Of course they do, but you're alleging something in this thread over and over and over again that even Delta isn't: an entire NE network strategy based upon illegal collusion which has zero basis in any fact, purely your imagination.
Truly. I never realized someone could be this
blinded by love and single-minded devotion to...an airline
Devotion not to an airline but to what something actually IS transcending law. I love proposed partnerships, mergers, acquisitions, etc...And this is quite intriguing. To point: I will await what I will pedict will be further collusion-like rationalization in terms of efficient deployment of assets between AA and B6 in Boston and NYC area so that the benefits they tout the alliance will bring to each other will be realized.
The markets that AA will leave are likely the markets they would've left anyways. Out of BOS, I expect them to be mostly hub routes with a couple of weekly leisure routes sprinkled in. So I do see them leaving SYR/ROC. But those are routes they were going to exit anyways. They never started RDU/AUS/IND and I don't expect them to start those now.
Out of LGA, AA will leave a bunch of cities that had 50 seaters before. It's possible JetBlue will enter a few of them with mainline, but it won't be able to in most cases, because those markets can't support mainline. So, JetBlue will likely beef up its Florida schedule and maybe add some oher markets it is strong in like CHS/MSY/RIC. All of these would be moves they'd do regardless of who they get the slots from.
Out of JFK, AA will simply leave most of its RJ markets. JetBlue has already added 5 routes out of JFK and only one of them (DFW) has AA presence at the moment. That's not one AA is likely to drop.
so at the end of the day, if JetBlue is going to bring service to additional markets and very few of them will see AA dropping out, what is questionable by any of this? it's simply not in JetBlue's interest to get into most of the markets that AA is likely to withdraw from.
It's funny that you still haven't raised a stink about LAX, where AA has actually withdrew from a few markets that AS added recently. Even that, you'd have to proof that AA/AS were actually colluding rather than just making moves that are logical to them. But you are complaining about a partnership that has not been formalized and have no exhibited any of this stuff.
I could very well be incorrect, but considering a similar AA-AS deal was announced pre-covid, this was very probably in the works at the same time, just not announced until this summer?
I won’t get into legal wrangling here, but ultimately for DL, isn’t this not a big deal? AA reduced their footprint, JB steps in here and there. Ultimately I think some smaller markets will be abandoned altogether if AA kills the 50 seaters, leaving DL with a great share into some cities. It’ll all work out in the end.
depends on the market. DL will see less competition in some of the small markets AA served with 50 seaters. It will see more competition to Florida and some of the leisure market out of LGA.
It will also see B6 with more slots at JFK, which will allow JetBlue to start a real TATL hub there. Keep in mind that JetBlue is getting a major terminal expansion at JFK with additional partners being able to move in and widebody gates. What it can do with 230 slots there is entirely different than what it can do with 180 slots. You should see JetBlue add more flights into some of these within perimeter JFK routes it had dropped/reduced like CLT/DCA/ORD/RDU/BUF since they will help feed TATL flights.
For AA, it will help rest of their network since they get codeshared flights to BOS/EWR/JFK that didn't exist before.