http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070628/lath102.html?.v=73

American submitted an application for operating Chicago - Beijing nonstop from 2009.

Proposed flight schedule eff 25MAR09:
AA189 ORD1115 - 1350PEK
AA188 PEK1550 - 1545ORD

Ah! Yet another sign that DFW is nothing more than a mega-domestic connecting hub for AA.

Quoting DeltaFFinDFW (Reply 1): Ah! Yet another sign that DFW is nothing more than a mega-domestic connecting hub for AA.

But we already knew that. Its a shame, I would like to see AA do more from DFW international.

Even with UA in the ORD-PEK market, the forecast numbers are so much stronger from ORD than DFW.

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter): American submitted an application for operating Chicago - Beijing nonstop from 2009. Proposed flight schedule eff 25MAR09: AA189 ORD1115 - 1350PEK AA188 PEK1550 - 1545ORD

I am sorry but I think that AA would have had a better chance if they would have submitted the route application as:

MIA-ORD-PEK

With ORD an existing gateway to China I dont see anything favorable out of the next round that AA is aiming for. I am however suprised that yet again Dallas got nothing out of the China bid, not even an originator to this flight. It is true, from appearances that AA has found DFW to be more important as a domestic hub than an international hub.

-JD

They might as well have not even wasted their time filing an application. They are going to get Chicago-Beijing right after Continental gets Cleveland-Xiamen. What a stupid move. They should have gone for Los Angeles-Beijing where they could have got many, though admittedly not as many as from O'Hare, connections, plus huge O&D. While I could be wrong, I think AA stands absolutely 0 chance of getting this route.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5): They might as well have not even wasted their time filing an application. They are going to get Chicago-Beijing right after Continental gets Cleveland-Xiamen. What a stupid move. They should have gone for Los Angeles-Beijing where they could have got many, though admittedly not as many as from O'Hare, connections, plus huge O&D. While I could be wrong, I think AA stands absolutely 0 chance of getting this route.

They're hoping that the DOT will use the same rationale that awarded them ORD-PVG the last time round (i.e., to compete with the incumbent on that route) given that the ORD-China market is large. I agree that it's a waste and that something like LAX-PEK/PVG should have been taken priority but I think that AA may actually have decent chance of getting it just by default as there are 4 frequencies up for grabs in 2009:

One will go to US for PHL-PVG or PEK (also satisfying the 2009 new entrant criteria)

One will most likely go to CO for EWR-PVG

There will still be two frequencies left for the remaining incumbents - AA, UA, and NW. UA will probably get a SFO-CAN in 2008, and they may stand another chance again if they apply for say LAX-PVG/PEK...Another question is whether DL can and will apply for a second frequency in 2009 (assuming that it pretty much has the 2007 designation locked up). Even if DL joins the fray, there will be two frequencies to be fought for among four carriers so AA's chances are certainly better than 0.

Agree. LAX-BJS would of been much better. The flights that I've taken from LAX to Asia, had many passengers connecting from Latin America as well as other parts of the States. I have my doubts about AA being rewarded ORD-BJS.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 6): One will go to US for PHL-PVG or PEK (also satisfying the 2009 new entrant criteria)

Do they even know what kind of equipment?

Quoting Panamair (Reply 6): There will still be two frequencies left for the remaining incumbents - AA, UA, and NW.

I have a feeling those will be:

UA SFO-CAN
777-200

NW DTW-PEK
747-400

-JD

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 2): But we already knew that. Its a shame, I would like to see AA do more from DFW international.

Hmm... if they could just find pilots that would fly DFW-PEK non stop. My understanding is that AA had DFW-PEK in the bag last time around but it was scuttled when they amended their application because their pilots would not fly the route.

Andrew

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 8): Do they even know what kind of equipment?

No, but 2009 is far enough away that they will have enough time to get the right equipment, etc.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 8): I have a feeling those will be: UA SFO-CAN 777-200

Except SFO-CAN with UA will most probably be in 2008 since the 2008 designation is specifically for a flight to CAN. All the 2009 applications will most likely be for PEK and/or PVG again.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 10): Except SFO-CAN with UA will most probably be in 2008 since the 2008 designation is specifically for a flight to CAN. All the 2009 applications will most likely be for PEK and/or PVG again.

I was mistaken, you are correct..

