And by the way, for you SFO-haters out there, I second someone's comment earlier that it's tiring to hear the negativity from you all. This thread was clearly titled SFO, so if you don't want to listen in our conversation about painful changes to the airline we love and rely on, just don't click on the thread please. Recognize we are largely still trying to stay with AA and that in its own small way helps makes the airline better and viable for all of us, even those who don't live in the Bay Area.
Agreed. I am interested in AA's ongoing cutbacks (not only at SFO), even though I don't live there. SFO is a significant destination for business and leisure travel, and certain predictable negative commentary is indeed tiresome.
When I look at a lot of award travel that requires me to do silly things like SFO->DFW->ORD->NRT, I'd definitely rather SFO be a hub. Granted, there are better routes if I book further out, but having direct flights if booked within 3-4 months, that would be wonderful.
I, too, agree on that. When it comes to MR, there is nothing better than an additional leg (e.g., SFO-LAX-JFK) without paying higher fare...(well, not include the tax and fees).
A hub does not mean expensive fares, it's competition. LAX for example is an AA hub, but there is a lot of competition so the fares are cheap. Fares are expensive only if one carrier has a monopoly on the route.
I'm fine with AA's SFO service. Also, SJC has early and late night flights for connections so sometimes I make my way down there. I've also flown SFO-LAX-SAN many times. AA does try to compete on this route because often they match the fares of its competitors. The only hole is SFO-SNA.