For anyone with status who can't get their company to pay for J, AA is the much better bet with Main Cabin Extra and systemwide upgrades if you are EXP.
 
YouGeeElWhy
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 5:27 pm

AAplat4life wrote:
If AA had a deeper code-share with CX, it might be able to be successful with an ORD route. Connections to other cities in Asia via NRT and JL can be limited, and will probably remain so given that the focus in Tokyo is more on HND right now. So this route could attract travelers who want to fly on to other cities, such as SIN, and actually help strengthen AA's reach from ORD, particularly given that HGK is a much better airport than either HND or NRT. Also, AA has a much better premium product right now than UA and overall traffic volume is up at ORD. So this is a potential opportunity. UA could respond by cutting fares on this route, but a coordinated effort between AA and CX could put UA at a disadvantage.
Something that AA could do to drive up demand on its HKG flights is market LAX/DFW<->India via HKG. CX has similar if not better connectivity to the sub continent as BA. LAX to India via HKG is faster than LAX to India vs Middle East/Europe.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1759
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:09 pm

737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?


You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:37 pm

9w748capt wrote:
You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.


Indeed. Having flown longhaul on AA's 77Ws numerous times in both MCE and J - including J on this particular route in question, DFW-HKG - I completely agree that AA's offering is not bad at all. AA's J seat is pretty much identical to Cathay's, and I think the soft product, while perhaps not as good, is hardly bad. And as for non-premium cabins, the truth is that Y on a 16-hour flight is Y - it sucks no matter what. But it sucks slightly less if you have a little more legroom. And that's MCE. I've flown longhaul Y on AA's 77Ws and Cathay's 77Ws, and I'd take AA's 77W - in MCE - any day of the week.
Last edited by commavia on Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:37 pm

YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Something that AA could do to drive up demand on its HKG flights is market LAX/DFW<->India via HKG. CX has similar if not better connectivity to the sub continent as BA. LAX to India via HKG is faster than LAX to India vs Middle East/Europe.


It already does. AA will gladly sell you the codeshare, even open up fare buckets that are meant for its corporate contracts.

But that benefits CX more than AA because...

The first CX flight of the day to Delhi is gone by the time AA's LAX flight arrives.

And, the second one is a two-hour connection with a late arrival into Delhi which is not attractive to most business travelers.

So I suspect most of the time-sensitive business traffic on an AA codeshare takes CX metal on both segments (LAX and Delhi).

(There was the possibility late last year that AA was going to attempt to recapture some of its codeshare traffic on the LAX segment by depopulating certain fare buckets, but that turned out to be a momentary blip.)
 
ahj2000
Posts: 1235
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:34 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:53 pm

commavia wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.


Indeed. Having flown longhaul on AA's 77Ws numerous times in both MCE and J - including J on this particular route in question, DFW-HKG - I completely agree that AA's offering is not bad at all. AA's J seat is pretty much identical to Cathay's, and I think the soft product, while perhaps not as good, is hardly bad. And as for non-premium cabins, the truth is that Y on a 16-hour flight is Y - it sucks no matter what. But it sucks slightly less if you have a little more legroom. And that's MCE. I've flown longhaul Y on AA's 77Ws and Cathay's 77Ws, and I'd take AA's 77W - in MCE - any day of the week.

Let's be honest though. Most people only care about one thing-price. The product isn't even really an issue once you look at the prices. (Looking into mid-February) Out of LA, AA is 200$ cheaper, and out of HK, AA is 1200$ cheaper in Y. For J and F, AA is slightly more expensive out of LA but is almost 5000$ and almost 8000$ cheaper out of HKG. (AA F fares out of HKG are 1000$ lower than CX J O.o )
If I was in Y, I'd be flying AA and spending that 200/1200$ elsewhere.
-Andrés Juánez
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:16 pm

9w748capt wrote:
737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:


It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?


You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.


