JFK-NRT goes double daily, well, sort of

[FWAAA]

When AA was awarded the JFK-HND route, it optimistically announced that the new HND flight would not replace the NRT flight, but with antitrust immunity, it looked likely that the JFK-NRT flight might not be necessary.    And eventually, the JFK-NRT flight, having existed for almost 10 years, was ended.
 
As JFK-HND could not be made viable thanks to the restrictive HND slot times,  AA and JAL finally threw in the towel on that route and it ends this weekend.   Now, the AA-JAL joint venture has just one daily flight to Tokyo from NYC, and it's the JAL 77W.   
 
I recently asked in another thread that has gone hopelessly off-topic whether new AA might revive the JFK-NRT flight now that HND is gone.  Turns out I was half right, kind of,   But it's not going to be AA flying the second daily frequency between JFK and NRT, it will be a JAL 787.    Yes, thanks to their joint venture, it really doesn't matter which airline actually flies the route, as they'll share the profits (or, as WT is sure to point out in multiple huge posts, the LOSSES) from the route.   But even though it doesn't matter to management, it has to matter to the pilots, as they were sold the ATI joint ventures with AA/BA and JAL on the claims that their long-haul flying would not decrease as a result.  Management even claimed that long-haul flying opportunities could even increase.
 
The joint venture's flights to Tokyo have been slowly increasing, with BOS, SAN and now a second daily JFK, but those are all on JAL's planes and none on AA's planes.  
 
http://press.jal.co.jp/en/release/201311/002736.html

 

[Kev3188]

Interesting. Is there any "easy" reasons (lack of available A/C, pilot training, etc., etc.) that is precluding AA from picking up any of these JV routes?

 

[WorldTraveler]

AA and JL both operated in JFK-NRT before.

JL's average fares were far higher than AA's.

That is more than enough reason as to why JL is operating the flight and not AA.

The fact that AA is throwing its support behind AA's DFW-HKG says that they both recognize that the JL is better off letting JL try to compete in the most competitive markets of the US-Japan market.

 

[Kev3188]

The fact that AA is throwing its support behind AA's DFW-HKG says that they both recognize that the JL is better off letting JL try to compete in the most competitive markets of the US-Japan market.

What?

 

[WorldTraveler]

what part are you missing?

DFW-HKG is being operated as part of the AA-JL JV. No?

If AA could generate average fares on its own aircraft comparable to what JL gets, AA would be operating the JFK-NRT flight.

 

[Kev3188]

what part are you missing?

The meaning of this sentence:

The fact that AA is throwing its support behind AA's DFW-HKG says that they both recognize that the JL is better off letting JL try to compete in the most competitive markets of the US-Japan market

 

[WorldTraveler]

I see your point...

... that the JV is better off letting JL.....

sorry and thanks....

 

[eolesen]

The JV would apply to flights not between the US and Japan, i.e. HKG?

That's news to me.

 

[FWAAA]

The JV would apply to flights not between the US and Japan, i.e. HKG?

That's news to me.

The AA press release announcing the DFW-HKG and DFW-PVG flights said that both would be operated as part of the JV with JAL:
 

Both routes will be operated as part of American's joint business agreement with fellow oneworld® alliance member Japan Airlines.

 
http://hub.aa.com/en/nr/american-airlines-responds-to-customer-demand-with-new-service-from-dallasfort-worth-to-hong-kong-and-shanghai
 
According to the JAL press release I linked earlier, the joint venture includes AA's other routes to China and ICN.  

 

[MAH4546]

The JV would apply to flights not between the US and Japan, i.e. HKG?That's news to me.

Yes. It applies to China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Viet Nam, the Philippines and Singapore. It also covers Canada, Mexico and, I believe, Brazil.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Joint Ventures may include countries that do not have Open Skies with the US but there can be no antitrust immunity or pricing and schedules coordination between airlines of any countries that do not have Open Skies with the US.
 
HKG, China, and Brazil among others do not have Open Skies and thus airlines cannot between those countries cannot have ATI. The US does have Open Skies with Japan but ATI is limited to countries with Open Skies.

 

[eolesen]

Yes. It applies to China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Viet Nam, the Philippines and Singapore. It also covers Canada, Mexico and, I believe, Brazil.

Seventh freedom services? Guess I missed some fine print.

I'd assumed the JV only applied to sixth. That certainly makes for a more interesting business case on both Korea and HKG.

 

[jimntx]

Well, E and WT, there's always the chance that the press release is wrong.  After all, according to the press, we had an American Eagle flight with 133 passengers aboard involved in a bomb threat recently! 

 

[WorldTraveler]

you are absolutely right, E.

AA and JL can share revenues on flights across the Pacific that do not involve Open Skies countries but AA has to make the decisions on a flight like DFW-HKG and China which involves a country that does not have Open Skies.

There are a few JVs among other US Airlines with similar inclusion of non-ATI countries but the AA-JL JV includes a far larger portion of the total JV operated outside of ATI.

 

[700UW]

Does Great Britain and the USA have Open Skies?