AA Down Under and Trans Pac?
- Thread starter Dont call me Shirley
- Start date
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
appears I should have put "closed" in " " since some people have their panties in a wad that DL might actually keep the flight and that AA will be forced to either continue to operate its money losing LAX-NRT flight or end up with a smaller LAX to Asia operation than DL.
wake me up if DL loses the SEA-HND frequency.
wake me up if DL loses the SEA-HND frequency.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
keep holding your breath waiting for a ruling that favors AA and is against DL.
but don't fall over dead doing so.
and when you pick yourself up off the floor, check out what " " means.
but don't fall over dead doing so.
and when you pick yourself up off the floor, check out what " " means.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
I'm sorry if you find it nonsense to argue that the DOT doesn't pull operating route authorities from a carrier and reawarding to another carrier.
and it also isn't childish but is in fact in the DOT's documents that AA filed its application with the same flight number it uses for LAX-NRT today.
and I'm glad you have handicapped the route award but given that HA already operates a Hawaii-HND route, the chances are not in their favor.
the DOT may finally formally close the case but if they wanted to strip the route from DL, they would have done it at least a month ago.
and regardless of whether you see it as a game or not, DL decided to add LAX-PVG which was the single advantage to Asia that AA operated relative to DL. but not now. Now AA is either forced to continue to subsidize its LAX-NRT to the tune of tens of millions of dollars - even at lower fuel prices - or end up with a smaller schedule than DL who already with just two routes carries 50% more passengers and more than double the amount of revenue in the local LAX-Asia market.
and it also isn't childish but is in fact in the DOT's documents that AA filed its application with the same flight number it uses for LAX-NRT today.
and I'm glad you have handicapped the route award but given that HA already operates a Hawaii-HND route, the chances are not in their favor.
the DOT may finally formally close the case but if they wanted to strip the route from DL, they would have done it at least a month ago.
and regardless of whether you see it as a game or not, DL decided to add LAX-PVG which was the single advantage to Asia that AA operated relative to DL. but not now. Now AA is either forced to continue to subsidize its LAX-NRT to the tune of tens of millions of dollars - even at lower fuel prices - or end up with a smaller schedule than DL who already with just two routes carries 50% more passengers and more than double the amount of revenue in the local LAX-Asia market.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
no, what you really want to believe is that the DOT will pull the route.
that is what you really want, isn't it.
because AA couldn't win in NYC, won't win in LAX, so let's just screw with DL and take their toys away from them.
you highlight precisely why DL has outsmarted AA and Parker so many times any other CEO would have run to the hills and hid their face.
but not Parker... he wants to go another round. and so do you.
there is no "down under" for AA
it is just "down" - as in 'down for the count'
that is what you really want, isn't it.
because AA couldn't win in NYC, won't win in LAX, so let's just screw with DL and take their toys away from them.
you highlight precisely why DL has outsmarted AA and Parker so many times any other CEO would have run to the hills and hid their face.
but not Parker... he wants to go another round. and so do you.
there is no "down under" for AA
it is just "down" - as in 'down for the count'
I've performed an exhaustive search of regulations.gov and I cannot find any evidence that "the case is closed."WorldTraveler said:
Perhaps you could enlighten us with a link to the closing of the case by the DOT or "the whole truth?"
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
you too clearly need to learn what the " "means.
while you are looking, you might also help your little friend in MIA understand the processes that the DOT uses to award routes and process route cases.
while you are looking, you might also help your little friend in MIA understand the processes that the DOT uses to award routes and process route cases.
I don't really care whether or not AA, HA or DL gets the route. But I do realize the realities of the route allocation process, and you are still in denial it is happening.
AA is winning in LAX though. Another thing you are in total and complete denial about. Laughable.
And speaking of DOT applications, Delta just applied to transfer some of its empty mainline flights between LAX and Mexico over to its regional partners.
AA is winning in LAX though. Another thing you are in total and complete denial about. Laughable.
And speaking of DOT applications, Delta just applied to transfer some of its empty mainline flights between LAX and Mexico over to its regional partners.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
feel free to let us know what definition you are using for "winning."
I have never said that AA is not succeeding at anything at LAX.
Other carriers including AA hold dual designations for int'l routes both for their mainline operator and one or more regional carriers.
