Let’s say

10x LAX
4x SFO
5x MIA
5x CLT
4x DCA

Let’s say they bump up DFW and ORD just to keep their hands on some slots:

4x ORD
4x DFW

Let’s say they bump up PHL with 4 rjs just to keep a few more

4x PHL

And let’s keep a token 1 daily to partner hubs

1x LHR
1x BCN

And CDG like they did in BOS for a while

1x CDG

43 departures.

So, for fun, let’s say 50 departures.

That’s around 60 slots that can be sold off in bunches or whole to earn a lot of money.

Furthermore, once 13L is redone next year, word is slots will go the way of EWR.

Now is the time to monetize.

What is AA waiting for?

Your obsession with AA reducing JFK is incredibly odd.

AA likely likes what they have with JFK as is. They aren’t waiting for anything.

Simply for the purpose of monetizing slots before there is nothing to monetize, I can agree, but I'm willing to bet you would never see them reduce LHR that much considering it's a billion dollar route for them. Take 1-2 ORD and DFW flights off and add them to LHR. Granted when slots go the way of EWR they can just add them back anyway.

If word on the street is slots will go away who will buy them? Why not just wait until next year?

they make money on the routes they have. why get rid of 3x to LHR (enormously profitable), flights to PHX/SAN/LAS/SEA that do well, MXP which has a lot of high value O&D, and you know...their whole grossly profitable south american operation (GRU is on a damn 77W for crying out loud!)

they cut DEN. the apocalypse is near, apparently

jfklganyc wrote:

Let’s say

10x LAX
4x SFO
5x MIA
5x CLT
4x DCA

Let’s say they bump up DFW and ORD just to keep their hands on some slots:

4x ORD
4x DFW

Let’s say they bump up PHL with 4 rjs just to keep a few more

4x PHL

And let’s keep a token 1 daily to partner hubs

1x LHR
1x BCN

And CDG like they did in BOS for a while

1x CDG

43 departures.

So, for fun, let’s say 50 departures.

That’s around 60 slots that can be sold off in bunches or whole to earn a lot of money.

Furthermore, once 13L is redone next year, word is slots will go the way of EWR.

Now is the time to monetize.

What is AA waiting for?

AA cannot match Delta or JetBlue in at JFK (ironically due to the US/DL slot swap) and with the addition of PHL as an international and northeast connecting hub they seem to be making changes into a smaller breadth but probably more profitable New York network. Between the 3 airports AA provides a good, but not all encompassing network for O&D traffic that no longer relies on connecting passengers. So yes, they are reduced in NY, but so much overreacting to a reasonable (and disputable) network correction.

4x ORD-JFK and DFW-JFK? Which market would that be catering to exactly? With nearby PHL doing well I doubt AA needs to just slot squat at JFK. They're not going to fly routes like that just to burn money.

jfklganyc wrote:

Let’s say

10x LAX
4x SFO
5x MIA
5x CLT
4x DCA

Let’s say they bump up DFW and ORD just to keep their hands on some slots:

4x ORD
4x DFW

Let’s say they bump up PHL with 4 rjs just to keep a few more

4x PHL

And let’s keep a token 1 daily to partner hubs

1x LHR
1x BCN

And CDG like they did in BOS for a while

1x CDG

43 departures.

So, for fun, let’s say 50 departures.

That’s around 60 slots that can be sold off in bunches or whole to earn a lot of money.

Furthermore, once 13L is redone next year, word is slots will go the way of EWR.

Now is the time to monetize.

What is AA waiting for?

Didn't realize they still had that many slots. They were only doing 80+ flights a day this past winter. My guess is they cut another 20-30 flights. They are probably still going to keep around SAN, GRU, EZE and MAD.

If JFK slots go away in the next 2 years, doesn't that give them nothing to monetize?

Question, if JFK gets cut down that much, what happens to their LGA slots?

MAH4546 wrote:

Your obsession with AA reducing JFK is incredibly odd.

AA likely likes what they have with JFK as is. They aren’t waiting for anything.

