Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:07 am

SUNCTRY738 wrote:
enilria wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Key takeaways here are less int'l from LAX, and decreasing long-thin routes

Should be interesting to watch, especially SEA-PVG

CLT down to 3 int'l routes it looks like

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx

I don't understand why two carriers flying SEA-PVG is a good idea, particularly when it is a double connect from most of AA's network.



I don't get adding SEA to PVG either for AA. I think AA may have really lost its way deciding to go up against DL at SEA.

The key point here is that DL is not some behemoth at SEA. They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As others have pointed put, AA/AS are clearly testing DL’s commitment to SEA. With there not going to be much Asia traffic in the near future, DL is certainly going to have to craft its plan for Asia. Having both LAX and SEA is certainly not the answer.
 
acavpics
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:54 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:13 am

tphuang wrote:
Again, AA is way too optimistic here. 25% lower capacity compared to 2019? Demand will be way down next year.


No. THings are going to improve next year. 2020 is not goign to last forever. When there are vaccines and cures, people WILL travel again.
 
kavok
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:24 am

BNAMealer wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
gaystudpilot wrote:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Delta fumbled SEA. Given its investment I can not imagine DL did not run risk scenarios and see AA/AS/oneWorld coming. There is no way SEA can support hubs for AA/AS and DL. Barring AA having to significantly shrink, DL will have to retrench, at best making SEA a focus city, and place more network emphasis on LAX.

AA should be well positioned in SEA with AS, CX and JL to be extremely successful. If AA can’t make SEA work, the whole executive team should be ousted. Was anyone at DL ousted for its SEA mess?

Agree with what kavok said.

DL didn't necessarily fumble SEA, it was doing fine, then now COVID hit.
The DL-AS thing was years ago and both had moved on and probably would've been fine until 4 months ago.

AA is playing with house money, going Lerroy Jenkins on the industry currently, and is more or less taking an aggressive "go big or go home approach" that is either going to position them for success in the post-COVID recovery or have them fail spectacularly. COVID is the biggest black swan event to hit the industry pretty much ever and outside really any typical scenarios that have ever occurred in the past.

Its a chess match, AA & AS want to double-down on SEA now. DL is going to either have to stick with it an play the long gate or cut their losses. The appetite to sustain losses and literally burn money is going to be low and they are going to have to pick their battles. DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time.


I have to wonder if there is any value in a traditional TPAC hub like SEA for DL anymore. With most Asia flying (i.e, China) struggling and DL struggling in Asia in general, why can't DL just make do with LAX as its TPAC hub for the limited Asian flying they have? Most of their hubs already have ICN flights, which is where they are routing most traffic through anyway these days.

Let AA/AS burn money in SEA, DL should focus on LAX and BOS where it has a better position IMO.


DL first has to figure out what is it’s new long term TPAC strategy. That decision will obviously be influenced both by: 1) Covid, and what the aviation demand looks like after a potential vaccine becomes available this winter, and 2) Politics/International Relations... specifically how the USA’s relationship with places like China and other Asian countries influences travel demand post-election.

I would guess DLs plans for various scenarios are being discussed, but any decision is months away until the impacts of 1 & 2 above are better understood. Thus SEA will likely remain status quo for DL for the remainder of 2020. Note that despite all of DLs build up, SEA never really eclipsed DTW as the sole dominant DL TPAC hub. (Both are about equal, and each see 5 TPAC destinations on DL metal, PVG, PKX, HND, ICN, and KIX/NGO).

A DL retreat from SEA will basically result in creating a OW fortress hub there, in a key growing market. Thus DL needs to be absolutely sure SEA holds no future if they are going to back out, because there is no going back on it should they leave.
Last edited by kavok on Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
TYWoolman
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:29 am

onwFan wrote:
SUNCTRY738 wrote:
enilria wrote:
I don't understand why two carriers flying SEA-PVG is a good idea, particularly when it is a double connect from most of AA's network.



I don't get adding SEA to PVG either for AA. I think AA may have really lost its way deciding to go up against DL at SEA.

The key point here is that DL is not some behemoth at SEA. They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As others have pointed put, AA/AS are clearly testing DL’s commitment to SEA. With there not going to be much Asia traffic in the near future, DL is certainly going to have to craft its plan for Asia. Having both LAX and SEA is certainly not the answer.


Long-term: The answer for Delta is a sustaining plan to rightsizing capacity in Seattle amid the competition and staying the course, while leveraging Detroit and Seoul into the Pacific. Another way to interpret the move: AA/AS is really testing passenger appetite for Delta service; As long as Delta delivers, it will be just fine in Seattle.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Topic Author
Posts: 5119
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:55 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Maybe someone with more knowledge of LAX can guide me here:
Would AA be able to use any of the gates that were being used for Asia & other long-haul, for additional domestic routes/frequencies? From AA pre-covid statements, it appeared that there wasn't much room to grow domestically otherwise until new gates come online

Of course they can. :tongue2:

All LAX's int'l gates at all terminals can swing for domestic use.


onwFan wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Maybe someone with more knowledge of LAX can guide me here:

Would AA be able to use any of the gates that were being used for Asia & other long-haul, for additional domestic routes/frequencies? From AA pre-covid statements, it appeared that there wasn't much room to grow domestically otherwise until new gates come online

I don’t think we would necessarily see much ‘growth’ in LAX, it will be a lot of rejigging to suit the domestic network.


SurfandSnow wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Key takeaways here are less int'l from LAX, and decreasing long-thin routes


IIRC, AA had publicly stated that hubs in Los Angeles and New York City were problematic financially. Cutting the weaker international routes from LAX certainly makes sense, and I can't help but wonder if some of the more obscure domestic services are on the chopping block (if they haven't been cut already). Does AA still fly LAX-ATL/BDL/CMH/IND/MCO/MSY/OMA/SDF? Surely O&D traffic can connect via PHX, DFW and in some cases even CLT or ORD. Those connecting beyond LAX to places like Australia and Hawaii could also be routed via the likes of DFW and PHX.

alasizon wrote:
To be fair, if they did choose/need to re-open the Nest; that would provide them more NB gates on T5. T4 without all the widebodies will really be able to handle a lot more narrowbodies so if they want to go more head-to-head in the domestic market, they have the gates now.


Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)
Last edited by Midwestindy on Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
SUNCTRY738
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 3:39 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:55 am

DL has always played their cards right in regards to dual west coast hubs at LAX and SEA. They aren't the ones having to make massive changes in that regards--AA is. Their touted LAX TPAC hub strategy has obviously failed and now they will have to rely on another airline to try and fill seats in SEA. This is anything but a certain success in my eyes. Not to mention AA's precarious debt load and weaker financial position between the big 3 airlines.

I agree with TYWoolman, if DL holds their ground at SEA and keeps LAX at the sametime, they will be fine for now and AA will lose money at SEA. A lot of you said AA would be the TPAC champ at LAX and DL had no shot there. Seems you were a bit off.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:58 am

Midwestindy wrote:
Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing for a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)


LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2329
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:03 am

onwFan wrote:
SUNCTRY738 wrote:
enilria wrote:
I don't understand why two carriers flying SEA-PVG is a good idea, particularly when it is a double connect from most of AA's network.



I don't get adding SEA to PVG either for AA. I think AA may have really lost its way deciding to go up against DL at SEA.

The key point here is that DL is not some behemoth at SEA. They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As others have pointed put, AA/AS are clearly testing DL’s commitment to SEA. With there not going to be much Asia traffic in the near future, DL is certainly going to have to craft its plan for Asia. Having both LAX and SEA is certainly not the answer.


I think you have to consider that DL is still running SEA int'l flights and will be up to ICN, HND, PVG, AMS in July - to me this indicates the importance of SEA to DL's network. DL has huge corporate contracts out of SEA, with companies that are doing well.

If anything, AA's PVG flight will just replace Hainan for AS. AA is just making a few safe moves with guaranteed feed.
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:10 am

SUNCTRY738 wrote:
DL has always played their cards right in regards to dual west coast hubs at LAX and SEA. They aren't the ones having to make massive changes in that regards--AA is. Their touted LAX TPAC hub strategy has obviously failed and now they will have to rely on another airline to try and fill seats in SEA. This is anything but a certain success in my eyes. Not to mention AA's precarious debt load and weaker financial position between the big 3 airlines.

I agree with TYWoolman, if DL holds their ground at SEA and keeps LAX at the sametime, they will be fine for now and AA will lose money at SEA. A lot of you said AA would be the TPAC champ at LAX and DL had no shot there. Seems you were a bit off.

What you say is something applicable in a pre-covid world. Not necessarily now.
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:17 am

tphuang wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing for a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)


LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.

I think that is a given - AA will not have any true West Coast hub.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2567
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:17 am

tphuang wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing for a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)


LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.


PHX is the intra-West Coast hub anyhow, not LAX and between PHX and DFW, the West Coast is pretty well covered in terms of connections to the rest of the country.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
tphuang
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:29 am

jbs2886 wrote:
onwFan wrote:
SUNCTRY738 wrote:


I don't get adding SEA to PVG either for AA. I think AA may have really lost its way deciding to go up against DL at SEA.

The key point here is that DL is not some behemoth at SEA. They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As others have pointed put, AA/AS are clearly testing DL’s commitment to SEA. With there not going to be much Asia traffic in the near future, DL is certainly going to have to craft its plan for Asia. Having both LAX and SEA is certainly not the answer.


I think you have to consider that DL is still running SEA int'l flights and will be up to ICN, HND, PVG, AMS in July - to me this indicates the importance of SEA to DL's network. DL has huge corporate contracts out of SEA, with companies that are doing well.

If anything, AA's PVG flight will just replace Hainan for AS. AA is just making a few safe moves with guaranteed feed.

More likely, sea pvg will be a huge bloodbath. Hard to say if it will be worse than lax pvg.

There will always be a Chinese carrier in the sea market. If not hainan, then someone else will pick it up.

As for sea, dl has indicated with it's action that sea is an integral part of it's network, even more so than lax. Aside from Asia, it covers pnw and Alaska which dl apparently does not think slc can do. Until 2022, business traffic will be way down, so delta better be prepared to lose a lot of money here.
 
jplatts
Posts: 3519
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:31 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
DL didn't necessarily fumble SEA, it was doing fine, then now COVID hit.
The DL-AS thing was years ago and both had moved on and probably would've been fine until 4 months ago.

AA is playing with house money, going Lerroy Jenkins on the industry currently, and is more or less taking an aggressive "go big or go home approach" that is either going to position them for success in the post-COVID recovery or have them fail spectacularly. COVID is the biggest black swan event to hit the industry pretty much ever and outside really any typical scenarios that have ever occurred in the past.

Its a chess match, AA & AS want to double-down on SEA now. DL is going to either have to stick with it an play the long gate or cut their losses. The appetite to sustain losses and literally burn money is going to be low and they are going to have to pick their battles. DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time.


One advantage that DL still has over AS in the SEA market is that DL still offers 1-stop connections from SEA through other hubs such as SLC, MSP, DTW, or ATL to some destinations in the Mountain West, Midwest, Northeast, and Deep South that aren't served by AA or AS.

DL could also differentiate itself from AA and AS in the SEA market by adding nonstop service out of SEA to some additional destinations not currently served by AS such as ALB, ASE, BTM, CPR, CLE, COD, COS, DSM, EGE, EKO, GJT, GRR, BDL, IDA, JAX, LWS, SDF, MEM, ORF, PIH, RIC, TUL, and TWF.

DL also has the option of using the A220-100 on routes such as SEA-ALB/CLE/BDL/JAX/SDF/MEM/ORF/RIC that are beyond the range of regional jets, whereas AA and AS would have to use larger planes to serve these markets nonstop from SEA. In addition to DL being able to use the smaller A220-100, DL also already has brand recognition and a FF base in the ALB, CLE, BDL, JAX, SDF, MEM, ORF, and RIC markets.

While AS already serves ABQ, BUR, IAH, ONT, PHL, RNO, STL, and SAT nonstop from SEA, DL could also add SEA-ABQ/BUR/IAH/ONT/PHL/RNO/STL/SAT nonstop service in order to better compete against AS in the SEA market.
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:47 am

tphuang wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
onwFan wrote:
The key point here is that DL is not some behemoth at SEA. They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As others have pointed put, AA/AS are clearly testing DL’s commitment to SEA. With there not going to be much Asia traffic in the near future, DL is certainly going to have to craft its plan for Asia. Having both LAX and SEA is certainly not the answer.


