Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Cointrin330
Posts: 1995
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: 437
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: 786
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: 10
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: 2223
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: 372
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: 2575
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: 4783
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: 258
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: 157
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.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2841
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:35 pm

Ishrion wrote:

Speculation for routes in Summer 2021:
- PHL-CMN seems to be out the window.
- ORD-KRK seems to be gone already, if not, it'll be a shorter season.
- DFW-MUC dropped/reduced.
- PHL-EDI/SNN dropped or reduced frequencies
- PHL-TXL shifts to BER and decreases frequencies
- ORD-VCE/PRG/BUD dropped?

Questions:
- What happened to SEA-LHR?
- Will SEA-BLR still go through?
- Is DFW-TLV still set for September 2021?


Well. That went fairly well. SEA-BLR/LHR confirmed, DFW-TLV still onboard but delayed to winter 2021.
 
onwFan
Posts: 437
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.
 
Vctony
Posts: 665
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 1999 10:51 am

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 3:45 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
American is following UA's lead, starting this fall AA and UA will reduce FA's staffing on their widebodies and some transcon flights. According to View from the Wing AA will reduce staffing to FAA minimum +1. AA's 77Ws - reduced to 11 FA's, 77Es/789s - reduced to 9 FA's, 788s - reduced to 8 FA's and A321Ts - reduced to 5 FA's.

Also somehow View from the Wing got a hold of an AA internal memo advising FA's to expect flat or moderate growth at bases located at BOS, SFO, and DCA. At the same time they should expect notable decreases at their PHX, LAX, and MIA bases. I think AA like UA will see a higher number of FA's commuting come October especially if bases like PHX, LAX and MIA are senior. Once all the good lines are taken I wonder if FA's at those bases will look to other bases to see if they can hold a great line. Also there is no mention of a SEA base so I'm wondering will AA's SFO based FA's staff AA's international flights out of SEA?

https://viewfromthewing.com/american-ai ... october-1/


The PHX base cut is interesting though. LAX is explained by loss of so much long-haul (and a lot of the domestic is Eagle). At MIA, significant amount of the flying is international and they are reducing number of FAd in international flights plus they are keeping the South America bases (I think it’s Lima, Bogota, Santiago and Buenos Aires?) open and they need to balance those lines with MIA flying.

But Phoenix? Why?


I'm curious about PHX as well.

This indicates that we could be looking at a substantial mainline cut at PHX. Maybe we're looking at it being right sized to more of a "focus city".

Most PHX flying is domestic and the base was already cut about a year ago (with several FAs moved to LAX and DFW).
 
DMPHL
Posts: 32
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: 1809
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: 833
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?
 
RemoFlyer
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:12 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:11 pm

Twitter update from JonNYC (assuming its meant to be public)

PHX, LAX expected to lose 800+ flight attendants, MIA maybe more than that. These are the "significant reduction" bases outlined in the info distributed yesterday
- 30% smaller management saves $500 million dollars
-money lost per day is reduced to $35 million now
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:58 pm

To me, the big question is why the flat to modest increase at SFO? Being that SFO is primarily United territory, and with most AA flights from SFO going to other AA hubs, why not shrink there if shrinkage is needed?
 
Vctony
Posts: 665
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 1999 10:51 am

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:01 pm

RemoFlyer wrote:
Twitter update from JonNYC (assuming its meant to be public)

PHX, LAX expected to lose 800+ flight attendants, MIA maybe more than that. These are the "significant reduction" bases outlined in the info distributed yesterday
- 30% smaller management saves $500 million dollars
-money lost per day is reduced to $35 million now


To me that screams that PHX will be hit with the buzzsaw.

We have an idea as to where some of the LAX cuts are coming from (the reduced international flying).

PHX cuts will be severe (each flight requires fewer FAs so to cut that many FAs means a larger cut of flying).

WN is currently the largest carrier at PHX in terms of passengers and it doesn't appear that this stat is likely to change.
 
