In light of recent developments, I’ve seen many people theorize that American Airlines may launch flights to Manila, Philippines (MNL). Let’s talk about the reason the rumor exists, and analyze it a bit.
In this post:
The case for American launching flights to Manila
We just learned that Philippine Airlines will be joining the oneworld alliance in 2027. While there had been no credible rumors of this being in the works, it sort of makes sense. We’ve increasingly seen Philippine Airlines partner with oneworld carriers, ranging from Alaska, to American, to Qatar Airways, and beyond.
We’ve also just seen American reveal it would cancel its Doha (DOH) flights, and instead, launch service to a new destination.
So the logical question that many people are asking is if this could now lead to American flying to Manila, given that this is essentially a partner hub? The arguments in favor of this are obvious:
- American would have connectivity in Manila, so it would open up some new one-stop service for American in the region, with American as the long haul carrier; that being said, keep in mind American is part of a transpacific joint venture with Japan Airlines, so it ideally wants to route traffic through Tokyo (admittedly that’s not always so valuable for service to secondary Southeast Asia destinations)
- Competitively, in late 2023 we saw United add service to Manila (and seemingly have success, as the airline has added more service since launch), and Delta also plans to fly to Manila as of 2027
Why I’m skeptical of American flying to the Philippines
Personally, I don’t see much merit to American flying to Manila, at least in the context of its current strategy. Let me emphasize that American doesn’t always act rationally, which is how it has gotten to the point where it’s barely profitable. So whether there’s merit to something or whether it actually happens are two completely different topics. 😉
As I see it, there are several major challenges. First of all, out of which hub will American serve Manila? The carrier’s only West Coast hub is Los Angeles (LAX). We’ve seen American try to build up its transpacific gateway out of there, only to ultimately retreat. We now know Delta plans to grow there, so I can’t imagine American trying to match that growth is a smart strategy.
I don’t see merit to American launching Los Angeles to Manila flights, where it would go head-to-head against Delta, as well as multiple daily Philippine Airlines flights. For that matter, American has a massive cost disadvantage compared to Philippine Airlines, so it’s hard to make sense of how the economics would work.
American wouldn’t be able to get a revenue premium to support that service, especially with Delta also operating in the market.
Okay, American could operate the route out of its Dallas (DFW) mega hub, I suppose, but at this point we’re talking about an 8,320-mile flight, which would be American’s longest flight. When you consider the cost of operating such a flight, it’s just hard to imagine the airline would be able to achieve revenue performance that justifies that.
I mean, keep in mind American no longer flies to Hong Kong (HKG), despite partnering with Cathay Pacific, and that route even being a bit shorter. So I have a hard time imagining American can make Manila work, if it can’t make Hong Kong work.
Anyway, we’ll see how everything plays out. If American actually wanted to become a global player, sure, I could see Manila making sense in the context of the overall route portfolio. But as a one-off strategy, I just don’t see how this could make sense.
Bottom line
G
El Paso to Manila here we come /j
You get to Tokyo then a 3 hr connection followed by another 5-7hr flight down to SE Asia. Manila would be more convenient.
Manila airport is an absolute zoo! It could be on Cairo level. Good luck to anyone trying to connect there...
Ben, you say, "American has a massive cost disadvantage compared to Philippine Airlines". While I agree that PAL has a labor cost advantage, because their pilots and cabin crew make less, the overall cost advantage is not "massive" on long-haul flights. The majority of costs such as fuel, aircraft financing, passenger food and amenities, ground handling, are all about the same. Even the vast majority of maintenance is going to be about the same.
G is right. F'n G.
G
7.8 or greater (some reports 8.2) earthquake, just off coast of Philippines. Hope everyone’s alright.
So weird to specify “Manila, Philippines” in the headline. Do you need to make sure readers don’t think it’s Manila, Texas or something?
It's reflexive.
I saw a similar post in a chat room with the response, 'As distinct from Shanghai IL.'
TBF, I'm glad of the confirmation that he didn't mean Manilla NSW.
Nothing will change here. AA and PAL have been friends for a long time so maybe it’s mostly a a surprise that they eventually joined OW. Maybe PAL flies to DFW but why do that even? This is probably more of a competitive response to DL, probably at the behest of PAL.
