AA Down Under and Trans Pac?
- Thread starter Dont call me Shirley
- Start date
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #152
you would only like to believe I don't know what I am talking about.
but it is precisely because I do that you and others spare no effort to attack me even while every bit of evidence shows that I am right.
btw, where is that new HND route that AA was so certain it would get?
but it is precisely because I do that you and others spare no effort to attack me even while every bit of evidence shows that I am right.
btw, where is that new HND route that AA was so certain it would get?
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
WorldTraveler said:
One has to wonder how it is possible to have an intelligent conversation on these boards with somebody that demonstrates that level of "mental horsepower".
WorldTraveler said:
Oh brother, you don't even know how to "grasp" something very basic like the Wright Amendment.
Psst ... you do realize that just like on these boards, in a court of law you'd also not get away with fabricating definitions (like DL is a new entrant carrier - but I digress ... ... ...
If AA wants to add several additional nonstop routes/flights from its growing LAX gateway to Asia, there is absolutely nothing Delta can do to stop it, and indeed the punitive, retaliatory ridiculousness contemplated here would very likely accomplish little to nothing. As said, AA has a greater strategic need to stick it out on LAX-Asia, and is in a better position there than Delta, so any (more) Delta capacity dumping would have a very low probability of accomplishing the goal of forcing AA off these routes, and an even lower probability of actually making a dime for Delta.
Ah, reality ...
Ah, reality ...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #155
you don't get that DL isn't trying to stop AA.
DL and UA will just be there to compete against AA.
Despite what you seem to believe, DL has the resources to increase its schedules where it needs to. Int'l flights and/to Asia will be priorities.
When DL is making money flying the Pacific and AA is not, it is far easier to call what AA is doing capacity dumping than the other way around.
And for the 33rd time, UA was the carrier that matched AA's LAX-PVG route announcement within hours.
You show the exact same mindset that AA does - it clearly is a defect in the water that supplies airline HDQs in Texas.
AA will just have to win against DL and UA in the marketplace and with both competing against them. AA has yet to demonstrate it can do that in NYC, ORD, or LAX. thank goodness for their fortress DFW hub.
DL and UA will just be there to compete against AA.
Despite what you seem to believe, DL has the resources to increase its schedules where it needs to. Int'l flights and/to Asia will be priorities.
When DL is making money flying the Pacific and AA is not, it is far easier to call what AA is doing capacity dumping than the other way around.
And for the 33rd time, UA was the carrier that matched AA's LAX-PVG route announcement within hours.
You show the exact same mindset that AA does - it clearly is a defect in the water that supplies airline HDQs in Texas.
AA will just have to win against DL and UA in the marketplace and with both competing against them. AA has yet to demonstrate it can do that in NYC, ORD, or LAX. thank goodness for their fortress DFW hub.
Delta has the resources to lose money dumping capacity at LAX to prove a point. Good for them. Meanwhile, AA has a stronger position at LAX and more than enough resources to withstand said capacity dumping by Delta if they deem it strategically important. Put another way - if Delta wants to dump needless capacity into LAX just to prove a point, and dilute their own yields over SEA and lose tons of money in the process - odds are AA will be more than capable, and also likely willing, to outlast Delta.
AA has proven conclusively that, when armed with a competitive network and competitive union contracts, it's quite the viable competitor producing system profits near if not above that of Delta and United. (And of course, since all this vaunted DOT-reported data relies on accounting and cost allocations along regional breakdowns that are both opaque and not directly comparable between carriers, the only true apples-to-apples we have is the overall system bottom line.)
Back here in reality, AA is more than capable of making smart investments in growing markets where it is strategically and competitively important to develop a presence, even if its a marginally profitable if not unprofitable presence for a time. This isn't news - Delta did the exact same thing in New York, for example.
AA has proven conclusively that, when armed with a competitive network and competitive union contracts, it's quite the viable competitor producing system profits near if not above that of Delta and United. (And of course, since all this vaunted DOT-reported data relies on accounting and cost allocations along regional breakdowns that are both opaque and not directly comparable between carriers, the only true apples-to-apples we have is the overall system bottom line.)
Back here in reality, AA is more than capable of making smart investments in growing markets where it is strategically and competitively important to develop a presence, even if its a marginally profitable if not unprofitable presence for a time. This isn't news - Delta did the exact same thing in New York, for example.
Talk about showing up and not knowing anything about the subject being discussed.Overspeed said:
AA currently has 13 gates at T-4 plus preferential use of four more at T-6 (obtained from UA, where the US flights currently operate) plus the 10 gates at the Eagle Dump on the SE side. Additionally, AA has preferential use of four more new gates at the new TBIT when they are complete sometime next year. That's a total of 31 gates, through which AA will be able to schedule more operations than will DL or UA, neither of which will control that much real estate in 2016.
Since it's clear that you have not been keeping up with the conversation thus far, let me bring you up to speed: WT claims that UA and DL (particularly DL) will match AA's expansion plans and thus, AA will never achieve any size advantage at LAX. WT has also posted that DL will obtain as much real estate as is necessary for DL's expansion plans.
Way down the line, it is likely that AA will be able to obtain gates in the mid-field concourse (still a paper terminal at this point) so that it can close the Eagle Dump. But that's a long ways off.
