LGAviation wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

LGAviation wrote:

Quite a few students are going to Europe, way cheaper in Spring! Just had some over this week.

Interesting, I must be getting old!

Or I must be living in a bubble No, in all honesty, you're average American college kid doesnt go to Europe for Spring Break but some do! But even though our friend actually went on AA, I suspect the majority of spring break travelers to Europe would go on DY or the likes and are not the target group for the CLT flight. Additionally, I have a strong feeling a lot of them would go to school in the Northeast and wouldnt like the backtracking to CLT either.

Spring Break study abroad trips are becoming sizable as of late...

Plus you have families with Elementary-Middle-High School students who travel abroad as well.

You would be surprised, not every single person heads down to Ft Lauderdale or Orlando this time of year

Midwestindy wrote:

You would be surprised, not every single person heads down to Ft Lauderdale or Orlando this time of year

Yeah, they're in Cancun, too. They'll head to Munich for Octoberfest in the fall...

flyingclrs727 wrote:

What's the advantage for AA to do this route? MUC is a Star Alliance hub.

CLT is an AA hub. The area around CLT has lots of business ties to Germany, and Bavaria in particular. MUC may be a Star hub, but it's also an important European city for both business and culture, and a city that AA wants to serve. Because of the ties between the Carolinas (and the South more broadly) and Germany, and the huge amount of connections AA can offer through CLT (including to Florida, which is a major destination for German tourists), AA felt that they had a better shot at making CLT-MUC work than they had with PHL-MUC.

My goodness, a.net goes crazy these days if an international route doesn't have a hub on both ends! Here are just a few examples of European routes the US3 fly with no significant feed on the Europe end:

Star/SkyTeam hubs served by AA: CDG, AMS, FRA, MUC, ZRH, FCO, PRG, ATH
SkyTeam/Oneworld hubs served by UA: LHR, MAD, CDG, AMS, FCO, PRG
Oneworld/Star hubs served by DL: LHR, BRU, CPH, FRA, MUC, ZRH, ATH

Many high school groups do Europe on spring break, I went with 200 (4 buses) in 1966. There are several tour operators that let teachers fly free to take groups of French, Spanish, History and other students.

compensateme wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

You would be surprised, not every single person heads down to Ft Lauderdale or Orlando this time of year

Yeah, they're in Cancun, too. They'll head to Munich for Octoberfest in the fall...

Don’t forget TPA and RSW.

Judging how a new route is doing starting on a Monday in April is not fair. Judge it after 90 days and how future reservations look for July until September. Not everything at AA has to start in DFW.

TTailedTiger wrote:

airportugal310 wrote:

Anybody who thinks a route is a home run right from the bat is delusional...routes take time to mature. That's a fact you can take to the bank

But for how long? Look at how quickly Delta axed SEA-KIX.

what are you talking about? its still bookable, into October at least. In fact, if you look at the DL seat mapper for the next few days, the flight is going out full with J one way walk up fares priced at $5,000.00. Color me stupid but I'd say that flight is not axed and in fact is doing quite well, quite the opposite in fact of AA CLT - MUC

jfk777 wrote:

J Not everything at AA has to start in DFW.

Yes it does.

compensateme wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

You would be surprised, not every single person heads down to Ft Lauderdale or Orlando this time of year

Yeah, they're in Cancun, too. They'll head to Munich for Octoberfest in the fall...

I went to Paris on spring break my junior year in '99 on TWA. I wasn't the only college student on the plane. So while Mexico and Florida might have been more popular, there were a bunch of us going to Europe.

jumbojet wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

airportugal310 wrote:

Anybody who thinks a route is a home run right from the bat is delusional...routes take time to mature. That's a fact you can take to the bank

But for how long? Look at how quickly Delta axed SEA-KIX.

what are you talking about? its still bookable, into October at least. In fact, if you look at the DL seat mapper for the next few days, the flight is going out full with J one way walk up fares priced at $5,000.00. Color me stupid but I'd say that flight is not axed and in fact is doing quite well, quite the opposite in fact of AA CLT - MUC

Ok you can drop the attitude.

viewtopic.php?t=1414725

Ishrion wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Just clarifying, I made this because the loads look me by surprise and wasn’t expecting a route like this to be performing like this.