Actually ignorance is continuing to bring up options like J and MCE when I have stated multiple times I am talking about Y and Y only.

I don't have the option of flying in MCE. I don't have that choice and it has nothing to do with price. I'm not going to get into details here on why, but I am strictly a Y flyer. When I'm flying 16 hours, I am choosing for comfort. And in Y and Y only, CX blows AA out of the water. I've flown both numerous times on the 777. The difference is absolutely staggering. It's more than just a game of inches (which CX wins in both width and pitch by the way) but also in seat design and comfort.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
jfk777
Posts: 7390
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:25 pm

DeSpringbokke wrote:
JFK-HKG not happening. AA only had NRT and later HND and dropped TYO flying altogether as they were burning through cash on night time HND flights. They're not going to magically restart an Asia flight from JFK to HKG. ORD-HKG is a long shot, but there's a chance, especially with UA continuing to fly a 777-200ER on the route. If UA were to upgauge the route to a 777-300ER, then forget about AA metal on ORD-HKG. If AA were to do this, better do a late morning departure from ORD, quick turnaround in HKG, and evening arrival in ORD, but not too late to miss connecting traffic.


JFK to HND didn't work because the hours were awful. that flight like all others had to leave and arrive between 2200-0700 meaning it left JFK at 1900 right in the middle of the European rush. the return left at 0655 at arrived at JFK at 0700. lousy hours from hell.
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:41 pm

737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?



I've flown both in Y and I'm 6'2 but clearly not anywhere near as overweight.
To call something awful based on an inche which I swear can't make much of a difference if you're 300 lbs, you have much bigger problems than that can fix.
*double eye roll*
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1759
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:22 pm

737max8 wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
737max8 wrote:

What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?


You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.


Actually ignorance is continuing to bring up options like J and MCE when I have stated multiple times I am talking about Y and Y only.

I don't have the option of flying in MCE. I don't have that choice and it has nothing to do with price. I'm not going to get into details here on why, but I am strictly a Y flyer. When I'm flying 16 hours, I am choosing for comfort. And in Y and Y only, CX blows AA out of the water. I've flown both numerous times on the 777. The difference is absolutely staggering. It's more than just a game of inches (which CX wins in both width and pitch by the way) but also in seat design and comfort.


How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).

Or hell, use miles to upgrade (admittedly this is a looong shot on AA) or even redeem for a J class award - those aren't that hard at all to find on CX.
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:36 pm

Rookie87 wrote:
737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:


It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?



I've flown both in Y and I'm 6'2 but clearly not anywhere near as overweight.
To call something awful based on an inche which I swear can't make much of a difference if you're 300 lbs, you have much bigger problems than that can fix.
*double eye roll*


It's clear you don't even read anything I wrote. I clearly listed a few items more than 1 inch of leg room that make a big difference to me. Try reading again maybe? I may be overweight but I know how to read. And if anything, when you are bigger, those extra inches of space make even more of a difference. Anyone with a functioning brain can figure that concept out.

Let me recap for you:

-More legroom
-More width (less people on the plane, wider aisles, less time to get served and use the restoom, not as shoulder to shoulder, etc).
-More ergonomical seat design
-Better service

So go ahead and make your third reply about how just one inch can't make a difference despite valid replies to this statement now multiple times.

9w748capt wrote:
737max8 wrote:
9w748capt wrote:

You. AA's MCE cabin is quite comfortable as far as Y goes. I'd take it over CX. More legroom in MCE, wi-fi, reasonably equal IFE. Plus wi-fi. Shocking but many would also prefer AA J over CX. Not sure why CX is so universally worshipped here.


Actually ignorance is continuing to bring up options like J and MCE when I have stated multiple times I am talking about Y and Y only.

I don't have the option of flying in MCE. I don't have that choice and it has nothing to do with price. I'm not going to get into details here on why, but I am strictly a Y flyer. When I'm flying 16 hours, I am choosing for comfort. And in Y and Y only, CX blows AA out of the water. I've flown both numerous times on the 777. The difference is absolutely staggering. It's more than just a game of inches (which CX wins in both width and pitch by the way) but also in seat design and comfort.


