MIA new routes

[WeAAsles]

But back on topic. They are expecting substantial growth here in MIA. They have hired 100 people on the ramp and are looking for another 100 soon. Hope for a MIA DUB route in the future. I loved Dublin when I visited there back in 99.

 

[700UW]

Gee WeAA,
 
How can AA be hiring?
 
According to the all might, all knowing wt, AA is over staffed, come on now, he knows more than someone like you who is actually working there and knows what is actually transpiring.

 

[FWAAA]

I don't know if AA is overstaffed or if DL outsources more work so you don't get the clear picture of actually how many people do the work? There usually is a redundancy in Management and support staff that can be trimmed but not so much on the frontline workforce.

Some of both.   WT has constantly alleged (incorrectly) that AA is over-staffed compared to DL and UA but he refuses to take the much-larger Envoy into account.  UA has no wholly-owned regional feed and DL's wholly-owned regional feed is much smaller than Envoy.   
 
In addition, pmAA hasn't outsourced as much ramp and maintenance as UA or DL.   
 
If he were intellectually honest, he'd argue that AA should outsource more so that it can match UA and DL.   But intellectual honesty is very difficult (nearly impossible) for WT, as he constantly shapes his posts and alleged facts to fit his narrative.
 
Of course new AA (pmUS and pmAA) is slightly over-staffed, as it has yet to layoff all of the duplicative workers - that will happen as the two carriers are combined.   

 

[WeAAsles]

Gee WeAA,
 
How can AA be hiring?
 
According to the all might, all knowing wt, AA is over staffed, come on now, he knows more than someone like you who is actually working there and knows what is actually transpiring.

So far it's all part time with no upgrades though. Yea there's new faces (kids) all over the place. I love new hires. They remind me how I felt when I first hired on. Lot's of enthusiasm. Have to put the brakes on em a little, lol.

 

[WeAAsles]

Some of both.   WT has constantly alleged (incorrectly) that AA is over-staffed compared to DL and UA but he refuses to take the much-larger Envoy into account.  UA has no wholly-owned regional feed and DL's wholly-owned regional feed is much smaller than Envoy.   
 
In addition, pmAA hasn't outsourced as much ramp and maintenance as UA or DL.   
 
If he were intellectually honest, he'd argue that AA should outsource more so that it can match UA and DL.   But intellectual honesty is very difficult (nearly impossible) for WT, as he constantly shapes his posts and alleged facts to fit his narrative.
 
Of course new AA (pmUS and pmAA) is slightly over-staffed, as it has yet to layoff all of the duplicative workers - that will happen as the two carriers are combined.   

Good post. I'm most worried for us on the field about the future of PHX? It's going to be a few years but all of the analysts predict a downsizing there. Whether that's through buyouts and attrition is irrelevant because there could still be people who have to move in the future.

MIA is the absolute safest place in the system to be if you have some seniority.

 

[WeAAsles]

On WT I don't know the guy yet but it seems like he's just a little in love with Delta so far? Personally I'd rather love a 5Ft 9in Russian girl myself but hey that's me.

 

[700UW]

Start saving and when you get your parity raise next year you can buy one of those, lol.
 
Shipping and handling extra!

 

[WeAAsles]

Start saving and when you get your parity raise next year you can buy one of those, lol.
 
Shipping and handling extra!

For now that's only an extra .47 cents. Certainly will have to use some savings. Or sell a few of my AAL shares?  

 

[LD3]

You missed the point.

AA can grow but doing so will mean it is growing in someone else's key markets.

And this doesn't hold true for DL??

 

[WorldTraveler]

Some of both.   WT has constantly alleged (incorrectly) that AA is over-staffed compared to DL and UA but he refuses to take the much-larger Envoy into account.  UA has no wholly-owned regional feed and DL's wholly-owned regional feed is much smaller than Envoy.   
 
In addition, pmAA hasn't outsourced as much ramp and maintenance as UA or DL.   
 