Yes, it’ll probably perform better in the coming months as well other AA routes(ORD-LHR is around half full give or take?)

You should clarify the Y loads. J is booked out with paid pax. Only 2-4 J seats available.

As far as I know, today’s flight has 9/28 booked in business. Usually it should be /20 since today got upgauged to an a333 again.

In Economy, around 84 is booked, or 31%.

Checking Saturday, it’s full in J.

Todays flight went out with 13 open up front and 178 in back. Yeah, thats alot, but its a new route. Friday has 2 open up front and 60 in back.

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

b747400erf wrote:

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

No way AA can compete with LH on this route. While neither carrier has a hub on both ends, I will wager AA drops this route long before, if ever, LH does.

b747400erf wrote:

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

Thanks for your gracious words, 6 year old account.

jumbojet wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

airportugal310 wrote:

Anybody who thinks a route is a home run right from the bat is delusional...routes take time to mature. That's a fact you can take to the bank

But for how long? Look at how quickly Delta axed SEA-KIX.

what are you talking about? its still bookable, into October at least. In fact, if you look at the DL seat mapper for the next few days, the flight is going out full with J one way walk up fares priced at $5,000.00. Color me stupid but I'd say that flight is not axed and in fact is doing quite well, quite the opposite in fact of AA CLT - MUC

He might be talking about last time. SEA-KIX has been started and dropped twice before by NW and DL.

EvanWSFO wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

No way AA can compete with LH on this route. While neither carrier has a hub on both ends, I will wager AA drops this route long before, if ever, LH does.

You do realize US kicked LH out on CLT-FRA before and BA to London

Boof02671 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

No way AA can compete with LH on this route. While neither carrier has a hub on both ends, I will wager AA drops this route long before, if ever, LH does.

You do realize US kicked LH out on CLT-FRA before and BA to London

Would you say LH kicked AA out of PHL-MUC/FRA then upgraded their FRA flight to a 744?

Nonsense post. Bookings for May are already heavier than current early April (slow season) bookings. Not already failing. I wouldn't be surprised if this route ends up being very successful.

JFKMan wrote:

Nonsense post. Bookings for May are already heavier than current early April (slow season) bookings. Not already failing. I wouldn't be surprised if this route ends up being very successful.

It definitely is. They're showing around 100 or less seats remaining, mainly in Economy.

Ishrion wrote:

JFKMan wrote:

Nonsense post. Bookings for May are already heavier than current early April (slow season) bookings. Not already failing. I wouldn't be surprised if this route ends up being very successful.

It definitely is. They're showing around 100 or less seats remaining, mainly in Economy.

Exactly. Which is great for a month PLUS out. Some days have 60 or less seats remaining.

JFKMan wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

JFKMan wrote:

Nonsense post. Bookings for May are already heavier than current early April (slow season) bookings. Not already failing. I wouldn't be surprised if this route ends up being very successful.

It definitely is. They're showing around 100 or less seats remaining, mainly in Economy.

Exactly. Which is great for a month PLUS out. Some days have 60 or less seats remaining.

Yeah, it took me by surprise that this week was performing so badly. I just checked some other flights, DFW/PHL/CLT/JFK/MIA-LHR has around 100+ seats in economy and open seats in the premium cabins. Seasonal routes that just restarted like DFW/ORD-FCO seem to be doing well at least...

First of all I am going to repeat what has been said and say it's silly to be discussing this when the flight has only operated 5 times. It's also silly to be going off of a seat map.

However, I highly doubt that CLT-MUC can support two carriers. IAD-MUC barely supports two carriers (I believe that LH's flight doesn't operate daily in the off season, I could be wrong), and IAD-MUC is a much larger market and IAD is a *A hub.

IMHO, I believe that AA will be the one to fail. LH has been on the route for 15 years now, and has likely developed the necessary corporate contracts essential to keep the route going. IIRC, the route is sustained by the German (and German-owned companies) POS. I highly doubt that Siemens or BMW or any of the other German firms that utilize the LH service will now jump ship to AA. I've also been under the impression that J makes the flight, everything else in YCL is just gravy.

