USA/Australia announce "OPEN SKIES PACT"

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

With The US and Austalia announcing a RARE/NEW open skies agreement, and coupled with that "most likely", AA won't get much Involved with Consolidation aka. NW/DL + UA/CO,..."NOW" is the time to ACT FIRST with AA ns flights to Austalia + New Zealand !!

New flights from DFW ??...........Absolutely NOT
New flights from LAX/SFO ?? .....Absolutely NOT

1 x 6/7 from "JFK" / SYD
1 x 6/7 from ORD / SYD
1 x 5 from ORD / to Aukland

NOW eolesen, I'll sit patiently waiting for your response, to tell me/us WHY AA should NOT do it !

Yes, AA Finally needs to pick up the phone to Boeing, and Order 6 777-200LR Worldliners.

I hope eleson does'nt tell me, that AA should WAIT for CO to fly the SYD route from EWR, or Quantas to be first out of JFK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Neither CO or Quantas have the 777-200 LR on Order.

A potential JFK/SYD could be marketed "to the hilt", with In flight service as GOOD or BETTER than Q/CO !!!


"STRIKE(FIRST) WHILE THE IRON IS HOT" !!!!!!!!!!!!

????????????

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

A potential JFK/SYD could be marketed "to the hilt", with In flight service as GOOD or BETTER than Q/CO !!!
service will get better when my pay gets better

until then eat cake

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

service will get better when my pay gets better

until then eat cake

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

" T F C ",

I hear ya',...I really do !

Having said that,....one thing AAers have always did well(despite our ANGER at HDQ) is to never take a Back seat to the competition.

This Australia "thing", is an "Ultra Rare Bird"(if you will)
The Conventional wisdom on this matter(as eolesen has been "pointing" out to me for YEARS)(and I'm NOT saying he was entirely Wrong), was that Qantas HAD a stranglehold (as most people would expect) over Australia. Well the rules just changed !!
Lets look specifically at a JFK/SYD route. SYD(obviously) IS Australia, and JFK(not ATL/ORD/LAX/DFW) IS America's REAL airport(think the worlds Financial center.
Though DL would argue loudly, AA is JFK !!

to fly this route, one would need the 777-200LR. The ONLY a/c today, capable of connecting the 2 city pairs. Only DL, currently has the 777-200LR !

So my point is, for AA to be FIRST, out of Kennedy, to SYD(Obviously ORD/SYD would ultimately figure into that mix.

Like ORD, JFK DEFINITELY has the O+D traffic to SYD, when you factor in the Enormously populated NE states.(EX:...NY/NJ/PA/CT/RI/MA/VT/NH/ME and possibly DE + MD !!!)

Boeing states that the A/C can carry 300 people...9450 Miles(BINGO for ORD which is 93xx "and change")
For Kennedy, they can add 1 extra gas tank, and carry 250 people, providing SUPERIOR In flight service.

(Special note of Interest)..though AA hasn't done it in a while,.....THEY(when they want to) STILL remember HOW to put on an "Inflight show". People can rave about the Superior Singapore service, "until the Cows come home", but their F/A's are still human beings. And I'll stack the JFK senior F/A's up against them ANYDAY !!

Bottom line,........New York (Especially JFK) Is.. OUR HOME TURF....................Period !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Winglet]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
People can rave about the Superior Singapore service, "until the Cows come home", but their F/A's are still human beings. And I'll stack the JFK senior F/A's up against them ANYDAY !!
!!

That's good. You had me going there for a minute.

 

[FWAAA]

Bears, I'm not Eric, but I still don't see AA flying to Australia. Sure, other airlines are now free to compete with QF and its 80% market share and UA's 20% market share, but I don't predict much success for them. Especially now that it's open skies.

Same with LHR. CO and DL and NW and US have been pining for years to fly to LHR and now that anyone can, the newcomers are not gonna make the huge $$$ that the Bermuda II Four have earned over the years.

Conventional wisdom is that the future is not in domestic flights, yet AA's extensive LAX operations provide lots of connections for the QF passengers. Every time I get on a morning flight at LAX, invariably I'm seated next to or near an Aussie who's connecting to MIA or JFK or ORD or DFW or, well, you get the idea.

I just don't see AA doing it but I've been wrong plenty of times before.

 

[eolesen]

The Conventional wisdom on this matter(as eolesen has been "pointing" out to me for YEARS)(and I'm NOT saying he was entirely Wrong), was that Qantas HAD a stranglehold (as most people would expect) over Australia. Well the rules just changed !!
Lets look specifically at a JFK/SYD route. SYD(obviously) IS Australia, and JFK(not ATL/ORD/LAX/DFW) IS America's REAL airport(think the worlds Financial center.

Bears, what is your facination with Australia?...