They've been cutting frequencies/routes here and there all of the past year. If you AA ff in NYC like me, you'd notice this. And if you follow JonNYC on twitter, this is going to continue. They just cut BDA down to once a day this past year. I don't see that route lasting much longer. MCO is a goner for sure. And once the international stuff goes, those routes reliant on connections like CLE/BWI are gone also. Mint has killed them on LAS/SAN and probably SEA also.

wenders825 wrote:

they make money on the routes they have. why get rid of 3x to LHR (enormously profitable), flights to PHX/SAN/LAS/SEA that do well, MXP which has a lot of high value O&D, and you know...their whole grossly profitable south american operation (GRU is on a damn 77W for crying out loud!)

they cut DEN. the apocalypse is near, apparently

LHR is profitable, but SAN/LAS/SEA are getting killed by mint entrance. They've been cutting various routes all of the past year.

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

Jul 2017 AA mainline at JFK had 2242 actual departures. Jul 2018 JFK had 2297 actual departures........Oh the horror! Now they may have cut a bunch of regional flying but no so much on the mainline side.

They absolute want to get all of One World into T-8 and have said so before that not being together limits some of what they want to do at JFK.

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

They will NEVER drop JFK-LHR.

jfklganyc wrote:

Let’s say

10x LAX
4x SFO
5x MIA
5x CLT
4x DCA

Let’s say they bump up DFW and ORD just to keep their hands on some slots:

4x ORD
4x DFW

Let’s say they bump up PHL with 4 rjs just to keep a few more

4x PHL

And let’s keep a token 1 daily to partner hubs

1x LHR
1x BCN

And CDG like they did in BOS for a while

1x CDG

43 departures.

So, for fun, let’s say 50 departures.

That’s around 60 slots that can be sold off in bunches or whole to earn a lot of money.

Furthermore, once 13L is redone next year, word is slots will go the way of EWR.

Now is the time to monetize.

What is AA waiting for?

And how many airlines have you been CEO?

JFK-SEA/LAS/SAN are all not doing well at all.

evank516 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

They will NEVER drop JFK-LHR.

Or any good business market.

FA9295 wrote:

JFK-SEA/LAS/SAN are all not doing well at all.

Facts to back it up?

The thing that AA & UA benefit from is their hubs are in big business markets. By just flying to their hubs, they serve a large portion of the population. So in JFK for example, by flying to LHR, ORD, DFW, LAX, etc. they are actually serving a large portion of the demand. Would I like to see them do more, sure but to what end? Financial losses...certainly not. Maybe with MAX & NEO aircraft they can be more competitive.

I do have a side question on this. What is AA's obligation to the hangar at JFK?

I can't see AA backing its way into a weak #4 in the NYC market. Delta isn't going to exchange LGA slots (where it's dumping a ton of $) for some AA JFK slots.

MIflyer12 wrote:

I can't see AA backing its way into a weak #4 in the NYC market. Delta isn't going to exchange LGA slots (where it's dumping a ton of $) for some AA JFK slots.

I also can't imagine AA being the reason for UA's re-entry either.

evank516 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

They will NEVER drop JFK-LHR.

AA could hand JFK-LHR over to BA, as the two airlines have a JV. AA did the same with BOS-LHR and one of its MIA-LHR routes.

Austin787 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

They will NEVER drop JFK-LHR.

AA could hand JFK-LHR over to BA, as the two airlines have a JV. AA did the same with BOS-LHR and one of its MIA-LHR routes.

Never happening.

Austin787 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

They will NEVER drop JFK-LHR.

AA could hand JFK-LHR over to BA, as the two airlines have a JV. AA did the same with BOS-LHR and one of its MIA-LHR routes.

Even with a JV, would you keep your own planes off of a route with a 9 figure profit?

Austin787 wrote:

AA could hand JFK-LHR over to BA, as the two airlines have a JV. AA did the same with BOS-LHR and one of its MIA-LHR routes.

Right, but it is not money for nothing. If their share of the TATL market within that JV goes down, their share of the revenue does as well. They can't just sit back and watch BA earn them a shedload of money while they sit on their hands. Doesn't work like that.

MAH4546 wrote:

Your obsession with AA reducing JFK is incredibly odd.

AA likely likes what they have with JFK as is. They aren’t waiting for anything.

AA likely would like to be bigger at JFK; but JFK is a slot limited airport. And slots in NYC tend to be reassigned to smaller airlines.

Boof02671 wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

JFK-SEA/LAS/SAN are all not doing well at all.

