Why new AC JFK/MIA no Flagship
Feb 9, 2006, 12:01 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 382
Why new AC JFK/MIA no Flagship
Hello peoples,
Why does the new Admirals Club in JFK and MIA have no First Class section or Flagship lounge? They would have more A,F,P traffic than places like Auckland or Brisbane where Qantas have NO F Class seats into or out of, yet has a dedicated F lounge.
Why do does they have under 450 seating when in Sydney the Qantas main Qantas Club (of three) has a 1000 seats and is still full??
I know AUS and USA are unrelated but MIA and JFK have much more traffic
Why does the new Admirals Club in JFK and MIA have no First Class section or Flagship lounge? They would have more A,F,P traffic than places like Auckland or Brisbane where Qantas have NO F Class seats into or out of, yet has a dedicated F lounge.
Why do does they have under 450 seating when in Sydney the Qantas main Qantas Club (of three) has a 1000 seats and is still full??
I know AUS and USA are unrelated but MIA and JFK have much more traffic
Feb 9, 2006, 1:07 am
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Dunno. AA's initial plans were to add a Flagship Lounge at JFK, and there's still one link on aa.com where it's promised:
http://www.aa.com/content/amrcorp/co...shistory.jhtml
Of course, this is old text that AA just hasn't gotten around to editing in the past three years or so. Or maybe, just maybe, AA will add a Flagship Lounge. AFAIK, the JFK terminal project will get a second Admirals Club (once the other half of the project opens), so maybe the FL will open at that time.
Currently, there are large terminal projects at New York JFK International, Los Angeles International and Miami International airports that will house new Admirals Clubs facilities, including a new Flagship Lounge at JFK.
Of course, this is old text that AA just hasn't gotten around to editing in the past three years or so. Or maybe, just maybe, AA will add a Flagship Lounge. AFAIK, the JFK terminal project will get a second Admirals Club (once the other half of the project opens), so maybe the FL will open at that time.
Feb 9, 2006, 8:48 am
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: NYC, USA
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, Lifetime Platinum, Marriott Titanium, HH Gold
Posts: 10,968
You never know. AA is still in the pre-construction phase on the new Terminal 8 at JFK (phase 2 of the whole project). They might well include a small F-class section to the new AC in the new Terminal 8 when it is built.
The real issue with the construction is that AA needs international arrivals gates and so cannot demolish the old terminal (at least the arrivals areas) until the new terminal is built (unless international arrivals will have to come in through a different terminal for a short period of time during the transition).
But the hope is 2007 or 2008 for phase 2 to be complete, and then we'll have our answer as to a FL at JFK. But the REAL issue is not the space or the time, but WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT? QF operates out of a different terminal at JFK, and most other airlines have abandoned Terminal 8, so who will pay for it? Clearly AA cannot support a FL on its own--look at DFW and MIA. The only reason why FLs continue to exist at LAX, ORD, and LHR is because other airlines pay AA an arm and a leg every time one of their premium pax goes in.
The real issue with the construction is that AA needs international arrivals gates and so cannot demolish the old terminal (at least the arrivals areas) until the new terminal is built (unless international arrivals will have to come in through a different terminal for a short period of time during the transition).
But the hope is 2007 or 2008 for phase 2 to be complete, and then we'll have our answer as to a FL at JFK. But the REAL issue is not the space or the time, but WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT? QF operates out of a different terminal at JFK, and most other airlines have abandoned Terminal 8, so who will pay for it? Clearly AA cannot support a FL on its own--look at DFW and MIA. The only reason why FLs continue to exist at LAX, ORD, and LHR is because other airlines pay AA an arm and a leg every time one of their premium pax goes in.
Feb 9, 2006, 10:02 am
#4
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Siesta Key
Programs: AA EXP-1.6MM, Hilton Diamond, ManU & Chicago Bears #1 Fan
Posts: 9,697
Originally Posted by ESpen36
You never know. AA is still in the pre-construction phase on the new Terminal 8 at JFK (phase 2 of the whole project). They might well include a small F-class section to the new AC in the new Terminal 8 when it is built.
The real issue with the construction is that AA needs international arrivals gates and so cannot demolish the old terminal (at least the arrivals areas) until the new terminal is built (unless international arrivals will have to come in through a different terminal for a short period of time during the transition).
