Whoa! AA-KE Codeshare

[commavia]

So AA itself says that its revenue-sharing Joint Business Agreement with JAL covers its newest nonstop route to China, but AA is wrong.  Fascinating.

 

[WorldTraveler]

no.... you clearly don't understand that AA can share its revenue with anyone it wants but antitrust immunity is only granted to specific markets.

JL is part of the JBA for a larger set of markets than where ATI is permitted.

btw, the UA TPAC JBA is multi-national and involves multiple carriers but ATI only exists where the US has Open Skies.

correct me if I am wrong.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

correct me if I am wrong.

 
Don't worry, with the mistakes, lies and fraudulent statements you make, it's a routine, standard operating protocol on these boards. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
 

 
 
 
http://www.aa.com/i18n/amrcorp/newsroom/fp_aa_jal_benefits.jsp
Scope of the Joint Business
The joint business will apply to non-stop flights on 10 trans-Pacific routes initially. It is expected to be expanded upon obtaining the required approval from authorities of third-party countries to add routes linking destinations beyond Japan and North America.
 
 
 
Trans-Pacific Flights
Operating Carrier Route JAL
Narita = New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Vancouver
Haneda = San Francisco
 
Operating Carrier Route AA
Narita = Dallas/Fort Worth†, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles
Haneda = New York†, Beijing = Chicago*, Shanghai = Chicago*, Los Angeles*
 
 
 
http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/american-airlines-japan-airlines-onewold-joint-business-launching-in-april-to-yield-usd150m-43349
 

 

[WorldTraveler]

you know, I truly feel sorry for someone who thinks it is ok to use religion to beat someone over the head, esp. since you have yet to discredit the statement that I just made that a JBA can include routes that do not allow ATI.

again, let me know if I am wrong but antitrust immunity has only been given in countries where the US has Open Skies, which does not include China.

you do understand the concept of ATI, don't you?

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

You have no idea how LAX-GRU is performing.
 
Stop pretending like you do.

 

[WorldTraveler]

actually, the US DOT does collect load factor data for flights that touch the US, whether operated by US or foreign airlines.

Revenue information is collected for US airlines and any foreign airlines in a joint venture with a US carrier - which again requires antitrust immunity.

 

[FWAAA]

thank you.

You're welcome. As I've said before, I fact check my posts. I would not have said that the DFW-ICN flight was part of the TPAC joint venture if I was not certain that was the case.

as for new service to ICN, all of the traffic via NRT competes with existing KE routes, so the chances that AA will win friends with KE by adding new routes that compete with them are slim.

Who cares whether KE likes AA's route planning decisions? Absent some more far-reaching announcement of cooperation, there's nothing "friendly" about this codeshare. It's merely a way for Korean-originating members of the KE frequent flyer program to continue earning KE miles and benefits on ICN-DFW-ICN once KE cancels its DFW flight, which is an obvious result once this codeshare is approved.

if AA starts codesharing beyond ICN, then, yes, there might be justification for new routes, but I seriously doubt that KE is going to be any less willing for AA to keep more revenue than what it has tried to offer DL - who has refused to be a Korean Air connection in N. America.

I don't believe that AA will codeshare beyond ICN. The justification for another nonstop AA route to ICN is supported, in part, by your assertion that JAL still flies plenty of AA connecting passengers to ICN via the NRT hub. That tells me that there's significant AA traffic to ICN beyond those on the DFW-ICN nonstop. It simply means that if AA begins another flight to ICN (like from LAX or ORD), some of the passengers are already flying the joint venture - as in, not all the customers on the new nonstop will have to be poached from competitors.

as much as you and others would like KE to be a silver bullet, there is nothing about KE that solves AA's transpacific problems without creating yet other ones.

What on earth are you talking about? Nobody here has indicated in any post any such nonsense. All this codeshare means is that KE is throwing in the towel and ceding DFW-ICN to AA. To remain barely relevant in the market, KE wants to codeshare on AA's nonstop so that its KE frequent flyer elites can still accrue benefits even though their airline is (more than likely) cancelling its nonstop service.

The benefits here to AA are very minimal.

 

[MAH4546]

again, let me know if I am wrong but antitrust immunity has only been given in countries where the US has Open Skies, which does not include China.

 

 
Antitrust immunity is only given to airlines in countries where the U.S. has Open Skies. The antitrust immunity can be used by those airlines to cover markets that do not have open skies. BA/AA JBA includes Mexico; the JL/AA JBA includes China. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

are you sure that DFW-ICN is part of the AA-JL JV? HKG is but I never read anything about ICN- but I might have missed it.... and if so, I'll be glad for you to show me.

btw, AA in the most recent quarter connected a significant amount of traffic from the US to ICN over NRT even after the DFW-ICN flight operated.... JL does absolutely risk losing some of that traffic

I didn't post that the DFW-ICN flight was not part of the JV.

