Rumor of ALL SJC-LAX/LAS/SNA/SAN cut in Dec -- DISASTER !!!
- Thread starter verhalen2003
- Start date
- Status
Let me make this EMPHATICALLY CLEAR.
I don't want to see any existing stations,routes, and especially employees disrupted, while we ride this storm out.
HOWEVER,
Crandall(in a NY minute)whacked out SJC(RDU,BNA) when he thought the situation warranted it. What I'm saying is that it does'nt come as a HUGE shock to me(if true) !!!
We're not talking downgrading JFK-LAX/SFO here.
I for one think AA has(for too long) been doing too much domestic, short haul(mainline) flying.
(Oh , by the way, it was'nt me that originally subscribed to that theory)
It was(yup, you've got it') Uncle Bobby.(Who we know, had NO EQUAL) !!!!!!!!!
(to a certain degree) let WN do/go, whatever/wherever there little hearts desire.
(the APA scope clause(SP?) notwithstanding), throw A/E at WN, get what we can out of it, and concentrate on offering the VERY best product, on our routes/countries that WN only dreams about in their sleep !!!!!!!!
Yes, that means running a lean,and VERY mean operation, with fewer mainline employees.
I definitely agree with a previous poster, that AA MUST get a liberal agreement out of APA(as far as A/E is concerned), no matter what it costs($$$$) them (AA) !!
Carty was right when he said(last friday) that we(AA) grew to big domestically, and to a certain degree, took our eye off the prize, which was to make sure that we paid strict attention to our Global service, which is(as far as US Global carriers go), Second to None !!!!!
NH/BB's
AA/AFL-CIO
I don't want to see any existing stations,routes, and especially employees disrupted, while we ride this storm out.
HOWEVER,
Crandall(in a NY minute)whacked out SJC(RDU,BNA) when he thought the situation warranted it. What I'm saying is that it does'nt come as a HUGE shock to me(if true) !!!
We're not talking downgrading JFK-LAX/SFO here.
I for one think AA has(for too long) been doing too much domestic, short haul(mainline) flying.
(Oh , by the way, it was'nt me that originally subscribed to that theory)
It was(yup, you've got it') Uncle Bobby.(Who we know, had NO EQUAL) !!!!!!!!!
(to a certain degree) let WN do/go, whatever/wherever there little hearts desire.
(the APA scope clause(SP?) notwithstanding), throw A/E at WN, get what we can out of it, and concentrate on offering the VERY best product, on our routes/countries that WN only dreams about in their sleep !!!!!!!!
Yes, that means running a lean,and VERY mean operation, with fewer mainline employees.
I definitely agree with a previous poster, that AA MUST get a liberal agreement out of APA(as far as A/E is concerned), no matter what it costs($$$$) them (AA) !!
Carty was right when he said(last friday) that we(AA) grew to big domestically, and to a certain degree, took our eye off the prize, which was to make sure that we paid strict attention to our Global service, which is(as far as US Global carriers go), Second to None !!!!!
NH/BB's
AA/AFL-CIO
So, I guess the answer is to be like Pan Am, and have a great expansive network with a few transcons thrown in for show, and farm out all of the short-haul flying?...
It worked well for them. Not.
Whether or not it is short-haul or mid-haul doesn't determine if there's demand for a RJ or a MD80. Demand and revenue do. Routes like DFW-GRR do great with an RJ, even though it is longer than DFW-ORD. That's because there's enough demand (and revenue) to justify the 3 50 seaters a day, but not enough for a single 130 seater...
It worked well for them. Not.
Whether or not it is short-haul or mid-haul doesn't determine if there's demand for a RJ or a MD80. Demand and revenue do. Routes like DFW-GRR do great with an RJ, even though it is longer than DFW-ORD. That's because there's enough demand (and revenue) to justify the 3 50 seaters a day, but not enough for a single 130 seater...
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/10/2002 11
17 AM eolesen wrote:
So, I guess the answer is to be like Pan Am, and have a great expansive network with a few transcons thrown in for show, and farm out all of the short-haul flying?...
It worked well for them. Not.
Whether or not it is short-haul or mid-haul doesn't determine if there's demand for a RJ or a MD80. Demand and revenue do. Routes like DFW-GRR do great with an RJ, even though it is longer than DFW-ORD. That's because there's enough demand (and revenue) to justify the 3 50 seaters a day, but not enough for a single 130 seater...