Feel free to let us know which routes you believe are empty. DOT data can pretty quickly validate the loads DL has operated those routes with.
and I am in denial of nothing. The DOT could not have opened a route allocation process to potentially reaward the SEA-HND slot if DL still held permanent authority. That should be obvious to anyone since it is pretty logical.
Just because DL doesn't hold the permanent authority at the moment doesn't for a minute mean anything one way or the other; the DOT is just as capable of reinstating permanent authority to DL just as it did when the route was first awarded. You just would like to think that the DOT's procedural action foreshadows something but it doesn't and the DOT never said it did.
and it is still highly probably that DL will retain the rights to use the flight from HND - and lower oil prices which will help AA in its efforts to make its Pacific operation profitable will also significantly improve the profitability of all of DL's Pacific routes, including the SEA-HND route and thus allowing DL to operate it on a profitable basis for far more of the year. And it wouldn't bother me in the least if the DOT told DL that the standard 90 day dormancy does not apply to this route but instead a more restrictive policy must be used.
I'd also like for you to tell me when the DOT has last pulled the route authority from a fully solvent carrier that is operating the route in question. DL's SEA-HND flight restarts Sunday. You have 2 business days left if you want to convince them they should revoke the authority because DL is not operating it.
I have never said that AA is not succeeding at anything at LAX.
Other carriers including AA hold dual designations for int'l routes both for their mainline operator and one or more regional carriers.
Feel free to let us know which routes you believe are empty. DOT data can pretty quickly validate the loads DL has operated those routes with.
and I am in denial of nothing. The DOT could not have opened a route allocation process to potentially reaward the SEA-HND slot if DL still held permanent authority. That should be obvious to anyone since it is pretty logical.
Just because DL doesn't hold the permanent authority at the moment doesn't for a minute mean anything one way or the other; the DOT is just as capable of reinstating permanent authority to DL just as it did when the route was first awarded. You just would like to think that the DOT's procedural action foreshadows something but it doesn't and the DOT never said it did.
and it is still highly probably that DL will retain the rights to use the flight from HND - and lower oil prices which will help AA in its efforts to make its Pacific operation profitable will also significantly improve the profitability of all of DL's Pacific routes, including the SEA-HND route and thus allowing DL to operate it on a profitable basis for far more of the year. And it wouldn't bother me in the least if the DOT told DL that the standard 90 day dormancy does not apply to this route but instead a more restrictive policy must be used.
I'd also like for you to tell me when the DOT has last pulled the route authority from a fully solvent carrier that is operating the route in question. DL's SEA-HND flight restarts Sunday. You have 2 business days left if you want to convince them they should revoke the authority because DL is not operating it.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
uh, first of all, please genuinely let me hope that you recognize that PVR and GDL are two entirely different types of markets.
your logic is like trying to argue BDA vs. BDL load factors.
and second, according to DOT data for Sept. 2014, the most recent for which int'l LFs are available, DL's GDL-LAX on a round trip basis had the HIGHEST LF of all operators between GDL and the US at 90.56% followed by DL's GDL-SLC route at 89.69.
even on a 12 month summed basis, DL's LAX-GDL LF at 80.6 is within TENTHS of a percent of the market average and above AA's DFW and US' PHX route - by 4-5 load factor points.
I have no idea where you are getting your data from but it doesn't square with publicly available DOT data.
your logic is like trying to argue BDA vs. BDL load factors.
and second, according to DOT data for Sept. 2014, the most recent for which int'l LFs are available, DL's GDL-LAX on a round trip basis had the HIGHEST LF of all operators between GDL and the US at 90.56% followed by DL's GDL-SLC route at 89.69.
even on a 12 month summed basis, DL's LAX-GDL LF at 80.6 is within TENTHS of a percent of the market average and above AA's DFW and US' PHX route - by 4-5 load factor points.
I have no idea where you are getting your data from but it doesn't square with publicly available DOT data.
Platinum Steve
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 81
I'm sure this next question will be greeted by volumes of unrelated nonsense (which I will be blissfully ignoring thanks to E's introduction of the "Ignore" feature*), but what will happen if (and I say if) AA gets the HND authority? It's pretty clear that they'll drop the LAX-NRT flight since they're evidently going to give that flight number to HND. But what happens to the hypothetically now-open slot at NRT? Can AA use that for JFK? Or PHL? Or SEA ( 😉 )? Or do they have to go through a new route approval process with DOT?
*Thanks, E!
*Thanks, E!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
