Here is the real issue with JFK... almost EVERY airline flies there. It is as competitive as you can get... and high competition means low profits. If you are an airline in Europe, Africa, or Middle East and you are going to fly to one US airport, it is probably JFK. If you are an East Asian airline and you have your LAX and SFO flights taken care of, your next choice is JFK. Again, everyone that can flies there.

And yes, there is a ton of OD in NYC, and as far as revenue OD goes, NYC is the obviously the largest market in the wealthiest country. But even a market as large as NYC has its limits. And when all these other airlines are flying to international markets, many with a lower labor cost, it becomes difficult for AA to make a profit. So AA switches their international flying to PHL, where far less competition means much greater profits, even with smaller OD.

If they could move all OW including BA into T8, that would help JFKs problems.

The port authorty and the larger than life governor need to apply this pressure.

This frees up space in T1, and allows the B6 build out to T7.

As per latest B6 in Europe article, they have planes to grow JFK. They and Delta get the space...not stagnant or shrinking airlines

I wonder when will PA make decision on which proposals to pick for the JFK modernization project.

jfklganyc wrote:

If they could move all OW including BA into T8, that would help JFKs problems.

That's what they should do. There is now plenty of space in Terminal 8 to accommodate all One World members currently serving JFK. Malev is gone. Air Berlin is gone. JAL would move out of Terminal 1, BA, Iberia and Qantas would move out of Terminal 7. Finnair and Qatar are there already. It is now becoming evident American won't be developing it's JFK hub, if not cutting even more flights, leaving enough slots for other One World airlines. I don't see American rebuilding it's JFK hub to the point of what it was at its peak. Why would they? They have now a big hub in PHL located less than 200 miles away, handling a lot of traffic, a lot of lights to Europe and many regional flights to all over the North East and the East Coast. I wouldn't be surprised if JFK looses SAN, LAS, and SEA, gone already are SJC and SNA, leaving only LAX and SFO on the West Coast as three-class service because there is a lot of business traffic, and maybe PHX once daily because PHX is a hub. There is no future for American Airlines at JFK unless it relies on its One World partners for connecting traffic. Jet Blue and Delta are now the two strongest players at JFK.

American 767 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

If they could move all OW including BA into T8, that would help JFKs problems.

That's what they should do. There is now plenty of space in Terminal 8 to accommodate all One World members currently serving JFK. Malev is gone. Air Berlin is gone. JAL would move out of Terminal 1, BA, Iberia and Qantas would move out of Terminal 7. Finnair and Qatar are there already. It is now becoming evident American won't be developing it's JFK hub, if not cutting even more flights, leaving enough slots for other One World airlines. I don't see American rebuilding it's JFK hub to the point of what it was at its peak. Why would they? They have now a big hub in PHL located less than 200 miles away, handling a lot of traffic, a lot of lights to Europe and many regional flights to all over the North East and the East Coast. I wouldn't be surprised if JFK looses SAN, LAS, and SEA, gone already are SJC and SNA, leaving only LAX and SFO on the West Coast as three-class service because there is a lot of business traffic, and maybe PHX once daily because PHX is a hub. There is no future for American Airlines at JFK unless it relies on its One World partners for connecting traffic. Jet Blue and Delta are now the two strongest players at JFK.

Why would AA drop PHX or cut it down to 1 flight a day? Even when JFK was a small spoke for US we flew the route 3 times a day out of T7.

chepos wrote:

American 767 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

If they could move all OW including BA into T8, that would help JFKs problems.

That's what they should do. There is now plenty of space in Terminal 8 to accommodate all One World members currently serving JFK. Malev is gone. Air Berlin is gone. JAL would move out of Terminal 1, BA, Iberia and Qantas would move out of Terminal 7. Finnair and Qatar are there already. It is now becoming evident American won't be developing it's JFK hub, if not cutting even more flights, leaving enough slots for other One World airlines. I don't see American rebuilding it's JFK hub to the point of what it was at its peak. Why would they? They have now a big hub in PHL located less than 200 miles away, handling a lot of traffic, a lot of lights to Europe and many regional flights to all over the North East and the East Coast. I wouldn't be surprised if JFK looses SAN, LAS, and SEA, gone already are SJC and SNA, leaving only LAX and SFO on the West Coast as three-class service because there is a lot of business traffic, and maybe PHX once daily because PHX is a hub. There is no future for American Airlines at JFK unless it relies on its One World partners for connecting traffic. Jet Blue and Delta are now the two strongest players at JFK.

