Dear All,

in order to consolidate the AA/US merger threads (and after input from users, which we highly appreciate) the moderators decided to start separate threads each discussing one aspect of the AA/US merger and its impact to both the industry and the two airlines involved.

Please continue discussing this hot news in their individual official threads:

AA/US Merger Impact: Fleet
AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs
AA/US Merger Impact: Employees
AA/US Merger Impact: HQ
A/US Merger Impact: Livery
AA/US Merger Impact: Unions
AA/US Merger Impact: Routes (THIS THREAD ONLY)
AA/US Merger Impact: Inflight Service

Enjoy & have a nice weekend!

The Airliners.net Moderator crew

I hope AA would have the foresight to add the PHX-MSY route that HP abruptly canceled just before Hurricane Katrina made landfall and never resumed when they merged with US.

What will happen to PHL-TLV if American Airlines takes over as owner of US Airways? Any idea if American Airlines would be able to fly there and if American Airlines would launch MIA-TLV after.

Okay, let's try this one again.


Does anyone have any opinion or historical facts to share on what impact the AA/US merger will have on the DCA beyond perimeter routes? Both airlines have flights which take advantage of exemptions to the rule.

Will whichever airline is regarded as the acquiring airline matter?

What are the odds that any of these flights will be an issue in the release of DCA slots which is expected in order for the merger to gain regulatory approval?

Quoting jfk787nyc (Reply 2): What will happen to PHL-TLV if American Airlines takes over as owner of US Airways? Any idea if American Airlines would be able to fly there and if American Airlines would launch MIA-TLV after.

I think PHL-TLV is very safe. It does very well.

The PHL-Asia flights that the Philadelphia Mayor, airport officials, etc have been begging US to start for the last few years likely won't happen though. I see those going to JFK.

Quoting jfk787nyc (Reply 2): What will happen to PHL-TLV if American Airlines takes over as owner of US Airways? Any idea if American Airlines would be able to fly there and if American Airlines would launch MIA-TLV after.

AA is the surving company, they still have the judgement against them in Israel. So unless they back track and pay the judgement, something AA hasn't done in the past 13 years, they're not going to fly to TLV. They pay the judgement or cut the route, we had a thread about a year or two ago discussing the former TWA employee's judgement against AA. With interest it's been mentioned to be upwards of $20 million, perhaps $30 million.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 8): AA is the surving company

My money is on "American Airways" being the name for the combined carrier, leaving no "surviving" carrier so to speak. A holding company will be created (American Airways) with subsidiary-American Airlines and subsidiary-US Airways operating under the umbrella of American Airways. Much like Continental taking over United, the stronger brand-name will be kept (American), and we will have many discussion of "sub-AA this" and "sub-US that" until the final bits of the airlines are finally combined years down the road.

Since we're treating this as if it's already happened, and because I put my domestic predictions primarily with the hub discussion, here are my predictions on the international network ...

Atlantic: some shifting and optimization among hubs/gateways; 1 daily FRA and seasonal GLA flights shifted from PHL to JFK (as 757s), and JFK also picks up 1 daily flight to TLV; CLT-FCO shifted to MIA-MXP and seasonal CLT-DUB ended entirely; PHL/CLT-FRA each lose 1 daily and PHL-MUC/ZRH exited entirely (due to dependence on Star connections); seasonal PHL-ATH market exited entirely (due to poor economy) while PHL-BCN and CLT-MAD upgraded from seasonal to year-round

Pacific: little direct impact from merger, beyond US bringing feed and connectivity from US hubs and strength markets to AA Asia-bound flights instead of onto United codeshare flights; may provide marginal boost to NRT/China flying; longer-term, AA/JL JV adds daily JL 787 on PHL-NRT

Latin America: little change beyond CLT losing GIG and likely GRU flying and some Caribbean weekend flying with that capacity shifted to MIA, although CLT retains substantial capacity to major markets (e.g., CUN, AUA, PUJ, SJU, STT, MBJ, etc.)

