AA pulled out NRT flight a couple of years ago and don't have any transpacific flights departing from JFK now. With recently dropped PVG/PEK and reduced NRT service from ORD. It makes LAX and DFW the only two gateway to China. Considering DFW is not an ideal location for connection traffic from the east coast and most people are seeking alternatives such as UA and DL. Some OW loyalist are in favour of flying JL and CX to Asia instead of routing via DFW.

AA is unlikely to introduce any flights from PHL and CLT to Asia, also intend to pull out all the Asian route from ORD. It seems like JFK is the only possible candidate for transpacific flight. Here comes some question.

1. Will it be more profitable if AA moves ORD-PVG/PEK flights to JFK? Because the strong O&D business traffic between NYC and China.
2. AA has JV with JL on JFK-HND/NRT, and the flights are always full. Is it possible for AA/JL to add the 3rd daily flight to Tokyo?
3. UA recently announced the surprise move by adding 2nd daily EWR-PVG between two financial cities. Will AA lose more premium traffic such as cooperate contracts to UA in great NYC market?

It's doubtful that this will happen. AA has already shown that it's Asia focus will be via DFW and LAX. Large markets like JFK are already heavily served by many carriers, most of whom are offering fares that are extremely low. My guess is that the yield AA would carry on such flights would be minimal. It's long-haul aircraft are better deployed elsewhere.

They do fly to Asia from JFK. JAL and Cathay Pacific do it for them.

evank516 wrote:

They do fly to Asia from JFK. JAL and Cathay Pacific do it for them.

AY also does a lot of Asia flying out of JFK, with their competitive 1-stop fares.

AA can't make ORD-Asia work for them, where they have a stronger domestic feed.

Never going to happen. However, one world does offer Some compelling flight options to Asia which I have taken advantage of. Still no reason to do it on aa metal

Yea I highly doubt we'll see AA start JFK-Asia service again in the near future. Even DL ended the JFK-NRT few years ago and they have a larger presence than AA. Too much competitive fares and airline options. Between Newark flights to Asia (United, Air China, Singapore Airlines) and JFK to Asia (Air China, Japan Air, ANA, Cathay Pacific, EVA Air, Hainan Air, XiamenAir) the options are endless for New Yorkers depending on which Asian destination they prefer to go too.

Have you seen what AA has been doing recently at JFK? They have right sized their operation. The last thing that will happen are long and expensive Asian flights from an East coast city that has been shrinking for them.

If anything, AA should focus on trying to lure JL into T8 with them to provide a more seamless experience for their NYC-TYO passengers. CX has HKG covered very well. The only market where I could see AA trying to gain some type of foothold is JFK-PVG, but I don't see any reason why that would end up being any better than ORD-PVG. MU has 2x daily flights on JFK-PVG and UA has EWR-PVG to boot.

FSDan wrote:

If anything, AA should focus on trying to lure JL into T8 with them to provide a more seamless experience for their NYC-TYO passengers. CX has HKG covered very well. The only market where I could see AA trying to gain some type of foothold is JFK-PVG, but I don't see any reason why that would end up being any better than ORD-PVG. MU has 2x daily flights on JFK-PVG and UA has EWR-PVG to boot.

JL is one of the four owners of T1 at JFK (the other three are AF, LH, and KE). Unlikely JAL will move unless it would want to divest itself of the investment completely but it would be better if they did co-locate with AA at T8 as others have done (CX, QF albeit from T7) to offer a more seamless experience. That said, JL can rely on O&D to fill its JFK services. The limited feed AA would provide there probably isn't worth it.

evank516 wrote:

They do fly to Asia from JFK. JAL and Cathay Pacific do it for them.

Yes we know that, and there is also Qantas who flies to Australia from JFK.. What the thread starter means is "AA should consider launching flight to Asia from JFK on its own metal." You are correct, JAL and Cathay Pacific both fly out of JFK.

Honestly I don't see that happening. JFK has seen a lot of cuts for AA in recent years, since the early 2010s. AA is counting on its OW partners to fly to the Pacific Rim.

Doesn't AA have metal-neutral JV with JAL and QF? Technically AA already flies from JFK, using the JAL and QF metals. AA is selling its own tickets with its own pricing on JAL and QF operated JFK flights.

