Page 13 of 14

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:24 am
by FSDan
AA would need to submit a new route application if they want to move either ORD-PEK or ORD-PVG to another U.S.-China route, correct? Hence their comment in the DL HND-gateway-moving application about how they agree, given the same freedom is applied to China authorities?

If that wasn't the case, I wonder if they'd be interested in moving ORD-PVG to PHL-PEK instead, and bringing back ORD-PEK (both on the 788)... With the new CZ codeshare, PEK has much better potential as a gateway to the rest of China for AA.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:54 am
by Ishrion
Has there been any update with what AA is going to do to the slots? They've got about 2 and a half months before the dormancy ends. Does this mean they have until then to make a decision or they have to start flying on June 30th?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 2:43 am
by jbs2886
Ishrion wrote:
Has there been any update with what AA is going to do to the slots? They've got about 2 and a half months before the dormancy ends. Does this mean they have until then to make a decision or they have to start flying on June 30th?


Dormancy end means they have to start flying, but AA said they will announce by then their plan.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:01 am
by janders
Well AA is not selling either ORD-PEK-PVG nonstop as far as the scheduled go out into Q1 2020 while NRT remains 3x weekly.

Doubtfull imo they come back atleast this year as it would be hard to market from scratch from this late stage.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:54 am
by chonetsao
FSDan wrote:
AA would need to submit a new route application if they want to move either ORD-PEK or ORD-PVG to another U.S.-China route, correct? Hence their comment in the DL HND-gateway-moving application about how they agree, given the same freedom is applied to China authorities?

If that wasn't the case, I wonder if they'd be interested in moving ORD-PVG to PHL-PEK instead, and bringing back ORD-PEK (both on the 788)... With the new CZ codeshare, PEK has much better potential as a gateway to the rest of China for AA.


1, Any EAST COAST USA (that includes PHL,MIA,JFK) to CHINA route is not going to happen with AA.
2, 788 is the wrong aircraft for USA-CHINA route. That is because 788 only has 20J seats now. With all other carrier have more premier seats on the market (think UA/DL and not mentioning Chinese carriers like CA/MU), AA can not command J revenue nor be able to get big contract like UA with Apple, thus doomed to failure. If the routes are restarted, the minimum aircraft requirement would be 789/772. But that would mean the route might go to 4/5 weekly instead of daily. One has to give.
3, PVG is a much better market than PEK for US carriers due to commerce. PVG is more likely to survive due for the demand. PEK's premium passengers are restricted to domestic carriers due to government contract rules which is a big advantage for CA/MU/CZ. US carriers has to rely heavily on USA originated premium demand (it does not mean that there is no other premium demand from PEK for US carriers, here I am just trying to say that PEK suits China originated premium pax better due to its political environment, which is way bigger proportion of premium traffic).
4, CZ's PKX hub would not happen until 2022. The reason is that, according to CAAC's plan, the move from PEK to PKX would be gradual during 5 IATA seasons. There was a document online about the move. I think the gradual movement means CZ can only move 10% or so of its flight in 2019, and the rest would happen during 2020 Spring/Summer season. So CZ would not be able to have a PEK nor PKX hub ready until the earliest winter 2021/spring 2022. That would make AA's corporation with CZ very tricky. Do AA stay in PEK or move with CZ? For the first 2 years, a split operation of CZ in Beijing would not help AA's routes at all.

My personal guess is that AA will use the MAX fleet ground as an excuse to ask for further dormant until August this year. And it is possible that under pressure AA will have to restart the route for August until further notice.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:23 pm
by jfk777
AA needs to do something in Chicago, maybe they should ditch Peking and fly to Shanghai, like they did when they started flights from ORD to China. Peking came years after they were already flying to PVG.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:55 pm
by tpaewr
jfk777 wrote:
AA needs to do something in Chicago, maybe they should ditch Peking and fly to Shanghai, like they did when they started flights from ORD to China. Peking came years after they were already flying to PVG.


I can tell you UA is thrilled with AA decline in ORD and will do nothing to make said return easy.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 2:51 pm
by c933103
China Daily claims AA consider resume flying the two routes in near future.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201905/2 ... bcc20.html

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 4:09 pm
by FSDan
c933103 wrote:
China Daily claims AA consider resume flying the two routes in near future.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201905/2 ... bcc20.html


With a more developed relationship with CZ, I could see AA being more successful with ORD-PKX on the next attempt (assuming they get favorable slot times). Probably better to at least try once more rather than let that authority pass to a competitor.