[Edited 2013-02-08 05:10:27]

PHL/CLT- FRA is currently at one daily flight (it's only twice daily in the summer). If this merger goes through it would be interesting to see if BA returns to CLT, I would expect LH to exit CLT. I just don't see the CLT-MAD as going year round, maybe I'm wrong.
I

Quoting PHLJJS (Reply 4):

I see PHL being one of the first new Asia routes of the combined airline, if not the first.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): Latin America: little change beyond CLT losing GIG and likely GRU flying and some Caribbean weekend flying with that capacity shifted to MIA,

I think CLT-GRU can work with more appropriate timing; I view it as similar to DTW-GRU or ORD-GRU. It's likely a smaller local market than either, but it's much better positioned for connections and AA is much stronger with Brasil point of sale traffic than either UA or DL.

I'd love to see an analysis by someone of...

How many airports are served by both US and AA?
How many are served by only US or only AA?
How many are likely to pick up new hub connections?
How many are likely to lose hub connections through consolidation?

Quoting thorntot (Reply 6): My money is on "American Airways" being the name for the combined carrier, leaving no "surviving" carrier so to speak. A holding company will be created (American Airways) with subsidiary-American Airlines and subsidiary-US Airways operating under the umbrella of American Airways. Much like Continental taking over United, the stronger brand-name will be kept (American), and we will have many discussion of "sub-AA this" and "sub-US that" until the final bits of the airlines are finally combined years down the road.

No, I think it will be known as American and the Airlines/Airways will only be in the official name, but will become "American" as the marketing name like most people refer to most of the airlines now anyways. Hence the "American" and no mention of AA on the new livery.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): Atlantic: some shifting and optimization among hubs/gateways; 1 daily FRA and seasonal GLA flights shifted from PHL to JFK (as 757s), and JFK also picks up 1 daily flight to TLV; CLT-FCO shifted to MIA-MXP and seasonal CLT-DUB ended entirely; PHL/CLT-FRA each lose 1 daily and PHL-MUC/ZRH exited entirely (due to dependence on Star connections); seasonal PHL-ATH market exited entirely (due to poor economy) while PHL-BCN and CLT-MAD upgraded from seasonal to year-round

I think the dependence on PHL-FRA is shifted to PHL-LHR with at least 3 daily not sure how it would play out between AA/US and BA.
Possibly double daily PHL-MAD.
PHL-ATH is definitely gone.
I think PHL-NRT and HKG are definitely in the cards

AA may be the suriving "name" but isn't the leadership supposed to be predominantly US? They may make the case to put an end to the TLV issue because they see the $$. I suspect PHL-TLV is upgraded to 772 rather than double daily and then JFK-TLV added.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): PHL-MUC/ZRH exited entirely (due to dependence on Star connections)

Really? US Airways has been in MUC since the late '90s. Yes, it was helped by an odd codeshare with Deutsche BA, but they kept it through the downturn, Deutsche BA's changes, and before they joined Star Alliance.

ZRH, maybe. AA flies JFK-ZRH right now.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 10): I see PHL being one of the first new Asia routes of the combined airline, if not the first.

PHL-PEK ? I remember US got green light on this route years ago but for whatever reason they abandoned it.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 14): I think PHL-NRT and HKG are definitely in the cards

I agree PHL-NRT is a distinct possibility.

PHL-HKG is a nonstarter. The market isnt there.

Quoting dtfg (Reply 16): PHL-PEK ? I remember US got green light on this route years ago but for whatever reason they abandoned it.

They didnt have the plane for it. It probably was a blessing in disguise. I dont think that flight would have been a success.

A lot of the focus seems to be on specific international points, but very little on domestic points. I would almost expect that the new AA will go through an add a second hub option to every airport that is currently served by only one.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 18): I would almost expect that the new AA will go through an add a second hub option to every airport that is currently served by only one.

I'd happily exchange a few PDX-PHX flights for the return of PDX-ORD and the PDX-DFW red-eye.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): PHL-AND OLD: Munich - Riem (MUC / EDDM) (closed), Germany">MUC/ZRH exited entirely (due to dependence on Star connections)

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 15): Really? US Airways has been in AND OLD: Munich - Riem (MUC / EDDM) (closed), Germany">MUC since the late '90s. Yes, it was helped by an odd codeshare with Deutsche BA, but they kept it through the downturn, Deutsche BA's changes, and before they joined Star Alliance.ZRH, maybe. AA flies JFK-ZRH right now.

I think PHL-AND OLD: Munich - Riem (MUC / EDDM) (closed), Germany">MUC will stay, but PHL-ZRH is going to go. Better to use the plane for Budapest(from either ORD or JFK) since there is no DL or MA.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): seasonal PHL-AND CURRENT: Athens - Eleftherios Venizelos (Spata) (ATH / LGAV), Greece">ATH market exited entirely (due to poor economy)

Much will depend on what Qatar Airways does. For those of you who don't know already, QR is planning to put on JFK-AND CURRENT: Athens - Eleftherios Venizelos (Spata) (ATH / LGAV), Greece">ATH, which is a bit of an amomoly, since neither city is a hub for them. However, they have been dragging their feet on this. Right now should be the time to start loading the flight into inventory, to start selling for the peak summer season. Yet they haven't. With this in mind, it's highly likely they will turn around and decide NOT do it.

If QR is on, then it's likely AA/US will give up on AND CURRENT: Athens - Eleftherios Venizelos (Spata) (ATH / LGAV), Greece">ATH forever, just like UA did last year. If they are off, then AA/US should keep the service----but out of another hub. PHL is OK, but synergy too weak compared to JFK(or ORD)-AND CURRENT: Athens - Eleftherios Venizelos (Spata) (ATH / LGAV), Greece">ATH.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 8): I can't see PHL-LIS surviving. At best it will be shifted to JFK-LIS. I would love to see them try something out of the box like BOS-LIS.

Philly is also weak here, too. Even more so. New York is do-able, but then you are directly competing against existing TP/UA flights. BOS-LIS is good. Or perhaps even service to Terceira, Azores Islands(TER). Many people that go to LIS are connecting there, and then turning around, and going west. They get the people to where they need to be AND burn less fuel on BOS(or JFK) to TER.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 17): I agree PHL-NRT is a distinct possibility. PHL-HKG is a nonstarter. The market isnt there.

True........there is enough Asia(as a continent) demand, but not any one strong city from PHL. But if you have to have any Asian hub to represent PHL traffic, NRT is the one........lots of connection options on AA partner JAL.

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 14): Possibly double daily PHL-MAD.

Sounds like a good idea.....but we need to see how the Iberia situation plays out, before adding the second flight. We can get a better gauge on it once IB figures out which inter-Europe flights they will have.

Also:
(1) Making the JFK-MAN trip a thru trip from AUS.
(2) More Puerto Rico in the winter
(3) One seasonal summer Europe trip out of STL, perhaps 4x/week to LHR. Good feeder to BA's hub.

First, a little history of AA and US at my hometown airport: With service dating back to the PI DAY hub in the mid-1980s, US left FWA and many other small Midwestern airports in 2004 as part of the broader PIT dehubbing. However, after over 30 years serving FWA (first with 727s, then F100s and ATRs, and now ERJs), AA/Eagle remains strong at FWA with service to ORD and DFW (the FWA-DFW route turns 13 this year).

I see this as the chance where the merged AA/US finally launches FWA-PHL, FWA-CLT, and potentially FWA-DCA as American Eagle (or whatever they want to call the regional arm) routes. All three cities have close ties to FWA: Wells Fargo and Lincoln Financial have large presences in FWA, PHL, and CLT, along with many other companies. There are also a lot of people from the PHL area that live in FWA now, likely due in part to Lincoln Financial. As for FWA-DCA, there is a huge untapped O&D market with many local ties (even moreso than NYC) that currently has to connect at ORD or DTW or use another airport with nonstop DC-area service.

From FWA, I could see AA/US adding one daily flight each to CLT and either DCA or PHL (initially a CR2 or ER4 for PHL and DCA; 70-seaters for CLT to compete with the likely upgrade of DL's FWA-ATL to larger aircraft) to start to complement the 3-4 daily ORD and 2 daily DFW flights. If successful initially (and I think it would be), FWA-PHL/CLT could go double-daily, though DCA would get larger aircraft in lieu of higher frequency due to slot controls. As for the existing Eagle routes from FWA, I see a bright future for them as well. I could see DFW being upgraded to larger aircraft for sure (either MQ CR7s moved from ORD as RW takes over 70-seat ORD flying or CR7s/CR9s/E-Jets from the pre-merger US regional partners) and potentially an ORD flight or two.

And I think that it's not just FWA that will get tapped into the PMUS (is it too early to start using that term?) network: Many other cities abandoned by US in the wake of the PIT dehubbing that still have a strong Eagle presence like GRR, PIA, and EVV will likely see service to PMUS hubs, but mostly to CLT as PHL has capacity issues and DCA is slot-controlled. With DL adding ATL back to PMNW cities like GRB and PIA, the merged AA/US needs to add CLT service to smaller Midwestern cities to compete with the world's single largest airline hub. And I wouldn't be surprised to see cities not currently served by either AA or US, like SBN, YNG, and LAN, added to a mix of PMAA and PMUS hubs.

PVD-DFW could come back in a US-AA merger. Not sure PVD-ORD or PVD-MIA would make the cut, but DFW seems like a solid candidate. US has plenty of gates and ticket counter space at PVD, so any new flights could easily operate without increasing overhead.

Quoting commavia (Reply 7): Latin America: little change beyond CLT losing GIG and likely GRU flying and some Caribbean weekend flying with that capacity shifted to MIA, although CLT retains substantial capacity to major markets (e.g., CUN, AUA, PUJ, SJU, STT, MBJ, etc.)

If CLT looses GIG then is DFW loosing GRU ? No way, CLT can be a complement to Miami, JFK and DFW asn an additional gateway to Brazil. AA would be wise to use CLT the way Delta uses Atlanta for international flights. AA needs to own Brazil the way Cathay owns Hong Kong. ORD to GRU needs to happen too why should United fly to Sao Paulo and not AA from ORD ?

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 24): If CLT looses GIG then is DFW loosing GRU ?

Huh? What does one have at all to do with the other?

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3): Does anyone have any opinion or historical facts to share on what impact the AA/US merger will have on the DCA beyond perimeter routes? Both airlines have flights which take advantage of exemptions to the rule. Will whichever airline is regarded as the acquiring airline matter? What are the odds that any of these flights will be an issue in the release of DCA slots which is expected in order for the merger to gain regulatory approval?

Going point by point, in no particular order of importance:

1. My guess is the SAN and LAS flights are safe, as is the legacy AA LAX. The question to me would be the 3 PHX slots - I'd bet you at least 2 of those stay, but I also bet they try to get approval to swap one to LAX, maybe even two. But dollars to pesos PHX keeps at least 1x. A potential wild card is the fate of the AS partnership post-merger - I don't know what the deal is there, but that may come into play with the effective addition of 1x LAX, 1x PDX, and 2x SEA as AA codeshares (I don't see that being a problem though as it's just a codeshare between two entirely unrelated airlines). Bottom line: probably nothing too drastic here, just some upgauging maybe, and perhaps a VERY slight reduction on IAD-West Coast service.

2. Eh, I don't think so here, but it's a possibility. Since we're talking about beyond perimeter slots, the only hubs affected are PHX and LAX, and you're going to see both remain reasonably strong even after some shifting to LAX. But I see that as more of a good business move period and not one that would depend on where US or AA does the formal acquiring. Bottom line: ditto to above, little impact from this.

3. If my understanding is correct, these slots themselves would be kosher as long as it is a merger and not a pure takeover by one party. Maybe WN pleads for a PHX flight or something like that, but probably nothing too major.

3a. Slots more broadly will most definitely be an issue here. This will only further consolidate US's hold at DCA, and might make things interesting for the within perimeter stuff. ORD and DFW will probably see some upgauging going on, LGA shuttle might get a slight bump to 320s with the added AA traffic, BOS may get some upgauging, and you might see some shifting from PHL to JFK and CLT to DFW or MIA. Plus, those couple daily USX DCA-DFW flights (just one example) would be good freebies to hand over as slot concessions. But count on more than a few surrendered slots.

