Originally Posted by
A320.b744
You're forgetting that the likes of LHR, CDG etc are key routes where ultimately frequency is as important as capacity for AA. Operating four daily ORD-LHR is more beneficial for AA than operating just two B77W flights as it allows people greater choice in connections.
No. Your argument was that the B788 is optimal for PVG etc, but then you switch and say it's all about frequency. When the B788 has replaced the B767 on so,e LHR flights, they hold roughly the same pax so clearly not a frequency consideration
No, MAN is not a key destination. Key European cities would be the likes of DUB, LHR, CDG, MAD, FCO, ZRH, MXP, FRA, AMS, BRU - business cities that are essential for a global network.
So, you ignore the fact MAN-ORD has been served pretty much consistently since 1985*, outlasting some othe the 'key cities' you mention above as an indicator to how AA clearly DO think MAN is a key destination?
You are also aware that in your 'key cities' speech, Manchester is classed as a Beta global city, putting it on par with the likes of Rio de Janerio, Geneva, Vancouver, Brisbane and more, and above the likes of Denver, Jeddah, San Jose and more. The only ranks above are Beta+ Which contains mostly capitals or huge economic areas such as Dusseldorf, and then alpha which are capital cities mostly. So, it's obviously a pretty key city considering it's a regional city.
*I am aware the route has gone seasonal but by continuous I mean it hasn't had a 'cut' of more than one season.
I do give MAN credit, however, in its ability in recent years to attract new business, and given the growth of the city's economy I would say that eventually MAN would become a key business destination - just not yet.
See above, but I could also point to the route network from MAN to show it is actually a good business destination. MAN actually outperforms some larger European rivals for level of long haul service.
Even when compared to a retrofitted B763, the B788 is a more comfortable aircraft. Therefore it makes a lot more sense for the B788 to initially replace the B763 on some of its longer routes such as DFW-MXP, which is over 5,300 miles, or on their flagship routes that connect to important hubs, e.g. ORD-LHR, where frequency and a high quality cabin is as important as capacity.
So, what you are effectively saying that despite MAN-ORD being a similar distance to LHR-ORD, and ticket prices for the routes being vaguely similar, MAN should put up with an inferior product while LHR gets the B788 'just because it's LHR'. Isn't this where AA are suffering.
Why should pax pay over the odds for a flight that has no AVOD, poor OTP for the same price of the LHR flight which runs on a nice shiney B788 roughly on time? This is why the likes of Virgin and Thomas cook are running rings around American. Better on board product, better OTP and for a fraction of the price. ,any be AA should put up more of a fight instead of sending in their sheds and wondering where all their pax are going. It's not exactly rocket science.