Why would AA drop PHX or cut it down to 1 flight a day? Even when JFK was a small spoke for US we flew the route 3 times a day out of T7.

I was only speculating a worst case scenario of AA at JFK, the worst that would happen if there are more drastic cuts at JFK to the point that JFK is no longer a hub or even a focus city. It all depends on the slots PANYNJ is willing to give AA.

The underlying premise of the thread is off: Slots at JFK can't be sold. The airline doesn't "own" the slot, they are simply assigned to the airline for its use with the presumption that they stay with the airline until it doesn't need it anymore. That said, the slots can be swapped and traded but its not like LHR or even the old days where they are hard assets that can be transferred. Even if they can be swapped, any deal would have to be approved by several government regulators including the DOT and the Port Authority. There aren't that many airlines that need/want slots at JFK that have assets at other airports AA would want or that the DOT would approve (maybe some more gates at EWR). While a UA JFK/EWR deal might seem logical, I don't see AA cutting a deal with UA as its 100% not in AA's interest to bring another competitor onto JFK-LAX/SFO. The most logical play after slot squatting is to deal with B6 to give them a leg up to fight DL (under the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' concept).

As to the terminal issues, I agree that its in AA and the JV's interest to consolidate AA/BA into Terminal 8. I don't really get what's going on with T8 (why BA renewed and invested) unless BA/AA were trying to block B6 or DL from expanding. JL owns 25% of terminal 1, so its unlikely they would move, although never is not really ever the answer. A BA move would be expensive as it would require a lot of premium construction to support that franchise (and trust me, you'd spend every penny to hold onto a $1B franchise).

Although its NYC, being #4 (which is what AA is close to being overall in NYC) is never a good place in a market. But despite that, AA has a great franchise from NYC to LA, ORD, CLT, DFW, LHR, GRU and MIA plus the shuttles from BOS/DCA. All are really key biz markets from NYC. The most recent cuts indicate to me that AA is slowly retreating not from NYC but from NY-point of sale. Many of the markets cut have a distinctively NY-based point of sale. And that might be the more interesting trend overall: Where are AA's passengers starting their trips? How many of those passengers are coming to NYC rather than flying away from NY? If my hunch is correct then more cuts are in store and any adds are going to be from very strong AA markets where having a NYC nonstop will help the S-curve of that market. In that sense, having a lot of service to NYC that might actually lose money but makes the other city (e.g. AUS) stronger and more profitable is worth the cost.

I can only think the reason the oneworld airlines haven't decamped to T8 is in part compounded by the fact that IAG owns T7 (so not just a reason to keep BA there but IB as well) whilst JL owns a stake of T1. JL might be the easier to move if it can sell its stake in T1. BA/IB might be harder - is there something that owning T7 gives them that simply being an operator out of AA's T8 doesn't? Logic would dictate that building out the main part of T8 to give BA dedicated facilities would make sense, but equally something is keeping them in T7. Personally, I do think some of it is the squatting element because B6 could then try and move to build out their T5/T6 complex unless IAG could find a buyer willing to purchase T7. AS might be one, but given they are sub-letting part of T7 they don't need the whole terminal so who else could partner with them who would appreciate their own terminal space at JFK?

IAG does not own T7. It has the right to operate T7 until 2023. If AA is going to cut more flights that matter (replacing EDI/FRA/DUB for DFW is cutting as far as I'm concerned) and I see no reason why AA/IAG get to use all of T7/T8 unless they plan to allow more international carriers to move there and modernize the facility. Most of my AA flights these days are out of Concourse C, which is just so far away. AA really hasn't invested in JFK terminal experience for the non-elites. Compared to T5, it's night and day. It's clear their goal is just to keep B6 from building out all the way to T7.

American 767 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

If they could move all OW including BA into T8, that would help JFKs problems.