Quoting Adh214 (Reply 9): Hmm... if they could just find pilots that would fly DFW-PEK non stop. My understanding is that AA had DFW-PEK in the bag last time around but it was scuttled when they amended their application because their pilots would not fly the route.

I am worried that these labour issues, and labour contracts are going to ultimatley turn the fate of American Airlines in an opposite direction..

-JD

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 4): MIA-ORD-PEK With ORD an existing gateway to China I dont see anything favorable out of the next round that AA is aiming for. I am however suprised that yet again Dallas got nothing out of the China bid, not even an originator to this flight. It is true, from appearances that AA has found DFW to be more important as a domestic hub than an international hub.

Tagging MIA on the backend is of very little consequence to the overall decision process.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5): They might as well have not even wasted their time filing an application. They are going to get Chicago-Beijing right after Continental gets Cleveland-Xiamen. What a stupid move. They should have gone for Los Angeles-Beijing where they could have got many, though admittedly not as many as from O'Hare, connections, plus huge O&D. While I could be wrong, I think AA stands absolutely 0 chance of getting this route.

With six awards being given out in out this summer and only six viable U.S. carriers, you really believe they have zero chance. I don't buy it. I also would say NW has more than a zero chance too.

Quoting Adh214 (Reply 9): Hmm... if they could just find pilots that would fly DFW-PEK non stop. My understanding is that AA had DFW-PEK in the bag last time around but it was scuttled when they amended their application because their pilots would not fly the route.

I don't buy that one either. The DFW market is still too small and connections are limited and AA already is an incumbant China carrier. While ATL has some of the same issues as DFW, DL is not an incumbant so they have a huge edge, and DL doesn't have as good of an alternative that AA has, i.e. ORD for AA is much better than JFK for DL.

My guesses are DL applying for LAX-CAN for the 2009 frequencies.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 12): Tagging MIA on the backend is of very little consequence to the overall decision process

Understandable.. But notice how US Airways tagged on Charlotte to its application..

Quoting Delta4eva (Reply 13): My guesses are DL applying for LAX-CAN for the 2009 frequencies.

Delta Air Lines partner China Southern flies the LAX-CAN route daily with a 777-200. Maybe Delta will get creative and go for JFK-CAN for the frequencies.

-JD

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 12):
The DFW market is still too small and connections are limited
Are you serious? Is DFW not the 3rd busiest airport in the US?

[Edited 2007-06-29 00:35:38]

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 15): Are you serious? Is DFW not the 3rd buisyest airport in the US?

That is from what source?

DFW is a strong domestic hub, mediocre international hub.. Compared to ATL, LAX, SFO, MIA, EWR their is not much of a long-haul World gateway at DFW.

-JD

Quoting Delta4eva (Reply 13): My guesses are DL applying for LAX-CAN for the 2009 frequencies.

I could see NW getting the CAN route and using their DTW, MSP, and MEM markets for feed. We are moving our Asia hub to CAN in 2008 and could use the NW flight to ferry employees back and forth from MEM. Have a close working relationship with NW.

When does NW get their first 787?

Quoting FXramper (Reply 17): I could see NW getting the CAN route and using their DTW, MSP, and MEM markets for feed.

CAN is served daily from NRT on an NWA 757

-JD

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 16): That is from what source?

Here is a pretty good source........

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/busi...ndex.cfm?airportType=All&year=2006

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 4): MIA-ORD-PEK With ORD an existing gateway to China I dont see anything favorable out of the next round that AA is aiming for. I am however suprised that yet again Dallas got nothing out of the China bid, not even an originator to this flight. It is true, from appearances that AA has found DFW to be more important as a domestic hub than an international hub.

What difference does a formal originator flight make? There's already flights from both DFW and MIA that would easily connect - what advantage does having the same flight number make?

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5): They might as well have not even wasted their time filing an application. They are going to get Chicago-Beijing right after Continental gets Cleveland-Xiamen. What a stupid move. They should have gone for Los Angeles-Beijing where they could have got many, though admittedly not as many as from O'Hare, connections, plus huge O&D. While I could be wrong, I think AA stands absolutely 0 chance of getting this route.

Depends on the competition. I too agree that LAX makes a lot more sense. The west coast is crying out for more flights to China, as all the recent new flights have been from the midwest or east coast.

Quoting FXramper (Reply 17): I could see NW getting the CAN route and using their DTW, MSP, and MEM markets for feed. We are moving our Asia hub to CAN in 2008 and could use the NW flight to ferry employees back and forth from MEM. Have a close working relationship with NW.

NW already flies to CAN from NRT. If NW were to go for a non-stop mainland flight, it would be to PEK/PVG.

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 19): Here is a pretty good source........

I thought you meant by O/D traffic

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 20): What difference does a formal originator flight make? There's already flights from both DFW and MIA that would easily connect - what advantage does having the same flight number make?

AA would have a much better chance on a non-existing originating point such as MIA

-JD

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 21): I thought you meant by O/D traffic

I believe DFW also has the 3rd largest o/d traffic in the US as well.

The problem with these china routes from DFW is that the pilots union is not willing to fly these routes. This in my opinion is only going to hurt them in the long haul when it comes time to renegotiate. AMR's senior management is not going to give them a 30% pay increase and the union is going to have no ground to stand on.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 6): (i.e., to compete with the incumbent on that route) given that the ORD-China market is large.

...only problem is, the LAX-China market is larger, and with no USA incumbent.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 6): There will still be two frequencies left for the remaining incumbents - AA, UA, and NW.

...at this point, DL is more than likely to be an incumbent as well.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 14): Maybe Delta will get creative and go for JFK-CAN for the frequencies.

Couldn't see it happening-- as CAN has yet to even support daily LAX service with feed at both ends. That, and CO/CX's NYC-HKGs would eat it alive.

Quoting DeltaFFinDFW (Reply 1): Ah! Yet another sign that DFW is nothing more than a mega-domestic connecting hub for AA.

I would bet it's because they won't have to get permission from the Pilots union to fly it.... somthing tells me with new leadership coming to the APA it's not going to be easy for AA Mgt to get any extras from the unions.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 16): Compared to ATL, LAX, SFO, MIA, EWR their is not much of a long-haul World gateway at DFW.

You can take ATL out of that list. If you are talking about O&D traffic, ATL doesnt belong on that list.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 12): Tagging MIA on the backend is of very little consequence to the overall decision process.

The only benefit would be to rally the politicians and businesses of South Florida to support the route.

NW shouldn't get any additional routes until they move their NRT-China flights to the US. It's ridiculous that precious US-China slots are allowed to be wasted on Japan-China service.

I find it interesting if not odd that this announcement was made today. Maybe AA is a little ticked off at the DFW airport folks for this whole BA DFW-LHR issue.

Just my 2 cents...

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 20): What difference does a formal originator flight make? There's already flights from both DFW and MIA that would easily connect - what advantage does having the same flight number make?

Yeah really. Selling a 1-stop from MIA would be cynical and meaningless (and, tie up a 777 for no good reason).

A connection via 737 is just as good, for all intents.

ORD-China serves practically the entire Eastern half of the USA. Excellent hub location, plus strong local demand (certainly stronger than DFW... Boeing corporate, anyone?). AA is making a great choice.

ORD would serve NYC, DCA, MIA, TPA, DFW, ATL, MSY, just about every major city east of Denver. LAX has great local but far inferior connections.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5): While I could be wrong, I think AA stands absolutely 0 chance of getting this route.

My thought is American does not want a second flight to China.

Quoting BayAreaPilot (Reply 27): NW shouldn't get any additional routes until they move their NRT-China flights to the US. It's ridiculous that precious US-China slots are allowed to be wasted on Japan-China service.

Not a waste at all. In SEA (a city with much more O&D to China than ATL, MIA, DFW, IAH, or many other hubs in the East), it's the fastest connection possible. Those of us on the left coast have 3 ways to get to China - NW via NRT, UA via SFO, or an Asian airline. NW is often the shortest and most convenient.

Quoting Tpac (Reply 28): I find it interesting if not odd that this announcement was made today. Maybe AA is a little ticked off at the DFW airport folks for this whole BA DFW-LHR issue. Just my 2 cents...

...nah, AA knew this was going to happen once "Open Skies" happened and AA will be adding its own DFW-LHR flight..just a matter of time...now will it be a separate flight from DFW-LGW or will they take one of the DFW-LGW flights and move it to LHR....  

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 25): You can take ATL out of that list. If you are talking about O&D traffic, ATL doesnt belong on that list.

ATL was not on the list because of O/D.. It was on the list because of International Flights

Quoting Tpac (Reply 28): Maybe AA is a little ticked off at the DFW airport folks for this whole BA DFW-LHR issue.

Nothing to do with that.. DFW has the connections for DFW service, it does not have the O/D for China service..

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 30): My thought is American does not want a second flight to China.

They do, they just have a problem with the Pilots which is a key factor in all of this..

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 32): ...nah, AA knew this was going to happen once "Open Skies" happened and AA will be adding its own DFW-LHR flight..just a matter of time...now will it be a separate flight from DFW-LGW or will they take one of the DFW-LGW flights and move it to LHR....

Where would the slot come from for the DFW-LHR service?

-JD

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 33): Where would the slot come from for the DFW-LHR service?

....could be from a multitude of route optimisations......for example, LAX-LHR goes double daily only during the summer..where does the slot go during the other seasons?


Current LHR routes
-------
ORD
JFK
MIA
BOS
LAX

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 33): Where would the slot come from for the DFW-LHR service?

It's as simple as shifting just one flight from elsewhere within AA's US-LHR network for a DFW flight...JFK comes to mind. And besides, if it comes down to it, there are conceivably LHR slots on the market that we aren't aware of.

I would not doubt AA's desire for DFW-LHR. It would, for all intents and purposes, be their Flagship route.

Back to the topic at hand, though...predictable move by AA – as usual. Perhaps this ORD route is a possibility in 2009 with the large amount of route authorities to be handed out. Certainly CO EWR-PVG seems to be a shoo-in, not to mention UA's SFO-CAN.

However, I'd be watching DL very closely. If they're serious about a LAX expansion, LAX-PEK is a distinct possibility, complementing CZ's LAX-CAN service, and introducing a suitable Pacific hub. Of course, if this were to occur, I'd look for UA to counter – giving LAX to DL is not something they seem willing to do, as evinced by the forthcoming relaunch of LAX-HKG.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 35): Back to the topic at hand, though...predictable move by AA – as usual. Perhaps this ORD route is a possibility in 2009 with the large amount of route authorities to be handed out. Certainly CO EWR-PVG seems to be a shoo-in, not to mention UA's SFO-CAN.

I would like to see AA start ORD-HKG...UA has 1x-2x/daily B744 flights (depending on day of the week)...I wouldn't be surprised to see either CX or O8 (Oasis Hong Kong) start this route first though..too bad, as I think it would be a money maker for AA....

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 33): DFW has the connections for DFW service, it does not have the O/D for China service..

The Dallas area has plenty o/d traffic for China service. Its no NYC but it has plenty to keep the flights profitable.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 35):

Los Angeles to Beijing/Shanghai and return on United is more of a possibility now than it was several years ago as the Chicago and San Francisco hubs are sufficiently operating China stages and scheduling is looking into new opportunities from established hubs including Los Angeles. Not saying it'll definitely happen, but there's more opportunity now than ever for United.

San Francisco to Guangzhou is the likely 2008 stage request, as obvious.

UnitedNRT

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 37): The Dallas area has plenty o/d traffic for China service. Its no NYC but it has plenty to keep the flights profitable.

Care to share the numbers then? The truth is that DFW isn't in the top 5, maybe not even the top 10 cities in terms of O&D to China. Same for ATL.

The places with O&D to China are LAX, NYC, SFO, ORD, BOS, IAD, SEA, ... ... ...

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 36): I would like to see AA start ORD-HKG...UA has 1x-2x/daily B744 flights (depending on day of the week)...I wouldn't be surprised to see either CX or O8 (Oasis Hong Kong) start this route first though..too bad, as I think it would be a money maker for AA....

ORD-HKG is one of those monopoly routes that seems to be BEGGING for competition. I've read that CX will evaluate ORD again upon delivery of the 777-300ERs, and there seems to be no question that AA would like to get a jump on the route. However, AA needs new pilot contracts ratified, not to mention a suitable aircraft.

Keep in mind, however, that the US-HK bilateral is completely separate from that of the US and PRC. Service to HKG cannot be requested within these route awards.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 40): Keep in mind, however, that the US-HK bilateral is completely separate from that of the US and PRC. Service to HKG cannot be requested within these route awards.

  ..but if O8 has openly stated they are looking into ORD, then there is the possibility of AA commencing HKG..and though they run with different set of bilaterals, AFAIK, it shouldn't be too much of a problem...

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 40): ORD-HKG is one of those monopoly routes that seems to be BEGGING for competition. I've read that CX will evaluate ORD again upon delivery of the 777-300ERs, and there seems to be no question that AA would like to get a jump on the route. However, AA needs new pilot contracts ratified, not to mention a suitable aircraft.

...the ole' union thing coming back to cause problems   .....but yes, until AA solves the pilot, f/a situation, I don't think they will be able to fly the route..but hopefully they will solve the problem soon enough...

CX will definitely look into ORD with their -300ER's....

Like CO's B772ER's which does EWR-HKG, AA's B772ER should be good enough..maybe some payload/pax restrictions occasionally, but for the most part, should have enough "oomph" to make it...

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 25): You can take ATL out of that list. If you are talking about O&D traffic, ATL doesnt belong on that list.

Who said anything about O&D? This year ATL stands to have over 9 million international passengers, which is incredible considering it's ATL.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 39): The places with O&D to China are LAX, NYC, SFO, ORD, BOS, IAD, SEA, ... ... ...

BOS has very little O&D to China. There's plenty of O&D to China from places other than LA and NYC though. China is so huge a market and a business center that China service is in demand from everywhere. Most big cities in the US have at least 25-30 daily, if not many more, O&D passengers going to/from China every day.

Jeremy

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 39): The places with O&D to China are LAX, NYC, SFO, ORD

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 42): There's plenty of O&D to China from places other than LA and NYC though. China is so huge a market and a business center that China service is in demand from everywhere.

Outside LAX, NYC, SFO, and ORD (maybe IAD and SEA), the rest of the markets are in the US are not going to fill a plane based on O&D. The only reason ATL stands a chance is because of its connections. Even to China, ATL, DFW, and other markets that size are insignificant. They only have a chance based on connections.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 40): Like CO's B772ER's which does EWR-HKG, AA's B772ER should be good enough

They're both 656K.lbs 772ERs. CO has the advantage of utilizing GE90s, whereas AA hauls significantly fewer seats on a shorter route.

Regardless, AA's birds could handily get the job done.

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 23): ...only problem is, the LAX-China market is larger, and with no USA incumbent.

While the LAX-China market is larger than the ORD-China market, the connections AA can offer through ORD (as well as the less circuitous routings through ORD vs. LAX from behind) plus the fact that several Chinese carriers fly nonstop into LA make ORD a better options economically for AA than LAX. If LAX was so much better for AA, then they would have chosen it.

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 26): The only benefit would be to rally the politicians and businesses of South Florida to support the route

Well, true, it's feel good, but that wouldn't have much of an effect on the decision process either. Usually politicians from large hubs of any airline applying for coveted routes support its airline very publically whether the flight originates/operates from the hub or not.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 30): My thought is American does not want a second flight to China.

I don't think that is true at all. With six frequencies up for grabs, everyone of the six carriers wants at least one.

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 37): The Dallas area has plenty o/d traffic for China service. Its no NYC but it has plenty to keep the flights profitable.

It actually doesn't, and the circuitous connections from the Northeast don't help the flight. A DFW-China flight would likely struggle economically for many years vs. an additional ORD-China flight.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 43): Outside LAX, NYC, SFO, and ORD (maybe IAD and SEA), the rest of the markets are in the US are not going to fill a plane based on O&D. The only reason ATL stands a chance is because of its connections. Even to China, ATL, DFW, and other markets that size are insignificant. They only have a chance based on connections.

While all the flights need connections, the above statement is pretty accurate.

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 22): I believe DFW also has the 3rd largest o/d traffic in the US as well.

That I question.. I have a very hard time believing that DFW has larger O/D marketshare than LAX, ORD, JFK, EWR, LGA, SFO, and LAS. If their is proof I would be more than happy to accept that I was incorrect in my assumption.

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 23): Couldn't see it happening-- as CAN has yet to even support daily LAX service with feed at both ends. That, and CO/CX's NYC-HKGs would eat it alive.

If and when China Southern enters SkyTeam, you can bet their will be additional flights from the US either on China Southern or Delta to Canton. Regarding China Southern they operated CAN-LAX daily with the 777 aircraft, and now it is down to 5x weekly. That is due to increase by first quarter 2008. China Southern is the largest airline in China by number of passengers carried. China Southern is the largest airline in Asia by fleet size.

Delta would not be eaten alive in the JFK market. Delta is fastly gaining ground in the New York market. I would go so far as to say that Delta has begun to detract from Newark and Continental. Their are numerous routes that Continetal uses 757 equipment on that Delta uses 763 on. I have a strong feeling that another Asian route will be added to JFK, very soon!   