How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).

Or hell, use miles to upgrade (admittedly this is a looong shot on AA) or even redeem for a J class award - those aren't that hard at all to find on CX.


I am completely aware of how MCE works and the different cabins on all US and many international airlines. I am willing to bet I have flown more airlines to more countries than any of you. But once again, you are making assumptions. I told you in my post that I don't have the option and it doesn't have to do with price. Therefore your credit card comment is irrelevant. I don't have the option to personally pay. I'm not flying on points. I don't have status. So stop assuming. I am only talking about the basic Y product on CX vs AA so I don't know why you all continue to bring up other options in response to my posts when I am not discussing them and have told you they are not an option. As I said in my comments, I am only taking about basic Y. So unless you have something constructive to say about a standard Y seat, it means nothing to me.

Go ahead and keep flying AA. I will keep flying CX. That's a beautiful thing.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:53 am

737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:
737max8 wrote:

What? You are so off base it's ridiculous. First of all, I don't fly J...not everyone on this forum gets the opportunity too. I am always flying in Y. These are leisure trips.

Secondly, the product in Y is so incredibly different on CX and AA on the 77W. Cathay has an extra inch of leg room AND an extra inch of width. 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 on the 77W makes a very large difference, especially when you are 6' and 300lbs. On top of that, the seat design is completely different. After just an hour or two the AA seat cushion on the bottom flat out hurts my @$$. Always have been comfortable on CX. Not to mention the service on CX is far superior.

I know the J seat is essentially the same. I know the differences in the Y product. You clearly don't. Who is the ignorant one here?



I've flown both in Y and I'm 6'2 but clearly not anywhere near as overweight.
To call something awful based on an inche which I swear can't make much of a difference if you're 300 lbs, you have much bigger problems than that can fix.
*double eye roll*


It's clear you don't even read anything I wrote. I clearly listed a few items more than 1 inch of leg room that make a big difference to me. Try reading again maybe? I may be overweight but I know how to read. And if anything, when you are bigger, those extra inches of space make even more of a difference. Anyone with a functioning brain can figure that concept out.

Let me recap for you:

-More legroom
-More width (less people on the plane, wider aisles, less time to get served and use the restoom, not as shoulder to shoulder, etc).
-More ergonomical seat design
-Better service

So go ahead and make your third reply about how just one inch can't make a difference despite valid replies to this statement now multiple times.

9w748capt wrote:
737max8 wrote:

Actually ignorance is continuing to bring up options like J and MCE when I have stated multiple times I am talking about Y and Y only.

I don't have the option of flying in MCE. I don't have that choice and it has nothing to do with price. I'm not going to get into details here on why, but I am strictly a Y flyer. When I'm flying 16 hours, I am choosing for comfort. And in Y and Y only, CX blows AA out of the water. I've flown both numerous times on the 777. The difference is absolutely staggering. It's more than just a game of inches (which CX wins in both width and pitch by the way) but also in seat design and comfort.


How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).

Or hell, use miles to upgrade (admittedly this is a looong shot on AA) or even redeem for a J class award - those aren't that hard at all to find on CX.


I am completely aware of how MCE works and the different cabins on all US and many international airlines. I am willing to bet I have flown more airlines to more countries than any of you. But once again, you are making assumptions. I told you in my post that I don't have the option and it doesn't have to do with price. Therefore your credit card comment is irrelevant. I don't have the option to personally pay. I'm not flying on points. I don't have status. So stop assuming. I am only talking about the basic Y product on CX vs AA so I don't know why you all continue to bring up other options in response to my posts when I am not discussing them and have told you they are not an option. As I said in my comments, I am only taking about basic Y. So unless you have something constructive to say about a standard Y seat, it means nothing to me.