That's what they should do. There is now plenty of space in Terminal 8 to accommodate all One World members currently serving JFK. Malev is gone. Air Berlin is gone. JAL would move out of Terminal 1, BA, Iberia and Qantas would move out of Terminal 7. Finnair and Qatar are there already. It is now becoming evident American won't be developing it's JFK hub, if not cutting even more flights, leaving enough slots for other One World airlines. I don't see American rebuilding it's JFK hub to the point of what it was at its peak. Why would they? They have now a big hub in PHL located less than 200 miles away, handling a lot of traffic, a lot of lights to Europe and many regional flights to all over the North East and the East Coast. I wouldn't be surprised if JFK looses SAN, LAS, and SEA, gone already are SJC and SNA, leaving only LAX and SFO on the West Coast as three-class service because there is a lot of business traffic, and maybe PHX once daily because PHX is a hub. There is no future for American Airlines at JFK unless it relies on its One World partners for connecting traffic. Jet Blue and Delta are now the two strongest players at JFK.

highly unlikely that one happens. JAL is one of the four owners of T1.

N717TW wrote:

The underlying premise of the thread is off: Slots at JFK can't be sold. The airline doesn't "own" the slot, they are simply assigned to the airline for its use with the presumption that they stay with the airline until it doesn't need it anymore. That said, the slots can be swapped and traded but its not like LHR or even the old days where they are hard assets that can be transferred. Even if they can be swapped, any deal would have to be approved by several government regulators including the DOT and the Port Authority. There aren't that many airlines that need/want slots at JFK that have assets at other airports AA would want or that the DOT would approve (maybe some more gates at EWR). While a UA JFK/EWR deal might seem logical, I don't see AA cutting a deal with UA as its 100% not in AA's interest to bring another competitor onto JFK-LAX/SFO. The most logical play after slot squatting is to deal with B6 to give them a leg up to fight DL (under the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' concept).

As to the terminal issues, I agree that its in AA and the JV's interest to consolidate AA/BA into Terminal 8. I don't really get what's going on with T8 (why BA renewed and invested) unless BA/AA were trying to block B6 or DL from expanding. JL owns 25% of terminal 1, so its unlikely they would move, although never is not really ever the answer. A BA move would be expensive as it would require a lot of premium construction to support that franchise (and trust me, you'd spend every penny to hold onto a $1B franchise).

Although its NYC, being #4 (which is what AA is close to being overall in NYC) is never a good place in a market. But despite that, AA has a great franchise from NYC to LA, ORD, CLT, DFW, LHR, GRU and MIA plus the shuttles from BOS/DCA. All are really key biz markets from NYC. The most recent cuts indicate to me that AA is slowly retreating not from NYC but from NY-point of sale. Many of the markets cut have a distinctively NY-based point of sale. And that might be the more interesting trend overall: Where are AA's passengers starting their trips? How many of those passengers are coming to NYC rather than flying away from NY? If my hunch is correct then more cuts are in store and any adds are going to be from very strong AA markets where having a NYC nonstop will help the S-curve of that market. In that sense, having a lot of service to NYC that might actually lose money but makes the other city (e.g. AUS) stronger and more profitable is worth the cost.

uh, yeah they can. Example, The Delta/United "swap" of JFK/EWR slots was actually United selling Delta JFK slots and Delta selling United EWR slots.

deltal1011man wrote:

uh, yeah they can. Example, The Delta/United "swap" of JFK/EWR slots was actually United selling Delta JFK slots and Delta selling United EWR slots.

Except it wasn't a sale. It is a lease and the DOT rejected the EWR lease...then did away with slot restrictions at EWR making it all moot anyways.

AA DFW-JFK JAN 4>3[1.1]
AA JFK-ORD JAN 1.1>1.9[1.0] FEB 1.0>1.4[1.0]
AA JFK-SAT FEB 0>0.5[0] MAR 0>1.0[0] APR 0>1.0[0] MAY 0>1.0[0] JUN 0>1.0[0] JUL 0>1.0[0]

AA increases

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

EWR is actually much closer to many travelers compared to JFK.

acentauri wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

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.

PHL's Terminal A-West infrastructure is fine. Any 2 Hour customs processing times (and I have never witnessed one more than an hour) are not the airport's problem, they're AA's. AA has the option to Bank international arrivals to avoid stacking, but chooses not do so - likely for economic reasons. Maybe AA should just move the remainder of the JFK international flights to CLT instead of PHL and then New Yorker's wouldn't have anything to complain about.

CLT has major problems with ground operations. Taxi times after landing can be up to 25-30 minutes to reach the gates. AA is trying to add more flights than the airport can handle.