7% Capacity Increase For 2004

[Hatu]

Fort Worth-based American Airlines will experience some of the most aggressive growth. The airline expects to increase its capacity by 7 percent in 2004, despite removing 57 aircraft from its fleet.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/031130/airlines_growth_1.html

 

[Winglet]

Read closely. It applies to AA and Eagle . . . . . meaning they'll be almost all Eagle . . . and then some. Ask yourself, once the F-100s are gone, where is the 100 seat flying going . . . . that's right Eagle and outsourcing to cheap code-sharers. Management slight-of-hand propoganda. Believe the news releases when you see it happen, not before.

 

[MiAAmi]

Rumor has it that a few S-80s will be coming back to service from the desert next year. Although I suspect that we will see more eagle expansion than AA.

 

[Hopeful]

Maybe Eagle will officially be converted into the AA's LLC. But for this to happen, Eagle needs to fly a larger aircraft to compete.

 

[kirkpatrick]

Read closely. It applies to AA and Eagle . . . . . meaning they'll be almost all Eagle . . . and then some.

This article doesn't make it clear, but an earlier article stated the airline, not Eagle, would expand capacity by six percent in 2004. Some of this will be due to putting seats back in the 757 and A300, but most from growth.

MK

 

[orwell]

Read closely. It applies to AA and Eagle . . . . . meaning they'll be almost all Eagle . . . and then some. Ask yourself, once the F-100s are gone, where is the 100 seat flying going . . . . that's right Eagle and outsourcing to cheap code-sharers. Management slight-of-hand propoganda. Believe the news releases when you see it happen, not before.

Perhaps you'd be good enough to detail what "cheap" domestic codeshare partner AA allegedly has in mind for assuming F100 routes.

Greyhound?


Since AA already have less then 50 F100s remaining in their fleet, they'd best get crackin' at finding those evil codeshare partners you know about!

I'm betting you'll say Eagle alone is enough to accomplish Evil Management's mission, though.

 

[jimntx]

Perhaps you'd be good enough to detail what "cheap" domestic codeshare partner AA allegedly has in mind for assuming F100 routes.

Well, how about what's already in place with codeshares.

I tried booking a flight DFW-YVR a month in advance. Cheapest non-stop on AA was over $1000 r-t (per AA.com). However according to Orbitz.com, I could book an Alaska Airlines flight DFW-YVR with a change of planes in SEA for $512 r-t. Interesting part was DFW-SEA going and SEA-DFW returning was codeshare on AA.
Oh, and I checked the loads on non-stop flights. All AA non-stops for specified dates were wide open.

So, as an academic exercise, on AA.com I tried booking a flight from DFW-SEA for specified dates. Cheapest fare "available" was almost twice what Alaska was going to charge to go all the way to YVR and on the same flights DFW-SEA and SEA-DFW.

If AA is going to gouge direct booking customers while giving away seats to codeshare partners, the LCCs don't have to worry about taking business away from AMR. Customers will leave of their own accord.

 

[orwell]

Perhaps you'd be good enough to detail what "cheap" domestic codeshare partner AA allegedly has in mind for assuming F100 routes.

Well, how about what's already in place with codeshares.

I tried booking a flight DFW-YVR a month in advance. Cheapest non-stop on AA was over $1000 r-t (per AA.com). However according to Orbitz.com, I could book an Alaska Airlines flight DFW-YVR with a change of planes in SEA for $512 r-t. Interesting part was DFW-SEA going and SEA-DFW returning was codeshare on AA.
Oh, and I checked the loads on non-stop flights. All AA non-stops for specified dates were wide open.

So, as an academic exercise, on AA.com I tried booking a flight from DFW-SEA for specified dates. Cheapest fare "available" was almost twice what Alaska was going to charge to go all the way to YVR and on the same flights DFW-SEA and SEA-DFW.

If AA is going to gouge direct booking customers while giving away seats to codeshare partners, the LCCs don't have to worry about taking business away from AMR. Customers will leave of their own accord.

I was referring to putting AA codes on OA metal, as I assume the author I quoted was. He was implying that the exit of F100s would leave AA the opportunity to farm out RPMs to other airlines, via codeshare. This is the type of codesharing the usually makes the union people all fired up.

In your example, an OA (in this case Alaska) is putting their code on AA metal. AA is making some revenue off of this - perhaps not as much as they would have if you had purchased the uncompetitive fare you quoted, but it's a different animal than what I was referring to. And of course you probably never would have purchased at that rate anyway.

That being said, your point is not lost - I agree that codesharing is a nuisance and largely a marketing gimmick. Crandall tried to argue against it years ago when it became a fad - a way for mediocre airlines to boast larger-than-reality networks. Unfortunately, it's here to stay.

 

[MAH4546]

Word is a major Eagle expansion is going to be going on in Miami. On 6 January, they start twice-daily MIA-CLT (mainline will still fly one daily flight) and daily MIA-RIC. I've heard the following destinations are being tossed around: GSO, ORF, GSP, BHM, MEM, JAX (replacing Executive Airlines service), GNV (would be operated by Executive Airlines), XNA, and SDF.

 

[Winglet]

How about reverse code-share with TSA using 90 seat jungle jets? AA lawyers seems to have gotten away with slithering around the scope agreement with the pilots. If not TSA, then someone else.

 

[orwell]

How about reverse code-share with TSA using 90 seat jungle jets? AA lawyers seems to have gotten away with slithering around the scope agreement with the pilots. If not TSA, then someone else.

The Transportation Security Administration has their own airline now? Excellent!

Talk about job efficieny - the same guys screening your bags can sprint to the gate to board you - perhaps even fly the planes!

Hmm...could be some scope problems coming out of that one, though.

 

[MiAAmi]

Read closely. It applies to AA and Eagle . . . . . meaning they'll be almost all Eagle . . . and then some. Ask yourself, once the F-100s are gone, where is the 100 seat flying going . . . . that's right Eagle and outsourcing to cheap code-sharers. Management slight-of-hand propoganda. Believe the news releases when you see it happen, not before.

Another negative Nancy!

 

[jimntx]

That being said, your point is not lost - I agree that codesharing is a nuisance and largely a marketing gimmick. Crandall tried to argue against it years ago when it became a fad - a way for mediocre airlines to boast larger-than-reality networks. Unfortunately, it's here to stay.

I don't think that codesharing is necessarily a "nuisance" for the airlines or the passengers--except, I resent buying a "More Room in Coach" ticket and find out that I am flying on a less room airline. If I'm told that is going to happen and buy anyway, it's ok, but tell me.

My point is how can AA justify $1000 seat on a half-full flight while giving seats away to a codeshare partner to a HEAVILY traveled destination like SEA which is less than 200 miles away? Before I was furloughed, I don't ever remember working a DFW-SEA flight that went out less than jam-packed full.

The airlines has been promoting the idea of customer's going to the Internet to book their own flights, yet when they do, they can get cheaper fares from competing/complimentary websites. Even Orbitz (which is partially owned by AMR) produces lower prices than AA.com for the same flights!

This makes no sense to me. I spent over 20 years in the Information Technology sector--mostly in the oil bidness. I don't see the competitive AAdvantage of creating a website that is slower than Christmas AND gives higher prices. But that's just me, I guess.

 

[Winglet]

TSA is Trans States Airlines, the reverse code-share with AE that Carty and Arpey set up to circumvent scope restrictions.