hvusslax wrote:

tphuang wrote:

As for this talk about Icelandic tourism picking up, that I'm sure is the case, but how many of those visitors are Americans and how many of those Americans doing stopovers in Iceland on the way to Europe?

Americans are the by far largest nationality of foreign tourists to Iceland. 415 thousand Americans visited in 2016, 23% of the total tourist number. 516 thousand Americans have visited Iceland in the first ten months of 2017, 27% of the total number of foreign tourists in that period.

Again a lot of people go there as part of stopover that would count toward this total and not be part of the crowd that would fly aa in this case

Exciting news, happy to see AA thinking a bit out of the box.

tphuang wrote:

hvusslax wrote:

tphuang wrote:

As for this talk about Icelandic tourism picking up, that I'm sure is the case, but how many of those visitors are Americans and how many of those Americans doing stopovers in Iceland on the way to Europe?

Americans are the by far largest nationality of foreign tourists to Iceland. 415 thousand Americans visited in 2016, 23% of the total tourist number. 516 thousand Americans have visited Iceland in the first ten months of 2017, 27% of the total number of foreign tourists in that period.

Again a lot of people go there as part of stopover that would count toward this total and not be part of the crowd that would fly aa in this case

I think people on this message board tend to overestimate the impact of stopover deals for tourism in Iceland. In a 2016 survey of visitors in Iceland, 31% of American respondents listed the stopover option as a factor in their decision to visit Iceland. The stopover traffic is significant of course but a large majority of American visitors (and the vast majority of other nationalities) is going out of their way to visit Iceland.

ORD/PHX going the way of STL?

mjoelnir wrote:

aa777lvr wrote:

DFW-KEF on a 752? Let's hope they have plenty of days where the KEF weather allows them to go N/A (no alternate), or it could be an interesting route to dispatch.

Two diversion airports in Iceland, AEY and EGS. RKV would have similar weather as KEF.

This same reason should make the A321 a NOGO/ SUB for this route

DobboDobbo wrote:

At MAN the AA/BA JV is being soundly defeated by a combination of: (i) DL/VS flying into JFK/ATL with some P2P; (ii) TCX P2P flying; and (iii) the likes of SQ, UA and FI offering a diverse range of options. The market shows it's not a shrinking one, or that it lacks premium demand.

One of the issues is that for a long time BA have relied on routing passengers through LHR, which is no longer acceptable in the marketplace. Likewise, routing via LGW, DUB is a non starter when direct options exist with other carriers.

It's a shame, but it feels like more of an AA issue rather than ORD or OW...

All the more reason for DL/VS to step up and add DTW-MAN to fill the gap that AA is leaving wide open for Midwest travelers who want timely service to MAN. Delta and VS. The market is growing good opportunity for DL/VS to jump in and print money getting people to MAN . It's obvious that in American Airlines new international strategy DFW and PHL are the major players not ORD anymore.

I have serious concerns about WOW Air being around two years from now. Icelandair is an established carrier and I doubt they are going anywhere. They are growing at a much slower rate with a much better reputation.

West Coast-KEF is already served. The catchment is going to be limited to the Midwest.

The demand for low cost travel from and to DFW area to/from Europe is far greater than travel from various cities in the US to Iceland. Europeans like to travel and Americans not as much. Whatever little O & D travel there is it will be adequately met by one of the two Icelandic carriers or AA. AA being the higher cost airline cannot charge too much, and so in the end will be loser.

uberflieger wrote:

CHI2DFW wrote:

I do think AA at ORD is in jeopardy

Hm, yeah, that's why AA is spending millions building 5 new gates for additional flights.

The MAN cut back shouldn't surprise anybody. The rising star is Dublin, a growing IAG hub with EI / FR connections to the UK regions and beyond. I believe AA ORD-DUB eventually goes year round.

Congratulations to DFW and all the new low fares KEF flights.