----------------
[/blockquote]
The truth is, wages and cost at the big network carriers WILL go down. We WILL become more efficient. Just look at all the inefficient jets the Bigs have parked perm. The maginal small airlines WILL NOT be able to survive. And the cycle will continue. As for the 3 50 seater vs 1 130 seat jet, the bank system alone rationalizes your stance. I just wish they would do 2 50 seaters and keep the one 130 seater on the peak times.
----------------
On 9/10/2002 11
17 AM eolesen wrote: So, I guess the answer is to be like Pan Am, and have a great expansive network with a few transcons thrown in for show, and farm out all of the short-haul flying?...
It worked well for them. Not.
Whether or not it is short-haul or mid-haul doesn't determine if there's demand for a RJ or a MD80. Demand and revenue do. Routes like DFW-GRR do great with an RJ, even though it is longer than DFW-ORD. That's because there's enough demand (and revenue) to justify the 3 50 seaters a day, but not enough for a single 130 seater...
----------------
[/blockquote]
The truth is, wages and cost at the big network carriers WILL go down. We WILL become more efficient. Just look at all the inefficient jets the Bigs have parked perm. The maginal small airlines WILL NOT be able to survive. And the cycle will continue. As for the 3 50 seater vs 1 130 seat jet, the bank system alone rationalizes your stance. I just wish they would do 2 50 seaters and keep the one 130 seater on the peak times.
- Thread Starter
- #35
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/10/2002 2:36:33 PM MiAAmi wrote:
Isn't all this really just speculation? I have't seen anything in Sabre yet. And I would think that there would at least be a press release about this. But nothing yet unless I missed it somewhere.
----------------
[/blockquote]
The information has come from ramp personnel at SJC and been confirmed by others. The ramp personnel at SJC had to be informed about these decisions in advance because there were some staffing decisions yet to be made that would affect the ramp workers directly. The SJC ramp person also indicated that there is not a firm date for the routes to cutover from mainline to Eagle yet... he indicated that it will be a phased transition, giving AA the chance to back out if the first routes are not accepted well. This contradicts the original rumor that all the routes would cutover on Dec 1... so far there is no substantiation for that specific date.
----------------
On 9/10/2002 2:36:33 PM MiAAmi wrote:
Isn't all this really just speculation? I have't seen anything in Sabre yet. And I would think that there would at least be a press release about this. But nothing yet unless I missed it somewhere.
----------------
[/blockquote]
The information has come from ramp personnel at SJC and been confirmed by others. The ramp personnel at SJC had to be informed about these decisions in advance because there were some staffing decisions yet to be made that would affect the ramp workers directly. The SJC ramp person also indicated that there is not a firm date for the routes to cutover from mainline to Eagle yet... he indicated that it will be a phased transition, giving AA the chance to back out if the first routes are not accepted well. This contradicts the original rumor that all the routes would cutover on Dec 1... so far there is no substantiation for that specific date.
Isn't all this really just speculation? I have't seen anything in Sabre yet. And I would think that there would at least be a press release about this. But nothing yet unless I missed it somewhere.
- Thread Starter
- #37
[blockquote]
----------------
I agree that you can probably fill the RJ's for at least the short term. And AA has a significant customer base in the SJC area owing to their two attempts at a hub/focus city at SJC. Whether or not RJ service is an agreeable long-term solution is another question; certainly, the bus ride out to the LAX satellite terminal adds an element of inconvenience to the customer experience.
Speaking from my experience with AA RJ's at BOS, I'd take a Southwest no-assigned-seats flight on a competitive route over a half-hour wait (in my case) on an unairconditioned bus and twenty minutes of confusion onboard over why the passenger manifest and bodies-in-seats didn't match up.
[/blockquote]
One IMPORTANT clarification... Any RJ service from SJC to points south will be served from the SAME terminals that they are now, NOT satellite terminals that you have to take a bus to. So forget about everything mentioned above about the bus ride out to the LAX satellite terminal and a half-hour wait (in my case) on an unairconditioned bus and twenty minutes of confusion onboard. LAX is the only affected airport that even has an AA satellite terminal, but RJ services that have replaced former mainline services do NOT use the satellite terminal; they depart from T3. The same will be true for LAX-SJC if it goes RJ. The RJ experience at the affected West Coast airports would be much more appealing than at say, DFW or BOS.
----------------
I agree that you can probably fill the RJ's for at least the short term. And AA has a significant customer base in the SJC area owing to their two attempts at a hub/focus city at SJC. Whether or not RJ service is an agreeable long-term solution is another question; certainly, the bus ride out to the LAX satellite terminal adds an element of inconvenience to the customer experience.
Speaking from my experience with AA RJ's at BOS, I'd take a Southwest no-assigned-seats flight on a competitive route over a half-hour wait (in my case) on an unairconditioned bus and twenty minutes of confusion onboard over why the passenger manifest and bodies-in-seats didn't match up.
[/blockquote]
One IMPORTANT clarification... Any RJ service from SJC to points south will be served from the SAME terminals that they are now, NOT satellite terminals that you have to take a bus to. So forget about everything mentioned above about the bus ride out to the LAX satellite terminal and a half-hour wait (in my case) on an unairconditioned bus and twenty minutes of confusion onboard. LAX is the only affected airport that even has an AA satellite terminal, but RJ services that have replaced former mainline services do NOT use the satellite terminal; they depart from T3. The same will be true for LAX-SJC if it goes RJ. The RJ experience at the affected West Coast airports would be much more appealing than at say, DFW or BOS.
Addressed to eoleson,
(Ok eric, get your calculator out)
If $1.1B = 7000 less jobs, does(per DC's fri. nite speech in Canada),We now need to cut costs by $3B, for the next few years, = 20,000 + jobs ?????????????
Eric, your on the ground floor down there in centerport, When in GODS name is HDQ going to stop dicking around, and put a 5+5, on the table, so as to get the numbers they need to really cut costs ??????????
I hope to HE*L AA's not counting on the 60/100% deal, plus those chicken sh*t LOA's(which are mostly for non union folks), to get to where they need to be, in terms of $savings !!!!!!!!!
If one wants to catch a lot of fish, one needs to use a lot of bait !!!!!!!!!
Regards,
NH/BB's
(Ok eric, get your calculator out)
If $1.1B = 7000 less jobs, does(per DC's fri. nite speech in Canada),We now need to cut costs by $3B, for the next few years, = 20,000 + jobs ?????????????
Eric, your on the ground floor down there in centerport, When in GODS name is HDQ going to stop dicking around, and put a 5+5, on the table, so as to get the numbers they need to really cut costs ??????????
I hope to HE*L AA's not counting on the 60/100% deal, plus those chicken sh*t LOA's(which are mostly for non union folks), to get to where they need to be, in terms of $savings !!!!!!!!!
If one wants to catch a lot of fish, one needs to use a lot of bait !!!!!!!!!
Regards,
NH/BB's
[blockquote]
If one wants to catch a lot of fish, one needs to use a lot of bait !!!!!!!!!
[/blockquote]
Bears, you need to consider giving up in your quest for a 5+5.
One might need to use a lot of bait if the fish aren't biting, but I don't think there's any doubt that we'll see layoffs happening, and there are going to be people towards the bottom of the list who will consider taking one of the two VLA options to get something now (travel?) vs. risking a layoff later with nothing.
If one wants to catch a lot of fish, one needs to use a lot of bait !!!!!!!!!
[/blockquote]
Bears, you need to consider giving up in your quest for a 5+5.
One might need to use a lot of bait if the fish aren't biting, but I don't think there's any doubt that we'll see layoffs happening, and there are going to be people towards the bottom of the list who will consider taking one of the two VLA options to get something now (travel?) vs. risking a layoff later with nothing.
As a AA Exec Plat flyer I would take WN 737 over AA RJ for short haul anyday because:
Carry on Luggage Space-Don't want to wait 30 minutes for luggage on a 55 minute flight
Free drinks vs no booze on Eagle (Big deal, Friday away from home all week working and one can not BUY a beer on Eagle)
WN has lots of leg room in coach
No waiting for a gate, no waiting for gate agent to pull up jet bridge, no waiting for ground crew to lead you in
No bus ride
WN will bend the rules no no exception policy
No taxes, expidite charges, change fee charges, space limitations on FF tickets, empty seat get on!
Free ticket on 4 RT with short hall flights
THE ABILITY TO APPLY UNUSED RESTRICTED TICKET TO FUTURE FLIGHTS and get double credit if you do it on the web site
Higher frequency, more stand-by chances
No ticket over $299
WN now has Kiosks
This short haul competition has been played out on DAL-AUS and AA gave up competing
Carry on Luggage Space-Don't want to wait 30 minutes for luggage on a 55 minute flight
Free drinks vs no booze on Eagle (Big deal, Friday away from home all week working and one can not BUY a beer on Eagle)
WN has lots of leg room in coach
No waiting for a gate, no waiting for gate agent to pull up jet bridge, no waiting for ground crew to lead you in
No bus ride
WN will bend the rules no no exception policy
No taxes, expidite charges, change fee charges, space limitations on FF tickets, empty seat get on!
