New AA service ORD-EZE
 

See this AA Forum thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=678678

I bring this up here because I believe this new flight is of great significance to xONExs that include SA, thus merits at least a heads-up here with a link to the AA thread, but if the mod feels differently please lock, or delete it.

EZE is already well served with flights to DFW, MIA and JFK -- so adding ORD doesn't really mean much for the 6 segments in NA. It does help with SA to Europe/Asia routings somewhat, but most DONEx travelers would prefer to fly BA trans-Atlantic.

I beg to differ. The new service adds a new NA gateway to/from South America, increasing the ways in which the NA segments can be taken. If you have ever struggled to construct an efficient NA itin on the way to/from SA you will understand why having a new gateway is significant.

I guess I am missing the point, as from my perspective DFW and ORD are mostly identical for US domestic flights (minor differences, the most significant being DFW-ANC while ORD-ANC is no more, and JFK-DFW while only LGA-ORD is offered). Mostly ORD is less useful than DFW as an AA hub for US domestic (but nicer).

EZE-LAX would have been much more significant as a new route from a OWE standpoint (also from a feed standpoint, if AA ever got decent feed into LAX -- something they steadfastly refuse to do, for some strange reason (presumably spelled UA).

Oh, I agree that EZE-LAX would have been much better, but I'm happy with EZE-ORD. Lots of my OWE NA segments start or end in ORD and now I won't have to waste a segment to get to DFW/JFK/MIA to connect to/from SA. Additionally, IB goes to ORD, but not to DFW, so that is also a plus for me. On top of that, AA return fares from SA to Europe via NA benefit a lot from having additional gateways in NA available for mixed routings (sometimes routing both ways via the same gateway incurs a penalty).

Anyhow, I welcome the new route yet fully understand it's not a biggie for some.

Having an extra gateway is also very handy if you take advantage of the right to transit the US which is a potent way to push the miles count. E.g. one can now do lhr-lax-[NA segments]-LAX-SCL-[SA segments]-EZE-ORD-PEK which if you actually want to go to China is a Good Thing (tm).

I still don't see any value added by having ORD as a gateway, in this example JFK was already available, so could go EZE-JFK-HKG-<lots of cities in china, not just PEK. I can think of a dozen other routes that AA could add which would be more useful for OWE routings. EZE was already exceptionally well served, compared to the average AA international destination.

You see no reason to sometimes prefer eze-ord-pek over eze-jfk-hkg-pek ?

Whatever. I find it useful, one other has agreed. Sorry if it's neither of any interest to you or a total bemusement to you that some of us are grateful for the service.