|
de le ted.........
|
I don't work for AA, but I don't think this has anything to do with downsizing the operation at SFO in any way. They are merely going to stop basing crews there. From what I hear, this is the first step toward eliminating the smaller domicile stations (in other words, BOS and DCA are on the block next) in favor of getting everyone in to NYC, MIA, DFW, ORD, and LAX ... and STL for the TWA orphans.
If the retirement spike has hit SFO particularly hard, and if closing the smaller bases was on the radar anyway, this makes more long-term sense than paying to move people to SFO to backfill, only to pay (again!) to displace them when the base closed later. |
Originally Posted by VenetianFryCook
(Post 1070804)
I don't work for AA, but I don't think this has anything to do with downsizing the operation at SFO in any way. They are merely going to stop basing crews there. From what I hear, this is the first step toward eliminating the smaller domicile stations (in other words, BOS and DCA are on the block next) in favor of getting everyone in to NYC, MIA, DFW, ORD, and LAX ... and STL for the TWA orphans.
If the retirement spike has hit SFO particularly hard, and if closing the smaller bases was on the radar anyway, this makes more long-term sense than paying to move people to SFO to backfill, only to pay (again!) to displace them when the base closed later. |
Originally Posted by VenetianFryCook
(Post 1070804)
I don't think this has anything to do with downsizing the operation at SFO in any way.
From Boyd Aviation Consulting: Alliance Strength. Not Market Strength. In airline strategic and tactical planning, the concepts of “market share” and “load factor” are no longer primary. Today, they’re busy re-engineering revenue streams. Just dominating a “route” isn’t the goal – securing and building traffic flows across nations and across intercontinental markets is the goal. We are seeing it in airline market planning. We’re seeing it in fleet decisions. And, we’re seeing it at airports of all sizes across North America, as airlines shift resources from traditional and historical applications. It's simple: carriers are re-deploying resources from airline strategies to global alliance objectives. Let's look at just one example. American Airlines in the past three months has announced it’s yanking BOS-SFO nonstops, with near 90% load factors, deleting SFO-HNL, with near 80% load factors, and relegating ORD-HNL (clocking in at over 80%) to only seasonal service. Traditional, worn-out, rearview-mirror thinking would conclude that such actions are nuts. Traditional me-too financial “experts” will conclude that American is being run out of these markets. What needs to be run out are some of these battery-powered Wall Street analysts, who get their expertise reading the drivel each other writes. The fact is that American – like Delta, like United, like Air France, like China Airlines, and so on – are shifting to alliance strategies instead of parochial market strategies. At HNL, for example the domestic market oneworld Alliance has just a 7.6% share. Star has 20%. At SFO, oneworld grabs less than 12%, v Star's 42%. Boston is a similar situation: [fancy graphic showing AA and OneWorld has little market share in BOS, SFO, and HNL] What’s the common thread? It’s the relative weakness of the oneworld alliance at BOS, SFO, and HNL. While these airports will continue to be spokes for American, a route like BOS-SFO simply doesn’t contribute corollary market strength to either AA or – more critically – to the oneworld Alliance. So, that routing for AA is toast. Can anyone actually cite an example of an airline that closed a pilot base, but maintained service levels? Seriously - name some. US Airways in BOS and LGA, Delta in DFW, Delta/Northwest in ANC, AA in RDU, Continental in DIA, Fed Ex in Subic, Spirit in SJU . . . airlines pull bases down when they pull flying down, and open bases up when they grow flying there (JetBlue in BOS). |
SFO-BOS is being done by AA's code share outsource partner JetBlue. Metal neutral.
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1072268)
SFO-BOS is being done by AA's code share outsource partner JetBlue. Metal neutral.
|
Originally Posted by aa73
(Post 1072312)
AA does not codeshare with B6. Interline agreement only. AMR wants a codeshare badly but APA is standing its ground.
|
Originally Posted by Sniper
(Post 1072222)
SFO-BOS and SFO-HNL are vanishing (I'm sure there are others). What replaced them? Nothing = downsize.
|
Originally Posted by Mink
(Post 1072454)
Sounds like removing the word "puppies" and inserting "small dogs". Maybe it's only an "interline agreement", but they are pax on a B6 jet, not an AA jet, for those routes in question, right? Is not the result the same in terms of keeping AA flying for AA pilots?
The AA-B6 interline is no different that American interlining with Delta, United or Air France. Each airline keeps it's revenue and all that. In a Code-Share, the revenue is split between the carriers. |
Originally Posted by Sniper
(Post 1072222)
SFO-BOS and SFO-HNL are vanishing (I'm sure there are others). What replaced them? Nothing = downsize.
From Boyd Aviation Consulting: Coincidence that BOS is also mentioned by Boyd, and BOS is likely on the chopping block as an AA pilot base? Can anyone actually cite an example of an airline that closed a pilot base, but maintained service levels? Seriously - name some. US Airways in BOS and LGA, Delta in DFW, Delta/Northwest in ANC, AA in RDU, Continental in DIA, Fed Ex in Subic, Spirit in SJU . . . airlines pull bases down when they pull flying down, and open bases up when they grow flying there (JetBlue in BOS). But just to clarify FedEx, we actually closed Subic because we were limited on growth and opened Hong Kong/Guangzhou so we could grow our Asia/Pacific System. Back to AA though, I feel bad for them and hope they can work out their issues to the benefit of all the employees. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:20 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands