AirFiero
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:36 pm

jplatts wrote:
One big difference between PDX and SEA for AS is that DL has a hub at SEA in addition to AS, whereas AS is the only carrier that has a hub at PDX. There are also some destinations that have nonstop service to PDX on only AS but have nonstop service to SEA on AS and at least one additional carrier.


Points taken regarding competition at SEA, and point to point routes from PDX. But is PDX a hub, or a focus city?

Even though UA has a fortress hub at SFO, there are some Asia-Pacific AS codeshare partners such as CX, FJ, JL, KE, and QF that serve SFO. AS can offer international connections onto CX, FJ, JL, KE, and QF flights at SFO, whereas UA doesn't codeshare with CX, FJ, JL, KE, or QF.


Two things here, UA has a lot of its own nonstop service using their own metal, and doesn’t UA have codeshare partners or aren’t they a member of an alliance?
 
737max8
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:36 pm

B1168 wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
HU adding ORD-CTU...... well, subsidies at work.
At some 10 years ago, China had the offer to sign open-sky with the United States. Who knows what will happen if that materialized? It’s just a 3rd portion open-sky, and it’s already becoming excessive; complete open sky? Ask Australians how they feel about it.

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


Gone in a year it will, but only if 3U manages to get Boston running. I hope I am kidding, but I am not... maybe their purpose is to drive UA out? Who knows.
737max8 wrote:
WN was using the MAX for a lot of these longer segments, so it does make sense to see a lot of them...things like MCO-SJC and PIT-LAX seemed to be a MAX pretty often. Can afford to cut those when you can connect folks through tons of stations in the middle of the country (HOU, DAL, STL, MCI, MDW, DEN, etc.)

Thanks for sharing!

As far as I’m concerned, I have seen (nearly) none of these 2nd tier city routes operated by equipment larger than 789/333 or more frequent than 3 weekly. That basically means nothing more than “the route exists”...


I don't think you mean't to quote me? Haha.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A343 A359 A388
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:41 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Thanks again enilria!

enilria wrote:
AA BOS-LAX OCT 6>5[6] NOV 6>5[5]
AA IAD-LAX JAN 2>1.2[1.6]
**AA LAX-STS NOV 1.0>0.1[0] DEC 1.0>0[0] JAN 0.2>0[0]

is it just me, or AA seems to be cutting back on some more stuff out of LAX?



It appears AS has won that competition. I believe AS has several STS-LAX flights with E75's vs. a single AA CRJ-700.


AS and AA also have code share etc agreements so I wondered why AA felt they needed to start this flight in the first place. I'd rather they focus on DFW and PHX flying from STS frankly.
 
jplatts
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:51 pm

AirFiero wrote:
Points taken regarding competition at SEA, and point to point routes from PDX. But is PDX a hub, or a focus city?


PDX is a hub for AS since AS already offers connections to destinations in Alaska, Hawaii, and Oregon through PDX from domestic destinations in the contiguous U.S.

AirFiero wrote:
Even though UA has a fortress hub at SFO, there are some Asia-Pacific AS codeshare partners such as CX, FJ, JL, KE, and QF that serve SFO. AS can offer international connections onto CX, FJ, JL, KE, and QF flights at SFO, whereas UA doesn't codeshare with CX, FJ, JL, KE, or QF.


Two things here, UA has a lot of its own nonstop service using their own metal, and doesn’t UA have codeshare partners or aren’t they a member of an alliance?


UA is in the Star Alliance, and there are also many other Star Alliance airlines such as AC, CA, AI, NZ, NH, OZ, TA, CM, BR, LH, SK, SQ, LX, and TK that already serve SFO. UA's Star Alliance partner TP will also be starting SFO-LIS nonstop service on June 10th.
 
dc10lover
Posts: 1535
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:11 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:19 pm

I hope the terminal at PAE can hold all the "737 / A320 passengers" if Alaska and United go mainline which they should.
Why endure the nightmare and congestion of LAX when BUR, LGB, ONT & SNA is so much easier to fly in and out of. Same with OAK & SJC when it comes to SFO.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2621
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:19 pm

Ishrion wrote:
Dropping STS before it even starts...