I'm still interested to see if they restart ORD-PVG (where CZ is much smaller). If they've been getting grief from their Chicago-based corporate customers, they might. Otherwise, I wonder if they'd apply to move that authority to a different route (LAX-CAN, PHL-PKX, etc.). The danger with that move would be that it would probably trigger another proceeding, and we already know DL and UA have their eyes on additional PVG flights (from MSP and EWR, respectively).

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 4:13 pm
by Ishrion
FSDan wrote:
c933103 wrote:
China Daily claims AA consider resume flying the two routes in near future.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201905/2 ... bcc20.html


With a more developed relationship with CZ, I could see AA being more successful with ORD-PKX on the next attempt (assuming they get favorable slot times). Probably better to at least try once more rather than let that authority pass to a competitor.

I'm still interested to see if they restart ORD-PVG (where CZ is much smaller). If they've been getting grief from their Chicago-based corporate customers, they might. Otherwise, I wonder if they'd apply to move that authority to a different route (LAX-CAN, PHL-PKX, etc.). The danger with that move would be that it would probably trigger another proceeding, and we already know DL and UA have their eyes on additional PVG flights (from MSP and EWR, respectively).


I believe AA already applied to move PEK/PVG slots but was rejected by the DOT

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 4:26 pm
by tphuang
The entire situation is ridiculous. ORD-PKX isn't going to solve any problems for them. ORD-PKX-Middle of China is a seriously low yielding market. And PKX is going to be a lower yielding airport than PEK. If AA isn't ready to loose money on ORD-China market, it needs to just quit rather than "holding" or "consider resuming".

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 4:34 pm
by jbs2886
Ishrion wrote:
FSDan wrote:
c933103 wrote:
China Daily claims AA consider resume flying the two routes in near future.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201905/2 ... bcc20.html


With a more developed relationship with CZ, I could see AA being more successful with ORD-PKX on the next attempt (assuming they get favorable slot times). Probably better to at least try once more rather than let that authority pass to a competitor.

I'm still interested to see if they restart ORD-PVG (where CZ is much smaller). If they've been getting grief from their Chicago-based corporate customers, they might. Otherwise, I wonder if they'd apply to move that authority to a different route (LAX-CAN, PHL-PKX, etc.). The danger with that move would be that it would probably trigger another proceeding, and we already know DL and UA have their eyes on additional PVG flights (from MSP and EWR, respectively).


I believe AA already applied to move PEK/PVG slots but was rejected by the DOT


No. UA and DL asked for frequencies to be moved. AA said they intended to announce a plan by the end of June 2019.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 5:19 pm
by FSDan
Ishrion wrote:
FSDan wrote:
c933103 wrote:
China Daily claims AA consider resume flying the two routes in near future.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201905/2 ... bcc20.html


With a more developed relationship with CZ, I could see AA being more successful with ORD-PKX on the next attempt (assuming they get favorable slot times). Probably better to at least try once more rather than let that authority pass to a competitor.

I'm still interested to see if they restart ORD-PVG (where CZ is much smaller). If they've been getting grief from their Chicago-based corporate customers, they might. Otherwise, I wonder if they'd apply to move that authority to a different route (LAX-CAN, PHL-PKX, etc.). The danger with that move would be that it would probably trigger another proceeding, and we already know DL and UA have their eyes on additional PVG flights (from MSP and EWR, respectively).


I believe AA already applied to move PEK/PVG slots but was rejected by the DOT


They applied for the long term ability to move their China frequencies around as needed without further proceedings, similar to how DL asked to be able to move their HND gateways around as needed without further proceedings. The DOT said no to both requests. But AA didn't apply to move their ORD-PEK/PVG frequencies to any other U.S.-China routes in particular.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:22 am
by janders
President Robert Isom denies any plans to resume China service from Chicago.

American Airlines does not have plans in the near future to resume its flights from Chicago to Beijing and Shanghai, President Robert Isom said at the Wolfe Annual Global Transportation Conference.
A Chinese press report this week said American was considering resuming the two routes in the near future, although there was no direct quote stating as such.


http://www.orientaviation.com/articles/ ... resumption

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:57 pm
by LAXintl
Considering how terrible this flying allegedly did per AA's own words, nothing really has changed even in the CZ partnership that would turn its fortunes around.

Don't think filling the plane was the issue for AA, its more to do with dynamics of market pricing which today still remains quite low and would lead to ongoing red ink.
Doubt AA is willing to carry such large loss leader routes without one heck of offsetting benefit.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:23 pm
by FSDan
janders wrote:
President Robert Isom denies any plans to resume China service from Chicago.