I wouldn’t bet against something out of Phoenix. Starlux is now flying to TPE from there. With a customs operation that can handle more and a lot cheaper operating costs than LAX, I’d say AA is looking at Phoenix for future west coast growth. I don’t know about Manila but I see PHX and PHL as the companies best hubs for future growth.
Lucky, I disagree.
AA is green with envy looking at UA’s expansion & they want a piss of the pi.
Whether or not they turn a profit, as you said they act irrationally, so they’ll want to fight UA for the moolah that MNL is churning.
The other question is, is there a chance PR will start flights to DFW?
They were looking into IAH.
That doesn’t anwer my question…
as noted, the chances are slim solely because of the distance involved. MNL-JFK is longer but w/ a strong relationship and JV - which AA and PR don't have - they can carry much of the traffic that could connect over DFW over other hubs.
NO other carrier is going to fly to MNL from any interior US cities so even ORD will be unique to PR
Chicago has a large Filipino diaspora so it made sense for PR to resume ORD. Same with Houston which they are looking into.
And to answer the question above, not likely as Houston has a larger concentration of Filipinos than Dallas. They can easily be funneled on JL and CX.
Doubt it. Let newest oneworld member PAL keep doing it.
With respect, are transiting patients in Manilla still getting bullets (or other contraband) surreptitiously placed in their carry on baggage being re-screened so that they can be frightened into submitting to the shakedown of penalty fees?
Haha - not patients, travelers!
There's a whole Wikipedia article about this and everything:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninoy_Aquino_International_Airport_bullet-planting_scandal
Good luck connecting in Manila. Overnight stay is recommended if you're changing terminals. Wild.
I, for one think if they attempted to that they would experience a rude awakening by Philippine Airlines who really don't get enough credit for how solid they have become over the years. The A350 long-haul experience is genuinely comfortable, the crews are consistently warm and attentive, and the whole service concept still feels more personal than most big carriers brother with anymore. They’ve also quietly built a pretty strong network out of Manila that...
I, for one think if they attempted to that they would experience a rude awakening by Philippine Airlines who really don't get enough credit for how solid they have become over the years. The A350 long-haul experience is genuinely comfortable, the crews are consistently warm and attentive, and the whole service concept still feels more personal than most big carriers brother with anymore. They’ve also quietly built a pretty strong network out of Manila that actually makes connections work smoothly instead of feeling like a hassle, especially across Southeast Asia and to North America. Even the soft product is like an airline that knows exactly what it wants to be.
It’s one of those carriers that people underestimate until they actually fly it again and realize it’s been steadily improving in the background!
dude...
calm down. You're taking a few idiots far too seriously and personally.
If an airline wants their aircraft to not smell and have soiled interiors, stop flying to the Philippines and India. Problem solved.
Silence you Irreverent Buffoon! You're spewing an intolerable defamation of a wondeful nation, and to any intelligent person, says more about the person making it than anything else - a comment that serves only as a total and absolute blight on intellectual integrity ( something that you very clearly seem to lack!)
As much as I am against the OP's lame attempt at humor and blatant racism, I can't help but think that you'll do great on that PSAT you have coming up, Darryl. I'm pulling for you.
So long as he has chatGPT with him ;)
I was hoping for a MIA-MNL nonstop for AA. I recall learning from one of your blog articles years ago that a lot of Filipinos tend to fly Manila to/from Miami.
Yes, there are a lot of passengers flying between these cities because most of them are workers in the cruise ship industry who are from the Phillipines. However, almost all of them fly economy on cheap tickets (often booked by their employer, who book them purely on price).
A MIA-MNL nonstop would be 9,300+ miles. That's too far with current aircraft capabilities. And with most passengers flying this route not being high yeilding, it...
Yes, there are a lot of passengers flying between these cities because most of them are workers in the cruise ship industry who are from the Phillipines. However, almost all of them fly economy on cheap tickets (often booked by their employer, who book them purely on price).
A MIA-MNL nonstop would be 9,300+ miles. That's too far with current aircraft capabilities. And with most passengers flying this route not being high yeilding, it wouldn't make sense for AA. Currently, QR seems to take care of most of this traffic (before the Iran war at least). Now, maybe we could eventually see Phillipine Airlines flying one-stop to MIA. Though that flight may work better as a charter, as I imagine it is highly seasonal.
