DOT Approves AS/AA LAX-MEX Route Swap

[WorldTraveler]

those schedules are simply not what is reflective in the automated schedule systems.

for July 2015, AA is showing 1 flight/day LAX-GDL and between 2 and 3 flights/day (84 flights/month) between LAX-SJD.

the same LAX-GDL schedule is there for August but even fewer SJD flights in August.

when will these greatly expanded schedules be posted?
 

Largest domestic carrier at LAX and ... largest carrier at LAX overall.  It's hysterical that "some" still can't accept that reality.
 
Either way, MEX is yet another important O&D market from LAX in which AA will now compete, and, again, yet another building block to continuing to build its ("leading") presence in the LAX market.
 
But by all means let's make this about AA using E175s to the Caribbean (in several markets, notably, where competitors including Delta have precisely zero presence) and ATL-DFW market share.
 
Classic.

what is classic is that you continue to hold onto AA's lead in the domestic market and think it makes up for a lack of flights in the int'l marketplace.

AA may very well add flights from LAX to Mexico but they are even further behind the game to Central America as a whole...

and just like what we have seen elsewhere, you continue to assume that AA can and will grow but other carriers will not.

Let us know when AM, DL, and UA decide to roll over and let AA add flights without any additions on their part.

 

[commavia]

Still can't admit that AA (when including USAirways, which is now operating on the same operating certificate) is the largest carrier at LAX - not just domestically, but at LAX overall, with the most flights, the most seats and - I believe - the most nonstop destinations.  Not that this fact - in and of itself - is all that important, but still - hysterical.

 

[WorldTraveler]

no one has argued that AA is not the largest airline at LAX.


AA is the largest carrier because of its position in the DOMESTIC market.

even if AA grows to the first place position to Mexico, it is still smaller than DL to Latin America as a whole and smaller than DL to Asia in terms of seats offered.

DL’s list of Latin markets from LAX is MTY, BJX, BZE, CUN,GDL,GUA, LIR, MGA, MZT, PVR, SAL, SJO, ZIH, ZLO.
AA: GDL, SJD, and now MEX.

and remember that just like so many other markets like SEA and PDX, AA's expansion at LAX to Mexico will step on AS.


Further, based on DOT data, AA is NOT the largest carrier based on O&D passengers to any of the 3 global regions from LAX. DL has the Pacific while UA has the Atlantic and Latin America.

and a big chunk of AA's size in Latin America from LAX is GRU which was burning cash like there was no tomorrow even before the Real dropped so much.

I can't wait to see the latest DOT data to see how much LAX-GRU is down now.

but since AA's goal seems to be to drive KE out of the market and then hope to woo them as an alliance partner, it isn't a surprise that AA won't back down anytime soon.

 

[commavia]

Ah yes, because AA's international presence at LAX this summer ...

• BZE (twice weekly)
• GDL
• GRU
• LHR (double daily)
• MEX (double daily)
• NRT
• PVG
• SJD (triple daily)
• YEG
• YVR (double daily)
• YYZ (double daily)

... is just embarrassing.  (And that's not counting flights operated by AA's joint business partners British Airways, Iberia, JAL and QANTAS.)
 
I swear ... you can't make this comedy gold up!

 

[MAH4546]

Seriously? Does your math suck that much?
 
I detailed the schedules. 
 
19 flights a week to SJD at 160/flight, 14 flights a week to MEX at 160/flight, 7 flights a week to GDL at 128/flight.
 
American Airlines will overtake Delta as the largest U.S. airline between LAX and Mexico. That's a fact and you are having an oddly hard time accepting it. 
 
And to think - that's with just three markets, when AA is planning on building up a lot more LA-Mexico flying in the future; not to mention a bigger push into LAX-Central America which starts with BZE this June. 
 
AA is likely going to enter LAX-PVR/MZT/BJX/etc. when the markets are liberalized. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

Canada isn't considered int'l either for DOT regions or for customs.. but if you want to...


Using Canada since you want to, DL is still the largest int'l carrier at LAX with 3300 int'l seats/day compared to 2300 for AA today (and 320 for MEX).

the only tragedy is that you continue to fight the reality that actually exists.

and, go right ahead with the build up to Mexico, MAH. It will finish AS off to Mexico

 

[commavia]

Well if anyone would know about continuing to fight reality ...

 

[700UW]

Canada isn't considered int'l either for DOT regions or for customs.. but if you want to...


Using Canada since you want to, DL is still the largest int'l carrier at LAX with 3300 int'l seats/day compared to 2300 for AA today (and 320 for MEX).

the only tragedy is that you continue to fight the reality that actually exists.

and, go right ahead with the build up to Mexico, MAH. It will finish AS off to Mexico

You have to use your passport to go to Canada, didnt know you need a passport to fly domestic?

Oh wait, Canada you do to go through customs on at least one end if any of the cities out of Canada are pre-cleared.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Canada is considered domestic in the DOT's global airfare ranking just as a US built car is considered domestic in Canada and vice versa - and that has been the case for both industries - and more - for decades.

and it also doesn't change that with or without Canada, DL is still a larger international airline at LAX than AA.

I'm glad that AA is growing into new markets but while everyone was here telling us that DL had no gates and was so small at LAX, they became the largest int'l airline at LAX.

and DL did it since the DL-NW merger and I can also assure you that DL won't give up its position in LAX just because AA feels like they need to be the number INTERNATIONAL airline at LAX to go with their position as the largest domestic airline.

