Boston Base

[WorldTraveler]

nah... you don't want to miss a thing, including to find out that most of the flights you work don't make money.

that's very important information for your career.

 

[commavia]

"Most of the flights" AA operates "don't make money."
 
What a joke.
 
We're now reach JAL-chooses-AA-over-Delta levels of detachment from reality.
 
The rhetorical walls are closing in, and the fear is growing stronger.

 

[WorldTraveler]

read what I said correctly... not what AA operates but what he/she works.

he/she is ORD-based, right?

he doesn't work MIA or DFW now, does he?

no wonder your sense of reality is distorted when you can't even read one sentence correctly

 

[commavia]

I'm not the one divining the individual flying patterns of any particular AA flight attendant, let alone speaking with baseless certitude about the profitability of such flights, but yet I'm the one whose "reality is distorted."  Like I said - detachment from reality.

 

[dfw gen]

you are arguing with a fool.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'm not the one divining the individual flying patterns of any particular AA flight attendant, let alone speaking with baseless certitude about the profitability of such flights, but yet I'm the one whose "reality is distorted."  Like I said - detachment from reality.

I don't have to "divine" anything to know that AA's ORD int'l operation has shrunk dramatically and still consists of several routes that can't possibly make money - unless of course UA is rolling in it on the routes AA and UA compete in.

detached reality would be continuing to bring up AA-JL. You do realize that it is AA that has retreated from Japan and is still losing money flying the Pacific? JL did nothing for AA.

detached reality is believing anything else.

 

[jcw]

no, AA is delivering strong RASM because US' pricing strategies are gone.if AA's merger were the sole reason, then they would be enjoying that strength by themselves.the fact that everyone is seeing strong revenue - including some of the best performance UA has seen in a long time - says that the industry as a whole is benefitting.and AA's employees STILL earn about 10% less than DL and UA's employees... when 25% plus of your costs are from employees who make less, it isn't hard to see how AA is doing the exact same thing that happened at US.

US pricing is not gone - I know some have forgotten the US had one of the strongest RAsM out of the bunch

 

[robbedagain]

then explain why according to the dallas morning news thru www.justplanenews.com states that more and more analysts are upping AA  and theres also a barron's article that explains AA could rise 40%

 

[WorldTraveler]

US pricing is not gone - I know some have forgotten the US had one of the strongest RAsM out of the bunch

US does not UNDERCUT other carrier hubs as it did for years. it was a vestige of HP's pricing and US continued it.

If AA did it, they would be susceptible to other carriers doing it to AA hubs which have much more local revenue than ÚS' hubs.

The DOJ discussed the issue in its lawsuit against AA/US.

AA's stock price doesn't necessarily say anything about AA's pricing policies.

 

[700UW]

Hey Joshie,
 
This is why AA runs the 777 from MIA to LAX, here is its routing over a two day period.
 
EZE MIA LAX PVG LAX GRU.

 

[LD3]

It should come as no surprise that if AA/US wants to use its merger primarily as a means to grow its network at the expense of other carriers while piggybacking on the success that other carriers have obtained in the industry, then other carriers WILL quickly focus their growth efforts into AA's key markets to stop their growth and protect what those carriers have obtained in their restructurings.
 

Would DL's Pacific network be as strong as it is now without the help of NW?

 

[WorldTraveler]

absolutely no way.

neither would DL be the strongest carrier in the Midwest without NW which built an outstanding dual hub strategy that connects nearly every point in the Midwest with two hubs- and at one time MEM as well.

without NW, neither could DL have made JFK-NRT work when neither DL or NW had been able to sustain it on their own.

conversely, DL made DTW-GRU work by using DL's network strengths, added CDG service alongside MSP, and used DL's 777s to add more service than NW had ever operated from DTW to Asia at one time.

the point is not that AA shouldn't get network synergies and see stronger revenues by getting rid of US' hub raiding pricing but that AA is adding capacity when others are cutting it and AA is adding capacity as much if not more in other carrier strength markets.