I was hoping for a MIA-MNL nonstop for AA. I recall learning from one of your blog articles years ago that a lot of Filipinos tend to fly Manila to/from Miami.
A MIA–MNL nonstop sounds good on paper. But it would be a very tough fit for American. The route is extremely long, highly dependent on consistent premium demand, and peripheral to their core transpacific strategy. There Asia footprint, which is, frankly, remarkably small, has been built around key JV hubs rather than deep, ultra-long spoke-to-spoke flying like this.
Philippine Airlines is very much better suited to that kind of city pair. Manila is it's natural...
A MIA–MNL nonstop sounds good on paper. But it would be a very tough fit for American. The route is extremely long, highly dependent on consistent premium demand, and peripheral to their core transpacific strategy. There Asia footprint, which is, frankly, remarkably small, has been built around key JV hubs rather than deep, ultra-long spoke-to-spoke flying like this.
Philippine Airlines is very much better suited to that kind of city pair. Manila is it's natural long-haul anchor, and the fact that they are literally built around connecting diaspora flows like MNL-North America nonstop markets. Plus the A350-900s and their brand new A350-1000s (first in Asia) are already optimized for ultra-long sectors, and their business model is far more aligned with point-to-point Manila–North America flying than AA’s hub-and-spoke system.
You're so obviously using AI. Stop.
That would be great for MIA.
Small problem: AA doesn't have anything that can come close to flying MIA-MNL, it's only 190nm shorter than the current world's longest flight (JFK-SIN).
There was a time when I flew to Manila 2 to 4 times a year from NYC. Once in the old days LGA-DFW-HKG on AA then CX, and recently JFK-HND/NRT-MNL on AA and JL. But I prefer CX or JL or QR, and will continue to do that because of the far far better service those airlines provide.
And a direct flight from the US to MNL on PAL or AA does not appeal...
There was a time when I flew to Manila 2 to 4 times a year from NYC. Once in the old days LGA-DFW-HKG on AA then CX, and recently JFK-HND/NRT-MNL on AA and JL. But I prefer CX or JL or QR, and will continue to do that because of the far far better service those airlines provide.
And a direct flight from the US to MNL on PAL or AA does not appeal to me, but I do think PAL joining OW makes perfect sense for Filipinos or the gazillion Fil-Ams who are connecting via AA to visit family here or there.
Only in the movies. In the Bourne Legacy, the flight to Manila was on AA. Even at the time of the film, AA didn't fly to Manila.
I find the cost structure commentary to be nascent.
All US airlines suffer this same structural disadvantage. Yet United seemingly finds it possible to do very significant amount of TPAC flying, often head to head against other carriers like CX or BR.
@ yoloswag420 -- Right, but United has a major advantage that American and Delta don't have. It has a mega hub at SFO with great geography and a ton of connectivity, a very loyal local customer base, and lots of corporate contracts, especially in the tech space.
That's what's needed to make this kind of service work, and it's the only reason United is as successful across the Pacific as it is (and keep...
@ yoloswag420 -- Right, but United has a major advantage that American and Delta don't have. It has a mega hub at SFO with great geography and a ton of connectivity, a very loyal local customer base, and lots of corporate contracts, especially in the tech space.
That's what's needed to make this kind of service work, and it's the only reason United is as successful across the Pacific as it is (and keep in mind, United's margins across the Pacific still aren't amazing). These kinds of routes just don't work on a one-off basis, when you can't combine those advantages.
and yet UA makes just over half of what DL does flying the Pacific while AA loses money and has for years flying to Asia. UA operated its TPAC network at breakeven for years precovid but got right that they could regrow faster than Asian carriers.
SFO is a huge local market and UA does serve lots of destinations from SFO; but there are a top 20 feeder markets for any international route and...
and yet UA makes just over half of what DL does flying the Pacific while AA loses money and has for years flying to Asia. UA operated its TPAC network at breakeven for years precovid but got right that they could regrow faster than Asian carriers.
SFO is a huge local market and UA does serve lots of destinations from SFO; but there are a top 20 feeder markets for any international route and a good chunk of UA's SFO hub is to domestic destinations that contribute little to their TPAC network.
LAX is an even larger local market and has far less US carrier service; US carriers consistently carry traffic for US residents/citizens as is true around the world.