Not an accurate statement. It's still scheduled to operate through the summer and autumn at the very least. It's listed on wikipedia as seasonal, so I'd assume AA plans on running it next year too until proven otherwise. I'm guessing AA wasn't seeing great bookings to wine country in the winter months, which doesn't strike me as surprising.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:22 pm

tphuang wrote:
Wouldn't something like that be a higher level decision though? If they have to make a decision about which one to grow and which one to shrink, I would expect the CEO or the board to make a decision like that. I'm operating under the following assumptions:
1) growth is 2% with basically the same # of departures and more seating on each flight.
2) Growing PDX is good for margins
3) Growing SFO/LAX is bad for margins
4) Main growth is at SEA, so other hubs can only grow at the cost of each other.
So if they pick to strengthen PDX (which faces no danger) at the expense of SFO/LAX, it will essentially be admitting that their VX purchase is not working out and they can't ever be more than a distant second in SFO or a distant 5th in LAX. If they pick to strengthen SFO/LAX and cut back PDX/SJC/SAN, they will most likely have worse margin and be a giant FU for the people inside the organization that pursued organic growth all this year. And worse margin will make them possibly a takeover target. I'm not sure how a VP can make such a decision.

Yes, it is probably even a board level decision, but somebody has to build the case. The VPs aren't digging around in the data and whoever takes this role will shape that analysis. Perhaps the decision is already made and the case to be made is irrelevant, but I think the quagmire they seem to be stuck in means that they do not have a clear direction from senior management and will lean on this person for the decision. I'm sure there is also a political aspect of that since either of those decisions will be unpopular, so if you are the CEO of an employee friendly company maybe you don't want that decision purely on your hands?

So, I think growing PDX is good for PDX, but I think you can make a good case that it pulls connecting traffic away from SEA and AS needs that connecting traffic to win the battle with DL. I'm not sure either is a very clear choice. We've seen as they have shifted routes that PDX is pretty clearly a sacrificial cow when SEA needs help in the form of capacity to fight Delta. Anyway, I actually don't know which is the better choice, but I see the arguments.

Agreed on the "At the cost of each other". I think that's why either PDX or SFO has to go. Having said that it is hard to imagine PDX getting much bigger without hurting SEA or SFO getting much bigger because of gates.

Agreed on your final points, except I think it's a closer decision than you make it because of the self-competition of PDX/SEA. It's a little bit like PHL/JFK or IAD/EWR.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2621
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:27 pm

enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
HU adding ORD-CTU...... well, subsidies at work.

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:37 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
LAXBUR wrote:
Haha. According to people on here the lack of Alaska’s schedule changes either means the airline has stabilized or is in trouble. This site is funny. Maybe...just maybe...the current schedules are working well enough. So dramatic.

It is incredibly unusual. The people saying things have "stabilized" have no basis for saying so. It's a rudderless ship that is under pressure from all angles and has no leader in place for the most critical part of their business.


Or is there a basis of saying there is turmoil at AS?

It's kind of the opposite of turmoil. They are just keeping on the same course while they develop a new strategy.
jplatts wrote:
One big difference between PDX and SEA for AS is that DL has a hub at SEA in addition to AS, whereas AS is the only carrier that has a hub at PDX. There are also some destinations that have nonstop service to PDX on only AS but have nonstop service to SEA on AS and at least one additional carrier.

Before DL came into SEA, they way AS looked at PDX was that SEA as an "O&D hub+heavy State of Alaska" and PDX was the regional connect hub. O&D hubs are much easier to attack which is what Delta did and is also doing at BOS because you are on theoretical equal traffic footing from day 1. Normally if you attack a hub you have the existing hub operator with 70% connecting traffic on every flight giving them a huge load advantage, PLUS the corporate contracts/loyalty nailed down. In an O&D hub the first advantage is gone. AS's strategy was to shift some of the PDX connecting traffic to SEA to shore up the hub in the battle with DL and give them more of a network advantage...at the expense of PDX. The problem with all these strategies is that kinda half-implemented all of them. They never moved all the PDX feed to SEA. They never did anything with the SFO hub acquired from VX. They said transcon from California was VX's crown jewel and yet seem to be basically in reverse in those markets. They said slots at DCA/LGA, plus DAL were key and that's all basically gone (DAL as a focus point is gone, just a feeder West now). So, they didn't really do anything to monetize all these pieces. The company is doing fine, but they didn't get any network synergies out of any of this. That's where they were hoping the last VP would take them and where they now hope that whoever comes into the spot will lead them.
B1168 wrote:
Gone in a year it will, but only if 3U manages to get Boston running. I hope I am kidding, but I am not... maybe their purpose is to drive UA out? Who knows.

