cmd320

Until you realize you'll be flying on AA.

Duke787

This is going to be a blood bath for AA in my opinion. LAX - SEA - BLR maybe saves you 1000 miles on a route that at a minimum is 9000+ so it's not a big savings and SEA - BLR straight up is only 900 miles shorter than SEA - NRT - BLR and 1100 miles shorter than SEA - DXB - BLR

Out of LAX you can get there with SQ, JL (starting end of March), EK, KLM, AF, EY, QR, LH, UA/LH, BA, AA/BA, CX.

So all of those airlines (especially EK) will just hammer AA with cheap fares in Y (same model EK has used to dominate the India market everywhere else) so sure AA can fill the plane with those fares (and corporate contracts) but they'll lose tons of money on the route.

So AA is basically counting on the O&D in J for SEA - BLR to sustain that route (what incentive does an LAX traveler who already has to connect have to fly on AA J for the longhaul instead of the superior international carriers available ex-LAX many of which offer lie-flats the whole way).

HDQDD

All of those cities already have one stop service to BLR. A connection via SEA isn't going to corner the West Coast-BLR market. Esp when the long haul is on AA.

HDQDD

True, and this is where I see an opportunity for DL (or AA) at SJC. The bay area can support both a hub as well as a nearly focus city/gateway, I'm not sure SEA can. The AA/AS alliance + DL will be an interesting battle to watch.

SJC ORD LDR

If SEA-BLR has any hint of success, I would think UA would start SFO-BLR and that would kill that. This move does nothing to weaken UA's strength in TPAC.

SJC ORD LDR

AA really only flies to their hubs from SFO. It's not a huge deal. Plus, by 2021, AA will be two concourses down from AS making connections slightly trickier. If I lived in SFO, this would not move me away from UA.

Beltway2A

I'm in agreement with you, it's funny to watch people who clearly know nothing about the route trying to speculate as to why they think it would be a failure. The current options for West Coast - BLR have usually ended with an unpleasant second leg for hub-BLR. Recognizing the need for more capacity and a nicer product on this route, a number of companies have upgauged their equipment recently. EY went from an A321 to a 787, SQ added a mainline (previously just MI) A350. KA unfortunately still flies their regional A330.

The West Coast professionals (family, friends and colleagues) I know that regularly visit BLR are looking forward to the flight launching. As long as the pricing is competitive, I expect it to be a success.

ab2013

DL needs to decide what’s most important to them. IMHO they’ve picked too many battles to fight, and I think that stems from overconfidence. BOS will be another problem for DL, because AA has also decided to grow there and there’s probably still loyalty left in the market for AA. BOS probably at the end of the day will be a tougher battle for DL if it becomes a 3 way battle and, last I checked, BOS is still a smaller station than SEA is for DL.

Based on what I understand, AS has historically avoided joining alliances (I think this is what AA has always wanted) but they must have decided that DL poses such a substantial threat to them that they’re changing strategy here and pursuing OW.

SJC ORD LDR

I think DL has the ability to absorb losses more than AA on these newly competitive routes, which means if it comes down to a urination match between AA and DL, DL has an advantage.

ab2013

As with any business, DL won’t sustain losses if it no longer makes sense. There must be some very intense discussions going on in their planning department in Atlanta.

A318neo

Not to worry. AA may act as a AS proxy for selected long haul routes that cannot be served by 737's from SEA.

DMPHL

​​​​In terms of distance to cover, connecting from almost any of those cities on the West Coast through SEA is either the same or significantly shorter than the one-stop options, which range from about 700 mi longer to almost 2000mi longer.

I also don't think, for most business travelers, or for corporate contracts, they will care if the long haul is on AA. If it gets them there quickly, gives them ample connection options and convenience, and they can rest on the plane, and at a good rate, then that's what they'll go with. Apple gives hundreds of millions every year to UA for a quite crappy business class soft product overall, and an absolutely inferior hard product if not on a Polaris-configured plane. The opinions obsessive FT types like us have about the relative merits and demerits of US-based airlines' business class products have approximately no bearing on what companies will choose to get from A to B.

UA might if they think it's worth it. But SFO-BLR is 700mi longer as a straight-shot. When it comes to headwinds, payload restrictions, etc., it might not be worth it from SFO. If you read what Vasu Raja said, he said that SEA seems viable since it's a place where they could do it at a profitable payload and with adequate feed from AS. LAX does not offer that, and probably has higher costs than SEA.

I get the reflective defensiveness of DL loyalists with a move like this (just as I get the reflective defensiveness of AA loyalists with the LATAM swap), but AA for all its faults isn't completely stupid, and they wouldn't launch a route like this if they didn't think it had a reasonable chance of success given geography, AS feed, and access to corporate contracts either on its own or through Alaska's strong FF and corporate base on the west coast.

HDQDD

I don't know if it's from overconfidence, or just a lack of solid places to add another gateway/hub/focus city. On the flip side, AA didn't really have any expansion outside it's hubs for many years. Now they seem to be acting more like DL and trying to grab up some P2P traffic in key markets.

Dawgfan6291

Unlikely. London isn't really a "new" route, its just adding capacity to the BA/AA joint venture. BLR is probably getting nothing but laughter.

Pretty unlikely American jumps into China for SEA any time soon, even then they will have to fight off United and Delta who would almost certainly request frequencies if American does.
Japan? its already blood bath and I don't see what American adds that JAL doesn't.
South Korea? lol okay.

So other than that its pretty much more off the wall crap like BLR and I just don't see Delta losing sleep over that, without a drastic change in international philosophy.
like what?

Other than maybe looking into bringing Delta metal back on LHR-SEA, I imagine most of the reaction in Atlanta today was laughter. SEA-BLR? That is suppose to be the dagger to Delta's heart?

AA/AS were already close partners when Delta built the SEA hub and AS already had partnerships with oneworld airlines flying to SEA. IMHO if this hurts anyone its EK.

Yellowjj

The only thing I see here is AS is more concerned about DL than they try to appear. They were fine being friends with benefits for years, now out of the blue they want the ring AA offered to them many moons ago.