I asked the question.


and your point about AA adding more service based on demand via NRT is precisely why JL would be threatened and any AA gateway already also has KE service... or maybe KE will fold in yet another market or it will be the mythical MIA to Asia flight on AA.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

you know, I truly feel sorry for someone who thinks it is ok to use religion to beat someone over the head, esp. since you have yet to discredit the statement that I just made that a JBA can include routes that do not allow ATI.

you do understand the concept of ATI, don't you?

For somebody who claims to have so much alleged knowledge in the industry, you should know that in the case of AA/JL ATI = JBA.  Educate yourself here:  http://www.airlineinfo.com/ostpdf80/33.pdf
 
By this order, the Department of Transportation grants approval of, and antitrust immunity (“ATI”) for, the separate applications of (1) Star Alliance members All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd,1 Continental Airlines, Inc.,2 and United Air Lines, Inc. (“NH/CO/UA” or “Star”)3 and (2) American Airlines, Inc., and Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd. (“AA/JL” or “oneworld”). The decisions in this order are conditioned upon the U.S.-Japan Open Skies aviation agreement being applied.
The Star applicants and oneworld applicants (collectively, the “ATI Applicants”)4 have requested a grant of immunity from the U.S. antitrust laws to operate two separate commercial alliances: for the Star applicants, a Joint Venture Agreement (“JVA”), and for the oneworld applicants, a Joint Business Agreement (“JBA”). We have concluded that, overall, each alliance will be procompetitive and is likely to generate substantial public benefits to the traveling and shipping public.

 

again, let me know if I am wrong but antitrust immunity has only been given in countries where the US has Open Skies, which does not include China.

For this, I'm going to use your own words from the DL thread against you:
If AA execs state that the ATI includes China, and you know it doesn't and you know they're lying, why don't you go report them to the authorities.
 

 

[FWAAA]

ATI is not permitted with Chinese carriers or involving US-China routes.

AA could share revenues and JL can help sell them, however.

but your point highlights that JL is trying to get into where passengers want to go in Asia which will hurt them if AA cooperates on the same itineraries with carriers other than JL.

False. Wrong. You are incorrect. AA's application for an immunized joint venture with JAL included all 65 Asian markets served by JAL, including airports in Japan, China, Thailand, Phillipines, Vietnam, Korea, Singapore, etc:

The American/JAL Immunized Alliance Will Add 65 New Asia Airports To The Immunized oneworld Global Network

Source: Exhibit JA-4, Page 2 of 2 of http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOT-OST-2010-0034-0001
 

JL can be part of the JBA without having ATI or revenue sharing for non Open Skies countries

Plz show me an approved DOT/DOJ application for ATI if you would like to convince me...you could be right but your cut and paste hasn't proven your point

Click on the links and edumacate yourself, Dingus. Consider yourself schooled in the basics of immunized joint ventures.
 

no.... you clearly don't understand that AA can share its revenue with anyone it wants but antitrust immunity is only granted to specific markets.

JL is part of the JBA for a larger set of markets than where ATI is permitted.

btw, the UA TPAC JBA is multi-national and involves multiple carriers but ATI only exists where the US has Open Skies.

correct me if I am wrong.

Multiple people have corrected you multiple times.
 

you know, I truly feel sorry for someone who thinks it is ok to use religion to beat someone over the head, esp. since you have yet to discredit the statement that I just made that a JBA can include routes that do not allow ATI.

again, let me know if I am wrong but antitrust immunity has only been given in countries where the US has Open Skies, which does not include China.

you do understand the concept of ATI, don't you?

Again, you've been corrected. You're wrong. It's clear that your knowledge of the immunized joint ventures is lacking. When expounding on subjects of which you know so very little, it's best to put down the shovel and stop digging once your ignorance has been revealed. But if you want to keep digging all the way to China, there's little we can do to stop you.

 

[WorldTraveler]

once again, you prove why this board is a pissing contest.

I have repeatedly ASKED you to provide evidence that AA and/or UA have ATI to points other than in countries where the US has an Open Skies agreement.

you STILL have not done that. The document you linked is for the application.

I see no order from the DOT or DOJ granting ATI to countries that do not have Open Skies.

since you of all people know how the government filing system works, how about the order showing that ATI is granted on all services whether operated on AA or JL and whether nonstop or via Japan.

that is the question that I have repeatedly been asking for.

you have yet to show anything.

even in the application the section Geographic Scope is REDACTED. Same for Revenue Sharing

grow up and learn how to have a discussion instead of your usual childish pissing contest.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

correct me if I am wrong.

 
How many times do you have to be corrected?
 
 

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, you have repeatedly demonstrated your childish foolishness.

and now you move on from Jesus face palms to the same for Godzilla.

breathtaking.

perhaps FWAAA can find a document that shows that AA and JL have ATI on AA's nonstop flights from the US to destinations outside of Japan that do not have Open Skies with the US.

perhaps it exists but it hasn't been demonstrated yet.

I have been schooled at nothing but how childish and vengeful some people are on this site.