The reason Qantas makes a killing is because they own the domestic Australian market. There are a lot more Australians who want to visit the US than there are Americans who want to go to Australia... I'm flying them twice in the next month (once in J, once in Y), so I'll tell you how great the service is compared to AA, BA, and CX (who I am also flying within the next two weeks...).

But as much as I'd love to see AA metal flying over the Harbour Bridge, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon. If you hadn't noticed, oneworld partners tend not to butt into each others hubs unless it is a from a hub. LAX, while sizeable, isn't a hub.

People can rave about the Superior Singapore service, "until the Cows come home", but their F/A's are still human beings.

Of course they're human. Did you want cows for flight attendants?.... If you'd like, I can suggest a few airlines where that's the norm...

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Bears, what is your facination with Australia?...

The reason Qantas makes a killing is because they own the domestic Australian market. There are a lot more Australians who want to visit the US than there are Americans who want to go to Australia... I'm flying them twice in the next month (once in J, once in Y), so I'll tell you how great the service is compared to AA, BA, and CX (who I am also flying within the next two weeks...).

But as much as I'd love to see AA metal flying over the Harbour Bridge, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon. If you hadn't noticed, oneworld partners tend not to butt into each others hubs unless it is a from a hub. LAX, while sizeable, isn't a hub.




Of course they're human. Did you want cows for flight attendants?.... If you'd like, I can suggest a few airlines where that's the norm...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

E,

The ONLY point I'll concede to you is the "One World BUTT" !

Having said that,...since people(in this case the Americans), who go to Australia, tend to buy round trip tickets, then AA could bring them "down under", and bring them home.

You notice E, and FWAAA, that I did NOT mention LAX/SFO !!

I'm talking KENNEDY here. WE/AA OWNS "KENNEDY" !!!
Qantas(yet) Does NOT fly from JFK(they haven't YET got the needed A/C)
Continental does NOT fly the route from EWR(again no 777-200LR)

SO......."WHY NOT AA" ??
Being (hypothetically) FIRST on a route like that, can make all the difference.

OR,

Do we wait until DL/NW breaks down, ...and then watch the FIRST thing Anderson does..After the break down,.....announce that "DL will fly the route !!
Because, as we know,...........THEY do HAVE the 777-200LR !

Crandall NEVER EVER shyed away from a route, because of what someone ELSE was doing.

Case in point,...JFK/BRU....ORD/BRU.

Everyone knew that SABENA was the "cats meow" from Brussels. Am I not CORRECT, or what about NRT ?????

I could'nt give a "rats A$$" what qantas does.

Take americans down....take americans back(and IF we grab a few Aussies who HATE qantas similiar to how some folks in MSP..hate NW,...well ALL the better)

 

[Hi-C-Camp]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

E,

The ONLY point I'll concede to you is the "One World BUTT" !

Having said that,...since people(in this case the Americans), who go to Australia, tend to buy round trip tickets, then AA could bring them "down under", and bring them home.

You notice E, and FWAAA, that I did NOT mention LAX/SFO !!

I'm talking KENNEDY here. WE/AA OWNS "KENNEDY" !!!
Qantas(yet) Does NOT fly from JFK(they haven't YET got the needed A/C)
Continental does NOT fly the route from EWR(again no 777-200LR)

SO......."WHY NOT AA" ??
Being (hypothetically) FIRST on a route like that, can make all the difference.

OR,

Do we wait until DL/NW breaks down, ...and then watch the FIRST thing Anderson does..After the break down,.....announce that "DL will fly the route !!
Because, as we know,...........THEY do HAVE the 777-200LR !

Crandall NEVER EVER shyed away from a route, because of what someone ELSE was doing.

Case in point,...JFK/BRU....ORD/BRU.

Everyone knew that SABENA was the "cats meow" from Brussels. Am I not CORRECT, or what about NRT ?????

I could'nt give a "rats A$$" what qantas does.

Take americans down....take americans back(and IF we grab a few Aussies who HATE qantas similiar to how some folks in MSP..hate NW,...well ALL the better)

Actually, there are many reasons AMR won't fly SYD. The previous poster is right - it is the same as LHR. Don't forget you have negotiations coming up with the pilots and all the China debacle from DFW, JFK-SYD no way. AMR does have a sizable portion from JFK, but they do not own NY, CAL owns NY, and DAL has a huge chunk of JFK as well as JBlu on domestic. UAL has LAX and SFO tied up so I really think it is going to remain similar to what it is now. Hopefully you will get to see the day when AMR finally reaches that point BEARs, I am sure you will be on the innaug. flight, as you should be.

 

[eolesen]

Crandall NEVER EVER shyed away from a route, because of what someone ELSE was doing.

Case in point,...JFK/BRU....ORD/BRU.

Everyone knew that SABENA was the "cats meow" from Brussels. Am I not CORRECT, or what about NRT ?????

