American Airlines makes a move to dominate at LAX

[WorldTraveler]

of course AA is getting press and not just using the move to T6 as a marketing ploy?

I would expect them to do no different but I am still waiting for how AA can have twice the gates that DL has but DL can board more LOCAL LAX passengers than native AA.

further, native AA's passenger share at LAX was 17%, US was 4.9%, DL was at 17.1, and UA was at 19.8%.

so the statement that DL and UA can't break 20% is not true even in the current context. Given that DL is adding seats to its 757s and has 739s to replace 738s on top of upgrading large RJs to mainline, it isn't hard for DL to break the 20% margin.

Finally, you still keep holding onto gates that aren't even under construction that at best will allow AA to upgrade RJs to mainline at some point in the future and yet with a gate advantage now, AA has only a 2% share advantage over UA.

methinks your expectations of dominance are vastly out of line with reality.

the fact that commavia can't realize that DL and UA"s expansion in Latin America is directly related to AA's growth in Asia and yet he comments freely on the subject is more than frightening. DL and UA clearly have decided that if AA wants to push into their key markets, then DL and UA will do the same thing in AA's key markets.

 

[Kev3188]

Oh, and BTW, this is a thread about AA at LAX. Please keep it that way.

This sure seemed reasonable enough...

 

[WorldTraveler]

so, it's not ok to ask how AA can have twice the amount of gates but generate the same amount of revenue as competitors?

And I actually thought that some people here were PROPONENTS of critical thinking.

hmmm.

and yet, some of us do support critical thinking, informed DISSENT, and consensus building that solves problems.

 

[MAH4546]

Look, WT in his own little world is quite jealous of what AA is already accomplishing with LAX. Delta will never be able to. It is what it is. Oh well. 
 
He's so desperate to twist and manipulate the numbers that when it comes to total gate counts, we are supposed to include all of AA+US gates, but when it comes to totaling passenger counts, we are only supposed to look at "native AA." 
 
Let's totally ignore the fact that US has already taken over routes like LAXPIT and LAXRDU. AA and US have been cross-fleeting since July. 
 
As for AA's gate numbers, well genius, let's consider this:
 
Gates in June 2014: 21 AA+3 shared T3 (one perferred use; two secondary use)+5 inactive (AA also was using one remote gate as needed)
Gates in November 2014: 24 AA+4 US+2 inactive
Gates in January 2016: 28 AA+4 TBIT+2 inactive
 
So just since this summer, AA has gone from 21 exclusive use gates to 28. 
 
So while AA was the largest carrier at LAX, it was using 21+3 gates, while UA was using 24 and DL using 17. It now has 28 in operation. When international operations move out of T4 in 2016, AA will be able to expand T4's baggage handling operation by closing down the FDIS, and run a very high gate-utilization operation out of the terminal with domestic flights and quick turns. More growth will be achieved by simply using larger planes, something that Delta is praised for doing in LAX. There isn't much 50-seat flying left, and it will be phased out and replaced by CR9s and E75s. 
 
The 2 inactive gates are owed to AA by LAWA, and AA will have the opportunity to grab 2 gates before anybody else when gates that AA finds appropriate become available. There will might be two opportunities for these gates to be located at T4. All bussing, which currently uses gate 44, will move to a new bus terminal in the TBIT connector in early 2016, which would leave room for a small jet gate pending some reconfiguration. There is also an inactive mainline jet gate, 49B.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

sorry, but the only desperation and manipulation is how you can post with a straight face that AA has some great advantage when DOT stats which are absolutely accessible to you show that DL has a very slight LOCAL LAX passenger advantage to native AA. AA plus US have just a 2% share advantage over UA and since UA has an average fare advantage to AA in the LAX local market, AA's advantage is less.

You are the one that is ticked to find out that the merger really did not produce any great advantage after all.

I'm jealous at nothing.

I am tired of hearing claims of what AA is going to do - ten years down the road that have no basis in what is happening now.

once again, I am more than happy to see AA grow. but you and commavia are incessant and completely wrong that AA will be the only carriers that will grow at LAX.

and you still can't explain how little of an advantage AA has or how AA is going to make LAX-Asia work when they don't make the current routes they fly work. And despite all of the blabber from AA execs this year about growth from LAX to Asia, DFW got the nod.

btw, DOT stats are for the 2nd quarter. AA, not US, operated LAX-RDU and PIT.

 

[jcw]

Nice try that's exactly what you do by changing topics or using double standard or fantasy metics

Let's see how long this response will be

 

[commavia]

Nice try that's exactly what you do by changing topics or using double standard or fantasy metics

 
Yes - exactly.
 
