yes, LAX-PVG does appear to be bookable again which it wasn't on AA.com (not to speak of the other websites) for a couple of months. I'm glad AA is going to give LAX-PVG a shot but I can't say that I reasonably expect AA to do very well in a market where it has no alliance partner on the other end; it has costs that are higher than the other nonstop players; and AA's presence in Asia as a whole is weaker in EVERY market it competes in, including China. I am willing to be surprised but given that AA underperforms UA on every route to Asia the two compete on, I'm not sure why anyone would think LAX-PVG would be any different.
Of course, E, you want to argue that AA and oneworld are now a "quality" alliance/airline now that AA and oneworld are number 3 out of 3... but the simple fact is that both Skyteam and Star serve more of the world with more flights than oneworld does and the same comparison exists between AA and DL and UA.
The simple fact is that AA and BA were fixated on getting ATI/JV for years while regulators on both sides of the Atlantic were demanding slots - and at the same time, other carriers were buildilng much larger and deeper alliances.
You are correct that size ultimately doesn't matter. The simple fact is that US airlines are BUSINESSES and are judged by the metrics for BUSINESSES. ON that mark, AMR and American Airlines underperform its peers in the US network airline business on nearly all financial metrics for the industry. So, not only does AA not have the largest network, it doesn't provide the financial performance that every one of its US network airline peers provide.
Commavia,
the simple fact is that this is a discussion about SYD-DFW. Just like on that "other board" there are people here are want to see AA in SYD and other markets like HKG. The simple fact is that there are very solid business reasons why AA is not able to make those markets work and why they rely on their partners to serve those markets - even though if AA was able to serve those markets, there would be more growth in the company and more jobs for AA employees.
Talk of new aircraft and new cities belies the fact that AA HASN"T managed to turn the company around 7 years after it did its out of court restructuring. Until AA addresses its basic structural problems, there will be those of us who will call the rumors and fantasies of massive growth for what it is. This forum happens to be one where the truth can be freely spoken from many perspectives.
When AA begins to address those structrural problems - and I believe APA will be key in beginning that process - then you and others will be able to freely dream about what AA can do.
But for now, make no mistake, other carriers ARE encroaching into AA"s key markets far more than exists for any other carrier.
---
let me add a few more things....
first, I have been quite complimentary of AA's efforts to reduce its distribution costs - siding clearly with the company and declaring that they will ultimately prevail. My only concern has been the cost of transtion that AA will clearly incur as they become uncompetitive relative to their peers relative distribution channels. But I have had no qualms in saying that AA is assuming its historical position of leadership with regard to the online agency debate, noting that this is an effort that helps AA employees because it is hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses which AA doesn't need to obtain from employees - and in which AA will have an advantage over its competitors for at least a short period.
I don't have any problem w/ pointing out the strong points as well as the challenges for any airline, DL included.
But while you want to deny DL's accomplishments, let me remind you of what DL has accomplished in less than 5 years since it emerged from BK:
1. After years of being able to figure out what it should be or being unable to recognize the changing market, DL decisively shifted its assets to become the largest US int'l carrier as measured by miles of int'l routes and RPMs flown, even before the NW merger.
2. DL reduced its costs to the lowest among the US carriers and has become one of the best performing US airlines from a financial stanpoint. Prior to the CO/UA merger, DL's market capitalization was larger than AA/UA/CO combined.
3. DL has executed the NW merger smoother than any large merger among US airlines.
4. DL is the only US network carrier that is growing its mainline capacitiy - and also shrinking its regional carrier capacity. Although UA/CO based on last year's size was larger than DL, based on current schedules and published guidance, DL could overtake UA as the largest US airline again in 2011.
While many (including over "there") argued that DL's hub at NRT would become obsolete, in fact, DL now has the largest transpacific connecting complex at NRT as JAL pulled down significant amounts of NRT capacity, is within a few percentage of being larger than JAL as the largest int'l airline from Japan, and DL managed to obtain the largest percentage of seats at HND (40% - whcih is very close to DL's overall transpacific seat share at NRT), meaning that all of the predictions of a masive shift in connecting capacity from NRT to HND simply aren't happening while DL is well positioned at both NRT and HND.
Further, DL has added more transapacific capacity overflying Japan than any other US airline, by this summer making DL's DTW gateway larger than UA's SFO gateway by RPMs (but not seats or flights) and larger than AA and UA at ORD COMBINED.
DL has managed to grow to 10 flights per day at LHR, including 3 flights/day from BOS and MIA using slots which AA and BA had to provide as part of its own ATI/JV approval - making DL the only carrier that bothered to even apply for any AA/BA slots.
Sure DL has not won every battle but the fact that DL's failures of the past few years have been small enough NOT to derail their overall progress and growth, you have to give them credit for what they have accomplished.
So, you can argue against DL if you want but an honest objective analysis shows that they have done what they needed to do as part of their restructuring, accomplishing things with respect to network, financial performance, and employee relations - while an honest assessment also shows that AA's restructuring has accomplished none of that.
Specific to this discussion, DL managed to being service with its own metal to SYD, obtain a partner for ATI/JV, and obtain the support of the Australian government in pushing for approval of the agreement from the US government.
I am happy to objectively discuss ANY airline and what they have accomplished. But in an open forum, it requires being objective about the accomplisments and failures of any airline you wish to discuss.
In this context, AA is one of the slowest growing US airlines, still has the highest costs, and is delivering financial results which trail its peers.
