Any intel if BA will bring F seats back to this market, or is J as good as it’s going to get?

I just wonder how more long will we still have BA here............

AntonioMartin wrote:

I just wonder how more long will we still have BA here............

Why would BA stop PHX ? They have been flying to PHX for 26 years, there's a large Oneworld hub for connecting traffic and very little in the way of competing non-stop traffic to Europe

AntonioMartin wrote:

I just wonder how more long will we still have BA here............

Why would BA leave PHX?, LHR supports both AA/BA out of PHX and they corrsinate in the route. I don’t see BA going anywhere.

remymartin11 wrote:

Any intel if BA will bring F seats back to this market, or is J as good as it’s going to get?

F is going the way of the Dodo bird. PHX isnt a particular financial energy, tech or entertainment center which tend to feed F passengers. I do not work for BA so obviously all conjecture but probably not high on the list

5th largest city in the US with OW hubs on either end, the LHR flight will be there for a while. Since there is a JV, it doesn't matter to BA or AA who is flying the route, right?

chepos wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

I just wonder how more long will we still have BA here............

Why would BA leave PHX?, LHR supports both AA/BA out of PHX and they corrsinate in the route. I don’t see BA going anywhere.

I hope you are right!

The 350K is a sweet ride so I don't really see it as a "downgrade." Otherwise, they use a 772 which is ok but PHX doesn't have the right biz mix to support F in the way places like LAX and SFO do.

There's an extremely low chance BA leaves PHX. Frequencies have increased in recent years with AA adding PHX-LHR to bolster their JV. Prior to that, BA operated double daily 744s seasonally. However, F was never a real focus because PHX is not particularly premium heavy. Even with the 744, PHX was one of the last destinations to get the new F product, and for a while was operated with the old F sold as J. It's also (as mentioned) part of a larger trend of phasing out F except to the most premium markets — NYC, LAX, IAD, MIA, etc. PHX doesn't really factor into the F conversation, but that doesn't mean it's not a profitable route for the JV.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

chepos wrote:

Why would BA leave PHX?, LHR supports both AA/BA out of PHX and they corrsinate in the route. I don’t see BA going anywhere.

I hope you are right!

Why would you think otherwise?

I was just thinking that with two airlines, even as OW partners, in the route, it might be a bit of overkill.....that and the aviation geek in me would hate to see BA be the one that left the route because....(in the case that I was right in my previous thinking and it was overkill) if AA was the one that left it, no big deal, we have AA planes landing here from about 50 other destinations daily..that's all.

AntonioMartin wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

I hope you are right!

Why would you think otherwise?

I was just thinking that with two airlines, even as OW partners, in the route, it might be a bit of overkill.....that and the aviation geek in me would hate to see BA be the one that left the route because....(in the case that I was right in my previous thinking and it was overkill) if AA was the one that left it, no big deal, we have AA planes landing here from about 50 other destinations daily..that's all.

BA/AA basically act as 1 airline operating that route, 2 flights, but they do NOT compete on this route. They coordinate schedules, pricing, etc. They determined based on market dynamics it makes most sense for BA to operate 1 flight and AA the other.

AntonioMartin wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

I hope you are right!

Why would you think otherwise?

I was just thinking that with two airlines, even as OW partners, in the route, it might be a bit of overkill.....that and the aviation geek in me would hate to see BA be the one that left the route because....(in the case that I was right in my previous thinking and it was overkill) if AA was the one that left it, no big deal, we have AA planes landing here from about 50 other destinations daily..that's all.

If you think PHX-LHR is overkill, what are your thoughts on DFW-LHR?

hz747300 wrote:

5th largest city in the US with OW hubs on either end, the LHR flight will be there for a while. Since there is a JV, it doesn't matter to BA or AA who is flying the route, right?

I wouldn't use the population of the city of Phoenix as a proxy for anything airline-related. The metro area itself is a better metric. Phoenix's is 16th in population. Then there are the already mentioned drivers of premium traffic.

Phoenix is not a place of abject poverty. Itsmetropolitan area has about 5 million people. That's more than enough to sustain a single route to a major hub in Europe

Denver's metropolitan area is about 3 million people, is a location of comparable distance from Europe and manages to sustain 2 competing alliances flying year round to London

Salt Lake City has a metropolitan population around 1.25 million people, yet has routes to London *and* Paris.

Yes a London-Phoenix route was a bit of a risk in the late 1990s by BA, but I'm just not seeing a reason to think London-Phoenix as a route might be at risk

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Phoenix is not a place of abject poverty. Itsmetropolitan area has about 5 million people. That's more than enough to sustain a single route to a major hub in Europe

Denver's metropolitan area is about 3 million people, is a location of comparable distance from Europe and manages to sustain 2 competing alliances flying year round to London

Salt Lake City has a metropolitan population around 1.25 million people, yet has routes to London *and* Paris.

Yes a London-Phoenix route was a bit of a risk in the late 1990s by BA, but I'm just not seeing a reason to think London-Phoenix as a route might be at risk

Not to drag this off-topic, but SLC really serves three adjacent metro areas, so the Combined Statistical Area is a more accurate representation than the Metro Area in this case, which is 2.6 million.

