If Dl "rolls Over"....... ?

[eolesen]

Based on the amount of money AA spent on their terminal at JFK, they are not a good candidate for competing at LCC fares.

[post="271478"][/post]​

Really? Show me one market where AA isn't competitive with a LCC's fares. If they're not within $20, I'd be shocked.

 

[okoge1027]

Although most have very little value due to new open skies agreements,yes, AA did get all of TWA's route authorities in the asset purchase agreement. We currently fly to Rome from JFK on a seasonal basis and I would like to see (and I think we might with the completion of the new terminal) AA fly many more transatlantic destinations.
However, I don't think you will see AA flying scheduled flights to the Middle East/Arab/Islamic countries anytime soon for obvious reasons. In addition to being a Middle Eastern country with many Arabs/Muslims I doubt you will see an AA aircraft in TLV because an Israeli court has determined that AA is responsible to pay TWA Inc.'s debts with regard to TWA's TLV employee's pension and severence. Thus if an AA aircraft ever lands there, it would be seized until AA pays off the TWA debts there.

[post="270781"][/post]​

Those Tel Aviv TWA workers would be waiting for a long time. I hope they've got another jobs by now. Don't they know the word "tough turkeys"????

 

[Bob Owens]

Really? Show me one market where AA isn't competitive with a LCC's fares. If they're not within $20, I'd be shocked.

[post="271528"][/post]​

Sure, because the employees are paying for it. AA is a Low labor cost carrier.

 

[mjk]

Sure, because the employees are paying for it. AA is a Low labor cost carrier.

[post="271617"][/post]​

How exactly would AA (or any other carrier) survive as a "high labor cost carrier"?

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

How exactly would AA (or any other carrier) survive as a "high labor cost carrier"?

[post="271641"][/post]​

Perhaps pricing their product for at least as much as it costs, promoting their product smartly and treating their work force with respect. Also, paying their work force what they deserve for their responsibilities. No sarcasm here. I know that this is not entirely possible because there is NO level playing field. When an airline can be a "paper airline", ie. farmout most every aspect of an airline, it grately hinders the true airlines.

 

[MCI transplant]

Perhaps pricing their product for at least as much as it costs, promoting their product smartly and treating their work force with respect. Also, paying their work force what they deserve for their responsibilities. No sarcasm here. I know that this is not entirely possible because there is NO level playing field. When an airline can be a "paper airline", ie. farmout most every aspect of an airline, it grately hinders the true airlines.

[post="271851"][/post]​

<_< Hey Ken! What Airline you talking about? Not aa!!! That's for sure!!!! 😛

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

<_< Hey Ken! What Airline you talking about? Not aa!!! That's for sure!!!! 😛

[post="271904"][/post]​

MCI, I'm sure I am not talking about any airline actually. It seems as if the airlines are all in a foot race that ends at the edge of a cliff. They are all running full throttle hoping that others will fall off the cliff before they do. It is insane to see the price of fuel going up & up and one/two airlines attempt to pass this cost along to the passenger, (common sense here), only to have some fool of another airline not follow suit.

And as far as respecting a labor group I do not know one airline that really embraces that concept. I know that AA doesn't and that hurts even more knowing that the twu cares even less about respecting their members. 🙁

 

[MCI transplant]

MCI, I'm sure I am not talking about any airline actually. It seems as if the airlines are all in a foot race that ends at the edge of a cliff. They are all running full throttle hoping that others will fall off the cliff before they do. It is insane to see the price of fuel going up & up and one/two airlines attempt to pass this cost along to the passenger, (common sense here), only to have some fool of another airline not follow suit.

And as far as respecting a labor group I do not know one airline that really embraces that concept. I know that AA doesn't and that hurts even more knowing that the twu cares even less about respecting their members. 🙁

[post="272001"][/post]​

<_< Truer statements have never been spoken!!!!

 

[Whadayano]

I think we should all remember that when DL bought the PA European routes they proceeded to lose over $300mm while they were rebranding and remarketing them. Today it might be somewhat faster to do (I think DL took 3 years before it began to turn around) but it would be awfully expensive, and on a return on investment basis pretty marginal. It would be intriguing for B6, but they'd need a 3rd equipment type and have to turn into a more hub-like airline, with the sacrifices in turn times that would mean--so think it would be something they'd turn down. You might remember too that the DL terminal at LGA is actually EAL's--which is to say, CO's--I think they have first rights if DL were to default on those bonds/lease payments. If the king of EWR had a serious presence at LGA, that would be a different dynamic for NY.

 

[upsilon]

You might remember too that the DL terminal at LGA is actually EAL's--which is to say, CO's--I think they have first rights if DL were to default on those bonds/lease payments.

[post="273100"][/post]​

Whoa here. Who was where at LGA?

I am only sure that the DL Shuttle took over the PA Shuttle that had set up in the Marine Terminal at LGA.

And I think when the EA shuttle started we boarded out of Concourse A. But when it "took off" they built a shed beside the main terminal. Then I recall that the EA Shuttle became the Trump Shuttle and finally the US Shuttle.

Was not CO the originally planned tenant of what is now the US terninal - before CO scaled back LGA and concentrated in EWR? Was EA ever in what is now the DL/NW terminal?

Someting in the quoted post does not fit; but time and age take their toll on the memory!

 

[eolesen]

CO is still the primary leaseholder for the terminal that US is subleasing. That's why it's a red herring to hear people think that US can somehow sell this as an asset.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

"BOY", this ol' post of mind , grew longer legs than I thought it would.

NH/BB's

 

[Fly]

"BOY", this ol' post of mind , grew longer legs than I thought it would.

NH/BB's

[post="273213"][/post]​

The MIND....the first thing to go! 🙄

 

[Wretched Wrench]

The MIND....the first thing to go! 🙄

[post="273240"][/post]​

No, I believe it is the second.

 

[Bob Owens]

How exactly would AA (or any other carrier) survive as a "high labor cost carrier"?

[post="271641"][/post]​

Maybe we should ask SWA?