It feels like AA has taken the brunt of the effect of alliances. For DL, buying the Pan Am network gave them a lot of FF's, especially in Germany and a large NY presence with JFK. Coupled with their ATL hub they have two strong markets to serve other cities from. For UA, the Lufthansa partnership gives them a strong partner in a strong country. Then you add a NYC hub in EWR plus being the largest in ORD gives them strength on both sides. AA was once the strongest carrier to Paris and LHR but has ceded much of the CDG to DL/AF. They're still strong in LHR obviously but not really able to maintain much else. PHL has a good TATL network but CLT isn't big enough of a city to sustain much more yet. Second fiddle in ORD. DFW catchment area is limited being so far south and west. Maybe when the MOM comes out and gives them a right sized aircraft to add more NYC and potentially CLT they can be more robust.

I don't understand the issues with flying DFW-KEF in a 757. What is the other option on FI or WW? Same narrowbody option. And if you think connecting to make it a shorter 757 route all you're doing I a narrowbody to that connecting city and adding the time to connect. It's weird and amazing to think that widebody's have been relegated to purely int'l service. It used to be that all transcons were widebody, now you'd be hard pressed to find one.

if one is savvy they can still do stopover in Iceland on AA. Book "open jaw" (called multi-city on website) DFW-KEF, return, for example LON-DFW and then find some 3rd party cheapo one-way from KEF to UK or the continent .

I wonder how many INVOLUNTARY stopovers WOW creates due to operational deficiencies that I have heard about? Is there ample lodging for all of that at KEF or do they have to schlep clear into town?

toxtethogrady wrote:

West Coast-KEF is already served. The catchment is going to be limited to the Midwest.

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

sw733 wrote:

toxtethogrady wrote:

West Coast-KEF is already served. The catchment is going to be limited to the Midwest.

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

stlgph wrote:

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

Just because WOW is flying nonstop doesn't mean everyone has abandoned the other options.

And similarly, there will continue to be many people, especially price-sensitive passengers, who will continue use WOW.
I know I'd rather a nonstop widebody service, with friendly Icelandic crew - as opposed to 2 x AA narrowbody's, combined with a layover in DFW both ways AND the infamous AA crew......

Let's see:

Millions of people living in USA metropolitan areas served by WOW and/ or Icelandair: "Hey, an inexpensive way to get to a bunch of European destinations! And we can stop over in Iceland and enjoy the hot springs if we want." Economically viable proposition to fill some A321's and A330's year round.

People in Iceland, population 300,000: "Hey, look! A convenient way to get connections to Midland/ Odessa, Oklahoma City, and....Shreveport!! Why, if 150 or so of us are willing to pay maybe $1000 plus RT Y, and 15 of us $3000 RT for F, every day during the summer months, we can cobble together load factors make a daily American Airlines 757 to DFW profitable! Let's say 100 days of service, why, only 1 in 25 of the people in the country need to fly the route! Heck, even if we can't fill it, European Oneworld FF's will want to double- or triple-connect through Iceland rather than fly nonstop to an AA hub anyway. See, AA *is* planning to make money on this route. Bring back cowboy boots for the rest of us!"

Jim

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

toxtethogrady wrote:

West Coast-KEF is already served. The catchment is going to be limited to the Midwest.

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

Trust me, I'm no fan of AA 757 longhauls, but to say nobody will take it simply because WOW is flying the route is simply not going to be true. AA has a big frequent flier base in SoCal...so limiting DFW-KEF to Midwest clientele is just not going to be the case.

Question though, having never flown WOW - are the crews actually Icelandic? At this rate, at what point does 87% of the Icelandic citizenship work for airlines

sw733 wrote:

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

Trust me, I'm no fan of AA 757 longhauls, but to say nobody will take it simply because WOW is flying the route is simply not going to be true. AA has a big frequent flier base in SoCal...so limiting DFW-KEF to Midwest clientele is just not going to be the case.