This is just my personal experience and doesn't represent the routes financials or day to day operations, but when I have utilized the LH flight, the back of the bus seemed to be packed with Indian VFR, and a good number of folks from Eastern Europe. Case in point: when I flew the route in March 2017, we were extremely late leaving from CLT, and the crew announced prior to departure that several connections weren't going to be made (a good number of the pax on board seemed to be connecting to the SQ flight, in fact). Anyway, there were bad thunderstorms at CLT, and we taxied out for departure only to hold for about 90 minutes due to weather, and we had to go back to the gate to refuel. When we went back to the gate, a girl from a couple of rows back asked to call her family in NC to tell her what happened. After the call, she had told me that I was the only one she could find that had a US cell phone...everyone else had a overseas device and I guess they didn't want to use an international charge on her.

It'll be interesting to see how LH's service does on the A350, which is an increase of 38 seats.

To be fair, you can't really compare LH + AA on CLT-MUC to US+ BA on CLT-LON and US+LH on CLT-FRA. First, I'm not entirely sure that US and LH ever operated concurrently on the route together, and CLT was simply a tech-stop on FRA-CLT-IAH where they also accepted passengers. I don't think LH ever operated CLT-FRA without a second USA terminating leg. It's unfair to compare it to US/BA as well, as the airline industry was suffering from the aftermath of 9/11 at the time. BA switched the CLT-LGW nonstop to CLT-BWI-LHR, which likely killed the route, in addition to the overall economic downturn.

Boof02671 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Why would AA even try to go against LH? LH has been on CLT-MUC for years and no doubt has all of the corporate contracts.

Cause when we were still US we chased LH out of CLT when they flew FRA-CLT-IAH in a 747 Combi. And we chased BA out also.

You mean like 1981 or so? Yeah, thats relevant to todays competitive situation.

USAirALB wrote:

However, I highly doubt that CLT-MUC can support two carriers. I

I'd agree 100%. However CLT-MUC is not the only market for either carrier on that route. AA will have more of an advantage with CLT being such a fortress hub for them. Being able to route all their MUC demand through CLT. LH can only pull local CLT traffic... to anywhere sure. But CLT local market certainly has its limits. Especially when that CLT local market is already biased towards AA.

USAirALB wrote:

First of all I am going to repeat what has been said and say it's silly to be discussing this when the flight has only operated 5 times. It's also silly to be going off of a seat map.

However, I highly doubt that CLT-MUC can support two carriers. IAD-MUC barely supports two carriers (I believe that LH's flight doesn't operate daily in the off season, I could be wrong), and IAD-MUC is a much larger market and IAD is a *A hub.

IMHO, I believe that AA will be the one to fail. LH has been on the route for 15 years now, and has likely developed the necessary corporate contracts essential to keep the route going. IIRC, the route is sustained by the German (and German-owned companies) POS. I highly doubt that Siemens or BMW or any of the other German firms that utilize the LH service will now jump ship to AA. I've also been under the impression that J makes the flight, everything else in YCL is just gravy.

This is just my personal experience and doesn't represent the routes financials or day to day operations, but when I have utilized the LH flight, the back of the bus seemed to be packed with Indian VFR, and a good number of folks from Eastern Europe. Case in point: when I flew the route in March 2017, we were extremely late leaving from CLT, and the crew announced prior to departure that several connections weren't going to be made (a good number of the pax on board seemed to be connecting to the SQ flight, in fact). Anyway, there were bad thunderstorms at CLT, and we taxied out for departure only to hold for about 90 minutes due to weather, and we had to go back to the gate to refuel. When we went back to the gate, a girl from a couple of rows back asked to call her family in NC to tell her what happened. After the call, she had told me that I was the only one she could find that had a US cell phone...everyone else had a overseas device and I guess they didn't want to use an international charge on her.

It'll be interesting to see how LH's service does on the A350, which is an increase of 38 seats.