Facts to back it up?

here is 2018Q1 for SAN/LAS
CityPair Dist Carrier Board %Regional AvgFare NSFare ConnFare % NS LF AvgAsm PRASM
JFKLAS 2248 AA 48019 0.00% 255.12 255.22 254.54 84.42% 87.17% 222.49 0.099
JFKLAS 2248 B6 81343 0.00% 252.95 252.63 286.68 99.04% 88.73% 224.15 0.0997
JFKLAS 2248 DL 124491 0.00% 314.37 312.9 361.58 96.97% 86.16% 269.59 0.1199
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22488 0.00% 286.81 288.14 276.6 88.45% 78.08% 224.99 0.092
JFKSAN 2446 B6 45369 0.00% 307.55 307.49 317.62 99.36% 87.11% 267.87 0.1095
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61231 0.00% 312.56 309.3 398.51 96.35% 80.71% 249.65 0.1021

vs 2017Q1
JFKLAS 2248 AA 44908 0.00% 280.47 266.58 385.94 88.36% 88.73% 236.53 0.1052
JFKLAS 2248 B6 90499 0.00% 220.05 219.45 294.54 99.19% 90.63% 198.89 0.0885
JFKLAS 2248 DL 122065 0.00% 313.9 310.9 411.28 97.01% 88.64% 275.57 0.1226
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22832 0.00% 309.01 297.45 443.39 92.08% 81.08% 241.17 0.0986
JFKSAN 2446 B6 40456 0.00% 247.24 247.31 231.83 99.50% 85.56% 211.59 0.0865
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61112 0.00% 327.18 324.83 382.34 95.91% 82.05% 266.51 0.109

both routes down 6 to 7% YoY. And this is with year's Q1 benefiting from half of easter in Q1, so the actual downward trend is even greater. We won't get JFK-SEA number, but it's likely to see the same effect of mint entrance. Not great when fuel prices are up so much.

Lest we not forget that United tried to serve only the sexiest markets from JFK in the early 2000s - EZE, GRU, HKG, LAX, LHR, MIA, NRT, SEA, SFO and SJU spring to mind. Granted, they didn't have the wonderful facilities that AA has, but that strategy was clearly a failure. VX tried to do the same from SFO in more recent times, and that also didn't pan out very well. Ultimately, you do have to serve the seemingly less desirable places like BWI, IND and RDU. The important FFers might have an annual conference in Vegas, an important client in Indianapolis or parents in the Carolinas. If AA cuts much further, they'll lose even more ground to B6 and DL... and probably will have to de-hub JFK. LGA, on the other hand, seems to be much stronger for AA these days than in years past.

SurfandSnow wrote:

Lest we not forget that United tried to serve only the sexiest markets from JFK in the early 2000s - EZE, GRU, HKG, LAX, LHR, MIA, NRT, SEA, SFO and SJU spring to mind. Granted, they didn't have the wonderful facilities that AA has, but that strategy was clearly a failure. VX tried to do the same from SFO in more recent times, and that also didn't pan out very well. Ultimately, you do have to serve the seemingly less desirable places like BWI, IND and RDU. The important FFers might have an annual conference in Vegas, an important client in Indianapolis or parents in the Carolinas. If AA cuts much further, they'll lose even more ground to B6 and DL... and probably will have to de-hub JFK. LGA, on the other hand, seems to be much stronger for AA these days than in years past.

However, now they have free reign at EWR to serve all of those markets without any issue, and I'm pretty sure they do.

Maybe I was asleep, but slots at JFK are going away? Then why would anyone want to buy them?

I would tend to look at the disposal of slots in a slot restricted airport the sign of an airline in trouble, or at best an airline that has thrown in the towel in the face of competition form elsewhere. My reading of AAs position is that it is not in that category - or at least not yet.

Just looking at Heathrow and some of the airlines who sold off slots - Alitalia; BMI; Cyprus Airways; CSA - Czech Airlines and you get the idea.

Austin787 wrote:

I think AA's long term plan at JFK is have flights to its other hubs: DCA,PHL,CLT,MIA,DFW,ORD,PHX,LAX. All other flights get dropped or shifted to PHL.

Which raises the question on what to do with Terminal 8, as it is underutilized today. Moving all OneWorld airlines to T8 makes most sense, but it depends on the future of the other JFK terminals. AA could also lease or sell T8 gates to United, if UA wants to return to JFK.