Note that CX is only code-shared, so AA is effectively selling CX tickets with CX deciding the fare, etc. AA only gets commission on CX operated JFK flights that it sells under AA code.

raylee67 wrote:

Doesn't AA have metal-neutral JV with JAL and QF? Technically AA already flies from JFK, using the JAL and QF metals. AA is selling its own tickets with its own pricing on JAL and QF operated JFK flights.

With JL, yes. With QF, not yet. It has been proposed and still under consideration at DOT.

Cointrin330 wrote:

FSDan wrote:

If anything, AA should focus on trying to lure JL into T8 with them to provide a more seamless experience for their NYC-TYO passengers. CX has HKG covered very well. The only market where I could see AA trying to gain some type of foothold is JFK-PVG, but I don't see any reason why that would end up being any better than ORD-PVG. MU has 2x daily flights on JFK-PVG and UA has EWR-PVG to boot.

JL is one of the four owners of T1 at JFK (the other three are AF, LH, and KE). Unlikely JAL will move unless it would want to divest itself of the investment completely

Hence them needing to be lured. If they didn't have a stake in T1 I assume moving to T8 wouldn't require much thought on their part.

Delta is, handily, the largest carrier at JFK. It's #2 by passengers in NYC (less than 2 points behind United). And Delta, with more than 2x AA's passenger count at JFK, doesn't do JFK-Asia on its own metal.

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traf ... G_2018.pdf

MIflyer12 wrote:

Delta is, handily, the largest carrier at JFK. It's #2 by passengers in NYC (less than 2 points behind United). And Delta, with more than 2x AA's passenger count at JFK, doesn't do JFK-Asia on its own metal.

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traf ... G_2018.pdf

Yup, this is the right response. If AA should consider it, then Delta should be excoriated that they are not launching (or re-starting) flights to Asia from JFK, where they have a larger customer base and more connecting feed.

Of course, we don't (fully) excoriate Delta because they are smart on their network and routes, and see JFK-Asia as a tough sell apart from the new JV with KE (and code shares with a few others).

Now, I think there probably is the market for JFK-Asia on DL, the numbers for AA would be much tougher.

AA had in some time JFK-HND route when HND traffic was not strong as is today.

The only viable east coast city AA has is PHL, so if they are going to fly to Asia it should be from there. AA seems scared or concerned about UA at Newark, why ? Continental showed us there is a market in Pennsylvania to Asia so why not from PHL ? Fly to Japan and don't let China scare you, DFW is great but geographically limited. Have some Texas sized courage but spread it to other AA hubs.

vorellanaj wrote:

AA had in some time JFK-HND route when HND traffic was not strong as is today.

AA also flew NRT for JFK for years and had pretty good loads in all cabins each time I flew the route. HND was a bit of a debacle, the flight NYC-TYO worked ok from a timing perspective but the return times were awful - I often flew JFK-HND, NRT-JFK when they were running both services for a period.

As much as I wish they'd rotate a AA frequency into the JAL JV I doubt it's going to happen, AA doesn't seem interested as of late in investing much into the NYC Operation, my guess is they're just running out what markets they have and will continue to trim.

jfk777 wrote:

The only viable east coast city AA has is PHL, so if they are going to fly to Asia it should be from there. AA seems scared or concerned about UA at Newark, why ? Continental showed us there is a market in Pennsylvania to Asia so why not from PHL ? Fly to Japan and don't let China scare you, DFW is great but geographically limited. Have some Texas sized courage but spread it to other AA hubs.

Unless a PHL-NRT flight (e.g.) can essentially be guaranteed to pick up primarily PHL catchment O&D, ORD and DFW are about 400 nm closer to Tokyo - and we know ORD was just reduced to 3 days/week. PHL-China could possibly work, IF it could exist on a relatively low fare/high load structure, which favorably competed with NYC airports. IMO, AA is transitioning its principle connecting focus to Asia through DFW and Trans-Atlantic focus through PHL, both of which probably have sufficient regional O&D and connecting traffic to financially support their flights.

DL and UA wish AA would launch JFK-Asia flights!

There is a reason the US3 don’t fly JFK-Asia.

AA is toast at JFK.

They arent launching Asia and we will be lucky to keep Europe.

nomorerjs wrote:

DL and UA wish AA would launch JFK-Asia flights!

There is a reason the US3 don’t fly JFK-Asia.

Although UA doesn't have JFK-Asia UA does have plenty of EWR-Asia which serves mostly the same market. Make it US2 to be more accurate.

Having said that I agree that there's a reason why DL/AA can't make Asia work from JFK. They also got enough coverage from partners.