Go ahead and keep flying AA. I will keep flying CX. That's a beautiful thing.



Congratulations on choosing to be miserable. Let me stand up and applaud you.
Upgrade options are there for both but you 'choose' the Y seat in CX that is more expensive than AA as stated above because of an inche here and there. AA service is faster since most of the crews on US airlines are more efficient, rush in some ways.
For the price difference between AA and CX you could be in MCE on AA but the seat that you never sat in is too uncomfortable....blah blah blah. You chose your hell, don't call it awful because you can't fit in the seat
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Sat Jan 14, 2017 5:49 am

Rookie87 wrote:
737max8 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:


I've flown both in Y and I'm 6'2 but clearly not anywhere near as overweight.
To call something awful based on an inche which I swear can't make much of a difference if you're 300 lbs, you have much bigger problems than that can fix.
*double eye roll*


It's clear you don't even read anything I wrote. I clearly listed a few items more than 1 inch of leg room that make a big difference to me. Try reading again maybe? I may be overweight but I know how to read. And if anything, when you are bigger, those extra inches of space make even more of a difference. Anyone with a functioning brain can figure that concept out.

Let me recap for you:

-More legroom
-More width (less people on the plane, wider aisles, less time to get served and use the restoom, not as shoulder to shoulder, etc).
-More ergonomical seat design
-Better service

So go ahead and make your third reply about how just one inch can't make a difference despite valid replies to this statement now multiple times.

9w748capt wrote:

How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).

Or hell, use miles to upgrade (admittedly this is a looong shot on AA) or even redeem for a J class award - those aren't that hard at all to find on CX.


I am completely aware of how MCE works and the different cabins on all US and many international airlines. I am willing to bet I have flown more airlines to more countries than any of you. But once again, you are making assumptions. I told you in my post that I don't have the option and it doesn't have to do with price. Therefore your credit card comment is irrelevant. I don't have the option to personally pay. I'm not flying on points. I don't have status. So stop assuming. I am only talking about the basic Y product on CX vs AA so I don't know why you all continue to bring up other options in response to my posts when I am not discussing them and have told you they are not an option. As I said in my comments, I am only taking about basic Y. So unless you have something constructive to say about a standard Y seat, it means nothing to me.

Go ahead and keep flying AA. I will keep flying CX. That's a beautiful thing.



Congratulations on choosing to be miserable. Let me stand up and applaud you.
Upgrade options are there for both but you 'choose' the Y seat in CX that is more expensive than AA as stated above because of an inche here and there. AA service is faster since most of the crews on US airlines are more efficient, rush in some ways.
For the price difference between AA and CX you could be in MCE on AA but the seat that you never sat in is too uncomfortable....blah blah blah. You chose your hell, don't call it awful because you can't fit in the seat


You still aren't reading. I don't have a choice. None. Zilch. Money is not even part of the equation. I can only book a Y seat. I don't need to explain why because it has absolutely nothing to do with comparing the Y products of the airlines, which is what I stated originally.

And the AA seat design is tight for everyone. I have talked to AA FA's that are tiny and dislike them. There are many threads here discussing how bad 3-4-3 vs 3-3-3 is and even how bad 3-3-3 on the 787 is, which I have both flown on AA and found to be very uncomfortable. Not sure why you are drinking the AA juice when it's very clear the Y product on CX is far superior than AA (not talking about MCE, or Y+, or anything else...just Y).
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
SATexan
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:49 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:33 am

YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Something that AA could do to drive up demand on its HKG flights is market LAX/DFW<->India via HKG. CX has similar if not better connectivity to the sub continent as BA. LAX to India via HKG is faster than LAX to India vs Middle East/Europe.