To be fair, you can't really compare LH + AA on CLT-MUC to US+ BA on CLT-LON and US+LH on CLT-FRA. First, I'm not entirely sure that US and LH ever operated concurrently on the route together, and CLT was simply a tech-stop on FRA-CLT-IAH where they also accepted passengers. I don't think LH ever operated CLT-FRA without a second USA terminating leg. It's unfair to compare it to US/BA as well, as the airline industry was suffering from the aftermath of 9/11 at the time. BA switched the CLT-LGW nonstop to CLT-BWI-LHR, which likely killed the route, in addition to the overall economic downturn.

I worked international Utility at US we most certainly operated the routes at the same time. We flew CLT- FRA-CLT, while LH flew FRA-CLT-IAH in a 747 Combi.

Nicoeddf wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Why would AA even try to go against LH? LH has been on CLT-MUC for years and no doubt has all of the corporate contracts.

Cause when we were still US we chased LH out of CLT when they flew FRA-CLT-IAH in a 747 Combi. And we chased BA out also.

You mean like 1981 or so? Yeah, thats relevant to todays competitive situation.

Try the 90s.

Ishrion wrote:

JFKMan wrote:

Nonsense post. Bookings for May are already heavier than current early April (slow season) bookings. Not already failing. I wouldn't be surprised if this route ends up being very successful.

It definitely is. They're showing around 100 or less seats remaining, mainly in Economy.

I am unsure if you understand the way route viability is determined. When a new route is started it is already losing money from the get go. There are significant expenses incurred by adding a new station, even a new route from an existing station. Most new routes are expected to have a revenue breakeven point within the first 12-18 months. Additionally each route is forecasted to have a certain annual performance based upon LF, CASM, RASM, and cargo revenues. Some flights are supported with revenue guarantees from corporate contracts, government/local subsidies. A good example of a routes with a revenue guarantee are AA's RDU-LHR or DL's ATL-STR. AA gives routes typically 6 months at least to prove their viability, when they are reevaluated. Routes performance are reviewed on an ongoing basis. However if you ask any route planner or revenue analyst they will tell you the route cannot be deemed a success or failure at this early on.

Boof02671 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

4 days into a route deciding it is a failure and claiming load factor off a seatmap site. Great contributions, 1 month old account.

No way AA can compete with LH on this route. While neither carrier has a hub on both ends, I will wager AA drops this route long before, if ever, LH does.

You do realize US kicked LH out on CLT-FRA before and BA to London

US kicked BA out because there was no feed on the CLT end. Now that it is AA, it doesn't matter. AA and BA are metal neutral. It doesn't matter which airline flies it, revenue is shared evenly. As for PHL, it's a much larger market with enough O&D to support it.

Seat maps tend to be only reliable right before flight time, or when they go dark as it gets turned over to Airport (GA) control. A few weeks ago flying JFK/MIA on a 777 the seat map showed plenty of seats. However, at the gate there were people waiting for seat assignments. I was Op Up (from PE sold as Y) to J. Ultimately all confirmed and some stand by paxs got seats.

OzarkD9S wrote:

Scarebus34 wrote:

This is fairly typical for this time of year. Spring break is basically over so the east bound flights have lighter loads and the west bounds usually have heavy loads through the first week in April then will drop off.

This is the second time Spring Break was mentioned in this thread. I have to wonder, who the heck goes to Europe on Spring Break? Don't like 90% of Spring Breakers go to a beach somewhere? Lovely as Munich is...not a place I would consider for a beach vacation. Or Spring Break.

Shoulder seasons are the best time to visit Europe. Cheaper flights, less crowds, cheaper accommodations, etc. I normally go in November, but went for Spring break twice. Can't beat 10 minute lines to get up the Eiffel Tower or 5 minutes to get into the Anne Frank house.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Why would AA even try to go against LH? LH has been on CLT-MUC for years and no doubt has all of the corporate contracts.

But, a lot of corporations tell employees that they don't have to fly the preferred carrier, if the preferred carrier doesn't have a non-stop, while another carrier does. So, for businesses in the Southeast who are contracted with AA, it may be that now employees have to fly AA via CLT to MUC, rather than fly LH.

My wife worked in the Chicago office of a company based in Cincinnati. Back when DL had its CVG hub, the company had its sole contract with DL. So, she had to fly Delta to CVG or ATL, but she could fly AA or UA to just about any place else out of ORD.

