You know this for a fact or is this your opinion?
CLT as you say is unproven yet, but, lets give it a chance before we write it off. .
Ive seen the figures for JFK/ORD and they are very positive. I have not seen PHL but what I do know is that cargo is a very big money earner on this route, hence why it sees the A330 versus a B757 or 2.
Not much point in merging if there's no synergies! Come on guys, when you're not fighting the other guy for his premium fliers and market share you move the aircraft to maximise yield which means American will be asking "Do we need all four hubs serving or is there duplication?"
You mention this, but then:
Continental / United swapped a EWR for a IAD
How do you know the new AA is not 'spreading its bets' in the same way. UA did this to free up slots at 1 airport. If the passenger demand and yield is there, why clog up 1 hub with 4 flights, instead of running to various hubs, where they could be the right number of crews, aircraft etc.
JFK/PHL are the only 2 hubs where there is a realistic chance over overlapping, with ORD/CLT being in their own areas. JFK is notorious for its delays, so the PHL flights are the perfect way of relieving pressure.
Yes, time could go on and 4 hubs is too much, but how about we let AA decide what is too much, hey?
Judging by past comments, MAN has surprised you before, particularly regarding the middle easterns, and wondering if its getting all too much. Yet, just this year Etihad is again almost doubling capacity, Saudia seems to be filling out its flights (even having to put on a B77W and still not enough seats) and the Emirates flights going out quite full in all 3 classes.
What is to say MAN will not surprise you again?