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farthest along in digesting its acquisition of Northwest, which had its own set of problems from its own acquisitions, outdated operations and equipment, and bankruptcy issues.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