Question though, having never flown WOW - are the crews actually Icelandic? At this rate, at what point does 87% of the Icelandic citizenship work for airlines

There were always a lot of Icelanders working as crew on non Icelandic airlines. As it is, it means that more find work at home.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

I don't understand the issues with flying DFW-KEF in a 757. What is the other option on FI or WW? Same narrowbody option. And if you think connecting to make it a shorter 757 route all you're doing I a narrowbody to that connecting city and adding the time to connect. It's weird and amazing to think that widebody's have been relegated to purely int'l service. It used to be that all transcons were widebody, now you'd be hard pressed to find one.

WOW is flying A330 not a narrowbody. With a free stopover that AA will not do.

sw733 wrote:

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

Trust me, I'm no fan of AA 757 longhauls, but to say nobody will take it simply because WOW is flying the route is simply not going to be true. AA has a big frequent flier base in SoCal...so limiting DFW-KEF to Midwest clientele is just not going to be the case.

Question though, having never flown WOW - are the crews actually Icelandic? At this rate, at what point does 87% of the Icelandic citizenship work for airlines

Lots of talk on the thread of the AA frequent flier base. AA has gutted the FF program and this will not help them going forward. Yes it used to be the best but it is now winning the race to the bottom. I have been EXP for 10 years and have lifetime status, I have not flown on a paid ticket in 6 months with AA. FF programs are not what they used to be and status/loyalty are not what they used to be.

airbazar wrote:

So which market is larger? U.S.-Europe or U.S.-KEF?

I'm not sure how that is that even relevant.

airbazar wrote:

The thing is, if the one-stop crowd is what AA is after, then WW is not the only competition.

AA isn't after only the "one-stop crowd." AA is after what every U.S. airline is after at every one of their hubs - as much capture of the local, likely FF-aligned O&D as possible, and the maximum amount of incrementally higher-yielding connecting traffic flows. This is hub economics 101. There is no reason AA cannot attempt to cater to both of these markets with this flight.

airbazar wrote:

Folks potentially connecting at DFW have lots of other 1-stop options for getting to KEF that does not involve going to DFW. FI has a wide ranging code-share agreement with B6. DL already flies to KEF from both JFK and MSP, and starting next Spring so will UA from EWR.

airbazar wrote:

Once again, what's baffling to me is the choice of DFW at the bottom of the country as AA's only gateway to Iceland which would require backtracking for just about any connecting passenger.

It's true that many behind-DFW markets can connect elsewhere to get to KEF, but the level of competition is far less intense than on the east coast, and it also disproportionately skews towards places where AA is relatively stronger as compared to, say, NYC. That should also help. Again, the level of demand outside the east coast is smaller, but competition is, too, and DFW is an exceptionally powerful hub capable of sucking in incredible volumes of traffic.

I don't know if it will be enough to make this work - in terms of yields - but I, personally, don't think AA will have trouble filling the plane if it wants to.

in the summer, try connecting thru EWR, JFK , or even PHL for that matter One thunderstorm and hoards of inbound domestic flights are significantly delayed or cancelled en masse, while the TATL flights all depart on time. DFW, I can rely on for reliable service, operationally .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41725713

"Are too many tourists visiting Iceland?" Last year 1.7 million people visited Iceland - more than triple the number that came in 2010.

Of course AA could be going after the fish cargo market.

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

toxtethogrady wrote:

West Coast-KEF is already served. The catchment is going to be limited to the Midwest.

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

LAX and SFO both have nonstop service to CDG and FRA, and yet many people still connect to AA's DFW-CDG/FRA services

wenders825 wrote:

Skyblue39 wrote:

sw733 wrote:

Already served by whom? There will be a good amount of people who would rather travel by AA rather than WOW. Folks in places like Los Angeles (with a large OneWorld frequent flier base) will probably be very drawn to use AA versus WOW.

LAX and SFO are both served by WOW direct to KEF.

Are you saying that someone will fly LAX-DFW-KEF for the honour and privilige of flying on AA's horrendous 757's? LOL.

