Arizona's worst-case merger scenario: Pittsburgh

[ChockJockey]

Ten.

Wow. That IS definitely, undoubtedly solid.

Durr-hurr-hurr. There are of course those who would welcome a PHX closure for purely sentimental reasons. If we're using arbitrary things to define solidity let's not forget that PHX handles more international volume in more flights to more destinations than AA does out of LAX.

Per the respective and current route maps, international destinations and departures under brand on 2/16/2013:

PHX:
YVR 2
YEG 2
YYC 2
SJD 5
HMO 1
MZT 3
PVR 4
GDL 3
ZLO 1
ZIH 1
MEX 2
CUN 2
SJO 1

LAX:
LHR 1
NRT 1
SHA 1
SJD 2

I wasn't implying that PHX has the international scope or size as PHL or CLT or should be a candidate for a transcontinental gateway.

The problem for PHX is going to be connecting traffic. With PHX beign right in between DFW and LAX the question is going to be which hub will go? I think it's a guarantee that LAX or PHX will not be a hub in five years. I tthink one could make a good argument for either, though I'd put the money on PHX simply because LAX is more... prestigous. Weather isn't a factor as that can go either way, though the summer heat might be a negative for PHX. Something tells me the density altitude in PHX in July and August is several thousand feet higher then in LAX, and that's got to do awful things to long haul flights like to NRT.

There is only one international market that both LAX and PHX serve and that is SJD, and that's why the two can conceivably coexist. Reconfigure LAX for more intercontinental service and route the West Coast international traffic through PHX, where we are the only US-based carrier currently serving international destinations.

 

[Black Magic]

An example of the Delta/Nw merger and the Slc hub could be the equivalent with Phx and a AA/US merger.

How many flights does Delta have at LAX? Quite a few if I remember right with many being international. Delta didn't downsize the SLC hub just because it was close to LAX and MSP.

Then again this Parker we are talking about so who knows..

 

[Jester]

An example of the Delta/Nw merger and the Slc hub could be the equivalent with Phx and a AA/US merger.

How many flights does Delta have at LAX? Quite a few if I remember right with many being international. Delta didn't downsize the SLC hub just because it was close to LAX and MSP.

I would consider SLC to be more of an inter-mountain west regional airport, much like DEN with UA's hub operations. SLC to LAX wouldn't be all that close with nearly 600 miles between the two either. The problem with PHX is that it really doesn't bring much to the table when sandwiched between DFW and LAX, especially as it is a low-yeilding market.

Furthermore, whatever PHX might offer in terms of an RJ hub could be handled through LAX (assuming there is enough gates available) or through DFW to the Rocky Mountain region. Either way, I don't see much of a future for PHX, assuming DFW and LAX aren't restricted in terms of available space or slots.

 

[zethya]

...........let's not forget that PHX handles more international volume in more flights to more destinations than AA does out of LAX.........

I wasn't implying that PHX has the international scope or size as PHL or CLT or should be a candidate for a transcontinental gateway......

There is only one international market that both LAX and PHX serve and that is SJD, and that's why the two can conceivably coexist. Reconfigure LAX for more intercontinental service and route the West Coast international traffic through PHX, where we are the only US-based carrier currently serving international destinations.

PHX certainly has much more scope and size than CLT. If CLT's connecting traffic is significantly cut, there will be little reason for more than 1 flight to LHR. The main reason CLT has the international destinations that it has is because it's the PHL reliever. If you flowed all of the CLT domestic-international connecting traffic through PHL, it would likely clog the already congested NE airspace. If the new AA rightsizes and optimizes a combined JFK/PHL, CLT should no longer be required for that purpose.

Likely a large factor that will influence how the combined network materializes is Airport profitability/passenger. For example. even though PHX has significantly more Domestic O&D than CLT, it is much lower Yielding/Passenger (Average 2011) - $13.9 versus $21.4. However LAX's Yields are even lower than PHX at $12.8. AA (new) could just as easily increase Asia service via LAX as start it from PHX. The disadvantage with PHX is that it has significanty less (in most cases miniscule) Asian international O&D than LAX to compensate for the low yielding domestic connections. PHX's relatively low Yields is also a reason why it may be downsized in favor of DFW, which has a $19.3 Yield. If combined network inefficencies were not a factor, CLT would be the most profitable connecting Hub in the new AA system. PHL's Yields are $16.4, however JFK's are significantly lower at $13.1, which is why there could be substantial benefits by optimizing the 2 into a huge international Hub - JFK for NYC O&D and PHL for PHL O&D and most international connecting traffic.