I'm sorry FWAAA but your answer doesn't fly. Airlines engage in partnerships because they find something to complement them, not overtake them. I can assure you the rationality you use doesn't exist on Amon Carter Blvd. If the market is there, AA can and will serve HKG.
Further, are you saying that AA's service is inferior to UA's because they have no problem competing against CX. And UA competes with a number of very high quality Asian carriers, some of which are fellow Star partners. But that hasn't stopped UA from expanding in Asia, as they rightfully should.
You can do better than that. I've seen your work and this isn't your best. 🙁
Sorry to let you down, WT. I'll try to do better.
😀
Seriously, though, I've flown AA F to NRT and LHR and GRU among lots of other places. And I've flown CX F to/from HKG, BA F to/from LHR and LAN F to/from SCL. If planning a AONE* (Oneworld First Class RTW), you'd be certifiable if you choose AA F over CX or BA over the long segments. Ya know what? AA F doesn't hold a candle to those other airlines, and frequent flyers (fliers?) know it. I don't work for AMR or any of its subsidiaries, so I have no trouble saying it. This post will earn me no friends with the AA regulars here, either. I respect their predicament: AA employees can't publicly denigrate their own service, but frequent flyers can.
UA is doing ok competing against CX? Really? Sorry if I sound skeptical, but Billions in losses for five years now and a three year plus stint in BK cause me to doubt that purchasers of international F find UAL F on a par with CX or SQ or TG. We touched on this the other day: Although I think that NW's four daily China flights (and their estimated $1 billion in annual revenue) would be very beneficial to AA, the right to fly to China and the NRT hubs haven't kept UAL or NW in the black. Both are in bankruptcy. So maybe those route authorities aren't worth the value I place on them. B)
We all know some of the reasons why the Asian carriers' perceived service levels exceed that of AA or UAL. In part, their FAs are stereotypical subservient Asian girls, not older matrons who have earned the right to fly plum international routes due to many years of seniority. And like it or not, Asian businessmen place some value on that aspect of service. Although they are loathe to admit it, so do some American businessmen.
That non-politically correct view doesn't fly here, and I realize that.
There are lots of other reasons, as well. For instance, AA's top-dollar flyers don't like the uncertainty of not knowing which AA F seat they will get. AA's customers overwhelmingly prefer the Flagship Suites over the Coffins in F on the 777s, but AA's financial troubles have caused AA to defer replacement of the Coffins for more than four years now. Nearly half of AA's 777s still feature the Coffins instead of the Suites. Several weeks ago, AA announced its intentions to finally replace all the Coffins with Suites, but gave no timetable.
That's just one example. The perceived quality level of First Class food and beverage service on CX or BA or LAN or SQ or TG or LH or QF (or several others) exceeds the AA standard. It just does. AA has slowly trimmed and cutback even on International F, and those who pay for those fares are aware of those changes. There are other differences as well.
Those reasons may not be why AA hasn't decided to compete with CX to the CX hub, HKG. But they certainly help explain why AA might not make buckets of money on such routes.
What about BA and AA to LHR, some might ask? Well, LHR is capacity-controlled. AA and BA are not free to schedule as many flights as they might like between JFK and LHR. Bermuda II limits frequencies.
As
Former ModerAAtor pointed out, HKG isn't open skies, but it's not restricted like LHR. Anyone can fly to HKG with the appropriate "rubber stamp" approval.
If AA thinks it can sell sufficient amounts of paid F and J to HKG, I'm certain AA will try it. But with each passing year, AA's absence in HKG confirms my suspicions: There are other routes where AA's number-crunchers think it can sell more F and J (like on routes not served by the world's leading F and J carriers, such as CX). AA apparently thought it could sell enough paid F and J to NGO to make that work. AA was wrong, and that route is gone.
Recently, AA resumed DFW-KIX. Presumably, because AA thinks it can sell enough F and J. But if it can't, then that route will be axed once again. Same with ORD-DEL. Everything I have heard says F and J are doing great on that route. But we'll know for sure if it continues for the long-term. Same with ORD-PVG next April. Conventional wisdom is that service to mainland China is like printing money. We'll see if it works out for AA.
From a frequent flyer perspective, AA metal to HKG or LHR or any number of destinations is preferable for only one reason: The ability to upgrade, which ain't realistically possible on CX or BA. So a business exec who can only get the company to pay for paid J will buy that ticket from AA and use a systemwide or miles and probably get moved up front. But the exec who can convince the employer to pay for F is just as likely to choose a carrier with higher-quality F. Simple as that.