Flying ORD-CTU will only drive themselves out. It's not a meaningful enough connect to UA to matter.
AirFiero wrote:
enilria wrote:
SANFan wrote:
AAG has, in the past, constantly adjusted schedules, including minor as well as major frequency changes -- which show up in these OAG threads -- along with time & equipment changes that don't. Even if the carrier continues its search for a new VP Network Planning, is there nothing happening in the entire department? (And should such a search be taking so long?)

I sure hope things change soon -- this is getting really troubling...

bb

I think a lot of this boils down to who is authorized to make decisions about PDX and SFO. The Planning team has been in a holding pattern during the recruitment process for the VP. I think there are factions that want to shrink PDX and those that don't. Same with SFO. There has been nobody to break that tie, so nothing is being done. I think even though it is now looking unlikely they will fill the VP spot, they will likely put somebody in charge of that decision whether it is an existing VP expanding their role to include Planning, or if they take a Director and give him/her the authority. I would expect one of those things to happen soon, and then hopefully we will see some closure on these things. My guess is that since that would, by definition (unless they hire a Director level from outside), be an insider they would lean toward the traditional AS network which would mean PDX stays and SFO withers. Just my guess... If they go with an outsider I think it is much more likely the opposite would happened.

The case for each is opposite:
SFO: No market control/unique connecting geography/Mega city/Need int'l long-haul to capture business travel.
PDX: Strong market control/duplicative connecting geography/not a mega city/don't need int'l long haul to capture business travel.


Is it possible that we a.nutters are addicted to change? If nothing is happening, we get wrestless and start unfounded speculation about bad news?

As for SFO, I’ll admit I’m not a fan, but trying to be objective, I don’t know what AS thought they would accomplish at SFO. I know, the criticism of AS and it’s merger with VX has been gone over to death. And I *like* AS. But there were at least two things that AS was up against at SFO...

1. VX had a unique identity and market niche. The chances of AS capturing that same trendy techy thing that VX was attempting seems unlikely.

2. UA’s fortress hub at SFO...what were/are the realistic chances of competing with UA there? What would AS offer as competition? They are what I’d call a “full service carrier “, meaning first/business class, reserved seating, and so on. They are straddling the line between full service and low cost. So what is AS offering that UA can’t deliver better, with more flights and more choices? Or WN can provide with low fares?

As for PDX, I’ve often wondered how they can profit from having a hub there with their main hub just 120 miles north.

LAX is a zoo,with a ton of competition and not enough gates to go around.

The one place where people welcome change? LOL. Yes, they squandered the VX acquisition. You could make the argument that WN's purchase of FL was identical. I think it's too early to say that they can't still make something of the pieces, though.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1539
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:59 pm

enilria wrote:
Yes, they squandered the VX acquisition.
No they didn't. They eliminated a competitor and B6 is still largely a non factor out west. Despite the talk, it was never about much more than that.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 5114
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:15 pm

A couple of comments by one troubled by the almost total lack of any activity coming out of AAG for 2 months now.

To all of those claiming this is much ado about nothing, I just wonder how long this thread would be today if someone had reported that UA, DL, AA, or F9 had made no schedule adjustments or tweaks for 2 months? Would the same folks simply say, "Oh, AA has simply reached a stabilized state and all their frequencies are perfectly balanced. There's no need to change a thing"? Heck, even WN is doing much more close-in tweaking of routes and schedules than they used to.

If there is one phase of the airline business that is generally extremely dynamic, it's schedules! So I'm to believe that AS issued their peak summer 2019 flight schedule in late 2018 and has not felt it necessary to make hardly any changes since? And just 4 months out, March, they are still completely satisfied with frequencies, equipment, and times of practically every route and flight in their system?

There very well could be all kinds of fuss in SEA about "PDX vs. SFO", and about a new VP Network Planning, etc., but someone should be in charge and able to keep the Network Planning department functioning! I've followed AS schedule changes for decades -- that's my thing -- and this just isn't normal, and it isn't right.

I quipped a couple of months ago on some thread that perhaps AS temporarily sent all the network planners to the various paint hangers to help get the VX red-tails painted quickly. Seems like it's time to send them back to their desks and offices in SEA!

bb
 
dr1980
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:55 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:28 pm

Too bad about the WS YHZ-BOS flight, it was nice having choice and it was a good option to connect with Delta services to the southern US. I’m actually flying WS to Boston tomorrow, although my return Friday will be on AC as I needed a morning flight.
Dave/CYHZ
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:32 pm

FSDan wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
HU adding ORD-CTU...... well, subsidies at work.

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.