AA potentially adding a few flights from LAX to Asia somehow jeopardizes AA's in MIA and Latin America.  Wow - just wow.  That's a classic - right up there with "Delta is going to do dump capacity until it bankrupts JAL" in the pantheon of airline discussion forum stupidity.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I've changed nothing.

my question from the beginning was why AA doesn't generate more local revenue than they do or than their peers given such a gate advantage and how AA is going to make routes work to Asia when they can't make the ones they do serve work. a 2% advantage over UA is hardly domination.

and all of this "one day when unicorns fly" scenario of gates at LAX belies the fact that the MSC is nowhere near completion.


all of this talk of domination belies the fact that AA has actually shrunk seats to JFK and added frequencies that require more gate time in total.

those are the core issues and no one has addressed them, including AA's marketing whiz kid that first proclaimed that AA would dominate LAX.

and commavia fails to admit that AA's desire to grow in Asia just might be the reason why DL and UA are both adding double digit amounts of capacity to Latin America - on top of the growth of low cost carriers and just as multiple currencies in Latin America are hitting multi-year lows relative to the dollar.

so, again, whether eh wants to admit it or not, AA is gambling on growth in Asia and in other carrier top markets at the very time that AA's historic cash cow in Latin America is heading south, and AA's actions only serve to accelerate that decline.

 

[AirbusA310]

Public hangings really  need to be brought back.

 

[WorldTraveler]

because answering a few basic strategic questions is too difficult... parroting a company PR fluff piece is supposed to pass for critical thinking?

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

glenn  the FAs turned down the JCBA  just FYI bro...

I am aware of that robbed.

I am one of those that believe that a short mediation session over the few contentious issues will move the needle far enough to get another T/A ratified.

I have been around long enough, and been involved in negotiations enough, to know th at sometimes people need to get the frustration out of their system.

I think that is what happened here and cooler heads will prevail. Mark my words.

The pilots will soon follow.

Of course this will all help with AA's focus on LAX growth. They truly have a rosy future.

 

[MAH4546]

Dude, get over it. You still use "native AA" like it matters.
 
And I answered your question - AA only now has 28 gates. It used to have only 21 as recently as SEPTEMBER 2014. 
 
I don't need to explain anything about LAX-Asia - it's not going to be easy for AA to do (like how Delta still can't figure out how to make money in New York), but AA is going to dive into it and I applaud them for it.
 
I never spoke of any advantages of the AA/US merger, which I was against. 
 
AA is the largest airline at LAX - it is the largest in local traffic, the largest in total traffic, the largest in LA-originating traffic, the largest in regional jet traffic, the largest in revenue share, and it is in a position where it greatly underutilizes it's resources as we speak so it will continue to grow while Delta simply can't (past ~180, I think it's at around 165 right now) and United clearly doesn't want to. 
 
And your just so obsessed with an AA performance in South America that is largely due to a political situation in Venezuela which has led to AA (and DL and UA) cutting service to the country appropriately and is not reflective of the overall market. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

uh, DL is making money in NYC.

And despite what you and your execs think, AA hasn't or it wouldn't be cutting and cutting.

yes, AA is the largest airline by 2 share points over UA.

You are dreaming of these grand plans that are based on gates that don't exist and won't for years.

and you are woefully underestimating the blood bath that AA will suffer by trying to launch LAX to Asia flights competitive with carriers that have far lower costs and far more capacity in the market.

The reason why DL and UA have avoided LAX to Asia outside of Japan is because Japan has very similar economics to the US market and US carriers can compete fairly effectively to/from Japan. The only reason why UA jumped into LAX-PVG was because AA did and UA is not going to let AA set up a TPAC operation right down the road from UA's massive SFO hub.

and while you count flights and gates, DL and UA have both managed to generate very similar amounts of revenue in the local market as AA - within a couple percent. No one except you cares if AA uses LAX as a hub if they don't generate proportionately higher revenues in the local market.

other carriers simply use their LAX resources more efficiently in serving the local market; they couldn't have a lot less in assets at LAX but generate comparable revenues and passengers.

and it still doesn't change that there are honestly a small number of key industry markets which are not served by each carrier from LAX already... adding a bunch of large RJs to get a huge flight count hasn't managed to give AA an advantage up to this point. To think that converting those large RJs to mainline by using some mythical gates that don't exist is going to move the dial is more than a stretch.

and you still can't answer - and commavia doesn't even want to admit - that AA is paying a high price in Latin America in order to push into key industry markets including to Asia where it is highly doubtful they will be profitable anyway.

giving up profits to gain a presence in LAX-Asia will rank with those AA FAs who thought they could get a better deal by trading away a sure hand. didn't and won't work out.

 

[robbedagain]

agree there glenn

 

[MAH4546]

I am not dreaming of any grand plans. AA flying 250-280 daily flights from LAX isn't grand, but it will be a healthy lead over UA and DL who won't be able to eek out more than ~200 and ~180, respectively. 
 
Nobody is talking about upgauging CRJs to mainline. You are making things up - as always - because you're annoyed at AA's LAX presence. 
 
And you honestly still refuse to admit that AA currently has 28 gates? I guess so. 
 
And AA's next batch of four gates will be ready in early 2016, so we'll be at 32 in less than 16 months. But let's keep making pretend those gates don't exist. 
 
Once again AA is the largest airline at LAX by total passengers, revenue share, gate count, O&D passengers and LA-originating passengers. And it did this when operating out of a constrained terminal, with as many as three gates at a time out of commission, plus with US Airways not having a single gate of its own. Those are no longer issues as US has its own gates and gate construction at T4 has concluded as of September 30th. 
 
I know how much you hate hearing those things.