TheBOSman

As the yen devalues, other than fuel costs (which are priced in USD across most of the world to the best of my knowledge), the costs for JL and NH devalue as well, as most of their costs are in yen. For US carriers, they are selling in yen but paying much more of their costs in dollars, so their costs aren't devaluing at a similar rate even though revenues are. DL and UA have both blamed some of their shortfalls in revenue on the declining yen as both have more Japan service than AA does.

Random Flyer

I accept what you say but won't the lower Japanese costs actually be offset by increased fuel bills, due to USD pricing? I don't think you can brush this aside, particularly for long routes like this. And the Yen may be at a four year low but it is not historically low. I certainly recall getting more Yen for my Dollar when I was staying in Tokyo about 12 years ago!

TheBOSman

The dollar is historically low over the past few years, relatively . And also, perhaps the US carriers carry more price-sensitive customers? I'm assuming, given the choice, that most of the ex-Japan customers would take JL or NH, particularly the ones paying for business/first class. I feel, at least for J/F, this might be the case ex-USA as well. The US carriers also serve some smaller points to/from NRT (this is mostly UA and DL here) that JL and NH don't serve (PDX, DEN, etc.). Those smaller markets are also likely more price sensitive and don't draw quite as high of a fare, compared to the larger NYC/LAX/SFO/etc. markets that are served by JL/NH and US carriers. NH serves SJC/SEA and JL serves BOS/SAN of course, but those are flown with the more fuel-efficient 787, as compared to the larger 777s/747s or older and less efficient 767s that DL/UA/AA deploy on these routes.

austin_res

UA is also cutting capacity to Japan - SEA-NRT and LAX-NRT will be flown on 787, in place of the 777.

FWAAA

I don't know (and frankly, don't care) whether the Japanese currency devaluation is actually impacting revenue. That Delta and United have pointed to it is good enough for me:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...ency-pain.html

Delta (if not UA) has also mentioned the yen in their press releases as excuses for lower-than-expected unit revenue growth.

Debates about whether Japanese people prefer AA/UA/DL or Japanese airlines are completely irrelevant; if the yen situation is impacting travel to/from Japan (as airlines are claiming), then AA shares that pain due to its immunized joint venture with JAL. And UA shares that pain due to its joint venture with NH. Regardless of whether Japanese people prefer American carriers or Japanese carriers. Delta doesn't have a joint venture partner but it's the largest carrier to/from Japan of any airline, and I'm certain that it carries large numbers of Japanese passengers (just like AA and UA do).

The facts clearly point to a revenue problem with travel to/from Japan right now, and if AA and JAL jointly believe that reducing frequency on ORD-NRT makes sense, I'm going to defer to them. This reduction isn't a unilateral decision by AA; AA and JAL jointly decide capacity to/from Asia on AA and JAL.

As I pointed out earlier, the sky may be falling, but I don't see this reduction from daily to 5x weekly as evidence that the sky is falling.

To those who insist that this temporary frequency reduction is an ominous precursor to cancellation of the route, I disagree. AA pilots will become very angry if AA cancels long-haul flying yet JAL does not. That alone will help keep AA metal flying.

AA_EXP09

And DEN-NRT

PaulInTheSky

An interesting re-scheduling of my flights from ORD-NRT to DFW-NRT put me to C on AA61. I thought the waitlisted upgrade would trigger a deduction of the eVIP from my account, but 10 days in, the eVIP is still there. Would you normally call AA to get it straightened out regrading the eVIP count, or I should let them fix the issue if they are supposed to take it off but they didn't?

FYI, eTicket number was already issued with the C on the AA61.