Microwave

The existing and concurrent TPA and RDU speculation threads have been merged into one. Feel free to speculate away in this new amalgamated thread about TPA, RDU, LIT or any other airport that you may think would make an excellent AA focus city or hub.

~Moderator

IADCAflyer

I'm going to move away from CLT/RDU and get back to pie-in-the-sky ideas.

My speculation is that AA makes a run at returning to SJC. Huge wealth base; only one major international airport at present time; lots and lots of corporate travel; lots of hatred towards United.

cmd320

Honestly, if their onboard F product was what once was pre-merger, I would say they should just take a run directly at United at SFO. Not a lot of people loving UA these days.

Speedracer2

I can see some increase in destinations and frequency at SJC, but a focus city let alone a hub? No way.

I think they will work hard at optimizing flights to and from the existing hubs and focus cities and then probably look at airport where they have significant presence (e.g. BOS) before even thinking about places like SJC.

middlekingdom

I agree. AA/US has an opportunity to consolidate with so many hubs (CLT, MIA, DCA, PHL, JFK) on the east coast, LAX/PHX on the west coast. I would assume that the first step after the reservation systems are combined is to do route optimization and eliminate an hub or two. All said about Doug Parker, he is a bean counter and he knows how to run a lean and mean shop. HP, then US were very lean compared to the other airlines. I doubt if he will invest more in a new focal city before he wrings out cost out of the existing system. My 1 -c-

dmbtr3

I don't buy the hub consolidation argument. Planes are full today. Hubs are busy. You can't simply eliminate one without presenting a logistical nightmare. Route optimization - sure. The hubs will evolve, but I don't see one going away anytime soon. I also don't see a new one being created unless capacity in the total system grows too large (i.e. they win market share) or they decide to get away from the cornerstone strategy.

morrisunc

Agree on this - I think they will make their $$ by right sizing and reallocating fleet types around the hubs.....I used to think PHX would be a gonner, but am thinking I was not wrong about that. Doug has said publically that CLT is performing even better not that it's been added to the AA system.

As for focus cities......only one I can think of would be Boston. They had a shot at RDU, but with Delta and Southwest both basically having focus cities I doubt we will see any expansion there. I think the LHR flight is safe, but I wouldn't be surprised to see AA let the LAX flight go.

middlekingdom

That is a valid argument that hubs are busy, flights are full and elimination of hub may create a nightmare. However, there is room for optimization which could lead to some hubs having less importance. For example, my previous PHX-RDU trip choice was through CLT. Now I am being routed though ORD (PHX-ORD-RDU). There are so many more choices now that management can deal with.

May CLT and the east coast hubs are safe due to congestion in current hubs. Again the hub I am most concerned about is PHX and then PHL. They could decide LAX (or even SJC) should be their major hub. Or they could decide that it makes sense to keep PHX so that they avoid the congestion in LAX.

In other words, my hypothesis is that they will wait for the reservation systems to merge and get single operating certificate before they decide if any hub needs to be expanded, contracted or even eliminated. Again I think that the argument that current traffic patterns would suggest they not eliminate a hub makes sense, but I think there is scope for rationalization which could affect importance of hubs.

I think that only after that will they look at new focal cities. So I do not think we will know their thinking for at least an year.

eponymous_coward

Are you sure they would pick SJC over the vast opportunities for a midcon LIT hub?

Much of which is quite adequately served from SFO.

The only metro area in the USA with two major international airports is NYC, which is considerably larger than the Bay Area.

The problem with AA starting P2P SJC international service is they have zip in the way of feed at SJC. (No, AS service doesn't count, look at their non-hub destinations out of SJC, it's all vacation places like SJD and OGG, or places like BOI or SLC that AA could serve better out of existing hubs like LAX/ORD/DFW.)

Any realistic plan for SJC means a huge buildup of domestic similar to DL at SEA, where you fly to top destinations and make yourself a comprehensive choice for the SJC-based passenger. That takes you straight into WN's wheelhouse: LAS, DEN, SLC, SAN, SNA. It probably means you need to stomp on the AS relationship by starting up SEA/PDX-SJC, just like how DL decided "the hell with partners, we want money".

Does AA really need a new West Coast hub when LAX is not exactly maxed out in terms of the places you can go TPAC from there, compared to UA at SFO or DL at SEA?

Which can survive just fine connecting to LAX/PHX/DFW/ORD.

VX would like to remind you that they actually exist as an airline based in the Bay Area that's not UA.

PHX is fine as a Mountain West connecting hub ala SLC for DL, DEN for UA. The geographic positioning is not as good, but it attracts natural O/D just by the virtue of population in a relatively isolated area (top 15 metro area in population, 250 miles from LAS, 400 miles from SoCal). It gives them the ability to serve some second-tier CA airports (OAK, BUR, LGB) as well as some natural routing for N/S Mexico flights in the Western US.

I would expect some rationalization of service for sure, but not a complete drawdown. If AA can't make money serving a hub for a metro area of 4+ million people, they're in a world of hurt.

FWAAA

I think new AA needs to develop Spokane, WA as a competitive hub to DL's new SEA hub. In addition, SJC should be re-started as an alternative to SFO. RNO makes a good hub alternative to DEN/SLC. BNA, PIT and STL all have lots of vacant space for AA to expand into small hubs at those airports. CMH used to be a hub for America West, so perhaps HPdbaAA should expand there as well.

Can never have too many hubs! @:-)

eponymous_coward

What about LIT?

FWAAA

At just 300 miles from STL, BNA and DFW, LIT would be duplicative. Not every city can be a hub - some have to be spokes!

Global321

My 2 cents...

Spokane is a very small MSA. If AA wants to make a mark, go after Seattle directly. Well over 3 million in the MSA, plus Vancouver and Portland are a direct train ride away ~ 3 hours or so each way.

SJC could be interesting due to SFO's weather issues.

I don't seen RNO, BNA, or CMH as hubs or even focus cities. Too small.

AA abandoned STL and US abandoned PIT. Nothing has changed (that I am aware of) to make it worth re-investing in those markets.

Fanjet

AA will never turn a station which WN has over 50% of the traffic into a focus city or hub. The only logical candidate for a somewhat limited expansion is BOS. Where AA/US have the most departures and almost the most passsenger traffic. The airline will build off of a position of strength; and not take chances where the odds are against them.

ubernostrum

Honestly, if we're doing fantasy time, I'd want to see a midwest hub that isn't ORD. Because I don't know anyone who actually says "hooray, I get to connect at ORD".

Seems to've been a decent strategy for DL, with their MSP operation. Pick a good-sized top-20 or top-25 metro area -- IND would throw money at you, or maybe re-open STL or try to influence the rebuilding of MCI, etc. -- and just move in.