Azul lands in AA"s backyard, AA lands in Azul's.
- Thread starter WorldTraveler
- Start date
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #33
feel free to look at the Census data and the size of the cities... but since air travel is well measured and has its own set of data, it makes far more sense to look at actual air passenger data, not just Census or city size data.
based on actual AIR TRAVEL data, the largest airports for intercontinental travel in the US are JFK, MIA, LAX, EWR, ATL, ORD, SFO, IAD, IAH, HNL. JFK boarded nearly 12.2 million intercontinental (non-North America) passengers last year, MIA 8.7, LAX 8.7, LAX 6.4, EWR 4.5, and ATL 4.0 million passengers. IAH had 2.5 million and DFW had just 1.6 million intercontinental passengers, less than half of the size that ATL had. those are the top five but it is interesting to note that ORD is number 6 with 3.6 million intercontinental passengers.
Even if you look at boardings to cities outside of the US rather than N. America, ATL and ORD change places - meaning ORD has more service to N. America as a proportion of total int'l traffic than ATL but still less intercontinental traffic.
Despite your notion of what cities are more global, ATL is the 5th most globally connected city in the US. DFW ranks 12th and PHL below that. DTW and MSP both rank in the top 20.
If you want to drill down to carriers at those cities to see who has the largest int'l operation, it is even more notable that DL's ATL hub is the 2nd largest int'l operation behind AA at MIA in the US followed by UA at EWR, UA at IAH, AA at JFK, and then US at CLT - which will take a major step backward with the cancellation of multiple int'l flights. AA at DFW is #9, DL at DTW is #10.
the notion that the Texas cities are more int'l than DL's hubs or that DL has a smaller int'l operation in the largest cities in the US is simply not born out by fact.
and specific to the question of the Middle East carriers, let us know which hubs they serve - and the evidence is overwhelming that despite the much larger market size than a lot of people here seem to think regarding DL's hubs, DL has less ME competition in its hubs than does nearly every other hub carrier.
and specific to Latin America, there aren't any new carriers starting new service to ATL; there are carriers starting new service to S. Florida, NYC, and Houston.
based on actual AIR TRAVEL data, the largest airports for intercontinental travel in the US are JFK, MIA, LAX, EWR, ATL, ORD, SFO, IAD, IAH, HNL. JFK boarded nearly 12.2 million intercontinental (non-North America) passengers last year, MIA 8.7, LAX 8.7, LAX 6.4, EWR 4.5, and ATL 4.0 million passengers. IAH had 2.5 million and DFW had just 1.6 million intercontinental passengers, less than half of the size that ATL had. those are the top five but it is interesting to note that ORD is number 6 with 3.6 million intercontinental passengers.
Even if you look at boardings to cities outside of the US rather than N. America, ATL and ORD change places - meaning ORD has more service to N. America as a proportion of total int'l traffic than ATL but still less intercontinental traffic.
Despite your notion of what cities are more global, ATL is the 5th most globally connected city in the US. DFW ranks 12th and PHL below that. DTW and MSP both rank in the top 20.
If you want to drill down to carriers at those cities to see who has the largest int'l operation, it is even more notable that DL's ATL hub is the 2nd largest int'l operation behind AA at MIA in the US followed by UA at EWR, UA at IAH, AA at JFK, and then US at CLT - which will take a major step backward with the cancellation of multiple int'l flights. AA at DFW is #9, DL at DTW is #10.
the notion that the Texas cities are more int'l than DL's hubs or that DL has a smaller int'l operation in the largest cities in the US is simply not born out by fact.
and specific to the question of the Middle East carriers, let us know which hubs they serve - and the evidence is overwhelming that despite the much larger market size than a lot of people here seem to think regarding DL's hubs, DL has less ME competition in its hubs than does nearly every other hub carrier.
and specific to Latin America, there aren't any new carriers starting new service to ATL; there are carriers starting new service to S. Florida, NYC, and Houston.
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #35
whatever term you would like to use is fine.
DFW is not "as international of an airport" as ATL is. MIA is AA's crown jewel in terms of int'l size but its presence at DFW is smaller than DL's at ATL and it's JFK size is smaller than DL's.
hard to argue that DL is a less int'l airline when you see stats like that... plus traffic reports that show that AA has the smallest int'l network of the big 3 US airlines.
DFW is not "as international of an airport" as ATL is. MIA is AA's crown jewel in terms of int'l size but its presence at DFW is smaller than DL's at ATL and it's JFK size is smaller than DL's.
hard to argue that DL is a less int'l airline when you see stats like that... plus traffic reports that show that AA has the smallest int'l network of the big 3 US airlines.
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #37
for whatever reason, ATL is a more int'l airport than DFW or IAH and DL's ATL int'l hub is only behind UA at EWR and AA in MIA.
Kev3188
Veteran
Who cares?
Meanwhile, here's Part 2 of CF's interview with Neeleman:
http://crankyflier.com/2014/12/08/across-the-aisle-from-david-neeleman-on-azuls-skycouches-us-partner-opportunities-and-more-part-2/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CrankyFlier+%28The+Cranky+Flier%29
Meanwhile, here's Part 2 of CF's interview with Neeleman:
http://crankyflier.com/2014/12/08/across-the-aisle-from-david-neeleman-on-azuls-skycouches-us-partner-opportunities-and-more-part-2/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CrankyFlier+%28The+Cranky+Flier%29
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #39
whoever cares are the ones who have tried to argue that DL's hubs are in second tier cities that are far less int'l.
given that DL's hubs at ATL and JFK are both in the top 5 carrier/hubs in the US and DL and UA each have two on that list, then a few people don't want to admit the truth for their bias.
as to the article, it once again validates that Azul is in high growth mode.
and I hope you caught that the 320neos will burn the same amount of fuel as the E195s but obviously carry a whole lot more revenue .
that is precisely the metric that a lot of airlines are considering..... newer technology aircraft are being used to increase the number of seats while keeping costs the same. That is the basis of why DL has selected the 339 as a replacement for 763s despite it likely having about 50-75 additional seats.
Azul is a quality airline that is indicative of a new wave of competition that is coming in Latin America.
and again AA did not say where its RASM weakness is coming from but their RASM for Nov was the weakest of DL and WN and may or may not be on par with UA which did not report monthly RASM but expected similar if only slightly better quarterly results.
given that DL's hubs at ATL and JFK are both in the top 5 carrier/hubs in the US and DL and UA each have two on that list, then a few people don't want to admit the truth for their bias.
as to the article, it once again validates that Azul is in high growth mode.
and I hope you caught that the 320neos will burn the same amount of fuel as the E195s but obviously carry a whole lot more revenue .
that is precisely the metric that a lot of airlines are considering..... newer technology aircraft are being used to increase the number of seats while keeping costs the same. That is the basis of why DL has selected the 339 as a replacement for 763s despite it likely having about 50-75 additional seats.
Azul is a quality airline that is indicative of a new wave of competition that is coming in Latin America.
and again AA did not say where its RASM weakness is coming from but their RASM for Nov was the weakest of DL and WN and may or may not be on par with UA which did not report monthly RASM but expected similar if only slightly better quarterly results.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Looks like AA is giving up on JFK-VCP after just six months. They're keeping MIA-VCP in place, however.
http://airlineroute.net/2015/03/10/aa-jfkvcp-s15cxld
http://airlineroute.net/2015/03/10/aa-jfkvcp-s15cxld
Doesn't DL still owe US Airways seven weekly unrestricted frequencies to GRU? When does DL transfer those to US?
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #42
no one has any interest in any frequencies to Brazil right now... the dollar went up another couple percent today.
Brazil's economic and political problems compounded with strong dollar performance compared to most global currencies is making travel from Brazil to the US an event of only the most well-heeled.
there will be ALOT of capacity coming out of the US- Brazil market if the dollar/real exchange rate stays even where it is.
given that Azul and other Brazilian low cost carriers have the pockets to grow their networks, this is the worst time for AA to have to be defending its network against their growth.
AA's capacity for Feb from Latin America was down but came close to matching demand. the real test will be in the March to May period which is low season for Brazil traffic.
Brazil's economic and political problems compounded with strong dollar performance compared to most global currencies is making travel from Brazil to the US an event of only the most well-heeled.
there will be ALOT of capacity coming out of the US- Brazil market if the dollar/real exchange rate stays even where it is.
given that Azul and other Brazilian low cost carriers have the pockets to grow their networks, this is the worst time for AA to have to be defending its network against their growth.
AA's capacity for Feb from Latin America was down but came close to matching demand. the real test will be in the March to May period which is low season for Brazil traffic.
OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #44
Brazil is like many developing world markets, China included, where the vast majority of the traffic is US bound.
AA's percentage of traffic to/from Brazil is much heavier Brazil originating than its competitors which means AA is more exposed to currency changes and also more susceptible to foreign competition.
Campinas is a market where Azul has a large hub and very strong name recognition. Further, Azul operates its own busses from various places in the city of São Paulo to Campinas so they do a good job of competing even for the SP local market where the difference in travel time to GRU vs VCP can be less than 30 minutes.
Azul can easily build its own flights from Campinas and most of Brazil. and they have far lower costs than any US carrier.
AA's network has been built around stimulating the market esp. to Florida and NYC where Brazilians love to travel and that discretionary segment of the market is highly susceptible both to competiion and to currency changes.
AA's percentage of traffic to/from Brazil is much heavier Brazil originating than its competitors which means AA is more exposed to currency changes and also more susceptible to foreign competition.
Campinas is a market where Azul has a large hub and very strong name recognition. Further, Azul operates its own busses from various places in the city of São Paulo to Campinas so they do a good job of competing even for the SP local market where the difference in travel time to GRU vs VCP can be less than 30 minutes.
Azul can easily build its own flights from Campinas and most of Brazil. and they have far lower costs than any US carrier.
AA's network has been built around stimulating the market esp. to Florida and NYC where Brazilians love to travel and that discretionary segment of the market is highly susceptible both to competiion and to currency changes.
I didn't know that the Chinese had so much disposable income and freedom to travel.WorldTraveler said:
That's interesting. Do you have any numbers?WorldTraveler said:
Similar threads
