I posted this awhile back, but can't find it now. Unless it's changed recently, the FL = the same space as the old US Envoy Lounge. One side of the A-West facility will be the FL and the other side, the regular AC, just as in the Envoy Lounge days. Both the new FL and new AMEX Centurion Lounge, above the BA Lounge, will have showers for the great unwashed.

Since this thread is about NYC changes, you ought to post your helpful PHL admirals club / FL changes in the thread about club changes, rather than this one.

Suggest reading the entire Reply, including the Reference ?, before taking on the pseudo role of the Forum Police. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

​​​​​​​oh I've read the entire reply and reference question, and said the info was helpful. BUT there is a whole thread that would be well served to hold changes to the PHL club, and it's not this one about New York. I even provided the list of other possible likely cities for the new LHR flight, so how many eye rolls should I respond to you with? No need to get an attitude dude. If there is significant PHL club changes to the point of blueprints and design documents it's ashame they're buried in a tangential conversation here and not in the place where people who actually care about that can see it with other PHL club news.

Build up of PHL facilities in order to accommodate feed formerly routed through JFK seems more than tangentially related. If anything, build up at PHL suggests the possibility of cuts to JFK. Not exactly off topic.

Does anyone have more floor plans for clubs NOT at NYC airports? Perhaps we can start a mini discussion about traffic at LGA in this thread. Or with the pull back at JFK how come there's not going to be a flagship lounge at CLT? Any CLT floor plans available? Let's make this thread the Omni of AA, yes?

/Sarcasm off

Fine, do whatever you want, I'd mostly like to know the new city getting LHR service we are still waiting to hear...that seems like eons ago, brought up by JonNYC but it's getting buried by all the noise

Bringing back a quote JonNYC said well up thread in regards to JFK: "the party's over..."

From my point of view, A broader pull up from JFK would be tough to defend. AA has all of the tools necessary to succeed against DL, considering that their niche--as we know--is O&D, premium heavy markets, and US-EU travel.

Compared to DL, AA has:

- The BA joint venture: with more seats, more options, more corporate contracts, and--crucially--one hell of a connecting network at LHR.

- The NYLON market: see above... DL may have bought 49% of VS to compete, but DL/VS offer no real connecting hub (outside of the lousy SkyTeam hub at T4, and DL goes out of its way to make their SkyTeam partners seem like they're not partners at all.)

- JFK-LAX/SFO: Product is far superior to LAX and SFO, and LAX frequencies are far superior. SFO frequencies are competitive.

- A better terminal: Agree that T8 can use better shops and restaurants, but in terms of layout and logistics, the place is a dream compared to T4. T8 over T4 can mean 30 minutes or more spent not in an airport.

- A better international product, especially in J or F. DL flies mostly 767s, and while they may have AVOD unlike the AA birds, the screens are smaller and they can hold less content than AA's tablets. AA's 777s are far superior to anything in DL's fleet.

- A better alliance and better JVs: folks complain--rightly so--that the difference between AAdvantage and the lambasted SkyMiles is ever shrinking, but having access to first class lounges (and first class redemptions) matters.

I could go on, but as a (formally) NYC-based premium-heavy, international-heavy, corporate flyer, I think pulling out of JFK would be a huge mistake. Instead I'd invest in a refreshed T8 and some very strong, well placed marketing campaigns... I'd also get the 788s and 789s to NY for the thin routes. The 767s can live out their lives at PHL where the audience is either truly captive or connecting...

The UA equation also warrants consideration, but it's already been proven not to matter. UA (as CO) has had their fortress hub at EWR long before:

- B6 got their start
- AA opened the new T8, or, most importantly
- DL built up their presense

Don't mean to rekindle an EWR debate... just suggesting it's already been decided.

I didn't get the impression that AA was going to cut back on JFK-LHR or JFK-LAX/SFO.

I never suggested they were. I was responding to the broader argument regarding AA's strategy and direction in NY in relation to their other hubs... that a pull back is a mistake and that they have the tools to compete against DL.

If executed properly, AA should be able to build share in JFK. If AA can't run an O&D and premium-market connecting hub at JFK along with a general connecting hub at PHL, then I would find a way to build and preference JFK over PHL, just as we see UA preferencing EWR over IAD.

I generally agree with this. AA is no longer competitive all the recreational routes, but it's still got a very competitive corporate base.

DL has tried very hard, put a lot of effort into it, but it just has many inherent disadvantages like weakness of skyteam in Uk, which forced it to invest into VS just to get some slots into LHR. OneWorld doesn't have as many members, but has more blue chip members that you'd want to fly on. And to important financial markets in other continents, OW really has ST crushed. These are advantages that DL just can't overcome. And AA has hubs to many major corporate O&D destinations out of NYC in ORD/BOS/DCA/LAX/MIA. DL tries to be the go to carrier for both corporate and leisure out of NYC and all it got is the worst margin of the major carriers in NYC.

For example, DL's efforts in asia are basically KE and MU, which are just not attractive partnerships compared to what CX and JL offer to the region. And product wise to Europe, 777s are pretty good compared to what DL offers.

A couple of things I disagree on:
A321T isn't a superior product unless you are referring to F and even that is probably more equal to mint suites. And in frequency, it's 13 to 11 against b6, which isn't fare superior.

While T4 is not that great. T8 really isn't either. The long distance to Concourse C is quite annoying.

Fair points -- especially on the strength of OW vs ST. Completely agree.

Another point: compared to AA's second market cutbacks, you could argue DL had a much more serious cutback from JFK earlier this year: NRT. Today, there is no way for a DL or SkyTeam flyer to get from NYC to Japan without connecting.

