AA has applied to delay ORD-PEK for a year

[CubsFanJohn]

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/...25/daily67.html How come am I not surprise with this from one of the most poorly ran companies in the airline industry. At least in my view and I don't work in the industry, I just think AA is too conservative at times, and has missed out on a lot of oppertunities. Let's see no flights from MIA-Africa (1 Stop Service most likely at DKR or LOS), didn't grab MIA-MXP service, no service to TLV because of the TWA fiazol (Which AA ummm.... did a poor job on), No service to CAI/DXB, no 757 TATL Flying to Europe. I could go on about AA's incompitance.

 

[The Goose]

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/...25/daily67.html How come am I not surprise with this from one of the most poorly ran companies in the airline industry. At least in my view and I don't work in the industry, I just think AA is too conservative at times, and has missed out on a lot of oppertunities. Let's see no flights from MIA-Africa (1 Stop Service most likely at DKR or LOS), didn't grab MIA-MXP service, no service to TLV because of the TWA fiazol (Which AA ummm.... did a poor job on), No service to CAI/DXB, no 757 TATL Flying to Europe. I could go on about AA's incompitance.

I feel that Arpey doesn't want this route yet - it was supposed to be a helluva money maker and that wouldn't bode well for his attempts to screw over the employees.

(Deleted by Moderator)

 

[TWU informer]

Probably has more to do with Pilot Pay/Staffing/Flight Hours than anything else.

 

[CubsFanJohn]

Probably has more to do with Pilot Pay/Staffing/Flight Hours than anything else.

Never thought of that point, wonder if they would have done this if they had an agreement with the clowns running the APA.

 

[Bob Owens]

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/...25/daily67.html How come am I not surprise with this from one of the most poorly ran companies in the airline industry. At least in my view and I don't work in the industry, I just think AA is too conservative at times, and has missed out on a lot of oppertunities. Let's see no flights from MIA-Africa (1 Stop Service most likely at DKR or LOS), didn't grab MIA-MXP service, no service to TLV because of the TWA fiazol (Which AA ummm.... did a poor job on), No service to CAI/DXB, no 757 TATL Flying to Europe. I could go on about AA's incompitance.

I'd have to agree that delaying the service doesnt make sense. If anything they shold have asked to start it early to capitalize on the Olympics. Right now China is hot, its captured the medias interest and its a place where the US Dollar still gets a lot. A year from now interest , as far as tourism, may wane.

 

[PHL]

IRight now China is hot, its captured the medias interest and its a place where the US Dollar still gets a lot. A year from now interest , as far as tourism, may wane.

None of the airlines filing to serve PEK from their US hubs are doing it for the tourism. China is huge business. US also delayed the start of PHL-PEK for current economic reasons. They bungled it even further by not really having an airplane ready to fly the route either. They were going to do it with A340's, but later said they'd do it with an A330-200. Then they suspended plans all together.

 

[TechBoy]

Probably has more to do with Pilot Pay/Staffing/Flight Hours than anything else.

Hardly. With the current economy, traffic to China is not growing like it had been. Both US and UA have delayed new China routes and now AA is doing the same. If they can fly ORD-NRT under the currrent contract, they can fly to PEK which is close to the same distance.

I also recall a couple of posters bashing other airlines for delaying China flights. Hmmmm, wonder what they think now?

 

[Winglet]

Never thought of that point, wonder if they would have done this if they had an agreement with the clowns running the APA.

A lot more likely it has to do with the management clowns. Crewing costs are minor. That's pure bunk that management and their zombies like to chant in order to divert attention from the real problems.

 

[FWAAA]

Hardly. With the current economy, traffic to China is not growing like it had been. Both US and UA have delayed new China routes and now AA is doing the same. If they can fly ORD-NRT under the currrent contract, they can fly to PEK which is close to the same distance.

I agree with you; this has nothing to do with the APA contract limits on duty day. Recall that when AA applied for DFW-PEK and was unable to secure a side letter with the APA, AA proposed changing its application to DFW-ORD-PEK? That was because ORD-PEK falls within the current contract's limits on duty day.

I also recall a couple of posters bashing other airlines for delaying China flights. Hmmmm, wonder what they think now?

I'm one of them and I'm madder than hell! Well, disappointed might better describe it. When US applied for its one year delay, I posted that AA should immediately object and ask for US' frequencies. I also think that AA is far too conservative when it comes to Asian expansion. Should have never let UA outbid it for the NRT 5th Freedom rights and the China rights.

IMO, AA should have been on the phone to Boeing a few months ago when US filed its delay to order a couple more 777s.

Problem with China is that the treaty now allows fast expansion, and it's possible that the expansion is outpacing the demand for J and F seats, especially now that the economy is slowing.

Still, AA has a reputation for going in for the kill, and failing to fight for the US frequencies was weak, IMO. Not the work of such a predatory beast as AA is known to be

 

[youbetcha]

A lot more likely it has to do with the management clowns. Crewing costs are minor. That's pure bunk that management and their zombies like to chant in order to divert attention from the real problems.

