AA applies for more Brazil service

[Bear96]

Delta's previous Atlanta-Manaus failed . . .

Oh my. Such harsh language.

Can't you think of a kinder way to phrase that? Like, "DL's visionary management wisely decided to use its assets and resources on an even more profitable route, yet again showing its vast superiority over mere mortal airlines like AA and UA (who really shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as DL)"?

Otherwise, you might hurt someone's feelings here and spark a 5,000 word post that no one will read.

 

[JFK Fleet Service]

The question I have is why have you taken it upon yourself to be the messenger.You are the president of the Delta fan club on this and other airline forums, why would you come to the AMR board and proclaim yourself the bringer of facts related to AA? Can you really be surprised to be pelted with rocks and garbage for that?

You can't expect to come in here, kick our airline and then get butthurt about people taking exception to your incessant long winded diatribes that all boil down to the same point, all airlines are insignificant worms trying to bask in the glorious light that is Delta Airlines.

 

[commavia]

Once again, the AArogance regarding the importance of MiAAmi is not only overblown, it is simply not accurate.
-According to AA’s own data filed with the DOT, MIA makes up about 25% of revenue but % of passengers on AA’s Latin (non-Caribbean network).
- AA’s revenue in non-MIA Latin markets is just 40% of all revenue carried by US carriers in those same markets and other carriers have a meaningful share (at least the majority) of revenue in every other non-MIA Latin O&D.
- 25% of revenue on AA’s MIA-SSA flight (at least the folks who get off the SSA-REC roundrobin flight) come from MIA.
- only 10% of the revenue on AA’s CNF and REC flights come from MIA
- DL’s average fares on ATL-MAO when it substantially operated were higher than AA’s on any of its new non-GIG/GRU routes. The markets that helped push up the average fares came from int’l to int’l connections at ATL in markets which AA will never capture because AA doesn’t even serve them with its own metal or even with single connections within oneworld.
You do realize that AA’s proposed stAArt of MIA-MAO comes 6 months after DL’s restart of ATL-MAO?
- ATL is the 2nd largest gateway to Latin America and effectively competes in every O&D region to/from Latin America except to/from S. Florida.
What we see, class, in this little exercise is that MiAAmi amounts to less than 10% of all the US-Latin America revenue and other carriers compete quite effectively with AA for the 90% that is not originating in MIA.
Further, AA continues to throw capacity at Latin America in its dAArtboAArd strategy of maintaining share which is why despite having the size advantage that should give them market premiums, AA’s Latin revenue growth trAAils the industry as it attempts to defend one of its few remaining strAAtegic assets against further incursions by other carriers (as has happened in the US and to Europe and Asia).
Meanwhile it is only a matter of time until some other US carrier decides to challenge AA in MIA-Latin America which will knock off yet one more of AA’s historic strategic advantages.
Any questions, class?
.
I thought so. Class dismissed.

.
.
The truth is not always eAAsy to hear but if you want to know what the problems are and find meaningful solutions, you've got to hear the truth, regardless of how pAAinful it may be.
Shooting the messenger has never changed the eventual outcome of anything and the same will be true with AA.

Like I said - some things never change.

I have had to put up with the incessant arrogance and condescension before - so it doesn't scare nor intimidate me.

The fact remains that AA continues to add secondary cities throughout Brazil, South America, and Latin America, from the Miami hub, when Delta has failed and struggled repeatedly in similar cities from Atlanta - a larger hub overall, but with a fraction of the economic, cultural and political ties to the region as Miami has. All the manipulated, misused or fabricated "data" and "facts" don't change that reality - no matter how much some try to twist them.

The question I have is why have you taken it upon yourself to be the messenger.You are the president of the Delta fan club on this and other airline forums, why would you come to the AMR board and proclaim yourself the bringer of facts related to AA? Can you really be surprised to be pelted with rocks and garbage for that?

You can't expect to come in here, kick our airline and then get butthurt about people taking exception to your incessant long winded diatribes that all boil down to the same point, all airlines are insignificant worms trying to bask in the glorious light that is Delta Airlines.

This is just the M.O. - get used to it. Everyone else had to tolerate it for months on end on the other forum.

 

[WorldTraveler]

no, DL and UA had almost identical RASM performance not only in Latin America but also in their other global regions, including the Pacific where both obtained significant mass through mergers and acquisitions... but in that region, where AA fared the worst relative to its peers, AA has been trying to develop ORD-PEK which is an uphill battle against UA who has managed to limit AA's ability to generate industry comparable revenue on every Pacific route out of ORD.
...
Once again, even in Latin America AA is paying for not "bulking up" via mergers and acquisitions and is now having to add capacity to build its network in other parts of the world and maintain or add capacity in Latin America to limit competitors even if that new capacity is not generating industry average or better revenue.
..
In other words, it is AA who is irrationally adding capacity and not only driving down AA's financial performance but also the industry as well.... sounds so much like Eastern and TWA.....
meanwhile AA employees are being told they are the problem and need to "fork over" money to subsidize AA's strategic flaws.
...
The truth requires both sides be told... AA has a revenue production problem that is compounded as competitors with lower cost structures and larger networks are able to more carefully manage capacity and add capacity only where it can meet not only strategic but also financial goals.
AA has a labor PRODUCTIVITY issue as well... which has been and will be discussed elsewhere.

 

[WorldTraveler]

for the simple reason because it is the truth.
You want to make it out to be anti-AA, pro-DL campaign but the reality is that DL DID turn their ship around, CORRECTLY consummated a merger, and is now reaping the benefits of a global network... something AA said it didn't need to do. Now that the UA/CO merger is moving forward and AA's position in NYC and LAX is even further challenged, the kitchen is getting hotter. Throw in the effect of WN and FL up and down the east coast and the lifting of the Wright Amendment in a few years at DAL and things get really toasty for AA.....
The answer is not to shoot the messenger but to figure out how to turn AA's ship AAround....

...

you could avoid the comparisons between AA and its peers if 1 AA could avoid releasing its financial results to the public and 2. if people on the internet only talked about stuff like the color of seat covers and menus on airplanes, stuff I could care less about.
I would also have to post a lot less if people did not make clearly inaccurate statements such as that markets in Latin America can only work if a carrier has access to the MIA local market when AA's own data shows that not to be the case.
...
until then, I'll continue doing what I do....and there will continue to be those who value the insights I bring in spite of the defensiveness that some here have....

 

[MAH4546]

The amount of lies and false information being posted here is hysterical. For one thing, the largest CNF-U.S. market is, surprise surprise, MIACNF. Then it's NYCCNF. BOSCNF is third at 18 PDEW. I'm not going to bother fact checking the other misinformation, but certainly it's filled with errors.

Some people do a great job at falsifying statistics and claiming to know certain things. Have fun with it.

 

[Kev3188]

Isn't all of this data publicly available via SEC filings? If so, what part of WT's points are debatable?

In that same vein, wasn't DL's last foray to MAO less than successful due to poor timing (correct me if wrong)? I know there's an idea that the end run to these frequencies is to warehouse them, but in the interim, what will DL be doing differently to make it at least profitable?

Sidebar to Mikey & JFK Fleet Service-- We've "known" each other on these boards a long time, and I hope you know that I agree with damn near everything you two post. That said, I think we (as in labor) need to take posts like WT's (and E's, FWAAA's, etc.) two ways: 1. We (again, general sense) need to be able to understand all sides of the business in order to defend our stake in it, and 2. We need to use forums like this as a platform to better craft our responses to capital. I think labor is all too quick to default to what we're comfortable with, and frankly, that's part of why we've been getting destroyed in negotiations the last several rounds. After all, if we can't do it here, how will we ever be able to do it at the table?

Also, just for the record, I want AA to succeed too. In what seems to have become a trend here, I also happen to have family that work there.

 

[eolesen]

Good to see you back, Mark.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Isn't all of this data publicly available via SEC filings? If so, what part of WT's points are debatable?

