In JFK they spent over a billion and ended up with fewer gates than they had before.
Bob,
anyone who has read this forum knows I have been particularly critical of AA in NYC....
but there are factors that should be considered....
AA and DL were both talking about new terminals at JFK before 9/11... the Port Authority had said even then it wanted to replace all of the original terminals.
AA managed to get a deal done before 9/11 while DL did not.
Obviously post 9/11, AA decided it didn't make sense to build out what they had originally planned back in the late 90s when aviation was doing very well and US airlines were posting record profits - across the board.
AA's decision to downsize its terminal project left what was going to be built disproportionately expensive.... it has also pushed AA's passenger service costs at JFK well above average for US airline projects which in turn makes it much harder for AA to compete in low cost carrier and short haul markets from JFK. Those terminal costs do make more sense for a long-haul domestic or int'l gateway but ultimately AA needs more people to use the terminal it has built and potentially if they do expand it the overall costs will go back down.
.
AA's overall costs have hurt its ability to compete in the NYC market and it is absolutely fair to say that DL used its cost savings from BK to focus the vast majority of its expansion efforts on the NYC market where it has doubled its size in 5 years - and when the slot deal is implemented (assuming final approval), DL's advantage over AA will grow further.
.
Neither of those circumstances that have helped DL are not things that AA could have replicated Evegiven the terminal commitments had already been made. Even if AA had filed for BK, airport facility costs are rarely reduced - at least for the passenger terminal.
AA's JFK terminal was built based on how the industry looked pre 9/11 and the industry looks very different now, as does AA's position in the industry.
Terminals are 30-40 year investments, though, so AA is well-positioned at JFK from a facility standpoint for a number of years to come.
.
Further, DL's facility costs at JFK will reflect 10 additional years of inflation compared to what AA spent and DL's commitment at JFK is far from what will be needed to finish the project.
.
Again in comparing to WN, they do not fly widebodies, do not have int'l flights that require more complex terminals, and will likely never build their own facility in NYC where the cost of construction is much higher than it is in other parts of the country.
Just for comparison, NW built its entire new DTW terminal complex (about 150 gates, half of which are mainline capable and half are RJ capable) not too many years ago for about the same amount of money on an inflation adjusted basis - and perhaps less - than what AA has spent at JFK or what DL will spend for 1/4 of that many gates.
But NYC is the largest market in the country and the largest int'l market; if AA or any other carrier wants to compete in that market, they must have the facilities.