And UA? does want to return to JFK. But what does T8 have that UA alone would want? If they can interline with the other *A carriers? It makes perfect sense. If they cannot because of a lack of gates? It sure Doesn't. JFK has Hangars available but gates are at a premium. I believe that JFK's Fort structure and lack of commonality is the problem and it will remain a problem until JFK is rebuilt to maximize it's space.

SurfandSnow wrote:

Lest we not forget that United tried to serve only the sexiest markets from JFK in the early 2000s - EZE, GRU, HKG, LAX, LHR, MIA, NRT, SEA, SFO and SJU spring to mind. Granted, they didn't have the wonderful facilities that AA has, but that strategy was clearly a failure. VX tried to do the same from SFO in more recent times, and that also didn't pan out very well. Ultimately, you do have to serve the seemingly less desirable places like BWI, IND and RDU. The important FFers might have an annual conference in Vegas, an important client in Indianapolis or parents in the Carolinas. If AA cuts much further, they'll lose even more ground to B6 and DL... and probably will have to de-hub JFK. LGA, on the other hand, seems to be much stronger for AA these days than in years past.

With the exception of BWI, they do serve those routes (IND & RDU) but from LGA. I don't think those routes specifically have to be served from JFK airport unless they are for connection purposes which aren't the reasons you outlined.

If slots in JFK go, or are being rumored to be going, why would any airline buy slots from AA? Instead of holding out and seeing if there is any truth to the rumor? This question doesn’t make sense on too many levels.

Brickell305 wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

Lest we not forget that United tried to serve only the sexiest markets from JFK in the early 2000s - EZE, GRU, HKG, LAX, LHR, MIA, NRT, SEA, SFO and SJU spring to mind. Granted, they didn't have the wonderful facilities that AA has, but that strategy was clearly a failure. VX tried to do the same from SFO in more recent times, and that also didn't pan out very well. Ultimately, you do have to serve the seemingly less desirable places like BWI, IND and RDU. The important FFers might have an annual conference in Vegas, an important client in Indianapolis or parents in the Carolinas. If AA cuts much further, they'll lose even more ground to B6 and DL... and probably will have to de-hub JFK. LGA, on the other hand, seems to be much stronger for AA these days than in years past.

With the exception of BWI, they do serve those routes (IND & RDU) but from LGA. I don't think those routes specifically have to be served from JFK airport unless they are for connection purposes which aren't the reasons you outlined.

JFK allows for more service to NYC from those places, since LGA is limited. EWR isn't an option for many NYC flyers

American will never close up shop at JFK. Yes, they don't have what DL and B6 have at JFK, but with PHL down the road, they really do not need a major connecting hub at JFK and that is what has changed. JFK serves as a P2P market for AA and for its sizable FF base and its large share of the corporate travel market. I don't see AA handing LHR over to BA (JFK is not Boston). They will keep what they have, maybe add a few additional routes, but the constant obsession with JFK a hub, not a hub for AA and AA liquidating JFK is wild speculation and not much more. T8 is arguably the best terminal at JFK and AA can capitalize on that by encouraging more Oneworld airlines that can to move there and to build some sort of bridge or pier for BA (financed jointly by IAG). If AA were in financial dire straits, which it is not, then they could sell T8 (they own it) and maybe swap with Delta but that's very unlikely barring a major recession, a huge spike in oil prices, and desperation setting in. The other argument is that AA could by JetBlue.

Before the merger AA didn’t have PHL or CLT. Now it does and therefore can concentrate on profitable O&D out of NYC. Now still not having showers in the ACs at PHL and CLT for the business flyer is another matter.

tphuang wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

JFK-SEA/LAS/SAN are all not doing well at all.

Facts to back it up?

here is 2018Q1 for SAN/LAS
CityPair Dist Carrier Board %Regional AvgFare NSFare ConnFare % NS LF AvgAsm PRASM
JFKLAS 2248 AA 48019 0.00% 255.12 255.22 254.54 84.42% 87.17% 222.49 0.099
JFKLAS 2248 B6 81343 0.00% 252.95 252.63 286.68 99.04% 88.73% 224.15 0.0997
JFKLAS 2248 DL 124491 0.00% 314.37 312.9 361.58 96.97% 86.16% 269.59 0.1199
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22488 0.00% 286.81 288.14 276.6 88.45% 78.08% 224.99 0.092
JFKSAN 2446 B6 45369 0.00% 307.55 307.49 317.62 99.36% 87.11% 267.87 0.1095
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61231 0.00% 312.56 309.3 398.51 96.35% 80.71% 249.65 0.1021