In that same vein, wasn't DL's last foray to MAO less than successful due to poor timing (correct me if wrong)? I know there's an idea that the end run to these frequencies is to warehouse them, but in the interim, what will DL be doing differently to make it at least profitable?

Sidebar to Mikey & JFK Fleet Service-- We've "known" each other on these boards a long time, and I hope you know that I agree with damn near everything you two post. That said, I think we (as in labor) need to take posts like WT's (and E's, FWAAA's, etc.) two ways: 1. We (again, general sense) need to be able to understand all sides of the business in order to defend our stake in it, and 2. We need to use forums like this as a platform to better craft our responses to capital. I think labor is all too quick to default to what we're comfortable with, and frankly, that's part of why we've been getting destroyed in negotiations the last several rounds. After all, if we can't do it here, how will we ever be able to do it at the table?

Also, just for the record, I want AA to succeed too. In what seems to have become a trend here, I also happen to have family that work there.

well said, Kev. As usual you demonstrate your wisdom and your ability to walk pragmatically yet comfortably with both labor and mgmt without losing your own convictions.
.
As for DL's previous attempt at MAO, I have shown before that it was a high yield, low load factor market with a high component of int'l to int'l connections at ATL that AA cannot duplicate at MIA.
DL is returning to the market with the same timings (according to what I have seen posted) as they used the last time.. a late afternoon dept. from ATL with a midnight turn at MAO and a return to ATL first thing in the a.m. DL retimed the flight to a double overnight pattern like the rest of deep south America flights but apparently decided it wasn't worth the increased aircraft resources it requires - one would end up sitting for the day at MAO vs allowing a 73G to be available for about 8 hours of flying in the peak daytime hours - more than enough for a roundtrip to the northeast or midwest. Given DL is pulling D95s, the 73G is a much less costly machine to operate for a similar sized aircraft - and DL's 73Gs have full IFE at every seat, something that WN's 73Gs won't have when they show up in ATL (to keep this route decision connected w/ the rest of what is going on in ATL).
Other than the G3 (gol) connections available both to DL and AA, I'm not sure why things will be different this time around... but given that there are more than enough frequencies remaining unused, it is possible that AA and DL will fight it out - TAM is also in the MIA-MAO market - and all will be bruised to the point they all back away. Not desired but it's happened before.
Given that the HND flights are being pulled back by both AA and DL, perhaps DL thought their "fighting fund" has a few more pennies to be used for "market development."
.
And to reiterate, I have a brother who works for AA... I am fighting like crazy to get people here to recognize that AA has real problems that need to be addressed by real people with real solutions... blaming other people or denying reality won't get it done.

-------------------------
Well, looks like all the gAAng has come out to weigh in on this topic… one which shouldn’t have gone beyond the first page since there are more than enough frequencies for AA and DL to do what they want to do in this route case and then have enough left over for one of them to still add a daily GIG flight and then some....
However, the following statement was made and required correction….

Delta's previous Atlanta-Manaus failed for the same reason all of their Atlanta-Brazil service has failed outside of Sao Paulo/Rio de Janeiro. The local market is tiny, and despite the size of the hub and the breadth of the connections, Delta couldn't overcome the fact that the vast majority of the market is going to Miami, Orlando, and New York - all three of which can be far better served with nonstops from Miami.

I clearly already established that only 25% of AA’s revenue from its Latin American network comes from MIA and I will refine that answer to say that only 22% of AA’s US-BRAZIL passengers and 20% of AA’s US-BRAZIL revenue comes from MIA.
For years, we have seen a few blindly loyal AA fans attempting to argue that nothing with regard to Brazil specifically and Latin America in general can work outside of MIA yet the facts overwhelming argue against that being true, including the fact that three other airlines (now two w/ CO/UA’s merger) have revenue greater than AA to Latin America – and that doesn’t even include US, NK, B6, AS and others that don’t even fly to S. America.
In fact, the US-Brazil market is LESS CONCENTRATED in S. Florida than most other Latin America markets. That is part of why there are more gateways to Brazil than for any other country in South America and they are all growing.
And then that erroneous statement was followed by

None of the above changes the reality that despite your spin and characteristic Delta P.R., recent history has shown that, generally speaking, Miami is necessary for just about all the secondary cities in South America - very few of which currently support nonstop flights to the U.S. outside of Miami. Delta has tried four non-Sao Paulo/Rio de Janeiro cities from Atlanta in the last few years. Three have failed, and one the jury is still out. I suspect this attempt at Manaus will be no different - with or without GOL.

