Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
FoxtrotSierra wrote:There is some truth to this, but the reality is, bad management can ruin anything. I'm not a DL fanboy or UA basher by any stretch of the imagination, but anyone that has been in this industry for more than a few years knows that DL under Anderson worked out remarkably well and UA under Smisek was a spectacular failure. That said, both DL and UA were able to eventually reap the advantages of acquiring a full service Int'l airline where AA got stuck with the cheap spoils that no one wanted. Despite its troubles, even UA was able to somewhat improve the overall state of the airline despite the rocky merger with CO simply because CO brought a better airline to the table in some aspects than UA itself was. The same cannot be said about AA that was also in a similarly bad state, but instead let the LCC mentality of US management take the reins which was a disaster waiting to happen, not to mention the disadvantage of trying to integrate two completely different business models, an inferior product, an awful reputation with the public, and gaining a MUCH smaller Int'l network from CLT/PHL than from DTW/MSP or IAH/EWR. To its credit, AA has rebranded to effectively give itself a clean slate, which is probably why AA/US went much better than UA/CO, fulfilled its promise to not dehub any city, and is actually taking advantage of CLT/PHL and leveraging their Int'l networks. That said, AA is still run by DP, and when you start out so low, you would think you can only go up, but US was even lower, and when you combine the worst of the worst with even worse, the result is not pretty. AA was bad before the merger, but it was still better than US, and putting them in control of AA basically ensured that the situation would become even worse, which it has.
zelalemon wrote:AA premerger was bankrupt. AA postmerger is profitable. I would make the argument that the US leadership has been great for the success of the airline.
zelalemon wrote:AA premerger was bankrupt. AA postmerger is profitable. I would make the argument that the US leadership has been great for the success of the airline.
cheapgreek wrote:Very bad morale among US employees especially going through two chapter 11's within a few of years.
chrisair wrote:On the inflight side, my anecdotal observations are: Cactus crews are generally excellent, customer focused, and always working in the cabin during the flight. US-East crews are a mixed bag. The older (true USAir) ones generally do the minimum and not much more, the younger ones that were with Cactus trainers are not bad. The legacy AAL FAs are also a mixed bag. I've had exceptional older ones and younger ones that make me wonder how they have a job.
Again, totally anecdotal. But I do think the PHX based Cactus FAs, especially the ones that started in the 80s and early 90s generally have the Cactus spirit.
FoxtrotSierra wrote:both DL and UA were able to eventually reap the advantages of acquiring a full service Int'l airline where AA got stuck with the cheap spoils that no one wanted.
chrisair wrote:PMAA had tons of food in First, much of it was quite tasty, and it was found on a lot of shorter ~2 hour flights.
ikolkyo wrote:PMAA honestly felt like it was stuck in the past compared to its competitors, the merger brought fresh life into everything.
IrishAyes wrote:The new AA has managed to resolve the East vs. West discrepancy between US and HP employees, and also been able to allow the airline to hire more people, retain jobs, grow hub operations, add profit-sharing, revamp the fleet, revamp the in-flight products.
chrisair wrote:On the inflight side, my anecdotal observations are: Cactus crews are generally excellent, customer focused, and always working in the cabin during the flight. US-East crews are a mixed bag. The older (true USAir) ones generally do the minimum and not much more, the younger ones that were with Cactus trainers are not bad. The legacy AAL FAs are also a mixed bag. I've had exceptional older ones and younger ones that make me wonder how they have a job.
Again, totally anecdotal. But I do think the PHX based Cactus FAs, especially the ones that started in the 80s and early 90s generally have the Cactus spirit.
EddieDude wrote:Many in this forum will not recall but a long time ago AA had MRTC and that was definitely a competitive advantage.
blink182 wrote:ikolkyo wrote:IrishAyes wrote:The new AA has managed to resolve the East vs. West discrepancy between US and HP employees, and also been able to allow the airline to hire more people, retain jobs, grow hub operations, add profit-sharing, revamp the fleet, revamp the in-flight products.
Was it a true resolution, or the raw majority of AAers overpowering the split among HP and US?
AA737-823 wrote:zelalemon wrote:AA premerger was bankrupt. AA postmerger is profitable. I would make the argument that the US leadership has been great for the success of the airline.
Measuring the profitability of a carrier in the BEST TIMES the US airline industry has ever known is hardly a useful benchmark.
And, the reduction in competition virtually guarantees the success of a carrier that has even a remote clue and the capital to run a flying company. (that excludes startups like Eastern)
In spite of the arrogance of the AA CEO in saying that they'll never make a loss again, let's just wait until the next big downturn in the industry, and see how AA (and others!) start crying.
AWACSooner wrote:PM AA was all sunshine and rainbows...and F pax got a free kitten to take home at the end of every flight. They served kobe filets and gave you unlimited Cristal champagne in F.
And then mean old US Airways came along and ruined it!
Actually, the merger, imo, was a shot in the arm to an AA that was seemingly swimming in circles regarding service and overall atmosphere. Post-merger, I've really begun to see a revamp in their overall customer service and hard product...at the expense of legroom and overall seat comfort (naturally, gotta cram more seats in and compete with everyone else). However, one thing I still think they need to fix is their IRROPS, especially at DFW. It always amazes me how much of a PITA I have trying to get rebooked out of DFW when they start shutting down due to that lightning bolt 400 miles away vs. being rebooked on DL out of ATL when the storm is on top of them (the 2016 meltdown notwithstanding).
drdisque wrote:So much misremembering.