They already do. I know quite a few Samsung employees that do DFW-HKG-BLR. The DFW flight arrives at 5:30 PM local time in HKG which is perfect for connections. Between 8PM-9PM you have Cathay/Dragon flights to Mumbai, Bangalore, Delhi, Chennai and Kolkata. All of them arrive in India around midnight local time, which is about the time that even the EU carriers like AF, LH, BA etc arrive. You can get a decent sleep before getting to work in the morning.

The LAX flight on the other hand arrives at 8 AM in HKG and will result in a 12 hour layover....
 
User avatar
Rajahdhani
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:13 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:06 pm

SATexan wrote:
YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Something that AA could do to drive up demand on its HKG flights is market LAX/DFW<->India via HKG. CX has similar if not better connectivity to the sub continent as BA. LAX to India via HKG is faster than LAX to India vs Middle East/Europe.


They already do. I know quite a few Samsung employees that do DFW-HKG-BLR. The DFW flight arrives at 5:30 PM local time in HKG which is perfect for connections. Between 8PM-9PM you have Cathay/Dragon flights to Mumbai, Bangalore, Delhi, Chennai and Kolkata. All of them arrive in India around midnight local time, which is about the time that even the EU carriers like AF, LH, BA etc arrive. You can get a decent sleep before getting to work in the morning.


I am in agreement with this one. I had the pleasure of doing DFW-HKG-BOM and it was superb. CX663 departs HKG at 20:00hrs HKT, and arrives into BOM at 00:15hrs IST. Quite a nice trip, and not too savage considering the length.

SATexan wrote:
The LAX flight on the other hand arrives at 8 AM in HKG and will result in a 12 hour layover....


This is to accomodate the W-shaped pattern that the 77W takes out of HKG.

Case in point;

Today's current AA 126 (operating HKG-DFW) is being operated by N736AT;

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N736AT

N736AT, arrived into HGK, as AA 193 (operating LAX-HKG).

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL1 ... /KLAX/VHHH

In essence, the 77Ws are being operated at DFW-HKG-LAX-HKG-DFW in a "W" pattern to maximize use of the aircraft. Changing the LAX flight time, would essentially disrupt the aircraft utilization maximization. Considering that AA does not hold a monopoly on LAX-HKG, yet does on the DFW-HKG sector - it's not illogical to assume that they considered the benefit of selling the premium into where they could command it. Why try to 'better time' connections at HKG, to LAX, when CX already dominates the LAX-HKG market anyway?

Interestingly, though - if you don't focus on those banks of flights, or even on connecting traffic as much - and focus on the LAX based passenger (where AA will handily possess a passenger base) - AA 193's 00:35hrs departure from LAX, and 08:00hrs arrival into HKG looks superb.

Though this might not fit everyone, everywhere - it certainly is impressive how they can 'press' the 77W into serving to very different missions, onto two very different customer bases, operating in two very different market conditions, and yet make it all work. I guess that the long-term health remains to be seen, however, as is - it's impressive.
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:09 am

winginit wrote:
uberflieger wrote:
ahj2000 wrote:
Didn't AA pretty much swear off NY-Asia a few years ago?

Nope, American has not 'sworn off' Asia from NYC, currently serves TYO, it's a metal neutral route completely handed over to JAL, because of the still not completed inadequate 772 configuration / fleet. I very much expect them back on NRT with their own equipment. HKG is a possibility once A350s arrive, IMHO. :airplane:


AA's JFKHND was a bloodbath, and would have been even with a reconfigured frame. You won't see AA metal between NYC and Asia for years.

Anyone know why they never restarted jfk-NRT after the HND mess finally ended? I flew both routes, NRT was much better timed & tough to use a swu on, hnd per the times was a nightmare coming back, I usually opted for connections to avoid the early morning hours..
1.4mm and counting...
 
winginit
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 12:38 am

HPAEAA wrote:
winginit wrote:
uberflieger wrote:
Nope, American has not 'sworn off' Asia from NYC, currently serves TYO, it's a metal neutral route completely handed over to JAL, because of the still not completed inadequate 772 configuration / fleet. I very much expect them back on NRT with their own equipment. HKG is a possibility once A350s arrive, IMHO. :airplane:


AA's JFKHND was a bloodbath, and would have been even with a reconfigured frame. You won't see AA metal between NYC and Asia for years.