I'd rather a nonstop direct A330 on WOW nonstop from LAX to KEF

LAX and SFO both have nonstop service to CDG and FRA, and yet many people still connect to AA's DFW-CDG/FRA services

If you’re happy to fly in AA 757s all the way from LAX to KEF and endure the wonderful ambience created by AA “prison guard” cabin crew with the added luxury of a stop in DFW.... then by all means go ahead!!! And Do Enjoy!

klm617 wrote:

DobboDobbo wrote:

At MAN the AA/BA JV is being soundly defeated by a combination of: (i) DL/VS flying into JFK/ATL with some P2P; (ii) TCX P2P flying; and (iii) the likes of SQ, UA and FI offering a diverse range of options. The market shows it's not a shrinking one, or that it lacks premium demand.

One of the issues is that for a long time BA have relied on routing passengers through LHR, which is no longer acceptable in the marketplace. Likewise, routing via LGW, DUB is a non starter when direct options exist with other carriers.

It's a shame, but it feels like more of an AA issue rather than ORD or OW...

All the more reason for DL/VS to step up and add DTW-MAN to fill the gap that AA is leaving wide open for Midwest travelers who want timely service to MAN. Delta and VS. The market is growing good opportunity for DL/VS to jump in and print money getting people to MAN . It's obvious that in American Airlines new international strategy DFW and PHL are the major players not ORD anymore.

But VS can’t even maintain ATL and JFK daily through the winter months so I’m not sure what good throwing DTW into the mix would do. It’s quite clear to see that MAN’s US ops are gearing more and more towards leisure P2P and the more direct options TCX, and to a lesser extent VS, continue to add the more the legacies operating to hubs will suffer as a result.

The evidence is quite clear - Delta have handed the reigns over to VS operating bigger aircraft to the hubs which has seen winter frequencies decrease a result, UA cut the second EWR in favour of IAD which was itself pulled and not replaced, AA dropped JFK and CLT and drastically cut ORD. Only PHL seems to be working which was a former US Airways route. And people still think BA are going to swoop in with 777s to JFK and ORD!?

jsnww81 wrote:

ORD-MAN going seasonal is the bigger news here, I think. That leaves London as the only year-round transatlantic destination from the ORD hub. I realize that a range of points are still available year-round from PHL, but it's still sad to see the ORD transatlantic operation dwindle down to almost nothing.

I wonder what kind of static Parker & Co. will get from the unions. One of the things that Parker stressed, at least to union members in Chicago, when he was courting the unions during bankruptcy, was that the prior management had let Chicago fall off the radar. Parker felt that management was letting Chicago and the upper Midwest slowly become controlled by United and Southwest. He vowed to increase flying at ORD and more aggressively compete with UA and WN. When you look at the amount of European flying out of ORD on UA, you ask how is this competing.

By the same token, UA seems to feel the need to offer a wide array of European destinations out of ORD, even though it offers many of those destinations out of EWR, as well as IAD.

While AA certainly has kept ORD on the map in terms of service to Asia, I don't think pilots and F/As in Chicago are going to be happy that the European gateway is all but gone.

By the same token, AA customers in Chicago aren't going to like the fact that going to Europe, particularly in the winter, means flying to PHL or LHR. No one like connecting at LHR, and the few people I know who live near PHL suggest finding someone else to connect, simply because of the delays. By the same token, DFW is a lousy connecting point for Europe, from ORD. I hated connecting at DFW, when flying between ORD and Florida. It simply adds too much time to the trip.

itchief wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

I don't understand the issues with flying DFW-KEF in a 757. What is the other option on FI or WW? Same narrowbody option. And if you think connecting to make it a shorter 757 route all you're doing I a narrowbody to that connecting city and adding the time to connect. It's weird and amazing to think that widebody's have been relegated to purely int'l service. It used to be that all transcons were widebody, now you'd be hard pressed to find one.

WOW is flying A330 not a narrowbody. With a free stopover that AA will not do.