The fundamental facts - whether you want to acknowledge and accept them or not - are still the same: Atlanta overflies the majority of the market for the U.S. (which is going to Miami and Orlando), and the vast majority of the remainder are markets that can just as easily be served via Miami as Atlanta. And, needless to say, that's before you get to the dramatically stronger and more established local presence AA has in every South American market - including every one in Brazil - compared with Delta, or any other U.S. airline.

Again, completely wrong. IN fact, AA carries only HALF of the traffic from NYC and MCO to Brazil. In fact, there are a number of other gateways that work quite effectively. The reality is that ATL is the #2 US airline gateway for US-Brazil traffic carrying half of the passengers that AA carries through MIA.
Again, the only advantage that AA has is MIA-Latin America traffic and in total that accounts for less than 10% of all US-Latin America traffic carried by US airlines.
There is more than enough room for other carriers to succed and to argue that MIA is necessary for either large or small - secondary or primary markets - is contradicted by DOT data.
.
We can debate these facts all day long but what is clear is that a few AA supporters have tried for years to argue that AA owns Latin America, that no one else can make it in Latin America, and that without MIA, no one will succeed to Latin America.
The obvious answer is that these folks are just plain wrong and continuing to act as if AA has some sacred lease on part of the world that no one else can touch is just flat out wrong – and will be challenged as such EVERY TIME.
The vast majority of people who read this forum have no idea where traffic originates or flows and can’t validate that the data that those of us who post is correct… and thus these kinds of “turf” arguments aren’t terribly productive for a public forum.
What is highly significant and can be verified is that despite being the largest airline in Latin America, AA could not generate RASM growth on par with its peers DL and UA. Note that other US airlines serving Latin America do not publish quarterly RASM numbers by region and so cannot be included in this analysis – therefore it is of necessity an AA, DL, UA/CO comparison, also the only US airlines that fly to deep S. America.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/AMR-Corporation-Reports-1Q-prnews-2771578228.html?x=0&.v=1
AMR

RASM(1)
(cents) Y-O-Y
Change ASMs(2)
(billions) Y-O-Y
Change
DOT Latin America 12.65 6.3 8.1 9.7

Net Income (Loss) $ (436)

Since columns don’t work well on forums, the data shows that AA’s Latin America RASM growth was 6.3% on 9.7% more capacity. AA’s Latin yield was up 4.7% (reported on a separate line)
AMR’s net loss for 1Q2011 was $436 million dollars.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Delta-Air-Lines-Announces-prnews-2151105544.html?x=0&.v=1

Delta

Passenger Revenue 1Q11 ($M) YOY Revenue Yield Capacity
Latin America 481 10% 16% 19% (6%)

Net Loss $ (318)
In words, DL’s Latin network had a 16% increase in RASM on 6% less capacity with a 19% increase in yield.
DL’s net loss for 1Q2011 was $318M.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/United-Continental-Holdings-prnews-1042505455.html?x=0&.v=1
UA/CO
1Q 2011
Passenger
Revenue
(millions) Passenger
Revenue
vs. 1Q 2010 PRASM
vs. 1Q 2010 Yield
vs. 1Q 2010 ASM
vs.
1Q 2010
Latin America 654 20.9% 15.4% 19.9% 4.7%

Net Loss ($213)