Boof02671 wrote:

Nicoeddf wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

Cause when we were still US we chased LH out of CLT when they flew FRA-CLT-IAH in a 747 Combi. And we chased BA out also.

You mean like 1981 or so? Yeah, thats relevant to todays competitive situation.

Try the 90s.

The 90s are equally irrelevant.

caverunner17 wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Scarebus34 wrote:

This is fairly typical for this time of year. Spring break is basically over so the east bound flights have lighter loads and the west bounds usually have heavy loads through the first week in April then will drop off.

This is the second time Spring Break was mentioned in this thread. I have to wonder, who the heck goes to Europe on Spring Break? Don't like 90% of Spring Breakers go to a beach somewhere? Lovely as Munich is...not a place I would consider for a beach vacation. Or Spring Break.

Shoulder seasons are the best time to visit Europe. Cheaper flights, less crowds, cheaper accommodations, etc. I normally go in November, but went for Spring break twice. Can't beat 10 minute lines to get up the Eiffel Tower or 5 minutes to get into the Anne Frank house.

Really though? The vast majority of college students want to maximize party time. Do they really care about the Eiffel Tower or the Anne Frank house? I'd say some of the more affluent might, but Europe basically takes two days off the vacation . IMO, most will fly 3 to 4 hours and be drunk by dinner time.

EvanWSFO wrote:

Really though? The vast majority of college students want to maximize party time. Do they really care about the Eiffel Tower or the Anne Frank house? I'd say some of the more affluent might, but Europe basically takes two days off the vacation . IMO, most will fly 3 to 4 hours and be drunk by dinner time.

That’s a stereotype. Nerds and Asian college students travel for spring break, too.

compensateme wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

Really though? The vast majority of college students want to maximize party time. Do they really care about the Eiffel Tower or the Anne Frank house? I'd say some of the more affluent might, but Europe basically takes two days off the vacation . IMO, most will fly 3 to 4 hours and be drunk by dinner time.

That’s a stereotype. Nerds and Asian college students travel for spring break, too.

Perhaps, but where I live, it's very much the reality.

TTailedTiger wrote:

AA would have to practically give the seats away for me to even consider them. A nice LH A350 vs a clapped out LUS A333. Not a difficult choice.

People here are very minority the majority of the flying public are lucky to know they are flying on a plane let alone who and what kind

LH has the better product, the corporate contracts and easy connections at MUC. When people do their homework on this route, LH comes out as the best option.

TTailedTiger wrote:

AA would have to practically give the seats away for me to even consider them. A nice LH A350 vs a clapped out LUS A333. Not a difficult choice.

Have you flown both? AA's 333's are nice, with 2 4 2 in Economy (Lufthansa's 350 is 3-3-3) and Business is 1-2-1 lie flat compared to Lufthansa's 2-2-2 lie flat. My experience is that the soft product is excellent on both. I don't see a tremendous superiority on Lufthansa at all.

dampfnudel wrote:

LH has the better product, the corporate contracts and easy connections at MUC. When people do their homework on this route, LH comes out as the best option.

First time I am seeing A.net disparage the A330, but I digress.

AA has corporate contracts, it is a massive hub for them, they are after all, the largest airline in the world. AA is anything but frivolous, they started this route after doing the homework. Corporate travelers probably aren't doing homework, they are told what to book or it is booked for them. OneWorld flyers and those not loyal to star will fly the route. That is a massive audience.

dampfnudel wrote:

LH has the better product, the corporate contracts and easy connections at MUC. When people do their homework on this route, LH comes out as the best option.

Just your subjective opinion. Most people would find there's not a major difference, either in the hard product or the soft. J is going to be nicer in AA's 1-2-1 configuration than LH's 2-2-2, and the soft product is comparable. Y is going to be Y. Lufthansa's PE is the only differentiator, as AA doesn't have it on their 333's. Otherwise, both are pretty similar.

EvanWSFO wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

This is the second time Spring Break was mentioned in this thread. I have to wonder, who the heck goes to Europe on Spring Break? Don't like 90% of Spring Breakers go to a beach somewhere? Lovely as Munich is...not a place I would consider for a beach vacation. Or Spring Break.

