AA adds second daily LAX-LHR

[WorldTraveler]

so, does gravity not work in NYC because it is, well, NYC?

do toilets flush in a different direction than the rest of N. America because it is NYC?

You want to believe that the basic principles of the airline industry don't apply because it is NYC but they applied when CO operated a hub there and they are becoming increasingly apparent at LGA and JFK as DL's dominance in the market increases relative to AA.

Airlines that have hubs in a city command higher fares in the market as a whole than for carriers that don't have hubs. those are principles that have been shown to be true in the airline industry for decades.
NYC
CO has had higher average fares in comparable markets from EWR compared to LGA/JFK markets and now DL is doing the same thing in LGA/JFK in market after market

the principles actually do apply and that is why it is less and less likely that AA can remain NYC as a niche carrier other than to its own hubs

 

[commavia]

What you fail to grasp is that, this is *not* "any other city". This is New York City. The largest city in the US. One of the premier cities on the planet. Arguably the capital of the world. Stop trying to equate what happens in other cities to what happens in NYC. There is no parity.

 
Yeah - not to mention that the premise is comically flawed to begin with (surprise, surprise).
 
First, AA does not intend to be a "niche" player in New York - that's just the wishful thinking of we-all-know-who.  Delta at DAL?  That's "niche."  In New York, in reality, AA is now, has long been, and clearly intends to continue being a very large and strong player, with a very compelling offering focused on offering very competitive service in the largest and most important (to business travelers) markets - like LHR, transcon, Chicago, the shuttle, etc.
 
Secondly, the other fact that "some" continue to try and distract from is that New York has no dominant market leader - and it certainly isn't Delta, which still isn't even the largest airline in the market.  So we can keep pretending that one carrier being "70% of the size of a competitor" somehow equates to "niche," but let's not loose sight of the critical context that this competitor that AA is "70% of the size of" is still only 21% of the market.
 
But we wouldn't want to let objectivity and reality get in the way of the B.S. ...

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

....... but let's not loose sight of the critical context that this competitor that AA is "70% of the size of" is still only 21% of the market.
 
But we wouldn't want to let objectivity and reality get in the way of the B.S. ...

 
Touché
 

 

[WorldTraveler]

except that being unable to see that AA is losing share and revenue to DL in NYC requires you to close your eyes and ignore all evidence.

in market after market, DL is gaining at the expense of AA.

here's a few examples:

BNA, CDG, DFW, LAS, LAX, LHR, MCO, MIA, ORD, RDU, SDQ, SFO, SJU....

in every one of those markets, DL's growth in local NYC revenue to those destinations far exceeds AA's growth (or AA is losing revenue to DL).

over the past two years, DL's local LGA/JFK revenue has grown by 23% while native AA's has fallen by 12%.

VX is the only airline besides AA/US that has lost local market revenue at LGA and JFK on a combined basis.

on a standalone basis, AA is half the size of DL and UA in NYC on a local market basis.

you can throw around seat share that include connections all day long but AA is losing and losing rapidly in the local market. even with markets such as BHX and EDI, AA simply has the smallest domestic feed of the 4 NYC hub carriers which should make it apparent that the same problem of lack of feed that has plagued AA will continue to do so.

US contributed enough to return AA/US to about 2/3 the size of DL and UA but most of US' NYC revenue and share is to/from its own hubs which it any carrier should be able to dominate even from NYC.

and since this thread is about LAX and LHR primarily, we can also see that DL's rate of revenue growth at LAX is twice that of AA/US and a similar story at LHR, even when factoring in the BA JV.

instead of trashing someone because they tell you what you don't want to hear, how about you accept that AA's strategy of building its network around the largest industry markets which it didn't defend well in BK has now produced the result that AA is well beyond the 8 ball in its core network.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

NYC is the world's premier air travel market, after London. Why some people keep insisting there is only room for one or two large players there, I have no clue. Keep deluding yourself, WT.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

AA simply has the smallest domestic feed of the 4 NYC hub carriers which should make it apparent that the same problem of lack of feed that has plagued AA will continue to do so.