As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

CTU and CKG are all new markets in terms of North American routes, and keeping that spot prevents any other carriers from taking away. So go-backs rarely happen in China......

It seems to me that adding capacities on existing LAX/JFK routes and seeking a transfer partner is a much better and cheaper thing for them to do... I honestly have no idea how it makes any sense.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:39 pm

FSDan wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
HU adding ORD-CTU...... well, subsidies at work.

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.


As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

CTU and CKG are all new markets in terms of North American routes, and keeping that spot prevents any other carriers from taking away. So go-backs rarely happen in China......

It seems to me that adding capacities on existing LAX/JFK routes and seeking a transfer partner is a much better and cheaper thing for them to do... I honestly have no idea how it makes any sense.

Anybody knows how 788s flying TLV-GRU/YVR-BNE are doing? It seems to me that the 788 flying CTU-ORD will be in similar conditions.
 
ucdtim17
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 6:38 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:59 pm

enilria wrote:
XE BUR-CCR MAY 0>1.6[0.9]
XE BUR-LAS MAY 0>6[1.0]
XE BUR-OAK MAY 0>5[1.2]
XE LAS-OAK MAY 0>3[0]
XE LAS-SNA MAY 0>3[0]
XE OAK-SNA MAY 0>1.9[0]


Nice to see someone taking advantage of AS's avoidance of OAK. 6x to BUR, 4x to SNA, 4x to LAS (by July) are approaching competitive with WN for many schedules.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3247
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:10 am

ucdtim17 wrote:
enilria wrote:
XE BUR-CCR MAY 0>1.6[0.9]
XE BUR-LAS MAY 0>6[1.0]
XE BUR-OAK MAY 0>5[1.2]
XE LAS-OAK MAY 0>3[0]
XE LAS-SNA MAY 0>3[0]
XE OAK-SNA MAY 0>1.9[0]


Nice to see someone taking advantage of AS's avoidance of OAK. 6x to BUR, 4x to SNA, 4x to LAS (by July) are approaching competitive with WN for many schedules.


among the northern cali airports, OAK has the least competition, so XE seems to have done well there. Interesting enough LGB-OAK consistently does better than to SFO and SJC for B6. SJC seems to have way too much capacity right now for the intra-west coast stuff, especially after WN piled on capacity on SJC-SNA/BUR/SAN to try to push out AS. XE actually got ran off BUR-SJC.

OAK on the other hand has much fewer flight since WN is not really bothered by XE. Consequently, XE now has built up a nice little option in OAK when it originally actually set up at CCR
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:54 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
enilria wrote:
Yes, they squandered the VX acquisition.
No they didn't. They eliminated a competitor and B6 is still largely a non factor out west. Despite the talk, it was never about much more than that.

#1 I would argue they overpaid for that.
#2 If they had told the DOJ that was the purpose the deal would not have been approved.
#3 They squandered the route network they bought.
FSDan wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
HU adding ORD-CTU...... well, subsidies at work.

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.

I have trouble thinking ORD is a prestige route like JFK or LAX worthy of losing tons of cash.
SANFan wrote:
If there is one phase of the airline business that is generally extremely dynamic, it's schedules! So I'm to believe that AS issued their peak summer 2019 flight schedule in late 2018 and has not felt it necessary to make hardly any changes since? And just 4 months out, March, they are still completely satisfied with frequencies, equipment, and times of practically every route and flight in their system?

I think it's a fair point that this industry has evolved to become very much about optimization of capacity. Not changing isn't optimization, so I agree that is not in step with profit techniques the other airlines are utilizing. BUT, we know why they are doing this as I have posted, so the bigger question is how much pressure for change has built over this waiting period and will we see something dramatic when it pops? Probably not, LOL.
B1168 wrote:
As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

Anybody know where the money or the subsidies come from? Is it from airport fees? or tax revenue? or printing money? or what? Is it a bottomless pit or are they thinking of it as a short term investment?
 
FSDan
Posts: 2621
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:14 pm

enilria wrote:
FSDan wrote:
enilria wrote:

This route will be gone in a year. The subsidies are huge, but not huge enough.


You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.

I have trouble thinking ORD is a prestige route like JFK or LAX worthy of losing tons of cash.


You could well be right - HNA Group has had well documented financial issues, so maybe they're a little more conscious of route performance than other Chinese carriers.