Free ticket on 4 RT with short hall flights
THE ABILITY TO APPLY UNUSED RESTRICTED TICKET TO FUTURE FLIGHTS and get double credit if you do it on the web site
Higher frequency, more stand-by chances
No ticket over $299
WN now has Kiosks
This short haul competition has been played out on DAL-AUS and AA gave up competing
- Thread Starter
- #42
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/11/2002 5:31:28 PM mrman wrote:
As a AA Exec Plat flyer I would take WN 737 over AA RJ for short haul anyday because:
Carry on Luggage Space-Don't want to wait 30 minutes for luggage on a 55 minute flight
Free drinks vs no booze on Eagle (Big deal, Friday away from home all week working and one can not BUY a beer on Eagle)
WN has lots of leg room in coach
No waiting for a gate, no waiting for gate agent to pull up jet bridge, no waiting for ground crew to lead you in
No bus ride
WN will bend the rules no no exception policy
No taxes, expidite charges, change fee charges, space limitations on FF tickets, empty seat get on!
Free ticket on 4 RT with short hall flights
THE ABILITY TO APPLY UNUSED RESTRICTED TICKET TO FUTURE FLIGHTS and get double credit if you do it on the web site
Higher frequency, more stand-by chances
No ticket over $299
WN now has Kiosks
This short haul competition has been played out on DAL-AUS and AA gave up competing
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sounds like somebody really has a thing for WN...
----------------
On 9/11/2002 5:31:28 PM mrman wrote:
As a AA Exec Plat flyer I would take WN 737 over AA RJ for short haul anyday because:
Carry on Luggage Space-Don't want to wait 30 minutes for luggage on a 55 minute flight
Free drinks vs no booze on Eagle (Big deal, Friday away from home all week working and one can not BUY a beer on Eagle)
WN has lots of leg room in coach
No waiting for a gate, no waiting for gate agent to pull up jet bridge, no waiting for ground crew to lead you in
No bus ride
WN will bend the rules no no exception policy
No taxes, expidite charges, change fee charges, space limitations on FF tickets, empty seat get on!
Free ticket on 4 RT with short hall flights
THE ABILITY TO APPLY UNUSED RESTRICTED TICKET TO FUTURE FLIGHTS and get double credit if you do it on the web site
Higher frequency, more stand-by chances
No ticket over $299
WN now has Kiosks
This short haul competition has been played out on DAL-AUS and AA gave up competing
----------------
[/blockquote]
Sounds like somebody really has a thing for WN...
V
Actually I am a big AA fan as well, I am an Ex Plat AA flyer 4 times a week. As a Texas boy AA & WN are my primary airlines. The point I was trying to make is that while you guys are looking rightfully so at costs, your missing the revenue generation boat. Competing on short haul with an RJ vs a 737 won’t get the O&D passenger for the reasons stated above. The Texas market and the Calf market are similar. AA has given up on competing with WN in Texas for O&D traffic. Most AA Intrastate flying is now RJ’s They are just getting connecting traffic from DFW. It looks like the California market is going the same way.
Maybe getting out of the short haul market is AA’s plan. I hope not. But with the new non refundible ticket use it or loose it policy, and WN across the concourse is giving their customers the ability to take funds on missed flights and apply them toward future travel on the web, your driving your best customers away from the short haul market.
And as my current view is that Rehab is for quitters, you guys have got to get booze on the Eagle. There is a revenue generator right there.
MrMan
Actually I am a big AA fan as well, I am an Ex Plat AA flyer 4 times a week. As a Texas boy AA & WN are my primary airlines. The point I was trying to make is that while you guys are looking rightfully so at costs, your missing the revenue generation boat. Competing on short haul with an RJ vs a 737 won’t get the O&D passenger for the reasons stated above. The Texas market and the Calf market are similar. AA has given up on competing with WN in Texas for O&D traffic. Most AA Intrastate flying is now RJ’s They are just getting connecting traffic from DFW. It looks like the California market is going the same way.
Maybe getting out of the short haul market is AA’s plan. I hope not. But with the new non refundible ticket use it or loose it policy, and WN across the concourse is giving their customers the ability to take funds on missed flights and apply them toward future travel on the web, your driving your best customers away from the short haul market.
And as my current view is that Rehab is for quitters, you guys have got to get booze on the Eagle. There is a revenue generator right there.
MrMan
Has anything been OFFICIALY announced about the cutbacks or is this all speculation or someones rumor?
- Status
Similar threads
