FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - How do AA Leadership still have jobs?
View Single Post
Old Jul 13, 2019 | 8:52 am
  #112  
wingnuthead
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
5 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Prisoner of EWR
Programs: Lifetime AA Plat, UA Silver which is basically useless
Posts: 185
Originally Posted by spin88
It will be interesting to watch. Delta's strategy c2008-2012 was to further gut the FFP redemption value, and investing in having leading operations both as to OT/cancellation rates but also more efficient baggage operations and a better network. Delta has been building on that in the last few years by also seeking to have the best hard Y and J product (e.g. not going 10x on the 777, buying A220s, buying A350s not 787s, new Delta suites, screens and power at all seats) while also seeking to have soft product that is a step ahead.

Smisik sought to follow Delta in cutting the FFP, but he also cut the product quality and ran really horrible operations and IRROPS recovery. That is the model that Parker has copied.

When Oscar took over in late 2015 he started a process of both improving product quality AND improving operations. While UA's IRROPS recovery still substantially lags that of DL, and its operations are slightly worse, operationally it is a much better airline than it was when Oscar took over. OTOH, when Scott Kirby took over UA, he went back to cutting product, and also rolled out some ultra uncomfortable product like 10x on the 777. With a fleet of more and more 737s vs. the more comfortable A320s, no in seat IFE on narrow bodies, and a fleet with tight/ultra-tight Y on the 777/787 fleets, UA is rapidly becoming the hard product laggard.

So when looking at results, what I think you are beginning to see, is that what Delta is getting over UA is a "better product, and service, and the resulting better NPS" premium, and what UA is currently getting over AAL is the "much better and more consistent operations" premium. The 9.7% operating margin (Delta) vs. 5.2% (UA) reflects better product/service, and the 5.2% margin (UA) vs 3.5% (AA) reflects better operations.

As AALs operations continue to deteriorate, and UA and DL roll out more PE product (the one area where AAL has lead) I would expect to see AAL fall further behind both carriers, which is IMHO what the street is seeing in the current stock price..
Very romantic with lots of acronyms and data, but the underlying facts are that all airlines have systemic cost problems, and they are all trying to digest both acquisitions and sprawling operational diversity. I'm not defending AA here, but rather, trying to argue that in the context of these massive companies that never existed before, no one has a golden playbook. And certainly, a company's stock price is a barometer of exactly ZERO in most cases, especially airlines.

There is a somewhat ridiculous fetish for Delta here on Flyertalk which I don't understand. Of the major legacy carriers (I hate that term and am a ridiculous hypocrite for using it ), Delta is the farthest along in digesting its acquisition of Northwest, which had its own set of problems from its own acquisitions, outdated operations and equipment, and bankruptcy issues. I was a NWA flyer for years, and while the people who worked there were lovely with midwestern sensibilities, it was an incredibly messy airline, shabby most days. Other than a couple of hubs and some Asia routes, the merger looked initially as if it was going into the toilet. Now, 11 years on, they have chipped away at all sorts of problems, and created on the surface at least, the appearance of a single airline. But they have old planes, and eventually, costs will rise substantially as they finance new planes, which will put pressure on margins. Their long term debt is roughly HALF of what AAs is, which no matter how you slice it, means they have an operational cost advantage. So they can simply try more things. But that too will come to an end. All this silly talk about "hard" product and "soft" product is odd. They have old planes, plain and simple. They punted on capital upgrades till it hurts. And it will hurt, but to their credit, they've held it together this long and invested in stuff that people seem to like, but that can't go on forever. Heck, I'm not even sure if they completed the integration of Republic Airlines (put here to see how old everyone is!)

AA, for all their warts, and they have plenty, is only a few years into a much larger acquisition/merger (call it what you like). And US air still hadn't completely digested all of AWA, and it was still messy. I used US air extensively for several years post merger for east cost short hops and it was a bizarre experience as a frequent flyer, but I still got where I was going. I was EXPLT on AA during that time as well. But US air was a sloppy concoction of several airlines , and I knew that when they went on to ingest AA, it would only get more borked, before it started to get better.

And making any kind of claim about how UA has "improved" is ludicrous too. Its fantasy at best. UA is the reigning king of decontenting/devaluaing just about everything. Have about a million miles on them too, and am too close to EWR to avoid them (which I did for years), and have all but given up on them in general as a real airline to have loyalty to (I gave up airline loyalty in general, but thats another discussion). My favorite stories always revolve around the times I was going to visit UA (I was a vendor to them, and all the others for that matter for years), and each time I was going to visit, my flights, on UA, were cancelled and I was stranded. Not making this up. And UA is about 6 years into their digestion of their dumb/somewhat less dumb merger/rout of CO, which was a great airline until it wasn't. They've made tons of mistakes and continue to do so. No one is in charge at UA. It is rudderless and going through the motions with little interest in doing anything other than showing up to work and going home at the end of the day.

Short of it is, Delta is farthest along at digestion post merger, as well as has either brilliantly or foolishly, put off capital expenditures it desperately needs. They seem to have had less media worthy cockups lately, but they certainly aren't devoid of lousy service, aircraft, complaints, and crazy people. AA is the least farthest along in its digestion of its merger, and is still working through basic issues I agree. But there has never been as large an airline company as AA, and with that stupid ambition (size), comes operational challenges that even the most ego-maniacal executive simply can't comprehend on a day to day basis. Again, not defending AA nor Parker here, but to his credit at least, he was the architect of this goofy merger, so I suspect he gets some more leeway to make it work. And like him or not, he's a through and through airline dude. And don't get me started on UA. They are lost, and have no personality at the moment, and most of their FFs really don't know what to make of it.... I certainly don't.

FWIW, and you can laugh at me (I laugh at myself for goodness sake), I now simply buy the cheapest tickets I can find. Norwegian Premium for Europe, Ryanair/Wizz/Easyjet/whatever inside Europe. Jetblue for domestic, and if I need, AA or UA for some oddball place I can't get to. We've depleted 4 million miles on AA, and am down to almost nothing there. Still have about a quarter million left on UA and am using that for short domestic hops as international now costs MORE than buying full freight on many airlines, even for J.

That was cathartic
wingnuthead is offline