scnzzz

Lufthansa? New hub announcement at LHR?

I'm assuming you mean BA

That PHX flight has been around for some time and likely has enough premium traffic to justify a 744. BA aren't (entirely) dummies. Whether there is room for another TATL player remains a topic of debate.

But the existence of a 744 TATL does not make it the next big story. When PHX sees a daily EK 388, along with daily or double daily service by EY/QR, LH, AFKL, VS CA, CX, JL, and KE/OZ, then we can talk about it being a major international gateway

perseus11

I think we all know the value of the NY centric O&D, particularly on a routing like JFK-TLV. The ? is, why would a global airline add significant "connecting" traffic and the required aircraft to a tightly slot controlled, highly competitive and (most) expensive U.S. airport, when they can flow connections to an airport with significantly lower fees, reasonable international O&D and minimal competition? Maintaining the status quo at JFK, or increasing it within the limits of the airport beyond the comfort level of LHR, is likely not going to affect market share enough to compete favorably with DL and others. If AA had the option to significantly increase overall profitability, via JFK, why didn't they do it before the merger - they essentially had most of the existing slots, aircraft and OW JVs available then?

IMO, JFK isn't going to be the main focus of international growth for AA in the future. Parker's team is way too conservative and innovative to follow the herd.

relangford

To get back to the original discussion: it seems that CLT has very high jet fuel taxes. For States, counties, and cities, this is a great source of revenue - make the people who don't live there pay through the nose for the benefit of those who do live there (same as high hotel "taxes", convention "taxes", etc.). Not really fair, but lucrative to the locality. That being said, there needs to be give-and-take (taxing authorities are generally only used to the "take" part) if CLT wants AA to keep current flight levels (which I doubt) or even increase flights (even more unlikely), extending the tax limit from $2.5M to, say, $5M, might still keep AA passengers' money flowing into Charlotte while giving some reduced relief to AA. We often seem to forget that all corporations really pay no taxes at all - it is their customers who pay, one way or another.

cmd320

Assume you mean BA here.

DCdeacon

Speculation about the future of the CLT hub has been discussed ad nauseam in this forum - I'm pretty sure that every possible perspective has been expressed about 15 different times. It's hard to believe we're still discussing this.

With that said, I'll reiterate my perspective (that I've also expressed 15 different times here over the past two years!):

But back to the original topic - I read the original article about this in the Charlotte Observer when it first came out, and absolutely nothing in it would give anyone reason to believe that the continuation or cessation of the fuel tax subsidy has any bearing on the future of the airport as a hub.

FWAAA

My point about JFK-TLV (which you overlooked) is that it is a possible new flight that requires no new connecting flights at JFK, not "significant connecting traffic" as you posted.

You may be right. My post was to correct what I view as the wholly incorrect assertion that CLT and DFW are the only AA hubs with room to expand. There is substantial room at every hub except for PHL and LGA.

Uhh, seriously? The JFK terminal construction wasn't complete until 2007, and by then, fuel costs were skyrocketing and AA was finally showing some small profits following the post-September 11 airline depression. During the construction, which began in 1999, AA downsized its JFK operations substantially, both due to the airline economic depression and a shortage of space while the terminal was being built. The immunized joint ventures weren't approved until shortly before AA filed a Ch 11 petition in 2011 to jam more efficient contracts (and corresponding cost savings) down the pilots' and FAs' throats.

The slots were stockpiled as they became available (some obtained from B6 in 2009) in anticipation of eventual cost parity with UA and DL. If Parker had no plans to ever expand at JFK, wonder why he hasn't sold the stockpiled slots? JFK has a lower connecting ratio than even LAX.

Inernational flights from JFK require a few connecting passengers, instead of 3/4 connecting passengers, like PHL-TLV, where 75% of the passengers, on average, are connecting from elsewhere. At JFK, it's likely to be more like 75% local and 25% connecting.

You may be right - but that's irrelevant to my post - and that was to correct the notion (incorrect, in my opinion) that AA has no room at JFK and thus no ability to expand at JFK. That's nonsense. AA+US combined accounts for fewer than 70 mainline departures at JFK, on average. That's about 1/3 of the terminal's capacity. JFK slots, outside the prime late afternoon, early evening period, can be obtained. And as posted, AA has been sitting on (using for throw-away flights) a couple dozen prime-time for TATL departure slots.

As an aside, I predict that over the next several years, AA will begin more TATL, TPAC and S American flights from JFK than from PHL and CLT, combined.

