American Airlines has revealed plans to scale back its transatlantic summer schedule due to ongoing Boeing 787 delivery delays. This is a familiar story, as American did exactly the same thing in 2024, and 2023, and 2022, and… well, you get the idea.
Continue reading: American Boeing 787 Delivery Delays Lead To Summer Route Cuts
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
And, Airbus continues to have delayed deliveries. According to a mid-level manager at AA, when the XLRs were to start delivery in March 2023, they were supposed to enter service on transcon routes. But, when delayed, they were to be deployed on TALT routes during low season to backfill 777-300s pulled for refit. But, when delayed again (along with 777-300 issues), the word is that the first deployment is back to transcon. But wait . . .
To be fair, all airlines are adversely affected by delayed deliveries from both Airbus and Boeing.
Are you sure that virtually all Boeing customers are experiencing delays ? So Boeing is making no deliveries at all ? Can’t help but wonder if American is in no hurry to receive the delayed aircrafts.
It would be strange to have a 50 minute connection or 5:45hr connection in LHR with the reductions considering there must be a hundred flights daily between the U.S. and LHR across all carriers.
"did exactly the same thing in 2024, and 2023, and 2022, and…"
That sums it up, right there.
Instead of padding a fair amount of cushion into their schedules, by slightly underutilizing available fleet, the airlines would rather announce these grandiose summer schedules to all kinds of places (to appease shareholders and media), then "quietly" pare them back, while apologizing to customers. This, even though they knew that the chances of operating such huge schedules was slim to none.
I do find it interesting though that these three routes, that have been around for many many years (and previously survived many recessions and downturns) are the ones being cut, whereas the ten trillion new/seasonal routes to Italy + Greece are not.
The fact that the Italy/ Greece routes are not cut, while things like dfw-fra are, should tell you all you need to know about what's profitable and what's not.
That's too broadly conclusive though.
What it really tells you is what makes the most amount of money in the least amount of time, which shouldn't be surprising for summer-seasonal operations.
That doesn't mean the other routes are unprofitable. Miami-Paris for example has survived 9/11, and the financial crisis, and AA's bankruptcy, and covid. It wouldn't have done that if it was losing money. What it and the others, likely are, are small-but-consistent trickles of year round profit, whereas the Italian/Greek routes are a raging waterfall of profit, but only for a few months in the summer.
AA is clearly hoping that they will get some airplanes for use in the 2nd half of summer but since the peak travel season for US customers is the 1st half of the year, AA will miss the 2025 peak season for many routes. Capacity will be lower and fares will be higher.
AA has always hoped for fleet rather than a good product and network to solve its problems and this appears to be more of the same... trying to grow their way out of their financial problems, in this case on their TATL network.
They obviously made their 2025 revenue and profit forecasts based on this reduced schedule which the investor market clearly did not like.
Can't imagine how happy would AeroB13a be with those news.
His intellegence gained from investigating children's poop and how some people bash on BA with no fair points would validate that.
And even better, his confidant Proximanova would happily defend him too.
"iF IT's bOEinG, i aIn'T gOInG!"
JFK-MAD and the LHR reductions are surprising. AA loves to funnel to its JV hubs.
Is this why BNE-DFW ends in March 27 ? I thought it was supposed to be year round.
You are absolutely correct Mason, old bean, one is happy to indulge your fantasy.
Your lack of original thought is as obvious as the copy, cut and paste waste of space posts you are pitied for.
Keep it up sunshine you are amusing your fanboy Eskimo by plagiarising his posts.
Thank you for the grin.
Thank you Boeing for letting AA down and allowing partner airlines to take advantage.
If it’s a Boeing …. I ain’t going …. to spend my hard earned money on a ticket.
To your points of "rather than a good product and network," changes to or inconsistency of its network was the primary reason that led me away from AA. AA had worked well for me and I had been CK for a number of years. But, all airlines and hotels evolve over time. And, with those changes, each consumer owes it to oneself to adapt.