Anyone know why they never restarted jfk-NRT after the HND mess finally ended? I flew both routes, NRT was much better timed & tough to use a swu on, hnd per the times was a nightmare coming back, I usually opted for connections to avoid the early morning hours..


There was simply no need with JL already having double daily JFKNRT on the route.
 
globalcabotage
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:17 am

AA could do a 9:30am from ORD-HKG, first departure and would compliment CX (and even UAs flight). Arrive ORD around 5:00pm to connect with the east coast. Could rotate with LHR, DFW, LAX, or MIA. Long shot, but could work if CX is on board.
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:58 am

Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I would fly this route multiple times a year. But I can't deal with the awful AA seats on DFW-HKG so I always go to LAX or SFO to catch CX.
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


Yeah but you forget 3-4-3 Y on AA but 3-3-3 on CX.
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:07 am

anrec80 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


Yeah but you forget 3-4-3 Y on AA but 3-3-3 on CX.


Don't even bother, I tried saying that 3 or 4 times and he kept mentioning things like MCE and "1 inch" when I explained I was strictly talking about basic Y and the multiple benefits on CX vs AA. For now.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:25 am

CPDC10-30 wrote:
CX is going 3-4-3 in Y on the 77W in 2018. Enjoy it while it lasts.

For anyone with status who can't get their company to pay for J, AA is the much better bet with Main Cabin Extra and systemwide upgrades if you are EXP.


Isn't CX gonna start getting A-350 and 777X with descent comfort levels?
 
User avatar
Rookie87
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 5:39 am

anrec80 wrote:
Rookie87 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
you must be talking about economy because the AA 773 business class seat is exactly the same as the one on CX. I've been flying AA lately on those routes in J because AA is offering sometimes half price than CX for the exact same J seat hard product. loads are good but are they making money by dumping cheap J seats on the market!



It never ceases to amaze me how these "frequent" flyers are as ignorant about the seats and what an airline offers as Joe Schmo who's never been on a plane. But you quoted him or her before I did.
Same J seat, 1in more pitch in economy on CX than AA....1 inche....1 freaking in lol but it's "awful"

*eye roll*


Yeah but you forget 3-4-3 Y on AA but 3-3-3 on CX.


And CX is switching to that soon so what is your point really?
Buddy up there posted about how awful the seat is because he can't fit in them. To judge a seat as awful because you can't "fit" in it doesn't really make for a good point. I've sat in both and luckily I fit. No issues at all with AA's seat design or Cathay's. The only issue I have with both is the location of the remote being right by your leg in bulkhead and exit seats. Am I going to call one or the other "awful"? Nope.
And who forgot what in the first place? You skipped the whole thread to give a reply that adds nothing. Most of us on here have sat in those cabins. An inche for us isn't going to make it an awful experience. His or her responses show that he or she has no business commenting for anyone and should put a disclaimer "personal opinion based on my size"
NOW she or he is butt hurt because he or she is "stuck" due to "private" reasons. Spare me

Back on topic. With AA having added LAX, I really don't see why they wouldn't add ORD. CX adding DFW would be interesting to say the least and I would love to see it happen just to see AA's response.
 
hz747300
Posts: 2417
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 5:46 am

I would like to pipe in here as I have flown CX and AA to the USA a few times now. The hard product is not that different and with CX switching to 3-4-3 it'll be more or less the same. The soft product is still different. The meals on AA were ok ex-HKG, but awful ex-US. In CX, they are good both ways. The ground staff for AA in HKG were stellar when we were traveling with our triplets, in LAX, non-existent. For CX, they were indifferent both ways. I don't think CX is the high & mighty untouchable it once was. And with the only way to earn Asia Miles of any note is to well over pay the next best non-CX fare, there are less and less reasons to fly CX anymore.