Shoulder seasons are the best time to visit Europe. Cheaper flights, less crowds, cheaper accommodations, etc. I normally go in November, but went for Spring break twice. Can't beat 10 minute lines to get up the Eiffel Tower or 5 minutes to get into the Anne Frank house.

Really though? The vast majority of college students want to maximize party time. Do they really care about the Eiffel Tower or the Anne Frank house? I'd say some of the more affluent might, but Europe basically takes two days off the vacation . IMO, most will fly 3 to 4 hours and be drunk by dinner time.

Somebody in my class went to AMS and BCN during spring break. Minus a quick night at a pub, he was mostly at monuments, champions league games, street food tasting, taking boat rides along canals/rivers and chilling at parks. The fraction of college students who party excessively is a LOT lower than you might think

asuflyer wrote:

A good example of a routes with a revenue guarantee are AA's RDU-LHR.

This is about the 20th time I’ve seen this. Maybe 10+ years ago that was the case, but it hasn’t been true for a very long time.

TTailedTiger wrote:

airportugal310 wrote:

Anybody who thinks a route is a home run right from the bat is delusional...routes take time to mature. That's a fact you can take to the bank

But for how long? Look at how quickly Delta axed SEA-KIX.

Depends every airline and rout has different conditions. I know in the world of texting and lack of any patience that It might seem like a fair question. In the world of big dollar business I'd hope they did some home work and have certain targets they want to reach. Heck if initial booking were not high enough they might even cancel the rout before it starts. Each airline and situation is different and can take months or years. We can only guess on here with out inside info.

flyboy7974 wrote:

You’re all missing the greatest drive..... our corporate clients dictated the swap and desire for the route to be switched to CLT.

The corporate contracts & their desire to have connections through the CLT hub eventually drove the change. Why connect through PHL to one Eagle Flight that most likely cancels on an IFR day when CLT might offer numerous flights and connections for those clients. While I am PHL based and disappointed by losing MUC, I understand the economics.

On the flip, with that & playing devils advocate, I am also told early bookings through CLT are abysmal & AA would like to return it to PHL. There are many other routes that AA has waiting for PHL but unfortunately, once again, limited and zero gate space eliminates those for now.

If there is no room at PHL why not us JFK. Look I know the AA history on this but how is AA going to make PHL its European Gateway if it has no gate space? Seems like a poor plan if the facilities are not there?

Pi7472000 wrote:

AA service is so awful it is not surprising! They have bare bones service in and unfriendly staff! I would pick Lufthansa any day to Europe over AA. Fares have been really cheap when I looked on this route for AA, but I would pay more to fly Lufthansa to be treated with some respect.

Not True I fly AA and have used LH several times. AA service is not the awful by a long means. Of course you can and will get hit and miss service on any airline. US airlines have improved a ton since the early 2000's I'm a paid J flyer with a tone of Paid out of my pocket AA flights. I've had some bad ones but get a lot more good ones then not. AA,DL,UA have upped there game quite a bit maybe not to the top airlines. Heck US domestic i'll take over EU domestic anyday.

flyguy89 wrote:

Why would AA NOT challenge a major international competitor at their fortress hub?

Shoe's on the other foot - MUC isn't an AA Fortress Hub

LJ wrote:

However, LH has connections ex MUC, which AA doesn't have. Thus it works both ways.

Ding ding ding... LH is able to sustain lots of other places in the US where UA isn't big with far larger equipment than an A350.

TTailedTiger wrote:

AA would have to practically give the seats away for me to even consider them. A nice LH A350 vs a clapped out LUS A333. Not a difficult choice.

That's the most blatant mistake AA is making here. Fly both in Business Class, they cost around the same thanks to competition, and it's day and night type differences.

