AA applies for Delta's Seattle-Haneda slot
- Thread starter MAH4546
- Start date
- Status
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
just wait and see how its soooo flippin bad for AA to do that I for one hope AA gets the run from LAX
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
josh Im not so sure the 787 would be as good fit from LAX vs say PHL if the new AA does begin Asia I think the 777 wld be much better out of lax
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
Well,with the substandard crew rest facilities on AA this route is preordained to fail...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #6
Delta said it’s studying American’s filing, “which appears to have no merit.”
“We are fully compliant with the DOT’s conditions regarding the use of Haneda frequencies,” Trebor Banstetter, a Delta spokesman, said in an e-mail. Reducing flights between some cities on a seasonal basis is a widespread practice among airlines, he said.
someone forgot to tell AA that they had a HND flight from JFK but they ditched it after it had average fares 1/3 of what other carriers were getting for comparable service to Japan and after the DOT told AA that there were already 2 carriers flying LAX-HND and another would not be added.
Someone AA's JV partner thought it would make more sense for them to fly from SFO to HND than from LAX and at the same time drop SFO-HND.
SO now, JL has direct competition from UA on SFO-HND while AA/JL are completely outclassed in LAX.
Another strategic failure on AA/JL's part.
“We are fully compliant with the DOT’s conditions regarding the use of Haneda frequencies,” Trebor Banstetter, a Delta spokesman, said in an e-mail. Reducing flights between some cities on a seasonal basis is a widespread practice among airlines, he said.
someone forgot to tell AA that they had a HND flight from JFK but they ditched it after it had average fares 1/3 of what other carriers were getting for comparable service to Japan and after the DOT told AA that there were already 2 carriers flying LAX-HND and another would not be added.
Someone AA's JV partner thought it would make more sense for them to fly from SFO to HND than from LAX and at the same time drop SFO-HND.
SO now, JL has direct competition from UA on SFO-HND while AA/JL are completely outclassed in LAX.
Another strategic failure on AA/JL's part.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #7
JAL is looking to move SFO back to NRT; HND will transfer to DFW, replacing AA's second NRT from there.
AA wants to move LAX service to Haneda and look to start PHL/MIA with slots from DFW/LAX.
Delta is fully compliant by flying the bare minimum of SEAHND service - re-starting the route every 90 days - but that doesn't change the fact DOT can strip it of the frequencies.
But it's a bigger case than just AA asking, because HA is going to ask, too.
AA wants to move LAX service to Haneda and look to start PHL/MIA with slots from DFW/LAX.
Delta is fully compliant by flying the bare minimum of SEAHND service - re-starting the route every 90 days - but that doesn't change the fact DOT can strip it of the frequencies.
But it's a bigger case than just AA asking, because HA is going to ask, too.
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
HA? What are their crew rest facilities like?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #9
so AA and JL are reshuffling their route system AGAIN with the only real growth coming from gaining access to DL's SEA-HND frequency for which there is no legal basis for them to get?
sounds about right. JL stupidly put its HND slot into another carrier's hub.
we've been hearing about MIA-NRT from you since we first ran into each other a decade ago...
can you tell us how well AA's LAX-GRU route is doing in terms of revenue?
I'll give you 5 seconds before I tell you that AA's average fares on that route are well below what they get on other GRU routes... but they clearly have money to burn in their efforts to hold onto market share in S. America.
.. .which is exactly what their strategy in Asia has been.
MAH4546 said:
Agree that most of the above sounds generally plausible. The joint AA/JAL hub at NRT - especially now that JAL has retimed multiple routes and added several more NRT-Asia flights - is actually becoming rather impressive, certainly far more so than it used to be even just a few years ago, let alone in the 1990s when AA and JAL started codesharing. The AA/JAL JV can now offer very convenient, 2-way connectivity between major U.S. hubs and over a dozen points (all the major markets) in East Asia.
It makes sense for SFO to move back to NRT - maximize the connectivity to/from Asia and improve the overall joint AA/JAL/oneworld offering in the SFO market. I still think a JAL 787 SEA-NRT also makes sense - I believe SEA is now the largest U.S.-NRT/Asia market unserved by the AA/JAL JV. Beyond that, linking LAX to HND is also clearly logical given the massive local market and the opportunity to connect to domestic HND - although for those reasons I still think a JAL 787 or 777 would be better suited than an AA flight. I'm highly skeptical of DFW-HND given the awful slot times, but it does perhaps make sense, if for nothing else than aircraft schedule, to transfer the second DFW-TYO flight - at NRT or HND - to JAL, perhaps sub-daily with a 787, and have AA simply upgauge the remaining 60/61 to a 77W. I continue to believe, as I have for several years, that both PHL-NRT and MIA-NRT make completely sense and both are merely a matter of when, not if, and the aircraft type.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #11
impressive means nothing as long as AA continues to underperform its peers on every route it flies across the Pacific except for DFW-NRT. After all these years, the only route that AA does well at is the same route it had when it operated the 747SP.
DL carries 20% more revenue on its LAX-HND route with a 767 than AA does on LAX-NRT with a 777.
DL carries 20% more revenue on its LAX-HND route with a 767 than AA does on LAX-NRT with a 777.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #12
Delta can fly LAX-GRU for strategic purposes and fail.
But when AA flies it for strategic purposes and does a far better job than Delta, it's a "disaster."
Totally makes sense!
Somebody's jealous Delta can't pull it off.
I've been talking about AA flying MIA-NRT for about as long as WT has been talking about Delta starting MIA-GRU or LAX-Secondary Asia. The difference is AA will start MIA-NRT in due course, the latter ones won't happen (although I would love for DL to challenge AA on MIA-GRU and think DL will do well in the market).
But when AA flies it for strategic purposes and does a far better job than Delta, it's a "disaster."
Totally makes sense!
Somebody's jealous Delta can't pull it off.
I've been talking about AA flying MIA-NRT for about as long as WT has been talking about Delta starting MIA-GRU or LAX-Secondary Asia. The difference is AA will start MIA-NRT in due course, the latter ones won't happen (although I would love for DL to challenge AA on MIA-GRU and think DL will do well in the market).
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #14
AA can follow the rules just like DL.
I know it is a lot to ask
I know it is a lot to ask
- Status
