Originally Posted by
EWR764
Are you really citing JFK as an example of a hub where AA's operation should be viewed favorably, especially in comparison to UA at EWR? AA is a mere shell of itself there and outside of LHR/LAX/SFO, JFK serves a continually diminishing purpose in AA's network. UA constantly catches heat for reducing LAX, but the truth is, United is far more committed to LAX than AA is to JFK.
I also find it strange that you cite UA's network limitations out of LAX and then point to DCA as an example of a more desirable AA hub. DCA is fantastic for Washington local traffic, but in terms of facilities, network and airspace constraints, it's a pretty crappy *hub*.
OTOH, DFW and CLT are two examples of hubs United doesn't have (in terms of frequencies and connectivity), that IMO it really needs to develop. Delta has ATL, but I would argue AA's structural advantage is that it has two such hubs, especially DFW, with a massive, growing and lucrative local market. AA's biggest problem right now is that it does not run a good operation... much like UA circa 2012-2015.
You are glossing over the crux of what I was saying, I never mentioned anything about which hubs were the most efficient or who had the better operation. I was simply refuting the previous claim that was stating that UA's hubs are in much bigger/better locations/cities than AA's which I don't think is necessarily true:
Secondly the point I was making about JFK was that UA not having a presence there certainly is a major hole for UA, which isn't a crazy claim to make considering there are dozens of articles where UA itself admits that:
https://skift.com/2017/04/21/united-...rong-decision/