AAFrequentFlyer

tmh,

so how do they fly ORD-DEL = ~7500 miles?

DFW-PEK = ~7000 miles
ORD-PEK = ~6600 miles

don't know the contract details between AA and it's pilot union but it does not make sense, does it?

rkkwan

AAFF - AFAIK, the pilot union granted an exemption for the ORD-DEL flight. But they haven't agreed on other flights, which resulted in the change from DFW-PEK to DFW-ORD-PEK petition last year.

lynnejoel1015

AA can't be doing too bad! They just posted a pretty healthy profit today, in spite of record high fuel prices - Southwest also posted a profit, but I think it was down from projections or down from last quarter and of course they're blaming the high fuel prices...

tmh

rkkwan is right about the exception for DEL. Looks as if that was a one time deal and a negotation chip. Plus - you can always take advanatage of the routing from Chgo.

And our buddies on the other side of town SHOULD blame higher fuel prices. They've been living off a fuel hedge for years. On top of that a few years back when they negotiated their contracts, the crew will be (or is) the highest paid. Thus the 25% - yes 25% - layoffs. For years they hid behind this facade of a better managed company because of that hedge. Sorry - not a big fan of Southwest for oh so many reasons.

rkkwan

During the last few years when the fuel prices are starting to rise, Southwest was in a much better financial shape than basically all of its peers. They can afford to hedge fuel - which cost money to do. The legacy airline in bankruptcies or near bankruptcies cannot afford to do that.

As a result, Southwest gets even stronger and makes profits when others can't.

But the legacy carriers have caught up, with Ch11 reorganizations, cost cutting, expanding internationall, etc. Now, the advantage Southwest has enjoyed is mostly gone. And airlines like Continental that didn't hedge fuel is now doing so. But reading the 2Q statement from CO, it has a small section about "fuel hedge inefficiencies". Yes, it saves them some money, but really not that much. [I don't quite understand the mechanics, but has something to do with differences in pricing trend between aviation fuel and heating oil, which is what airlines use to hedge against their fuel.]

And the domestic market is really tough. Price pressure is huge, so nobody can raise price fast enough domestically to match fuel and labor cost.

soccr

Been away and would let this go but just let me say why I posted in the first place. It just seems more than ironic that AA wants "popular pressure" to do the trick for them with the gummint when they ignore similar expressions of popular wishes on just about issue that meant they'd actually have to change their practices and policies.

You constantly read what amounts to "people won't pay for..." this or that, but that didn't stop them from imposing the curbside baggage fee, etc., nevermind the general attitude one confronts with AA.

They expect the gummint to be responsive to popular pressure but don't want to hear it themselves.

I can see signing the petition IF I wanted to go to Beijing via Chicago AND I only wanted to fly AA, but otherwise, I'll sign it when they show any evidence of responsiveness to anything other than the bottomline. Naive concept, huh? ;-)

AAFrequentFlyer

Nobody ever has a gun pointed to their heads during these requests for signatures for a specific routes. You don't want to sign it, don't. Simple really. You don't want to fly AA, CO, UA, etc. don't. Simple really. The beauty of our capitalist system. Simple really.

What AA or any other airlines seeking the route approval is trying to do is find the people that will be effected by the new routes. Perhaps any businessperson that is required by their corporation to fly AA only, or a person working for our government and has no choice but to fly US based airline for business (unless there is no choice). Perhaps the same person(s) live in the Chicago area and fly to PEK on a very regular basis. For them it would be a blessing to be able to catch a non-stop. Perhaps the same person(s) live in the mid-west small town. It would also be a blessing for them to catch just one connection, instead of 2-3.

These are the people AA is looking for when asking to sign the petition. The airline is trying to show DOT that that particular route is needed more than perhaps MIA-PEK or DEN-PEK, etc.

Anybody else that signs the petition is just an extra topping on the cake.

So yes, your concept is naive, sorry to say, because this has nothing to do with the quality of service. Do you think UA can or will provide better service if they get the route? DOT will give this route to a US based airline. Take your pick and sign their petition if you feel so strongly about it.

btw, I did not sign the DFW-PEK petition and I won't sign this one either. It will not have any negative effect on me if they don't get it (other than flying to PEK for vacation on economy fare, upgraded to business class with my free e-VIPs. )

soccr

I love being lectured to by people who have VIP status. I would shrug at all of it, too, if I knew I would always have elite status and treatment.

