MIA-FRA

[FWAAA]

Continuing its long-time unbroken string, in 2013, US Airways once again had the lowest Atlantic yields and unit revenues. Been that way since at least 1995. In 2013, which airline had higher Atlantic yields and unit revenue? AA or DL?

Answer: AA.

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2013%2012%20Month%20Documents/Traffic%20and%20Capacity/Atlantic/Atlantic%20Passenger%20Yield.htm

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2013%2012%20Month%20Documents/Traffic%20and%20Capacity/Atlantic/Atlantic%20Passenger%20Revenue%20per%20ASM.htm

Say it isn't so. Delta gets lower yields and unit revenue across the Atlantic than AA.

Obviously, AA is in for a challenge as it integrates the even lower yielding and lower unit revenue CLT and PHL hubs, which have lagged the industry for nearly 20 years.

 

[WorldTraveler]

we're not talking about FCO as a hub. and AZ's problem is far different from what US carriers face.

AZ is a hopelessly broke airline that might have gotten a slight reprieve - but at the cost of selling its soul to the Arabs.

US is a larger airline in both MXP and FCO than AA. and they generate higher revenue.

As much as it hurts some of you to admit, Italy is not a market where US didn't do well.

and we're also not talking about the Atlantic as a whole, FWAAA.

what you failed to show is that DL's profitability across the Atlantic is higher than any other carrier - perhaps using those 764s and 333s so heavily instead of 777s has helped DL to keep costs in line with revenues.

And it also might explain why DL has been so focused on getting into LHR which is a naturally protected market and one which produces high revenues.

and let's also not forget that yields are biased toward shorter haul segments. Doesn't hurt that LHR is the shortest of the major destinations from the US.

but this discussion is about Germany - where incidentally US also has a better track record than AA but also had the benefit of a JV partner.

perhaps AA can move some Germany capacity out of US hubs to AA.... let's see. It won't be hard to imagine that UA knows exactly what US has carried and what AA can carry and will be very aggressive in protecting its traffic.

 

[MAH4546]

US is a larger airline in both MXP and FCO than AA. and they generate higher revenue.
 

 
Want to try that again before you keep making up facts?
 
Hint: One of the big four U.S. airlines does not fly to Milan. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, you are correct on that statement.

I made 3 statements.

US IS larger than AA and generates higher average fares to FCO - that is correct.

US IS larger than AA and generates higher average fares to Italy as a whole - that is correct.

US IS NOT larger than AA or generate higher average fares to MXP.


it doesn't change that E's statement is the one that is the most incorrect and drew me back into the conversation.

AA is in fact the low fare leader any way you slice the Italy market.

and DL with a JV partner generates the highest amount of revenue at an average fare premium.

and all of that data is subject to change when 2nd quarter 2014 data becomes available within the net couple weeks.

 

[737823]

WT if DL and AZ are doing so great why did AA chase them off MIA-MXP? Pretty sure until a few years ago there were many more MXP routes including BOS.

Josh

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2013%2012%20Month%20Documents/Traffic%20and%20Capacity/Atlantic/Atlantic%20Passenger%20Yield.htm

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2013%2012%20Month%20Documents/Traffic%20and%20Capacity/Atlantic/Atlantic%20Passenger%20Revenue%20per%20ASM.htm

Say it isn't so. Delta gets lower yields and unit revenue across the Atlantic than AA.

Obviously, AA is in for a challenge as it integrates the even lower yielding and lower unit revenue CLT and PHL hubs, which have lagged the industry for nearly 20 years.

 

 

 
 

but this discussion is about Germany - where incidentally ... ... ...
 

 
Also, you forgot to mention, surprisingly, that in Germany DL is the largest USA-based carrier outside of FRA (as you have bragged previously) .
...

 

[eolesen]

I'm inaccurate in saying that driving all the discount traffic across CLT would be a zero sum game?...

You pick the most curious things to latch onto, WT...

 

[zethya]

Even AZ struggles to make FCO work as a hub it's a trash yield market. AA is smart to focus on MXP if that's where the money and fashion industry is. Why has USAIR stayed away from MXP all these years? I know there are many Italians in MIA, and AZ did both FCO and MXP for many years but AA chased them away for MXP.

Josh

US flew PHL-MXP in 2006-2007. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

WT if DL and AZ are doing so great why did AA chase them off MIA-MXP? Pretty sure until a few years ago there were many more MXP routes including BOS.

Josh

first of, the JV between DL and AZ is only a couple years old... not sure of the exact age... but they couldn't have chased DL off if DL wasn't part of the JV.

And even if they were, DL has very much said that it won't participate in a JV on certain routes.

if you recall, the AF LAX-LHR route that was a flop and was also not something that DL wanted because DL didn't believe that AF could make the route work.

again, AZ is hardly even the 10th best example to use in any argument about the way the world should work.

I'm inaccurate in saying that driving all the discount traffic across CLT would be a zero sum game?...

You pick the most curious things to latch onto, WT...

except I didn't say that.

you pick the strangest things to latch onto in thinking that I am latching onto anything you say.
 
 

US flew PHL-MXP in 2006-2007.

thank you. I was certain they had.

and I would bet it will be back.

the notion that AA can make MIA and JFK work by splitting the service between two gateways is hardly a recipe for success, esp. from NYC where multiple carriers offer daily nonstop service thruout the year.

 

[MAH4546]

first of, the JV between DL and AZ is only a couple years old... not sure of the exact age... but they couldn't have chased DL off if DL wasn't part of the JV.

And even if they were, DL has very much said that it won't participate in a JV on certain routes.

if you recall, the AF LAX-LHR route that was a flop and was also not something that DL wanted because DL didn't believe that AF could make the route work.

again, AZ is hardly even the 10th best example to use in any argument about the way the world should work.


except I didn't say that.

you pick the strangest things to latch onto in thinking that I am latching onto anything you say.
 
 

thank you. I was certain they had.

and I would bet it will be back.

the notion that AA can make MIA and JFK work by splitting the service between two gateways is hardly a recipe for success, esp. from NYC where multiple carriers offer daily nonstop service thruout the year.

 
Yeah how stupid of AA to serve Milan from it's two largest and most important long-haul markets and then splitting the service for a ten week period during the weakest period of trans-Atlantic travel. 
 
Heck, it's not like Delta does...oh wait, it does! 
 
PHLMXP won't be back. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, we have heard for months, no years, that US can't compete in the int'l market.

and yet there most certainly are markets, esp. in continental Europe where US and its hubs have performed better than AA has.

Of course it would be fine for me if AA wants to stick it out in NYC and lose money in the process.

 

[eolesen]

Of course it would be fine for me if AA wants to stick it out in NYC and lose money in the process.

Why not? IIRC, DL lost money there for years before it finally started to break even, no?

 

[jcw]

your right - didn't DL just announce that they just became profitable in NY and just getting to profitability in LGA - amazing how some WT can't remember all those losses - it must be like childbirth for him - he forgets all the bad things DL has done or stuck with until it became profitable

 

[topDawg]

Why not? IIRC, DL lost money there for years before it finally started to break even, no?

eh Delta took losses to grow to be the largest airline in NYC. 
 
AA is still going to be number three outside of some kind of crazy deal where they get a bunch of slots. #3 and taking losses..... 
 

WT if DL and AZ are doing so great why did AA chase them off MIA-MXP? Pretty sure until a few years ago there were many more MXP routes including BOS.

Josh

FWIW chasing off AZ isn't something to brag about. 
 
AZ is a dumpster fire. They were probably finding ways to take losses on MIA-MXP before AA showed up. (not saying AA or the market isn't profitable.) 
 

The annual local demand between Miami and Rome is approximately 135,000 local passengers a year; between Miami and Milan is approximately 105,000. Between Miami and Venice is approximately 45,000. That is approximately close to 800 people per day flying between Miami and Italy's three biggest markets. It's more than every single other airport in the Southern U.S. and Italy combined.
 
More people fly between Miami and Rome in one month than do between Charlotte and Rome in one year.
 
The market isn't lucrative and it's mostly South Florida and California traffic flows. 
 
To be fair, it's not like South Florida-Italy is a goldmine, but the market is just massively huge, second only to New York-Italy. 

Italy in general seems like a great place to go to burn money. 
 
Like you said JFK-MXP was strong.....then a carrier with an endless check book jumped right into it. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

your right - didn't DL just announce that they just became profitable in NY and just getting to profitability in LGA - amazing how some WT can't remember all those losses - it must be like childbirth for him - he forgets all the bad things DL has done or stuck with until it became profitable

not only is dawg correct that DL lost money to become #1 from LGA and JFK and in the ENTIRE NYC market but the entire airline lost money as well as to/from Europe. IIRC, DL also did not distinguish between profitably at LGA and JFK but it is quite likely that the problem was JFK, not LGA.

The difference between DL to Europe and AA to Asia is that DL didn't continue to lose money in one region of the money even after the airline overall became profitable which is where AA is right now.

Further, since the topic is about MIA-FRA, it is more relevant to ask what AA is going to do to compete against LH which is not only far stronger from Germany to MIA but also from Germany to all of the destinations in Latin America for which a MIA hub is supposed to help AA.

Given that MIA-MXP proved exactly what I said would happen with JFK-MXP which was that AA weakened its JFK-MXP flight in order to start MIA-MXP, how is AA going to put enough passengers on MIA=FRA without pulling traffic off of other FRA flights which are at the same time seeing decreased loads because of the loss of the Star relationship?