AA closes SFO crew base
10-17-2011 | 06:49 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
From: A319/20/21 FO
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.
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.
10-17-2011 | 09:21 AM
#33
(retired)
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: Old, retired, healthy, debt-free, liquid
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.
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.
10-19-2011 | 07:58 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,001
Likes: 0
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.
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).
10-20-2011 | 04:28 AM
#36
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 9
10-20-2011 | 08:39 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 945
Likes: 0
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?
10-20-2011 | 09:42 AM
#39
seeing the country...
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,004
Likes: 35
From: 73N A
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.
10-20-2011 | 10:54 AM
#40
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 424
Likes: 1
From: B767 FO
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).
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