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 34): ....could be from a multitude of route optimisations......for example, LAX-LHR goes double daily only during the summer..where does the slot go during the other seasons?

I highly doubt that AA is going to detract one of its DFW-LGW services to LHR only on a seasonal basis. The only route that I can see being pulled down from is ORD. That is questionable at best since AA is head to head with UA on that route, and does not want to lose market share to their number one competitor in the London market. I have a feeling AA is going to have to pay for the Heathrow slot. Question is how much and at what time period would the slot be for?

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 35): It's as simple as shifting just one flight from elsewhere within AA's US-LHR network for a DFW flight...JFK comes to mind. And besides, if it comes down to it, there are conceivably LHR slots on the market that we aren't aware of.

AA has the most lucrative route network to Heathrow from the USA. I highly doubt that AA would purge a JFK, LAX, ORD, MIA, or BOS to Heathrow service as those markets claim much higher yields to Heathrow than Dallas could.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 35): It would, for all intents and purposes, be their Flagship route.

Ha Ha Ha.. I have a feeling AA has a flagship route and it is not DFW-LON, nor will it be DFW-LHR. For all intents and purposes the AA Flagship routes would be JFK-LHR. Correct me if I am wrong but the fact in and of itself that there are 6 daily 777 in a three class config filled nearly solely with O/D that would be the AA Flagship Heathrow route.

Quoting Akizidy214 (Reply 37): The Dallas area has plenty o/d traffic for China service.

From what industry? From what VFR sector?

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 40): ORD-HKG is one of those monopoly routes that seems to be BEGGING for competition.

AA has needed this route for years. It is a shame it has not been attempted previously however AA has Pilot issues, and a lack of equipment to sustain the route nonstop. Has AA ever looked at ordering the 777-200LR? Couldn't AA instead attempt ORD-TPE, or would that fall to the same fate as ORD-NGO, DFW-KIX, SJC-NRT, SEA-NRT, and SJC-TPE?

-JD

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 46): AA has the most lucrative route network to Heathrow from the USA. I highly doubt that AA would purge a JFK, LAX, ORD, MIA, or BOS to Heathrow service as those markets claim much higher yields to Heathrow than Dallas could.

Actually im not sure. I think AA could stand to lose a LHR slot from JFK to give to DFW. The reason being is that they are going to want to compete with BA and there is still going to be ample service from JFK to LHR on AA. I would think that the yields would be very high on DFW-LHR given that DFW-LGW preforms very well for AA, LHR can only be better.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 45): If LAX was so much better for AA, then they would have chosen it.

who was speaking of AA?

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 46): I have a very hard time believing that DFW has larger O/D marketshare than LAX, ORD, JFK, EWR, LGA, SFO, and LAS.

....careful with JFK. Also, you seem to be forgetting ATL, which has routinely been in the top 5 O&D airports in the USA since 2001.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 46): If and when China Southern enters SkyTeam, you can bet their will be additional flights from the US either on China Southern or Delta to Canton.

Perhaps, though do realize that DL (and soon CO) already codeshares, yet CZ has still shown little interest in making the routing daily.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 46): Delta would not be eaten alive in the JFK market.

In the market as an aggregate whole? Of course not.
On a route like JFK-CAN, they'd lose their shirts to JFK/EWR-HKG. No question. It'd be JFK-LGW vs JFK-LHR x10.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 46): Has AA ever looked at ordering the 777-200LR?

Indeed they have.... and quite a few here remember the absolute sh!tfit that they threw over it at the Asian Aerospace show 2000--- going as far as to LOI for the A345, which anyone with half a brain knew was a farce.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 47): Actually im not sure. I think AA could stand to lose a LHR slot from JFK to give to DFW. The reason being is that they are going to want to compete with BA and there is still going to be ample service from JFK to LHR on AA. I would think that the yields would be very high on DFW-LHR given that DFW-LGW preforms very well for AA, LHR can only be better

My question is that would AA forego a proven high-yielding Heathrow-JFK frequency for DFW? It was and has been my underrstanding that the reason AA is so profitable on the JFK-LHR segment is due to negotiated contracts that stipulate flights and ample P and J availability to fulfill those contracts. Does DFW have the O/D in place to merit JFK losing 16P and 35J seats everyday?

-JD