And UA has a fleet disadvantage with its use of older generation and fuel inefficient 777s across the Pacific while DL's TPAC network is almost entirely A350s which are larger than AA or UA's 787s but also much more fuel efficient than the 777s. AA has shifted to largely 787s as well so they do not have an aircraft cost problem like UA.
The issue is simply that AA is not competitive from the west coast while UA leads the big 3 and DL is not far behind and intends to challenge UA's western US dominance esp. to Asia.
and right now, DL has the financial strength to develop its western US and will have an advantage as long as this war in the Middle East goes on.
UA makes just over half of what DL makes on TPAC PER ASM.
@ Tim Dunn -- Oh my...
a) as Delta increases its TPAC flying, its profit per ASM will go down as well (though I'm not even sure what math you're using to measure this, so if you can provide "makes," that would be great, without talking about the number of lost bags United has, or how it flies 737s between Newark and Los Angeles)
b) Having a global route network is also about loyalty...
@ Tim Dunn -- Oh my...
a) as Delta increases its TPAC flying, its profit per ASM will go down as well (though I'm not even sure what math you're using to measure this, so if you can provide "makes," that would be great, without talking about the number of lost bags United has, or how it flies 737s between Newark and Los Angeles)
b) Having a global route network is also about loyalty program revenue nowadays, and I imagine your math doesn't factor that in
c) UA is more than a little bit ahead of DL on the West Coast
d) Having larger planes isn't necessarily a good thing, especially when most of the money is made in the forward cabin
Ben, I do believe that you might well be aware that I know little to nothing about the U.S. Airline industry. However, I can read and I can research via reliable sources of information posted on the internet. Furthermore, I have a very keen sense of smell, with an ability to identify bull’s excrement when it is in the vicinity.
Ben, you are being surrounded by the stuff and it is coming at you...
Ben, I do believe that you might well be aware that I know little to nothing about the U.S. Airline industry. However, I can read and I can research via reliable sources of information posted on the internet. Furthermore, I have a very keen sense of smell, with an ability to identify bull’s excrement when it is in the vicinity.
Ben, you are being surrounded by the stuff and it is coming at you in bucket loads from a particular source. I am sure that you do not need me to actually point out from whence it comes?
The information from the ‘ex-pert’ is completely at odds with the majority of unbiased analytical data freely available elsewhere. If I can see the writing on the wall and clearly others can too, perhaps you require a visit to Specsavers on your next UK visit …. :-)
"while UA leads the big 3 and DL is not far behind and intends to challenge UA's western US dominance esp. to Asia."
Tim, it's barely 1030am in the old ATL and you're already this bad at math?
From the West Coast to Asia...
Delta has ~29% of the flights United has. and UA has about 4x the capacity from the West Coast to Asia vs Delta. that's a LOT BEHIND for Delta.
The...
"while UA leads the big 3 and DL is not far behind and intends to challenge UA's western US dominance esp. to Asia."
Tim, it's barely 1030am in the old ATL and you're already this bad at math?
From the West Coast to Asia...
Delta has ~29% of the flights United has. and UA has about 4x the capacity from the West Coast to Asia vs Delta. that's a LOT BEHIND for Delta.
The rest of your spiel is the usual nonsense you want to be true but isn't.
Will you next be telling us about Delta's west coast to Latin America dominance and buildup? By cutting 30% of Flights?
@ MaxPower -- "From the West Coast to Asia...
Delta has ~29% of the flights United has. and UA has about 4x the capacity from the West Coast to Asia vs Delta. that's a LOT BEHIND for Delta."
Ouch. Wouldn't it be fun if someone actually tried to response to those kinds of claims, rather than changing the topic?
@ben ;)
We can dream...
Tim, we’ve been through this so many times yet you keep repeating it.
There is no financial measurement of profit per ASM. One, no airline breaks profits by regions out the same way. Two, yields are how profits are measured.
In the last quarter reported, the yields were extremely close for DL and UA. That’s in spite of UA having no fortress hubs, while DL has four, without even a competing airport in...
Tim, we’ve been through this so many times yet you keep repeating it.
There is no financial measurement of profit per ASM. One, no airline breaks profits by regions out the same way. Two, yields are how profits are measured.
In the last quarter reported, the yields were extremely close for DL and UA. That’s in spite of UA having no fortress hubs, while DL has four, without even a competing airport in the city.
DL also makes significantly more credit card revenue, with Kirby advising credit card profits will double with the next contract with Chase.