But the hope is 2007 or 2008 for phase 2 to be complete, and then we'll have our answer as to a FL at JFK. But the REAL issue is not the space or the time, but WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT? QF operates out of a different terminal at JFK, and most other airlines have abandoned Terminal 8, so who will pay for it? Clearly AA cannot support a FL on its own--look at DFW and MIA. The only reason why FLs continue to exist at LAX, ORD, and LHR is because other airlines pay AA an arm and a leg every time one of their premium pax goes in.
The real issue with the construction is that AA needs international arrivals gates and so cannot demolish the old terminal (at least the arrivals areas) until the new terminal is built (unless international arrivals will have to come in through a different terminal for a short period of time during the transition).
But the hope is 2007 or 2008 for phase 2 to be complete, and then we'll have our answer as to a FL at JFK. But the REAL issue is not the space or the time, but WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT? QF operates out of a different terminal at JFK, and most other airlines have abandoned Terminal 8, so who will pay for it? Clearly AA cannot support a FL on its own--look at DFW and MIA. The only reason why FLs continue to exist at LAX, ORD, and LHR is because other airlines pay AA an arm and a leg every time one of their premium pax goes in.
Can you explain how JFK FL would differer from the ops at ORD?
ORD is in AA terminal, so I assume you mean connecting traffic, and if that's it, then JFK would get it too, wouldn't they?
Reporting from MIA AC. On the way home......
Feb 9, 2006, 11:02 am
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: NYC, USA
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, Lifetime Platinum, Marriott Titanium, HH Gold
Posts: 10,968
Originally Posted by andrzej
Can you explain how JFK FL would differer from the ops at ORD?
ORD is in AA terminal, so I assume you mean connecting traffic, and if that's it, then JFK would get it too, wouldn't they?
ORD is in AA terminal, so I assume you mean connecting traffic, and if that's it, then JFK would get it too, wouldn't they?
Aren't there some OW partners that operate out of Terminal 3?
Feb 9, 2006, 11:11 am
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by ESpen36
Aren't there some OW partners that operate out of Terminal 3?
Feb 9, 2006, 11:22 am
#7
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Given currently only AY flies out of T-9, AFAIK, I'm not so sure any other airline's bucks will be available to support a FL. With BOS FL closure, no FL included at DFW Terminal D, I'm not too sanguine about this idea.
Feb 9, 2006, 11:30 am
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,241
I don't get it -- if QF sees the value in paying cash to AA every time a QF F pax (or OW emerald) enters the LAX FL, then why can't AA see the value in paying infrastructure/operations every time an AA int'l F pax enters its lounge?
Feb 9, 2006, 11:44 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
While the LAX arrangement certainly benefits AA's frequent flyers, since without QF pax and money we'd likely have a less opulent F lounge, I'm not convinced that we'd have NO F lounge without QF. I'm also unconvinced that JFK will have NO F lounge without other participants to help pay.
At JFK, AA competes with BA and VS for premium LHR traffic (UA is down to about one daily JFK-LHR, so that's not as big a factor). An F lounge at JFK may very well payoff for AA on this basis alone. Add in all the other premium long-haul flights from JFK and an F lounge may very well be in the works.
Now, to complete the thought alluded to in the first paragraph: AA and UA compete on the JFK-LAX route, and perhaps an F lounge is necessary on both ends of that route regardless of QF's participation at LAX and perhaps regardless of participation by any other OW carrier at JFK.
There's an F lounge at ORD without a QF-type co-tennant. Why? Maybe the competition with UA for LHR and NRT traffic, combined soon with competition for PVG traffic. Add DEL, and maybe an F lounge is not out of the question even without a QF co-pay.
Similar situation at MIA. Plenty of F seats on long-haul AA flights. Fewer competitors at MIA compared to ORD or JFK. There used to be a FL there, and there just may very well be one there again. Even if QF isn't helping to pay.
DFW? Even less competition than at MIA. Three daily flights to Japan with F seats and one or two daily flights to LGW with F seats plus one to FRA. South America from DFW - No F seats. Flagship Lounge at DFW? I'll go out on a limb here and say "Never."
At JFK, AA competes with BA and VS for premium LHR traffic (UA is down to about one daily JFK-LHR, so that's not as big a factor). An F lounge at JFK may very well payoff for AA on this basis alone. Add in all the other premium long-haul flights from JFK and an F lounge may very well be in the works.