You're ignoring the directional travel, G... Travel between BRU and the US is probably 50/50 split for continent of origin. Likewise with NRT. It simply isn't the case with AU - US. As previously mentioned, it's something like 70/30 in the Aussie's favor. Guess who wins?

Look at US-Mexico travel. US carriers dominate by a wide margin, mainly because the bulk of the traffic is made up of US nationals heading to Mexico. It doesn't help the likes of Mexicana and Aeromexico that it is easier to walk across the border in the middle of the night than it is to buy an airline ticket...

Likewise in the Caribbean. People booking from the US rarely choose Cayman Airways, Air Jamaica, etc.. They tend to fly on a US carrier, which is why bottom feeder Spirit even makes a few bucks at the Caribbean carriers' expense.

Back to Australia...

Virgin's transpac carrier isn't going to be a guaranteed success by any measure -- Virgin Blue isn't exactly making Qantas bleed in the domestic market, and I doubt they'll put much of a dent in the trans-pac traffic, either. Several of the flights I've been trying to book to LAX have been totally sold out as far as six weeks in advance, and that's in Business Class...

 

[Maark767]

service will get better when my pay gets better

until then eat cake

Nice.... Good idea , lets shoot ourselves in the foot. Next time just sit down and not do any services..... that will get them.

 

[Skymess]

Nice.... Good idea , lets shoot ourselves in the foot. Next time just sit down and not do any services..... that will get them.

Yeah, Mark, kind of like opening all the wine on every LHR flight just to pour it down the drain as a protest for the people who got fired for taking stuff. Brilliant.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Actually, there are many reasons AMR won't fly SYD. The previous poster is right - it is the same as LHR. Don't forget you have negotiations coming up with the pilots and all the China debacle from DFW, JFK-SYD no way. AMR does have a sizable portion from JFK, but they do not own NY, CAL owns NY, and DAL has a huge chunk of JFK as well as JBlu on domestic. UAL has LAX and SFO tied up so I really think it is going to remain similar to what it is now. Hopefully you will get to see the day when AMR finally reaches that point BEARs, I am sure you will be on the innaug. flight, as you should be.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HI-C,

Sorry my friend, CO is in "NJ", and ANYWHERE CO goes, AA could go if they wanted to.

Same as JFK.

Just because DL has an Insatiable appetite to land a 767 on ANY strip it can locate in eastern Europe/Mongolia, doesn't make them OWNING JFK.

AA didn't built that "taj-Mahal" in terminal 8/9 In JFK for Nothing.

I NEVER thought I'd see any US carrier penetrate LHR, BUT SURPRISE...It Happened
And Sure, being successful into SYD wouldn't happen overnight, but you've got to TRY.

It still surprises me, after all these years since De-regulation, SOME folks(every now and then) Still think with a Regulated Mindset :down:

 

[eolesen]

Most people have no problem thinking of deregulation when it comes to serving international markets. Unfortunately, just about the only thing that was deregulated domestically were pricing and marketing....

It's easier to serve international routes than it is to serve LGA, JFK, DCA, ORD, SNA, or LGB. The ability to serve any market without permission is mostly allowed, but not really.

SFO-DCA and LAX-LGA are prohibited, even if you have available slots at DCA or LGA. Then there's MDW-DAL....

The industry will never be truly deregulated until legislation is introduced which prevents CongressCritters from interfering. You've got Blowberstar standing in front of the merger train, and Chuck Schmoomer as well as local politicians in LGB have done just about everything in their power to make sure JetBloo is protected from other airlines...

And yes, I also include the RLA and antics like PEB's as being forces which interfere in the ability of the market to be truly deregulated.

 

[Skymess]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HI-C,

Sorry my friend, CO is in "NJ", and ANYWHERE CO goes, AA could go if they wanted to.

Same as JFK.

Just because DL has an Insatiable appetite to land a 767 on ANY strip it can locate in eastern Europe/Mongolia, doesn't make them OWNING JFK.

AA didn't built that "taj-Mahal" in terminal 8/9 In JFK for Nothing.

I NEVER thought I'd see any US carrier penetrate LHR, BUT SURPRISE...It Happened
And Sure, being successful into SYD wouldn't happen overnight, but you've got to TRY.

It still surprises me, after all these years since De-regulation, SOME folks(every now and then) Still think with a Regulated Mindset :down:

You're right. You never know what's going to happen. Never say never to anything.

 

[JFK777]

AA's pilots should thank their luck AA didn't go Ch 11 and their pension are still the right size, not the PBGC reduced size.

Qantas wanted to SYD-AKL-DFW with their 744ER 6 years ago, it didn't happen. AA has a great fleet of 777's and 777-200LR/300ER should be part of the fleet, GE engines welcome. DFW to Australia should be part of the program and pilot resistence to operating long haul fights is wrong. It only hurts themselves. AA to Australia from DFW and South Africa from Miami & JFK should part of the rpogram.