vs 2017Q1
JFKLAS 2248 AA 44908 0.00% 280.47 266.58 385.94 88.36% 88.73% 236.53 0.1052
JFKLAS 2248 B6 90499 0.00% 220.05 219.45 294.54 99.19% 90.63% 198.89 0.0885
JFKLAS 2248 DL 122065 0.00% 313.9 310.9 411.28 97.01% 88.64% 275.57 0.1226
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22832 0.00% 309.01 297.45 443.39 92.08% 81.08% 241.17 0.0986
JFKSAN 2446 B6 40456 0.00% 247.24 247.31 231.83 99.50% 85.56% 211.59 0.0865
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61112 0.00% 327.18 324.83 382.34 95.91% 82.05% 266.51 0.109

both routes down 6 to 7% YoY. And this is with year's Q1 benefiting from half of easter in Q1, so the actual downward trend is even greater. We won't get JFK-SEA number, but it's likely to see the same effect of mint entrance. Not great when fuel prices are up so much.

Wow. B6 is killing it yoy on JFK-SAN. I know personally I take mint on this route instead of AA now.

I wonder if AA would be contemplating keeping their flying roughly the same maybe cut some frequencies on low yield cities and do a partnership with B6 sort of like AS @ SEA.

MKIAZ wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

Facts to back it up?

here is 2018Q1 for SAN/LAS
CityPair Dist Carrier Board %Regional AvgFare NSFare ConnFare % NS LF AvgAsm PRASM
JFKLAS 2248 AA 48019 0.00% 255.12 255.22 254.54 84.42% 87.17% 222.49 0.099
JFKLAS 2248 B6 81343 0.00% 252.95 252.63 286.68 99.04% 88.73% 224.15 0.0997
JFKLAS 2248 DL 124491 0.00% 314.37 312.9 361.58 96.97% 86.16% 269.59 0.1199
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22488 0.00% 286.81 288.14 276.6 88.45% 78.08% 224.99 0.092
JFKSAN 2446 B6 45369 0.00% 307.55 307.49 317.62 99.36% 87.11% 267.87 0.1095
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61231 0.00% 312.56 309.3 398.51 96.35% 80.71% 249.65 0.1021

vs 2017Q1
JFKLAS 2248 AA 44908 0.00% 280.47 266.58 385.94 88.36% 88.73% 236.53 0.1052
JFKLAS 2248 B6 90499 0.00% 220.05 219.45 294.54 99.19% 90.63% 198.89 0.0885
JFKLAS 2248 DL 122065 0.00% 313.9 310.9 411.28 97.01% 88.64% 275.57 0.1226
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22832 0.00% 309.01 297.45 443.39 92.08% 81.08% 241.17 0.0986
JFKSAN 2446 B6 40456 0.00% 247.24 247.31 231.83 99.50% 85.56% 211.59 0.0865
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61112 0.00% 327.18 324.83 382.34 95.91% 82.05% 266.51 0.109

both routes down 6 to 7% YoY. And this is with year's Q1 benefiting from half of easter in Q1, so the actual downward trend is even greater. We won't get JFK-SEA number, but it's likely to see the same effect of mint entrance. Not great when fuel prices are up so much.

Wow. B6 is killing it yoy on JFK-SAN. I know personally I take mint on this route instead of AA now.

I wonder if AA would be contemplating keeping their flying roughly the same maybe cut some frequencies on low yield cities and do a partnership with B6 sort of like AS @ SEA.

Yep, they also get higher yield on SAN than JFK-SFO. The rumours earlier this year of AA putting lie flats on this route never happened. Shame really. I think it's shown that putting high quality product in the New York market results in good returns.

tphuang wrote:

MKIAZ wrote:

tphuang wrote:

here is 2018Q1 for SAN/LAS
CityPair Dist Carrier Board %Regional AvgFare NSFare ConnFare % NS LF AvgAsm PRASM
JFKLAS 2248 AA 48019 0.00% 255.12 255.22 254.54 84.42% 87.17% 222.49 0.099
JFKLAS 2248 B6 81343 0.00% 252.95 252.63 286.68 99.04% 88.73% 224.15 0.0997
JFKLAS 2248 DL 124491 0.00% 314.37 312.9 361.58 96.97% 86.16% 269.59 0.1199
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22488 0.00% 286.81 288.14 276.6 88.45% 78.08% 224.99 0.092
JFKSAN 2446 B6 45369 0.00% 307.55 307.49 317.62 99.36% 87.11% 267.87 0.1095
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61231 0.00% 312.56 309.3 398.51 96.35% 80.71% 249.65 0.1021

vs 2017Q1
JFKLAS 2248 AA 44908 0.00% 280.47 266.58 385.94 88.36% 88.73% 236.53 0.1052
JFKLAS 2248 B6 90499 0.00% 220.05 219.45 294.54 99.19% 90.63% 198.89 0.0885
JFKLAS 2248 DL 122065 0.00% 313.9 310.9 411.28 97.01% 88.64% 275.57 0.1226
JFKSAN 2446 AA 22832 0.00% 309.01 297.45 443.39 92.08% 81.08% 241.17 0.0986
JFKSAN 2446 B6 40456 0.00% 247.24 247.31 231.83 99.50% 85.56% 211.59 0.0865
JFKSAN 2446 DL 61112 0.00% 327.18 324.83 382.34 95.91% 82.05% 266.51 0.109

both routes down 6 to 7% YoY. And this is with year's Q1 benefiting from half of easter in Q1, so the actual downward trend is even greater. We won't get JFK-SEA number, but it's likely to see the same effect of mint entrance. Not great when fuel prices are up so much.

Wow. B6 is killing it yoy on JFK-SAN. I know personally I take mint on this route instead of AA now.

I wonder if AA would be contemplating keeping their flying roughly the same maybe cut some frequencies on low yield cities and do a partnership with B6 sort of like AS @ SEA.

Yep, they also get higher yield on SAN than JFK-SFO. The rumours earlier this year of AA putting lie flats on this route never happened. Shame really. I think it's shown that putting high quality product in the New York market results in good returns.

I feel like AA needs an A321 between the standard config and the T, which will basically be what a standard TATL A321LR would be. Order enough to handle TATL needs and premium but not T premium transcon. Maybe something like 12C/16W/24Y+/112Y (no idea if that fits)

sagechan wrote:

tphuang wrote:

MKIAZ wrote:

Wow. B6 is killing it yoy on JFK-SAN. I know personally I take mint on this route instead of AA now.

I wonder if AA would be contemplating keeping their flying roughly the same maybe cut some frequencies on low yield cities and do a partnership with B6 sort of like AS @ SEA.

Yep, they also get higher yield on SAN than JFK-SFO. The rumours earlier this year of AA putting lie flats on this route never happened. Shame really. I think it's shown that putting high quality product in the New York market results in good returns.

I feel like AA needs an A321 between the standard config and the T, which will basically be what a standard TATL A321LR would be. Order enough to handle TATL needs and premium but not T premium transcon. Maybe something like 12C/16W/24Y+/112Y (no idea if that fits)

That's essentially what DL does with their 757s aside from what you said about keeping the Ts for premium transcon right?

Pretty much, my understanding is that F does well on those limited routes so I'd assume the T stays in its current role in my hypothetical. Then the international neo does things like MIA-LAX, LAX-DCA, XXX-PHL for some international all lie flat connections and other routes that would likely have some paid C class or competition with lie flat product. The W class would be optional but would match the rest of the international fleet.

Yes give up on beyond perimeter routes like LAS SAN AUS. I'm sure B6 and DL would love to upgrauge their current flights!

I've never seen or heard anyone use the word "monetize" in advocating anything but a transaction that directly benefited themselves or their friends in a lopsided deal. It's just about the #1 "watch your wallet" word out there in negotiations, a dead giveaway that someone is trying to pull a fast one on you.

All these miracles that are going to happen in Philadelphia are an oasis which is not going to happen. It took me 2 hours to clear customs in PHL Sunday August 5th, they do not have the infrastructure to handle all their international flights. PHL & JFK are two separate operations, everyone has been predicting JFK's demise because AA moved one 767 flight to Zurich. AA will be at JFK for decades and will have many flight to LHR.