American Airlines does not have plans in the near future to resume its flights from Chicago to Beijing and Shanghai, President Robert Isom said at the Wolfe Annual Global Transportation Conference.


So at this point is there basically guaranteed to be another proceeding to allocate AA's two tier-1 frequencies? I'd assume that even if AA wanted to start other routes to tier-1 cities, the DOT would make into a competition with UA and DL involved...

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:41 pm
by Prost
It would be interesting to have open skies with between the US and PRC to see what routes are actually worthwhile to peruse.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:47 pm
by Polot
FSDan wrote:
janders wrote:
President Robert Isom denies any plans to resume China service from Chicago.

American Airlines does not have plans in the near future to resume its flights from Chicago to Beijing and Shanghai, President Robert Isom said at the Wolfe Annual Global Transportation Conference.


So at this point is there basically guaranteed to be another proceeding to allocate AA's two tier-1 frequencies? I'd assume that even if AA wanted to start other routes to tier-1 cities, the DOT would make into a competition with UA and DL involved...

It’s only a competition if other airlines want the open frequencies. If AA (or UA, or DL) applies and no one challenges then the DOT will gladly give the requester the frequencies- the DOT does not force airlines to bid in competition for things they don’t want.

With all the China changes in the past couple of years I am completely lost on where things stand now. Have AA’s frequencies already been re-allotted? How many Chinese Tier 1 frequencies are open?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:48 pm
by chonetsao
LAXintl wrote:
Considering how terrible this flying allegedly did per AA's own words, nothing really has changed even in the CZ partnership that would turn its fortunes around.

Don't think filling the plane was the issue for AA, its more to do with dynamics of market pricing which today still remains quite low and would lead to ongoing red ink.
Doubt AA is willing to carry such large loss leader routes without one heck of offsetting benefit.


It is very sad, but I don't think AA:
1, had the right plane for ORD-China roures
2, knew how to deal with Chinese market
3, had the vision or resource to improve its market pisition
4, had the patience to fortify its routes

Plus, I think the loss of Kirby to UA is a great defeat. No one in LUS management is capable to save AA on ORD- China routes. The one may had the ambition is still hiding among the lower management level and it would take another decade before the clueless LUS management to go, and by then I think the whole AAs China route is already lost to DL and UA.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:50 pm
by Prost
American has 787-8s, if that isn’t a good plane for the market then I guess the market shouldn’t be flown.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:39 pm
by jfk777
Prost wrote:
American has 787-8s, if that isn’t a good plane for the market then I guess the market shouldn’t be flown.


The issue is not the 787-8 , its the AA 787-8, having only 20 J class and 28 Y + seats. The AA 787-8 fleet need to have many more J class seats because economy yields to China are lousy. The AA 787-9 have too few J class seats too, they only have 30 Business Class seats when United have 48. AA needs to reconfigure their 787 fleet with more premium seats. The seating configuration of an A330 should not be the same as a 787 since the 787 flies far longer routes. AA should be able to fly to China from Chicago.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:59 pm
by FSDan
Polot wrote:
FSDan wrote:
janders wrote:
President Robert Isom denies any plans to resume China service from Chicago.

American Airlines does not have plans in the near future to resume its flights from Chicago to Beijing and Shanghai, President Robert Isom said at the Wolfe Annual Global Transportation Conference.


So at this point is there basically guaranteed to be another proceeding to allocate AA's two tier-1 frequencies? I'd assume that even if AA wanted to start other routes to tier-1 cities, the DOT would make into a competition with UA and DL involved...

It’s only a competition if other airlines want the open frequencies. If AA (or UA, or DL) applies and no one challenges then the DOT will gladly give the requester the frequencies- the DOT does not force airlines to bid in competition for things they don’t want.

With all the China changes in the past couple of years I am completely lost on where things stand now. Have AA’s frequencies already been re-allotted? How many Chinese Tier 1 frequencies are open?


UA's extra EWR-PVG frequency request and DL's MSP-PVG request were both sidelined by the DOT because they were requesting the frequencies for summer 2020 and the DOT didn't want to award anything that far ahead. If I remember correctly, DL's proposed flight was going to use a frequency vacated by UA's canceled GUM-PVG service, and UA was asking to use AA's unused frequencies for their 2nd EWR-PVG flight. So including AA's unused PEK/PVG frequencies, I believe there are 3 pairs of tier-1 frequencies on the table right now.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 6:01 pm
by Prost
DL was going to use the unused HA slots as well, DL was able together 7 frequencies not reliant on AA.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 6:25 pm
by chonetsao
jfk777 wrote:
Prost wrote:
American has 787-8s, if that isn’t a good plane for the market then I guess the market shouldn’t be flown.


The issue is not the 787-8 , its the AA 787-8, having only 20 J class and 28 Y + seats. The AA 787-8 fleet need to have many more J class seats because economy yields to China are lousy. The AA 787-9 have too few J class seats too, they only have 30 Business Class seats when United have 48. AA needs to reconfigure their 787 fleet with more premium seats. The seating configuration of an A330 should not be the same as a 787 since the 787 flies far longer routes. AA should be able to fly to China from Chicago.


That is very correct. The problem is AA's B788 has too few business class seats. AA can sell plenty Y seats to tour groups, but to help yield, AA needs to match the premium capacity to the dominant carrier on this route in order to compete efficiently. AA's B788 is good for secondary European summer routes or Latin America truck routes that does not warrant a B772 or premium heavy B789 (comparatively speaking), but it is a very wrong plane for Asia.

I think AA wants to fly its LAX-HND new slot in B788. I think that would end in failure too. The original 28J B788 is easier to handle in a market like this. 20J B788 is not competitive for USA-Asia route when other airlines are using 48J birds or 30J birds.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:08 pm
by airzona11
chonetsao wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Prost wrote:
American has 787-8s, if that isn’t a good plane for the market then I guess the market shouldn’t be flown.


The issue is not the 787-8 , its the AA 787-8, having only 20 J class and 28 Y + seats. The AA 787-8 fleet need to have many more J class seats because economy yields to China are lousy. The AA 787-9 have too few J class seats too, they only have 30 Business Class seats when United have 48. AA needs to reconfigure their 787 fleet with more premium seats. The seating configuration of an A330 should not be the same as a 787 since the 787 flies far longer routes. AA should be able to fly to China from Chicago.


That is very correct. The problem is AA's B788 has too few business class seats. AA can sell plenty Y seats to tour groups, but to help yield, AA needs to match the premium capacity to the dominant carrier on this route in order to compete efficiently. AA's B788 is good for secondary European summer routes or Latin America truck routes that does not warrant a B772 or premium heavy B789 (comparatively speaking), but it is a very wrong plane for Asia.

I think AA wants to fly its LAX-HND new slot in B788. I think that would end in failure too. The original 28J B788 is easier to handle in a market like this. 20J B788 is not competitive for USA-Asia route when other airlines are using 48J birds or 30J birds.


Makes you wonder if they should shift flying to 772s?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:49 pm
by B1168
chonetsao wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
Considering how terrible this flying allegedly did per AA's own words, nothing really has changed even in the CZ partnership that would turn its fortunes around.

Don't think filling the plane was the issue for AA, its more to do with dynamics of market pricing which today still remains quite low and would lead to ongoing red ink.
Doubt AA is willing to carry such large loss leader routes without one heck of offsetting benefit.


It is very sad, but I don't think AA:
1, had the right plane for ORD-China roures
2, knew how to deal with Chinese market
3, had the vision or resource to improve its market pisition
4, had the patience to fortify its routes

Plus, I think the loss of Kirby to UA is a great defeat. No one in LUS management is capable to save AA on ORD- China routes. The one may had the ambition is still hiding among the lower management level and it would take another decade before the clueless LUS management to go, and by then I think the whole AAs China route is already lost to DL and UA.


That is a very true summary. I think I also need to add that AA also lack enforcement in China prior to 2016.
Above all, it is vital to understand that many TPAC from second tier Chinese cities are heavily subsidized and heavily affected 1st tier cities’ US traffic. On second tier cities, Chinese carriers own such an advantage that even UA dumped XIY and HGH, and will suffer in CTU in their foreseeable future.
AA also need a major rebranding. For example, they most definitely need a subfleet of 787s with more J; alongside, oasis project must be eliminated and a subfleet of A321neo with lie-flat breeds are needed for existing 757 replacement.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:50 pm
by B1168
airzona11 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
jfk777 wrote:

The issue is not the 787-8 , its the AA 787-8, having only 20 J class and 28 Y + seats. The AA 787-8 fleet need to have many more J class seats because economy yields to China are lousy. The AA 787-9 have too few J class seats too, they only have 30 Business Class seats when United have 48. AA needs to reconfigure their 787 fleet with more premium seats. The seating configuration of an A330 should not be the same as a 787 since the 787 flies far longer routes. AA should be able to fly to China from Chicago.