In spite of the huge DL advantage, UA, in the last quarter reported, was only a fraction behind.
DL is unable to compete against AS in SEA, reduced to just copying new AS routes, so they’re setting sights on LAX, where they will invest a ton of resources to gain a couple of percentage points, if that.
Meanwhile in NYC, UA is increasing its lead over DL, where DL runs an inefficient split hub, one of which is constrained by a perimeter rule. And that’s before UA starts JFK service next year.
of course there is just as much profit per ASM as there is revenue or cost per ASM.
you just don't like it because UA trails at it.
and UA uses the same credit card model DL does. UA just doesn't do it near as well, primarily because international flights contribute far less loyalty program revenue per seat mile than domestic flights.
Yeah, Scotty said that UA would push AA out of ORD - and...
of course there is just as much profit per ASM as there is revenue or cost per ASM.
you just don't like it because UA trails at it.
and UA uses the same credit card model DL does. UA just doesn't do it near as well, primarily because international flights contribute far less loyalty program revenue per seat mile than domestic flights.
Yeah, Scotty said that UA would push AA out of ORD - and that doesn't appear to be happening so we will take his word on UA's future credit card revenue with a tiny grain of sea salt - until UA actually reports it.
DL is the largest airline at 2 of 3 NYC airports and is increasing its lead over its competitors, esp. the low cost ones; feel free to thump your chest if it makes you feel better. Meanwhile UA doesn't even serve all 3 NYC airports as a result of yet another strategic failure by UA.
sit tight and see what DL does at LAX - I am sure you will argue til the cows come home but DL will do what UA has not and cannot do.
I'm trying to figure out what word you meant when you wrote nascent ( "just coming into existence, beginning to display signs of future potential, or recently formed.") But I also wonder why SFO is so easily dismissed. AA flies there from eight hubs, none of which wants to hear "we can't get you there (in one stop) from here."
Ben,
it is always good to dialogue with you.
First, I have never and still do not argue that DL will be at parity with UA in terms of size from CA to Asia.
I have said and believe very firmly that DL will serve all of the primary TPAC destinations from LAX with some duplication at SEA although I expect LAX to be the larger hub.
And as much as some...
Ben,
it is always good to dialogue with you.
First, I have never and still do not argue that DL will be at parity with UA in terms of size from CA to Asia.
I have said and believe very firmly that DL will serve all of the primary TPAC destinations from LAX with some duplication at SEA although I expect LAX to be the larger hub.
And as much as some want to argue about larger size being an advantage, I will once again ask why UA can't turn its larger size from the west coast to a financial advantage.
As much as some people will try to argue that DOT profit by global region data is all made up, it is pretty close for all regions to total SEC reported profits. How those profits are divided might not be 100% aligned w/ what carriers report on their books but the only way to argue that international profits aren't what the DOT reports is to take some of the profits off of domestic.
You are correct in your article that UA's profits are not what they could be - which is what I have said all along - so I appreciate that you admit that.
UA has long been far more focused on market share and size than profits and they state that over and over including hoping they can eliminate the competition - such as AA in Chicago - in order to obtain the level of profits that DL gets from its hubs.
As for UA's size on the west coast, the difference in local O&D from the western US is much closer between DL and UA than 29%. DL is the 2nd largest carrier on the west coast by local market revenue; what UA connects over SFO does not matter given that other carriers connect traffic over interior US hubs - AA over DFW and DL over SLC, MSP, DTW and ATL.
In fact, DL is the largest US airline to E. Asia OUTSIDE of CA; UA has no hub other than EWR that serves even 2 E. Asia cities (IIRC, someone will certainly correct me if I am wrong) while DL serves 2 cities in E. Asia from 3 hubs east of the Rockies and DTW has service to 3 E. Asian cities.
DL is focused on eliminating the advantage that UA has on the west coast by beginning/restarting DL's first service to the major E. Asian cities that UA exclusively serves among US carriers. DL will get a bigger advantage from adding MNL, HKG and SIN than UA will get by adding the 2nd or 3rd flights to those destinations of by flying to KIX.
and, yes, credit card and loyalty program revenue matters. Amex is simpy a richer program for DL.