IADCA wrote:

I've never seen or heard anyone use the word "monetize" in advocating anything but a transaction that directly benefited themselves or their friends in a lopsided deal. It's just about the #1 "watch your wallet" word out there in negotiations, a dead giveaway that someone is trying to pull a fast one on you.

It's a perfectly legit word, used properly by the OP.

From the Oxford American Dictionary:

monetize something: to earn money from something, especially a business or an asset (= something that a business owns)
Newspapers try to monetize their online content in several ways.

The Oxford English statement on origin:

Origin
Late 19th century: from French monétiser, from Latin moneta ‘money’.

Why are you even trying with a post like that? Haha

But thank you!

Midwestindy wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

Lest we not forget that United tried to serve only the sexiest markets from JFK in the early 2000s - EZE, GRU, HKG, LAX, LHR, MIA, NRT, SEA, SFO and SJU spring to mind. Granted, they didn't have the wonderful facilities that AA has, but that strategy was clearly a failure. VX tried to do the same from SFO in more recent times, and that also didn't pan out very well. Ultimately, you do have to serve the seemingly less desirable places like BWI, IND and RDU. The important FFers might have an annual conference in Vegas, an important client in Indianapolis or parents in the Carolinas. If AA cuts much further, they'll lose even more ground to B6 and DL... and probably will have to de-hub JFK. LGA, on the other hand, seems to be much stronger for AA these days than in years past.

With the exception of BWI, they do serve those routes (IND & RDU) but from LGA. I don't think those routes specifically have to be served from JFK airport unless they are for connection purposes which aren't the reasons you outlined.

JFK allows for more service to NYC from those places, since LGA is limited. EWR isn't an option for many NYC flyers

How is EWR not an option for many NYC flyers, both JFK and LGA are options for me and I live 60 miles south of Kennedy airport.

STT757 wrote:

How is EWR not an option for many NYC flyers, both JFK and LGA are options for me and I live 60 miles south of Kennedy airport.

It's not that it isn't an option but for many it's hugely inconvenient because there are more people served by NYC airports than just those in Manhattan...

I personally live *just* over the Queens/Nassau County boundary on LI. I can be at JFK in 10mins, LGA is very traffic dependent but could be 30mins if traffic is kind. EWR is even more unpredictable because of the Belt Parkway. I don't know many LIers around me that would even consider EWR as an option either, other than the hugely price sensitive people. It's either a double dose of public transport links or the aforementioned terrible drive.

I've lived in NY for over 4yrs now and have flown out of EWR once, earlier this year, because the deal was exceptional but otherwise it isn't even on my radar. I've only flown out of LGA a handful of time and my other 100 or so trips have all started from JFK.

When you live 60miles from NYC I can see why EWR, JFK and LGA would be, for the most part, broadly equivalent in terms of options...percentage wise the difference isn't that great. I had the same philosophy when I lived in Richmond, VA and would fly international to the UK, the difference distance wise between IAD and BWI isn't that huge, although if you live in Reston, VA you need a lot more incentive to tackle the Beltway around to BWI versus just going out of IAD.

fbgdavidson wrote:

STT757 wrote:

How is EWR not an option for many NYC flyers, both JFK and LGA are options for me and I live 60 miles south of Kennedy airport.

It's not that it isn't an option but for many it's hugely inconvenient because there are more people served by NYC airports than just those in Manhattan...

I personally live *just* over the Queens/Nassau County boundary on LI. I can be at JFK in 10mins, LGA is very traffic dependent but could be 30mins if traffic is kind. EWR is even more unpredictable because of the Belt Parkway. I don't know many LIers around me that would even consider EWR as an option either, other than the hugely price sensitive people. It's either a double dose of public transport links or the aforementioned terrible drive.

I've lived in NY for over 4yrs now and have flown out of EWR once, earlier this year, because the deal was exceptional but otherwise it isn't even on my radar. I've only flown out of LGA a handful of time and my other 100 or so trips have all started from JFK.

When you live 60miles from NYC I can see why EWR, JFK and LGA would be, for the most part, broadly equivalent in terms of options...percentage wise the difference isn't that great. I had the same philosophy when I lived in Richmond, VA and would fly international to the UK, the difference distance wise between IAD and BWI isn't that huge, although if you live in Reston, VA you need a lot more incentive to tackle the Beltway around to BWI versus just going out of IAD.

