AA, UA and DL in China

[commavia]

Other than you, who on earth cares whether DL is able to ensure that AA never "surpass(es) DL as the 2nd largest US int'l carrier?"

 
Exactly.
 
Once again returning from Delta fantasyland, does any high-yielding longhaul premium business traveler care one bit whether AA is the "2nd largest U.S. international carrier?"  Of course not.  What they care about is network breadth and schedule convenience.  As a result, AA need not be #1 everywhere, but merely be "good enough" to be competitive and relevant.  And AA is basically there, and rapidly filling in the gaps where it isn't.  To Europe, AA now serves all the major markets with at least 1 daily flight from at least 1 U.S. hub, while just about any other market has extensive connectivity options available over LHR and MAD.  In Asia, AA now has all the principal business markets of East Asia covered nonstop for the central and eastern U.S., and apparently may soon be enhancing connectivity from the West Coast (on top, of course, of the connectivity available via NRT and/or HKG).  And in Latin America, it goes without saying - AA's network is so handily dominant that no other U.S. carrier even comes close.
 
So I'm sure that regardless of its rank among "U.S. international carriers," AA will be just fine.
 
Isn't reality fun?!

 

[WorldTraveler]

AA and US themselves said the justification for the merger was so that AA could be competitive with DL and UA.

even after the merger, new AA is the 3rd largest US int'l airline, #3 to DL and UA in both Europe and Asia.

I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to understand that it is just as ok for DL and UA to protect their markets as it is for AA to do so, which is exactly what they are doing and have done, esp. in Latin America.

AA decided to add ICN last year so DL, in part, added 744s from DTW to ICN and then a SEA flight, which is already being upgraded to a 332 after less than six months of operation. AA announced HKG so DL announced a SEA-HKG flight. AA added DFW-PVG so DL upgrades DTW-PVG to a 744.

DL has added capacity in Latin America, so now, AA has stepped it up and their capacity in Latin America is growing by double digit rates as well to ensure that DL can't grow any more than half the size of AA in Latin America, which is roughly the size DL has grown to in Latin America.

On top of the evidence that KE is undercutting AA's fares in its new DFW-Asia markets, it confirms exactly what I have said which is that carriers protect their own markets even in the face of new flights by other carriers.

It isn't an AA or DL or KE thing. It is what strategically motivated carriers do who are interested in maintaining their presence for the long haul.


as for Europe, of course AA gains a presence in some key continental Europe markets that it hasn't been able to succeed in and that is a positive thing.

It isn't a surprise that AA is adding flights to its alliance partner hubs but we haven't seen the flights that don't feed into oneworld's network get pulled or at least reduced in capacity.

No one expects AA to not add flights to its new alliance strength markets but no one is going to roll over and let them add capacity across the board or roll out the red carpet for AA to add capacity in markets where other carriers are already strong.

that is exactly why the idea that AA will succeed in its expansion in Asia just because they need to do so doesn't hold water.

finally, if it only takes one gateway from the US to one foreign city for AA to be competitive, why is AA trying to grow and maintain 3 gateways to Asia? - although I do see that AA will not even be operating 3 daily flights from ORD to Asia this winter.

Methinks that AA's ORD-Asia operation will be the most susceptible to cuts since it appears that the fare differences between AA and UA are large and aren't getting smaller despite years of AA efforts to close the gap.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

finally, if it only takes one gateway from the US to one foreign city for AA to be competitive, why is AA trying to grow and maintain 3 gateways to Asia? - although I do see that AA will not even be operating 3 daily flights from ORD to Asia this winter.

Methinks that AA's ORD-Asia operation will be the most susceptible to cuts since it appears that the fare differences between AA and UA are large and aren't getting smaller despite years of AA efforts to close the gap.

 
If AA's ORD-Asia is not generating the $$$, is there a chance flights may be moved to PHL?  Does PHL have better potential for Asia flights than ORD?

 

[robbedagain]

Frugal  I do think that PHL would be a great option for PHL to Asia routes    But the quest is  how could ORD not be soo money generating   wouldnt that also make UA Asia runs unprofitable

 

[737823]

Regarding AA ORD-Asia flying my most recent experience (April 2012) to PEK went out 6/14 (two F seats for crew rest) and 12/37 in J after upgrades and non-revs so I can't imagine at that time the flights were performing. AA has since tweaked the gd awful PEK times slightly so maybe it is performing better.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

If AA's ORD-Asia is not generating the $$$, is there a chance flights may be moved to PHL?  Does PHL have better potential for Asia flights than ORD?

I have absolutely argued for quite some time that PHL-Asia makes more sense than ORD-Asia.

UA is playing 2nd fiddle to Asia beside a much smaller UA....
 
 

Frugal  I do think that PHL would be a great option for PHL to Asia routes    But the quest is  how could ORD not be soo money generating   wouldnt that also make UA Asia runs unprofitable

because UA has a 30 year head start in its large presence to Asia over AA, including service from ORD.

UA simply has the market locked up which leaves AA with lower quality revenue.

AA has for years trailed UA in revenue performance not just in the local ORD market but also in the key flow markets over ORD.

DFW to Asia gives AA the freedom to step out of UA's shadow in ORD and LAX but DFW is too far south for a lot of US to Asia traffic and then you still have the problem with a not very happy KE who is undercutting AA in the markets that AA needs to generating premium revenue due to the very long flight times compared with other hubs.
 

Regarding AA ORD-Asia flying my most recent experience (April 2012) to PEK went out 6/14 (two F seats for crew rest) and 12/37 in J after upgrades and non-revs so I can't imagine at that time the flights were performing. AA has since tweaked the gd awful PEK times slightly so maybe it is performing better.

Josh

and you know that full cabins means nothing....AA has the same issue with its transcon flights but still generates average fares that aren't that much higher than other carriers to LAX and below other carriers to SFO.

The real key is the quality of the revenue that AA is getting.

PEK is a unique situation because DL launched both DTW and SEA to PEK with late slot times while AA launched ORD-PEK.

UA had/has much better slot times.

yet, AA managed to improve its slot times somewhat while DL did something with one of its Chinese partners to get slot times comparable to UA's from ORD.

plus, PEK is not the business market that PVG is.

transferring the flight to LAX likely won't help.

but it still requires that any carrier figure out how to get premium revenues despite the slot times. so far, AA continues to trail UA in generating comparable revenues to UA with whom AA competes on every US-China route from ORD and LAX.

 

[usabusdriver]

...
before long, I get to start talking about how much share WN is taking from AA at DFW.

DFW is not a sideshow out on the coast for AA. it is their hometown.
...

 
WT,
 
Also tell us how much share and revene WN is taking DL in ATL.

 

[WorldTraveler]

FL/WN has about a 13% revenue share of the ATL market which unchanged over the past several years.