I don't agree with this criticism. Simply because you have a JV doesn't mean you don't operate international flights, especially from a specific carrier's hub. By your arguments, AA should stop flying to LHR from LAX, ORD, JFK, MIA, etc. and simply rely on BA. That will never happen.
That's not behind my criticism of Kirby. His comment makes it sound like AA doesn't already serve PHX, and that's false.
Of course AA metal will continue to fly on the routes across the Atlantic despite the joint venture with BA/IB. Part of the reason is that the joint business agreement allocates the revenues (and hopefully profits) by complex formulas, and the more metal flown by AA, the more money it gets under the agreement. The pilots at AA feared ATI because they (mistakenly) believed that AA would stop flying TATL flights and outsource all flying to BA/IB. AA has actually increased its own metal flights to London and Madrid since the ATI was granted. This summer, AA metal flew a record 19 daily flights to LHR from BOS, JFK, RDU, MIA, ORD, DFW and LAX. Joint venture partner BA flew about 40 additional flights from its various gateways. Combined, AA/BA flew about 61 daily flights to London from 20 USA gatway cities.
BA has a long history of serving PHX and presumably, it has matched capacity with demand, so a merger between US and AA won't suddenly mean any increased demand for PHX-LHR. So there's no need for an additional frequency.
That said, I don't see adding PHX-LHR as being high on the priority list, even though BA is able to fill a 6x/week 744.
Agreed. Like I said, AA/BA already serves PHX from LHR. A higher priority might be for CLT's first flight to LHR. If/when US and AA merge, I could see the US PHL slots moved to CLT so that CLT would finally be connected to LHR instead of Gatwick. BA already serves PHL with two daily flights, one on a 767 that could be upguaged to a larger plane.
My criticism of Kirby was the unbridled arrogance in telling people in PHX that US could better allocate AA's 19 LHR slots (and widebody aircraft) in moving a flight to PHX, as if AA and BA haven't already determined the best allocation of London capacity among the 61 daily flights the joint venture operates. Implicit in Kirby's ignorant comments is an assumption that Parker/Kirby know better than BA and AA how to allocate those flights. Imagine that - executives of a Tempe-based airline with exactly one Heathrow flight in its entire network know that PHX is in need of a second daily flight when the joint venture that flies to LHR 61 times a day has determined that the market needs one daily flight. That's a classic wxample of hubris.
I expect the airliners.net crowd to make the kind of statements that Kirby made, but I don't expect them from real airline executives.
What's next? Parker/Kirby will proclaim that PHL, PHX and CLT will soon get flights to China and Tokyo because they're getting ready to take over an airline that operates 777s (capable aircraft, of which US operates none)? Maybe if Philly, Phoenix and Charlotte pony up really big subsidies will those flights takeoff.