Miamiairport
Posts: 665
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:03 pm

kavok wrote:
To me, the big question is why the flat to modest increase at SFO? Being that SFO is primarily United territory, and with most AA flights from SFO going to other AA hubs, why not shrink there if shrinkage is needed?


Maybe AA is expecting more feed from/to AS at SFO?
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26220
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:23 pm

Vctony wrote:
RemoFlyer wrote:
Twitter update from JonNYC (assuming its meant to be public)

PHX, LAX expected to lose 800+ flight attendants, MIA maybe more than that. These are the "significant reduction" bases outlined in the info distributed yesterday
- 30% smaller management saves $500 million dollars
-money lost per day is reduced to $35 million now


To me that screams that PHX will be hit with the buzzsaw.

We have an idea as to where some of the LAX cuts are coming from (the reduced international flying).

PHX cuts will be severe (each flight requires fewer FAs so to cut that many FAs means a larger cut of flying).

WN is currently the largest carrier at PHX in terms of passengers and it doesn't appear that this stat is likely to change.


Yeah that's crazy. Or it can mean a lot more regional flying? It's a heavy mainline hub.

International flights are more heavily staffed, obviously, and with AA going to the FAA minimum staffing on these flights the massive cuts at MIA and LAX can be more attributed to that than proportionally large cuts in flying (plus the Miami lines are shared with the South America bases which aren't closing). But that can't explain Phoenix.
a.
 
onwFan
Posts: 437
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: 1659
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: 833
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.
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:03 pm

kavok wrote:
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.


That theory works when airlines like DL are making billions, not now when DL is hopeful to getting to something like LOSING *only* $25 million a day. No airline is in a position to fly half empty planes just to maintain gates. AA/AS is about to eat DL’s lunch in SEA. AA/AS *OW are about to dominate SEA-Asia and also dominate SEA’s largest TATL market LHR. Good luck DL!
 
HardeesBiscuit
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:46 am

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:15 pm

Miamiairport wrote:
HardeesBiscuit wrote:
cathay747 wrote:

Enjoy yourself.

Maybe it hasn't exploded throughout the whole state, but it has and continues to do so in the big, popular, heavily-populated areas where all the "young people" want to go for beaches and booze and partying, turning all those areas into super-spreading breeding grounds, because they're all invincible and don't give a good goddamn for anyone but themselves...how many have been on TV saying crap like "well I'm 25 and not worried about it"? Then throw in the local wacko residents with their screaming that "it's my body, my choice, and it's my right to not wear a mask" and I just want to throw up.

Sorry to digress from the thread topic but I had to get that rant off my chest. Back to AA network info...


Plenty of reason to travel to Florida without night life booze and partying. But you seem to have a chip on your shoulder that people are traveling. Enough that you want to throw up. I don't wear a mask either unless I'm on a plane (yes I've travelled by plane during all this). AA sees the traffic and they're wisely adding flights to make $, even if it pisses you off.


People go to FL during the winter time for the weather. I lived in FL for 7 years and before than made more than a 20 trips a year for nearly 20 years. In the summer time the weather here is horrible. It's our "winter" and we'd rather deal with endless humidity and non stop storms (and an occasional hurricane) for 4 month than snow, ice and freezing temperatures for 4 months. Summer time people, mostly young people come for the nightlife and beach.

Throughout the pandemic my flying in and out of MIA has not slowed down. Who do I see on these packed flights? Young people ready to party. Take away the partying and the beaches what do you have? Walking around in god awful humidity looking at boarded up bars and clubs. Not exactly an exciting memory.

Now MCO has Disney. And the weather in Orlando in the summer is far more harsh than on the coasts. Disney is not re-opening. That leaves TPA/Clearwater and Ft Myers/Naples and that crowd particularly the latter skews older. In other words take away MCO, FLL and MIA and tourism and ergo air travel take a huge hit. I don't hate anything I'm just realistic about what young people want. As I said in another thread I predict that CUN will soon be rolling out the welcome mat just like they did for Spring Breakers when several FL towns decided throngs of college kids wanting to party was not want they wanted.


Um, Disney actually IS opening. Magic Kingdom + Animal Kingdom opens July 11 Disney Studios and EPCOT on July 15. Universal has already been open.
Watch out, Karen, here we come!
https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/travel-information/


Re: the AA cuts & international, interesting that although they're changing the RDU flight attendant base to a satellite instead of a base, that they ARE adding back the RDU-LHR international flight. Which ought to put the perpetual questions to rest about "is it, profitable, doesn't it need a subsidy, why is it flown, probably will be cut." Obviously it makes cash or it wouldn't return, espcially on as a 777-300, AA's largest aircraft.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5208
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:19 pm

kavok wrote:
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.


I think BOS and SEA are different situation. AA is going to actually slightly increase FAs at BOS. That shows they intend to at least keep their current capacity at BOS if not more. I can see them looking at NYC market as something that's not sustainable and make BOS just as important. I wouldn't be surprised if they keep a couple of these non-hub routes. It seems that AA will have an easier path to be the legacy of choice at BOS. AA also has a lot of gates at BOS that it can make use of.

At SEA, DL has been very stubborn in adding flights back really quickly. They are clearly the legacy of choice there. They have made a larger and longer commitment to the area. They have brought back capacity at SEA faster than NYC. So the notion that they will give up there is just unrealistic at this point. AA is hoping at this point that AS will provide enough feed for it to be successful to a couple of routes in Asia. That seems hard to do. It's more likely that AA's SEA to Asia efforts will not work out than for DL to retreat from there at this point.

I think DL is making the wrong choice here. Dominating LAX should be their #1 priority. But it seems like they are "pot committed" in SEA to use a poker analogy.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2361
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:24 pm

kavok wrote:
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.


This. Plus, DL has focused on hubs and connectivity. BOS has a lot of connectivity with other east coast hubs.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5277
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:36 pm

MrPeanut 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


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.


Funny, aren't you the one who said AA would cut LAX down to DFW, ORD, JFK, LAS, PHL, BOS, PHX, & MIA?

Your credibility went out the window after that.....
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:47 pm

tphuang wrote:
kavok wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

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.


I think BOS and SEA are different situation. AA is going to actually slightly increase FAs at BOS. That shows they intend to at least keep their current capacity at BOS if not more. I can see them looking at NYC market as something that's not sustainable and make BOS just as important. I wouldn't be surprised if they keep a couple of these non-hub routes. It seems that AA will have an easier path to be the legacy of choice at BOS. AA also has a lot of gates at BOS that it can make use of.

At SEA, DL has been very stubborn in adding flights back really quickly. They are clearly the legacy of choice there. They have made a larger and longer commitment to the area. They have brought back capacity at SEA faster than NYC. So the notion that they will give up there is just unrealistic at this point. AA is hoping at this point that AS will provide enough feed for it to be successful to a couple of routes in Asia. That seems hard to do. It's more likely that AA's SEA to Asia efforts will not work out than for DL to retreat from there at this point.

I think DL is making the wrong choice here. Dominating LAX should be their #1 priority. But it seems like they are "pot committed" in SEA to use a poker analogy.


I agree with most of your comments, especially in regards to BOS. I also believe AA is going to make a renewed push at BOS, and it will be very interesting to see how DL responds there... especially if DL is able to use the pandemic to gain even more space/flights from JFK.

What I disagree with is the assertion that DL needs to build up LAX at this time. I do think it’s obvious DL will eventually grow LAX further, and it will be very interesting how AA responds when they do. I have to believe Raja and crew realized that with AA dropping those TPAC flights from LAX, that it is very likely DL may eventually try some of them from LAX post COVID. That all being said, the opportunity for DL to grow LAX will still exist after the pandemic ends, and that would be the appropriate time for DL to try those higher risk routes should they wish. But there is no need for DL to lose money and grow LAX now.

I stand by my earlier post though, that DL does need to retain a healthy market share at SEA during the pandemic so they have the gates they need post pandemic. That is DLs more urgent need. But kudos to AA/AS for making it hard on DL to achieve that.
Last edited by kavok on Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:56 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
MrPeanut 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


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.


Funny, aren't you the one who said AA would cut LAX down to DFW, ORD, JFK, LAS, PHL, BOS, PHX, & MIA?

Your credibility went out the window after that.....


No that is not what I said. I specifically said LAX will resemble more of a focus city, and among other things, the remaining TPAC flights that will remain can be easily filled via local O&D and the cities specifically mentioned. These cities were mentioned because they are AA hubs or metro areas with high number of foreign visitors.
Last edited by MrPeanut on Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
jonair8
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:10 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:05 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
kavok wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

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.


That theory works when airlines like DL are making billions, not now when DL is hopeful to getting to something like LOSING *only* $25 million a day. No airline is in a position to fly half empty planes just to maintain gates. AA/AS is about to eat DL’s lunch in SEA. AA/AS *OW are about to dominate SEA-Asia and also dominate SEA’s largest TATL market LHR. Good luck DL!


Yep, you sure are correct. Delta should just pull out of SEA right now and head straight for ATL! Might as well file for bankruptcy right now!

Anti-Delta much? Ridiculous, even laughable. You conveniently neglect to also say that AA burns more cash right now than DL does. DL also has more cash in the bank than AA. SEA has come back faster than the other hubs have, and DL is committed to SEA. The OAG schedule threads every week show it. Will AA be successful in SEA? Perhaps. Will Delta get run out of SEA? Remains to be seen. Big question is, will AS have the capacity to feed all of AA's new flights, or will AS still use their capacity to serve others in SEA? We'll see if all if this sticks post COVID. For now, I suggest that DL takes your advice and just hands the entire west coast to AA.
 
bcbhokie
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:30 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:11 pm

tphuang wrote:
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.


Interesting observations, and I agree SEAPVG will be a bloodbath. I wonder if Delta could respond by letting MU take over the route? That would backfill Hainan if they leave from the CAAC perspective, and would save Delta from having to light money on fire keeping service to PVG.

(It's possible that there's enough cargo to move that both DL and AA can find a niche, though.)
 
tphuang
Posts: 5208
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:13 pm

kavok wrote:
tphuang wrote:
kavok wrote:

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.


I think BOS and SEA are different situation. AA is going to actually slightly increase FAs at BOS. That shows they intend to at least keep their current capacity at BOS if not more. I can see them looking at NYC market as something that's not sustainable and make BOS just as important. I wouldn't be surprised if they keep a couple of these non-hub routes. It seems that AA will have an easier path to be the legacy of choice at BOS. AA also has a lot of gates at BOS that it can make use of.

At SEA, DL has been very stubborn in adding flights back really quickly. They are clearly the legacy of choice there. They have made a larger and longer commitment to the area. They have brought back capacity at SEA faster than NYC. So the notion that they will give up there is just unrealistic at this point. AA is hoping at this point that AS will provide enough feed for it to be successful to a couple of routes in Asia. That seems hard to do. It's more likely that AA's SEA to Asia efforts will not work out than for DL to retreat from there at this point.

I think DL is making the wrong choice here. Dominating LAX should be their #1 priority. But it seems like they are "pot committed" in SEA to use a poker analogy.


I agree with most of your comments, especially in regards to BOS. I also believe AA is going to make a renewed push at BOS, and it will be very interesting to see how DL responds there... especially if DL is able to use the pandemic to gain even more space/flights from JFK.

What I disagree with is the assertion that DL needs to build up LAX at this time. I do think it’s obvious DL will eventually grow LAX further, and it will be very interesting how AA responds when they do. I have to believe Raja and crew realized that with AA dropping those TPAC flights from LAX, that it is very likely DL may eventually try some of them from LAX post COVID. That all being said, the opportunity for DL to grow LAX will still exist after the pandemic ends, and that would be the appropriate time for DL to try those higher risk routes should they wish. But there is no need for DL to lose money and grow LAX now.

I stand by my earlier post though, that DL does need to retain a healthy market share at SEA during the pandemic so they have the gates they need post pandemic. That is DLs more urgent need. But kudos to AA/AS for making it hard on DL to achieve that.


Given that they have already made the decision to continue with their SEA investment, I would totally agree that SEA will be a major emphasis on their rebuild process. I think that means a lot of A220s will get deployed there. AS is going to make sure everything routes through SEA the next couple of years to ensure they can get as many gates as possible. DL can't go half way here.

The confusing parts of DL moves thus far is how slowly it has added back at LGA/JFK. Very slow.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:14 pm

tphuang wrote:
I think BOS and SEA are different situation. AA is going to actually slightly increase FAs at BOS. That shows they intend to at least keep their current capacity at BOS if not more. I can see them looking at NYC market as something that's not sustainable and make BOS just as important. I wouldn't be surprised if they keep a couple of these non-hub routes. It seems that AA will have an easier path to be the legacy of choice at BOS. AA also has a lot of gates at BOS that it can make use of.

At SEA, DL has been very stubborn in adding flights back really quickly. They are clearly the legacy of choice there. They have made a larger and longer commitment to the area. They have brought back capacity at SEA faster than NYC. So the notion that they will give up there is just unrealistic at this point. AA is hoping at this point that AS will provide enough feed for it to be successful to a couple of routes in Asia. That seems hard to do. It's more likely that AA's SEA to Asia efforts will not work out than for DL to retreat from there at this point.

I think DL is making the wrong choice here. Dominating LAX should be their #1 priority. But it seems like they are "pot committed" in SEA to use a poker analogy.


The problem is that you cannot dominate LAX. There are no slots (like JFK), and the airport has been agreeable lately in gate expansions. Therefore, it’s hard to dominate under that kind of environment. So I actually like Delta’s strategy there.

But I do agree with you that AA won’t pose much of a problem for DL at SEA. The best AA can do is offer unique routes such as Bangalore or routes to OW hubs. Head to head AA will lose because they have a significant revenue problem, and have for years. I am shocked that they have yet to fix their broken pricing model/strategy to more closely resemble competitors. Even if this was addressed, they still have service issues and enormous debt to overcome.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:17 pm

Duplicate post delete
Last edited by MrPeanut on Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26220
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:19 pm

MrPeanut wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
MrPeanut wrote:

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.


Funny, aren't you the one who said AA would cut LAX down to DFW, ORD, JFK, LAS, PHL, BOS, PHX, & MIA?

Your credibility went out the window after that.....


No that is not what I said. I specifically said LAX will resemble more of a focus city, and among other things, the remaining TPAC flights that will remain can be easily filled via local O&D and the cities specifically mentioned. These cities were mentioned because they are AA hubs with loyal flyers in large metro areas.


LAX will remain a large domestic hub for AA, possibly I would think at PHX's expense. AA is very strong at LAX domesticlly. It doesn't rely on feed from three flights to China and Hong Kong to fill flights to Omaha, Indianapolis, Tulsa, etc.

Lest we forget, London, Sydney, Tokyo, Auckland and Christchurch are sticking around, not to mention Hawaii flying.
a.
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2900
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:55 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
kavok wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

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.


That theory works when airlines like DL are making billions, not now when DL is hopeful to getting to something like LOSING *only* $25 million a day. No airline is in a position to fly half empty planes just to maintain gates. AA/AS is about to eat DL’s lunch in SEA. AA/AS *OW are about to dominate SEA-Asia and also dominate SEA’s largest TATL market LHR. Good luck DL!


AS/AA is going to dominate TPAC from SEA by offering two routes? What delusion... None of this has even started yet and people are declaring winners and losers.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:57 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
MrPeanut wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:

Funny, aren't you the one who said AA would cut LAX down to DFW, ORD, JFK, LAS, PHL, BOS, PHX, & MIA?

Your credibility went out the window after that.....


No that is not what I said. I specifically said LAX will resemble more of a focus city, and among other things, the remaining TPAC flights that will remain can be easily filled via local O&D and the cities specifically mentioned. These cities were mentioned because they are AA hubs with loyal flyers in large metro areas.


LAX will remain a large domestic hub for AA, possibly I would think at PHX's expense. AA is very strong at LAX domesticlly. It doesn't rely on feed from three flights to China and Hong Kong to fill flights to Omaha, Indianapolis, Tulsa, etc.

Lest we forget, London, Sydney, Tokyo, Auckland and Christchurch are sticking around, not to mention Hawaii flying.


What do you mean by “remain a large domestic hub”? LAX was not a large hub before and certainly won’t be a large hub after.

Nevertheless, LHR and Tokyo were always flown by AA even before LAX was a hub. Christchurch no longer has a start date, and Auckland is seasonal only. So basically SYD will be the only year round TPAC destination AA added since LAX became a hub. Unfortunately, SYD is not exclusive to LAX and can be reached via QANTAS from other US cities. LAX doesn’t offer anything unique to the international network other than a seasonal flight to Auckland.

I also do not know what you mean by American was very strong at LAX domestically. I assume you are using market share. Market share means nothing if they are not profitable, especially now that they have all that debt. Considering AA lost market share on their flagship LAX-JFK route - even after UA pulled out of that route - speaks volumes on how well AA can compete at LAX when faced with head to head competition. AA has a lot to fix internally and they are not going to waste money on losing hubs right now. They cannot afford to.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5208
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:11 pm

LAX was not a strong performer domestically. Those west coast stuff were hugely unprofitable. Aa is cutting back on all the weaker performing stations. That include mia lax phx and nyc. I don’t know why this is so hard to see.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3321
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:32 pm

OA412 wrote:
onwFan wrote:
They have struggled sustaining long haul to Asia to even large markets like HKG and KIX.

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.


I'd also add that DL probably isn't remotely regretting their decision to pull out of HKG right now. Hong Kong is a city trending in the wrong direction as a place people want to visit and conduct business.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
onwFan
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:32 pm

RemoFlyer wrote:
Twitter update from JonNYC (assuming its meant to be public)

PHX, LAX expected to lose 800+ flight attendants, MIA maybe more than that. These are the "significant reduction" bases outlined in the info distributed yesterday
- 30% smaller management saves $500 million dollars
-money lost per day is reduced to $35 million now

Can someone plase shed some light on the current sizes of their FA bases at LAX and PHX?
 
FSDan
Posts: 3321
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:43 pm

To summarize the long haul routes that were not mentioned in the press release (indicating that they are presumably not being discontinued, and may have already had restart/launch dates announced):

LAX-HND (presumably still 2x daily based on route award)
LAX-CHC (presumably starting W21)
DFW-DUB
DFW-LHR
DFW-MAD
DFW-CDG
DFW-AMS
DFW-FRA
DFW-NRT (I didn't miss an announcement of consolidation to HND, did I?)
DFW-HND
DFW-ICN
DFW-PVG
DFW-HKG
DFW-AKL (presumably starting W21)
ORD-LHR
ORD-FCO
ORD-ATH
MIA-LIM
MIA-EZE
MIA-MVD
MIA-LHR
MIA-BCN
CLT-DUB
CLT-MAD
PHL-KEF
PHL-SNN
PHL-EDI
PHL-LIS
PHL-BCN
PHL-VCE
PHL-PRG
PHL-ATH
JFK-LHR
JFK-FCO
BOS-LHR
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8058
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:57 pm

tphuang wrote:
kavok wrote:
tphuang wrote:

I think BOS and SEA are different situation. AA is going to actually slightly increase FAs at BOS. That shows they intend to at least keep their current capacity at BOS if not more. I can see them looking at NYC market as something that's not sustainable and make BOS just as important. I wouldn't be surprised if they keep a couple of these non-hub routes. It seems that AA will have an easier path to be the legacy of choice at BOS. AA also has a lot of gates at BOS that it can make use of.

At SEA, DL has been very stubborn in adding flights back really quickly. They are clearly the legacy of choice there. They have made a larger and longer commitment to the area. They have brought back capacity at SEA faster than NYC. So the notion that they will give up there is just unrealistic at this point. AA is hoping at this point that AS will provide enough feed for it to be successful to a couple of routes in Asia. That seems hard to do. It's more likely that AA's SEA to Asia efforts will not work out than for DL to retreat from there at this point.

I think DL is making the wrong choice here. Dominating LAX should be their #1 priority. But it seems like they are "pot committed" in SEA to use a poker analogy.


I agree with most of your comments, especially in regards to BOS. I also believe AA is going to make a renewed push at BOS, and it will be very interesting to see how DL responds there... especially if DL is able to use the pandemic to gain even more space/flights from JFK.

What I disagree with is the assertion that DL needs to build up LAX at this time. I do think it’s obvious DL will eventually grow LAX further, and it will be very interesting how AA responds when they do. I have to believe Raja and crew realized that with AA dropping those TPAC flights from LAX, that it is very likely DL may eventually try some of them from LAX post COVID. That all being said, the opportunity for DL to grow LAX will still exist after the pandemic ends, and that would be the appropriate time for DL to try those higher risk routes should they wish. But there is no need for DL to lose money and grow LAX now.

I stand by my earlier post though, that DL does need to retain a healthy market share at SEA during the pandemic so they have the gates they need post pandemic. That is DLs more urgent need. But kudos to AA/AS for making it hard on DL to achieve that.


Given that they have already made the decision to continue with their SEA investment, I would totally agree that SEA will be a major emphasis on their rebuild process. I think that means a lot of A220s will get deployed there. AS is going to make sure everything routes through SEA the next couple of years to ensure they can get as many gates as possible. DL can't go half way here.

The confusing parts of DL moves thus far is how slowly it has added back at LGA/JFK. Very slow.

It’s not confusing at all as to why DL has brought back so little capacity in NYC in June. They brought more back for July and more is planned for August but it will be awhile. NYC was hit hardest earliest had more strict lock downs. Unlike business traffic returns LGA is going to stay quiet.

There is minuscule business and corporate traffic currently. Most large companies aren’t even getting people back into offices until at least September if not more months beyond that. The big consultancies and professional and financial service firms are all working remote. Until that stuff starts to recover LGA will be slow.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2841
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:00 pm

FSDan wrote:
To summarize the long haul routes that were not mentioned in the press release (indicating that they are presumably not being discontinued, and may have already had restart/launch dates announced):

DFW-NRT (I didn't miss an announcement of consolidation to HND, did I?)


Nope. In exactly one week, AA's DFW-HND will inaugurate and operate alongside DFW-NRT.

There aren't any available HND slots for AA to transfer DFW-NRT anyway.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:14 pm

jplatts wrote:
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 barely makes KIX-LAX work, and that's a far more powerful market, where both AA and AS have a hub/focus.



jplatts wrote:
AA or JL can also probably make DFW-KIX nonstop service work

AA already flew and dropped that route, after losing an exclusive cargo contract. It wasn't worth it on pax traffic alone.



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

It's never been a strong market from the west coast, and no airline has been able to make it work long term, despite so many having tried even within the last few years (AA, DL, KE, etc).



hl8208 wrote:
AA pulling out should open up gate space for DL at TBIT.

Gate space at TBIT hasn't been an issue or limitation for DL, who barely even uses TBIT; save for its Australian eastbounds which usually arrive in the pre-dawn hours, prior to T2 customs opening.



clrd4t8koff wrote:
DL severely cut both BOS & LAX to focus on SEA.

what "severe cut" has DL made at LAX :confused:
Last edited by LAX772LR on Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2102
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:16 pm

enilria wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
CLT and LAX look like the big losers here. PHL and DFW made our pretty well.

Presently PHL cannot legally accept any intl flights per U.S. restrictions.

Same with CLT
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:31 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
Vctony wrote:
RemoFlyer wrote:
Twitter update from JonNYC (assuming its meant to be public)

PHX, LAX expected to lose 800+ flight attendants, MIA maybe more than that. These are the "significant reduction" bases outlined in the info distributed yesterday
- 30% smaller management saves $500 million dollars
-money lost per day is reduced to $35 million now


To me that screams that PHX will be hit with the buzzsaw.

We have an idea as to where some of the LAX cuts are coming from (the reduced international flying).

PHX cuts will be severe (each flight requires fewer FAs so to cut that many FAs means a larger cut of flying).

WN is currently the largest carrier at PHX in terms of passengers and it doesn't appear that this stat is likely to change.


Yeah that's crazy. Or it can mean a lot more regional flying? It's a heavy mainline hub.

International flights are more heavily staffed, obviously, and with AA going to the FAA minimum staffing on these flights the massive cuts at MIA and LAX can be more attributed to that than proportionally large cuts in flying (plus the Miami lines are shared with the South America bases which aren't closing). But that can't explain Phoenix.


PHX has a heavy legacy US flight attendant employee base. In fact, many routes out of LAX were staffed by PHX based FA’s. This reduction was already in the works last year, but was far from completed. Considering the depth of the reduction at LAX and taking into consideration that some flights out of LAX pre-covid were still staffed by PHX based FA’s would indicate a larger right sizing hitting LAX beyond the international flight reductions.
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 816
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

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

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:49 pm

Again, why does DL need SEA anymore with US-China traffic in the toilet? DL barely flies any Asia routes out of SEA to begin with and they are losing a ton of money there. They already fly to HND/PVG out of LAX, why not just open ICN and use LAX as their TPAC hub for what they need? Considering how much they emphasize using ICN as an international transfer hub, SEA is incredibly pointless in DL's network. AA/AS will have the upper advantage in SEA as they have way more scale, and despite what people say here, DON'T rule out the possibility of AA absorbing AS down the road.

DL needs to focus on LAX and SLC in the west. SLC needs to be bulked up big time when things recover and the new terminal fully opens.
 
MrPeanut
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:36 pm

Re: American Airlines Network Thread - 2020

Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:51 pm

BNAMealer wrote:
janders wrote:
Well well. AA drops marginal LAX longhauls and hopes they will do better from SEA?

Me thinks they are placing too much hope on AS and ignoring the obvious that SEA is not only a smaller pie to eat from, but it already has DL as a player. Plus SEA not exactly well connected to the AA network unlike LA is.

Be fun watching how things play out in the years to come.


Me thinks this is AA positioning themselves to acquire AS down the road, when things recover.



This cannot happen for two reasons:
1. AA’s market cap is only 43% bigger than AS even though AA has 5 times the amount of revenue

AND

2. AA has too much debt

You couldn’t fund the acquisition with equity because it would cut stockholder by more than half. You couldn’t fund it with debt because AA already has too much debt. Assuming AA could find a financial institution willing to lend it debt, it would be at card level interest rates such as what they were charged in their last debt offering.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 777luver, alexwm, B787oftheworld, battlegroup62, boefan, Google Adsense [Bot], jhdk, mig17, MrHMSH, NiallS, SCQ83, skipness1E, StTim, T54A, TEALflyer, tjwgrr, TYSflyer, User001, Ziyulu and 212 guests

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