A.net overestimates the choice of metal. Most consumers book on price - widebody or narrowbody be damned.

BHXflyinghigh wrote:

But VS can’t even maintain ATL and JFK daily through the winter months so I’m not sure what good throwing DTW into the mix would do. It’s quite clear to see that MAN’s US ops are gearing more and more towards leisure P2P and the more direct options TCX, and to a lesser extent VS, continue to add the more the legacies operating to hubs will suffer as a result.

The evidence is quite clear - Delta have handed the reigns over to VS operating bigger aircraft to the hubs which has seen winter frequencies decrease a result, UA cut the second EWR in favour of IAD which was itself pulled and not replaced, AA dropped JFK and CLT and drastically cut ORD. Only PHL seems to be working which was a former US Airways route. And people still think BA are going to swoop in with 777s to JFK and ORD!?

I agree that we are unlikely to see BA or anyone else swoop in, or VS fly to the Midwest just yet, but a few points of order:

1 - statistically the overwhelming majority of flying is leisure. Even on the likes of LHR-JFK. The way in which the market addresses this has clearly changed (DL/VS appear to be an exception to this).

2 - VS are due to operate JFK and ATL daily next winter. It's not a case of being unable to sustain, it's a case of VS being short of aircraft (A333 covering B789 due to engine issues, A333 refurb) so covering at LHR. Even DL are helping out VS this winter. Signs are that SFO and BOS are to go year round as of W19.

No doubt AA have had their issues, but the market is there, and it is being served pretty well.

DobboDobbo wrote:

BHXflyinghigh wrote:

But VS can’t even maintain ATL and JFK daily through the winter months so I’m not sure what good throwing DTW into the mix would do. It’s quite clear to see that MAN’s US ops are gearing more and more towards leisure P2P and the more direct options TCX, and to a lesser extent VS, continue to add the more the legacies operating to hubs will suffer as a result.

The evidence is quite clear - Delta have handed the reigns over to VS operating bigger aircraft to the hubs which has seen winter frequencies decrease a result, UA cut the second EWR in favour of IAD which was itself pulled and not replaced, AA dropped JFK and CLT and drastically cut ORD. Only PHL seems to be working which was a former US Airways route. And people still think BA are going to swoop in with 777s to JFK and ORD!?

I agree that we are unlikely to see BA or anyone else swoop in, or VS fly to the Midwest just yet, but a few points of order:

1 - statistically the overwhelming majority of flying is leisure. Even on the likes of LHR-JFK. The way in which the market addresses this has clearly changed (DL/VS appear to be an exception to this).

2 - VS are due to operate JFK and ATL daily next winter. It's not a case of being unable to sustain, it's a case of VS being short of aircraft (A333 covering B789 due to engine issues, A333 refurb) so covering at LHR. Even DL are helping out VS this winter. Signs are that SFO and BOS are to go year round as of W19.

No doubt AA have had their issues, but the market is there, and it is being served pretty well.

Announcements of Winter schedules for 2019?! Where is the news of that as I haven’t seen that mentioned with 2 years in advance.

Also cannot see any schedules for VS to ATL and JFK next winter from MAN. Nothing bookable. Where are your sources or is this merely speculation?

Antarius wrote:

itchief wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

I don't understand the issues with flying DFW-KEF in a 757. What is the other option on FI or WW? Same narrowbody option. And if you think connecting to make it a shorter 757 route all you're doing I a narrowbody to that connecting city and adding the time to connect. It's weird and amazing to think that widebody's have been relegated to purely int'l service. It used to be that all transcons were widebody, now you'd be hard pressed to find one.

WOW is flying A330 not a narrowbody. With a free stopover that AA will not do.

A.net overestimates the choice of metal. Most consumers book on price - widebody or narrowbody be damned.

