AA getting 4 gates in LAX T6.
- Thread starter IORFA
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #92
Again when AA actually succeeds with a west coast hub you can celebrate but a few gates are probably the easiest and least significant part of succeeding
If they make it i will buy the beers
Until now it is all just talk
If they make it i will buy the beers
Until now it is all just talk
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
youre truly unbelievable there... AA will make LAX work pretty much the same flippin way DL will try to make SEA work. In your own opin its only DL that does it all right and no one else does it right plain n simple
Kev3188
Veteran
Having the proper facilities is part of a foundation for success.WorldTraveler said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #96
sure it is and I have never said otherwise. Remember, I congratulated AA on its strategic success with getting the gates.
I also have noted that AA is once again the largest revenue carrier at LAX for local traffic, a title which it lost after the UA/CO merger but which has regained.
Yet, I also have repeatedly asked how AA would overcome the one goal which is part of its stated goals at LAX which is to become a profitable, viable competitor to Asia from the west coast. The data is very evident that AA has the lowest average fares from LAX to the markets in Asia where it directly competes and AA's own data which it provides to the DOT shows that it loses money on its entire transpacific operation and, since AA's two LAX-Asia have some of the largest gaps between AA revenue performance and that of other carriers, it is absolutely relevant to ask how AA with four or ten or twenty more gates is going to correct a problem which they have been plagued by for years.
The real reason why we have such heated arguments on this site is because there are a host of people here who cannot hear the compliments and positive things some people say but focus solely on the negative comments and are unable to discuss those challenges will be met.
Those who have no willingness or ability to honestly discuss the negative side of the equation should probably not participate in the discussion at all.
I also have noted that AA is once again the largest revenue carrier at LAX for local traffic, a title which it lost after the UA/CO merger but which has regained.
Yet, I also have repeatedly asked how AA would overcome the one goal which is part of its stated goals at LAX which is to become a profitable, viable competitor to Asia from the west coast. The data is very evident that AA has the lowest average fares from LAX to the markets in Asia where it directly competes and AA's own data which it provides to the DOT shows that it loses money on its entire transpacific operation and, since AA's two LAX-Asia have some of the largest gaps between AA revenue performance and that of other carriers, it is absolutely relevant to ask how AA with four or ten or twenty more gates is going to correct a problem which they have been plagued by for years.
The real reason why we have such heated arguments on this site is because there are a host of people here who cannot hear the compliments and positive things some people say but focus solely on the negative comments and are unable to discuss those challenges will be met.
Those who have no willingness or ability to honestly discuss the negative side of the equation should probably not participate in the discussion at all.
Force Majeure
Advanced
- Sep 21, 2013
- 114
- 212
Let me rephrase that so we all know exactly what you meant:WorldTraveler said:
Those who have no willingness or ability to participate in my negative, qualifying, subjective, cherry-picking analysis of factoids and data of Delta Airlines competition should probably not participate in the discussion at all.
That should clear it up. Everybody got that now?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #98
except there is no cherry picking involved and what is involved is consistent hypersensitivity by the AA fan club that posts on here and other sites about AA's invincibility when it is clear - and as Kev has noted - that every carrier has its strengths and weaknesses.
Problem is that neither AA or its fan club can honestly admit their weaknesses. AA so far as I know has never admitted they lose buckets of money flying the Pacific and yet they do.
DL admits that NYC driven by JFK is on the verge of profitability and we have waves of comments from people on here who want to point to DL's lack of profitability while failing to admit that profitable airlines don't cut routes that are profitable, which is exactly what AA has done for years from NYC including to Asia and the Caribbean and now on the transcons.
Instead of admitting that AA has decided that their strategy allows someone else to pick up the passengers that AA no longer wants and that other carriers might well be able to succeed, we have endless attempts to defy the obvious truth.
AA in BK surrendered enormous market strength in NYC and DL because of its successful restructuring, merger, and strategic initiatives has made it all but impossible for AA to ever grow to be on parity at NYC with DL again.
AA, recognizing that they have been relegated to the #3 network carrier position in NYC and will struggle to grow to parity with UA from ORD has no choice but to hold onto LAX. AA has long been very strong at LAX but the level of dominance of AA over other carriers is far smaller than what DL and UA have over AA at NYC. LAX' value for any carrier involves Asia where AA has an abysmal track record of financial success. Further, even if AA succeeds at building LAX to Asia, they are still in the 3rd place position in the entire west coast market because DL and UA both have larger and multiple strengths on the west coast which AA does not.