Don't forget that BA started PHX without a OW hub and relied on O&D (plus the tag on to SAN) and their codeshare with America West. It survived 9/11 with the SAN tag being removed. Then AWE went to US, US married AA and now we have one big happy OW hub that can easily justify the two carriers flying to another OW hub in LHR.

incitatus wrote:

hz747300 wrote:

5th largest city in the US with OW hubs on either end, the LHR flight will be there for a while. Since there is a JV, it doesn't matter to BA or AA who is flying the route, right?

I wouldn't use the population of the city of Phoenix as a proxy for anything airline-related. The metro area itself is a better metric. Phoenix's is 16th in population. Then there are the already mentioned drivers of premium traffic.

Phoenix is actually up to 10th. It has a surprisingly small number of international connections for a city of its size, meaning it probably won't see F class anytime soon.

hpff wrote:

incitatus wrote:

hz747300 wrote:

5th largest city in the US with OW hubs on either end, the LHR flight will be there for a while. Since there is a JV, it doesn't matter to BA or AA who is flying the route, right?

I wouldn't use the population of the city of Phoenix as a proxy for anything airline-related. The metro area itself is a better metric. Phoenix's is 16th in population. Then there are the already mentioned drivers of premium traffic.

Phoenix is actually up to 10th. It has a surprisingly small number of international connections for a city of its size, meaning it probably won't see F class anytime soon.

Isn't AZA the chosen airport for Canadian airlines?

BuildingMyBento wrote:

hpff wrote:

incitatus wrote:

I wouldn't use the population of the city of Phoenix as a proxy for anything airline-related. The metro area itself is a better metric. Phoenix's is 16th in population. Then there are the already mentioned drivers of premium traffic.

Phoenix is actually up to 10th. It has a surprisingly small number of international connections for a city of its size, meaning it probably won't see F class anytime soon.

Isn't AZA the chosen airport for Canadian airlines?

For the ULCC ones, AC and WS fly into SkyHarbor.

DEN only gets J class now as well. We had F seats DEN-LHR just as COVID hit and they cancelled. Now all we can rebook J.

BA744PHX wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Why would you think otherwise?

I was just thinking that with two airlines, even as OW partners, in the route, it might be a bit of overkill.....that and the aviation geek in me would hate to see BA be the one that left the route because....(in the case that I was right in my previous thinking and it was overkill) if AA was the one that left it, no big deal, we have AA planes landing here from about 50 other destinations daily..that's all.

If you think PHX-LHR is overkill, what are your thoughts on DFW-LHR?

Well, I mean, after reading other comments here, I no longer feel it is overkill. But as far as DFW-LHR...well, DFW is better at drawing international airlines than PHX so it seems to me, I mean I guess, that the Dallas public is willing to and-or can afford to travel international better, and also that there are better business connections around the world between Dallas and international cities so maybe Dallas can support two airlines on that route? But again, i have been to Dallas a total of less than an hour (flight connecting in 2008) so I dont know exactly what Im talking about...

AntonioMartin wrote:

BA744PHX wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

I was just thinking that with two airlines, even as OW partners, in the route, it might be a bit of overkill.....that and the aviation geek in me would hate to see BA be the one that left the route because....(in the case that I was right in my previous thinking and it was overkill) if AA was the one that left it, no big deal, we have AA planes landing here from about 50 other destinations daily..that's all.

If you think PHX-LHR is overkill, what are your thoughts on DFW-LHR?

Well, I mean, after reading other comments here, I no longer feel it is overkill. But as far as DFW-LHR...well, DFW is better at drawing international airlines than PHX so it seems to me, I mean I guess, that the Dallas public is willing to and-or can afford to travel international better, and also that there are better business connections around the world between Dallas and international cities so maybe Dallas can support two airlines on that route? But again, i have been to Dallas a total of less than an hour (flight connecting in 2008) so I dont know exactly what Im talking about...

Dallas has over two million more people than Phoenix and also draws flyers from around the region (Austin/OKC/et cetera), unlike Phoenix which really is a spoke of Los Angeles when it comes to international travel networks. It's also significantly better geographically for connections, especially Asia/Australia/PNW-Mexico/Central America or Europe/smaller western cities and is supported by a massive hub.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

hpff wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

Well, I mean, after reading other comments here, I no longer feel it is overkill. But as far as DFW-LHR...well, DFW is better at drawing international airlines than PHX so it seems to me, I mean I guess, that the Dallas public is willing to and-or can afford to travel international better, and also that there are better business connections around the world between Dallas and international cities so maybe Dallas can support two airlines on that route? But again, i have been to Dallas a total of less than an hour (flight connecting in 2008) so I dont know exactly what Im talking about...

Dallas has over two million more people than Phoenix and also draws flyers from around the region (Austin/OKC/et cetera), unlike Phoenix which really is a spoke of Los Angeles when it comes to international travel networks. It's also significantly better geographically for connections, especially Asia/Australia/PNW-Mexico/Central America or Europe/smaller western cities and is supported by a massive hub.

There are a few more factors at play here that make the difference.