I think what's important is that most people will book on price to fill the back of the plane. The front of the plane will vote based on either FF status earning (small) or convenience (much bigger). I don't see AA's choice being more convenient. For the AA loyalists in DFW that want to earn miles and forgo the stopover benefits (e.g. just stay in Iceland), this is a good choice. Is there enough of those people to fill a plane daily and still make a profit? That's the part I question. WOW and other carriers have lower cost structures so filling an A330 with rock bottom fares still keeps them afloat. AA can't do that.

DobboDobbo wrote:

BHXflyinghigh wrote:

But VS can’t even maintain ATL and JFK daily through the winter months so I’m not sure what good throwing DTW into the mix would do. It’s quite clear to see that MAN’s US ops are gearing more and more towards leisure P2P and the more direct options TCX, and to a lesser extent VS, continue to add the more the legacies operating to hubs will suffer as a result.

The evidence is quite clear - Delta have handed the reigns over to VS operating bigger aircraft to the hubs which has seen winter frequencies decrease a result, UA cut the second EWR in favour of IAD which was itself pulled and not replaced, AA dropped JFK and CLT and drastically cut ORD. Only PHL seems to be working which was a former US Airways route. And people still think BA are going to swoop in with 777s to JFK and ORD!?

I agree that we are unlikely to see BA or anyone else swoop in, or VS fly to the Midwest just yet, but a few points of order:

1 - statistically the overwhelming majority of flying is leisure. Even on the likes of LHR-JFK. The way in which the market addresses this has clearly changed (DL/VS appear to be an exception to this).

2 - VS are due to operate JFK and ATL daily next winter. It's not a case of being unable to sustain, it's a case of VS being short of aircraft (A333 covering B789 due to engine issues, A333 refurb) so covering at LHR. Even DL are helping out VS this winter. Signs are that SFO and BOS are to go year round as of W19.

No doubt AA have had their issues, but the market is there, and it is being served pretty well.

I’m intrigued as to what ‘signs’ indicate SFO and BOS go year round when their initial summer run this year was cut short and hasn’t been increased next year AFAIK.

boilerla wrote:

Antarius wrote:

itchief wrote:

WOW is flying A330 not a narrowbody. With a free stopover that AA will not do.

A.net overestimates the choice of metal. Most consumers book on price - widebody or narrowbody be damned.

I think what's important is that most people will book on price to fill the back of the plane. The front of the plane will vote based on either FF status earning (small) or convenience (much bigger). I don't see AA's choice being more convenient. For the AA loyalists in DFW that want to earn miles and forgo the stopover benefits (e.g. just stay in Iceland), this is a good choice. Is there enough of those people to fill a plane daily and still make a profit? That's the part I question. WOW and other carriers have lower cost structures so filling an A330 with rock bottom fares still keeps them afloat. AA can't do that.

IMO, AA loyalists will book it. That might be some premium and some upgrades. Also important is the front of a 752 only had 16 seats.. So it isn't like having to fill 8 F and 52J on the 77W.

I also don't think that AA needs to make money. They just need to make life hard for WOW. A 752 is relatively cheap to operate and if they can pull a chunk of the low end from WOW and get a handful of J passengers and AA loyalists, I expect it to be a success for AA.

raylee67 wrote:

Either the flights will go empty, or Iceland is going to be swamped with tourists

It already is. The tourism is absolutely straining the resources of the Island.

BHXflyinghigh wrote:

klm617 wrote:

DobboDobbo wrote:

At MAN the AA/BA JV is being soundly defeated by a combination of: (i) DL/VS flying into JFK/ATL with some P2P; (ii) TCX P2P flying; and (iii) the likes of SQ, UA and FI offering a diverse range of options. The market shows it's not a shrinking one, or that it lacks premium demand.

One of the issues is that for a long time BA have relied on routing passengers through LHR, which is no longer acceptable in the marketplace. Likewise, routing via LGW, DUB is a non starter when direct options exist with other carriers.

It's a shame, but it feels like more of an AA issue rather than ORD or OW...