I'm hoping ROC gets mainline back . All we have now is 1 A319 to/from CLT . A n/s to DFW again would be nice. Our MQ CR7 flight ended a few years back.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 11): I think CLT-GRU can work with more appropriate timing; I view it as similar to DTW-GRU or ORD-GRU. It's likely a smaller local market than either, but it's much better positioned for connections and AA is much stronger with Brasil point of sale traffic than either UA or DL.

CLT-GIG already works. Why would they axe that? It is consolidated and got upgraded during the summer season to the 332 for the first time given the strong loads.

CLT-GRU is more complicated though: the 762 is not the best product out there, the compatition is fierce and the schedule is plain awful. I can see US getting better slots at GRU if they stick for a while there though.

Lets not forget PHX-Asia route that the locals here are trying to get!

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 29): Lets not forget PHX-Asia route that the locals here are trying to get!

What about it? It's even more unlikely to happen under an AA/US merger than if US remains alone.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 22): Many other cities abandoned by US in the wake of the PIT dehubbing that still have a strong Eagle presence like GRR, PIA, and EVV will likely see service to PMUS hubs

GRR currently has six flights a day to ORD on American Connection and three flights a day to DFW on American Eagle. Could we see capacity on these current routes reduced in return for flights to CLT, PHL, and/or DCA? There has been speculation/meetings with airport officials for the last few years about the return of US to GRR but it seems that the cost of setting up a new station has been the main concern for them. It looks like GRR could in the end reap positive benefits from this merger.

Also, could we see smaller Midwestern airports like AZO gain service to PHL after losing prior service on US to PIT?

Quoting AirDance (Reply 31): Also, could we see smaller Midwestern airports like AZO gain service to PHL after losing prior service on US to PIT?

PHL is capacity-constrained, so the merged AA/US would have to choose PHL routes wisely (and DCA even more, as it's slot-controlled).

CLT has no such similar restrictions, plus it's in a growth market and it would be defense against DL's increased ATL-Midwest routes, so expect more CLT routes from PMAA-only cities than PHL or DCA routes.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 32):

Finally an A.netter who sees CLT opportunities. Most here can't wait to close CLT leaving ATL as the only hub in a catchment area of over 35m people.

Quoting commavia (Reply 25):

Quoting commavia (Reply 25): oting jfk777 (Reply 24):If CLT looses GIG then is DFW loosing GRU ? Huh? What does one have at all to do with the other?

Because USairways had the vision to start its own servie to Brazil and NOT wait until AA did it for them. Why would any one think killing a profitable flight to Rio de Janiero is a good idea.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 33): Finally an A.netter who sees CLT opportunities. Most here can't wait to close CLT leaving ATL as the only hub in a catchment area of over 35m people.

Thanks... but you forgot to make that "35 million people and growing".  

Growth is the key word here, and the word that will keep CLT a viable and thriving hub.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 33): Finally an A.netter who sees CLT opportunities. Most here can't wait to close CLT leaving ATL as the only hub in a catchment area of over 35m people.

There are plenty of opportunities that could come to CLT for increased destinations (maybe not increased flights though). I think there are a few destinations in the great lakes region that could see 1x to 2x flights. Depending on how station costs, revenues, and network rationalization, I could easily see GRR/FWA/TOL/FNT/EVV/BMI - CLT being added. None of those markets can support MIA but could easily support CLT with a wide array of southeastern and Caribbean destinations. It just depends on who is in charge - US or AA personnel or a mix...it's going to get interesting that's for sure. I've got my popcorn and I'm ready to watch the show.

Quoting af086 (Reply 28): CLT-GIG already works. Why would they axe that? It is consolidated and got upgraded during the summer season to the 332 for the first time given the strong loads. CLT-GRU is more complicated though: the 762 is not the best product out there, the compatition is fierce and the schedule is plain awful. I can see US getting better slots at GRU if they stick for a while there though.

I can see a combined AA/US keeping a few select Caribbean or Central American flying out of CLT but I doubt we'll see deep S. America remain when AA has the same flights from JFK/MIA/DFW with a better product offering.