Michael

Neither is likely but I would say it's significant more likely AA bails on all Europe flying from JFK than adds Asia. I repeat I don't think either will happen.

AA these days can't even stay on DR and PR routes out of JFK. They just cut JFK-PUJ. And those are much friendlier operating confines for a US legacy carrier. I think we are just hoping at this point AA stick out a little longer on European routes. If they ever add PHL-MXP, JFK-MXP is a definite goner.

jfklganyc wrote:

AA is toast at JFK.

They arent launching Asia and we will be lucky to keep Europe.

Just because Delta is king at JFK and JetBlue is second doesn't mean there is no role for AA. Just because a 767 flight to Zurich moved to Philadelphia everyone is putting nails in AA's JFK coffin. AA strongest franchise at JFK is London with four 777 daily, AA would have to liquidate for that to stop. It has strong franchises to LAX and SFO plus Brazil and Argentina. Even if JetBlue started flying to London that would be competition for Norwegian not so much AA/ BA and Delta/Virgin.

Cointrin330 wrote:

FSDan wrote:

If anything, AA should focus on trying to lure JL into T8 with them to provide a more seamless experience for their NYC-TYO passengers. CX has HKG covered very well. The only market where I could see AA trying to gain some type of foothold is JFK-PVG, but I don't see any reason why that would end up being any better than ORD-PVG. MU has 2x daily flights on JFK-PVG and UA has EWR-PVG to boot.

JL is one of the four owners of T1 at JFK (the other three are AF, LH, and KE). Unlikely JAL will move unless it would want to divest itself of the investment completely but it would be better if they did co-locate with AA at T8 as others have done (CX, QF albeit from T7) to offer a more seamless experience. That said, JL can rely on O&D to fill its JFK services. The limited feed AA would provide there probably isn't worth it.

JL is also apart of the same consortium which will be investing in the new T1 as well.

Actually, AA's requested right dormitory was until 2019 fall. Which was when the new Beijing airport will open. Consider their new relationship with CZ, maybe they want to launch some new services to the new airport at the time.

AA just axed DUB and EDI from JFK. PAP PLS DEN as well. Beyond other cuts.

Sadly, AA isnt launching another long haul from JFK.

We will be lucky to keep what we have

Does anyone know just how profitable JFK is for Delta? My guess is the margons are rather thin.

Isn't it economically wiser for AA to have a prescence at JFK, but their hub at PHL, where there is still sizable population but much less competition?

SteelChair wrote:

Does anyone know just how profitable JFK is for Delta? My guess is the margons are rather thin.

Isn't it economically wiser for AA to have a prescence at JFK, but their hub at PHL, where there is still sizable population but much less competition?

We will find out in 10 years. That is when the decisions AA is making today will shake out.

No one knows if they will regret giving away New York at this time

I have to say, I flew out of JFK last Friday night on DL but we taxied past AA's T8 on the way out to 22R and it was a total ghost town over there. There were more more partner airlines parked there than AA metal itself and almost the entire satellite concourse was empty sans a CX plane I believe. For the number 3 carrier at 7:15 PM at JFK that's pretty sad.

SteelChair wrote:

Does anyone know just how profitable JFK is for Delta? My guess is the margons are rather thin.

Isn't it economically wiser for AA to have a prescence at JFK, but their hub at PHL, where there is still sizable population but much less competition?

AA has had a large presence at JFK for 70 years, they have a PHL hub from a merger. No MBA's or CPA's decided "lets open a PHL hub because there is less competition". Allegheny was a predecessor of Usairways, it started a PHL hub when it was just a regional airline. AA has always existed at JFK NOT being the biggest or second biggest airline, remember there were things called TWA & Pan AM. In the 1980's began to make miserable for those two with 767 flights to Continental Europe, some of which it still flies today or were inherited from TWA and NOT moved to PHL. Contrary to popular rumor AA still flies to places like Paris, Madrid, Barcelona and Milan plus LHR.

jfk777 wrote:

SteelChair wrote:

Does anyone know just how profitable JFK is for Delta? My guess is the margons are rather thin.

Isn't it economically wiser for AA to have a prescence at JFK, but their hub at PHL, where there is still sizable population but much less competition?