I commute everyday into Lower Manhattan, that's 50 miles, it takes 65 minutes in the morning and 90 minutes heading home in the afternoon. I know people who commute to Kennedy airport from my area. I work with people who commute into Manhattan everyday from the Poconos, that's 100 miles one way. So obviously EWR is an option for not most, but all of NYC residents. Factors such as distance, airfare, flight schedules etc.. all play a role in a consumers decision. But to say EWR is not an option is far from accurate.

STT757 wrote:

fbgdavidson wrote:

STT757 wrote:

How is EWR not an option for many NYC flyers, both JFK and LGA are options for me and I live 60 miles south of Kennedy airport.

It's not that it isn't an option but for many it's hugely inconvenient because there are more people served by NYC airports than just those in Manhattan...

I personally live *just* over the Queens/Nassau County boundary on LI. I can be at JFK in 10mins, LGA is very traffic dependent but could be 30mins if traffic is kind. EWR is even more unpredictable because of the Belt Parkway. I don't know many LIers around me that would even consider EWR as an option either, other than the hugely price sensitive people. It's either a double dose of public transport links or the aforementioned terrible drive.

I've lived in NY for over 4yrs now and have flown out of EWR once, earlier this year, because the deal was exceptional but otherwise it isn't even on my radar. I've only flown out of LGA a handful of time and my other 100 or so trips have all started from JFK.

When you live 60miles from NYC I can see why EWR, JFK and LGA would be, for the most part, broadly equivalent in terms of options...percentage wise the difference isn't that great. I had the same philosophy when I lived in Richmond, VA and would fly international to the UK, the difference distance wise between IAD and BWI isn't that huge, although if you live in Reston, VA you need a lot more incentive to tackle the Beltway around to BWI versus just going out of IAD.

I commute everyday into Lower Manhattan, that's 50 miles, it takes 65 minutes in the morning and 90 minutes heading home in the afternoon. I know people who commute to Kennedy airport from my area. I work with people who commute into Manhattan everyday from the Poconos, that's 100 miles one way. So obviously EWR is an option for not most, but all of NYC residents. Factors such as distance, airfare, flight schedules etc.. all play a role in a consumers decision. But to say EWR is not an option is far from accurate.

It is not an option for people who are not willing to make that commute.

tphuang wrote:

STT757 wrote:

fbgdavidson wrote:

It's not that it isn't an option but for many it's hugely inconvenient because there are more people served by NYC airports than just those in Manhattan...

I personally live *just* over the Queens/Nassau County boundary on LI. I can be at JFK in 10mins, LGA is very traffic dependent but could be 30mins if traffic is kind. EWR is even more unpredictable because of the Belt Parkway. I don't know many LIers around me that would even consider EWR as an option either, other than the hugely price sensitive people. It's either a double dose of public transport links or the aforementioned terrible drive.

I've lived in NY for over 4yrs now and have flown out of EWR once, earlier this year, because the deal was exceptional but otherwise it isn't even on my radar. I've only flown out of LGA a handful of time and my other 100 or so trips have all started from JFK.

When you live 60miles from NYC I can see why EWR, JFK and LGA would be, for the most part, broadly equivalent in terms of options...percentage wise the difference isn't that great. I had the same philosophy when I lived in Richmond, VA and would fly international to the UK, the difference distance wise between IAD and BWI isn't that huge, although if you live in Reston, VA you need a lot more incentive to tackle the Beltway around to BWI versus just going out of IAD.

I commute everyday into Lower Manhattan, that's 50 miles, it takes 65 minutes in the morning and 90 minutes heading home in the afternoon. I know people who commute to Kennedy airport from my area. I work with people who commute into Manhattan everyday from the Poconos, that's 100 miles one way. So obviously EWR is an option for not most, but all of NYC residents. Factors such as distance, airfare, flight schedules etc.. all play a role in a consumers decision. But to say EWR is not an option is far from accurate.

It is not an option for people who are not willing to make that commute.

sagechan wrote:

I feel like AA needs an A321 between the standard config and the T, which will basically be what a standard TATL A321LR would be. Order enough to handle TATL needs and premium but not T premium transcon. Maybe something like 12C/16W/24Y+/112Y (no idea if that fits)

The problem is, AA has likely the highest cost structure of any US airline. So it's really hard to make a less dense plane and fly it on "unproven" routes. It's hard taking back market share when you have the highest costs and any misstep results in losses.