UA/CO’s Latin network had RASM growth of 15.4% on 4.7% more capacity with a 19.9% increase in yield.
UA’s net loss for 1Q2011 was $213M.
What these public numbers clearly state is that AA’s RASM growth was the weakest in Latin America driven by capacity additions that clearly came only by limiting revenue growth – including from fare increases. AA’s yield growth was one-fourth of the yield growth at DL, which removed some capacity, and UA/CO which added about half the amount of capacity (on a % basis) as AA.
------
Once we get past the notion that some people have that AA by virtue of being the largest airline in Latin America will succeed where others will fail, we can have substantive discussions about the region.
Once it is accepted that AA is adding capacity to Latin America yet failing to generate industry comparable RASM growth, then we can discuss whatever market changes might occur.
Once it can be accepted that all the evidence shows that AA from MIA accounts for about 10% of all US carrier Latin America traffic and that other carriers compete quite effectively for the other 90%, then the heat that has been flying on this discussion can be extinguished.
When it is accepted that AA is making short term decisions to keep its industry high CASM from increasing further by adding capacity which is bringing down not only the financial performance of AA but also the rest of the industry, then we can talk about winning strategies in Latin America.
For now, it is simply preposterous to argue that other carriers are failing at their attempts to manage their Latin networks including adding flights as they see opportunities.
When AA shows industry leading RASM growth in the regions in which it is adding capacity, including Latin America, you can get back with me about how other carriers should not be adding capacity but it is ok for AA to do so. When AA"s losses are no more than what other carriers of similar size are reporting, then it might be time to argue whether AA is doing things better than other carriers.
.
Until then, I suggest those who want to argue focus 100% of their attention on fixing AA.
.
By all means, those who live in glAAss houses should definitely not throw stones.

 

[commavia]

Yeah, yeah, I've heard this same old song and dance before.

Atlanta is not a viable competitor or replacement for Miami. Period.

I find it cute that you feel the need to continually remind us that Atlanta is the #2 U.S. hub to South America. Good for Atlanta, and good for Delta. But as the saying goes, there's a big difference between being a close #2 and a distant #2, and in the race to be the largest U.S. hub to South America - and, indeed, all of Latin America - Atlanta is not even marginally close. By the time all of these frequencies are allocated, AA will be flying at least 56 weekly frequencies from Miami to Brazil alone. Delta only flies 69 to the entire continent of South America (AA is approaching 190). If you'd like to widen the net of that comparison to include Central America and the Caribbean, plus even Mexico, the gap wides even further. In addition, I noticed you were selective and (as always) carefully worded your point that Miami constitutes X% of AA's traffic to "Latin America" (I have no idea whether that statistic is true or you fabricated it). I'd be curious to know what portion of AA's traffic to SouthAmerica - excluding Mexico, but really more relevant to this discussion on Brazil specifically - AA generates from Miami. I'm guessing its more than 25%.

Either way, it still doesn't matter. Your endless diatribes don't change the fact that Miami is, and will always be, the definitive hub and gateway for Central America, South America, and the Caribbean - that hasn't changed in 40 years, and it won't be changing anytime soon. Fabricated, manipulated and selectively changed facts also don't change the fact that Atlanta-Manaus was a failure the first time, and so likely will be again, just as was Atlanta-Fortaleza and Atlanta-Recife. As I said from the outset - I at least give Delta credit this time for recognizing that Manaus is just a means to warehouse frequencies, and acknowledging in their application that they want these to be eligible to move to Rio if/when Delta wants - bravo to them for at least being honest this time around.

Atlanta is a great hub, and I - like many - admire and give Delta great credit for what they've been able to achieve there, but because it has very little cultural, economic, and political connections with South America, Atlanta simply is not now nor will it ever be a true gateway hub to South America outside of the prime big cities. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Atlanta won't be supporting nonstop flights to Montevideo, La Paz or Cali anytime soon.

Bottom line: this will be my last post in this thread replying to you. As I said, I learned to ignore this comedy on the last forum (before I stopped seeing these diatribe threads, interestingly enough). I won't be engaging in this again - just sitting back from the sidelines and enjoying the humor of it all.