AA has had a large presence at JFK for 70 years, they have a PHL hub from a merger. No MBA's or CPA's decided "lets open a PHL hub because there is less competition". Allegheny was a predecessor of Usairways, it started a PHL hub when it was just a regional airline. AA has always existed at JFK NOT being the biggest or second biggest airline, remember there were things called TWA & Pan AM. In the 1980's began to make miserable for those two with 767 flights to Continental Europe, some of which it still flies today or were inherited from TWA and NOT moved to PHL. Contrary to popular rumor AA still flies to places like Paris, Madrid, Barcelona and Milan plus LHR.

Well thank you for the history lesson, perhaps some on here needed it. Let's deal with the situation as it exists and the situation as it exists today due to the evolution of the industry that you described is that American has a Hub at Philly. My comment is that it's probably more profitable than a hub operation at JFK and yet as you rightly point out they still retain a presence at JFK in markets that are profitable or strategically important. In orher words, AA is fine with the strategy as it exists. They arent flying to Asia because 1) their partners do, and 2) it isn't very high yielding. My guess is that their partners international service levels and scores are much high then theirs (like the other 2 US3).

The only successful NYC-Asia service was CO, built of having a true ominidirectional hub EWR. Combined now with United‘s traditional strength in Asia, I don’t see anyone else having the chance
. Least of all AA

I don't see AA adding any new international routes out of JFK. If anything, AA likely cuts more JFK flights - GIG, CDG, MAD, FCO, and MXP seem likely to disappear in the near future.

Austin787 wrote:

I don't see AA adding any new international routes out of JFK. If anything, AA likely cuts more JFK flights - GIG, CDG, MAD, FCO, and MXP seem likely to disappear in the near future.

Why would RIO and Madrid disappear when AA has or soon will have JV's to those cities. Why such doomsday prognostications for cities Delta and United also fly to ? AA has flown from JFK to Paris for 30 years and does from hubs on the east coast or midwest. Such negative AA comments.

jfk777 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I don't see AA adding any new international routes out of JFK. If anything, AA likely cuts more JFK flights - GIG, CDG, MAD, FCO, and MXP seem likely to disappear in the near future.

Why would RIO and Madrid disappear when AA has or soon will have JV's to those cities. Why such doomsday prognostications for cities Delta and United also fly to ? AA has flown from JFK to Paris for 30 years and does from hubs on the east coast or midwest. Such negative AA comments.

AA typically defers to its JV partners on international routes.
AA used to fly JFK-GIG year round; now they fly it seasonal (usually the first step towards ending a flight). In fact, if the JV goes through AA could drop its own metal from the route and defer to LATAM.
AA flies JFK-MAD and JFK-CDG on 767, and they plan to pull all 767s from JFK so that makes those routes candidates for the chop block. Maybe they fly those routes during the summer on 777 but I'm not willing to bet on it. AA can have JV partner Iberia add an extra frequency on JFK-MAD. Delta and Air France have a stronghold on JFK-CDG plus they both have a superior onboard product; I don't think AA can compete there.

jfk777 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I don't see AA adding any new international routes out of JFK. If anything, AA likely cuts more JFK flights - GIG, CDG, MAD, FCO, and MXP seem likely to disappear in the near future.

Why would RIO and Madrid disappear when AA has or soon will have JV's to those cities. Why such doomsday prognostications

Such negative AA comments.

It's similar to the endless threads and comments about how AA will or should shutter the PHX hub...talk about a horse that's been beaten to death!

There are too many armchair CEO's in these forums who don't know what they're talking about or who make comments which are based solely on their own personal desires/preferences, like, I'm sorry to say, the OP of this very thread who thinks AA should consider launching flights to Asia from JFK. I fully agree with everyone who's said that it's not going to happen. In today's world and market realities, it isn't going to work for them. AA will retain existing markets at JFK which are PROFITABLE for them to retain, and will only add any that WOULD BE profitable. It's as simple as that folks. Austin787 thinks it likely they'll cut more...well, if GIG/CDG/MAD/FCO/MXP are profitable, why would they cut them? Why do you think they're "likely to disappear in the near future"? What do you base that statement on? What facts? Should any of those turn UNPROFITABLE, then yeah, they'll cut. But none of us on here can make a statement like that unless we have access to AA's internal data which they use to base such decisions on. People need to stop prognosticating and just accept that if something is cut, it's because it wasn't profitable to continue it, and leave emotion/sentiment/personal feelings out of it.