That is very correct. The problem is AA's B788 has too few business class seats. AA can sell plenty Y seats to tour groups, but to help yield, AA needs to match the premium capacity to the dominant carrier on this route in order to compete efficiently. AA's B788 is good for secondary European summer routes or Latin America truck routes that does not warrant a B772 or premium heavy B789 (comparatively speaking), but it is a very wrong plane for Asia.

I think AA wants to fly its LAX-HND new slot in B788. I think that would end in failure too. The original 28J B788 is easier to handle in a market like this. 20J B788 is not competitive for USA-Asia route when other airlines are using 48J birds or 30J birds.


Makes you wonder if they should shift flying to 772s?


Then they won’t fill the plane. ORD is a harsh market. If they regularly have 80% LF on DFW-PEK’s 788, they will be 1/3 empty on 772.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 8:17 pm
by x1234
Since PHL is a connecting hub if AA were smart they'd launch PHL-HKG (first) or PHL-PVG (second) or even PHL-PEK (third). AA simply needs to look a demographics in the USA and the majority of Asian businesses and travelers are located on the coasts. Since NYC is such a HUGE market they could launch from PHL and have the market to themselves. No need to compete with UA/MU/HU/CX in ORD or anywhere else. The reason LAX & DFW work is that LAX is a HUGE market and DFW is where the tech scene is in the USA (telecommunications, cell phones, etc.) which naturally have business to China and Asia attracting paid J.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 9:57 pm
by jfk777
x1234 wrote:
Since PHL is a connecting hub if AA were smart they'd launch PHL-HKG (first) or PHL-PVG (second) or even PHL-PEK (third). AA simply needs to look a demographics in the USA and the majority of Asian businesses and travelers are located on the coasts. Since NYC is such a HUGE market they could launch from PHL and have the market to themselves. No need to compete with UA/MU/HU/CX in ORD or anywhere else. The reason LAX & DFW work is that LAX is a HUGE market and DFW is where the tech scene is in the USA (telecommunications, cell phones, etc.) which naturally have business to China and Asia attracting paid J.


Those reasons are true, the main reason DFW to Asia works is that DFW is AA's mother hub and its biggest. There would be dark days at AA if AA couldn't make DFW to Asia work.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 1:35 am
by Ishrion
airzona11 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
jfk777 wrote:

The issue is not the 787-8 , its the AA 787-8, having only 20 J class and 28 Y + seats. The AA 787-8 fleet need to have many more J class seats because economy yields to China are lousy. The AA 787-9 have too few J class seats too, they only have 30 Business Class seats when United have 48. AA needs to reconfigure their 787 fleet with more premium seats. The seating configuration of an A330 should not be the same as a 787 since the 787 flies far longer routes. AA should be able to fly to China from Chicago.


That is very correct. The problem is AA's B788 has too few business class seats. AA can sell plenty Y seats to tour groups, but to help yield, AA needs to match the premium capacity to the dominant carrier on this route in order to compete efficiently. AA's B788 is good for secondary European summer routes or Latin America truck routes that does not warrant a B772 or premium heavy B789 (comparatively speaking), but it is a very wrong plane for Asia.

I think AA wants to fly its LAX-HND new slot in B788. I think that would end in failure too. The original 28J B788 is easier to handle in a market like this. 20J B788 is not competitive for USA-Asia route when other airlines are using 48J birds or 30J birds.


Makes you wonder if they should shift flying to 772s?


For starters, I don't believe AA operated the 788 with 20J and 28Y last year before it was cut. They just began reconfigurating the aircraft in September/October. So they had more J seats, yet failed.

The problem was the competition on ORD-China. There's UA on PEK/PVG, China Eastern on PVG, and Hainan on PEK and the upcoming CTU. AA had to sell cheap tickets in order to actually fill the plane, and lost money by doing so.

Cathay and United also fly ORD-HKG.

When the routes first began, they operated the 772s but downgraded once they received the 788s. That shows the premium seats weren't the problem with 16F and 37J seats...

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 2:45 am
by HPAEAA
x1234 wrote:
Since PHL is a connecting hub if AA were smart they'd launch PHL-HKG (first) or PHL-PVG (second) or even PHL-PEK (third). AA simply needs to look a demographics in the USA and the majority of Asian businesses and travelers are located on the coasts. Since NYC is such a HUGE market they could launch from PHL and have the market to themselves. No need to compete with UA/MU/HU/CX in ORD or anywhere else. The reason LAX & DFW work is that LAX is a HUGE market and DFW is where the tech scene is in the USA (telecommunications, cell phones, etc.) which naturally have business to China and Asia attracting paid J.