If he were intellectually honest, he'd argue that AA should outsource more so that it can match UA and DL.   But intellectual honesty is very difficult (nearly impossible) for WT, as he constantly shapes his posts and alleged facts to fit his narrative.
 
Of course new AA (pmUS and pmAA) is slightly over-staffed, as it has yet to layoff all of the duplicative workers - that will happen as the two carriers are combined.

except that DOT data does show what percentage of the employee base is for each type of job function as well as for mainline vs. subsidiaries.

Yes, I know that AA has a larger regional carrier and also does a higher percentage of inhouse maintenance which inflates its numbers but just between 2012 and 2013, AA's percentage of outsourced maintenance went from 25% to 30% in one year. DL's percentage is at 40% for 2013 and DL sent nearly all of their cabin mods out to contractors.

AA/US still have two headquarters and there are duplicate staff in fairly large overlap cities like LGA, LAX, and ORD. There are duplicate res offices. We had a thread on here about the duplicate lounge personnel at LAX.

And then there are still duplicate hubs which will be resolved one way or the other. AA/US has duplicate internal competing hubs just like UA/CO had between CLE and ORD, EWR vs IAD. AA simply doesn't need the amount of duplicate hub capacity on the east coast - 4 hubs have some form of hub status and also have flights to Europe.
 
 

And this doesn't hold true for DL??

of course it holds true. WeAAsles gets it that there will be a move by each carrier to move into each other's strength areas while trying to protect their own and they will figure out ways to carefully carve up the market where it is obvious the other network carriers are coming and they might as well protect the market between themselves rather than give it to the LCCs. to a great extent, that is what AA and UA did between LAX and ORD.

But AA is smaller in BOTH Asia and Europe relative to DL while Latin America is the smallest of the global regions (Europe/TATL, Asia/TPAC, and Latin America). the relatively little amount of int'l growth DL must do to have at least a #2 presence in each of the global regions is less than what AA has to do to get to the same place.

As much as some people act like it is all personal, it is simply a result of the fact that DL has a first mover advantage because it started the megamerger era and executed the DL/NW merger as flawlessly as any larger merger as any merger has taken place.

AA/US might be equally flawless and AA might well address its strategic weaknesses fairly quickly - and benefit from UA's weakness at the same time - but DL had at least a 7 year head start. The fact that DL is growing in Latin America at a 25% growth rate while also building out the west coast to Asia shows the capacity of a megacarrier to address the relatively small strategic deficiencies in their network..

And let's be clear that AA's need to balance its TATL network is relatively small in comparison to what it has to do in Asia.

And all of the growth that AA and DL are doing/will do is highly dependent on how quickly UA can get its act together. UA knows full well how much revenue it is losing to AA and DL and how the future of that company depends on getting their merger resolved and working.



As for FLL, DL is number 4 in passenger share behind B6, NK, and WN with about 14%. but in terms of revenue share, DL is #2 because the network carriers get higher average fares not only in FLL but in most markets where they compete with LCCs. DL's revenue share of the FLL local market is just under 17%. on a combined basis, AA/US' passenger revenue share at FLL is just over 12% while revenue share is at 15%.

Remember again that we have yet to see the affect of rationalizing AA/US combined network and DAL-FLL is one of the markets that WN will enter while DFW-FLL is one of AA's top markets.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Miami and New York are the two most important European gateways in the U.S., and the only ones that can consistently fill a plane to Europe 365 days a year. 

 
I was under the impression that a large percentage of the people filling the planes to Miami 365 days a year are European "holidaymakers", mostly seniors (especially Germans).  If that is the case for traffic from other European countries, is the typical European vacationer the market AA should be chasing?  Wouldn't it make for sense to leave that for alliance partner AB?  From Miami AA already serves LHR, MAD, CDG, BCN, MXP.  IMHO, the only major European business centers missing, that I can think of off the top of my head are maybe BRU and ZRH - but even the MIA-ZRH fares are not as high as those to LHR, MXP and CDG.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

problem is that the jury is still far from out that even the last wave of AA's growth, esp. to Asia and Europe, will produce positive earnings for AA.

