New AA flights from Miami

[WorldTraveler]

Every airport that I can think of outside smaller markets pays for building terminals then pays the bonds back with user fees/PFC's/etc. So AA hasn't spent "billions of dollars on a new terminal." Over time, they'll pay their share of total airport costs, but not up front except for whatever they are responsible for, i.e. office/crew room furnishings, etc).

It's like airplanes. After all the paperwork is done and money finishes changing hands, the airline hasn't spent the cost of an airplane immediately. They either do a sale/leaseback or EETC to get most/all of their money back then make lease/EETC payments for X years.

Jim

MIA built their new terminal because AA as the primary tenant said they wanted it and sign contracts to pay for much of the cost of the terminal. The bonds, PFCs etc are all part of the process but don't doubt for a minute that the primary tentants pay major portions of the cost of the terminal and at most US airports have pretty broad authority to approve or not approve projects that would increase their rent.

And people forgot DL had a hub at DFW and closed it down, had a hub in MCO and closed it down.

If they wanted to go back into DFW they dont need to buy assets from AA.

You failed to mention that DL pulled down a hub at DFW which had over 200 mainline flights per day which yielded a maximum of 15% local market share and redeployed those assets over the Atlantic and in NYC where DL doubled its market share in a market that is worth multiples more than DFW.

If DL buys the DFW hub from AA it is because of the local market and the strategic flows that it produces - and which they never had.

I'm not sure if DL ever called MCO a hub or not but it doesn't change that DL is still the largest network carrier in nearly every city in Florida outside of MIA - reducing MCO did nothing to hurt DL's position in FLA.

Both were about the correct redeployment of assets, which incidentally is waht AA is doing w/ their new MIA terminal

 

[700UW]

Gee didnt see DL flying MD80s and 737s to Europe.

I seriously doubt DL had 200 widebody flights from DFW per day.

 

[wings396]

At that time DL was in a world of hurt, and they were just looking to stop their losses. As I have said before, DL has had their share of ups and downs.

 

[LD3]

You failed to mention that DL pulled down a hub at DFW

No, I am pretty sure 700 said DL closed their hub in DFW, your playing word games by calling it "pulled down". Either way, AA showed DL the door..

 

[700UW]

And people forgot DL had a hub at DFW and closed it down, had a hub in MCO and closed it down.

If they wanted to go back into DFW they dont need to buy assets from AA.

Yep I did say that.

 

[WorldTraveler]

If you two can copy and quote entire sentences, then perhaps we can have a conversation of substance.

let me help

You failed to mention that DL pulled down a hub at DFW which had over 200 mainline flights per day which yielded a maximum of 15% local market share and redeployed those assets over the Atlantic and in NYC where DL doubled its market share in a market that is worth multiples more than DFW.

The simple fact is DL redeployed its assets, built NYC into what it is today - 3-4X larger than what it was 10 years ago. Still is the #2 airline at NYC and the number #1 network airline in most of FLA. and AA and US' position in NYC is far weaker today than it was 10 years ago.

DL profitably redeployed assets. I'll be happy to hear suggestions but I don't think any airline has done the same thing.

CO's buildup of EWR is the closest redeployment of assets - but EWR also required huge expenditures on new aircraft.

 

[700UW]

Once again you hijack a thread and turn into DL.

 

[WorldTraveler]

all of the following comments were made about DL and or ATL before I said anything ... so once again you are wrong, 700.

In fact, is there any post of yours in this thread that doesn't mention DL?

I realize that there are examples of southeast domestic itineraries where the CLT hub makes sense, but seriously now, if you're flying in or out of ATL to a non-hub, then a nonstop on DL is the way to go. As FA Mikey said, you can't be everything to everyone. No business person in their right mind would connect at CLT to get from ATL to TLH or ATL to JAX when DL can take you nonstop. Connecting traffic almost always pays lower fares than nonstop traffic, so right off the bat you're settling for less revenue.

AA isn't expecting people to fly all the way down to MIA so they can connect there on purely domestic itineraries. MIA is a Latin American gateway/hub where AA's extensive schedule exists primarily to feed the numerous international flights, as well as satisfy the fairly high O&D to/from MIA.

All of this talk about CLT & MIA baffles me a bit. If they can't coexist with US, why would Delta be interested in MIA & DFW when they have ATL? I would think that having MIA & ATL would be more of an issue than CLT given that ATL most likely serves some duplicate flying with MIA that CLT doesn't.

And people forgot DL had a hub at DFW and closed it down, had a hub in MCO and closed it down.

If they wanted to go back into DFW they dont need to buy assets from AA.

Back in the day AA ran Delta out of town, and they gave BN a shove off the cliff when they were hurting as well. I recall Crandall being quoted as saying
"Delta won't be making another ATL in our backyard".

 

[BoeingBoy]

MIA built their new terminal because AA as the primary tenant said they wanted it and sign contracts to pay for much of the cost of the terminal. The bonds, PFCs etc are all part of the process but don't doubt for a minute that the primary tentants pay major portions of the cost of the terminal and at most US airports have pretty broad authority to approve or not approve projects that would increase their rent.

And PIT built the new terminal for US. You see, the regulators say that an airport which receives federal funds can't discriminate, favoring one airline over another when it comes to the cost of terminal facilities, ramp space and the like. Every major airport receives federal funds, including a significant share of the cost of airport improvements, so the lease rates per foot for terminal space and the like must be the same for all signitories.

Jim

 

[eolesen]

So, if I want to travel from GSO to Louisville or ATL amd I going to have to go all the way down to MIA to change planes? Or if my travel plans call for ATL to Tallahassee or JAX am I going to have to travel all the way down to MIA to make that connection? Doesn't sound very business friendly or convenient.

Wow, what an exciting city pair. GSO-SDF had demand for about 400 passengers the entire month of June. 200 flew via ATL, and 140 via CLT. The rest were split across DCA (60 pax), PHL (35), and DTW (13), all of which are just about as inconvenient as MIA.

On your ATL examples, more than 95% of the market was carried on nonstops.

If the fare is cheap enough, I'm sure there are a lot of people who will make the connection, even if it adds 3 hours to a trip. I know my friends at Sabre who are forbidden from flying on AA are finding that out the hard way. One of them had to fly DFW-LAX-TUS a couple weeks ago, instead of taking a nonstop.

 

[jimntx]

And people forgot DL had a hub at DFW and closed it down, had a hub in MCO and closed it down.

If they wanted to go back into DFW they dont need to buy assets from AA.

Back in the day AA ran Delta out of town, and they gave BN a shove off the cliff when they were hurting as well. I recall Crandall being quoted as saying
"Delta won't be making another ATL in our backyard".

First off, DL closed the DFW hub following 9/11 when EVERY airline was looking for ways to cut costs and survive. I would have a hard time saying that AA "ran them out of town." DL is in DFW--maybe not hub levels of activity, but you rarely see the DL gates in terminal E without an airplane at them. If DL wanted to build up DFW again, they would need to get gates from somewhere. There is very little (if any) unallocated gate space at DFW.

Wings, if you recall Crandall saying what that, you must be hallucinating. Crandall had been retired for years when DL closed the DFW hub following 9/11.

 

[700UW]

It was 2005 when DL shut down the hub in DFW.

 

[wings396]

First off, DL closed the DFW hub following 9/11 when EVERY airline was looking for ways to cut costs and survive. I would have a hard time saying that AA "ran them out of town." DL is in DFW--maybe not hub levels of activity, but you rarely see the DL gates in terminal E without an airplane at them. If DL wanted to build up DFW again, they would need to get gates from somewhere. There is very little (if any) unallocated gate space at DFW.

Wings, if you recall Crandall saying what that, you must be hallucinating. Crandall had been retired for years when DL closed the DFW hub following 9/11.

No, I'm not as he made that comment when Delta started to develop the DFW Hub, not when they closed it. I also believe the pulldown started prior to 9/11.

 

[jimntx]

Believe what you wish. Doesn't make it so. I have several DL f/a friends who got furloughed when the DFW base closed after 9/11.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'm not sure what the point of arguing about when DL's DFW hub closed since this a thread about AA and its MIA expansion today.

Concern about thread drift apparently doesn't matter if the accuser wants to do the drifting.

If AA is guilty of shutting down a number of hubs, it is also "guilty" of reallocating its assets where they can produce better revenues - which is exactly why their MIA and Latin America operation is as strong as it is. DL did the same thing at DFW.

The problem w/ AA is that they have retreated in many other key markets that are larger - Europe and Asia - and haven't figured out how to regain its position in those markets. DL and UA have recovered what they lost thru downsizing thru mergers and have become much stronger in the regions where their merger partner was strong.
WRT to a merger between AA and US, many of the strategic challenges facing AA and US will still exist which will still leave them at a substantial disadvantage to other airlines.

And PIT built the new terminal for US. You see, the regulators say that an airport which receives federal funds can't discriminate, favoring one airline over another when it comes to the cost of terminal facilities, ramp space and the like. Every major airport receives federal funds, including a significant share of the cost of airport improvements, so the lease rates per foot for terminal space and the like must be the same for all signitories.

Jim

paying the same rate per square foot or per pound of landed weight does not mean that every carrier pays the same amount. Airlines DO pay the majority of the cost of the airport. Leases for hub airports frequently do allow the airline some control over concessions as well as give them some portion of the parking revenue etc.
But AA's payments to MIA amount to hundreds of millions of dollars per year and they pay the highest part of MIA's expenses of any single entity.