You fail to grasp that domestic feed isn't necessary to make money in the nation's largest O&D market. Maybe it was necessary for Delta to finally get profitable as they created a presence in NY, but not for established New York carriers

 

[commavia]

You fail to grasp that domestic feed isn't necessary to make money in the nation's largest O&D market. Maybe it was necessary for Delta to finally get profitable as they created a presence in NY, but not for established New York carriers

 
Not to mention that the above stupidity just further reinforces the inability of some to view anything outside of the lens of Delta.
 
When you aren't the market leader, you have to use your resources more smartly, and so thus for AA, the strategy isn't about maximizing "domestic feed," and nor should it be.  In fact, JFK and LGA are suboptimal for "domestic feed" in the context of "feeding" anything due to lacking facilities, airfield and airspace congestion, and/or competition.  AA now has a massive portfolio of hundreds of slots at JFK and LGA to optimize not for domestic feed, per se, but rather for both domestic and international O&D, and complimenting that a far superior hub to either JFK or LGA down at PHL that can be used to handle both domestic and international connections.
 
Between JFK and LGA, AA now offers an extremely comprehensive nonstop offering to most of NYC's largest and most important business O&D markets, and I personally expect that to only further strengthen as AA reorients its slot portfolio even more towards O&D and shifts suboptimal connections away from JFK and down to PHL.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

^^ THIS! well said, commavia

NY has always been suboptimal for domestic feed... I thought everyone knew that, but I guess not.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Not to mention that the above stupidity just further reinforces the inability of some to view anything outside of the lens of Delta.

When you aren't the market leader, you have to use your resources more smartly, and so thus for AA, the strategy isn't about maximizing "domestic feed," and nor should it be. In fact, JFK and LGA are suboptimal for "domestic feed" in the context of "feeding" anything due to lacking facilities, airfield and airspace congestion, and/or competition. AA now has a massive portfolio of hundreds of slots at JFK and LGA to optimize not for domestic feed, per se, but rather for both domestic and international O&D, and complimenting that a far superior hub to either JFK or LGA down at PHL that can be used to handle both domestic and international connections.

Between JFK and LGA, AA now offers an extremely comprehensive nonstop offering to most of NYC's largest and most important business O&D markets, and I personally expect that to only further strengthen as AA reorients its slot portfolio even more towards O&D and shifts suboptimal connections away from JFK and down to PHL.

except that this isn't about DL alone.

your attempts to reframe the conversation into just about DL show that you don't understand or don't want to admit that DL developed and is succeeding at a strategy that AA either couldn't do or was too late to the party to try.

anyone who understands the NYC market knows full well that LGA and JFK were divided between umpteen carriers for years with no clear leader.
OTOH, CO managed to build a hub at EWR that gave it the dominant position in the NYC area and average fare advantages in most markets in which it competed from EWR compared to other carriers at LGA and JFK.

DL came out of BK, 1t years after buying the Pan Am assets, with the belief that DL could build a dual hub strategy at LGA and JFK that would challenge CO's dominance of the NYC market and also allow DL to leapfrog AA, US, and B6 at LGA and JFK.

AA was showing weakness and pulling down routes at JFK because of B6's cost advantage long before DL started growing JFK post-BK.

DL pulled off the slot deal at LGA, added enough flights at JFK in order to become the largest carrier there, and has continued to go after one market after another that other carriers, largely those that AA and US have abandoned.

The difference between DL and UA's operations is that DL relies on far less domestic feed than UA requires at EWR because LGA and JFK are the preferred airports for NYC local travelers.

Size matters in hubs.. and the fact that NYC is NYC doesn't change that the largest carriers in a market get a fare and share advantage. that has been proven over and over in the airline industry and no one has yet to provide any proof that NYC is any different.

just hoping that NYC won't end up being like other cities isn't enough for AA to hold onto its presence in NYC.