The gate caps imposed by the lawsuit settlement agreement at LAX expire, IIRC, in 2020, but I'm guessing that the NIMBYs in Westchester, Culver City, El Segundo and Inglewood and other surrounding neigborhoods file lotsa lawsuits in hopes of obtaining another settlement agreement that caps the number of gates permitted at LAX.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
True that AA will be at the top of the heap for real estate for the presumable future, but last I checked, UA still has ~20 gates, more than they need for their current schedule. If they wanted to expand at LAX, they could could easily displace whatever DL does.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #160
and still the conversation revolves around the "they can't succeed because they won't have enough real estate".
that is Texas airline mgmt. speak for "we will dominate the market by cutting them out of the market - whether thru gates, market access limitations, or by hook or by crook.
AA has all the gates it needs at JFK and had the slots to operate far more flights than it currently has - but has pulled back anyway.
DL and UA BOTH have more than enough gates and space in their schedule to add whatever INTERNATIONAL flights they need to from LAX to ensure that AA does not gain an advantage.
Given that AA is currently #3 out of the 3 US carriers, DL will be adding yet another Asia flight on top of the two that each of the big 3 already operates and DL is already the largest carrier in the LAX to Asia local market, it is hard to even believe that anyone is suggesting that AA is going to reach parity, let alone surpass DL or UA.
but it's almost spring and there are people dying to gaze into the sky and watch clouds go by - so who am I to try to bring them back to reality?
that is Texas airline mgmt. speak for "we will dominate the market by cutting them out of the market - whether thru gates, market access limitations, or by hook or by crook.
AA has all the gates it needs at JFK and had the slots to operate far more flights than it currently has - but has pulled back anyway.
DL and UA BOTH have more than enough gates and space in their schedule to add whatever INTERNATIONAL flights they need to from LAX to ensure that AA does not gain an advantage.
Given that AA is currently #3 out of the 3 US carriers, DL will be adding yet another Asia flight on top of the two that each of the big 3 already operates and DL is already the largest carrier in the LAX to Asia local market, it is hard to even believe that anyone is suggesting that AA is going to reach parity, let alone surpass DL or UA.
but it's almost spring and there are people dying to gaze into the sky and watch clouds go by - so who am I to try to bring them back to reality?
AA has the will, the resources, and yes, the gates.
Delta has absolutely no strategic rationale for dumping capacity into LAX - it would be a money-losing waste just to prove a point, which is why I suspect that if it even is attempted at all, it won't last long.
Delta has absolutely no strategic rationale for dumping capacity into LAX - it would be a money-losing waste just to prove a point, which is why I suspect that if it even is attempted at all, it won't last long.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #162
I have never questioned whether AA has the resources.
AA DOES NOT HAVE the track record of succeeding to Asia on ANY flight from JFK, ORD, or LAX that is competitive with DL and/or UA.
DL started SEA-PVG and within the first month said it was profitable. DL gets IDENTICAL onboard revenue from SEA using a 332 as AA gets from LAX on a 772.
Given the increased connecting at PVG between DL and its Skyteam partners, DL is pretty confident that it can operate 4 flights/day this summer - a 744 from DTW, a 332 from SEA, and 777s from both LAX and from NRT.
yell "capacity dumping" all you want. DL has far higher average fares from LAX to Asia than AA does. Capacity dumping is what carriers who price at the bottom of the barrel do and lose money doing it.
that is the most accurate description of AA's LAX to Asia operation that could be made.
but keep throwing stones there, commavia. Maybe you'll sleep better tonite despite the clear facts which are NOT in your favor
AA DOES NOT HAVE the track record of succeeding to Asia on ANY flight from JFK, ORD, or LAX that is competitive with DL and/or UA.
DL started SEA-PVG and within the first month said it was profitable. DL gets IDENTICAL onboard revenue from SEA using a 332 as AA gets from LAX on a 772.
Given the increased connecting at PVG between DL and its Skyteam partners, DL is pretty confident that it can operate 4 flights/day this summer - a 744 from DTW, a 332 from SEA, and 777s from both LAX and from NRT.
yell "capacity dumping" all you want. DL has far higher average fares from LAX to Asia than AA does. Capacity dumping is what carriers who price at the bottom of the barrel do and lose money doing it.
that is the most accurate description of AA's LAX to Asia operation that could be made.
but keep throwing stones there, commavia. Maybe you'll sleep better tonite despite the clear facts which are NOT in your favor
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
yeppers if it not higher air fares than its capacity anything to make your fictional bull$h!t look as real as possible
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #164
it's all about highest profitability.
if you can come up with a formula that comes up with it while defying the principles which have been proven for years, plz do let us know.
what is absolutely clear is that DL is the HIGH FARE carrier from LAX to Asia and AA is the lowest.
if you can come up with a formula that comes up with it while defying the principles which have been proven for years, plz do let us know.
what is absolutely clear is that DL is the HIGH FARE carrier from LAX to Asia and AA is the lowest.
Indeed it is about the "highest profitability." And this year, AA is projected - by some estimates - to have the "highest profitability" of the U.S. carriers.
So clearly AA has the resources to make strategic investments that have a positive halo effect on the overall network, as AA's management clearly believes Asia does.
So clearly AA has the resources to make strategic investments that have a positive halo effect on the overall network, as AA's management clearly believes Asia does.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