It exactly this reason why I think we'll see a rather significant expansion from AA out of MIA into the eastern US.

I'm not saying CLT is going to shrink dramatically but I personally see this merger as a big win for MIA ... if AA doesn't run out of room.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 33): Finally an A.netter who sees CLT opportunities. Most here can't wait to close CLT leaving ATL as the only hub in a catchment area of over 35m people.

No, I dont think anyone credible actually believes the hub is going to be shut down outright.

What were questioning is whether there is a need for a 650 flight per day hub. I have said that I dont think so, but that I see CLT being more than 400 and less than 500 flights per day. I have also said, there is not much of a need to serve CLT-Europe beyond the UK and Germany on a year round basis and perhaps CDG and MAD in the summer. I have also said, I think BA will come in at some point.

All that said, the only destinions I really see CLT losing are in the Caribbean, GIG, and Europe. I think GRU will be re-timed and kept. I dont see them losing any destinations domestically.

As far as growth, I dont see it beyond a couple of domestic points. Sorry.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 26): Going point by point, in no particular order of importance:

Thanks very much for your insightful reply. I realize that the DCA beyond perimeter route authorities have come about over time via various means, and would think these rights would be the most sought after by other airlines if any needed to be released as a condition of the merger.

It'll be interesting to watch!

Quoting af086 (Reply 28): CLT-GIG already works. Why would they axe that? It is consolidated and got upgraded during the summer season to the 332 for the first time given the strong loads. CLT-GRU is more complicated though: the 762 is not the best product out there, the compatition is fierce and the schedule is plain awful. I can see US getting better slots at GRU if they stick for a while there though.

These work because the ton of capacity US routes through CLT. If US/AA axe any of that GIG/GRU become tougher to turn a profit.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 32): PHL is capacity-constrained, so the merged AA/US would have to choose PHL routes wisely (and DCA even more, as it's slot-controlled).

Not really. US chooses to operate a banked hub rather than rolling and they fly a ton of props/RJs. They can either spread flts out into a rolling hub or cut frequency in favor of larger aircraft.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 38): All that said, the only destinions I really see CLT losing are in the Caribbean, GIG, and Europe.

I agree that the GIG frequencies could be better used for more MIA-Northern Brazil.
Why Europe? What does AA bring that makes AA want to move Europe flights elsewhere? PHL and CLT coexists now well as Euro-gateways. JFK is mostly for locals.
Also Caribbean is better served for many markets thru CLT not MIA (not saying MIA loses anything). But this notion that Caribbean wil lbe moved from CLT to MIA is incorrect I think. US already is profitable from CLT to the region, cutting CLT doesnt improve MIA at all and cuts off many smaller cities from the region as they wont have MIA service.

I dont understand why people think that AA will cede the Southest to Europe and Southeast and Midwest to Caribbean to Delta and ATL.

The WSJ has a good article on AA/US. It isnt like DL/NW or UA/CO. Those mergers were done to make the industry smaller. This is being done to make AA bigger. You wont see AA shrink US the way DL has shrunk or even UA has shrunk.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41): I agree that the GIG frequencies could be better used for more MIA-Northern Brazil.

Doesn't non-GRU Brasil have available frequencies?

Quoting usairways85 (Reply 40): These work because the ton of capacity US routes through CLT. If US/AA axe any of that GIG/GRU become tougher to turn a profit.

True, but US doesn't need 7 daily CLT-PIT flights to be a viable option for PIT-GRU traffic. Four is more than sufficient. That's true in most markets.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41): Also Caribbean is better served for many markets thru CLT not MIA (not saying MIA loses anything). But this notion that Caribbean wil lbe moved from CLT to MIA is incorrect I think. US already is profitable from CLT to the region, cutting CLT doesnt improve MIA at all and cuts off many smaller cities from the region as they wont have MIA service.

I never said that CLT-Caribbean will cease to exist, Ive always said that CLT-Caribbean will be the major markets only (SJU, MBJ, CUN, PUJ, AUA, etc.).