LAX is quite simply a strategic do or die proposition for AA and they have enormous obstacles far beyond a couple gates to overcome in order to say they succeed at LAX on the same basis that DL and UA succeed.
I congratulated AA on their strategic success in gaining access to more gates at LAX but that success was rooted in agreements that go back long before DL began its current buildup on the west coast or UA decided to reduce its presence.
If AA succeeds at LAX, great. But those who are as certain of AA's success at LAX with a few more gates would do well to consider the entire picture.
Problem is that neither AA or its fan club can honestly admit their weaknesses. AA so far as I know has never admitted they lose buckets of money flying the Pacific and yet they do.
DL admits that NYC driven by JFK is on the verge of profitability and we have waves of comments from people on here who want to point to DL's lack of profitability while failing to admit that profitable airlines don't cut routes that are profitable, which is exactly what AA has done for years from NYC including to Asia and the Caribbean and now on the transcons.
Instead of admitting that AA has decided that their strategy allows someone else to pick up the passengers that AA no longer wants and that other carriers might well be able to succeed, we have endless attempts to defy the obvious truth.
AA in BK surrendered enormous market strength in NYC and DL because of its successful restructuring, merger, and strategic initiatives has made it all but impossible for AA to ever grow to be on parity at NYC with DL again.
AA, recognizing that they have been relegated to the #3 network carrier position in NYC and will struggle to grow to parity with UA from ORD has no choice but to hold onto LAX. AA has long been very strong at LAX but the level of dominance of AA over other carriers is far smaller than what DL and UA have over AA at NYC. LAX' value for any carrier involves Asia where AA has an abysmal track record of financial success. Further, even if AA succeeds at building LAX to Asia, they are still in the 3rd place position in the entire west coast market because DL and UA both have larger and multiple strengths on the west coast which AA does not.
LAX is quite simply a strategic do or die proposition for AA and they have enormous obstacles far beyond a couple gates to overcome in order to say they succeed at LAX on the same basis that DL and UA succeed.
I congratulated AA on their strategic success in gaining access to more gates at LAX but that success was rooted in agreements that go back long before DL began its current buildup on the west coast or UA decided to reduce its presence.
If AA succeeds at LAX, great. But those who are as certain of AA's success at LAX with a few more gates would do well to consider the entire picture.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
and problem is you will never admit to dl weakness....but as kev and as most of us know every airline has its strengths and weakness...
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
American Airlines will pick up gates from United Airlines at LAX
If it keeps its current plans, American could operate flights from as many as five LAX terminals, not all of which are connected inside security. It is also scheduled to soon operate flights from the Tom Bradley International Terminal.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20140527/american-airlines-will-pick-up-gates-from-united-airlines-at-lax
If it keeps its current plans, American could operate flights from as many as five LAX terminals, not all of which are connected inside security. It is also scheduled to soon operate flights from the Tom Bradley International Terminal.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20140527/american-airlines-will-pick-up-gates-from-united-airlines-at-lax
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
You see, that's the problem....according toWT, DL has no weaknesses, only strengths.robbedagain said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #102
absolutely incorrect.
I have never said that DL has no weaknesses or tried to shun away from what is factually presented as a DL weakness.
problem is that too many people on here want to frame weaknesses within their own personal framework and not based on any kind of subjective, big picture reality.
purely from a network perspective, I have noted multiple times that DL's strategic weaknesses have involved LHR; Latin America, esp. from MIA; and the southwest/Texas, esp. to the west.
DL hasn't ever listed those weaknesses so I am not parroting something they are saying.
But I have also said that DL is methodically building on its own successes to deal with its weaknesses.