It's not just AA. I can fly DL, EK, NH, OZ, AA, UA, to the USofA for less than CX, have more or less the same hard product, slightly worse IFE (but on AA I had internet!), and slightly more indifferent service.

I think anything AA does to launch more service to the US from HKG, the better for the market. CX needs to be more strategic and not so focused on cost savings to win in the long run.
Keep on truckin'...
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2630
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 7:14 am

9w748capt wrote:
How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).


Rookie87 wrote:
Upgrade options are there for both but you 'choose' the Y seat in CX that is more expensive than AA as stated above because of an inche here and there. AA service is faster since most of the crews on US airlines are more efficient, rush in some ways.
For the price difference between AA and CX you could be in MCE on AA but the seat that you never sat in is too uncomfortable....blah blah blah. You chose your hell, don't call it awful because you can't fit in the seat


If you've read 737max8's previous posts you would know that he is a non-rev flyer who often boasts of how much he flies and how many places he flies, while spending nothing (domestically and on his airline) or next to nothing on other airlines. Therefore there is no buying a ticket in J or using miles to upgrade.

When he states that he can only fly Y and money is not the issue, that is sort of true (as a non-rev) and sort of false (he could fly Y+ or J if he had the money to do so; he apparently doesn't).
 
737max8
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 8:43 am

IPFreely wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
How do you not have the option to pay for MCE? You have a brain and a credit card right? You could pay for MCE. MCE is part of the Y cabin, if you weren't aware (sounds like you're not).


Rookie87 wrote:
Upgrade options are there for both but you 'choose' the Y seat in CX that is more expensive than AA as stated above because of an inche here and there. AA service is faster since most of the crews on US airlines are more efficient, rush in some ways.
For the price difference between AA and CX you could be in MCE on AA but the seat that you never sat in is too uncomfortable....blah blah blah. You chose your hell, don't call it awful because you can't fit in the seat


If you've read 737max8's previous posts you would know that he is a non-rev flyer who often boasts of how much he flies and how many places he flies, while spending nothing (domestically and on his airline) or next to nothing on other airlines. Therefore there is no buying a ticket in J or using miles to upgrade.

When he states that he can only fly Y and money is not the issue, that is sort of true (as a non-rev) and sort of false (he could fly Y+ or J if he had the money to do so; he apparently doesn't).


What I do with my money (and yes, I have flown in premium cabins various times by spending my $$$ or pointsout of pocket) or anything like this is irrelevant to what I was saying, and that has been my point the entire time. The amount of flying I have done only goes to back up my thoughts about different products and experiences, there is nothing to boast about. I was simply comparing the basic Y products. I only had to state more when the replies kept bringing up things like MCE. I am not discussing MCE because I do not sit in MCE. The reason why means nothing to comparing the basic Y seats.

While my size certainly contributes to why I prefer CX to AA, I am not the only one who prefers a 3-3-3 cabin to a 3-4-3 cabin. There are so many places here and online damning the 3-4-3 on the 77W and embracing the airlines that still fly 3-3-3. I know that 3-4-3 is likely to be coming for CX, and at that point, an efficient routing may trump comfort. Who knows, if the pitch is still the same it still may be superior to the AA seat still. I named 4 reasons why I prefer CX to AA, and width is only one of them. I also am not a fan of the design of the AA seat, not just the size. And I know many people who agree, including AA employees. I really hope that the A359 seat makes it to a 3-4-3 77W, or even better, if CX ever starts a route like DFW themselves they utilize the A359 which is very comfortable and provides more space than the 77W in a 3-4-3 config.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
horizon360
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 7:48 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 9:58 am

It's possible that CX might consider more NA routes once they have more A359's available but we'll have to wait and see. Given the recent comments coming out of CX regarding them reviewing their business practices and operating in a 'challenging and competitive environment' I guess they will be even more careful than usual when considering opening up new routes.