All the more reason for DL/VS to step up and add DTW-MAN to fill the gap that AA is leaving wide open for Midwest travelers who want timely service to MAN. Delta and VS. The market is growing good opportunity for DL/VS to jump in and print money getting people to MAN . It's obvious that in American Airlines new international strategy DFW and PHL are the major players not ORD anymore.

But VS can’t even maintain ATL and JFK daily through the winter months so I’m not sure what good throwing DTW into the mix would do. It’s quite clear to see that MAN’s US ops are gearing more and more towards leisure P2P and the more direct options TCX, and to a lesser extent VS, continue to add the more the legacies operating to hubs will suffer as a result.

The evidence is quite clear - Delta have handed the reigns over to VS operating bigger aircraft to the hubs which has seen winter frequencies decrease a result, UA cut the second EWR in favour of IAD which was itself pulled and not replaced, AA dropped JFK and CLT and drastically cut ORD. Only PHL seems to be working which was a former US Airways route. And people still think BA are going to swoop in with 777s to JFK and ORD!?

Surprise, surprise! DFW-KEF turns into MAN-DTW!

ckfred wrote:

jsnww81 wrote:

ORD-MAN going seasonal is the bigger news here, I think. That leaves London as the only year-round transatlantic destination from the ORD hub. I realize that a range of points are still available year-round from PHL, but it's still sad to see the ORD transatlantic operation dwindle down to almost nothing.

I wonder what kind of static Parker & Co. will get from the unions. One of the things that Parker stressed, at least to union members in Chicago, when he was courting the unions during bankruptcy, was that the prior management had let Chicago fall off the radar. Parker felt that management was letting Chicago and the upper Midwest slowly become controlled by United and Southwest. He vowed to increase flying at ORD and more aggressively compete with UA and WN. When you look at the amount of European flying out of ORD on UA, you ask how is this competing.

By the same token, UA seems to feel the need to offer a wide array of European destinations out of ORD, even though it offers many of those destinations out of EWR, as well as IAD.

While AA certainly has kept ORD on the map in terms of service to Asia, I don't think pilots and F/As in Chicago are going to be happy that the European gateway is all but gone.

By the same token, AA customers in Chicago aren't going to like the fact that going to Europe, particularly in the winter, means flying to PHL or LHR. No one like connecting at LHR, and the few people I know who live near PHL suggest finding someone else to connect, simply because of the delays. By the same token, DFW is a lousy connecting point for Europe, from ORD. I hated connecting at DFW, when flying between ORD and Florida. It simply adds too much time to the trip.

Let’s accept reality, the GAAtewAAy to the world is toast. UA and alliance partners are the only hope for Int’l expansion at ORD. AA just cuts one to add one. Hola BCE, adios DUS! See ya MAN, ciao VCE!

I wish AA would just drop ORD!

uberflieger wrote:

CHI2DFW wrote:

I do think AA at ORD is in jeopardy

Hm, yeah, that's why AA is spending millions building 5 new gates for additional flights.

The MAN cut back shouldn't surprise anybody. The rising star is Dublin, a growing IAG hub with EI / FR connections to the UK regions and beyond. I believe AA ORD-DUB eventually goes year round.

Congratulations to DFW and all the new low fares KEF flights.

Agree ORD has gotten believe love in the way of local markets the last few years?
TA Travel is down with PHL/CLT and even JFK able to take part of the load and TA travel I'd guess being in the tank has far has profits Funneling traffic into PHL/LHR-DUB (soon) and I suppose CLT also seems to be program.

I like and want AA to be strong to all places and have tons of mega hubs. The airline business is has shown plenty of times in the past that is lacks discipline. The New AA Mideast focus TA appears to focused pm PHL. DFW is there mega hub. I don't see this changing until AA gets some new directions due to market needs or management change.

nomorerjs wrote:

ckfred wrote:

jsnww81 wrote:

ORD-MAN going seasonal is the bigger news here, I think. That leaves London as the only year-round transatlantic destination from the ORD hub. I realize that a range of points are still available year-round from PHL, but it's still sad to see the ORD transatlantic operation dwindle down to almost nothing.