If Connecting in Ord doesn’t work PHL has little to no chance.... ORDs catchment (Midwest +east coast) is larger than PHL (east coast - nyc traffic) for west bound flights and most of the east coast traffic has easy access to flights from NYC, WAS & BOS which offer non stops already on OALs (including CX & JAL)... PHL doesn’t have the traffic to support a single flight let alone 3.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 4:24 am
by acentauri
HPAEAA wrote:
x1234 wrote:
Since PHL is a connecting hub if AA were smart they'd launch PHL-HKG (first) or PHL-PVG (second) or even PHL-PEK (third). AA simply needs to look a demographics in the USA and the majority of Asian businesses and travelers are located on the coasts. Since NYC is such a HUGE market they could launch from PHL and have the market to themselves. No need to compete with UA/MU/HU/CX in ORD or anywhere else. The reason LAX & DFW work is that LAX is a HUGE market and DFW is where the tech scene is in the USA (telecommunications, cell phones, etc.) which naturally have business to China and Asia attracting paid J.

If Connecting in Ord doesn’t work PHL has little to no chance.... ORDs catchment (Midwest +east coast) is larger than PHL (east coast - nyc traffic) for west bound flights and most of the east coast traffic has easy access to flights from NYC, WAS & BOS which offer non stops already on OALs (including CX & JAL)... PHL doesn’t have the traffic to support a single flight let alone 3.

The PHL/NYC air catchment is "Significantly" larger than ORD, so to assume it doesn't have the traffic is a bit far fetched. Also, AA ORD has been in downsize mode for some time. If the Company wanted to fly from PHL to China, they would simply set up the network to feed the flights and since AA doesn't even fly to China/HKG from NYC, IAD, or BOS, there would be zero East Coast network competition.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 4:54 am
by seabosdca
Remember when US thought it was going to buy used 345s to operate PHL-PEK?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 5:26 am
by acentauri
seabosdca wrote:
Remember when US thought it was going to buy used 345s to operate PHL-PEK?

They actually got the award, but never followed through (twice), due to economic conditions. Here's 2 references.
https://www.aviationpros.com/home/news/ ... na-flights
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/ ... ladelphia/

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 9:06 am
by chonetsao
Ishrion wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:

For starters, I don't believe AA operated the 788 with 20J and 28Y last year before it was cut. They just began reconfigurating the aircraft in September/October. So they had more J seats, yet failed.

The problem was the competition on ORD-China. There's UA on PEK/PVG, China Eastern on PVG, and Hainan on PEK and the upcoming CTU. AA had to sell cheap tickets in order to actually fill the plane, and lost money by doing so.

Cathay and United also fly ORD-HKG.

When the routes first began, they operated the 772s but downgraded once they received the 788s. That shows the premium seats weren't the problem with 16F and 37J seats...


That is right. When the route was dropped, B788 is still 28J.

Incidentally you mentioned 16F36J B722. As far as I know, ORD's China route performed very well with 16F37J B772.

Then the competition intensified with new entrant. What we are trying to say is, in this market condition, AA will not be able to compete with the 20J B788.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 9:12 am
by chonetsao
acentauri wrote:
HPAEAA wrote:
x1234 wrote:
Since PHL is a connecting hub if AA were smart they'd launch PHL-HKG (first) or PHL-PVG (second) or even PHL-PEK (third). AA simply needs to look a demographics in the USA and the majority of Asian businesses and travelers are located on the coasts. Since NYC is such a HUGE market they could launch from PHL and have the market to themselves. No need to compete with UA/MU/HU/CX in ORD or anywhere else. The reason LAX & DFW work is that LAX is a HUGE market and DFW is where the tech scene is in the USA (telecommunications, cell phones, etc.) which naturally have business to China and Asia attracting paid J.

If Connecting in Ord doesn’t work PHL has little to no chance.... ORDs catchment (Midwest +east coast) is larger than PHL (east coast - nyc traffic) for west bound flights and most of the east coast traffic has easy access to flights from NYC, WAS & BOS which offer non stops already on OALs (including CX & JAL)... PHL doesn’t have the traffic to support a single flight let alone 3.

The PHL/NYC air catchment is "Significantly" larger than ORD, so to assume it doesn't have the traffic is a bit far fetched. Also, AA ORD has been in downsize mode for some time. If the Company wanted to fly from PHL to China, they would simply set up the network to feed the flights and since AA doesn't even fly to China/HKG from NYC, IAD, or BOS, there would be zero East Coast network competition.


