LAX-NRT Delayed

ArtTang

Advanced
Feb 14, 2003
221
0
AA says it will not start the BCN (Barcelona) route out of JFK as planned.
Another casualty of low bookings.
 

Senor Pelon

Member
Aug 21, 2002
73
12
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/27/2003 6:53:49 AM eolesen wrote:

I heard from someone who has a cousin dating the daughter of one of Don Carty's elementary school classmates that it was all TWA's fault...
----------------
[/blockquote]
I'm glad you jumped the gun on Bagsmasher.
10.gif']
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
Even with the demands of CRAF, couldn't AA find 2 777 from its South America operation to fly LAX to NRT. All those 777 & 767-300's flying to GRU, GIG, SCL & EZE stay there all day to fly back in the evening. Couldn't 2 763's move from the domestic fllet to replace 2 777's needed for LAX-NRT? Or better cut one daily frequency to South America freeing a pair of 777's. Latin America is in the dumps economically so why not redeploy aircraft.
 

s80dude

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
721
5
USA
Visit site
The company is saying that LAX-NRT is being delayed because of a slump in Asian travel bookings, not because of lack of equipment going to CRAF.
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
For an airline with Pacific ambition AA has to learn there is a peeking order of internatioal importance.

1. JFK- AA flies to LHR 6 times daily with 777(international chariot of choice). Other important European cities, GRU, EZE and NRT.

2. LAX - with all the transcon flight, this itself is a huge market. LHR(AA's flagship flight from LAX), SYD (QF code-share), HKG (via CX) and no NRT. This should have happened 10 years ago had Crandall not decided to fly from San Jose-NRT(DELTA got the LAX flight).

3. MIA- Since this airport has no Asian connection it prestige is already less then the others. Lets face the fact that South America service to the people on main street is not important. The only real prestige destination here is LHR. Remember NATIONAL airlines from MIAMI, it flew to London, Paris, Amsterdam, Frankfurt and others but never flew to South America or the Caribean (only San Juan was served). Braniff's Latin American service never counted much to the good 'ole boys back in Dallas. I always remeber NATIONAL.

Flying A300, 757 and 737-800's to the Caribean and South America doesn't exite anyone. The glory of watching transpacific flights take-off from LAX remindsme the wonder flight is. Ever watch a South African 747-400 take -off for JHB from JFK using all the runway, AA used to code share this flight before SAA went ot Delta. DFW, LAX, ORD & JFK should be 777 bases for AA. MIA to LHR should be operated as a rotation from LHR as RDU-LGW is flown, a rotation with DFW-LGW. PACIFIC ambition requires prioritizing goals at AA.
 

MiAAmi

Veteran
Aug 21, 2002
1,490
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/1/2003 3:48:55 PM JFK777 wrote:


3. MIA- Since this airport has no Asian connection it prestige is already less then the others. ----------------
[/blockquote]

It may not have the "prestige" you are talking about. But if you look at which station has had the least cuts its MIA. Right now its about the money, and its flowing thru miami better than most stations.
 

MAH4546

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
1,457
1,004
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/1/2003 3:48:55 PM JFK777 wrote:


3. MIA- Since this airport has no Asian connection it prestige is already less then the others. ----------------
[/blockquote]

Middle East is Asia. Starting 28 October 2003, El Al starts twice-weekly 777-200 service between Miami and Tel Aviv on Sunday and Tuesday. They launch Chicago (Monday and Wednesday) the next day. It replaces the current El Al service to both cities, which is operated by a North American Airlines 757 (MIA) and 738 (ORD) that flies to JFK to connect with LY. (And, war or no war, state-owned El Al has never suspended operations, and never will. Even during war, thier flights go on, usually being escorted by military jets as they land and take off from Ben Gruion).


Your points on MIA being suddently "less important" because it does not have a flight to Tokyo (LanChile has applied with Japanese aviation authorites for SCL-MIA-NRT, BTW) is ridiculous. I'm not saying it is as big a world gateway as JFK or LAX, it isn't, but it is still an important gateway and the #1 airport in the US in terms of international passengers.

Prestige or not, Miami is currently AA's most stable hub operation and the only one that is operating more mainline flights now than before 9.11 (Eagle is another story).

I don't have any accsess to any profit factors or anything, but I would bet you plenty that AA makes more money with thier two daily MIA-LHR flights than they do with their six JFK-LHR flights.
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
PRESTIGE and profits are synonamous. When Pan AM and TWA were selling routes what did AA , DAL and UA pay BIG money for? LHR & Tokyo. UA and AA most profitable routes are to London and Japan. Prestige may not matter much in aviation today, but an international route with high fares and barriers to entry is profitable. Those two factors are characteristics of NRT and LHR.

BA is so profitable because no more competition can enter LHR. The player may change, but only so many flights a day can fly to LHR. Slot controls equal profits. Slots = prestige= profits.
 

Latest posts