Since DL is the largest int'l airline at JFK and UA is at ORD, strategically AA has no choice but to try to become the largest int'l airline at one of its hubs at the big 3 US airports - it just has to get past DL and UA in each case.

 

[commavia]

Blah blah blah.  AA has a necessarily meaningful and competitive presence - both domestically and internationally - in NYC, and CHI, and certainly at LAX, let alone DFW and MIA, plus CLT, PHL, PHX, WAS, etc.
 
So back to what this thread was actually about - how AA will soon be flying nonstop from LAX to MEX, leveraging a presence in this large and important market as yet another building block (along with its terminal/gate rights, 3-class transcon service, First Class lounge, top shelf longhaul partners, etc.) to continuing to bolster its market leadership at LAX.  Reality.

 

[robbedagain]

having a hub at LAX  and the airline continues to expand  its great to see more flights.  AS will be selling flights on AA according to an article on justplanenews.com    

 

[WorldTraveler]

Blah blah blah.  AA has a necessarily meaningful and competitive presence - both domestically and internationally - in NYC, and CHI, and certainly at LAX, let alone DFW and MIA, plus CLT, PHL, PHX, WAS, etc.
 
So back to what this thread was actually about - how AA will soon be flying nonstop from LAX to MEX, leveraging a presence in this large and important market as yet another building block (along with its terminal/gate rights, 3-class transcon service, First Class lounge, top shelf longhaul partners, etc.) to continuing to bolster its market leadership at LAX.  Reality.

and no one has denied that.

If you want to argue about size, then it is absolutely relevant to note that AA is the largest DOMESTIC airline at LAX but is not the largest int'l airline including to Latin America. And whatever gain it gains with Mexico will be short lived as soon as DL can enter the LAX-MEX market as well.

either size doesn't matter in which case all of the gates that AA acquires won't matter - or size does matter - and AA is for now not the largest int'l airline in any of NYC, CHI, or LAX and DL is actually the largest int'l carrier in both of AA's LAX and JFK hubs.

and if AS wants to dismantle its network piecemeal to AA, DL will have no objections. AA is a higher cost competitor than AS so DL's west coast goals will be easier to attain.

 

[commavia]

Still peddling the same simplistic, binary logic to distract from the same biased, baseless arguments.
 
Back here in reality, it's more subtle than, "either size matters or it doesn't" - and frankly, I would have thought that someone claiming to be such an industry "expert" would understand that.
 
Depending on the circumstances, and the business models of the rivals, size can matter, and in such cases, the relative disparity in size matters a great deal.  Thus why, for instance, AA has remained an extremely strong competitor in the NYC metro market, despite never being - at least in the deregulated era - the region's largest operator, as AA's 15.1% market share is set against its two larger rivals who have 23.9% and 21.7% market share, respectively.  By contrast, Delta was not able to remain a viable hub competitor at DFW because its larger rival, AA, was typically 2-3x larger.  And thus, yet again bringing this back to the actual point of this thread, why this market (along with the gate rights, 3-class transcon service, etc.) will be important for AA to continue to bolster its competitive presence at LAX and defend its leading market share in the market.
 
Context - it's important.

 

[WorldTraveler]

For now, AA is the third largest int'l airline in both NYC and LAX and number 2 in CHI, only because DL has no int'l flights from there.

of course context is important, commavia, including that AA WAS much larger than DL in NYC for most of the time since both airlines took to the skies. The gap between AA and DL was also much larger in LAX than it is now too.

The context that you want to ignore is that AA spent 10 years wandering thru the wilderness and lots a significant amount of market share to DL in key markets. AA's great salvation is that UA has floundered around as well so the market share losses to UA have been minimal.

but AA and UA on a combined basis and individually have both given up huge amounts of their market share and power to other carriers and DL has been the legacy carrier that managed to outlast all of the others and grow up against AA and UA, who were both chosen instruments of the US government since the beginning of US aviation while DL was not.

That is the REAL context and one that undoubtedly gave DL a fighting spirit which has translated into the ability to successfully move into one market after another than AA and UA have once dominated.

so yes, context is important. but the context you don't want to see is that AA is not the largest int'l airline in NYC, CHI, or LAX and was stronger than DL in NYC but gave that up. Now you believe that AA will simply decide it wants to grow in LAX and DL and UA will just roll over and let that happen and I respectfully submit to you that will not happen.


specific to the LAX-MEX case, this is what the DOT said:

The Department is cognizant that the United States and Mexico recently concluded negotiations on a modernized air transport agreement, and the Department anticipates that there could be substantial changes in the market within the next year. Against this background, the Department tentatively finds it in the public interest to limit its approval of the Joint Applicants requests for amended exemption authorities to a period of one year. 12 A timely renewal application will provide an appropriate vehicle for consideration of whether the situation prevailing in the market at that time might call for a different regulatory treatment.

 

[commavia]

The histrionics are fun, but back here in reality, Delta's lack of favoritism from the U.S. government eighty years ago is of little relevance.
 
What is of relevance is that while AA was "wandering thru the wilderness" and United was "managing a merger," Delta's adept management team took advantage to improve its competitive position and strategic secure gains while they could.  Those days are over.  As has been said repeatedly, Delta no longer has the ability to push without AA and/or United pushing back - as we've seen with HND, and LAX-MEX, etc.  It's not 2009 anymore - despite what some peoples' flawed thinking and failed arguments might imply.