AA announces cuts at DFW in order to start flights at Love field

[PacoPollo]

nyone elses.

As for the Lima, Peru thing... think about it. Airplanes aren't sitting around unused. If an MD-80 goes to Love field, that MD-80's normal routing, say to LAX, needs to be filled.

..Yeah with an RJ.

 

[TR4A]

I wonder how profitable those routes were before they dropped them?

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

As for the Lima, Peru thing... think about it. Airplanes aren't sitting around unused. If an MD-80 goes to Love field, that MD-80's normal routing, say to LAX, needs to be filled. Grab a 757 which would normally go to Peru, and send it to LAX instead. It's a ripple effect.

"Cox said the shift of American flights to Love Field will eliminate service from D/FW Airport to Long Beach, Calif.; Providence, R.I.; Green Bay, Wis.; Toledo, Ohio; and Rochester, Minn. It also would eliminate American's service from D/FW Airport to Lima, Peru."


I'm glad you worded this without spin, Gorilla. Cox at DFW is unable to do the same. He is trying to prove that AA's service to Kansas City means fewer Texans can fly to Peru.

The reality is Lima service has nothing to do with moving flights to Love field, period.

 

[cipolini]

AA's historically predatory business practices? Or SWA's historically predatory business practices? LUV, let go of the "little guy" image, it doesn't work anymore. LUV's market capitalization is 4X of AA's, or pretty much anyone elses.

As for the Lima, Peru thing... think about it. Airplanes aren't sitting around unused. If an MD-80 goes to Love field, that MD-80's normal routing, say to LAX, needs to be filled. Grab a 757 which would normally go to Peru, and send it to LAX instead. It's a ripple effect.

Um, if I remember correctly, and I do, AA was flying F100s all over the place (well Chicago and LAX, maybe LGA) out of here a couple of years ago to drive the mighty Legend Airlines out of here. I'm sure at the time AA's market cap was a wee bit higher than Legend's - but lower than ours.

I think their load factors out of LGB probably weren't so hot, hence pulling those flights. Tyler, Shreveport, etc is punishment for those cities not supporting AA side of the WA issue. Notice the flights they are adding out of Love SAT and AUS are on AA's side of the issue... I'm sure that is purely a coinsidence though.

 

[aa73]

If you guys put us out of business, can I have a letter of rec? I promise to be a good employee and to shed my Sky-Naziness at the door!

(oh yeah, can you waive the 1000 PIC Turbine requirement... and a 73 Type too? Hey, it's Christmas....)

:nuts:

 

[Slug]

No Ripple

As for the Lima, Peru thing... think about it. Airplanes aren't sitting around unused. If an MD-80 goes to Love field, that MD-80's normal routing, say to LAX, needs to be filled. Grab a 757 which would normally go to Peru, and send it to LAX instead. It's a ripple effect.

Actually, the DFW to DAL swap of the MCI and STL flights was shown as a one for one swap. There was no stealing the aircraft off of other routes to fill the new MCI/STL schedule. In one of my earlier posts I showed it was a net loss of 11 jets. They move the jets from DFW to DAL and then dropped 11 more flights. No ripple effect there. Just poor management. Again, BooHoo.


Slug



aa73 - we need to have a beer sometime!

 

[aa73]

aa73 - we need to have a beer sometime!

(Butt-head voice) Uhhhhhh.... we're THERE, dude! Huh-huh-huh