Doesn’t AA have 7 frames already built and sitting in Charleston? Wonder why those frames aren’t delivering within 1-2 months coming off of the assembly line? Seats?
Don't know specifically but there has been talk that business suites have been held up. Post-COVID, many airlines are doing cabin upgrades and manufacturers can't produce them fast enough.
How many times in the past few years has AA changed its mind regarding service to Australia? Air crews have lost count. Referring to my comment below, it was changes to and inconsistency of the network that led me away from AA.
No that's a seasonal route because it's much more profitable to fly aircraft to Europe in the summer than Australia
Since United couldn't make LAX-BNE work it seemed doubtful that AA could make DFW a going concern. Same with DL from LAX. The Queensland government offered them juicy subsidies to operate, but once that offer lapses they won't stick around. Qantas will keep throwing a 332 at LAX every day, and United will run a 772 to SFO five times a week, but that will be it. The BNE market is not Sydney or Melbourne, plus the US dollar is very strong at the moment which makes traveling there expensive for many.
American’s strategy is hope and pray and when deliveries don’t materialize blame someone, good enough for its CEO to get his bonus.
I booked business class for 65k points, aus-dfw-bne for next Wednesday. I much rather fly into Brisbane. I assume that the subsidy from the government makes the flight a lot cheaper.
Marginally at the most. It's part of their QF joint venture, so it's pooled with all traffic both airlines have between Australia and the US (there are connections at both ends, not just point-to-point, and they all could use other US and AU gateways). It would, however, reduce AA's net costs for that sector
American made a huge mistake by retiring all of its A330s and 767s during the pandemic. Its international operations are now extremely limited as a result. Delta and especially United have massively superior international networks because they have way more widebodies. United has 224 widebodies. Delta has 170. American has 126.
American actually serves more international destinations than Delta (mostly due to shorthaul regional ops within the Americas) while their number of longhauls is similar. Neither are anywhere near UA's level.
Also, while UA and DL have more widebodies, they use a not-insignificant amount of them on domestic spoke-terminating routes..... whereas AA almost only does so to position widebodies between hubs for international turns. So it doesn't have quite the limiting effect that the raw deficit alone would imply.
Here are the stats (per Curium) as of December 2024:
United serves 360 destinations: 214 domestic and 146 international destinations
American serves 356 destinations: 226 domestic and 130 international destinations
Delta serves 311 destinations: 214 domestic and 97 international destinations
The number of planes in the fleet and the number of destinations SIMPLY. DOES. NOT. MATTER>
as much as some want to turn every discussion into a bragging discussion, all that matters is total revenues and ultimately profits.
in 2024, AA generated the least amount of revenue of the big 3 but also had the least amount of expenses.
AA's problem is that it doesn't get enough revenue for the expenses it has.
and the big difference between DL and both AA and UA's total revenues and profit is its much larger amount of other revenue which include credit card and other sources of revenue including the MRO. DL had $10 billion in other revenue compared to $3.8 billion for AA and $3.4 billion for UA.
UA does the best job of the big 3 of generating transportation revenue - but they also fly the most ASMs. They do the worst job of non-transportation revenue - and that is the reason why the gap between them and Delta will remain large and will not close until UA gets a credit card contract that is better than what DL has with Amex.
Add in the MRO revenue - which AA and UA cannot match because DL has exclusive airline contracts on nearly all new generation engines - and DL has a profit advantage.
AA has too many costs for its business strategy - heavily short haul domestic transportation.
Even in the domestic market, DL generates more revenue with fewer costs and more efficiency.
AA's problem isn't international. It is an inefficient domestic network.
"The number of planes in the fleet and the number of destinations SIMPLY. DOES. NOT. MATTER>
as much as some want to turn every discussion into a bragging discussion, all that matters is total revenues and ultimately profits."
Everything matters to you when it makes Delta look good, Tim. You only think destination count doesn't matter when it makes look delta look inferior to you. THEN you make it an issue and say it doesn't matter.