Austin787 wrote:

AA flies JFK-MAD and JFK-CDG on 767, and they plan to pull all 767s from JFK so that makes those routes candidates for the chop block. Maybe they fly those routes during the summer on 777 but I'm not willing to bet on it. AA can have JV partner Iberia add an extra frequency on JFK-MAD. Delta and Air France have a stronghold on JFK-CDG plus they both have a superior onboard product; I don't think AA can compete there.

As of now, both JFK-MAD and JFK-CDG are loaded for next summer on 772 equipment. Don't forget that CDG is basically AA's strongest non-partner-hub long haul destination. They serve CDG from all hubs except LAX and PHX.

Also, if AA really is intent on keeping some NYC coporate clients, I can't see them doing away with JFK-CDG. MAD is another story given the IB JV - if there comes a point where AA has a better use for that 772 elsewhere, it wouldn't really hurt their overall position to hand JFK-MAD completely over to IB.

FSDan wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

AA flies JFK-MAD and JFK-CDG on 767, and they plan to pull all 767s from JFK so that makes those routes candidates for the chop block. Maybe they fly those routes during the summer on 777 but I'm not willing to bet on it. AA can have JV partner Iberia add an extra frequency on JFK-MAD. Delta and Air France have a stronghold on JFK-CDG plus they both have a superior onboard product; I don't think AA can compete there.

As of now, both JFK-MAD and JFK-CDG are loaded for next summer on 772 equipment. Don't forget that CDG is basically AA's strongest non-partner-hub long haul destination. They serve CDG from all hubs except LAX and PHX.

Also, if AA really is intent on keeping some NYC coporate clients, I can't see them doing away with JFK-CDG. MAD is another story given the IB JV - if there comes a point where AA has a better use for that 772 elsewhere, it wouldn't really hurt their overall position to hand JFK-MAD completely over to IB.

Everyone seems to forget that AA is a decent #2 at LGA. Combined with a rational JFK operation AA is still a player in NYC. Maybe the locals are all about DL and B6, and UA at EWR, but there are still millions of travelers going TO NYC from AA's stronghold/feeder markets and AA will do just fine going forward in NYC.

American airllines has one world partners and codeshares that fly out of JFK to asia. I am sure they don't want confilct with their routes. What would be the point of having a partner if you are taking all of the passengers and america is american airlines turf.

prinxe1 wrote:

American airllines has one world partners and codeshares that fly out of JFK to asia. I am sure they don't want confilct with their routes. What would be the point of having a partner if you are taking all of the passengers and america is american airlines turf.

You ressurected a thread that had been dormant for four months to say what had already been said? Interesting.

winginit wrote:

prinxe1 wrote:

American airllines has one world partners and codeshares that fly out of JFK to asia. I am sure they don't want confilct with their routes. What would be the point of having a partner if you are taking all of the passengers and america is american airlines turf.

You ressurected a thread that had been dormant for four months to say what had already been said? Interesting.

My apologies. I guess i missed some sections when i was reading through it

I wouldn’t argue that AA should restart considering JL already serves the route for One World. If anything I’d argue DL or SkyTeam in general has a hole flying nonstop between New York and Tokyo, but that ship has sailed away several years ago. KE or bust (or DTW).

Well AA already flies to Asia from NYC, NOT just through their own metal. TYO with JL and HKG with CX (JFK and EWR). I am not sure what the pax numbers 9r demand are for both NYC-TYO/HKG but given the chance, maybe AA should.

LAX-HKG is already served by AA and CX and both codeshare on each other's flights.

I think Russia limits the number of airlines over its' airspace to one airline per country. I think for the US that's UA. So AA would need to take a pretty bad routing to make this happen to avoid Russia.

WeatherPilot wrote:

I think Russia limits the number of airlines over its' airspace to one airline per country. I think for the US that's UA. So AA would need to take a pretty bad routing to make this happen to avoid Russia.

Incorrect. How do you think AA does DFW-HKG without hitting Russia? https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flig ... 5#1fbcc417

jfklganyc wrote:

SteelChair wrote:

Does anyone know just how profitable JFK is for Delta? My guess is the margons are rather thin.

Isn't it economically wiser for AA to have a prescence at JFK, but their hub at PHL, where there is still sizable population but much less competition?

We will find out in 10 years. That is when the decisions AA is making today will shake out.

No one knows if they will regret giving away New York at this time

When will Terminal 8 be expanded?

With fares sometimes at $500 or less between NYC and Asia, many should be thankful that some folks on the Asia side have deep pockets keeping the NYC/Asia service at the levels there is now.