On the A321T -- I haven't flown Mint but I would argue that AA and JetBlue cater to different markets. The 321T was configured for and marketed to Hollywood clientele and what I'll call, for lack of a better term, top tier corporate contracts (those that spend, in volume, the most with AA -- typically large consulting and IT firms.) JetBlue's 321s may have a nice cabin up front, but their configuration is still much more coach heavy, and B6 is still very much an airline that caters and markets to leisure flyers.

Compared to DL -- AA wins hands-down. DL flies a mix of 757s and 767s (with one daily A330 sometimes on the schedule.) These aircraft are also coach heavy compared to AA... The 757s have the same BE Diamond seats as AA has in J, but tapered an inch or two width-wise to fit the smaller 757 diameter. There are also fewer of them up front (16 on DL vs 20 on AA.) The 767s have 1-2-1 seating, but with an aging product that, despite the all-aisle access, has a number of drawbacks compared to the Diamond and is wholly inferior to AA's Zodiac Cirrus seats in F. (DL's 767 product has the same bones as JetBlue's Mint, but I assume Mint has much nicer finishes and a far better IFE system.)

Only the once-daily, seasonal A330 offers a competing product with essentially the same seat as AA's F seat, but again angled and tapered in a way to fit a narrower format and a higher density. (NB: I mean angled as in terms of the angle away from fuselage center-line, not in terms of the bed.)

DL/KL/AF has a better connecting network in Europe at AMS/CDG than AA/BA at LHR.

On the A321Ts, F is ahead of anything else, but J is nothing special. JFK-LAX has a ton of flights per day, but it's hard to say JFK-SFO is competitive. The have just over half of the JFK-SFO flights as DL.

This one is really debatable and depends on where you are flying. For South America and Oceania, AA has an advantage. ST and OW are both strong in Europe. However, OW has no members in Africa and is extremely weak in Asia. It looks like China Southern may come to OW or at least have an extensive partnership with AA in the future. However, OW would still be way behind ST in Asia even if they stole China Southern.

Pretty much agree with these points.

I also think pulling out of NYC would be a mistake, and I do not think they would ever entirely pull themselves out. However, I do think AA has demonstrated (and will continue to demonstrate) that JFK will be almost entirely O&D and any route must have sizable premium demand or exist on a seasonal basis so NYC-based flyers will fly AA when they go on vacation. They have a fortress hub at PHL and seem to prefer connecting passengers there, so there is no need to do the same up I-95.

It appears that AA is focusing on their core strengths at JFK: LHR, certain important markets in Europe and South America, and flights to the west coast. I do not think they can be everything to everyone at JFK. Mainly because of their lack of access to additional viable time slots. B6 would still have a domestic advantage there. And DL a TATL one.

Interesting that LGA is often left out of these discussions. Half of my AA flying is out of LGA (generally terminal C). I was happy that AA brought back the ATL flights after cancelling them post merger - I hope routes like that stay.

A few observations as a NY-based, premium-heavy, domestic + international flyer:

- I fly both AA's A321T and B6's Mint product fairly regularly (roughly monthly) and split between the two. My preferences are basically AA F > > > B6 Mint > AA J -- the Mint/AA J product is fairly comparable (even with the Mint "suite", which I find awkward). I've found the AA food service roughly comparable to Mint, slightly worse in drinks. B6's AVOD is solidly worse than AA's (although occasionally live TV is a reason to prefer B6), and B6's internet is slightly better than AA. Lack of lounges is a problem for B6, although I try to minimize my time at the airport period. I split my travel about 60/40 between AA and B6, mostly on JFK/SFO (which neither have tons of flights on, but are CONSISTENTLY vs. United who has a crazy assortment of equipment, or DL who just seems to half-... that route).

- I find the AA/BA mix on NYLON to be great from a "quantity of options" perspective, however BA isn't a great partner (anymore). Their aircraft are in poor condition on that route (albeit I still love the 747 upper deck) with a dated business class and no wifi (really? in 2017?!?). Food and alcohol quality has fallen off, JFK T7 is a ....-show of a terminal in many ways, and BA has made their connecting flights within Europe miserable to fly (Club Europe feels like "old BA" economy, and their new economy feels worse than Ryanair). I try to stick to the AA 77W as much as possible -- best hard product, solid wifi, great AVOD, and reasonably good food / alcohol in both J and F. Plus, you have a solid lounge on both the JFK (Flagship) and LHR end (CX) now.

- Beyond London, I hate AA for int'l service. There are very few options from JFK and many are served by dismal 757 and 767 aircraft, neither of which I'll take if i can possibly avoid. There's no Asia service from JFK and not much S. America. I tend to fly other carriers non-stops -- preferring but not exclusively OneWorld. I actually like the IB A330s quite a bit (in spite of mediocre wifi), and AY isn't too bad either. AA isn't really a choice to most int'l destinations out of JFK.

- Beyond JFK/LAX domestically: B6 Mint pretty much crushes everybody else on every route they fly it on -- SEA, LAS, SAN. That aside, all domestic premium cabins are fairly equally unimpressive. I'll avoid CRJ200s and E145s as much as possible but aside from that, all the A320 and 737s pretty much smell the same in domestic premium: I optimize for a non-stop as much as possible, which often takes me off AA (and sometimes to B6's Core) just to get where I'm going. I hate connecting in DFW/IAH/IAD/ATL/MIA -- SLC/PHX/CLT/DEN are pretty solid for me.