Specifically, DL spent $360M to buy half of VS in order to get a JV and a stronger LHR presence, has bought stakes in two Latin airlines to do the same thing, and is slowly adding routes from Texas to the west.
but DL is also building on its own successes which have involved strong performance on its own LHR flights since it got in as well as its ATL-Latin America and more recently JFK - Latin America service as well as its limited but strong performance in the DFW local market as well as elsewhere in Texas.
what I have yet to hear anyone articulate is how AA is going to turn two heavily money-losing routes from LAX to Asia around based on either a hub or even a few more gates. What new O&Ds does AA expect to flow over LAX in order to increase revenues that they can't do now? What strategies can AA use to go after the local market that they haven't used already? What partners can demonstrate success in helping AA build its Asian network?
these are valid questions and simply saying in blind faith that AA will make it work when they haven't done so before and when Parker and co. have zero experience in Asia doesn't strike me as a terribly intelligent way to discuss the topic.
I have never said that DL has no weaknesses or tried to shun away from what is factually presented as a DL weakness.
problem is that too many people on here want to frame weaknesses within their own personal framework and not based on any kind of subjective, big picture reality.
purely from a network perspective, I have noted multiple times that DL's strategic weaknesses have involved LHR; Latin America, esp. from MIA; and the southwest/Texas, esp. to the west.
DL hasn't ever listed those weaknesses so I am not parroting something they are saying.
But I have also said that DL is methodically building on its own successes to deal with its weaknesses.
Specifically, DL spent $360M to buy half of VS in order to get a JV and a stronger LHR presence, has bought stakes in two Latin airlines to do the same thing, and is slowly adding routes from Texas to the west.
but DL is also building on its own successes which have involved strong performance on its own LHR flights since it got in as well as its ATL-Latin America and more recently JFK - Latin America service as well as its limited but strong performance in the DFW local market as well as elsewhere in Texas.
what I have yet to hear anyone articulate is how AA is going to turn two heavily money-losing routes from LAX to Asia around based on either a hub or even a few more gates. What new O&Ds does AA expect to flow over LAX in order to increase revenues that they can't do now? What strategies can AA use to go after the local market that they haven't used already? What partners can demonstrate success in helping AA build its Asian network?
these are valid questions and simply saying in blind faith that AA will make it work when they haven't done so before and when Parker and co. have zero experience in Asia doesn't strike me as a terribly intelligent way to discuss the topic.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
just because they do not have experience in Asia does not mean they cant go ahead and apply for Asian routes out of LAX and other points.. Its not like the execs are gonna be the ones who fly the pax there anyway or be the ones to off load or on load the plane anyhow.. just the same inexperience they have once the 787 come on line in nov and the 350 comes on line later
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
They will proceed the same way Delta did when they had "zero" experience in Asia (which was not long ago btw). They will buy it.WorldTraveler said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #105
and who will AA buy? I'm sure you are aware that AA and NW had preliminary discussions about a merger years ago. AA also was beat by UA in the Pan Am Asia transaction.
it is precisely because DL recognized that they had no reasonable chance of building Asia on their own that they bought a company that had exceptional experience in Asia and DL made sure they used NW's experience to succeed. But since even NW had a hard time making many routes outside of Japan work on a sustained basis, DL moved slowly in expanding beyond Japan.
It is precisely by using DL's 777s in NW's DTW hub which had a number of routes before the merger that DL has been able to build DTW into the largest US carrier TPAC gateway outside of the west coast.
If AA can figure out how to mimic what DL and UA have done, more power to them.
But let's also remember that AA has had an advantage in Latin America because they acquired EA's Latin assets and has carefully nurtured and built it into a very strong franchise.
DL is making calculated investments which are supporting more growth but AA still has an advantage. UA is slipping further back relative to DL and AA even though CO had an enormous advantage in the northern half of Latin America.
it is precisely because DL recognized that they had no reasonable chance of building Asia on their own that they bought a company that had exceptional experience in Asia and DL made sure they used NW's experience to succeed. But since even NW had a hard time making many routes outside of Japan work on a sustained basis, DL moved slowly in expanding beyond Japan.
It is precisely by using DL's 777s in NW's DTW hub which had a number of routes before the merger that DL has been able to build DTW into the largest US carrier TPAC gateway outside of the west coast.
If AA can figure out how to mimic what DL and UA have done, more power to them.
But let's also remember that AA has had an advantage in Latin America because they acquired EA's Latin assets and has carefully nurtured and built it into a very strong franchise.
DL is making calculated investments which are supporting more growth but AA still has an advantage. UA is slipping further back relative to DL and AA even though CO had an enormous advantage in the northern half of Latin America.