SOBE ER DOC

Your experiences at CLT are a harbinger of things to come at the AA hubs. Under the flight banking model CLT goes from periods of absolute desolation to complete mayhem and back to desolation, all within a couple of hours.

As for the topic of fuel tax breaks, I think AA is playing their hand wisely. If they can get a better deal elsewhere, why not? As a number of folks have mentioned in the thread already, there are a number of reasons why CLT "could" see flight reductions if they do not play nice with AA.

drewp123

That's similar to saying "Net-debt worldwide equals zero.", it's interesting but glosses over important issues. Taxes aren't 100% passed onto customers, it depends on price elasticity.

CLTRob

Just read an article in the Charlotte Observer, dated 12/8/2014, between the Observer and DP. Combining that article with the latest article about the tax breaks, it appears that the CLT hub will remain as is, domestically, if the tax breaks are granted. The article of 12/8 states that the CLT hub is profitable and an import part of the merged airlines. It also mentions that approximately 50% of departures between AA and US are Express flight, but many of these flights will be upgrading to larger aircraft such as the E175. The only mention of a reduction in service is to international travel. My guess is that CLT will remain the same domestically with some tweeks (maybe less flights to the non-hub cities out west that can route through DFW and ORD), continue to fly 2 flights per day to LHR (oneworld hub), daily to FRA (over 200 German companies in the Charlotte area), and daily to MAD (oneworld hub). Even though many of the European cities are served from JFK, MIA and ORD, to me it makes sense for the new AA to continue seasonal service from CLT to DUB, CDG and FCO as these are large tourist destinations. JFK, MIA and PHL have a lot less connecting flights than CLT, and I for one wouldn't want to travel west to ORD to connect to an eight hour flight east to Europe. Of course, I think it will hing on the the tax breaks.

SFO777

UA said the same thing about CLE... before Smisek decided he wanted to close it claiming that it had lost money for decades.
I would take anything DP or any airline CEO says with a giant dose of skepticism.

CLTRob

Now that you mention it . . . I do remember reading the same about CLE and then it was de-hubbed. However, CLT is a much larger hub than CLE ever was, and an east coast hub has been something that AA has always needed to successfully compete.

We do have choices though. CLT to ATL is only a 37 minute flight to the worlds largest hub that offers many options, and many more international flights that are year-round, e.g., CDG, FCO, etc.

Cltfc

Why does it make more sense to connect CLT- Europe rather than Via, Mia, Phl, JFk or DFW and Ord? Other then you live in Charlotte.I think you better get used to flying to other hubs for a lot of the international flying for your one trip a year to Europe because that's the reality of what is going to happen. The second Clt-LHR flight looks like it has been made seasonal after October 2015 as it only operations sporadically. Eventually, all the Seasonal flights will be eliminated except maybe Mad. AA will be able deploy that fleet to year round destinations from MIA or another Hub, instead of summer CLT to Europe and winter CLT to Florida and the islands- which is low yield flying anyway. Once again I believe CLT will be drawn down to a 500 flight a day hub within 3 years.

Cltfc

Well I am sorry to tell you, AA really doesn't need CLT to compete now as: Phl, DCA Mia and DFW can cover almost all of the smaller SE markets. As costs spike at the new AA, look for rationalization of all the hubs. And with CLT's inability to produce revenue like the other AA Hubs it will be impacted significantly more than the others. And you are correct, you do have Choices of connecting to Atl, or other AA hubs to get to Europe. But remember CLT has very weak O&D traffic,so it wont be a problem for that traffic to transfer somewhere else.

lowfareair

^^

Just about every hub will have the 'status quo' for the time being, as AA committed to maintaining them that way for 3 years per their merger settlement with the government. Don't expect any drastic changes until January 2017, at the earliest.

acvitale

As for CLT and AA. I only bring up one item. Some of you are too young to remember this but, When US and Piedmont merged and CLT became what it is.. AA had RDU. And it was an AA hub (So was BNA) Both are gone as AA made due with NYC, MIA, DFW, and ORD.

PHX and CLT are both hubs that will likely be downgraded and if the fuel tax and increased wages make them unprofitable they will go away.

LAX, MIA, DFW are likely to continue to expand.

ORD is likely about right

As for fuel taxes... Delta is strong arming Georgia for the same and if you investigate the union further the same sleazy lobbyist that threatened the Ga senator if Ga fuel tax waivers are not renewed are likely tied to the effort to get AA/US taxes added in CLT. (Think of this as business to business competition using government. Something Pan Am and TWA did with Congress between the 1940s and the 1980s.)