P.S. I'm also surprised by some of the comments above mentioning no significant difference between CX's 3-3-3 and AA's 3-4-3 economy configurations. This goes against the vast majority of reviews, trip reports and articles written about both configurations. Obviously, if there was price parity between AA's MCE and CX's economy, MCE would be the way to go. Otherwise CX would be the obvious choice in basic Y for both comfort and service levels.
 
CXGabriel
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:26 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 12:16 pm

horizon360 wrote:
It's possible that CX might consider more NA routes once they have more A359's available but we'll have to wait and see. Given the recent comments coming out of CX regarding them reviewing their business practices and operating in a 'challenging and competitive environment' I guess they will be even more careful than usual when considering opening up new routes.

P.S. I'm also surprised by some of the comments above mentioning no significant difference between CX's 3-3-3 and AA's 3-4-3 economy configurations. This goes against the vast majority of reviews, trip reports and articles written about both configurations. Obviously, if there was price parity between AA's MCE and CX's economy, MCE would be the way to go. Otherwise CX would be the obvious choice in basic Y for both comfort and service levels.


I agree. Don't know what they're talking about claiming no significant difference between CX's 3-3-3 and AA's 3-4-3 economy configuration.

There're a lot of mentions of CX's 77W going to 3-4-3. We may find out more when they release their 2016 performance later, but I think the A350-1000 will replace many of the 77W starting in 2018 with a 3-3-3 configuration. The 3-4-3 conversion for 777's will probably be limited to regional flying instead of long-haul. I've flew CX's A359 recently, on both PY and Biz class, and I found the seats to be very comfortable and noticeable improvement over 77W's. I am interested in trying the new AA's PY seats to compare, but there's no questions that CX's food and services are better than AA's.
 
raylee67
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 12:21 pm

I am not sure AA is actually making a lot of money on its HKG service. I travel between HKG and NYC/YYZ a lot. Regardless of the time of year I search, AA almost always come up as the lowest price, whether I search Economy or Business, for HKG originating ticket. Their flights are pretty full most of the time, especially Business Class. So I don't think they are losing money on HKG, but is HKG a cash cow? Probably not either.

What AA needs is to add CX into the AA/JL/QF trans Pacific JV. The problem is I don't think CX is interested.

If AA is thinking about any further expansion to HKG, it would be better off sending a 787 to HKG from MIA than opening up HKG-ORD or HKG-JFK.

Better yet, if it cannot figure out what to do with spare 787 or 77W, I think routes like ICN-ORD, ICN-LAX, TPE-LAX or even CAN-LAX or NGO-LAX seasonal may be more promising than HKG-ORD or HKG-JFK.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
User avatar
b777900
Posts: 378
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 7:27 pm

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:20 pm

chrisp390 wrote:
So it seems the DFW - HKG flight and LAX - HKG flight have been very successful for American Airlines to date with strong load factors and fares that seem to be above average.

I would imagine a lot of the success is due to the alliance with CX along with all the SE Asia destinations that passengers can connect to via HKG. With that in mind, I know AA planned ORD - HKG before 9/11, do you think there is any chance we see them look at launching that again to complement the west coast flights? What about JFK - HKG instead?


What about a MIA -HKG NS on a350 on either CX or AA once they get there 350's/.
[i[b]]Prepare for Gate arrival, Gate 32
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5365
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: JFK/ORD - HKG on AA?

Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:26 pm

IMO in the long run I think AA will add ORD-HKG to compliment CX. No way they add JFK-HKG.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], bar11, bennett123, BlueTrue, Captaindoony, D L X, davidjohnson6, doug, dstblj52, FromCDGtoSYD, Google Adsense [Bot], LAX772LR, LightningAce, loubeyre, mdt320, Oykie, SASViking, SQ22, SurfandSnow, trexel94, yashk and 191 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos