Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
madpropsyo
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:02 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:13 pm

CobaltScar wrote:
madpropsyo wrote:
CobaltScar wrote:
There is no comparison between hard/soft product on a AS and B6 flight, especially on transon.


On the handful of flights where B6 operates Mint, yes, of course.

On every single other aircraft and the airport experience though? First Class, Upgrades, Lounges, etc. AS beats B6 hands down.


So you'd rather fly transcon in a Alaska economy cabin or a Jetblue one? (since you already agreed jetBlue business >> alaskas)

One has large TVs, more legroom, free wifi, more snacks/drinks, lower density seating

the other does not.


This argument is completely irrelevant to the thread topic, but since you insist... B6's new dense cabins are the same as AS at 32" pitch so there is no legroom or density advantage. Seatback TV is a happy bonus but mostly irrelevant with streaming entertainment. Mint is on barely 10% of B6's fleet so while it is nicer than AS's 1st what is nicer is having the option on every route.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
nine4nine wrote:
JAMBOJET wrote:

What's the matter with Alaska's hard product? They have more legroom in every cabin than American, Delta, and United and an in-flight entertainment system equivalent to narrow body product on AA, United, Southwest, Delta on the 717 product, Hawaiian etc. PTVs aren't everything.



When the WiFi and seatback power port actually works. I’ve been on some AS, WN, and UA flights where the network was down the entire flight or the power wasn’t there or INOP. At least in the old days before IFE at least you had a big cushy seat with the option to sleep the flight away. Now sitting on a park bench which is pretty impossible to even sleep with nothing to stare at other than a plastic seat back is misery.

And AS first class is bottom of the barrel in the US. I would never book it outside of the the small upgrade fee at the gate.


This person obviously has an axe to grind. More legroom, quality food on 3.5hr flights. That’s more than I’ve gotten on AA or even DL. DL does have nice IFE. But to say bottom of the barrel especially against AA and UA really makes you look foolish.



As someone who travels for business a handful of times I’m entitled to my opinion and know who has what products I’m well aware. I work for no airline not have any biases towards other airlines. I fly all airlines and the level of service varies greatly between carriers. And I will back up my statement AS is WN with a first class cabin. Comparing them to DL or AA is absurd. They had a unique platform to work with acquiring VX that would have set them in their own category but they scoffed and nothing about the AS experience is unique or better.
717, 727-100, 727-200, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 742, 748, 752, 753, 762, 763, 772, 77W, 787-10, DC9, MD80/88/90, DC10, 319, 220-300, 320, 321, 321n, 332, 333, CS100, CRJ200, Q400, E175, E190, ERJ145, EMB120
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 4760
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:34 pm

I do think these are good adds for AS. It's a weird time and their strategy is changing with AA. Alot of these can feed Asia or Hawaii or alaska bound flights too it's not all about o&d. These can feed future AA sea adds. Their product is NOT competative on LAX-JFK/BOS but for these smaller cities without a premium Transcon business class they have the best in class F product. AS has the best legroom , seats, and food compared to regular domestic UA,DL or AA.

Really doesn't seem too much of a shot at B6 to me more about trying to take advantage of a very weird situation in the industry. I bet we see AS start to shrink their presence against true Transcon products out of EWR, JFK and BOS and focus more on routes like these that they can shine on. They can lean more on AA in the future for premium JFK Transcon routes.
Last edited by slcdeltarumd11 on Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1884
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:06 pm

Couple of comments:

-> When will the construction at Terminal 6 be done? I believe it will give Alaska 2 MORE signatory/preferential use gates
-> Eagles Nest (formerly the Skywest Bro hub) will be torn down to make room for the new Terminal 9.
-> AS knows where it stands in the business. In the middle. They'll carry the "maybe I'll pay $500 vs $900-$2000" crowd for First and then fill the plane up with people who are either price or schedule driven. Everyone else seems to be duking it out JUST for the premium traffic.

We know Alaska's days as an innovator are "over". Everyone forgot that Alaska was first to offer free movies. First to offer *real* snacks in a lounge (used to be ONLY soda and the same snack mix you get on the plane... lounges didn't even offer FRESH FRUIT. Bars were all for pay). Alaska used to be the only airline to do yearly elite frequent flyer dinners/social gatherings with top execs. They also were the first airline to stop requiring saturday night stays to get the cheapest fare. Alaska is the last holdout to earn status based on miles flown, not $$. And their First product has degraded to just "meh" from the amazing VX super recliner. But, they still have lounges. Lots of access to international partners. No change fees for MVP Golds and up, etc. So there's a "Southwest plus" niche they are filling.
xx
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5362
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:35 pm

phatfarmlines wrote:
More like AS clapping back at DL......

Open season on DL especially with the AA/B6 news.

I guess if you call clapping back at Delta by adding all of 3 routes Delta flies. (LAX-TPA/KOA/LIH)

I'm sure the folks in Atlanta are absolutely freaking out of SEA-RSW :lol: :roll:
 
Tack
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:13 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:37 pm

nine4nine wrote:
JAMBOJET wrote:
catiii wrote:

Until they address their inferior hard product they’re going to remain irrelevant.


What's the matter with Alaska's hard product? They have more legroom in every cabin than American, Delta, and United and an in-flight entertainment system equivalent to narrow body product on AA, United, Southwest, Delta on the 717 product, Hawaiian etc. PTVs aren't everything.



When the WiFi and seatback power port actually works. I’ve been on some AS, WN, and UA flights where the network was down the entire flight or the power wasn’t there or INOP. At least in the old days before IFE at least you had a big cushy seat with the option to sleep the flight away. Now sitting on a park bench which is pretty impossible to even sleep with nothing to stare at other than a plastic seat back is misery.

And AS first class is bottom of the barrel in the US. I would never book it outside of the the small upgrade fee at the gate.


I’m willing to bet you’ve never in your life paid for and flown AS’s FC let alone any airlines FC. I appreciate your opinion, but if all you’ve ever experienced in any premium cabin is via the walk back your coach seat, then it’s just that. Your opinion. My experience as a OW Emerald whose paid for many FC seats, including AS, is that their product is quite good. Cheers!
 
Tack
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:13 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:43 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
phatfarmlines wrote:
More like AS clapping back at DL......

Open season on DL especially with the AA/B6 news.

I guess if you call clapping back at Delta by adding all of 3 routes Delta flies. (LAX-TPA/KOA/LIH)

I'm sure the folks in Atlanta are absolutely freaking out of SEA-RSW :lol: :roll:


I think you’re right. Counting all the money they’ve lost on failed Attempts at being a stakeholder in flawed carriers, the weakness of ST vs OW and *A, and AA slapping it’s code on two big DL competitors, I’d expect a bit of ‘freaking’ out in ATL.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4969
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:44 pm

Tack wrote:
nine4nine wrote:
JAMBOJET wrote:

What's the matter with Alaska's hard product? They have more legroom in every cabin than American, Delta, and United and an in-flight entertainment system equivalent to narrow body product on AA, United, Southwest, Delta on the 717 product, Hawaiian etc. PTVs aren't everything.



When the WiFi and seatback power port actually works. I’ve been on some AS, WN, and UA flights where the network was down the entire flight or the power wasn’t there or INOP. At least in the old days before IFE at least you had a big cushy seat with the option to sleep the flight away. Now sitting on a park bench which is pretty impossible to even sleep with nothing to stare at other than a plastic seat back is misery.

And AS first class is bottom of the barrel in the US. I would never book it outside of the the small upgrade fee at the gate.


I’m willing to bet you’ve never in your life paid for and flown AS’s FC let alone any airlines FC. I appreciate your opinion, but if all you’ve ever experienced in any premium cabin is via the walk back your coach seat, then it’s just that. Your opinion. My experience as a OW Emerald whose paid for many FC seats, including AS, is that their product is quite good. Cheers!

Not everyone sees the value us playing twice as much to get to the same place at the same time. Many rich people
Fly coach
 
gmcc
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:54 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:00 pm

[quote="usxguy"]Couple of comments:

-> When will the construction at Terminal 6 be done? I believe it will give Alaska 2 MORE signatory/preferential use gates
-> ..... /quote]
From what I can find at LAWA gate count goes to 15.
It was meant to start in March 2020 and last for 36 months. Clearly that is not happening now. Given that the AA redo of T4 was just about to go before the LAX board for approval I would expect a similar time lag for AS on T6 so approval might happen in Aug/Sep. There was also some unexpected fire line work in the 5.5 core that might also impact the T6 project. Given all that any work on T6 might start in March 2021. And if LAWA/AS decide to change the layout because of covid it might be longer.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2441
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:17 pm

As a side note I was able to book a RT FLL to SFO nonstop on AS Christmas week.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1884
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:29 pm

Dayam. Who needs Real Housewives when you can just read an A.Net thread about Alaska's moderate First Class.

I think Alaska does something no one else does well: consistency.

On American, I can get a lie flat on one plane, a decent seat on one 737-800, then cringe as I connect to an Oasis 737 seat, or Airbus A321 - LUS. Before, I could have ended up on a lie-flat on one 757, and then a crappy recliner on another. I even, thankfully, had an A319 swapped to an A330. THAT was a nice ride (CLT/SJU). But can you imagine going the OTHER way?

Virgin was awesome. But it didn't cut it. That's why it went for sale. Alaska had its own plans for it, which were better than Jetblue (which was to cut everything and run it as all Y). Alaska is at least trying to make a good utility out of some of the VX offerings. And it seems LAX won over SFO. When was the last time AS added, successfully, a new route out of there vs LAX?
xx
 
allegiantflyer
Posts: 366
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:36 pm

It's nice to see the Bullish AS that we saw in 2017 after the acquisition come out in force again, it seemed they became very timid and eager to cutback following that period in time. Big expansion announcements like these are very exciting, they only come every few years. here are some of my takeaways;

- AS seems in the likes of B6 (and VX for that matter, whom I wonder if old VX people are now at AS) to steer clear of making expansions to cities in the mid-continent in preference to explore transcons, which would explain the Florida routes.
-The adds in Montana help solidify AS's longtime leadership role in the (albeit very small) Montana market. They also seem to have been building up BOI again, reminds me of the old Horizon hub from a long time ago.
-The Hawaii adds are nice to see but also arent daily like some of their other HI routes, maybe if they are interested in serving with a few frequencies a week they should consider doing BOI-HNL etc the way allegiant did a few years back, would also complement their other BOI adds.
-Beware, we've seen in the past with every AS expansion comes a AS drawback. Many of the California routes AS added in 2017 following the merger were cut within less than a year of their addition. AS is not patient with new routes that don't immediately turn a profit.
Last edited by allegiantflyer on Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
MIAFLLPBIFlyer
Posts: 493
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:25 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:58 pm

dfwjim1 wrote:
As a side note I was able to book a RT FLL to SFO nonstop on AS Christmas week.


The FLL-SFO AS route has nine lives. It seems every year the route is cut only to reappear as a seasonal route. With these ads from FLL it might as well be permanent seasonal now.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8068
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 11:00 pm

allegiantflyer wrote:
-Beware, we've seen in the past with every AS expansion comes a AS drawback. Many of the California routes AS added in 2017 following the merger were cut within less than a year of their addition. AS is not patient with new routes that don't immediately turn a profit.


AS has, intermittently, been a little capacity constrained. That's not the case for 2020 or 2021!
 
BTVB6Flyer
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:20 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Thu Jul 16, 2020 11:45 pm

Also appears they are adding 3x weekly SFO-TPA, starting November 20th
 
FSDan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:04 am

Wow, some definite drama in this thread!

My takes on these adds:
LAX-EUG/MFR/BZN - these make a ton of sense and should do well on E75s; I expect AA won't bring these back either
PDX/SAN-FLL - I think AS will do alright with these; my guess is point of sale is higher on the West Coast than in FLL for these
LAX-TPA - jury is out - AS probably has a better shot than AA had at making this work, but if WN stays in the market that will be 3 carriers, and that seems like too many for this route (and DL and WN are way stronger on the TPA end)
SEA/LAX-RSW - I'm skeptical on these - they seem like long, low yield routes, although it does help that there's no competition
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26222
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:05 am

MIAFLLPBIFlyer wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
As a side note I was able to book a RT FLL to SFO nonstop on AS Christmas week.


The FLL-SFO AS route has nine lives. It seems every year the route is cut only to reappear as a seasonal route. With these ads from FLL it might as well be permanent seasonal now.


It's never been permanently discontinued, but sometimes it has been flown all winter long and other times only during peak (Thanksgiving+Christmas+February/March).

As a frequent traveler on FLLLAX due to my status on Alaska, happy to see AS double down on LAX-Florida flying.
a.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:20 am

11C wrote:
Is AA going to be an intermediary between its partners B6 and AS and have them work together as a 3 tiered team or are they going to battle independently while giving feed to AA?


That’s an excellent question. I wish I had the answer.[/quote]

That will be interesting to see. In a perfect world (for AA, anyway), I think the coastal strategy would look like this:
  • AS would give up on LAX and SFO transcons and focus their transcon efforts on SEA/PDX/SAN-FLL/MCO/DCA/EWR/BOS, as well as having a beefy presence up and down the West Coast (including the Mexican resort destinations and Hawai'i)
  • B6 would focus on JFK/BOS transcons and maybe some LAX-secondary East Coast transcons, as well as service between the Northeast and Florida/Caribbean
  • AA would handle traffic from both coasts to the interior of the country, some high premium routes like JFK-LAX/SFO, and long haul.

In reality, whether or not B6/AS can figure out how to cooperate in areas where they both want a piece of the pie, as well as how AA handles their relationship with B6 outside the Northeast (particularly at FLL and now also LAX) is yet to be seen.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 1049
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:06 am

Chugach wrote:
New routes are LAX-RSW/TPA/LIH/KOA/BZN/MFR/EUG, PDX-FLL, SAN-FLL, and SEA-RSW.

Discuss.

https://investor.alaskaair.com/news-rel ... s-2020-lax


Also FAT. Although it was announced before most of the others.
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8624
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:22 am

Did AS announce TPA-SFO too?

I see it.
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
n7371f
Posts: 1830
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 3:25 am

Choosing AS over B6 on LAX-FLL is akin to asking a 65 yr old woman out on a date vs a 35 year old.

This AS LAX "expansion" one of worst kept secrets in industry. And when you look at it, it's a handful of flights a day and more than half are on 76 seat RJ's. Minimal risk/exposure.

The real interest is what they do at SFO. They now have the room to grow, if they choose to, with AA vacating T2. But SFO has been tough for AS on just about anything inherited from Virgin - they've found better success going back to their old home, adding direct flights to Pac NW.

SANFan wrote:
In a slightly different view from most of the posts so far, very nice to see AS taking a direct stab at Blue with SAN-FLL! (I wonder if this might also have a slight hint toward AS's "buddies" over at AA to be careful with what they are apparently cooking up with B6 today...? I refer to AA's SAN-MIA service.)

This addition (SAN-Lauderdale) comes as a very pleasant surprise. I think most of us were expecting to see PDX-FLL announced since AS has been hinting at it for a couple of weeks now. I had wondered if AS might take a swipe at Blue for adding SAN-EWR and SAN-FLL sure seemed like a good fit for such a swipe so it's all good I say!

Next I'd love to see AS jump into SAN-TPA -- keeping the Florida theme and all -- since that's a route that I believe the carrier has been looking at for a while now; I'm not sure what WN's plans are for the route. Let's remember that AS has already scheduled daily-double flights between SAN and MCO for the winter so that's more toward the Florida theme...

Thank you Alaska for giving us here in SAN something to chew on as part of this big and important announcement!

bb
 
iAmAlaska49
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 8:06 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 3:40 am

jplatts wrote:
AS adding SFO-TPA nonstop service is also a possibility with UA currently being the only airline serving TPA nonstop from the San Francisco Bay Area.


SFO-TPA has been added as well. It's weird they didn't announce it with all the other routes. Their schedule shows it starting 11/20, which is the same day LAX-TPA starts.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4969
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:42 am

It seems like a lot of routes are being announced on a lot of carriers for a “dying” industry
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26222
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:12 am

iAmAlaska49 wrote:
jplatts wrote:
AS adding SFO-TPA nonstop service is also a possibility with UA currently being the only airline serving TPA nonstop from the San Francisco Bay Area.


SFO-TPA has been added as well. It's weird they didn't announce it with all the other routes. Their schedule shows it starting 11/20, which is the same day LAX-TPA starts.


Indeed, but weekend-only.

Also as part of expansion, LAXFLL is back to being a year-round route.
a.
 
vadodara
Posts: 1146
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:10 pm

Seems like AS has figured out how to grow these markets profitably.
a) extend the network to Pacific NW
b) pick transcon's to leisure/seasonal markets

Not a bad strategy; it allows its presence to grow in S Cal and probably offers a future launch pad to other destinations such as RDU, AUS and perhaps even iAH/ATL.
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:28 pm

n7371f wrote:
Choosing AS over B6 on LAX-FLL is akin to asking a 65 yr old woman out on a date vs a 35 year old.


Yeah. The 65-year old may be frugal, but has more money and a better network of friends and business colleagues to connect with.
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:39 pm

Don’t forget that AS’s bread and butter has always been moving pax north and south along the West Coast. Strengthening LAX helps AS achieve that better. AS’s biggest challenge in building up LAX previously was competition from AA. And that competition is no longer necessary.

Simply put, there were many cities like FAT or EUG that AA had to have in its network. To be a competitive domestic player on the national level, AA couldn’t simply tell it’s frequent flyers out East that “I am sorry, but we can’t fly you to EUG or FAT because those cities aren’t accessible from anywhere in our network”. And thus AA operated (likely unprofitable) flights from LAX to EUG, FAT, and others simply to achieve the de facto broad network requirement of being a legacy airline.

With the OW partnerships, AA can now use AS to get pax to FAT and EUG. More importantly, they can also drop those unprofitable flights to those cities that AS serves. And in doing so, it opens then door for AS to strengthen their own network by flying to more of those destinations from LAX.

It doesn’t really require coordination, because it is a natural move for both airlines. AA can drop those unprofitable intra-West coast routes, and AS can solidify its passenger base in the west by offering more LAX service.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8068
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:57 pm

kavok wrote:
Simply put, there were many cities like FAT or EUG that AA had to have in its network. To be a competitive domestic player on the national level, AA couldn’t simply tell it’s frequent flyers out East that “I am sorry, but we can’t fly you to EUG or FAT because those cities aren’t accessible from anywhere in our network”. And thus AA operated (likely unprofitable) flights from LAX to EUG, FAT, and others simply to achieve the de facto broad network requirement of being a legacy airline.

With the OW partnerships, AA can now use AS to get pax to FAT and EUG. More importantly, they can also drop those unprofitable flights to those cities that AS serves. And in doing so, it opens then door for AS to strengthen their own network by flying to more of those destinations from LAX.


I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5957
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:59 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
n7371f wrote:
Choosing AS over B6 on LAX-FLL is akin to asking a 65 yr old woman out on a date vs a 35 year old.


Yeah. The 65-year old may be frugal, but has more money and a better network of friends and business colleagues to connect with.



That is true, but in the end, everyone wants to at least dance with the young, sexy one...
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 3:36 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
kavok wrote:
Simply put, there were many cities like FAT or EUG that AA had to have in its network. To be a competitive domestic player on the national level, AA couldn’t simply tell it’s frequent flyers out East that “I am sorry, but we can’t fly you to EUG or FAT because those cities aren’t accessible from anywhere in our network”. And thus AA operated (likely unprofitable) flights from LAX to EUG, FAT, and others simply to achieve the de facto broad network requirement of being a legacy airline.

With the OW partnerships, AA can now use AS to get pax to FAT and EUG. More importantly, they can also drop those unprofitable flights to those cities that AS serves. And in doing so, it opens then door for AS to strengthen their own network by flying to more of those destinations from LAX.


I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams. Consider a college textbook publisher based in PHL, who by virtue of being based in PHL is inclined to fly AA for business. But if AA doesn’t fly to any west coast college town, that publisher may switch to DL/UA even though they live in PHL. Being a US3 means you have to fly to many of those tertiary cities from somewhere, even if those specific flights don’t generate profits on their own. Otherwise you lose the whole corporate contract. So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.

Enter the AS partnership. Now AS can provide the necessary connectivity to those smaller West Coast markets. AA no longer is “required” to serve EUG/FAT/etc. And since they are money losers, AA can finally achieve their goal of dropping those stations. All of that requires no coordination, and makes obvious business sense.

Part 2:
For it’s own benefit, AA is dropping LAX flying to small cities for reasons described above. AS has always wanted a bigger presence in LAX. AS has a lot of frequent flyers in EUG. And most importantly, the legacy competition (AA) that previously existed on a route (AA’s LAX-EUG) just went away. Now AS has an opportunity to try a route they have always wanted to see if they could make work, without having a competitor. So AS can add it, again without coordination with AA.

So AS expands LAX, and AA shrinks it... because it is in each parties interest to do so, even without coordination.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5025
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 4:34 pm

Aren't AS and B6 on the same team now ?
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
Posts: 5280
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 4:40 pm

kavok wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
kavok wrote:
Simply put, there were many cities like FAT or EUG that AA had to have in its network. To be a competitive domestic player on the national level, AA couldn’t simply tell it’s frequent flyers out East that “I am sorry, but we can’t fly you to EUG or FAT because those cities aren’t accessible from anywhere in our network”. And thus AA operated (likely unprofitable) flights from LAX to EUG, FAT, and others simply to achieve the de facto broad network requirement of being a legacy airline.

With the OW partnerships, AA can now use AS to get pax to FAT and EUG. More importantly, they can also drop those unprofitable flights to those cities that AS serves. And in doing so, it opens then door for AS to strengthen their own network by flying to more of those destinations from LAX.


I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. (You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams). So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.

Enter the AS partnership. Now AS can provide the necessary connectivity to those smaller West Coast markets. AA no longer is “required” to serve EUG/FAT/etc. And since they are money losers, AA can finally achieve their goal of dropping those stations. All of that requires no coordination, and makes obvious business sense.

Part 2: For it’s own benefit, AA is dropping LAX flying to small cities for reasons described above. AS has always wanted a bigger presence in LAX. AS has a lot of frequent flyers in EUG. And most importantly, the legacy competition (AA) that previously existed on a route (AA’s LAX-EUG) just went away. Now AS has an opportunity to try a route they have always wanted to see if they could make work, without having a competitor. So AS can add it, again without coordination with AA.

So AS expands LAX, and AA shrinks it... because it is in each parties interest to do so, even without coordination.


I've actually looked at the financials on some of these routes and most of the smaller destinations didn't perform poorly, domestically it was the LAX-IAH/AUS/SLC/DEN/SEA/e.t.c that were the worse performers for obvious reasons. They actually do pretty well on regional routes like LAX-OKC/TUL/TUS/XNA/OMA/ABQ/MFR/e.t.c

I do agree there is room to relinquish some of that flying to the Pacific Northwest though, as you can leverage AS's strength there.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
winginit
Posts: 2880
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 4:53 pm

klm617 wrote:
Aren't AS and B6 on the same team now ?


Why would they be on the same team? Because they're both going to codeshare with American? They remain fierce competitors albeit with strengths in different markets apart from what will be notable overlap in LAX.

At one point both QR and EY had codeshare with American. Were they on the same team? CZ and CX both codeshare with American - they despise each other and compete fiercely.
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:19 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
kavok wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:

I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. (You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams). So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.

Enter the AS partnership. Now AS can provide the necessary connectivity to those smaller West Coast markets. AA no longer is “required” to serve EUG/FAT/etc. And since they are money losers, AA can finally achieve their goal of dropping those stations. All of that requires no coordination, and makes obvious business sense.

Part 2: For it’s own benefit, AA is dropping LAX flying to small cities for reasons described above. AS has always wanted a bigger presence in LAX. AS has a lot of frequent flyers in EUG. And most importantly, the legacy competition (AA) that previously existed on a route (AA’s LAX-EUG) just went away. Now AS has an opportunity to try a route they have always wanted to see if they could make work, without having a competitor. So AS can add it, again without coordination with AA.

So AS expands LAX, and AA shrinks it... because it is in each parties interest to do so, even without coordination.


I've actually looked at the financials on some of these routes and most of the smaller destinations didn't perform poorly, domestically it was the LAX-IAH/AUS/SLC/DEN/SEA/e.t.c that were the worse performers for obvious reasons. They actually do pretty well on regional routes like LAX-OKC/TUL/TUS/XNA/OMA/ABQ/MFR/e.t.c

I do agree there is room to relinquish some of that flying to the Pacific Northwest though, as you can leverage AS's strength there.


Agreed, and I should have clarified that the small cities I was referring to were those that are north-south routes from LAX (roughly along or west of interstate 15). I agree that those routes whose flight path is more East-West in orientation are still valuable for AA, as pax on those flights tend to have LAX as the destination, or as a connection point to TPAC/Hawaii. The other advantage is flyers in those small cities east of LAX will likely also have service to the DFW megahub, meaning there are probably more local AA frequent flyers than in cities west of I-15. Currently if you live west of I-15 (and not in LAX) there is little reason to be an AA frequent flyer.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1884
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:30 pm

glad to see FLL/LAX is back. I took that flight frequently as it timed up well with LAX/ANC. Add in that FLL/SEA was typically an early AM flight and suddenly the 4PMish LA flight gets a lot of connecting traffic :)
xx
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2441
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:28 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
MIAFLLPBIFlyer wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
As a side note I was able to book a RT FLL to SFO nonstop on AS Christmas week.


The FLL-SFO AS route has nine lives. It seems every year the route is cut only to reappear as a seasonal route. With these ads from FLL it might as well be permanent seasonal now.


It's never been permanently discontinued, but sometimes it has been flown all winter long and other times only during peak (Thanksgiving+Christmas+February/March).

As a frequent traveler on FLLLAX due to my status on Alaska, happy to see AS double down on LAX-Florida flying.


I flew AS FLL-SFO last Christmas and was also going to this route in April, 2020 (was to leave FLL early in the morning and return to FLL at 430 AM) but the Corona thing put an end to that trip.
 
jplatts
Posts: 3613
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:52 pm

vadodara wrote:
Seems like AS has figured out how to grow these markets profitably.
a) extend the network to Pacific NW
b) pick transcon's to leisure/seasonal markets

Not a bad strategy; it allows its presence to grow in S Cal and probably offers a future launch pad to other destinations such as RDU, AUS and perhaps even iAH/ATL.


While VX never served Atlanta or Houston, VX had considered adding service to ATL and Houston prior to the AS-VX merger.

However, AS adding LAX-ATL/IAH and SFO-ATL/IAH nonstop service might be possibilities with
(a) ATL and IAH both being top destinations that AS doesn't currently serve nonstop from California,
(b) AS having a FF base (including the former VX FF base) in the San Francisco Bay Area and Greater Los Angeles to support LAX-ATL/IAH and SFO-ATL/IAH nonstop service on AS, and
(c) VX having considered serving these two destinations nonstop from SFO and LAX prior to the VX-AS merger.

While VX had never served AUS nonstop from LAX, VX adding LAX-AUS nonstop service might have happened if VX were still around and the AS-VX merger hadn't taken place. AS adding LAX-AUS nonstop service might still be a possibility with AS's FF base in Greater Los Angeles, the AS-AA partnership, AA's FF base in both Greater Los Angeles and Greater Austin, and the former VX FF base in Greater Los Angeles.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4969
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:04 pm

usxguy wrote:
glad to see FLL/LAX is back. I took that flight frequently as it timed up well with LAX/ANC. Add in that FLL/SEA was typically an early AM flight and suddenly the 4PMish LA flight gets a lot of connecting traffic :)

So far out of the way! DL ANCMSP all day long going east!
 
catiii
Posts: 3584
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:19 pm

allegiantflyer wrote:
It's nice to see the Bullish AS that we saw in 2017 after the acquisition come out in force again, it seemed they became very timid and eager to cutback following that period in time. Big expansion announcements like these are very exciting,


This is what passes for "bullish" and "big" at AS? This was at best a timid response to B6's LAX growth and TCON expansion out of Newark. It actually sounds like they got a courtesy heads up from AA about the B6 codeshare and threw something together to get out there as a competitive response.
 
catiii
Posts: 3584
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:20 pm

klm617 wrote:
Aren't AS and B6 on the same team now ?


No. They aren't.
 
vadodara
Posts: 1146
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:31 pm

jplatts wrote:
While VX had never served AUS nonstop from LAX, VX adding LAX-AUS nonstop service might have happened if VX were still around and the AS-VX merger hadn't taken place. AS adding LAX-AUS nonstop service might still be a possibility with AS's FF base in Greater Los Angeles, the AS-AA partnership, AA's FF base in both Greater Los Angeles and Greater Austin, and the former VX FF base in Greater Los Angeles.


So VX probably got done due to 2 changes and didnt have deep pockets to pivot:
a) the transcon product got drastically upgraded so VX 'cool' cabins were not so cool
b) A319 was probably a non-optimum aircraft for intrastate or even WA/OR to CA routes

AS's simple fleet probably provides greater flexibility to manage these markets.
 
vadodara
Posts: 1146
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:34 pm

catiii wrote:
This is what passes for "bullish" and "big" at AS? This was at best a timid response to B6's LAX growth and TCON expansion out of Newark. It actually sounds like they got a courtesy heads up from AA about the B6 codeshare and threw something together to get out there as a competitive response.


B6 has done fairly well with their strategy out of BOS/JFK. But at some point they will get trapped in their own box.

For starters, they could not outbid AS for VX. FLL is fairly modest. Even on E Coast, B6 may find it hard to muscle in the space held by AA/DL/UA. AA's weakness at JFK helps but it still has limited upside.
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:42 pm

catiii wrote:
allegiantflyer wrote:
It's nice to see the Bullish AS that we saw in 2017 after the acquisition come out in force again, it seemed they became very timid and eager to cutback following that period in time. Big expansion announcements like these are very exciting,


This is what passes for "bullish" and "big" at AS? This was at best a timid response to B6's LAX growth and TCON expansion out of Newark. It actually sounds like they got a courtesy heads up from AA about the B6 codeshare and threw something together to get out there as a competitive response.


You do realize that JetBlue’s “big” LAX announcement was moving an operation from one local airport to another and not even keeping all the flights? The rest was just “we want to have this many flights later”. So if you want to play that game you’re not batting with much. Kinda pathetic.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5212
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:44 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
catiii wrote:
allegiantflyer wrote:
It's nice to see the Bullish AS that we saw in 2017 after the acquisition come out in force again, it seemed they became very timid and eager to cutback following that period in time. Big expansion announcements like these are very exciting,


This is what passes for "bullish" and "big" at AS? This was at best a timid response to B6's LAX growth and TCON expansion out of Newark. It actually sounds like they got a courtesy heads up from AA about the B6 codeshare and threw something together to get out there as a competitive response.


You do realize that JetBlue’s “big” LAX announcement was moving an operation from one local airport to another and not even keeping all the flights? The rest was just “we want to have this many flights later”. So if you want to play that game you’re not batting with much. Kinda pathetic.


I think retaliation was in reference to the earlier 30 routes add which definitely involved many AS markets. Based on how many routes B6 added that time, I really don't see this as a major response.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5025
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:48 pm

catiii wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Aren't AS and B6 on the same team now ?


No. They aren't.


Call me naïve but I think these three are working together towards a common goal so in my estimation they are all on the same team at this point. But what do I know.
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...
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:29 pm

klm617 wrote:
catiii wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Aren't AS and B6 on the same team now ?


No. They aren't.


Call me naïve but I think these three are working together towards a common goal so in my estimation they are all on the same team at this point. But what do I know.


Either you're naive or AS and B6 are breaking the law.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:50 pm

kavok wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams. Consider a college textbook publisher based in PHL, who by virtue of being based in PHL is inclined to fly AA for business. But if AA doesn’t fly to any west coast college town, that publisher may switch to DL/UA even though they live in PHL. Being a US3 means you have to fly to many of those tertiary cities from somewhere, even if those specific flights don’t generate profits on their own. Otherwise you lose the whole corporate contract. So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.


I think you missed the part where EUG, FAT, and many other small Western cities are already connected into the broader AA network via PHX, and often additionally DFW. AA arguably never needed to fly LAX-EUG for network reasons. AA was flying LAX-FAT long before the US merger, but even back then FAT was connected to the rest of the AA network via DFW, and US had it connected to their network via PHX.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1807
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:22 pm

FSDan wrote:
kavok wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams. Consider a college textbook publisher based in PHL, who by virtue of being based in PHL is inclined to fly AA for business. But if AA doesn’t fly to any west coast college town, that publisher may switch to DL/UA even though they live in PHL. Being a US3 means you have to fly to many of those tertiary cities from somewhere, even if those specific flights don’t generate profits on their own. Otherwise you lose the whole corporate contract. So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.


The AA EUG-PHX flight is (I think) new in the last couple of years and isn't the best for connections timing....it arrives PHX at 2:30 or 3:00 pm depending on schedule adjustments. If you want to get somewhere earlier in the day, that means a different route or carrier out of EUG. The E75 to LAX T6 will be a big improvement on metal and avoiding the eagle's nest hassles, plus better mileage plan credit.
I think you missed the part where EUG, FAT, and many other small Western cities are already connected into the broader AA network via PHX, and often additionally DFW. AA arguably never needed to fly LAX-EUG for network reasons. AA was flying LAX-FAT long before the US merger, but even back then FAT was connected to the rest of the AA network via DFW, and US had it connected to their network via PHX.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:30 pm

cschleic wrote:
FSDan wrote:
kavok wrote:

My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams. Consider a college textbook publisher based in PHL, who by virtue of being based in PHL is inclined to fly AA for business. But if AA doesn’t fly to any west coast college town, that publisher may switch to DL/UA even though they live in PHL. Being a US3 means you have to fly to many of those tertiary cities from somewhere, even if those specific flights don’t generate profits on their own. Otherwise you lose the whole corporate contract. So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.


I think you missed the part where EUG, FAT, and many other small Western cities are already connected into the broader AA network via PHX, and often additionally DFW. AA arguably never needed to fly LAX-EUG for network reasons. AA was flying LAX-FAT long before the US merger, but even back then FAT was connected to the rest of the AA network via DFW, and US had it connected to their network via PHX.


The AA EUG-PHX flight is (I think) new in the last couple of years and isn't the best for connections timing....it arrives PHX at 2:30 or 3:00 pm depending on schedule adjustments. If you want to get somewhere earlier in the day, that means a different route or carrier out of EUG. The E75 to LAX T6 will be a big improvement on metal and avoiding the eagle's nest hassles, plus better mileage plan credit.


PHX-EUG definitely predates LAX-EUG. LAX-EUG/MFR/RDM on AA are some of the more recent domestic adds (although LAX-TUL/OMA/SDF etc. are even newer).
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
kavok
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: AS claps back at B6, announces LAX and FLL expansion

Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:47 pm

FSDan wrote:
kavok wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
I don't see your points. AA & AS don't have an anti-trust immunized JV. They will still compete - they can't coordinate capacity, or scheduling, or pricing NOT to compete. People expect way too much from codesharing. If codesharing could achieve even half what some people think there would be no use for alliances, JV, or equity stakes.

As for FAT and EUG, AA's route map (perhaps slow to catch up with COVID reductions) shows both with service from PHX, and FAT with service from both DFW and PHX. That's pretty good for airports ranked #102 and #118 in arrivals count for 12 months ending 4/2020. One would struggle to call either a must-serve destination - WN certainly doesn't.


My point is basically this:
Part 1:
AA doesn’t want to be flying LAX-EUG/FAT/etc. Those routes are money losers, and cash is obviously very tight right now. The obvious financial answer is to simply drop them. But they can’t drop them and still consider themselves a full service domestic carrier. You can’t tell your corporate clients that the only cities west of the Rocky Mountains they can fly to are those big enough to have pro sports teams. Consider a college textbook publisher based in PHL, who by virtue of being based in PHL is inclined to fly AA for business. But if AA doesn’t fly to any west coast college town, that publisher may switch to DL/UA even though they live in PHL. Being a US3 means you have to fly to many of those tertiary cities from somewhere, even if those specific flights don’t generate profits on their own. Otherwise you lose the whole corporate contract. So AA was forced to fly to EUG/FAT/etc. when they didn’t want to.


I think you missed the part where EUG, FAT, and many other small Western cities are already connected into the broader AA network via PHX, and often additionally DFW. AA arguably never needed to fly LAX-EUG for network reasons. AA was flying LAX-FAT long before the US merger, but even back then FAT was connected to the rest of the AA network via DFW, and US had it connected to their network via PHX.


Agreed on PHX. Arguably if there was a reason for AA to be flying PHX-XXX before, that reason doesn’t change by AS building up LAX. So many of those stations may still remain in the AA network. However, most of the smaller cities west of I-15 don’t really see service to DFW. If they do have AA service, it is only to PHX and/or LAX. And the further north you go up the Pacific coast, the more out of the way PHX/LAX becomes as a connection point to somewhere East.

I guess my biggest point is that AA frequent flyers going to one of those small cities west of I-15 would still choose to connect in PHX/LAX because they had to. Now they don’t have to, and can use AS, which means demand goes down on those AA Eagle flights from PHX/LAX. So it may no longer make sense for AA to fly the route.

And while yes AA/AS can’t coordinate... but if AA drops and AS adds (or vice versa), both airlines win.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 747classic, 9Patch, A350OZ, alggag, Argent, ARN, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], blandy62, Boeing787Guy, dfwneedsqf, ERJ170, Ertro, evanb, Flyingsottsman, GLANKG, guillermohs, hOMSaR, keesje, kriskim, Lukas757, Majestic-12 [Bot], MrBren, N743AS, Noche, NoNonsense, NZ321, qf789, rivervisual, SCFlyer, Theseus and 228 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