 

Now this is hilarious!
On one hand you say it's too early to judge AA, while at the same time writing pages & pages of diatries how AA should just give up, is doomed, no route will work, etc. etc. etc. because DL superiority. 
So, is the jury still out, or have you already rednered your decision?

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

 But intellectual honesty is very difficult (nearly impossible) for WT, as he constantly shapes his posts and alleged facts to fit his narrative.

+1

 

[WorldTraveler]

absolutely nowhere have I ever said that AA should just give up or is doomed.

If you interpreted what I have written like that, it is your interpretation and not what I have written.

I have noted that the merger did not move AA's relative position in Europe or Asia relative to DL and UA and that AA is subsidizing its current Asia operations to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

AA added several new European routes a year ago (JFK-DUB, ORD-DUS etc) that haven't generated revenues sufficiently high to say they are a success... ie the average fares are not higher than on routes like JFK-BRU that AA previously cancelled.

Once again, the simple fact is that AA has too many gateways to both Europe and Asia that it is either trying to maintain and/or build and is adding a lot of routes to both regions without any evidence so far that they are succeeding.

There will be hubs rationalized and some of these routes pulled.

It also is absolutely true that DL and UA have a lot less strategic weakness in the int'l arena relative to AA - and it almost entirely focuses on S. Florida to Latin America.

given the growth of LCCs in the region, it will make it far easier for DL or UA to grow from S. Florida to Latin America than it will be for AA to grow to Europe or Asia, in many cases also having to compete against large and sometimes lower cost int'l carriers as well.

Latin America is the smallest global region and is also the most concentrated with AA having a higher percentage of Latin America than DL or UA have of Europe or Asia and is also concentrated with a higher percentage of the market in a few large cities - in this case MIA. It is a lot easier for either DL or UA to add flights to/from MIA - one city - some of which could be on large RJs or small mainline aircraft - than it is for AA to deploy widebody aircraft to Europe or Asia.

Latin America is also growing far faster than Europe which makes it easier for DL or UA to focus on the growth part of the market which will be expanded because of low fare stimulation of the market.

Given that DL is stronger in Florida as a whole than UA and has a strong presence in S. Florida, I fully expect that DL will add MIA-Latin America flights, focusing on the largest markets as well as in partnership with AeroMexico and Gol, both of which DL partially owns.

For now, UA is doing next to nothing in terms of its strategic weaknesses which include not just Florida-Latin America but the entire southeast US and the loss of TAM as an alliance partner.


I fully expect that DL will add MIA to Latin America but expanding in MIA to Latin America is not on DL's highest priority list because DL is focusing on the west coast as well as tightening up other key east coast markets.

 

[commavia]

Delta has no meaningful, sustainable competitive advantage relative to AA (or United) that either or both of those competitors cannot combat and/or replicate.  Period.
 
The constant focus on AA being "#3 out of 3," Delta getting to "at least #2," etc. is a characteristic red herring masquerading as a cogent argument.  The reality is that this distinction matters little - what truly matters is capacity, and market access.  If AA can get you to pretty much all the same major European markets - national capitals, business centers, leisure destinations, etc. - that Delta and United can, and be within 5-10 bps in terms of overall market share, does the fact that it's technical "#3 out of 3" matter?  Of course not.  In Asia, the distinction is more meaningful, given that AA currently lacks a major west coast gateway, but there, too, as has already been said, the gap is closing as Delta dismantles its NRT hub and AA ramps up its nonstop Asia service overflying Japan.  And as for Latin America, AA's lead is so insurmountable that Delta simply cannot close the gap in the way AA has now done across the Atlantic via the merger.  AA is pretty much the size of Delta and United combined in the region, offering a level of nonstop access to every major regional market of consequence that no other U.S. carrier sans a MIA hub can ever replicate.
 
Still some bitter clingers refusing to accept reality ...