I'm all for fully and openly recognizing, accepting and dealing with AA's problems. They've got lots of them - and the management and the unions are going to have to come together and work together, somehow, someway, to solve them and get AA moving again. But, needless to say, that being said, the endless and incessant drumbeat of how AA continues to fail at every turn, and valiant Delta can do no wrong, gets just as old here as it did the last time I had to hear it.

"Any questions? Didn't think so. Class dismissed." (And you call us arrogant.)

 

[WorldTraveler]

Glad you're out so I can get in the last and AAccurate word.
.
.

For years you and others have AArrogantly asserted that the Latin America world revolves around AA at MIA and you affirm exactly that AAttitude with what you have written above.
.
.
You not only stuck your nose in a conversation and asserted "facts" which are not only flat out wrong, but you chose to turn what should have been an open and closed discussion about a few new flights by BOTH AA and DL into a bar room brawl because the route case wasn't even contested because there are more frequencies available than the total of all the requests submitted to the DOT.
.
.
You have AArrogantly and incorrectly asserted that the MIA local market is the most important iin the US-Brazil market yet DOT data shows that there is more REVENUE in the NYC-Brazil market than in MIA and other carriers get half of that revenue as they do in every other major US region outside of S. Florida.
.
.
You have tried to argue that US carriers can't compete in US-Brazil routes outside of GRU and GIG, yet AA"s own data submitted to the DOT shows that only one of their new markets - SSA - has revenue concentrations in MIA as high as or higher than the rest of AA's Brazil network, even though REC and CNF are all served only by AA among US carriers. DL is apparently doing quite well in BSB as well as on DTW-GRU since they are adding capacity to those markets WHILE ALSO taking advantage of the full increase in RASM available to carriers in those regions.
In short, DL and UA have demonstrated that they know how to manage their market additions to generate maximum RASM, not pursue some dAArtboAArd strategy that mAAh advocates. Thankfully, even with its problems, AA is run by people who understand their markets better than you and he even if they are willing to pursure market share strategies at the expense of AA's financial health, something that UA and DL apparently know better than to do.
The fact that AA has been unable to separate iSSA from REC and has repeatedly not asked for more frequencies to do so shows that perhaps DL's decision to drop FOR and REC has far more to do with the small size of the local NE Brazil markets than it does with the ATL or MIA hubs; DOT data shows that AA and DL carried very similar number of passengers per day out of their respective NE Brazil stations.... DL simply chose not to operate two stations on a near daily basis that board such a small number of passengers while operating an expensive circle flight/round robin routing in order to provide the frequency needed. Given that these are the only int'l flights that AA operates that I know of on this basis that are not driven by operational needs (such as Bolivia), it certainly validates that this type of routing is expensive and likely driven more by market share strategies than financial success goals.
.
.
So you were not only factually wrong, but you have once again drawn wrong conclusions using your inability to interpret the correct data.
.
.
In summary, you got your clock cleaned in yet another argument that you started on a subject that you really don't know what you are talking about.
.
.
So why don't you and your little airline exec wannabe friend go regroup and see if he can explain why he has persisted in spouting for years that AA should start ORD-GRU yet they did not... and what AA mgmt apparently doesn't know that he does which would cause them to pass on the opportuntiies to add service to Fortaleza, Belem, and a host of other cities in the NE of Brazil that he has been advocating - obviously with no connection to reality.
.
.
Yeah, AA along with every other company has problems - but it sure has assets as well. .
.
.
Understanding each and being able to intelligently know the difference betweeb the two is the only basis for meaningful discussions on this and other aviation discussion forums.

 

[eolesen]

Isn't all of this data publicly available via SEC filings? If so, what part of WT's points are debatable?

No, Kev. It's not all in SEC filings. SEC financials will give you the financials and some idea of where that carrier's revenues are split by geography, but a lot of the rest is left to interpolation.