On the other hand, MF is still flying SEA-SZX-XMN (hardly a prestige route, I'd think) and I can find round trips for as little as $513 less than a week out. They must be losing money hand over fist on routes like that...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
as739x
Posts: 5164
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:43 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Thanks again enilria!

enilria wrote:
AA BOS-LAX OCT 6>5[6] NOV 6>5[5]
AA IAD-LAX JAN 2>1.2[1.6]
**AA LAX-STS NOV 1.0>0.1[0] DEC 1.0>0[0] JAN 0.2>0[0]

is it just me, or AA seems to be cutting back on some more stuff out of LAX?



It appears AS has won that competition. I believe AS has several STS-LAX flights with E75's vs. a single AA CRJ-700.


AA is flown by Compass on the E175, its on our pilot bid starting May. I believe this was a seasonal launch anyways. Little early to say AS has won something that hasn't started
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:47 pm

FSDan wrote:
enilria wrote:
FSDan wrote:

You have more faith in the Chinese airlines than I do when it comes to expecting them to drop loss-making international routes... We've seen HU plod along with JFK-CKG and JFK-CTU despite horrendous load factors and low fares. CA did drop their SJC-PVG route, but other than that I can't think of too many examples of the Chinese carriers backing off their crazy expansion into secondary/tertiary routes.

I have trouble thinking ORD is a prestige route like JFK or LAX worthy of losing tons of cash.


You could well be right - HNA Group has had well documented financial issues, so maybe they're a little more conscious of route performance than other Chinese carriers.

On the other hand, MF is still flying SEA-SZX-XMN (hardly a prestige route, I'd think) and I can find round trips for as little as $513 less than a week out. They must be losing money hand over fist on routes like that...

Wow. Just taxes are probably $140. That leaves like $170 each way. I guess enjoy the gift of cheap travel from the Chinese govt.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1539
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:54 pm

enilria wrote:
cledaybuck wrote:
enilria wrote:
Yes, they squandered the VX acquisition.
No they didn't. They eliminated a competitor and B6 is still largely a non factor out west. Despite the talk, it was never about much more than that.

#1 I would argue they overpaid for that.
#2 If they had told the DOJ that was the purpose the deal would not have been approved.
#3 They squandered the route network they bought.

#1 Did they have a choice? They were competing against B6. Would AS rather B6 have all of VX's assets out west right now, especially at LAX and SFO?
#2 True. They had to play the game and say how great it was for consumers, just like all the other mergers.
#3 Did they? Most of it is still intact. Is it any worse than what happened to CVG/MEM with DL/NW, CLE with UA/CO, or even ATL/MKE with WN/FL?
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:08 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
enilria wrote:
cledaybuck wrote:
No they didn't. They eliminated a competitor and B6 is still largely a non factor out west. Despite the talk, it was never about much more than that.

#1 I would argue they overpaid for that.
#2 If they had told the DOJ that was the purpose the deal would not have been approved.
#3 They squandered the route network they bought.

#1 Did they have a choice? They were competing against B6. Would AS rather B6 have all of VX's assets out west right now, especially at LAX and SFO?
#2 True. They had to play the game and say how great it was for consumers, just like all the other mergers.
#3 Did they? Most of it is still intact. Is it any worse than what happened to CVG/MEM with DL/NW, CLE with UA/CO, or even ATL/MKE with WN/FL?

They should have just cut to the chase and proposed a deal with B6. That's where it is all headed anyway.

DAL as a focus city/connect point is gone. The DCA/LGA slots are not being used by AS. They have shrunk in JFK and transcon (which was the most valuable part of VX). They now have a very uncompetitive transcon premium product whereas VX was once the leader. AND they have pulled back in SFO. So nothing is completely gone, but it's all dying on the vine.

DL/NW: CVG was not part of NW, so it's really only MEM which was the weakest of the 3 NW hubs. The other two are going strong. So I would say this is headed to a worse place than that one.
UA/CO: If you agree that effectively UA acquired CO (some would debate that, but from a management perspective, the UA management ended up with control eventually) CLE isn't the acquired carrier, but if you make the argument that CO acquired UA then CLE was the weakest hub. Pretty much the same argument as DL/NW.
WN/FL: Yes on WN. They did exactly the same thing. It was a liquidation to eliminate a competitor in the industry and that's not what mergers are supposed to accomplish from a legal perspective.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3247
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:18 pm

buying VX to chase out B6 from west coast is a rather short sighted view. Given today's market, there is no way B6 could financial afford to compete in west coast market
 
airliner371
Posts: 2404
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:53 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:21 pm

enilria wrote:
They have shrunk in JFK

They have not. Alaska today is operating the same number of flights VX/AS did at the time of the merger.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:46 am

enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

Anybody know where the money or the subsidies come from? Is it from airport fees? or tax revenue? or printing money? or what? Is it a bottomless pit or are they thinking of it as a short term investment?