AAFrequentFlyer

huh???

that was the weakest point of my argument. Did you read the rest? or do you have reading apprehension difficulties?

Allow me to explain it to you again step by step:

1. I'm a sales executive Asia region for Caterpillar living in Peoria, Il.
2. I fly to PVG or PEK about once a month.
3. Caterpillar has an exclusive contract with AA for cheap business class seats anywhere AA flies.
4. Here are my choices:
a)Take PIA to ORD to NRT to PEK (all AA coded flights except for the last segment on JL codeshare)
or
b)Take PIA-ORD-PEK

Which one would you chose if you had to do it once a month?

or I'm an investment banker, living in Chicago, doing a number of deals with China.

same scenario as above but now no connections.

Get it?


The above is just an example - I don't have any facts to back up the exclusivility of CAT and AA contract or if it even exists, but I do know that many large corps have these kind of contracts.

Like I said, personaly I don't have any need/want/care for this route, but if AA gets it, I will use it to my advantage, or should I say, AAdvantage!

soccr

As I said, I just love being lectured to -- oh, say on the capitalist system, etc. Sarcastic snarling about my reading comprehension is just more arrogance.

I really don't give much of a darn about this route or whether it suits your travel needs or not. My point had to do with the irony (you might even say, hypocrisy) of AA's "courtship" of our signatures on a petition. You chose to be fingerwagging and didactic about that, and go after me personally (yet again). Knock yourself out.

tmh

If a TM is poor or dumb enough to have an exclusive airline agreement when they have business at a destination their airline doesn't serve should be fired. I can just see Cat making people unproductive because AA doesn't serve PEK out of ORD because they won't let them fly UA. And I'll bet Jim Owens would agree.

SamH

I received an email from CO this morning asking me to sign their petition to gain routes from EWR and CLE to Shanghai.

I may have received requests from AA and/or others but deleted them without reading them. I actually looked twice at this email because of this thread.

I signed the petition for CO. Not that I am a flyer to China at this time, but with business trends, who knows what the future will bring. Also, this may help CO's status in CLE, which would be a good thing for us.

The email described the CLE connection as a "through flight service" Does this refer to a codeshare or perhaps a connection at EWR to Shanghai?

rkkwan

The reason for all these petitions is because DOT has made the route selection process a political one.

It's not based on highest bid. It's not totally based what route can serve the most customers, what route can get create the most competition, or what route can make the US airlines most competitive against the Chinese.

Instead, it's which airline has the loudest mouth lobbyists, which airline has the most influence with politicians. It's pretty disgusting, in my opinion.

All the airlines are guilty, and so are the politicians and DOT itself. CO probably started this with its EWR-PEK petition for 2005. Then everybody else follows, with AA extremely active last year. But UA got IAD-PEK, mostly because of politics, even though CO's EWR-PVG makes a lot more commercial and competitive sense.

Now, it's a just an arms race. If you download CO's petition, more than half the 200 pages are letters from various people supporting the bid. Including all those from Cleveland. Most amazingly, all CLE got is a change of a flight number of their early CLE-EWR flight to match the EWR-PVG one. And perhaps an international concierge wearing a suite by the gate in the morning. Nothing else. In fact, those who book CLE-PVG as one flight gets fewer miles. But CO get all these Ohio politicians a mention in the newspaper, I guess.

Same with USAirways's CLT and AA's DFW tagged on.

rkkwan

SamH - I wrote my reply before reading yours.

All CO's doing with the CLE tagged on, is switching the flight number of one of the early flight - most likely 124 - to CO87. And the last EWR-CLE flight - CO425 - to CO86. Still a 737.

There's no guarantee of through connection, so misconnect can definitely still happen.

If you book CLE-PVG, you'll get about 7,210 miles. But if you book CLE-EWR-PVG as a multi-leg, then you get 500 for CLE-EWR and about 7,380 for EWR-PVG.

If one flies BF, there will be a grey-coated concierge at CLE in the morning and afternoon to assist.

That's it.

SamH

Thanks for your reply rkkwan. Unfortunately your explaination makes more logical sense than any other I can come up with.

Of course we have to realize that the airlines are in business to make money for their owners (shareholders). If they could do that without ever getting a plane into the air they would do it.