1) First thing Id say is that population and demand dont really correlate. DFW is larger than South Florida, Boston, Houston, Vegas, Orlando, etc. and yet all those places have a lot more international O&D than DFW.
2) To really gage local demand by international carriers, you have to take out those that have joint ventures with the hub airline. For examples, AY, IB, and JL would probably not be at DFW if not for the AA hub.
3) The DFW area has a much larger and more ethnically diverse immigrant population than Phoenix does. That is going to drive demand for international carriers more so for North Texas.

I do believe DFW-LHR is adequately served, my response was to that poster who thought twice daily PHX-LHR was overkill (it’s not, and I wonder if an additional daily or 3-4 weekly increase by BA maybe warranted) that maybe overkill but I don’t know

LAXdude1023 wrote:

hpff wrote:

AntonioMartin wrote:

Well, I mean, after reading other comments here, I no longer feel it is overkill. But as far as DFW-LHR...well, DFW is better at drawing international airlines than PHX so it seems to me, I mean I guess, that the Dallas public is willing to and-or can afford to travel international better, and also that there are better business connections around the world between Dallas and international cities so maybe Dallas can support two airlines on that route? But again, i have been to Dallas a total of less than an hour (flight connecting in 2008) so I dont know exactly what Im talking about...

Dallas has over two million more people than Phoenix and also draws flyers from around the region (Austin/OKC/et cetera), unlike Phoenix which really is a spoke of Los Angeles when it comes to international travel networks. It's also significantly better geographically for connections, especially Asia/Australia/PNW-Mexico/Central America or Europe/smaller western cities and is supported by a massive hub.

There are a few more factors at play here that make the difference.

1) First thing Id say is that population and demand dont really correlate. DFW is larger than South Florida, Boston, Houston, Vegas, Orlando, etc. and yet all those places have a lot more international O&D than DFW.

That's a good point.

Among other things, PHX is primarily a leisure market, not a business market filling the pointy end at premium fares on short notice. PHX-LHR also overflies lots of other hubs.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

2) To really gage local demand by international carriers, you have to take out those that have joint ventures with the hub airline. For examples, AY, IB, and JL would probably not be at DFW if not for the AA hub.

At the risk of veering off-topic, you've brought up an interesting thought experiment. Which international carriers would still serve which US cities if their JVs instantly disappeared (or never existed)? Obviously, for example, AF, KL, LH, BA, etc, would still serve the NYC area if those JVs didn't exist (though maybe the exact airport mix would change). Extending that would be an interesting topic of discussion in its own right.

As to DFW and PHX, it's already been discussed that BA started PHX before AA had a hub there, so that one is pretty safe. For DFW, while I agree that AY and IB are only there because of the AA hub I think JL might be there anyway due to the Japanese companies with large North American offices in the DFW area (Toyota, Kubota, etc). That being said, your point still stands.

Just did PHX-LHR-PHX these past three weeks in J and both ways the A350-1000 was full. I certainly would love the opportunity to welcome back F on the route as I'm sure there could be a market there. If you take a look at the fares in Y, Y+, and J on BA to Europe through LHR, they are astronomical compared to taking a one stop to LHR or a two stop option elsewhere in Europe. The convenience certainly makes the route worth it. We were off the plane and through PHX customs within 15 minutes.

dfw88 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

2) To really gage local demand by international carriers, you have to take out those that have joint ventures with the hub airline. For examples, AY, IB, and JL would probably not be at DFW if not for the AA hub.

At the risk of veering off-topic, you've brought up an interesting thought experiment. Which international carriers would still serve which US cities if their JVs instantly disappeared (or never existed)? Obviously, for example, AF, KL, LH, BA, etc, would still serve the NYC area if those JVs didn't exist (though maybe the exact airport mix would change). Extending that would be an interesting topic of discussion in its own right.

As to DFW and PHX, it's already been discussed that BA started PHX before AA had a hub there, so that one is pretty safe. For DFW, while I agree that AY and IB are only there because of the AA hub I think JL might be there anyway due to the Japanese companies with large North American offices in the DFW area (Toyota, Kubota, etc). That being said, your point still stands.

One good example of that is when Latam and AA were first denied a JV by Chilean courts they came up with, among other things, for LA to fly SCL-ORD. Won't ever happen now with LA+DL, LA is very conservative when adding new destinations, especially from SCL. They cancelled PPT for good :/

Back on topic:
With AA+BA doing so well in PHX as said here in the forum, is there space for another European carrier? I may have smoked a bit, pardon me so it came to mind, with PHX's good connectivity with Mexico, maybe IB can take a dip into PHX to connect many Mexican smaller cities with Spain? and to complement the existing services. I hope speaking about, with IB being in oneworld having a transatlantic jv with BA (duh) and AA I'm not veering off topic?

AA and IB both fly between Madrid and Dallas. That probably gives plenty of options for people flying between Spain and Mexico's smaller cities. DFW is also about 90 mins less flying from MAD compared to PHX-MAX.
Plus, Iberia flies 19x weekly between Madrid and Mexico City

Condor flies PHX FRA a few times a week. It is seasonal but it has been for the last few year (with the exception of the pandemic)