NW and DL were not in bankruptcy when they merged. (NW had exited about a year prior and DL several years prior).
UA was not in bankruptcy when it merged. (it had exited SEVERAL years prior)
AWACSooner wrote:Actually, the merger, imo, was a shot in the arm to an AA that was seemingly swimming in circles regarding service and overall atmosphere. Post-merger, I've really begun to see a revamp in their overall customer service and hard product...at the expense of legroom and overall seat comfort (naturally, gotta cram more seats in and compete with everyone else).
Byrdluvs747 wrote:AA's new branding and hard product were decided by then CEO Tom Horton, well before the merger. All the new aircraft were ordered with IFE in Y before Doug came along. Notice how he's now stripping it out, in addition to degrading the meal service.
F9Animal wrote:PM AA was kind of boring to me. They were due for a refresh before they went into bankruptcy in my opinion. Fares were of course pretty high, at least compared to other airlines when I shopped fares.
The new merged brand is not as good as the old AA either. More can be done to better the customer experience for sure. I personally don't like the industry of today. It just doesn't have the warm and fuzzy feeling that flying used to have.
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:People tend to wax nostalgic about PMAA. The reality is that AA was an industry-leader through most of the 1980s and 1990s, but like most of the other legacies lost their way and were in shambles once the industry downturn hit and through most of the mid-2000s.
They were the last to go through the painful restructuring process primarily since they avoided bankruptcy as long as possible. Service standards, morale, operational rigor, and technology were all lagging during much of this time.
When people refer to AA's greatest, it certainly wasn't anything between about 2003-2013.
AWACSooner wrote:Never been a fan of Doug...and it doesn't surprise me that he's doing this to AA after some of his boneheaded decisions at US (i.e. charging for water).
CV990A wrote:Pre-merger AA? Nothing but MD-80s. As far as the eye could see, MD-80s.
I do feel the in-flight experience has gotten stingier, but can't really say they are better or worse than any of the other legacies. I'm loyal to them because they offer the only non-stops on the routes I need to fly for work and to visit family and they haven't screwed me over (yet).
Byrdluvs747 wrote:AWACSooner wrote:Actually, the merger, imo, was a shot in the arm to an AA that was seemingly swimming in circles regarding service and overall atmosphere. Post-merger, I've really begun to see a revamp in their overall customer service and hard product...at the expense of legroom and overall seat comfort (naturally, gotta cram more seats in and compete with everyone else).
AA's new branding and hard product were decided by then CEO Tom Horton, well before the merger. All the new aircraft were ordered with IFE in Y before Doug came along. Notice how he's now stripping it out, in addition to degrading the meal service.
Byrdluvs747 wrote:AWACSooner wrote:Actually, the merger, imo, was a shot in the arm to an AA that was seemingly swimming in circles regarding service and overall atmosphere. Post-merger, I've really begun to see a revamp in their overall customer service and hard product...at the expense of legroom and overall seat comfort (naturally, gotta cram more seats in and compete with everyone else).
AA's new branding and hard product were decided by then CEO Tom Horton, well before the merger. All the new aircraft were ordered with IFE in Y before Doug came along. Notice how he's now stripping it out, in addition to degrading the meal service.
slowrambler wrote:LAA was an airline of tired 772s crossing the Atlantic with four looped movies on the IFE in economy, the angle-flat "Next Generation Business Class" which was way behind its competitors, and an inability to run on schedule. I remember the first time I, coming from the LUS network, set foot in one and couldn't figure out for the life of me what was Flagship about it.
The merged AA is not perfect by any means, but I don't buy that it's worse than before.
winginit wrote:Many in this thread seem to be chopping the AA experience into simple pre and post merger categories, but I think there would be value in trisecting it given the distinct financial and managerial pivots:
1. Pre 9/11 American (Crandall)
2. Pre-Merger/Bankruptcy (2001-2013)
3. Post-Merger/Bankruptcy (2013-Present)
I've racked up between 100K and 200K annual miles on American for roughly the past decade, and have the below observations:
1. Pre 9/11 (I admittedly wasn't at this time as frequent a traveler as I am today)
Product: Fine, but never in my mind industry leading. There's nostalgia these days for the MD80s and DC10s given where the industry has gone as far as pitch and general comfort are concerned in economy, but these never came across to me as luxurious even in premium cabins
Service and Morale: It's here that I think AA really shined at the time. The carrier was clearly on top of the world at times both financially and in reputation, and I really got the sense that employees were proud of who they worked for
2. Pre-Merger, Post-911
Product: These were some obvious dark days, and it was here that I think the products themselves reached a low. What had been shiny new 777s quickly became dated with those horrible 2-3-2 angled lie flat J seats, and the domestic MD80s began to really show their age. I have few fond memories of AA's hard product during this time with the exception of the 772s F product
Service and Morale: While the product may have started slipping and employees were clearly anxious as the dark years continued, there was this sort of resilience that I think has since been lost. FA and ground staff hiring was essentially frozen, but there was a general optimism for the future as the recovery began to kick in that everything would eventually be okay, and that showed both in the air and on the ground.