American gets Delta's Haneda slot

[diamondcutter]

So DL went through the time and money just to prove they were right? WT Can you back this up with facts ? Was there a press release or some secret internal memo ???

 

[MAH4546]

Delta is leaving because after abusing the slot, the restrictions DOT forced upon it (thanks to none other than American Airlines) where so onerous, it had no choice but to give AA the route. And considering AA's superior position in the LA marketplace, and it's JBA with JAL, it's going to be no help to Delta on its own LAXHND route. 

 

[FWAAA]

Which airline reported over $322 million of profits in the Pacific region in the 4th quarter of 2014? Was it DL?

Uhh, no.

AA? Yep. http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements_Financial.aspx?Data=6

Looks like AA's long non-profitability period to Asia might be turning the corner.

I couldn't care how much (or little) of that profit involved LAX given management's assurance that LAX is the next Pacific gateway that will see "investments" now that DFW is pretty much built-out.

Still waiting for DL to dump so much capacity into the Pacific region that it drives JAL out of business.

I don't see Delta adding much more capacity to the Pacific but I see AA adding a bunch more. LAX to the remaining usual suspects plus CHI to ICN plus JFK to China plus maybe PHL to Japan.

Will AA produce lots of profits on all that new capacity? Couldn't freakin' care less.

 

[700UW]

FWAAA,
 
I was waiting for someone to post that.
 
He knows but he has to lie as it doesnt fit his narrative and misinformation.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Which airline reported over $322 million of profits in the Pacific region in the 4th quarter of 2014? Was it DL?

Uhh, no.

AA? Yep. http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements_Financial.aspx?Data=6

Looks like AA's long non-profitability period to Asia might be turning the corner.

I couldn't care how much (or little) of that profit involved LAX given management's assurance that LAX is the next Pacific gateway that will see "investments" now that DFW is pretty much built-out.

Still waiting for DL to dump so much capacity into the Pacific region that it drives JAL out of business.

I don't see Delta adding much more capacity to the Pacific but I see AA adding a bunch more. LAX to the remaining usual suspects plus CHI to ICN plus JFK to China plus maybe PHL to Japan.

Will AA produce lots of profits on all that new capacity? Couldn't freakin' care less.

since I have acknowledged AA's latest quarterly profit to the Pacific... you clearly managed to forget that post so you, 700, could call me a liar despite the fact that it is ... which makes you, not me, the liar.

and their decline in the Latin region is happening as we speak with losses far larger than any other airline has reported in any other region.

and despite those profits in the Pacific, AA still showed a substantial revenue disadvantage to DL and UA in the region.

LAX to the usual suspects? like the ones that I have said other carriers would start on top of AA and that has absolutely happened?

and DL has enormous potential to grow Asia... including more from SEA, MSP, and more.

I don't expect you to see DL's potential.

if you don't care what is profitable or not for anyone, then it is all just a dartboard and string line exercise suitable for a.net

 

[FWAAA]

and their decline in the Latin region is happening as we speak with losses far larger than any other airline has reported in any other region.

Not a big surprise given the substantial additional capacity by all airlines and the challenging economies in the region.

and despite those profits in the Pacific, AA still showed a substantial revenue disadvantage to DL and UA in the region.

So what? I suspect that once AA has a comparable Pacific network from LAX, its revenue disadvantages will diminish.

if you don't care what is profitable or not for anyone, then it is all just a dartboard and string line exercise suitable for a.net

Sure, but then you couldn't participate, since they banned your ass from that website years ago.

Actually, it's not just a random dartboard exercise, it's the build-out of a viable Pacific network that will rival that of DL and UA. One that will foreclose any corporate account objection of "but AA's Pacific options from LAX don't match up to those of DL or UA." With a comparable network that will take business travelers where they need to go, I suspect that the revenue disadvantage will diminish and eventually evaporate.

But I realize that won't stop your nonstop braying about how little revenue AA achieves on its Pacific network. Keep up that howling or else the moon might get lonely.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I don't have to bray about anything. I simply use DOT statistics that come from AA, not some underground bunker that manipulates data to be different from what AA actually has.