Not sure, but real estate selling is a major source for (many) cities’ finance, part of which becomes the subsidies they pay to airlines.
You see, starting a route is actually a good piece of “political achievement”... after all, as long as tickets can be sold in insanely cheap prices to fill up 70% of the cabin, success!
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2262
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:46 am

dmstorm22 wrote:
enilria wrote:
*UA DEL-EWR MAY 0.7>0[1.0] JUN 1.0>0[1.0]


I thought this cut was supposed to be short term, but now extending for 2+ months.

Guessing there still is no end in sight to the issue of having to go around Pakistan airspace? Or is there some larger reason also at play here?


It’s all about the airspace dispute/silly politics. AC are doing the same with YYZ-DEL.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:06 am

tphuang wrote:
buying VX to chase out B6 from west coast is a rather short sighted view. Given today's market, there is no way B6 could financial afford to compete in west coast market


Isn’t the current view that B6 is shrinking in the west? Would that be different if there was no AS buyout, or B6 won the buyout race?
 
c933103
Posts: 3826
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:29 am

enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

Anybody know where the money or the subsidies come from? Is it from airport fees? or tax revenue? or printing money? or what? Is it a bottomless pit or are they thinking of it as a short term investment?

I just checked Chengdu government's website but those figures doesn't make sense to me even if those figures are to be trusted.http://gk.chengdu.gov.cn/govInfoPub/det ... 29537&tn=2
It claims that, last year the city government income was 18 Billion Yuan. While the city expense was 40 Billion. And then they also need to pay another 34 Billion to other smaller administrative units within its administration for them to operate. I can't see how this is something sustainable.
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:28 pm

c933103 wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

Anybody know where the money or the subsidies come from? Is it from airport fees? or tax revenue? or printing money? or what? Is it a bottomless pit or are they thinking of it as a short term investment?

I just checked Chengdu government's website but those figures doesn't make sense to me even if those figures are to be trusted.http://gk.chengdu.gov.cn/govInfoPub/det ... 29537&tn=2
It claims that, last year the city government income was 18 Billion Yuan. While the city expense was 40 Billion. And then they also need to pay another 34 Billion to other smaller administrative units within its administration for them to operate. I can't see how this is something sustainable.


Good question...... unfortunately, I can’t answer it. A fact I know though, is that many cities literally live of by selling land.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:22 pm

airliner371 wrote:
enilria wrote:
They have shrunk in JFK

They have not. Alaska today is operating the same number of flights VX/AS did at the time of the merger.

I meant they shrunk the VX routes. They have 20% less frequency in JFK-LAX/SFO vs pre-merger. Those were the routes that were supposedly their key markets.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:23 pm

c933103 wrote:
enilria wrote:
B1168 wrote:
As far as I’m concerned, they have subsidies from local governments provided to cover all losses the airline have on the route until reaching a gap value of upwards of 20 million dollars per year, and these agreements are usually effective for 3 years.

Anybody know where the money or the subsidies come from? Is it from airport fees? or tax revenue? or printing money? or what? Is it a bottomless pit or are they thinking of it as a short term investment?

I just checked Chengdu government's website but those figures doesn't make sense to me even if those figures are to be trusted.http://gk.chengdu.gov.cn/govInfoPub/det ... 29537&tn=2
It claims that, last year the city government income was 18 Billion Yuan. While the city expense was 40 Billion. And then they also need to pay another 34 Billion to other smaller administrative units within its administration for them to operate. I can't see how this is something sustainable.

That's an even worse deficit than the U.S. govt! LOL
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:28 pm

AirFiero wrote:
tphuang wrote:
buying VX to chase out B6 from west coast is a rather short sighted view. Given today's market, there is no way B6 could financial afford to compete in west coast market


Isn’t the current view that B6 is shrinking in the west? Would that be different if there was no AS buyout, or B6 won the buyout race?

I think the argument is that B6 was losing in LGB and wanted VX to replace it with a better West Coast presence. I'm not sure I buy it. AS is still a marginal player in California compared to WN and was even more marginal at that point. They were defending something they didn't "own". The argument that they needed to keep B6 from getting a foothold in California because it was a threat to them is pretty weak. What they really did was do WN a favor and setup a future merger with B6. Just like WN did DL a huge favor by purchasing and euthanizing FL. That purchase was so much more accretive to DL earnings than WN, and the VX deal was much more accretive to WN than AS.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3247
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:36 pm

enilria wrote:
AirFiero wrote:
tphuang wrote:
buying VX to chase out B6 from west coast is a rather short sighted view. Given today's market, there is no way B6 could financial afford to compete in west coast market


Isn’t the current view that B6 is shrinking in the west? Would that be different if there was no AS buyout, or B6 won the buyout race?

I think the argument is that B6 was losing in LGB and wanted VX to replace it with a better West Coast presence. I'm not sure I buy it. AS is still a marginal player in California compared to WN and was even more marginal at that point. They were defending something they didn't "own". The argument that they needed to keep B6 from getting a foothold in California because it was a threat to them is pretty weak. What they really did was do WN a favor and setup a future merger with B6. Just like WN did DL a huge favor by purchasing and euthanizing FL. That purchase was so much more accretive to DL earnings than WN, and the VX deal was much more accretive to WN than AS.


I think if B6 had "won" the vx deal, they'd be in even bigger trouble right now. They'd have to defend BOS and be involved in this west coast market share battle. Not something I think they are capable of. If anything AS drew WN's attention, which has led to WN focusing away from markets where B6 cares about BOS/FLL.
 
Tenbru73
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 12:09 am

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:34 am

dr1980 wrote:
Too bad about the WS YHZ-BOS flight, it was nice having choice and it was a good option to connect with Delta services to the southern US. I’m actually flying WS to Boston tomorrow, although my return Friday will be on AC as I needed a morning flight.


The OAG changes indicates BOS-YHZ has been dropped... not YHZ-BOS.

I went on the WestJet site and you can book YHZ-BOS for all 2019 but you can't book BOS-YHZ after June 3rd for the remainder of the year.

My amateur opinion, WestJet didnt' drop the whole flight (YHZ-BOS-YHZ ) because they want to keep a foot in the market.
Right now, there's a shortage of aircraft due to the Max grounding and 4 x 737 now running out of Halifax to Europe.
I don't know which WestJet hub flights were lost due to starting Europe... maybe YYZ-BOS-YYZ was impacted?
So at least run a q400 one way BOS-YYZ because more yield than BOS-YHZ?.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2262
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Thu Apr 25, 2019 1:29 am

Tenbru73 wrote:
dr1980 wrote:
Too bad about the WS YHZ-BOS flight, it was nice having choice and it was a good option to connect with Delta services to the southern US. I’m actually flying WS to Boston tomorrow, although my return Friday will be on AC as I needed a morning flight.


The OAG changes indicates BOS-YHZ has been dropped... not YHZ-BOS.

I went on the WestJet site and you can book YHZ-BOS for all 2019 but you can't book BOS-YHZ after June 3rd for the remainder of the year.

My amateur opinion, WestJet didnt' drop the whole flight (YHZ-BOS-YHZ ) because they want to keep a foot in the market.
Right now, there's a shortage of aircraft due to the Max grounding and 4 x 737 now running out of Halifax to Europe.
I don't know which WestJet hub flights were lost due to starting Europe... maybe YYZ-BOS-YYZ was impacted?
So at least run a q400 one way BOS-YYZ because more yield than BOS-YHZ?.


Operating a route nonstop in one direction only makes zero sense whatsoever. WS in their early days oddly enough did just that in a few instances, but it’s been 15 years since that’s happened.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Thu Apr 25, 2019 1:00 pm

tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
AirFiero wrote:

Isn’t the current view that B6 is shrinking in the west? Would that be different if there was no AS buyout, or B6 won the buyout race?

I think the argument is that B6 was losing in LGB and wanted VX to replace it with a better West Coast presence. I'm not sure I buy it. AS is still a marginal player in California compared to WN and was even more marginal at that point. They were defending something they didn't "own". The argument that they needed to keep B6 from getting a foothold in California because it was a threat to them is pretty weak. What they really did was do WN a favor and setup a future merger with B6. Just like WN did DL a huge favor by purchasing and euthanizing FL. That purchase was so much more accretive to DL earnings than WN, and the VX deal was much more accretive to WN than AS.


I think if B6 had "won" the vx deal, they'd be in even bigger trouble right now. They'd have to defend BOS and be involved in this west coast market share battle. Not something I think they are capable of. If anything AS drew WN's attention, which has led to WN focusing away from markets where B6 cares about BOS/FLL.

