WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #91
BTW, just a look at AA and DL's 1st quarter earnings report shows that on a consolidated basis, DL spent over 9% more per employee on salaries and benefits than AA did.
New AA is going to grow in NYC.
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
What are you waiting for me to tell you? AA obviously didn't profit in LGA-MSP/ATL/CLE, so it is cutting them. I'm waiting for you to tell me how that means AA is losing money in New York City.
Delta is canning service from JFK to Louisville and St. Louis - so I guess that means Delta must obviously not be profitable in New York City (well, we all know that is in fact true that Delta loses a ton in New York, but based on your logic, I am able to draw that conclusion solely on the fact Delta is discontinuing these markets).
Delta is canning service from JFK to Louisville and St. Louis - so I guess that means Delta must obviously not be profitable in New York City (well, we all know that is in fact true that Delta loses a ton in New York, but based on your logic, I am able to draw that conclusion solely on the fact Delta is discontinuing these markets).
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #93
no, Mark, DL is reallocating that capacity elsewhere. I have no problems with a carrier discontinuing markets and reallocating but money making companies don't cut their overall presence where they make money.
In just the past year, AA/US combined have cut close to 1500 seats/day from their combined NYC schedules while DL has added over 2000 seats/day and B6 has added over 1200 seats/day. UA has also reduced about 1200 seats/day but they have a larger base than AA to begin with.
Over the past 6 years which includes all of the mergers plus the slot swap, DL has added over 16,000 seats/day while AA standalone (not even including US to mitigate the effects of the slot swap) has cut almost 5000 seats/day which is 17% of its seats.
DL has by far added the most seats in the NYC market while B6 is actually about flat and UA is slightly smaller post merger than it was separate (remember they had to divest slots at EWR).
As of this summer, DL and UA each have right at 24% of the seats in the combined NYC market while AA/US is at 14%.
In just the past year, AA/US combined have cut close to 1500 seats/day from their combined NYC schedules while DL has added over 2000 seats/day and B6 has added over 1200 seats/day. UA has also reduced about 1200 seats/day but they have a larger base than AA to begin with.
Over the past 6 years which includes all of the mergers plus the slot swap, DL has added over 16,000 seats/day while AA standalone (not even including US to mitigate the effects of the slot swap) has cut almost 5000 seats/day which is 17% of its seats.
DL has by far added the most seats in the NYC market while B6 is actually about flat and UA is slightly smaller post merger than it was separate (remember they had to divest slots at EWR).
As of this summer, DL and UA each have right at 24% of the seats in the combined NYC market while AA/US is at 14%.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #95
that's all you can do when confronted with the reality that AA has cut 17% of its own capacity - totally separate from US - over the past 6 years at NYC where the industry as a whole has added 1% and DL has added 46%?
AA might well be profitable in NYC now but they gave up a whole heck of a lot to get there - gutted their NYC-Caribbean operation, have reduced capacity in the transcons significantly, have cut flying to other carrier hubs as well as former AA hubs (STL, RDU), and have no presence on their own metal from NYC to Asia.
AA's average fares in NYC have grown at the slowest rate of any of the big 4 carriers in the NYC market, proof that giving up size is absolutely related to pricing power.
If that is an acceptable niche position, then I say go for it.
BTW, since you and Mark want to talk about LAX, DL has said that LAX is solidly profitable for them which shouldn't be a surprise since DL has higher average fares than AA, uses no 50 seat RJs, and has no aircraft in its fleet that have a CASM even close to the now-retired AA 762s which were the highest CASM aircraft in the US carrier fleet.
So, if AA is now profitable in LAX, congratulations and welcome to the club.
DL expects to be profitable in NYC and did it by adding 45% capacity compared to cuts by both AA and UA.
AA might well be profitable in NYC now but they gave up a whole heck of a lot to get there - gutted their NYC-Caribbean operation, have reduced capacity in the transcons significantly, have cut flying to other carrier hubs as well as former AA hubs (STL, RDU), and have no presence on their own metal from NYC to Asia.
AA's average fares in NYC have grown at the slowest rate of any of the big 4 carriers in the NYC market, proof that giving up size is absolutely related to pricing power.
If that is an acceptable niche position, then I say go for it.
BTW, since you and Mark want to talk about LAX, DL has said that LAX is solidly profitable for them which shouldn't be a surprise since DL has higher average fares than AA, uses no 50 seat RJs, and has no aircraft in its fleet that have a CASM even close to the now-retired AA 762s which were the highest CASM aircraft in the US carrier fleet.
So, if AA is now profitable in LAX, congratulations and welcome to the club.
DL expects to be profitable in NYC and did it by adding 45% capacity compared to cuts by both AA and UA.