LGAviation wrote:

No matter how CLT is doing, AA will retain some sort of link to MUC but CLT will be difficult when I assume the BMW contract for MUC/Spartanburg would have to be with Lufthansa and AA brand recognition in Germany is fairly poor from all those years that it took them to pull the old 767s out of the country. O&D between CLT and MUC other than BMW (which is why the LH flight is one of the few to be offered only out of MUC and not FRA) should be low and it's merely a matter of finding the most convenient entry point in the US and I am surprised that the answer for MUC was CLT and not PHL when LH only competes on FRA-PHL.
I have also definitely noted when booking AA flights out of FRA recently, that AA really tries to route you through CLT which I found a little annoying given that I need to go to rural NE but they definitely did not want to see you going through LHR or DUB and PHL which would've been so much quicker. The only reason I'll fly AA is that they were half the price of the LH/UA via IAD or DL via DTW options. It's so sad to see the downsizing of FRA from 2015 where I was still on a FRA-MIA flight (which sadly though was still one of the older 767s and suffered from a diversion and an overnight delay of my onward flight) and PHL, CLT and DFW were still running but I guess I couldve expected the downsizing of FRA following the consolidation of the LUS routes which used to connect and not compete that much with LH.
I really hope AA will come back to Germany (outside Berlin) with something that doesnt require backtracking to the Northeast as badly as CLT and DFW do.

Yup, Brand recognition suffered due to old 767s, and now they're sending old 332/3s to change that view

The link they retain would be through IAG via LHR but yeah, let's wait how AA does at TXL given that DL just returned and UA alos does pretty good there after years and years of building out that flight. What hurts AA in Germany is that they depend 80% on IAG for European connections, and IAGs reputation is about as bad as US Airways. The comparison for the new AA on this site a while back was merging Dillard's with Dollar Tree, and there's something to that that drags down AA to this day.

grbauc wrote:

Not True I fly AA and have used LH several times. AA service is not the awful by a long means. Of course you can and will get hit and miss service on any airline. US airlines have improved a ton since the early 2000's I'm a paid J flyer with a tone of Paid out of my pocket AA flights. I've had some bad ones but get a lot more good ones then not. AA,DL,UA have upped there game quite a bit maybe not to the top airlines. Heck US domestic i'll take over EU domestic anyday.

There's a difference between good and "not awful" and there's arguably more "hit and miss" on US carries than on LH, strikes aside. I agree with you that EU domestic is a pain compared to US domestic, and that AA, DL and UA have improved a lot since the early 2000's, especially their soft product. But the hard product on this route is a stark contrast, as stark as EU domestic vs US domestic.

grbauc wrote:

.....................
If there is no room at PHL why not us JFK. Look I know the AA history on this but how is AA going to make PHL its European Gateway if it has no gate space? Seems like a poor plan if the facilities are not there?

PHL is already AA's European Gateway. It's not exclusively a Gate problem. It's a cheapness problem. AA could add more flights at PHL, without adding new gates, if they wanted to financially support "Banking", including the associated labor and network schedule revision costs. US Airways successfully used this multiple Bank approach at PHL for some time. Of course AA could Pay to add a few Gates, revert back to the IAD mobile lounge concept for selected flights, which was used for awhile, or just dehub PHL and move the problem to JFK, where it becomes an even bigger problem. Another possible solution is pay for the necessary structural upgrades to the A-East terminal to increase the number of international gates. Of course at PHL, nothing is easily done. AA can't even get the new Flagship Lounge construction started. CLT is just too far removed geographically and O&D wise to consider as a total replacement for PHL international traffic. It is now and has been for some time, the principal PHL Reliever.

ua900 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

AA would have to practically give the seats away for me to even consider them. A nice LH A350 vs a clapped out LUS A333. Not a difficult choice.

That's the most blatant mistake AA is making here. Fly both in Business Class, they cost around the same thanks to competition, and it's day and night type differences.

yep. American's 1-2-1 lie flat is infinitely superior to the LH 2-2-2. direct aisle access, more privacy, imho better service. I don't get why people think so highly of European carriers. they're so far behind american and asian carriers it's not even funny.

airzona11 wrote:

dampfnudel wrote:

LH has the better product, the corporate contracts and easy connections at MUC. When people do their homework on this route, LH comes out as the best option.

First time I am seeing A.net disparage the A330, but I digress.

AA has corporate contracts, it is a massive hub for them, they are after all, the largest airline in the world. AA is anything but frivolous, they started this route after doing the homework. Corporate travelers probably aren't doing homework, they are told what to book or it is booked for them. OneWorld flyers and those not loyal to star will fly the route. That is a massive audience.

I thought Aeroflot was the largest airline in the world---