AA clearly thinks they can grow their network to be large enough to be significant. The problem which you and your little a.net buds can't grasp is that other carriers can and will add capacity because those markets are just as strategically important to them as they are to AA.

so the overcapacity that you cite as reasons for underperformance in Latin America will take place in LAX to Asia.

If AA can't find a market that they can add and gain an advantage that other carriers can't also duplicate, then it is a dartboard exercise looking for a target while others are throwing their own darts - which happen to be larger.

 

[jcw]

Interesting new metric - now you are saying the only way an airline can be successful is if you can start a route no one else can - using that logic DL is doomed on LAX to LHR - interesting spin

 

[commavia]

Still not getting it. IT DOES NOT MATTER if other carriers can burn money dumping capacity on top of AA just to prove a point. AA has the strategic need ("the will") and more money than those other carriers - not to mention, in the case of LAX specifically, several other unique advantages.

So good for Delta if it wants to prove a point running loss-making airplanes all over the Pacific out of LAX just to prove a point, and best of luck to Richard Anderson in explaining to his bosses (the shareholders) and Wall St why that's the best use of precious shareholder capital when he's already got a good thing going up the coast at SEA that this would directly undermine.

But by all means - let's keep dreaming, as I think we all realize it's been a rough few days for some...

 

[WorldTraveler]

and you aren't getting that other carriers have just as much strategic justification to add flights to LAX that they have a better chance of being profitable than AA does - or least as much - because they already do better than AA on existing flights.

It is only on your world that adding flights that have higher revenue metrics at competitors is capacity dumping while it is a strategic buildout for AA.

As I have repeatedly said and you can't accept, DL and UA can and will protect their west coast to Asia positions and will likely add and succeed at any flights that AA can add from LAX to Asis/Pacific.

 

[jcw]

Ok using your logic on this one - then you must be ready to admit DL is stupid for starting MCO- GRU there are plenty of airlines that are more profitable than DL in LATAM - so you  repeatedly have said and you can't accept (your words not ours) - that AA can and will protect their LATAM positions and will likely add and success at any flights that DL can add from the US to LATAM
 
It's a tough one when others use your logic against you and then you struggle to spin it

 

[diamondcutter]

So DL went through the time and money just to prove they were right? WT Can you back this up with facts ? Was there a press release or some secret internal memo ???

Still waiting for your answer ???????????

 

[WorldTraveler]

I gave an answer but you either ignored it or don't believe that DL would fight the legal battles to prove it was right in being reawarded the route and to prove to SEA that it would fight to keep service for them but can't make routes work if the demand isn't there, even with a hub.

As it is the US will have HND service to just 2 mainland cities and one in Hawaii compared to 18 cities with NRT service. It shouldn't be hard to figure that the problem is HND slot times.

Ok using your logic on this one - then you must be ready to admit DL is stupid for starting MCO- GRU there are plenty of airlines that are more profitable than DL in LATAM - so you  repeatedly have said and you can't accept (your words not ours) - that AA can and will protect their LATAM positions and will likely add and success at any flights that DL can add from the US to LATAM
 
It's a tough one when others use your logic against you and then you struggle to spin it

what?

You come up with the most BIZARRE conclusions and this has got to be near the top of the list.

No one said that AA wouldn't protect Latin America - but if going after DL in MCO means they have to add their own flight which will siphon off traffic from AA's MIA hub and hurt AA in MIA worse than it will if they leave DL to fight it out with the Brazilian airlines.

 

[jcw]

read the sentence - it's your sentence just switching AA and DL
 
you can't even remember what you wrote - if the logic works for DL then it works for AA
 
This is why you have no creditability

 

[Lake Central]

Ok using your logic on this one - then you must be ready to admit DL is stupid for starting MCO- GRU there are plenty of airlines that are more profitable than DL in LATAM - so you  repeatedly have said and you can't accept (your words not ours) - that AA can and will protect their LATAM positions and will likely add and success at any flights that DL can add from the US to LATAM
 
It's a tough one when others use your logic against you and then you struggle to spin it

 
 
WT posted in the Delta forum that MCO-GRU, "was a shot across the bow" of American's MIA hub.