Ha, last night's 7:30? Same experience - I booked months ago with a fully empty F cabin, and even a week ago it was barely half full. I wonder if there was a large group of unassigned seats in F? Upgrade list was 12 or so deep, and I was third on the list.

My guess is they'll sell everyone of the F seats on that flight.

I've flown the JFK To EGE flight, which benefits from international connections and is on a 757. The LGA to EGE will definitely siphon off more domestic travel. I will consider it

How do you like that Delta GM status? Not sure if I can swing the MQM this year, but I should be easily able to hit GM status on Delta next year assuming I upgrade my Delta AMEX to the Platinum or Reserve

I'm liking it! Besides C+ upgrades all the time, I am upgraded to FC more than I was expecting. I'm also thanked for my loyalty much more as a GM than as an AA EXP.

I fly several times a year between JFK and ZRH. Now that they have removed the NSs and require a connection in PHL or LHR, especially since my most recent trip JFK-LHR-ZRH and ZRH-PHL-JFK required long connections in LHR and PHL with delays on JFK-LHR, I emailed AA CR noting these issues. I also noted that other airlines, DL in particular, run NSs between JFK and ZRH, which would equate to lost revenue when I fly DL (instead of AA).
I just received a response, some of which was probably "boilerplate", but the main gist was that they lose revenue on that route--how come DL is (presumably) making a profit.:confused:
[The ZRH-PHL flt is scheduled to arrive at about 3 pm and the PHL-JFK on a "small" RJ requires a 3+ hour connection--a big annoyance, even more so if the PHL-JFK were cancelled since the next flt is the NEXT day.:td:]

AA management has been accused of not always making the best decisions, but I'm pretty sure that they knew when they left JFK-ZRH that DL and LX fly the route and that AA would lose a large fraction of their business and revenue on that route to those two when they abandoned the nonstop.

Did they say they lose revenue or they lose money? Because if they lose revenue (ie their revenue on the route is negative), that's truly impressive. However, I can certainly believe that their costs exceed their revenue. It's not difficult to imagine DL and/or LX making a profit when AA doesn't on a particular route. For example, DL can offer a good many more connections at the JFK end, in part because they don't have a hub 120 miles away that can probably serve every connection that would be possible over JFK just as efficiently (from AA's point of view; I recognize that a small number of passengers [most of whom are probably on FlyerTalk] might prefer JFK over PHL as a connecting airport, but I would bet the number of passengers who will choose a flight based on that difference is pretty small. In fact, I'd bet there's a larger number of people who will avoid JFK and its chronic delays than who will avoid PHL and it's slightly-less-chronic delays).

DL also could easily have a different mix of corporate contracts, frequent flyers, operational costs, etc at both the NYC and ZRH end. (It really could be different in a way that favors this route rather than larger overall.)

And DL could be losing just as much money as AA but be more willing to stick it out for whatever reason. The revenue picture is likely to improve for DL and LX with AA gone, just as it would have improved for AA and LX if DL had left.

There are just all sorts of ways that DL and LX could be doing better on this particular route than AA even without AA management doing a poor job. At the end of the day, AA just isn't as strong in NYC as DL. This all, of course, has been hashed out at great length in this thread.

Their main emphasis was on the word "profitable".
On a side note, their email was TIMESTAMPED on Sunday, 7/22/18 at 10:20 PM (EDT)...AA CR must work interesting hours.:)

AA is saying that the transcon business is stronger "in LA more than the East Coast markets" and that there isn't demand for widebodies in "Kennedy-Seattle" according to Vasu Raja, via Gary Leff:

https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea...centers-on-la/

Seems like a recipe for further de-emphasizing JFK in general, further cuts to JFK-SFO and no lie-flat expansion out of JFK (or BOS or PHL for that matter).

I wouldn't be so sure about that.



It means your email was responded to by an absolute nobody.

If they are going to focus on ex-LAX transcons, one can always hope for LAX-BOS...especially since UA has recently loaded 3x 752 with flat beds on that route starting mid-fall.

AA lost a major corporate (maybe more?) contract to DL on this route because it's employees were sick of flying the ancient and often delayed/MX 763 on AA. That's one of the main reasons they left the market.

I was at JFK a couple of days ago and got a real chuckle. I don't know if it was an AA employee van or some other AA van, but it was all branded on the outside and said something like from NYC you can go anywhere in the world. I'm forgetting the actual wording but that was the gist......I guess they must mean if you want to not fly on AA proper.