I think you have to consider that DL is still running SEA int'l flights and will be up to ICN, HND, PVG, AMS in July - to me this indicates the importance of SEA to DL's network. DL has huge corporate contracts out of SEA, with companies that are doing well.

If anything, AA's PVG flight will just replace Hainan for AS. AA is just making a few safe moves with guaranteed feed.

More likely, sea pvg will be a huge bloodbath. Hard to say if it will be worse than lax pvg.

There will always be a Chinese carrier in the sea market. If not hainan, then someone else will pick it up.

As for sea, dl has indicated with it's action that sea is an integral part of it's network, even more so than lax. Aside from Asia, it covers pnw and Alaska which dl apparently does not think slc can do. Until 2022, business traffic will be way down, so delta better be prepared to lose a lot of money here.

That would be a lot of money. Add to that the money they will burn in BOS and MIA. Plus, when Covid struck, DL had no idea whether AA was serious about SEA or not. What happens in the future can be quite different...

I do not think SEA’s role in DL’s network has much to do with domestic market. It was dictated purely by the need for a TPAC hub. They got contracts & were basically capitalizing on the fact that AS was not able to offer an international network for their customers. With AS in oneworld and the AA expansion, they are certainly bound to lose contracts. I don’t know the numbers, but given that DL is already significantly smaller than AS, I cannot imagine SEA being profitable anytime in the near future for DL.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:57 am

jplatts wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
DL didn't necessarily fumble SEA, it was doing fine, then now COVID hit.
The DL-AS thing was years ago and both had moved on and probably would've been fine until 4 months ago.

AA is playing with house money, going Lerroy Jenkins on the industry currently, and is more or less taking an aggressive "go big or go home approach" that is either going to position them for success in the post-COVID recovery or have them fail spectacularly. COVID is the biggest black swan event to hit the industry pretty much ever and outside really any typical scenarios that have ever occurred in the past.

Its a chess match, AA & AS want to double-down on SEA now. DL is going to either have to stick with it an play the long gate or cut their losses. The appetite to sustain losses and literally burn money is going to be low and they are going to have to pick their battles. DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time.


One advantage that DL still has over AS in the SEA market is that DL still offers 1-stop connections from SEA through other hubs such as SLC, MSP, DTW, or ATL to some destinations in the Mountain West, Midwest, Northeast, and Deep South that aren't served by AA or AS.

DL could also differentiate itself from AA and AS in the SEA market by adding nonstop service out of SEA to some additional destinations not currently served by AS such as ALB, ASE, BTM, CPR, CLE, COD, COS, DSM, EGE, EKO, GJT, GRR, BDL, IDA, JAX, LWS, SDF, MEM, ORF, PIH, RIC, TUL, and TWF.

DL also has the option of using the A220-100 on routes such as SEA-ALB/CLE/BDL/JAX/SDF/MEM/ORF/RIC that are beyond the range of regional jets, whereas AA and AS would have to use larger planes to serve these markets nonstop from SEA. In addition to DL being able to use the smaller A220-100, DL also already has brand recognition and a FF base in the ALB, CLE, BDL, JAX, SDF, MEM, ORF, and RIC markets.

While AS already serves ABQ, BUR, IAH, ONT, PHL, RNO, STL, and SAT nonstop from SEA, DL could also add SEA-ABQ/BUR/IAH/ONT/PHL/RNO/STL/SAT nonstop service in order to better compete against AS in the SEA market.


With what gates? When the new S-to-A cross-over is complete, DL might get 3 to 4 gates back. DL was pretty much maxed out on gates before COVID. AS has a lot more gates at SEA than DL.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:59 am

Some people here really do not understand the gate situation at SEA. It's not like SEA is metropolis of an airport like ORD, ATL or DEN. SEA will be packed to the gills again, eventually.
 
klm617
Posts: 4873
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:29 am

IPFreely wrote:
Kbud wrote:
American couldn't make ORD work to Asia. I would have to bet that they have much more connecting passenger traffic there compared to Alaska in Seattle.


"In business, competition is never as healthy as total domination.” - Peter Lynch.

In Chicago, American had to compete with an 800 lb gorilla for ORD-Asia.

In Seattle there is no 800 lb gorilla, only a 400 lb gorilla. And American isn't competing with the 400 lb gorilla, they've partnered with it.

Big difference.


Here is just the proof you were looking for about AA and ORD you commented on it yourself. This quote says it all "In business, competition is never as healthy as total domination.” - Peter Lynch.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Topic Author
Posts: 5119
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:45 am

tphuang wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing for a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)


LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.


FA bases are all shrinking or flat, even DFW is shrinking so FA base changes are hardly telling. Regardless they aren't going to shrink big time in LAX.

AA's financial weakness in LAX was Asia, that is now largely out of the picture.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
jplatts
Posts: 3519
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:50 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
Its a chess match, AA & AS want to double-down on SEA now. DL is going to either have to stick with it an play the long gate or cut their losses. The appetite to sustain losses and literally burn money is going to be low and they are going to have to pick their battles. DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time.


onwFan wrote:
That would be a lot of money. Add to that the money they will burn in BOS and MIA. Plus, when Covid struck, DL had no idea whether AA was serious about SEA or not. What happens in the future can be quite different...

I do not think SEA’s role in DL’s network has much to do with domestic market. It was dictated purely by the need for a TPAC hub. They got contracts & were basically capitalizing on the fact that AS was not able to offer an international network for their customers. With AS in oneworld and the AA expansion, they are certainly bound to lose contracts. I don’t know the numbers, but given that DL is already significantly smaller than AS, I cannot imagine SEA being profitable anytime in the near future for DL.


Unlike at SEA where AS already has nonstop service out of SEA to most of the domestic destinations that DL serves nonstop from SEA, DL clearly has an advantage over B6 at BOS due to DL having nonstop service out of BOS to some domestic destinations not currently served by B6 such as CVG, CMH, IND, MCI, MKE, and ORF. DL also already offers 1-stop connecting service from BOS through other DL hubs to many destinations that have no nonstop service out of BOS on any airline and that are not served by B6. DL is also able to capture some FF's in Greater Boston that B6 isn't due to DL offering nonstop or 1-stop connecting service from BOS to many destinations that aren't served by B6.

DL can still make some more domestic adds out of BOS that are not in competition with B6, that would be profitable once demand and fares return to normal levels, and that would be sustainable in the long term. DL also is unlikely to lose as many FF's to B6 in the BOS market due to some DL FF's in the BOS market who have to travel to destinations not served by B6.

On the other hand, DL stands to lose more FF's in the SEA market to AS and AA, not only due to AS nonstop routes out of SEA, but also due to AA SEA-CLT nonstop service, AA's plans to serve a few international destinations nonstop from SEA, JL SEA-NRT nonstop service, CX SEA-HKG nonstop service, BA SEA-LHR nonstop service, and connections available from SEA on AA, JL, CX, and BA to many other destinations that are not served nonstop from SEA.

One advantage that DL will continue to have over AA and AS in the Seattle market, even with further expansion by AA, AS, or their partners, is that DL will still continue to offer 1-stop connecting service from SEA through other hubs such as SLC, MSP, DTW, or ATL to some destinations not served by AA or AS in the Mountain West, Midwest, Northeast, and Deep South.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:58 am

Midwestindy wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Well there we have it, this seems like an obvious move for AA in LAX:

International has been a struggle for AA in LAX, however now it is much easier to cut knowing your competitors will likely follow suit & while also knowing that international demand will be suppressed for potentially years to come

Domestic performed much better than int'l, & this frees up space for AA to grow its domestic market share in LAX, should DL & UA decide to retreat. AS feed in LAX will give AA a boost in LAX during the rebuild of the network, potentially allowing for a faster recovery for AA's LAX domestic route network than UA or DL.

Domestic networks are going to be the most important for the next couple years, this move along with the AS partnership opens up many domestic opportunities for AA (should they choose to go after them)


LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.


FA bases are all shrinking or flat, even DFW is shrinking so FA base changes are hardly telling. Regardless they aren't going to shrink big time in LAX.

AA's financial weakness in LAX was Asia, that is now largely out of the picture.

there were 3 bases that was mentioned as getting significant cuts and LAX was one of them.

AA struggled in far more than just Asia. All that intra-west coast stuff were huge money losers. And they struggled on competitive transcon markets.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26152
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:07 am

tphuang wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
tphuang wrote:

LAX is one of the 3 FA bases getting a lot of cuts. AA is going to shrink big time at LAX, because it struggles out there. It's most likely going to just rely on AS for the west coast stuff.


FA bases are all shrinking or flat, even DFW is shrinking so FA base changes are hardly telling. Regardless they aren't going to shrink big time in LAX.

AA's financial weakness in LAX was Asia, that is now largely out of the picture.

there were 3 bases that was mentioned as getting significant cuts and LAX was one of them.

AA struggled in far more than just Asia. All that intra-west coast stuff were huge money losers. And they struggled on competitive transcon markets.


You are failing to differentiate between mainline and regional and between international and domestic. Obviously when there are massive cuts to an international network, which also requires much more flight staffing, you are going to see the FA base shrink pretty significantly. Miami is also going to see large cuts less so because of cut flying but also because AA is not closing it's South America bases, and needs to balance that.

Fun fact: Most of AA's domestic bulk at LAX existed before Beijing, Hong Kong, Sydney and Auckland were ever launched. And the latter two are staying.
Far more concerning than LAX or MIA FA base shrinking is Phoenix shrinking, which is all domestic. That's either in play for massive cuts or shifting a lot to Eagle. The majority of what AA flies domestically from LAX was around in 2008-09, which is roughly when Shanghai first launched.

You're going to be very disappointed to see that AA will maintain a strong domestic network at LAX. It's always been very strong at LAX domestically irrelevant of feed to China. And the South America flying obviously was largely just local, LAXGRU/EZE are 120,000+ annual local passengers and AA had it to itself.
a.
 
USAirALB
Posts: 2265
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:46 am

I would expect routes such as CLT-CDG/FCO, MIA-MXP to come back fairly quickly once international travel largely resumes. I also wouldn't be surprised to see LAX-GRU resume as well, given that it is a relatively large local market.
RJ85, F70, E135, E140, E145, E70, E75, E90, CR2, CR7, CR9, 717, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 744ER, 752, 753, 762, 772, 77E, 77W, 789, 319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343, 359, 388
 
n7371f
Posts: 1801
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:10 am

In case anyone wanted to know how desperate AA is to generate cash flow, look no further than trying to add SEA-Shanghai. It's idiotic to be adding international in this day and age to begin with. Then add your debt is $40 billion, your credit rating stinks, you can't borrow more money unless it's at a punative interest rate. And you're going to try building up a INTL hub at SEA where you have no foundation, you're trusting AS to feed you. Comical. Of course the AS folks will think it's great and, sure, it is - they have no skin in the game. It also reads like AA is ready to pull back on LAX on certain routes and leave them to AS as well.
Last edited by n7371f on Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:21 am

n7371f wrote:
In case anyone wanted to know how desperate AA is to generate cash flow, look no further than trying to add SEA-Shanghai. It's idiotic to be adding international in this day and age to begin with. Then add your debt is $40 billion, your credit rating sinks, you can't borrow more money unless it's at a putative interest rate. And you're going to try building up a INTL hub at SEA where you have no foundation, you're trusting AS to feed you. Comical. Of course the AS folks will think it's great and, sure, it is - they have no skin in the game. It also reads like AA is ready to pull back on LAX on certain routes and leave them to AS as well.


I tend to agree with you. AS and DL tried and failed miserably. AA has even fewer gates than DL has at SEA. When COVID is under control (ha ha), SEA is going to be bursting at the seams again, even with the new FIS facility. SEA used to have a pair of airlines serving SEA-PVG (HU and DL). DL will be returning to that route soon. I don't think HU is coming back. I still fail to see where all these gates are going to come from.
 
rjbesikof
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:21 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:22 am

AKL surprises me a little bit. Before all of this started, they were going to move up the start date of LAX-AKL by a few weeks. Now they are not even going to be operating it come October. How did LAX-SYD perform in normal times?
 
airzona11
Posts: 1744
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:27 am

n7371f wrote:
In case anyone wanted to know how desperate AA is to generate cash flow, look no further than trying to add SEA-Shanghai. It's idiotic to be adding international in this day and age to begin with. Then add your debt is $40 billion, your credit rating sinks, you can't borrow more money unless it's at a putative interest rate. And you're going to try building up a INTL hub at SEA where you have no foundation, you're trusting AS to feed you. Comical. Of course the AS folks will think it's great and, sure, it is - they have no skin in the game. It also reads like AA is ready to pull back on LAX on certain routes and leave them to AS as well.


You just described burning cash flow not generating cash flow. AA had this planned precovid and now they are unveiling the plan. DL was/is going to be a competitor but now has to fight on more fronts. AA and AS can coordinate and should. Why provide duplicate capacity in a depressed market ?
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:27 am

n7371f wrote:
In case anyone wanted to know how desperate AA is to generate cash flow, look no further than trying to add SEA-Shanghai. It's idiotic to be adding international in this day and age to begin with. Then add your debt is $40 billion, your credit rating sinks, you can't borrow more money unless it's at a putative interest rate. And you're going to try building up a INTL hub at SEA where you have no foundation, you're trusting AS to feed you. Comical. Of course the AS folks will think it's great and, sure, it is - they have no skin in the game. It also reads like AA is ready to pull back on LAX on certain routes and leave them to AS as well.

How about waiting to see how DL does at SEA post-covid? I’d be happy to be proved wrong if DL has unlimited apetite and ability to sustain losses at all of SEA, BOS and MIA as some here say.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2567
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:40 am

rjbesikof wrote:
AKL surprises me a little bit. Before all of this started, they were going to move up the start date of LAX-AKL by a few weeks. Now they are not even going to be operating it come October. How did LAX-SYD perform in normal times?


AKL probably has more to do with the fact that NZ is more or less closed to the world and will remain so for a while and resuming SYD (remember, JV with QF) gives them better access to the AU/NZ market as a whole. Just not enough demand to satisfy both AKL and SYD right now, particularly since NZ will likely continue to run the route once everything starts to open back up.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:46 am

It show the emergency of Vashon Airport
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26152
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:08 am

airzona11 wrote:
n7371f wrote:
In case anyone wanted to know how desperate AA is to generate cash flow, look no further than trying to add SEA-Shanghai. It's idiotic to be adding international in this day and age to begin with. Then add your debt is $40 billion, your credit rating sinks, you can't borrow more money unless it's at a putative interest rate. And you're going to try building up a INTL hub at SEA where you have no foundation, you're trusting AS to feed you. Comical. Of course the AS folks will think it's great and, sure, it is - they have no skin in the game. It also reads like AA is ready to pull back on LAX on certain routes and leave them to AS as well.


You just described burning cash flow not generating cash flow. AA had this planned precovid and now they are unveiling the plan. DL was/is going to be a competitor but now has to fight on more fronts. AA and AS can coordinate and should. Why provide duplicate capacity in a depressed market ?


AA and AS can not coordinate schedules whatsoever.
a.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13205
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:01 am

onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX.

To be fair, almost nobody stateside has been able to make KIX work longterm, except UA via the uniquely concentrated power of the SFO hub.

DL has a particularly erratic history with HKG, having attempted nonstop service there from 4 different gateways since 1995, and eventually failing at all of them.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
jplatts
Posts: 3519
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:37 am

LAX772LR wrote:
onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX.

To be fair, almost nobody stateside has been able to make KIX work longterm, except UA via the uniquely concentrated power of the SFO hub


JL can likely make SEA-KIX nonstop service work due to SEA's geographical location, AA/AS frequent flyer bases in the U.S., JL frequent flyer base in the Keihanshin (Kyoto/Osaka/Kobe) region, significant business ties between the Keihanshin region and the contiguous U.S., O&D traffic between SEA and KIX, and significant connecting feed from AS and AA flights on the SEA end. JL adding SEA-KIX nonstop service would also make it easier for passengers to connect to Osaka from the contiguous U.S. as more U.S.-originating passengers going to Osaka would be able to avoid double connections, connecting through Tokyo, or having to clear customs and immigration in Tokyo before connecting onto TYO-OSA nonstop flights.

AA or JL can also probably make DFW-KIX nonstop service work due to AA having its main hub at DFW and the business ties that exist between the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex and the Keihanshin region, including Osaka-based Kubota having its North American headquarters in Grapevine near DFW Airport, some of Toyota's suppliers having headquarters in the Keihanshin region, and the business relationship that exists between Dallas-based DART and Osaka-based Kinki Sharyo (the manufacturer of DART Light Rail cars).
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:08 am

CLT704 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Key takeaways here are less int'l from LAX, and decreasing long-thin routes

Should be interesting to watch, especially SEA-PVG

CLT down to 3 int'l routes it looks like

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx


No mention of CLT-DUB/MAD, don't get too excited.

I think that makes sense, given MAD and DUB are hubs of JV partners IB and EI (future). They are probably holding on to summer seasonal service for now and will fly them depending on traffic levels. FRA and MUC are probably staying in CLT because AA doesn’t seem to be able to make it work from anywhere else, and they have more feed in CLT than PHL. LHR is obvious.

I think CLT is solidyfing its role as a fortress domestic + Caribbean hub. With this announcement, AA is just removing routes that they surely know aren’t going to fly (of course not all of the remaining may necessarily operate when the time comes).
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 1901
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:13 am

As AA and AS work more closely together, does it look like AA might take over some transcon flying to AS hubs or focus cities where there is or was some overlap? I'm referring to NYC specifically. Does this mean AA re-enters JFK-SAN, JFK-SEA and potentially adds JFK-PDX, and perhaps ups JFK-SFO by one frequency? What about other markets, like Boston or Miami? I'm not suggesting that AA would overtake AS transcon flying across the board. That makes no sense, but hey hub and focus markets? Their standard domestic service (non A321T) are quite similar, and AA does not have enough A321Ts to fly more routes, but curious if AS pares down JFK (maybe they're part of the 70 slots returned alongside AA?) and focuses on EWR to SEA/PDX and may SAN and leave the JFK flying to AA?
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:27 am

Cointrin330 wrote:
As AA and AS work more closely together, does it look like AA might take over some transcon flying to AS hubs or focus cities where there is or was some overlap? I'm referring to NYC specifically. Does this mean AA re-enters JFK-SAN, JFK-SEA and potentially adds JFK-PDX, and perhaps ups JFK-SFO by one frequency? What about other markets, like Boston or Miami? I'm not suggesting that AA would overtake AS transcon flying across the board. That makes no sense, but hey hub and focus markets? Their standard domestic service (non A321T) are quite similar, and AA does not have enough A321Ts to fly more routes, but curious if AS pares down JFK (maybe they're part of the 70 slots returned alongside AA?) and focuses on EWR to SEA/PDX and may SAN and leave the JFK flying to AA?

AA and AS cannot coordinate on such issues. But AA can choose on its own to add certain transcon markets, as it has a better chance of making routes like JFK-SEA/PDX stick with lot of feed from the PNW. We will also likely see some adjustments from AS’ side, but that will also not be a coordinated decision.
 
NYCAAer
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:22 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:24 pm

USAirALB wrote:
I would expect routes such as CLT-CDG/FCO, MIA-MXP to come back fairly quickly once international travel largely resumes. I also wouldn't be surprised to see LAX-GRU resume as well, given that it is a relatively large local market.


From what I’ve heard, GRU was bleeding cash out of LAX.
 
hl8208
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2016 5:34 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:07 pm

NYCAAer wrote:
USAirALB wrote:
I would expect routes such as CLT-CDG/FCO, MIA-MXP to come back fairly quickly once international travel largely resumes. I also wouldn't be surprised to see LAX-GRU resume as well, given that it is a relatively large local market.


From what I’ve heard, GRU was bleeding cash out of LAX.


OTOH, I recall reading somewhere that EZE was actually profitable?

In any case, I'd love to see DL redouble their efforts at LAX. AA pulling out should open up gate space for DL at TBIT. Once int'l traffic returns to normal, I can see DL resuming LHR and starting ICN on their own metal. Highly unlikely, but maybe they'll pick up those PEK slots they fought tooth and nail for against AA, and resume GRU if it doesn't cannibalize their efforts at MIA.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2200
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:17 pm

hl8208 wrote:
NYCAAer wrote:
USAirALB wrote:
I would expect routes such as CLT-CDG/FCO, MIA-MXP to come back fairly quickly once international travel largely resumes. I also wouldn't be surprised to see LAX-GRU resume as well, given that it is a relatively large local market.


From what I’ve heard, GRU was bleeding cash out of LAX.


OTOH, I recall reading somewhere that EZE was actually profitable?

In any case, I'd love to see DL redouble their efforts at LAX. AA pulling out should open up gate space for DL at TBIT. Once int'l traffic returns to normal, I can see DL resuming LHR and starting ICN on their own metal. Highly unlikely, but maybe they'll pick up those PEK slots they fought tooth and nail for against AA, and resume GRU if it doesn't cannibalize their efforts at MIA.



It was with LATAM. Now? Who knows what it will be like.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
EMB170
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:16 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:52 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
'Summer 2021' is both non-specific, and, given circumstances, a long time away. This announcement means nothing. Let us know when these routes are awarded in pilot bid packages and available for sale.

My thoughts exactly. This is like the fictitious default schedule at this point. Playing with house money at this point, can always pull it down later.

Only 25% down for Summer 2021???? That is wildly optimistic in my opinion.

And that SEA-BLR route.....that route was a "jump the shark" move in Pre-COVID era. Downright delusional if think they are going to get that going in winter 2021.
A majority of the workforce that would even use that route is still likely to be working remote/virtually still in that timeframe.

No one can even predict what the Sept-Dec schedule will look like, but long range for 2021 might as well just take a SWAG for now.



I read that and thought, 'good god, are they still pushing forward with those non-sequitur TPAC routes out of SEA?!' Let AS feed them at LAX and run them from Southern California. But, it's their money to lose...
IND ORD ATL MCO PIT EWR BUF CVG DEN RNO JFK DTW BOS BDL BWI IAD RDU CLT MYR CHS TPA CID MSP STL MSY DFW IAH AUS SLC LAS
 
Prost
Posts: 2571
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:11 pm

I kind of had this fantasy that Alaska would have taken some of the 787s that other carriers parked and started up their own long haul network. I’d love to see what kind of splits in revenue AA/AS have negotiated.

While everyone agrees there is a chess type game being played here, the reality is any growth being announced is just more loss opportunities. No carrier has yet figured out how to even break even.
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4775
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:15 pm

gaystudpilot wrote:
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Delta fumbled SEA. Given its investment I can not imagine DL did not run risk scenarios and see AA/AS/oneWorld coming. There is no way SEA can support hubs for AA/AS and DL. Barring AA having to significantly shrink, DL will have to retrench, at best making SEA a focus city, and place more network emphasis on LAX.

AA should be well positioned in SEA with AS, CX and JL to be extremely successful. If AA can’t make SEA work, the whole executive team should be ousted. Was anyone at DL ousted for its SEA mess?

When DL ended the relationship with AS, the word from AS is that they were essentially being "blackmailed" into being DLs sole partner. From DLs perspective, it was that they couldn't control pricing on the AS legs and AS wasn't offering them enough feed because of all the partners it's trying to feed at SEA. I honestly don't see how AA isn't going to run into the exact same issue. Absent a JV or merger, AA can't control AS' pricing and can't have leverage over how many seats are allocated to AA connects vs. JL, CX, SQ, etc. connects. It's entirely possible we're about to see AS/DL 2.0 here. I think people are getting way ahead of themselves calling AAs moves in SEA a roaring success when not a single one of these routes has even launched. I'm sure DL did the risk analysis, and I'm willing to bet they were well aware that AA would partner with AS, but given their own history with AS, it was a risk they were willing to take.

onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As another poster noted, HKG yes, but everyone, including the Japanese carriers, has struggled to make a go of KIX. Only UA with SFO has been able to sustain long-term service. HKG is an interesting case, and people seem to completely overlook some very important facts. Not a single US airline, not AA, not DL, not UA has been able to make LAX-HKG work. Up until a few years ago when DFW-HKG was launched and when CX expanded into places like BOS and SEA, HKG had only been able to successfully maintain TPAC service to the big 4 US TPAC destinations (ORD, NYC, LAX, and SFO). HKG is obviously a very tough nut to crack. UA has succeeded there (and even they had to drop ORD) because they serve HKG from SFO and NYC. Besides, I think people overemphasize HKG. It's a single city in Asia. It's not the be all, end all of Asia service. Plenty of airlines do not serve HKG and survive just fine. DL isn't going to collapse because they don't serve HKG. But besides those two, where has DL "struggled" to maintain longhaul to Asia. The DTW routes have been flying constantly since they were launched. Same for the SEA routes sans KIX and HKG. DL has never retrenched from PVG, PEK, NRT/HND, or ICN, so I'm having a tough time understand how they're struggling.

I still think we're getting way ahead of ourselves here. See above. Let's see how the AA/AS relationship actually works out. It's entirely possible we're about to see a rehash of the AS/DL relationship.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
DFW17L
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:53 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:19 pm

jplatts wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX.

To be fair, almost nobody stateside has been able to make KIX work longterm, except UA via the uniquely concentrated power of the SFO hub


JL can likely make SEA-KIX nonstop service work due to SEA's geographical location, AA/AS frequent flyer bases in the U.S., JL frequent flyer base in the Keihanshin (Kyoto/Osaka/Kobe) region, significant business ties between the Keihanshin region and the contiguous U.S., O&D traffic between SEA and KIX, and significant connecting feed from AS and AA flights on the SEA end. JL adding SEA-KIX nonstop service would also make it easier for passengers to connect to Osaka from the contiguous U.S. as more U.S.-originating passengers going to Osaka would be able to avoid double connections, connecting through Tokyo, or having to clear customs and immigration in Tokyo before connecting onto TYO-OSA nonstop flights.

AA or JL can also probably make DFW-KIX nonstop service work due to AA having its main hub at DFW and the business ties that exist between the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex and the Keihanshin region, including Osaka-based Kubota having its North American headquarters in Grapevine near DFW Airport, some of Toyota's suppliers having headquarters in the Keihanshin region, and the business relationship that exists between Dallas-based DART and Osaka-based Kinki Sharyo (the manufacturer of DART Light Rail cars).


+1
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:24 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
Key takeaways here are less int'l from LAX, and decreasing long-thin routes

Should be interesting to watch, especially SEA-PVG

CLT down to 3 int'l routes it looks like

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx


Lol....I told you LAX would be cut. Without TPAC, the importance of LAX drops considerably. With their TPAC experiment gone, expect less feeder flights into LAX as AA focuses on their domestic network next.
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:41 pm

OA412 wrote:
gaystudpilot wrote:
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Delta fumbled SEA. Given its investment I can not imagine DL did not run risk scenarios and see AA/AS/oneWorld coming. There is no way SEA can support hubs for AA/AS and DL. Barring AA having to significantly shrink, DL will have to retrench, at best making SEA a focus city, and place more network emphasis on LAX.

AA should be well positioned in SEA with AS, CX and JL to be extremely successful. If AA can’t make SEA work, the whole executive team should be ousted. Was anyone at DL ousted for its SEA mess?

When DL ended the relationship with AS, the word from AS is that they were essentially being "blackmailed" into being DLs sole partner. From DLs perspective, it was that they couldn't control pricing on the AS legs and AS wasn't offering them enough feed because of all the partners it's trying to feed at SEA. I honestly don't see how AA isn't going to run into the exact same issue. Absent a JV or merger, AA can't control AS' pricing and can't have leverage over how many seats are allocated to AA connects vs. JL, CX, SQ, etc. connects. It's entirely possible we're about to see AS/DL 2.0 here. I think people are getting way ahead of themselves calling AAs moves in SEA a roaring success when not a single one of these routes has even launched. I'm sure DL did the risk analysis, and I'm willing to bet they were well aware that AA would partner with AS, but given their own history with AS, it was a risk they were willing to take.

onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX. Except for ICN and possibly PVG, AA/AS will have a huge advantage over DL from SEA, and double the market share (and number of routes?).

As another poster noted, HKG yes, but everyone, including the Japanese carriers, has struggled to make a go of KIX. Only UA with SFO has been able to sustain long-term service. HKG is an interesting case, and people seem to completely overlook some very important facts. Not a single US airline, not AA, not DL, not UA has been able to make LAX-HKG work. Up until a few years ago when DFW-HKG was launched and when CX expanded into places like BOS and SEA, HKG had only been able to successfully maintain TPAC service to the big 4 US TPAC destinations (ORD, NYC, LAX, and SFO). HKG is obviously a very tough nut to crack. UA has succeeded there (and even they had to drop ORD) because they serve HKG from SFO and NYC. Besides, I think people overemphasize HKG. It's a single city in Asia. It's not the be all, end all of Asia service. Plenty of airlines do not serve HKG and survive just fine. DL isn't going to collapse because they don't serve HKG. But besides those two, where has DL "struggled" to maintain longhaul to Asia. The DTW routes have been flying constantly since they were launched. Same for the SEA routes sans KIX and HKG. DL has never retrenched from PVG, PEK, NRT/HND, or ICN, so I'm having a tough time understand how they're struggling.

I still think we're getting way ahead of ourselves here. See above. Let's see how the AA/AS relationship actually works out. It's entirely possible we're about to see a rehash of the AS/DL relationship.


I was actually only referring to their Asia routes from SEA. But since you pointed out other routes, yes - DTW is the prime long standing successful Asia hub. Apart from HKG and KIX - as evidenced by their recent cuts, MSP/PDX-HND were anything but successful. We are yet to see DL’s long haul network changes - other than at ICN and PVG, a lot of routes are certainly going to be dropped, for example HND - there is simply no demand for DL to fly 7 daily into TYO on top of NH, JL and UA.

As for KIX, not sure if you forgot that JL has been able to sustain LAX-KIX. As for HKG, AA is in no danger of losing HKG passengers - the CX partnership is deep enough & AA FFs simply love CX, who is the sole carrier on LAX/SEA/JFK/ORD-HKG and even larger than UA on SFO-HKG.

Also, you seem to assume that the terms of the partnership between AA/AS are the same as what existed between DL/AS. Clearly the situations are different - at that time, there was no third carrier competition (actually even AA was a partner), plus they were not in SkyTeam, plus they did not codeshare on DL long haul. AS has already started codesharing on AA’s and QF’s LAX long haul flights and will most probably soon on multiple oneworld airlines including CX. The dynamics is entirely different now.
 
DMPHL
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:33 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:34 pm

OA412 wrote:
gaystudpilot wrote:
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Delta fumbled SEA. Given its investment I can not imagine DL did not run risk scenarios and see AA/AS/oneWorld coming. There is no way SEA can support hubs for AA/AS and DL. Barring AA having to significantly shrink, DL will have to retrench, at best making SEA a focus city, and place more network emphasis on LAX.
...
When DL ended the relationship with AS, the word from AS is that they were essentially being "blackmailed" into being DLs sole partner. From DLs perspective, it was that they couldn't control pricing on the AS legs and AS wasn't offering them enough feed because of all the partners it's trying to feed at SEA. I honestly don't see how AA isn't going to run into the exact same issue. Absent a JV or merger, AA can't control AS' pricing and can't have leverage over how many seats are allocated to AA connects vs. JL, CX, SQ, etc. connects. It's entirely possible we're about to see AS/DL 2.0 here. I think people are getting way ahead of themselves calling AAs moves in SEA a roaring success when not a single one of these routes has even launched. I'm sure DL did the risk analysis, and I'm willing to bet they were well aware that AA would partner with AS, but given their own history with AS, it was a risk they were willing to take.
...
I still think we're getting way ahead of ourselves here. See above. Let's see how the AA/AS relationship actually works out. It's entirely possible we're about to see a rehash of the AS/DL relationship.


If that's true, you can also assume that AA was entirely aware of the AS/DL situation and the limited feed the partnership provided, and would not have ensured that the terms of an agreement with AS were better.
 
peterinlisbon
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:37 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:43 pm

Asia routes are a bit shorter from SEA so it makes sense as a way of cutting costs. I see it as a way of continuing to provide the same connectivity whilst using less fuel.
 
kavok
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:04 pm

Since we are discussing AA growing TPAC service from SEA, the logical question is where does AA go next? AA really can’t call SEA much of a TPAC hub if the only two flights offered are PVG and a niche market in BLR. And while it could be argued that partner flights to HKG and NRT should be included, that is still only 4 flights in total.

So again, where could AA grow next from SEA? AA doesn’t have any spare HND slots, and those can’t be relocated anyway (currently). Maybe PEK next? ICN seems difficult with KE/DL on both sides. And after that, then you start getting into some difficult markets to sustain (SIN, MNL, TPE, etc).

The point being, if BLR, PVG, and maybe PEK (in the future) are the only flights AA is offering from SEA, how much of a threat is that really to DL?
 
onwFan
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:25 pm

kavok wrote:
Since we are discussing AA growing TPAC service from SEA, the logical question is where does AA go next? AA really can’t call SEA much of a TPAC hub if the only two flights offered are PVG and a niche market in BLR. And while it could be argued that partner flights to HKG and NRT should be included, that is still only 4 flights in total.

So again, where could AA grow next from SEA? AA doesn’t have any spare HND slots, and those can’t be relocated anyway (currently). Maybe PEK next? ICN seems difficult with KE/DL on both sides. And after that, then you start getting into some difficult markets to sustain (SIN, MNL, TPE, etc).

The point being, if BLR, PVG, and maybe PEK (in the future) are the only flights AA is offering from SEA, how much of a threat is that really to DL?


They would probably add nothing in the near future. An unexpected add would be MNL if the partnership with PR gets approval - PR was also looking to add MNL-SEA when UA blocked it, but I doubt there is demand now...

Well if AA/OW launch just one more route on top of NRT, HKG, PVG, BLR, they would be offering their FFs the same number of long haul options as DL/SkyTeam (I am not counting KIX returning). If you ask me, the bigger threats are two other things:-

1. That there is not going to be any traffic for multiple carriers to fight over, and that applies to both DL and AA/AS. But AA and AS are each investing much less into this partnership when compared to DL, and are also twice as big at SEA.

2. Another aspect that has been largely ignored is shift of AS huge FF base all over the west coast towards AA/OW flights. Many of them could have been chosing DL for long haul, but now they will choose AA.
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1657
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:32 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time


What’s interesting about this statement is that DL severely cut both BOS & LAX to focus on SEA. Also interesting about BOS is that AA has maintained a significant presence given the environment/circumstances of the pandemic whereas DL’s terminal A has been a GHOSTOWN. Given AA’s committed focus on BOS and OW’s international dominance at BOS (BA 4x daily to LHR, EI 3x daily, IB & Level to MAD & BCN, LA to GRU, JL to NRT, CX to HKG) this could also make for a challenging time for DL in BOS unless they’re ready to really double down. They were uniquely positioned to be the dominant network carrier of the US3 in BOS and then gambled on SEA and that appears it could be a losing bet.
 
kavok
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: American adds more Asia to SEA, and other long-haul changes

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:54 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
DL can't sustain capacity dumping and yield trashing in SEA, LAX, and BOS at the same time


What’s interesting about this statement is that DL severely cut both BOS & LAX to focus on SEA. Also interesting about BOS is that AA has maintained a significant presence given the environment/circumstances of the pandemic whereas DL’s terminal A has been a GHOSTOWN. Given AA’s committed focus on BOS and OW’s international dominance at BOS (BA 4x daily to LHR, EI 3x daily, IB & Level to MAD & BCN, LA to GRU, JL to NRT, CX to HKG) this could also make for a challenging time for DL in BOS unless they’re ready to really double down. They were uniquely positioned to be the dominant network carrier of the US3 in BOS and then gambled on SEA and that appears it could be a losing bet.


Possibly, though here is the kicker: If/when the Covid situation resolves, and travel demand starts to increase again, DL can always boost up BOS and LAX flying to whatever level they deem appropriate. That is not necessarily true at SEA.

SEA has been, and will continue to be, very much gate constrained. The airport authority grants SEA gate space based on how much service a given airline is providing. Thus if DL is going to fly half empty planes from somewhere, SEA is a much better choice than LAX and BOS right now, because the long term return is more gate space at SEA when demand eventually returns. In BOS and LAX, DL will still have the necessary gates needed when demand returns, regardless of how much flying they do today.

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