A321T

[FWAAA]

except that AA is ADDING FC seats, the most expensive to produce and supposedly the least price sensitive, to the market via increased flights.

 
Yes,  AA added 40 First Class seats, and UA stopped selling any First Class seats.    Given the increased privacy and the lack of competition, the total number of First Class seats sold in the market has gone down.   Arpey and Horton were gambling that AA might actually sell more than AA had historically sold.   Perhaps their assumptions will prove incorrect.

Even though the business class cabin is smaller, the number of seats is marginally increasing via the increased number of flights.

 
AA is flying 10 fewer business class seats (formerly 270 per day, now 260 per day) and given that they're nicer seats and go flat, Arpey and Horton probably assumed that AA would sell a few more of them than before.   Seems like a reasonable gamble to me.
 

Like the Asia issue, I raised the issue long before people on here would acknowledge it was an issue and yet the concerns I raised have turned out to be true.

Overall, AA's financial performance is strengthening; the fact that UA is pulling back even if only a seasonal basis in some markets which AA serves will help but there are strategies such as the transcon strategy that absolutely have risks which you don't seem to want to acknowledge and which are beyond just normal capacity increases in other markets.

Yes, like everywhere else, you, and you alone, saw the issues long before everyone else and your all-knowing presence is the correct view.  Always is and always will be.  

One thing I'll admit to "failing to grasp" is why you are obsessed with making every thread about you and not the topic. You seem to crave approval much more so than any other participant on any other forum I've ever encountered.

 

[WorldTraveler]

no, I don't crave approval.

I discuss business issues. I have done it for more than 10 years on aviation chat forums.

I earned hundreds of negative votes because people refused to acknowledge that AA had a revenue generation problem in Asia; you are free to choose to dismiss the fact that I mentioned it long before other people or the media did but it was absolutely true.

Now that Parker has acknowledged it, those who have argued that AA will build out both DFW and LAX to Asia and sustain ORD to Asia might be surprised if he decides AA can't afford to do both. are you aware that AA's total losses on the Pacific reached the highest levels in years during the 4th quarter? The creditors of AMR didn't give control of AA to Parker for any reason other than he has s demonstrated ability to turn airlines around.

I don't like all he does but he has a very keen ability to figure out what is wrong with markets and fix them.

Maybe you are right with the capacity AA is adding to the transcons. If UA were selling it F capacity, I doubt if they would be pulling them. For AA to think they can add capacity which UA couldn't profitably sell at the same time that there is an increase in capacity by competitors is a bold assumption.

Further, AA is indeed walking away from a significant portion of the coach cabin market which has long been the largest part of the market both by seats and by revenue.

We are probably about a month away from the first public data on transcon performance since the 762s came out of JFK-LAX fairly quickly in the 1st quarter.

I have a feeling that Parker has seen that data and he will act as quickly to correct fix what he sees wrong just as he is to fix the losses which AA has been sustaining in Asia for years.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

You're making things up again.   Since your error has been pointed out to you repeatedly, I have to assume that the error wasn't accidental.
 
AA's nine daily 762s between LAX and JFK featured 1152 economy seats each way.   AA has run nine daily 762s for the last several years.   Before B6 and VX came along, AA sometimes ran as many as 11 daily 762s.   Now, the 13 daily A321Ts feature 936 economy seats each way.   That's a reduction of 216 seats, or 19%.    40%?    Nope.   
 
"Big chunk" of the economy passenger market?   Nope, just 19% of them.   

 
You'd figure that someone (WT) that claims to know all about the best in commercial aviation and to speak the whole truth, would "grasp" the accurate numbers ... ... ... unless they don't fit a certain narrative  

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

My question has been regarding evidence that a niche carrier can survive in someone's hubs and beyond that operate on a niche basis on the transcons in markets where other carriers are operating by serving the entire market.
 

 
I don't think AA is a niche carrier in the JFK-LAX market no matter how often you keep on repeating it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I get the numbers.

if someone doesn't serve the whole market, then that defines you as a niche company. Like UA, AA is thinking they can spit out a big chunk of the coach market but yet hold onto a full first class product when it doesn't even plan to offer a FC product on most of its much longer and less competitive int'l markets.

AA's strategy is completely opposite of what nearly every carrier does in highly competitive markets... it maintains the only FC product in the market and expands the number of seats; business class seats -which every other carrier offers and which are for most people very satisfactory for a 6 hour flight - and AA keeps the capacity in that cabin relatively flat; and then walks away from 40% of the seats on an aircraft per aircraft basis, allowing other competitors to gain even more market share.