I don't believe that the decision has a thing to do with the pilots' contract. The argument was when they applied for DFW Beijing. The flying time required an exception from APA to fly it. ORD Beijing is a shorter flying time and comports with their contract.

Given all the changes and cancellations of trips that were 777s, just where are they all going if not to Beijing? Are they replacing the A300s in the Carribean?

 

[FWAAA]

Hardly. With the current economy, traffic to China is not growing like it had been. Both US and UA have delayed new China routes and now AA is doing the same. If they can fly ORD-NRT under the currrent contract, they can fly to PEK which is close to the same distance.

I agree with you; this has nothing to do with the APA contract limits on duty day. Recall that when AA applied for DFW-PEK and was unable to secure a side letter with the APA, AA proposed changing its application to DFW-ORD-PEK? That was because ORD-PEK falls within the current contract's limits on duty day.

I also recall a couple of posters bashing other airlines for delaying China flights. Hmmmm, wonder what they think now?

I'm one of them and I'm madder than hell! Well, disappointed might better describe it. When US applied for its one year delay, I posted that AA should immediately object and ask for US' frequencies. I also think that AA is far too conservative when it comes to Asian expansion. Should have never let UA outbid it for the NRT 5th Freedom rights and the China rights in the '80s. Huge mistake from which AA has never fully recovered.

IMO, AA should have been on the phone to Boeing a few months ago when US filed its delay to order a couple more 777s.

Problem with China is that the treaty now allows fast expansion after years of much slower growth, and it's possible that the expansion is outpacing the demand for J and F seats, especially now that the economy is slowing. And fuel is still over $3/gal. China (and LHR) were huge money-makers when not everyone was allowed to begin service to those destinations. Neither is so hot now that so many new flights have been added.

Still, AA has a reputation for going in for the kill, and failing to fight for the US frequencies was weak, IMO. Not the work of such a predatory beast as AA is known to be.

As much as I detest the decision to delay, keeping the supply of seats tighter will help keep fares up, and that's a good thing for AA.

 

[Pain at the Pump]

Nothing should have stopped American Airlines from starting up the Ord-Pek route ! I firmly believe that some of the past ceo's of American would Not have made this decision.

 

[CubsFanJohn]

I agree with you; this has nothing to do with the APA contract limits on duty day. Recall that when AA applied for DFW-PEK and was unable to secure a side letter with the APA, AA proposed changing its application to DFW-ORD-PEK? That was because ORD-PEK falls within the current contract's limits on duty day.



I'm one of them and I'm madder than hell! Well, disappointed might better describe it. When US applied for its one year delay, I posted that AA should immediately object and ask for US' frequencies. I also think that AA is far too conservative when it comes to Asian expansion. Should have never let UA outbid it for the NRT 5th Freedom rights and the China rights.

IMO, AA should have been on the phone to Boeing a few months ago when US filed its delay to order a couple more 777s.

Problem with China is that the treaty now allows fast expansion, and it's possible that the expansion is outpacing the demand for J and F seats, especially now that the economy is slowing.

Still, AA has a reputation for going in for the kill, and failing to fight for the US frequencies was weak, IMO. Not the work of such a predatory beast as AA is known to be

Missing out on the UA ex-Pan Am Pacific Rights was a big boo-boo for AA. I believe in the Book American Eagle and the rise of Bob Crandall, he did admit that they should have been more aggressive. They did admit about the botched 1989 ORD-NRT bid....

 

[eolesen]

Flying a route for just the prestige isn't gonna cut it anymore, guys.

I just did a couple searches for business class seats to/from Japan for a trip coming up next week, and routes which normally are tight for D inventory are wide open. D is used for the CirclePacs & RTW's, and is also tied IIRC to AAdvantage upgrade award inventory.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Walmart, Target, etc. had their buyers focusing on Mexico and closer-in countries as opposed to giving their business to Asian suppliers.

My brother in law's company moved their manufacturing to China a few years ago, and just about all the cost savings they got from shifting manufacturing is being eaten up by shipping costs, to the extent they're rethinking whether or not to bring some of it back home. Good if they do, but that's not going to happen overnight.

If other companies are thinking the same (and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to be looking at this...), then there's a pretty good chance that business traffic isn't quite as good as it was two years ago on the Pacific.

Maybe they're now they're heading to Mexico & Latin America, which we know from Mark's connections is still doing pretty well.

 

[Mach85ER]

Good info eolesen,

I've been expecting to read about info like yours for years. I've yet to read or hear anyone in the media address the total change in the global shipping model due to high energy prices. About 5 years ago I looked at 2 large pallets of Brazilian peppers on the ramp at LAX. Shipped through JFK if you can believe that.

It might have made sense to me if it was MSP in the winter, but it would seem that things grow in CA. It took alot of fuel to support those palets at 35000 feet for 15 hours+. I thought at the time that stuff like that will end.

I think some of this may benefit us. I do think the mass market caribbean destination resorts and islands are screwed due to the expected travel costs to get there and the shipment costs of everything they use on these islands.

I know that on one island with desalinaton costs and diesel powered electric, the water came out of the shower head cold at 70 cents/minute, and that was at $50/barrel oil