When AA has fallen as far as it has in key markets such as a number of transcon, Caribbean, Asian, and European cities, the evidence is simply overwhelming that the same rules that apply to the rest of the airline industry still apply in NYC.


AA's size in NYC has been buoyed solely by US which managed to dominate the market to its own hubs - not terribly unexpected for any airline.

quit childishly calling someone else names because they tell you something you don't want to hear despite the fact that it is the truth.

NYC is the world's premier air travel market, after London. Why some people keep insisting there is only room for one or two large players there, I have no clue. Keep deluding yourself, WT.

I didn't say there is room for just two airlines.

The evidence overwhelming says that the #3 and below player in a market cannot compete with larger rivals.

AA is the #3 or smaller carrier in a number of markets and they simply do not get fares on par with what larger carriers get.

how can you possibly refuse to believe these realities when you look at market like JFK-SFO where AA is now 5 out of 5 in size and has an average fare disadvantage to both DL and UA despite AA's supposedly higher quality product?

 

[commavia]

Fascinating.  The "#3 and below player in a market cannot compete with larger rivals."  I guess Delta is screwed in Southern California then!
 
Of course that distinction is characteristically meaningless and contrived.  Back in reality - i.e., back where Delta isn't poised to "win in N. Texas" - there is absolutely no evidence that the #3 competitor in a market cannot be highly competitive and successful when #1 and #2 both have less than 25% market share each.  Reading these diatribes, the uninformed would think that #1 United and #2 Delta control 70% of the market between them (i.e., the way #1 United and #2 AA are at ORD) and AA is at 5% share.  In reality, the difference between #1 United and #3 AA in NYC is less than 10 percentage points.
 
Bottom line: the New York market is so vastly large, so incredibly competitive, and so non-dominated by any single competitor (or competitors) that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that AA cannot be a very strong competitor - absolutely no reason, that is, other than the fact that it would destroy the carefully-constructed web of BS spun by certain Delta fanboys.
 
AA now has a better hub in the northeast corridor than Delta and as a result has now been freed to optimize its slot portfolio to cater to the huge NYC local market, and even those who don't want to admit it know it.  Yet another reminder of how powerful the fear has become.

 

[WorldTraveler]

can you not focus on the points of the discussion instead of resorting to character assassination?

you are clearly an intelligent person but the mere fact that you cannot discuss real business issues without trying to insert emotion and slander says a whole lot about you.

the difference between AA, DL, and UA at LAX is that the difference between the 3 players - and WN - is far less than 5 points in share size.

in fact, native AA and DL at LAX had virtually identical amounts of share and local revenue in the most recent quarter. UA was ahead by a couple points. US adds 5 points of share to AA's count that provides an advantage to AA but the total share difference between AA, DL, and UA at LAX is less than 5 points. and it also doesn't change that DL is still growing revenues at LAX faster than AA or UA.

but back to NYC, all the US merger did was increase the number of markets that AA served because most of US' presence from NYC was in markets which they served to their hubs and where they were already the dominant airline. US did nothing for AA in terms of the competitive markets to the Caribbean, Europe, Asia or the transcons where AA has cut back and lost share over the past few years.

Nothing.

AA's share in competitive, non-hub markets continues to shrink and there is no sign that is changing. AA isn't adding more capacity to those markets.

when DL and UA each serve every market that AA does from NYC, get average fare equality if not premiums in the local market, and also put more passengers on their flights to many destinations because of their larger hubs, then the notion that AA will eventually serve more than its hubs from NYC is a stretch - and even in those it is hard to deny that DL has 20% or more of the market to every one of AA/US' hubs from the same airports that AA serves while UA does the same thing from EWR.

I'm sorry if those are realities you don't to admit but they not only are real but they highlight the consequences of AA's decision to not file for Bk earlier to get costs down to competitive levels while other carriers were growing into AA's key markets from NYC.