Of course the numbers will be obvious before long, but it also is worth noting that the highest network and strategy executives at AA who dreamed up the transcon and Asia strategies have all been replaced by US execs.

anyone wanna bet on how long it will be before AA's 321T strategy is revised?

 

[eolesen]

I get the numbers.if someone doesn't serve the whole market, then that defines you as a niche company.

Right. By that definition, then DL not offering international F makes them a niche company, too.

 

[WorldTraveler]

perhaps... but since AA doesn't offer FC on its 767 routes now and is pulling it off all but its 773s, it makes AA in the same niche. And since no US airline offers int'l FC on every flight, maybe FC int'l or not isn't really the definition of niche.

BTW, I understand that AA is reconfiguring its 772s to the same business class size as DL and with about 10 seats less total on the aircraft. truth or false? also, will the AA 772s be in 10 abreast or 9 abreast?

 

[FWAAA]

Right. By that definition, then DL not offering international F makes them a niche company, too.

Exactly.   And the most bizarre part is that AA still serves "the whole market" on JFK-LAX, meaning F, J and Y.    The only change is that AA is serving a slightly smaller part of the Y market (19% fewer daily seats).   
 
Another WT definition that backfired on him.    

 

[john john]

I

Those flights are also 35% or higher with top tiers, so they need the upgrade space, powerports and MCE. RJ's won't cut it.

RJ’s frequency with First Class and wifi parkers M.O.

 

[john john]

Y  Now, the 13 daily A321Ts feature 936 economy seats each way.   That's a reduction of 216 seats, or 19%.    40%?    Nope.   
 
"Big chunk" of the economy passenger market?   Nope, just 19% of them.

And parker said this was an AA past management experiment to be look at

 

[FWAAA]

perhaps... but since AA doesn't offer FC on its 767 routes now and is pulling it off all but its 773s, it makes AA in the same niche. And since no US airline offers int'l FC on every flight, maybe FC int'l or not isn't really the definition of niche.

 
Fair enough, but if AA doesn't fly 767s on JFK-LAX, and instead offers increased frequencies with 19% fewer Y seats, then AA is a "niche" carrier?    I understand.   Match DL's economy configuration or else be a "niche" carrier.   Uh-huh.
 

BTW, I understand that AA is reconfiguring its 772s to the same business class size as DL and with about 10 seats less total on the aircraft. truth or false? also, will the AA 772s be in 10 abreast or 9 abreast?

They can ban you from posting there, but they can't prohibit you from reading airliners.nut.   
 
Last I heard, the 772s would feature 3-3-3 MCE and 3-4-3 E-, just like the 77Ws.   Dunno if that's been changed.

 

[Overspeed]

They can ban you from posting there, but they can't prohibit you from reading airliners.nut.  
 
Last I heard, the 772s would feature 3-3-3 MCE and 3-4-3 E-, just like the 77Ws.   Dunno if that's been changed.

 
With the new cabin refurb it will on the 772
 
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/American_Airlines/American_Airlines_Boeing_777-200_B.php

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

no, I don't crave approval....

....I earned hundreds of negative votes because people refused to acknowledge that AA had a revenue generation problem in Asia

Yeah, that's why.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and there have you have it.

And parker said this was an AA past management experiment to be look at

 
 

With the new cabin refurb it will on the 772
 
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/American_Airlines/American_Airlines_Boeing_777-200_B.php

AA's business class will become the same size as DL's yet DL will retain 9 abreast in coach and have more total seats on the aircraft.

yet apparently, the reduction in the size of AA's business class has taken place since the Parker regime took over.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

I get the numbers.

if someone doesn't serve the whole market, then that defines you as a niche company. Like UA, AA is thinking they can spit out a big chunk of the coach market but yet hold onto a full first class product when it doesn't even plan to offer a FC product on most of its much longer and less competitive int'l markets.

AA's strategy is completely opposite of what nearly every carrier does in highly competitive markets... it maintains the only FC product in the market and expands the number of seats; business class seats -which every other carrier offers and which are for most people very satisfactory for a 6 hour flight - and AA keeps the capacity in that cabin relatively flat; and then walks away from 40% of the seats on an aircraft per aircraft basis, allowing other competitors to gain even more market share.

 
Seeing that you're rambling on further, it is clear you don't grasp the numbers.
 
You keep on parroting the "40% of the coach seats on an per aircraft basis" yet totally ignore the fact that while AA reduced aircraft size AA increased frequency at the same time.
 
And just to be a pr!ck, if one uses your own (made up) definition, DL is a niche carrier in the JFK-LAX market as it is the only carrier using widebody aircraft and not offering 1rst class product.