I think you misunderstood 'catchment' area. I think HPAEAA is referring to 'transit flight [NETWORK] catchment' area. From ORD, AA's network covers the whole Midwest and east coast for connecting traffic. This is significantly larger (in terms of network opportunities) than PHL/NYC area. An originated flight from PHL can only attract a much smaller network area (i.e. Northeast and Carolinas).

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 10:00 am
by HPAEAA
chonetsao wrote:
acentauri wrote:
HPAEAA wrote:
If Connecting in Ord doesn’t work PHL has little to no chance.... ORDs catchment (Midwest +east coast) is larger than PHL (east coast - nyc traffic) for west bound flights and most of the east coast traffic has easy access to flights from NYC, WAS & BOS which offer non stops already on OALs (including CX & JAL)... PHL doesn’t have the traffic to support a single flight let alone 3.

The PHL/NYC air catchment is "Significantly" larger than ORD, so to assume it doesn't have the traffic is a bit far fetched. Also, AA ORD has been in downsize mode for some time. If the Company wanted to fly from PHL to China, they would simply set up the network to feed the flights and since AA doesn't even fly to China/HKG from NYC, IAD, or BOS, there would be zero East Coast network competition.


I think you misunderstood 'catchment' area. I think HPAEAA is referring to 'transit flight [NETWORK] catchment' area. From ORD, AA's network covers the whole Midwest and east coast for connecting traffic. This is significantly larger (in terms of network opportunities) than PHL/NYC area. An originated flight from PHL can only attract a much smaller network area (i.e. Northeast and Carolinas).

@chonetsao - thank you for clarifying on my behalf, exactly.
Also from the east coast AA does have network connectivity to APAC (inc PRC/HKG) from BOS, JFK, EWR & IAD thanks to their JV with JAL and codeshare with CX. As recently as 2018 I saw AA pushing traffic into these flights vs their own metal from the east coast in J & Y.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 2:47 pm
by jayunited
Ishrion wrote:
For starters, I don't believe AA operated the 788 with 20J and 28Y last year before it was cut. They just began reconfigurating the aircraft in September/October. So they had more J seats, yet failed.

The problem was the competition on ORD-China. There's UA on PEK/PVG, China Eastern on PVG, and Hainan on PEK and the upcoming CTU. AA had to sell cheap tickets in order to actually fill the plane, and lost money by doing so.

Cathay and United also fly ORD-HKG.

When the routes first began, they operated the 772s but downgraded once they received the 788s. That shows the premium seats weren't the problem with 16F and 37J seats...


I see the point that your making, when AA first started nonstop service to China ORD was their only gateway later on AA added LAX-PVG, and AA has never been a strong player in China. When you have only 3 flights for example ORD-PVG, LAX-PVG and ORD-PEK its easy to fill up a 77E. AA probably was making money when ORD-China was their main gateway covering everything east of the Rockies. However I wonder if the problems AA began experiencing with their ORD-China flights were self inflicted with the addition DFW-China? Was ORD-China downguage and then suspension really caused by outside influences like UA and Chinese carriers subsequent entry into the ORD market? Or was was the downguage and suspension caused by the fact that AA had to siphon some of ORD's connecting traffic to make DFW-China work?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 3:05 pm
by ILS28ORD
My opinion all along as AA has cut INTL flying from ORD is that they just don't want ORD to work. They have a large feed of mainline and regional and refuse to connect pax through ORD onto long haul flights on their own metal. The new AA just doesn't want to. (Unless it's seasonal Europe) They prefer to force everyone through DFW. As said above, they could flow pax through whatever hub they want, and they chose DFW. If ORD-china yields are garbage, but you primarily fly connecting pax, who cares what kind of competition is on the route when the point of sale is outside of Chicago and AA is basically giving you a price with multiple hub connection options at that price. Ex. Wouldn't someone flying from BOS-HKG on AA get charged the same regardless of a connection at DFW or ORD, with ORD being less out of the way. How do yields affect anyone other than pax originating in Chicago?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 8:55 pm
by Ishrion
jayunited wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
For starters, I don't believe AA operated the 788 with 20J and 28Y last year before it was cut. They just began reconfigurating the aircraft in September/October. So they had more J seats, yet failed.

The problem was the competition on ORD-China. There's UA on PEK/PVG, China Eastern on PVG, and Hainan on PEK and the upcoming CTU. AA had to sell cheap tickets in order to actually fill the plane, and lost money by doing so.

Cathay and United also fly ORD-HKG.

