AA downgrades LAX-PVG and LAX-GRU to 787s, 777s move to Europe

Not open for further replies.


Corn Field
Dec 5, 2003

as expected, low yields on LAX-GRU and PVG mean that several AA LAX routes will be converted to 787s.

Also, AA is converting a number of 767 markets to 777s for the service of 2016 including from JFK.


It is highly doubtful that adding 777s to the Atlantic can be a long-term solution given that the 772 is the highest CASM aircraft across the Atlantic and the 772 represents a significant increase in capacity compared to what AA has operated in several of those markets where AA's yields and revenues are lower than average compared to the competition

AA might be able to get by with that kind of capacity at that kind of CASM in the summer but the capacity is way too much in the winter and in every season, other carriers will serve the market with lower CASM aircraft.

AA still has yet to demonstrate that it has a long-term viable plan to redeploy all of the 777s that it is pulling from the Pacific and Latin America.
AA still has yet to demonstrate ... to internet forum Delta fanboys ... that it knows what it's doing with 777s.  I'll look forward to getting the memo once our resident expert is brought up to speed on, and is satisfied with, Parker's thinking.
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
DL's LAX-GRU slots were transferred to DTW-GRU giving DL and UA midwest hub to GRU service, something AA does not have.

so, sure, ask if you would like and you will get the answer that DL has added service in a region that AA doesn't even compete to Brazil from since the midwest DOES NOT include Texas by anyone's defintion except for AA's.

the LHR routes have been discussed ad nauseum and it is still true that DL simply moved capacity and aircraft from int'l to domestic markets.

specific to this topic, AA is holding onto LAX-GRU but using a smaller, more fuel-efficient aircraft that might allow it to win the war of attrition against KE which some people still think will choose AA as a partner.

as for the 777s, you can defend AA's decision to put 777s on flights to Europe including from NYC, but the 772ER is a larger, higher CASM aircraft than practically every other aircraft used by competitors and adds seats to several markets including FCO and CDG where AA gets lower average fares than its competitors.

It shouldn't be too hard to figure out that AA's profit margin on those routes will be lower when it uses larger, higher CASM aircraft.

AA doesn't have a viable place to deploy its 772s that it is pulling off the Pacific and has bought itself another summer but those aircraft will be too large by the winter of 2016.
Fantastic - good for Delta.  Congratulations on competing "in a region that AA doesn't even compete to Brazil from," just like AA, too, competes in multiple regions that Delta doesn't even compete to Brazil from - namely the west coast and south Florida.
and yet AA is supposedly the largest airline in the midwest at least by AA geography.
So AA can't be the "largest" airline in a given region unless AA flies from that region to Brazil?  Fascinating.
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
no, AA can't be the largest airline in a region where they create their own definition that doesn't agree with every other authority. The term "Midwest" does not include Texas.

AA doesn't fly from the Midwest to Brazil and isn't the largest carrier there.

AA might have the advantage of offering LAX-GRU service but DL and UA serve the Midwest-Brazil market.

and specific to the other route involved here, DL and UA both serve PVG from other west coast gateways while AA has only LAX - which DL and UA also serve.
It might be good to remember these comical posts of WT and save them for when DL starts to place their A350s on XYZ routes.  It will surely spell doom and gloom for DL, just like it apparently is for AA now. 
I'm going to be ROTFLMAO if AA pulls the 767s off their current routes and dumps all the capacity on the JFK transcons, because as we all know, the best in commercial aviation is not to have high average fares, but to be the leader in capacity in a market.    Well, actually, the Whole Truth is, that whether it is highest average fare, or capacity, is dependent on where that places DL.  If DL fails on those 2, then create another metric to be judged by - such as % local market, # of passengers processed through a given jetway / hr, or make something else up.
Oh, and speaking of transcons, I guess AA now has the 767s to place at LGA just in case the perimeter restrictions are lifted.
Can DL say check-mate and can a certain DL fankid cheerleader say unhinged?
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
someone has a bug up their butt tonite.

AA isn't going to pull the 767s off of their current routes because they have too many widebodies coming as it is.

The whole truth is that AA is pulling 777s off of underperfoming Pacific routes and replacing them with newer 787s and then adding the 777s to 767 routes in hopes that it can justify keeping those aircraft around without having to write them down because AA has too many widebody aircraft on order.

given that AA doesn't even operate JFK-FCO on a year round basis and JFK-CDG is a combination of 757s and 767s, adding a 777 either means reduced frequencies or an increase in capacity in a market where AA already underperforms the competition.

at best, AA will consolidate JFK-CDG to a single daily 777 and JFK-FCO will be a seasonal market, both with a high CASM aircraft that adds seats to at least some of the markets at some times of the year.

Perhaps AA can make it all work but it is more than a little ironic to argue that AA needs a lower CASM aircraft to fly the Pacific but will end up with the highest CASM aircraft on a number of Europe routes.
777s to CDG and FCO?!  What a disaster for AA.  Again.  What are they doing over there in Ft Worth?  What a sad, sad, state of affairs for the world's largest airline.  Delta will destroy AA in these markets (just like LAX-LHR and Midwest-Brazil).  I think it's obvious that another bankruptcy is mere months away.
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
nope. I didn't say disaster.

I said AA is adding the highest CASM aircraft to routes which it doesn't even operate on a year round basis and where other carriers get higher average fares and total revenue.

Can you accept those basic facts along with the clear conclusion that AA is merely shuffling its 772 fleet around based on a need to make Latin America and the Pacific profitable even while sending the aircraft that didn't work there to Europe?

is the irony not apparent to you?
Not open for further replies.