I'm assuming data O&D percentages is coming out of DOT Form 41/T-100 data. Fare data is probably from the DB1B, which is a 10% sample, and not as accurate as the sources actually used by the airlines (e.g. TCN, MIDT and BIDT). Both will give you a high level idea of market performance, and are good enough for an armchair analyst or career web forum expert.

The data used by the airlines comes from MIDT and BIDT, which come from the GDS's and to a lesser degree the IATA clearinghouse. I seriously doubt anyone here has access to any of those. We sell both MIDT and BIDT, and it ain't cheap when you start getting it for several carriers....

 

[WorldTraveler]

What is not debatable is that DL and UA generated far better RASM growth on their Latin networks as well as throughout their entire networks compared to AA.
...
RASM performance information is publicly available to anyone who can read... it isn't confidential, doesn't require any special programs, and isn't restricted to people who understand the intricacies of the business.
..
You and I and others can debate finer points of the business regarding where traffic comes from and what it is worth but there is no denying that AA is underperforming the industry when it comes to revenue generation.
...
For anyone who wants to advance the cause of AA to make a statement that another carrier is failing anywhere belies the facts of AA's RASM underperformance as well as AMR's overall losses which remain the worst in the industry.
In the meantime, recognize that AA is doing the best it can with a very bad situation and their actions only make them more subject to criticism. Remember it was just a few months ago that industry analysts said that AA needed to remove more capacity than it planned to do; AA has yet to do so and continues to maintain plans to keep capacity in the market which is not generating industry acceptable returns. It is likely that AA will underperform the industry for quite some time because it is not managing its network for maximum RASM but to increase productivity which produces very different results.
...

There is nothing wrong with touting the benefits and strengths of your own preferred carrier but when you start taking swings at others when your own house is in as bad if not worse shape, you are asking to get swatted.


..
again, this route case and this topic should have been an open and shut case were it not derailed by people who wanted to use it as an opportunity to take an inaccurate swipe at someone else while forgetting the chaos that was their in their own yard.
...
Learn how and what to discuss or not and move on - and close this topic.

 

[Kev3188]

No, Kev. It's not all in SEC filings. SEC financials will give you the financials and some idea of where that carrier's revenues are split by geography, but a lot of the rest is left to interpolation.

I'm assuming data O&D percentages is coming out of DOT Form 41/T-100 data. Fare data is probably from the DB1B, which is a 10% sample, and not as accurate as the sources actually used by the airlines (e.g. TCN, MIDT and BIDT). Both will give you a high level idea of market performance, and are good enough for an armchair analyst or career web forum expert.

The data used by the airlines comes from MIDT and BIDT, which come from the GDS's and to a lesser degree the IATA clearinghouse. I seriously doubt anyone here has access to any of those. We sell both MIDT and BIDT, and it ain't cheap when you start getting it for several carriers....

E--

You're right... I forgot to include Form 41/DOT stats when I wrote that... Had all the 1Q reports on my mind...

 

[upsilon]

Yeah, yeah, I've heard this same old song and dance before.
(snip)
Your endless diatribes….
(snip)
Bottom line: this will be my last post in this thread replying to you. As I said, I learned to ignore this comedy on the last forum (before I stopped seeing these diatribe threads, interestingly enough). I won't be engaging in this again - just sitting back from the sidelines and enjoying the humor of it all.
(snip)
…the endless and incessant drumbeat of how AA continues to fail at every turn, and valiant Delta can do no wrong, gets just as old here as it did the last time I had to hear it.

"Any questions? Didn't think so. Class dismissed." (And you call us arrogant.)

commavia, thanks for not copying/quoting the post since I have chosen the option of it not appearing on my screen. I share your sentiments entirely. Your analogy to the classroom is appropriate. He is like a lecture professor. If no one is in the classroom, they stop showing up and the course is cancelled. I believe it would be the same if there were no responses to his posts.

Such posters are not “trolls”, they are “sciolists” (Noun, archaic ... “a superficial pretender to knowledge, a self-proclaimed expert with little real understanding and a pretentious attitude of scholarship”. Their purpose in life is to be noticed and oll of this is evidenced by the signature!