You've been squawking lately that Delta has the better network vs AA and UA. They do not. They have an inferior number of destinations across the board, domestic and international.
Don't confuse Delta's self-proclaimed monopoly pricing power at their core hubs with anything else. Delta has an inferior network to UA and AA and if you add alliance partners, Delta's network is even worse.
as usual, Max, it is you that, full of hypocrisy, reject actual facts because you don't like the reality that they point.
First, AA has the least number of mainline aircraft of the big 3 right now. If planes matter, then AA loses.
Second, all of the big 3 – and every other US airline – are for-profit companies and the big 3 are all publicly traded which means they exist solely to return wealth to their owners, the stockholders.
Third, AA does a poorer job of generating profits than DL or UA and DL leads the pack on that metric because they have understood what it takes to generate profits better than AA or UA and have done it better for far longer.
Fourth, AA’s domestic strategy is high cost relative to the revenue it generates. In the scope of global route systems, the difference in the number of domestic markets that the big 3 serve is insignificant and AA simply does not get a revenue advantage because of their larger number of destinations. DL, in contrast, serves more cities with mainline than any of the big 4 which is a much more cost-effective way to generate revenue.
Fifth, it is you that keep calling DL’s hubs “monopolies” and not DL because you can’t stand to admit that DL knows how to generate revenue better. There is actually data that is being discussed on a.net right now that shows how “dense” DL’s route system is compared to AA and UA’s. DL flies more seats on fewer markets than AA or UA and THAT is how they get pricing power. UA thinks that flying to a million destinations generates a revenue advantage but they can’t prove it and have never said what the value of doing that is. AA thinks the same thing about their domestic network.
DL simply generates more revenue more efficiently than AA or UA. That is a fact and there is abundant data to prove it.
And DL also is paying its people the best right now while AA and UA have open labor contracts and workgroups that are being paid below top tier market rates. Even AA’s new FA contract doesn’t match DL’s in terms of pay. UA has a large bill coming to get labor settlement; their execs said as much.
Airplanes don’t matter but even if they did, AA has already lost. And despite AA’s younger fleet, they do not have a higher percentage of new generation aircraft than DL or UA which means they won’t have to spend as much on new aircraft but they also will have a fuel efficiency disadvantage as DL and UA acquire new generation aircraft and retire older aircraft – and UA most certainly will be accelerating aircraft retirements including widebodies or they will be at a much higher cost disadvantage esp. to DL.
facts are not what you want them to be but what they are, Max
American management could care less as long as they are getting their real bonuses all while paying its staff members 1-2% rates, what a joke! AA is in trouble with the lack of widebody aircraft and now blaming Boeing over and over again!
This discussion is not about profits or losses, or the total number of aeroplanes any airline has. It's about the match, or in this case mismatch between the routes an airline wants to operate, and the aeroplanes it has available that are suitable for those routes. Fleet and balance sheet dynamics may have been what got them to the decision point, but AA's decision here was based on the cards it had to play, not the cards other players hold, or if they theoretically had 1,000 short haul aircraft that were unsuitable for the routes in play.
When you're sitting for a physics exam, you don't get to redefine the questions to be about economics and offer an answer based on that, you have to answer the question that was asked.
Fair point. I guess I really meant "long haul international" destinations, not all international. And, as you mentioned, AA's total international destination number has a lot of 737 flights from Miami to various places in Latin America and the Caribbean. While AA is strong in Latin America (but weaker than it used to be before the LATAM partnership ended), it is incredibly weak in Europe and Asia. It serves the fewest destinations in Europe of the big 3. It serves about half the number if destinations in Asia as United. And it doesn't even serve Africa (unlike United and Delta).
I stand by my original comment that American screwed up when it got rid of all of its A330s and 767s during the pandemic.
You seem to think 15 paragraph replies about nothing make you seem cool and make people forget delta fired you
Your inability to say what you want concisely isn’t cool and it does not make you smarter. It just makes you incredibly verbose in addition to stupid.
Keep trying. It makes everyone laugh when you do.