Now, to complete the thought alluded to in the first paragraph: AA and UA compete on the JFK-LAX route, and perhaps an F lounge is necessary on both ends of that route regardless of QF's participation at LAX and perhaps regardless of participation by any other OW carrier at JFK.
There's an F lounge at ORD without a QF-type co-tennant. Why? Maybe the competition with UA for LHR and NRT traffic, combined soon with competition for PVG traffic. Add DEL, and maybe an F lounge is not out of the question even without a QF co-pay.
Similar situation at MIA. Plenty of F seats on long-haul AA flights. Fewer competitors at MIA compared to ORD or JFK. There used to be a FL there, and there just may very well be one there again. Even if QF isn't helping to pay.
DFW? Even less competition than at MIA. Three daily flights to Japan with F seats and one or two daily flights to LGW with F seats plus one to FRA. South America from DFW - No F seats. Flagship Lounge at DFW? I'll go out on a limb here and say "Never."
Feb 9, 2006, 1:41 pm
#10
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA PLT
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Similar situation at MIA. Plenty of F seats on long-haul AA flights. Fewer competitors at MIA compared to ORD or JFK. There used to be a FL there, and there just may very well be one there again. Even if QF isn't helping to pay.
Feb 9, 2006, 2:43 pm
#11
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 542
Originally Posted by FWAAA
While the LAX arrangement certainly benefits AA's frequent flyers, since without QF pax and money we'd likely have a less opulent F lounge, I'm not convinced that we'd have NO F lounge without QF.
Feb 9, 2006, 7:07 pm
#12
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: JFK/LGA
Programs: AA EXP/5 MM, BA Blue Bayou, HH LT Diamond
Posts: 5,828
[donning hometown hat]
I will again make the point that JFK has the most Premium seats per day of any AA station. Period. The international 777 service to LHR (6), NRT, and GRU alone would support an FL. Add a dozen or more 762s to the west coast and I am willing to wager that JFK is AA's number one station for Premium class service, both in terms of $ and # of seats. To do a construction project the scale of T-8/9 and not include an FL would be criminal. Let's see if Arpey is a felon.
[graciously removing hometown hat]
I will again make the point that JFK has the most Premium seats per day of any AA station. Period. The international 777 service to LHR (6), NRT, and GRU alone would support an FL. Add a dozen or more 762s to the west coast and I am willing to wager that JFK is AA's number one station for Premium class service, both in terms of $ and # of seats. To do a construction project the scale of T-8/9 and not include an FL would be criminal. Let's see if Arpey is a felon.
[graciously removing hometown hat]
Feb 10, 2006, 12:10 am
#13
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Juan, PR, USA
Programs: AA PLT 1MM, Starwood Preferred, Hilton Gold VIP
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by pauleeepaul
[donning hometown hat]
I will again make the point that JFK has the most Premium seats per day of any AA station. Period. The international 777 service to LHR (6), NRT, and GRU alone would support an FL. Add a dozen or more 762s to the west coast and I am willing to wager that JFK is AA's number one station for Premium class service, both in terms of $ and # of seats. To do a construction project the scale of T-8/9 and not include an FL would be criminal. Let's see if Arpey is a felon.
[graciously removing hometown hat]
I will again make the point that JFK has the most Premium seats per day of any AA station. Period. The international 777 service to LHR (6), NRT, and GRU alone would support an FL. Add a dozen or more 762s to the west coast and I am willing to wager that JFK is AA's number one station for Premium class service, both in terms of $ and # of seats. To do a construction project the scale of T-8/9 and not include an FL would be criminal. Let's see if Arpey is a felon.
[graciously removing hometown hat]
Feb 10, 2006, 2:52 am
#14
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
How much of the terminal buildout at JFK endured AA budget cuts (if any)? Is that a reason why the JFK FL is not there today?
Feb 10, 2006, 6:58 am
#15
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Programs: AA EXP, Qantas Gold, HHonors Gold, A|Club Gold, Marriott Silver, ICHG Gold
Posts: 68
One reason for the difference in size may be the difference between AC and Qantas Club policies - Qantas Gold (equiv PLT) and Platinum (equiv EXP) members have complimentary Qantas Club membership (with automatic First access even for domestic flights for Platinums) - hence a much larger share of the economy class cabin will have access to the premium lounges.