I tend to think you guys are correct on one point: Europe's woes are being used to mask a pullback that looks to be intentional and planned, where we feed one another's hub, and forgo direct flights. If it were not so, we'd stick with frequency reductions. I just don't get the feeling there is an intention to add direct flights back later, especially not after a US-based STAR or oneworld competitor gets in.

I think this a foolish move a) because it adds connections, b) because competitors are frequently interested in filling the void, and c) some pax have a prference for a carrier from their own country. JFK-CDG-bravethebaggagrhandlerstrikemisconnecttryingtofibd therightterminalcatchanA320sichourslaterandsitnext toasmellyguyinamddleseat-BUD is NOT the same as JFK-BUD.

When furloughed, I sometimes had to buy tickets for employees, for example to Korea from the East Coast. I would get a limousine to JFK, and KAL direct, over a flight via DTW and NRT. My boss once let a travel agent buy such a ticket on NW, and swore he would never do it again, based on the extra connection(s).

Bottom line, every time you add a flight segment, especially on another airline, you increase the chance of an insatisfactory experience exponentially.

This feels like the SECOND time we're going to squander all of the PanAm Atlantic rights we grossly overpaid for.