I can't disagree with that.
 
dr1980
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:55 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:01 pm

Tenbru73 wrote:
The OAG changes indicates BOS-YHZ has been dropped... not YHZ-BOS


Interesting, I didn’t pick up on that. The flights currently don’t operate as a true turn, the aircraft I flew down on was at YHZ overnight, operated YHZ-BOS, then operated BOS-YYZ. A Q400 comes from somewhere else (YYZ?) later in the day then operates BOS-YHZ.

It’s strange but perhaps they figure getting another YYZ flight out of Boston is more important given fleet constraints. It will be interesting to see if it reverts once the Max debacle is over.
Dave/CYHZ
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:41 am

tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
AirFiero wrote:

Isn’t the current view that B6 is shrinking in the west? Would that be different if there was no AS buyout, or B6 won the buyout race?

I think the argument is that B6 was losing in LGB and wanted VX to replace it with a better West Coast presence. I'm not sure I buy it. AS is still a marginal player in California compared to WN and was even more marginal at that point. They were defending something they didn't "own". The argument that they needed to keep B6 from getting a foothold in California because it was a threat to them is pretty weak. What they really did was do WN a favor and setup a future merger with B6. Just like WN did DL a huge favor by purchasing and euthanizing FL. That purchase was so much more accretive to DL earnings than WN, and the VX deal was much more accretive to WN than AS.


I think if B6 had "won" the vx deal, they'd be in even bigger trouble right now. They'd have to defend BOS and be involved in this west coast market share battle. Not something I think they are capable of. If anything AS drew WN's attention, which has led to WN focusing away from markets where B6 cares about BOS/FLL.


So many What If's.
If B6 would have Won the VX bid it would have almost abandoned everything in LGB with the exception of 1 LGB-JFK and 5 LGB-SFO.
Double down on connecting Red Eye dots from LAX and SFO.
Added West Coast flying like SFO-ONT,SFO-BUR,SFO-ABQ ect ect.
I don't think they would be struggling.
It would have 5 of the biggest US catchment areas.
I don't think London would be on the books but building Mint class service to several daily flights.
Flyguy
my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:00 am

wnflyguy wrote:
tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
I think the argument is that B6 was losing in LGB and wanted VX to replace it with a better West Coast presence. I'm not sure I buy it. AS is still a marginal player in California compared to WN and was even more marginal at that point. They were defending something they didn't "own". The argument that they needed to keep B6 from getting a foothold in California because it was a threat to them is pretty weak. What they really did was do WN a favor and setup a future merger with B6. Just like WN did DL a huge favor by purchasing and euthanizing FL. That purchase was so much more accretive to DL earnings than WN, and the VX deal was much more accretive to WN than AS.


I think if B6 had "won" the vx deal, they'd be in even bigger trouble right now. They'd have to defend BOS and be involved in this west coast market share battle. Not something I think they are capable of. If anything AS drew WN's attention, which has led to WN focusing away from markets where B6 cares about BOS/FLL.


So many What If's.
If B6 would have Won the VX bid it would have almost abandoned everything in LGB with the exception of 1 LGB-JFK and 5 LGB-SFO.
Double down on connecting Red Eye dots from LAX and SFO.
Added West Coast flying like SFO-ONT,SFO-BUR,SFO-ABQ ect ect.
I don't think they would be struggling.
It would have 5 of the biggest US catchment areas.
I don't think London would be on the books but building Mint class service to several daily flights.
Flyguy

Too many what ifs? People post these threads like "what if piston engine planes were all that ever existed" or " what if Northwest and American had merged". LOL. These are tangible what ifs by comparison.
 
JayWings
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:27 am

LAXBUR wrote:
Haha. According to people on here the lack of Alaska’s schedule changes either means the airline has stabilized or is in trouble. This site is funny. Maybe...just maybe...the current schedules are working well enough. So dramatic.


Agreed! People claim the sky is falling and AS is gutting SFO when they close down 4 under performing routes... but when the they don’t cut anything and observe an equilibrium of their route network they are destined for failure and the airline is falling apart! The drama of it all!
 
Tenbru73
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 12:09 am

Re: OAG Changes 4/21/2019:AA Drops LAX-STS;HU Adds ORD-CTU;WN MAX Cuts;WS Drops BOS-YHZ

Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:23 pm

Well, i was wrong.
Westjet YHZ to BOS is completely dropped now.
I can't do the one way direct booking anymore.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... june-2019/

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos