What's new

WHAT WILL AA DO?

Nice map. You can't win 'em all, but it's probably time to start focusing on what can be salvaged.

NRT bound/originating traffic can already be handled on AA from DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and LAX.

SFO is a lost cause because UA owns that market.

HNL and KOA are throw-away markets in terms of yields -- mostly Japanese honeymooners heading to the beach. Japan-Hawaii is also a market CO and DL cover pretty well, so no need to be the fourth horse in a three horse race.

That really leaves YVR as the only two major markets where a direct connection to NRT might make sense.

Don't underestimate the HKG connect vs. NRT, folks. If you're going to Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, or the Phillipines, it's pretty much a wash. Some markets are 200-300 miles longer via NRT, some are longer via HKG, depending if you leave from ORD or LAX... I find HKG easier to transit, so the elapsed time might be compelling enough in cases where the flying time is a little longer.

I could see CX deciding to serve ORD if AA doesn't, which might be some incentive for APA to consider giving the same waiver they did for DEL.
 
I could see CX deciding to serve ORD if AA doesn't, which might be some incentive for APA to consider giving the same waiver they did for DEL.

I have long said that if it made any sense to fly ORD-HKG, then CX would already be flying it.

Recently, someone posted (probably on Flyertalk) that ORD was not a permitted gateway for CX under the USA-HKG bilateral, but MAH45456 responded that it wouldn't be too difficult for CX to add ORD. After all, UA is permitted to fly ORD-HKG.
 
Might American airlines purchase 6-12 777 "world liners" so they could fly from DFW/ORD/JFK to anywhere in the world that they wished to, not "giving a hoot" as to what DL or anyone else does ?
 
AA's got to get some added flexibility in the pilot contract first, and that's going to require giving something back to APA.
 
Might American airlines purchase 6-12 777 "world liners" so they could fly from DFW/ORD/JFK to anywhere in the world that they wished to, not "giving a hoot" as to what DL or anyone else does ?

I don't see AA buying any 777LRs given that the 787-9s on order are supposed to be able to fly almost as far as the 777LR.

Besides, the LRs are necessary only for ultra-longhaul flights like nonstop USA-South Africa flights as well as USA-BOM and DFW-DEL. Unless QF and AA break up, there's no reason for AA to fly to Australia. Add in oil at $80/bbl and ultra-longhaul flights don't make as much sense as they did when oil was half the price.

I don't see enough demand for AA to fill a nonstop plane to BKK or SIN or other similar destinations.
 
I don't see AA buying any 777LRs given that the 787-9s on order are supposed to be able to fly almost as far as the 777LR.

Besides, the LRs are necessary only for ultra-longhaul flights like nonstop USA-South Africa flights as well as USA-BOM and DFW-DEL. Unless QF and AA break up, there's no reason for AA to fly to Australia. Add in oil at $80/bbl and ultra-longhaul flights don't make as much sense as they did when oil was half the price.

I don't see enough demand for AA to fill a nonstop plane to BKK or SIN or other similar destinations.
AA has a commitment not an order for the B787s with a delivery date of 2013. AA is waiting for the pilots contract to decide to confirm the order. if not they'll look for better replacement for their widebodies. Theirs no need for 772LR for now because AA doesn't have long hauls or ultar-longhaul thats needs that A/C but the FLTs that AA has right now can be handle by B772ER.
http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders...tTimeout=100000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_787_orders
 
AA has a commitment not an order for the B787s with a delivery date of 2013. AA is waiting for the pilots contract to decide to confirm the order. if not they'll look for better replacement for their widebodies.

You're correct, but if AA and the pilots don't reach a satisfactory agreement, there will be no need for any airplanes, let alone new 787s. The company and the pilots will reach agreement in plenty of time for the 2013 anticipated 787 deliveries.

Theirs no need for 772LR for now because AA doesn't have long hauls or ultar-longhaul thats needs that A/C but the FLTs that AA has right now can be handle by B772ER.

Agreed. That's why I said that AA would likely not order any LRs.
 
You're correct, but if AA and the pilots don't reach a satisfactory agreement, there will be no need for any airplanes, let alone new 787s. The company and the pilots will reach agreement in plenty of time for the 2013 anticipated 787 deliveries.



Agreed. That's why I said that AA would likely not order any LRs.

The B773ERs will be a good A/C if AA decides to fly solo in some asian market because of the added capacity of that A/C. It will offset some of the cost of doing business in that area. It also gives it some range. AA doesn't want that added expenses that why they're fighting so hard for JAL but if JAL comes out of bankruptcy without asian routes it will be worthless for AA.
 
What will AA do? They will go back to using CX as their Asian partner and focus on HKG instead of NRT. JAL was a new'ish member of Oneworld and, while valuable, the alliance performed just fine before it came on board, and will be just fine without them.

The real issue is what will JAL do after they are blocked from joining up with Delta/Skyteam? They'll be hanging out there all alone once again.
 
What will AA do? They will go back to using CX as their Asian partner and focus on HKG instead of NRT. JAL was a new'ish member of Oneworld and, while valuable, the alliance performed just fine before it came on board, and will be just fine without them.

And what will they do with that money earmarked for the JAL offer? Spread it among the elite of the company no doubt.
 
The money that is being offered to JAL is not AMR's to do anything with. The money belongs to TPG. I can assure you that TPG will not give the money to AMR for bonus money. That is NOT going to happen. There will be no money unless JAL stays in OW and accepts the OW offer rather than the DL/Skyteam offer.
 
The money that is being offered to JAL is not AMR's to do anything with. The money belongs to TPG. I can assure you that TPG will not give the money to AMR for bonus money. That is NOT going to happen. There will be no money unless JAL stays in OW and accepts the OW offer rather than the DL/Skyteam offer.

Looks like AMR's and it's OW partners share is $300 million. That's about a fair amount for AA's top 400 mangers come bonus time.



http://startelegram.typepad.com/sky_talk/2...14-billion.html
 
Now, you're really stretching. The OW partners are just as hard up for cash as we are. Do you seriously think that their share of the $300 million will be given to AMR for bonus payments? You must think that the executives at BA, QF, and the others are really stupid.

The only part of the $300 million that would be available for bonus payments is AMR's share. And, at this point we don't even know if they have it in the bank. They may have been planning to borrow our share. The cash on hand is getting dangerously close (relatively speaking) to the credit card covenants threshold.

But, it's all moot because barring a cease and desist order from the U.S. government (which probably ain't gonna happen), JAL is going to be part of Skyteam; so, the OW offer is a non-starter.
 
Whatever money AMR was pledging was little more than a loan that they'd see repaid back via alliance revenues.

Agree with the comment a few posts above --- AA and oneworld survived just fine without JAL, and they'll find a way of surviving when they're gone. People said the same thing when CP evaporated, and frankly, it doesn't appear that their loss has been missed.
 
It explain's what options AA has for the term if JAL decides leave the alliance. A quote from the article.

"In the long term it might be even better for American because it's going to force them to... cut a deal with a Chinese carrier, and that's where the real growth is going to be," -- Michael Boyd, airline consultant.

For American, Lost JAL Link Could Prove Beneficial
http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1263844296.html
 

Latest posts

Back
Top