When the routes first began, they operated the 772s but downgraded once they received the 788s. That shows the premium seats weren't the problem with 16F and 37J seats...


I see the point that your making, when AA first started nonstop service to China ORD was their only gateway later on AA added LAX-PVG, and AA has never been a strong player in China. When you have only 3 flights for example ORD-PVG, LAX-PVG and ORD-PEK its easy to fill up a 77E. AA probably was making money when ORD-China was their main gateway covering everything east of the Rockies. However I wonder if the problems AA began experiencing with their ORD-China flights were self inflicted with the addition DFW-China? Was ORD-China downguage and then suspension really caused by outside influences like UA and Chinese carriers subsequent entry into the ORD market? Or was was the downguage and suspension caused by the fact that AA had to siphon some of ORD's connecting traffic to make DFW-China work?


To be honest, the additional DFW-China flights could've caused AA's ORD-Asia demise.

In AA's last financial report for 1Q 2019, they said Asia flying was the most profitable I believe... most likely because they dropped 2 routes and cut a 4x frequency on NRT.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:46 pm
by Ishrion
Game over. AA's dormancy ends today and is officially returning the 14 frequencies so other carriers may use them.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 28567-0736

Despite American’s efforts, American is unable to resume its two services in the near future. American is therefore returning its frequencies so that they are available for use by other carriers.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:47 pm
by compensateme
Ishrion wrote:
Game over. AA's dormancy ends today and is officially returning the 14 frequencies so other carriers may use them.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 28567-0736

Despite American’s efforts, American is unable to resume its two services in the near future. American is therefore returning its frequencies so that they are available for use by other carriers.


I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:48 pm
by ITSTours
Ishrion wrote:
Game over. AA's dormancy ends today and is officially returning the 14 frequencies so other carriers may use them.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 28567-0736

Despite American’s efforts, American is unable to resume its two services in the near future. American is therefore returning its frequencies so that they are available for use by other carriers.


This is surprising! Even with the recent CZ relationship and with the upcoming Daxing airport?

I assume 7 will go to UA and 7 will go to DL?

Re: AA drops ORD-PEK

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:05 pm
by strfyr51
Flighty wrote:
janders wrote:
Yes I would hope DL or even UA oppose the dormancy and seek reallocation of the frequencies.

Gotta give AA credit though. They won't endlessly nurse a loss making route.


Okay... so then what?

Why are they in China? Why are any US airlines there?

Dropping ORD PEK has a lot of symbolism:
* We don't think ORD China is going to improve anytime soon
* We lose symbolically to UA and we accept it
* ORD to Cancun is more of a serious business opportunity than Beijing.
* We will lose the frequencies and we don't care
* Our strategy was based on a future that never came. Our strategy was wrong all along

I think you're taking it that if AA can't make money then no US Airline should be there?? Maybe the route isn't enough for 2 US Airlines from Chicago and American couldn't cut into United's Hustle. United has been flying that route for a while now,

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:13 pm
by x1234
I guess you can't simply squat on the slots. I DO know for a fact AA's DFW-Asia flights have some of the highest load factors due to the tech scene in Texas and no competition. This is lead by HKG & NRT/HND as they have alliance hubs and also HKG & NRT/HND have higher yields than PEK/PVG. This allows DL to possibly launch MSP-PVG, ATL-PEK & ATL-HKG (different bi-lateral). UA can also possibly add a 2nd daily EWR-PVG like they wanted (though a more likely scenario now is to up-gauge EWR-PVG to the 77W) and launch IAD-PVG.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:20 pm
by jayunited
compensateme wrote:
I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.


Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by requesting to add additional service to China from another U.S. gateway perhaps IAD?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:22 pm
by enilria
jayunited wrote:
compensateme wrote:
I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.


Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by adding additional service to China from another U.S. gateway?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.

My guess is that DL files for the frequencies 5 minutes after the first carrier does, and no sooner. Could be wrong, but...

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:24 pm
by sagechan
Given the restrictions does AA have to return the slots to apply for a completely different pair? (I'm assuming they just don't want any more Sino-US loses for now though)

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:33 pm
by tphuang
No big loss here. If you have money to burn like dl or if you have a huge Asian network like ua, you add more China flying. Otherwise, just stay out of that madness. Why are people so eager for $700 rt fares to Asia?

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:07 pm
by Fargo
jayunited wrote:
compensateme wrote:
I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.


Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by requesting to add additional service to China from another U.S. gateway perhaps IAD?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.


Why would DL want MSP-PEK when they already run from DTW? ATL-PEK would make more sense.