I wonder what kind of static Parker & Co. will get from the unions. One of the things that Parker stressed, at least to union members in Chicago, when he was courting the unions during bankruptcy, was that the prior management had let Chicago fall off the radar. Parker felt that management was letting Chicago and the upper Midwest slowly become controlled by United and Southwest. He vowed to increase flying at ORD and more aggressively compete with UA and WN. When you look at the amount of European flying out of ORD on UA, you ask how is this competing.

By the same token, UA seems to feel the need to offer a wide array of European destinations out of ORD, even though it offers many of those destinations out of EWR, as well as IAD.

While AA certainly has kept ORD on the map in terms of service to Asia, I don't think pilots and F/As in Chicago are going to be happy that the European gateway is all but gone.

By the same token, AA customers in Chicago aren't going to like the fact that going to Europe, particularly in the winter, means flying to PHL or LHR. No one like connecting at LHR, and the few people I know who live near PHL suggest finding someone else to connect, simply because of the delays. By the same token, DFW is a lousy connecting point for Europe, from ORD. I hated connecting at DFW, when flying between ORD and Florida. It simply adds too much time to the trip.

Let’s accept reality, the GAAtewAAy to the world is toast. UA and alliance partners are the only hope for Int’l expansion at ORD. AA just cuts one to add one. Hola BCE, adios DUS! See ya MAN, ciao VCE!

I wish AA would just drop ORD!

Just because the season for MAN got supposedly shortened the hub should be closed?

IMO, this doom and gloom about ORD is more about OW. OW has an incredibly small breadth across Europe. OW has LHR and to a much lesser extent MAD as main connecting points. *A has MUC, FRA, ZRH, BRU, etc.. Subsequently UA maintains a larger compliment of routes to these hubs through the winter. How many winter TA routes does UA fly from ORD that aren't a *A hub or LHR? 2? ...AMS and CDG?

I am surprised KEF wasn't an add for the "crown jewel" of PHL

In regards to the ORD talk, I think AA is satisfied with the size of their current operation, its the JFK operations I believe are more in jeopardy, and even in that case its not that bad. I would be shocked if any airline were to significantly downsize any of their hub operations in the current economic condition.

usairways85 wrote:

IMO, this doom and gloom about ORD is more about OW. OW has an incredibly small breadth across Europe. OW has LHR and to a much lesser extent MAD as main connecting points. *A has MUC, FRA, ZRH, BRU, etc.. Subsequently UA maintains a larger compliment of routes to these hubs through the winter. How many winter TA routes does UA fly from ORD that aren't a *A hub or LHR? 2? ...AMS and CDG?

Outside of a few RJ adds, AA has done nothing at ORD. Parker is all talk. He’s done nothing to show ORD is viable to AA. Kirby is at UA and knows the lack of strategy AA has for ORD so UA can focus on other hubs since AA is no threat.

If it doesn’t involve CLT, DFW, LAX, MIA, or PHL, AA has no interest. JFK, ORD, and PHX are just in the way of AA. Cut them ASAP now that the merger restrictions are over and it’s better for shareholders.

Now if Doug gets off his ass and does something to surprise Kirby, it could get interesting. But that won’t happen and UA knows it so they funnel resources elsewhere.

Parker and AA, be a man and get out of ORD and let those valuable gates be used by someone that wants ORD as a real hub, not 5th fiddle in the network.

[quote="ckfred"] I don't think pilots and F/As in Chicago are going to be happy that the European gateway is all but gone./quote]

ORD is already infamous across the AA network for having the sourest, least motivated flight attendants of the major hubs. The difference between a DFW- and an ORD-based crew on longhaul is night and day; almost like flying two different carriers. Here comes yet another reason for them to be unhappy.

I think the discussion is quite a bit of course from: AA adding DFW - KEF.