AA getting 4 gates in LAX T6.

[WorldTraveler]

sorry but the notion that the deal was put in place to keep the gates out of DL's hands started here.

The TBIT gates are mentioned in the settlement agreement between LAWA and AA which allowed LAWA to tear down pieces of AA's leasehold to make room for the MSC.

It also may be why AA got the T6 gates mentioned at the start of the thread.. AA negotiated first right of refusal whenever gates get turned over to the city. Smart move on AA's part, and it kept them out of DL's hands...

http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-1590_rpt_bac_6-23-09.pdf

the facts that DL uses the largest aircraft and generates far higher revenue per gate at LAX is public information. So are the amount of losses that AA has sustained for years on the Pacific.

If you don't want to hear it, then don't read or participate in a topic talking about what AA has accomplished at LAX or what they can do with several more gates - and it is far from clear that these 4 gates are really much of a net increase in gates after the DOJ divestiture.

 

[700UW]

DL blah blah blah DL.

 

[MAH4546]

AA will have 34 mainline jet capable gates at the end of the decade and the ability to operate ~300 daily flights on mainline jets if they chose to from LAX.
 
That is a sigfniciatn advantage over DL or UA at the airport, and will fully allow it to build a very capable hub operation compared to DL/SEA and UA/SFO, with the geographic disadvantage more than made up for my the stronger local market, especially compared to SEA.
 
Remember, as already admitted on this thread, if it were not for gate constraints, Delta would have chosen LAX, not SEA, for it's trans-Pac hub. AA, fortunately, doesn't have Delta's gate problems at LAX. It has more than double the space.

 

[WorldTraveler]

but they don't have that now and you are still counting chickens where the eggs aren't even known.

Further, it doesn't change that the whole reason AA is on this gate hunt at LAX is because they want to build a transpac gateway - something they have not been able to do successfully yet and they still are #3 among US carriers in the LAX-Tokyo market and #2 out of 2 in the LAX-PVG market. The entire notion of grabbing a bunch of gates to build a hub when they haven't proven they can succeed with what they have is well, so American.

No, DL never said that it would build a transpac gateway anywhere near the scale it has at SEA in LAX, in part because the costs of operating at LAX are higher due to the longer stagelengths to Asia and because of the increased competition at LAX that doesn't exist to anywhere near the same degree at SEA.

So, AA can grab all the gates they want but if they can't successfully compete in the largest revenue markets from the city and they also have to use a high percentage of that gate capacity to carry connecting traffic which other carriers send elsewhere, then AA's position at LAX is not near as much as you want to believe it is.

 

[700UW]

Legal Challenge
 
http://www.airlineforums.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&fromMainBar=1

 

[MAH4546]

American runs a profitable LAX operation as it stands. What it does in LA is working, and AA is simply building upon its success in the LA market.

 

[WorldTraveler]

in general, yes.

In specifics, the Asian operations a huge money-losing proposition.

And if the transcons were as profitable in all cabins as you want to believe they were, AA wouldn't have walked away from 40% of the coach market. DL is now using the same 763s that AA has in its fleet to increase capacity in the coach market that AA walked away with its decision to focus solely on the premium market plus a smattering of the coach market.

And it also doesn't change that for both the domestic and int'l operations when separated, DL and UA both get higher average fares from LAX passengers than AA does.

If AA is succeeding at LAX, DL and UA apparently are even more so - if profitability is even halfway part of the goal of running a business.

 

[robbedagain]

then explain where DL is losing in any one part of its ops?   id bet that you wont even say 1 word bec delta can do no wrong and all the other airlines can do no right regardless

 

[WorldTraveler]

If DL maintains its current operation and even grows including by converting some of the flights to mainline, they lose nothing.
There is no admitting that DL will lose if they are not.

If AA really does grow its operation significantly larger than DL, then there really could be market shift taking place - but the evidence is more than apparent that it is UA and not DL that is providing the revenue that AA is picking up.

Bur if AA turns around and runs a hub at LAX and forces a bunch of connecting traffic thru those gates, there is little real gain.


and, once again, DL is running 15-30 more passengers per flight thru LAX compared to AA and UA respectively, and is getting higher average fares than AA and on par with UA (DL and UA's revenue profile at LAX is actually quite similar.)

It isn't hard to understand that if DL puts more passengers per flight than AA or UA and gets average fares on par with UA which has the smallest average aircraft size of the big 3, then DL's revenue is going to compare quite favorably.

pure facts and analysis.

 

[robbedagain]

so if AA takes jets from the E 170s and higher and make it work basically the very same scenario DL does then both can make money but in your eyes only DL can

 

[WorldTraveler]

nowhere did I say that.

If AA deploys a high percentage of its new flights on Ejets or mainline then they are in a good shape.... but let's also remember that the whole RJ crisis has left new AA with the largest number of flights on aircraft 50 seats or smaller which means that AA is heavily exposed to the loss of flying as pilot staffing at regional carriers gets worse and worse.

The logic was always that AA - which had pilot contract limitations on the number of large RJs it could operate but which were greatly relaxed in BK - would be able to use the large RJs to replace many of the small RJs.

Now, the pilot crisis is getting worse and AA has way more demands on its large RJs than the fleet they have ordered - and then there is talk about growing in major competitive markets like NYC, ORD, and LAX where they have retreated or need lots of large RJs just to rebuild their operation - above replacing the 50 seat flying.

All of the great expectations from AA's refleeting and growth opportunities in the eyes of many AA internet fans will come face to face with reality.

 

[MAH4546]

So when the 757 trans-con conversions are complete and the 763s are gone from JFKLAX, what's your new excuse?
 
The reality is that the 763s are on the route as a stop-gap measure and because Delta can't make money right now flying them to Europe.

 

[robbedagain]

I think I shld of included the CRJ-9 Next Gen  too     Give it time WT and I think itll get even better for AA

 

[WorldTraveler]

So when the 757 trans-con conversions are complete and the 763s are gone from JFKLAX, what's your new excuse?
 
The reality is that the 763s are on the route as a stop-gap measure and because Delta can't make money right now flying them to Europe.

both of those things are what YOU want to believe but only that.

If DL intended to pull the 767s, they wouldn't keep adding 767s to the schedule (I believe JFK-LAX is up to 5 out of 8 or so of the flights).

And DL's Atlantic system is SOLIDLY profitable - hitting as high as 25% profit margin last summer. It is pure envy on your part to believe that DL can't make money flying to Europe because they clearly do.

What really kills you is that DL managed to put an aircraft that AA and DL share and DL is managing to grow its presence in the market while AA's total number of seats in the market is shrinking.

It also means that DL is pushing more revenue thru each departure at LAX while AA is needing more gates to carry less revenue because of using smaller aircraft.

Sure, the trip costs are lower but when you have to fight for gates because you are downgauging flights, then the notion of maximizing assets is hard to defend.

 

[700UW]

Time for another thread to be locked, thanks to DL WT Pollution