What to expect USAir PHL-TLV

[robbedagain]

given that that was a twa/israel thing bec of twa ch11 and subsquent merger with aa.... and i dont think the israelis twa employees won any battle in courts in israel n us won i have to believe that there is realistically no way the israelis could even try to seize an AA aircraft or anything like that? can any us air carrier operate 7 days a week to n from israel

 

[700UW]

According to the article they have a judgement against AA.

Yes any carrier can operate 7 days a week to and from Israel.

 

[robbedagain]

so basically they could seize the plane as judgment? can you provide the link to that article please
for the second part thanks....

 

[700UW]

I am trying to find it again, it was on airliners.net and it was a link in hebrew, had to translate it.

 

[FWAAA]

I doubt that an AA plane is at risk of being seized if it flew to TLV, but if that's what Israeli law provides, then AA will hire lawyers in TLV to fight. If an Israeli court determines that creditors in TLV can seize a plane, then I'm certain that Parker will get out the checkbook and pay the judgment. As I've posted before, if the route really prints money the way some people claim it does, the judgment sounds like a lot less than the cost of one pair of LHR slots. Of course, if new AA ends up having to pay the judgment, then might as well keep the PHL route and begin JFK and MIA to TLV to amortize the cost of that judgment over more passengers (and more revenue).

 

[WorldTraveler]

700,
show me where in my post I said that AA or US was making a promise regarding this route that they could not keep?

what 762 or 763 will AA or US use that can fly 6600 miles?

Of course the 777 is a larger aircraft but it also burns about 33% more fuel per hour than a 767.
Flying a MIA passenger on a nonstop from MIA to TLV compared with from a NE gateway will add 3 or more hours to the flight time when the chances are quite high that AA would get a fairly high percentage of the MIA-TLV traffic via PHL simply because of the hub effect on market presence.

And it still doesn't change the fact that MIA is in the corner of the country and is a poor choice for connecting traffic elsewhere to the US. So AA would be focused on the local market which is highly vulnerable because DL, LY, and UA can still carry those MIA passengers over other hubs (as could new AA over PHL)

MIATLV ranks right there in likelihood with MIANRT for many of the very same reasons. It doesn't matter how strong the local market is, serving either market from MIA would be a very costly way to serve a very small percentage of the US that could be served more efficiently via other hubs.

And if AA really has to pay the severance payment (yes, it isn't really a fine) then it makes more sense to start JFK service to get to the heart of the US-TLV market. But the $18M payment with over 10 years of interest is not just a cost you sweep under the rug. A fine/severance payment is not an asset that can be carried on the books like a slot which has value. CO might have spent $50M on a slot pair, but those slots have not gone down in value. Paying the severance payments will be a sunk cost that AA will be burdened with as long as it operates to TLV with no chance of ever recovering that cost.

 

[700UW]

El Al used a 767-200 on the route in the past.

MIA to JFK to transfer is how long?

 

[wings396]

while waiting for government approval for mergers, companies are famous for making promises they never will keep.

Right here I think......
Note the use of the word "promise"....

 

[WorldTraveler]

and where does it say anything about the MIA-TLV route? hint: nowhere.

outbound US int'l connections can be as short as 30 minutes depending on the airline and airport. I'm not sure what AA's minimum connect time is at JFK.

 

[wings396]

Hint, what is the discussion about?
Are you really even gonna debate that you said something that you clearly did? Wow..

 

[737823]

Of course the 777 is a larger aircraft but it also burns about 33% more fuel per hour than a 767.
Flying a MIA passenger on a nonstop from MIA to TLV compared with from a NE gateway will add 3 or more hours to the flight time when the chances are quite high that AA would get a fairly high percentage of the MIA-TLV traffic via PHL simply because of the hub effect on market presence.

And it still doesn't change the fact that MIA is in the corner of the country and is a poor choice for connecting traffic elsewhere to the US. So AA would be focused on the local market which is highly vulnerable because DL, LY, and UA can still carry those MIA passengers over other hubs (as could new AA over PHL)

MIATLV ranks right there in likelihood with MIANRT for many of the very same reasons. It doesn't matter how strong the local market is, serving either market from MIA would be a very costly way to serve a very small percentage of the US that could be served more efficiently via other hubs.

LY operated the route from MIA for many years, it did very well until fuel prices went through the roof making the 767-200ER uneconomical for the route. LY was going to send new 777s to MIA but instead added GRU which has since been cut. Of course, the category II status has barred LY from adding new service to the US until late last year when the category I status was reinstated.

MIA-TLV is a huge market, perhaps one of the largest unfilled O&D transatlatic markets and is the largest unserved market from TLV. Many Israeli expatriates, not just Jews in Broward county as many believe. Add in many Israelis that vacation in Miami, and other Jewish populations- Argentinian Jews, Cuban Jews (Jewbans), Venezuelan Jews, etc many of whom conduct business, own homes or at the very least transit in MIA to travel to Israel, there certainly is a market.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

no, wings, you are on yet another witch hunt to try to prove me wrong and you have no evidence other than your own imagination to show that I said that AA/US 'promised' anything.

I simply said that promises are part of the gov't approval promise; I said absolutely nowhere that this route was a promise although others have trotted out 'evidence' that seems to show it is.

Josh,
yes, we've heard how many Jews live in S. Florida and I am not doubting that. US carriers carry just under half of the nonstop capacity between the US and TLV; LY carries the rest. The DOT collects pretty extensive data on origin and destinations of passengers and US carries must report it.
The DOT shows that there are less than 150 passengers per day carried by US carriers between TLV and ALL Florida cities and Latin America. If the US carriers that serve TLV and all of these destinations don't carry enough passengers to fill a single 777 size aircraft - what it would take to operate a flight between MIA and TLV, why are we supposed to believe that there is a S. Florida-Israel market anywhere near as large as some people say.
And even if AA operated a flight, the chances they would carry all of that traffic is very small since every other US carrier gateway is between MIA and TLV and most of LY's capacity can easily carry the traffic as well.

150 passengers isn't enough to make money. Fuel isn't going down in price.

And do you know that average fares between MIA and TLV are not much different than from NYC which is a whole lot closer?

In fact, AA gets almost identical average fares for MIA-deep S. America as US carriers get from MIA-TLV and S. America is half the distance.

MIA-TLV won't happen - move on to the next topic.

 

[robbedagain]

dont ever say never may be one day it could resume never know

 

[wings396]

no, wings, you are on yet another witch hunt to try to prove me wrong and you have no evidence other than your own imagination to show that I said that AA/US 'promised' anything.

I simply said that promises are part of the gov't approval promise; I said absolutely nowhere that this route was a promise although others have trotted out 'evidence' that seems to show it is.

Josh,
yes, we've heard how many Jews live in S. Florida and I am not doubting that. US carriers carry just under half of the nonstop capacity between the US and TLV; LY carries the rest. The DOT collects pretty extensive data on origin and destinations of passengers and US carries must report it.
The DOT shows that there are less than 150 passengers per day carried by US carriers between TLV and ALL Florida cities and Latin America. If the US carriers that serve TLV and all of these destinations don't carry enough passengers to fill a single 777 size aircraft - what it would take to operate a flight between MIA and TLV, why are we supposed to believe that there is a S. Florida-Israel market anywhere near as large as some people say.
And even if AA operated a flight, the chances they would carry all of that traffic is very small since every other US carrier gateway is between MIA and TLV and most of LY's capacity can easily carry the traffic as well.

150 passengers isn't enough to make money. Fuel isn't going down in price.

And do you know that average fares between MIA and TLV are not much different than from NYC which is a whole lot closer?

In fact, AA gets almost identical average fares for MIA-deep S. America as US carriers get from MIA-TLV and S. America is half the distance.

MIA-TLV won't happen - move on to the next topic.

"while waiting for government approval for mergers, companies are famous for making promises they never will keep"


Please clarify the above remarks to me, Mr Witch Hunt...
And the topic of this thread is the PHL-TLV route correct? And your above response was in reference to a MIA-TLV route, correct? What exactly were you referencing here? I suppose that you post so many pages of "Facts", that you don't really know what you did or didn't say anymore.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I said companies in the process of seeking governmental approval for mergers make all kinds of promises they can't or don't intend to keep. Period.

I said nothing about TLV or MIA.

You jumped to that conclusion.

The route won't happen because it doesn't make economic sense.

We don't even know if AA will be able to operate into TLV w/o first paying its 13 year old obligations - but since the internet has chewed on that thought for 13 years w/o resolution, I'll leave it to the Israeli government to decide what the outcome will be.

And yes the new AA will be directly related to the old AA; the majority of the company will be composed of the old AA. If it weren't, then AA's tax losses which amount to billions of dollars would be at risk. It makes little sense to argue that the new AA is not related to the old AA in order to avoid a severance payment for Israeli workers of TWA but lose the opportunity to reduce its US taxes by billions of dollars.