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41): Why Europe? What does AA bring that makes AA want to move Europe flights elsewhere? PHL and CLT coexists now well as Euro-gateways. JFK is mostly for locals.

Thats mainly because of the size of the airline. Im saying that the need for CLT-FCO and CLT-DUB can simply be shifted given ORD, JFK, and (presumably) PHL will serve those same markets and CLT doesnt have a large market to them. CLT-LHR/FRA are completely safe as CLT has a high yielding and pretty sizeable presence to those destinations. CLT-CDG is not a very large market and CDG is served from JFK, ORD, MIA, (presumably) PHL, and DFW. All of the mentioned are much larger in size than CLT-CDG, however I still see a demand for CLT-CDG in the summer as demand spikes. CLT-MAD could be a good seasonal one as well.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41): I dont understand why people think that AA will cede the Southest to Europe and Southeast and Midwest to Caribbean to Delta and ATL.

I don't think it's a question of giving up the Southeast/Midwest markets to DL at ATL. They certainly don't want to do that at all. It's a question of streamling operations and profits.

Example - CLT-GRU
Ask yourself just some of the following questions:

How many passengers are originating in CLT for the GRU flight?
How many passengers are connecting in CLT for the GRU flight with one connection?
How many passengers are connecting in CLT for the GRU flight with two or more connections?

WILL the additional options of JFK,MIA,DFW funnel customers away from the CLT flight?

How many of those connecting passengers can now connect in JFK,MIA,DFW with the same # of connections or less?

For those passengers originating in CLT, how much additional time would a connecting flight add to their itinerary?

Do we have extra capacity on our flights out of JFK,MIA,DFW?

How many corporate contracts do we have across the system will allow these customers to travel in international F if offered?

Can the equipment used on CLT-GRU be deployed somewhere else allowing us to ...
replace and retire an older piece of equipment?
enhance the customer experience?
open up a new route in the system?
upguage a route in the system?

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 41): Caribbean is better served for many markets thru CLT not MIA (not saying MIA loses anything). But this notion that Caribbean wil lbe moved from CLT to MIA is incorrect I think.

The big check mark for CLT here is airport costs. If we assume that a lot of the connecting leisure traffic to the Caribbean is relatively low yielding/price sensitive, why not fly that through one of the cheapest hubs in the country rather than one of the most expensive?

Clearly there is a HUGE O&D market for MIA-Caribbean and that traffic isn't going anywhere, but - from a cost perspective - I don't understand why so many people seem to think that connections from the North East/Central/West are better served over MIA than CLT.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 39): Thanks very much for your insightful reply. I realize that the DCA beyond perimeter route authorities have come about over time via various means, and would think these rights would be the most sought after by other airlines if any needed to be released as a condition of the merger. It'll be interesting to watch!

Absolutely! I don't think they necessarily have to remain as-is either, where say a DCA-PHX just switches colors to another carrier. So it could be great for the other players looking to expand service elsewhere (e.g,, UA to DEN/SFO/LAX, DL or VX to LAX, someone else to SAN, etc.).

As there is no AA/US Merger Impact: Pax thread, i shall post it here.

Does wither carrier loose some pax by merging? For example, a AA adverse pax who was a US FFer (and vice versa)....do they move to DL. Is this a fraction of people or a lot and does it help the other carriers market share?

If this deal goes thru, it does make Parkers deal with DL over LGA look brilliant as he will be getting back a lot of slots with the merger. With the merger, he probably would have been forced to divest some anyway, so at least he go something for them.

I'm hearing quite a few rumours about AA pulling the plug on DFW-YYC (as early as September). WS has announced that this will be one of their new routes (formally being announced on Monday).

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 43): Thats mainly because of the size of the airline. Im saying that the need for CLT-FCO and CLT-DUB can simply be shifted given ORD, JFK, and (presumably) PHL will serve those same markets and CLT doesnt have a large market to them

I dont see why CLT-DUB is such an obvious one to scrap. Essentially, the Dublin route was a way to get extra utilisation out of a domestic 757 that will produce decent yields in peak season, and can use domestic gates at CLT due to CBP in Dublin. It was launched probably because it was a quick, easy win using existing resources.