You can talk about PHL being the premier NE hub but it simply doesn't square up with the reality that AA is not wining in the local markets from NYC outside of its own hubs while even there other carriers have significant and growing shares in those markets as well.

put the emotions aside and accept that AA probably has lost NYC other than to its hubs; all of the gnashing of teeth on your part and all of the efforts on theirs aren't likely to change the reality that they waited too long to decide to fight back and at this point they are doing it from a position that is far behind the leaders in the market and with a lack of resources to grow to parity with them.

finally, based on the latest DOT data and even before the most recent quarter, DL is the largest carrier in the NYC local market based on passengers while UA has an advantage in revenue.

 

[700UW]

Really? And you accused Eric of sleeping with Holly and you call names and attack all the time.

 

[FWAAA]

What you fail to grasp is that, this is *not* "any other city". This is New York City. The largest city in the US. One of the premier cities on the planet. Arguably the capital of the world. Stop trying to equate what happens in other cities to what happens in NYC. There is no parity.

I remember reading somewhere that NYC residents were much more likely to hold a US Passport than in any other major US city - this was, of course, prior to GW's insistence that passports be required for all international travel, including Canada and the Caribbean. But even today, NYC residents are far more likely to travel to Europe. Like you said, NYC has no equal.

 

[WorldTraveler]

on business issues, no.

when E or someone else wants to attack my character, then I do what most anyone else will do which is fight back.

and none of this changes that AA has not and probably cannot turn around their slide in NYC.

They are fighting back in LAX but it takes years worth of expectations that AA will get gates at LAX while others get no more to believe that the gap between AA will grow large enough to give them the same revenue advantage that DL and UA now enjoy in NYC.

and it also doesn't change that AA faces more competitive growth in its key markets - esp. DFW/DAL and MIA alongside Latin America - than any other US carrier faces except perhaps AS.

I remember reading somewhere that NYC residents were much more likely to hold a US Passport than in any other major US city - this was, of course, prior to GW's insistence that passports be required for all international travel, including Canada and the Caribbean. But even today, NYC residents are far more likely to travel to Europe. Like you said, NYC has no equal.

so why has the list of cities that AA has served from NYC shrunk as much as it has and why has AA's average revenues even in markets they have recently started trailed the rest of the industry?

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

When AA has fallen as far as it has in key markets such as a number of transcon, Caribbean, Asian, and European cities, the evidence is simply overwhelming that the same rules that apply to the rest of the airline industry still apply in NYC.
 

 
This statement just doesn't pass the smell test.
 
For one thing, AA is still the leader in JFK transcons
 
Granted, AA kind of walked away from the JFK - Carribean I think around the time the A300s were retired and B6 appears to have stepped in.  But isn't it interesting that in the JFK - Carribean mighty DL is an afterthought.
 
JFK-Asia:  AA had attempted the 1 flight to Tokyo.  1 market!  ONE.  Yet some would believe that AA quit serving a dozen Asian destinations.  Ofcourse prior to the NW merger DL could barely find Tokyo on the map.
 
European cities?  What are you taking about?  Out of JFK AA serves the European cities that are major, important business centers - LHR, CDG, ZHR,MXP - , places people usually pay decent fares to fly to.  Just because they don't serve 2nd or 3rd tier European cities, it doesn't mean that AA is weak or insignificant in the JFK-Europe market.
 

put the emotions aside and accept that AA probably has lost NYC

finally, based on the latest DOT data and even before the most recent quarter, DL is the largest carrier in the NYC local market based on passengers while UA has an advantage in revenue.

Ah yes, like I said before:  if you didn't make all your posts reek of BS, you would want us to believe that AA is going to make New York just a spoke from DFW.  Dream on.
 
BTW:  good job picking up on that 1 selective statistic to validate your DL uber alles narrative.  Hopefully it will tide you over until your medication(s) are refilled.