AA can justify its adds however it wants but ORD-DUS is a core market for LH/UA. JFK-DUB is right on top of DL.

it is precisely when AA reports lower LFs on significantly more int'l capacity across the board that other carriers are justified in saying that AA is adding capacity that the market cannot absorb including in other carrier strength markets.

more significantly, AA added capacity throughout its BK and has continued to do it since the merger and the primary revenue reason is to expand its network which is still lacking in many key areas while also from the cost side avoiding dealing with excessive costs including too many airplanes and people that AA didn't deal with in BK.

the industry has had carriers since deregulation that have added capacity when the rest of the industry has shown capacity discipline.

and you know what happens?

the industry collectively decides to put its excess capacity into the "offending" carrier's markets.

Sure, DL wanted to start LAX-LHR and LAX-DFW but I can absolutely assure you that WN, DL, and UA will all decide that there are a whole lot of markets that make sense to expand on their networks if AA wants to continue throwing capacity into its network....

and specific to this discussion, it might not be too long before we see other carriers adding BOS-MIA, BOS-SJU, BOS-ORD, and MIA-Latin America because those carriers will get a piece of AA's revenue if AA is dead set on getting a piece of other carrier's networks while the rest of the industry contracts.

so AA can decide if it really wants to see the unique, high value parts of its network marginalized just so it can fly a few highly competitive markets to Europe and Asia.

history has shown that is the type of price that airlines have paid in the past.

 

[commavia]

 Hahahahaha.  These arguments get increasingly stupid, and detached from reality, with each passing day - it's so transparent that, on point after point, everything is oriented around trying to explain away Delta's (1) deficiencies, and/or (2) diminishing competitive advantage.
 
AA's network is no more "lacking" than Delta's.  The only major domestic regional hole for AA is the Rocky Mountains, the least populated part of the country.  Meanwhile, Delta is #4 out of 4 in Texas, a denser, more populated, and vastly more important place.  Internationally, AA is competitive to Europe, and far closer to where it needs to competitive in its weakest region (Asia) than Delta is in its weakest region (Latin America).  All this hyperventilation about all the capacity AA is adding with no mention of the fact that AA may well be more profitable than Delta at the moment.  An airline with lower costs leveraging those costs to grow - what a novel idea!
 
The message is always the same ... that it's American that better be careful about growing because if they do, it "might not be too long" (how foreboding!) before another airline responds.  But of course, unlike five years ago, it's now a two way street: Delta also better watch out and be careful because now AA, too, can put pressure on Delta when and where it wants to.  The days of Delta getting to push without competitors pushing back are O-V-E-R.  And therein, of course, lies the source of all the tears behind the laughter: AA's network and finances are (very) rapidly eliminating one Delta competitive advantage after another, and some people just can't handle it.  Fear, fear, fear.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

AA can justify its adds however it wants but ORD-DUS is a core market for LH/UA. JFK-DUB is right on top of DL.
 

DUS is a hub for 1-world member AB.  I don't recall the exact dates, but I do believe AA started ORD-DUB after AB joined 1-world.
 
With respect to JFK-DUB - who cares if it is on top of DL.  According to what you post here, DL should be able to crush AA - so why all the whinining?  Same for LH/UA with respect to ORD-DUS.  If they have what it takes to eliminate AA from ORD-DUS they'll do it.

 

[commavia]

With respect to JFK-DUB - who cares if it is on top of DL.

 
Precisely.  A perfect example of the standard myopia that undermines all the B.S. logic.  Who cares if JFK-DUB is "on top of Delta?"  It's also on top of United, and Aer Lingus, the carrier with the most capacity in the market.  But this isn't about them.  It's about Delta, and it's about the pathological need to constantly re-validate its dominance and superiority, even in situations where Delta is neither dominant nor superior.  Again - it's so transparent, and has been for so long, that it's just funny.