In fact, DL specifically said that part of their growth in E. Asia is because they need it to grow their loyalty/Amex program. UA, again, cannot seem to translate its larger international network into more revenue - even more loyalty program revenue. Secondary cities in Europe or one stop service to SE Asia contribute very little additional value.
and you surely know that the greatest value for credit card programs is on the domestic system -and DL handedly outclasses UA (and everyone else) in the domestic loyalty and credit card market.
specific to this discussion, I agree w/ you that AA is unlikely to serve MNL On its own metal; DFW is the only hub that could make sense and the distance is simply too great.
and that reality gets to the reality that the A350 is simply a larger and more cost efficient aircraft than what AA and UA have available. AA can't get the range from its DFW to most of E. Asia that it does not serve while UA will be at a huge disadvantage to DL's A350s for years - and might be even if UA orders the 777X.
MNL is just the first of several more markets that DL will serve on its own metal to reduce UA's advantage including from the west coast.
AA won't be a consideration in E. Asia expansion.
Phew! What a back peddler you can be when you try Timothy Wayne Dunn. You would never be so contrite with any other contributor.
Why does it have to be LAX or DFW? Why not PHX? AA offers a lot more connectivity there than LAX and the distance isn't as far as DFW.
@ Larry -- If American doesn't fly to Tokyo out of Phoenix (a joint venture hub, and a much shorter flight), then it seems highly unlikely the airline would fly to Manila, in my opinion.
1) Greater SoCal has the largest population of Filipinos in the US and it's not even close. LA alone has a greater concentration of Filipinos outside of any other city in the world besides Manila.
2) Texas has 2.5X the number of Filipinos than Arizona and more connectivity than PHX.
Purely speculating, LAX-SIN and LAX-MNL could make sense.
LAX-SIN checks all the boxes for O&D, and the QF JV leveraging SIN as a scissor hub. (78P might be a better fit for this route.)
While LAX-MNL by AA may face some challenges, they still have more feed than DL with PR's partnership. I sense it'd also be Nat Piper's response to Delta's posturing at LAX. It's essentially an offence to keep DL out of MNL. 789 (J30) is just about right for this market.
It is doubtful that an AA route could work w/o a joint venture and PR has little incentive to get into a JV unless AA flies the route on its own metal.
AA's problem is that it cannot compete for sales with DL and UA; that was the case why they gave up on their sales team and there isn't any evidence that they are doing any better in building new routes.
AA also...
It is doubtful that an AA route could work w/o a joint venture and PR has little incentive to get into a JV unless AA flies the route on its own metal.
AA's problem is that it cannot compete for sales with DL and UA; that was the case why they gave up on their sales team and there isn't any evidence that they are doing any better in building new routes.
AA also has the lowest profit margin and will probably lose money this year due in part to high fuel prices. Depending on labor settlements, UA might be just breakeven. There is little appetite for route development when profits are as rare as they are right now.
Poor Delta is walking into a slaughter. It should stick with its Europe flying it gave up on Asia as soon as it bought NWO.
let's sit tight and see how this plays out.
DL has done more to develop multiple hubs than any other US airline - and probably any other airline in the world.
DL is already the largest domestic airline at LAX and largest international carrier at SEA.
The A350 is simply THE superior TPAC aircraft and DL is the only US airline that has it
In fact, Scott Kirby is raililng about Rolls Royce...
let's sit tight and see how this plays out.
DL has done more to develop multiple hubs than any other US airline - and probably any other airline in the world.
DL is already the largest domestic airline at LAX and largest international carrier at SEA.
The A350 is simply THE superior TPAC aircraft and DL is the only US airline that has it
In fact, Scott Kirby is raililng about Rolls Royce again undoubtedly because he knows that DL will have an advantage that UA can't touch with its fuel inefficient 777s or its 787s,
Rolls just upgraded technology on the XWB 84 that powers the 359 and fuel burn is down 1.8%. DL has 10 aircraft w/ those engines in service already. 1.8% is huge on longhaul flights.
DL will do just fine. It has targeted AA and B6 esp. over the past 10 years and its focus now is on UA's TPAC advantages from the west coast
That’s a fair assessment of AA’s constraints right now, though Philippine Airlines is in a very different spot - they are not fighting a multi-hub US network battle, it’s anchored in Manila and built around exactly these long-haul diaspora flows, of which Florida has a very large population of. This alongside the A350 product improvements gives them a much clearer and more natural fit for Pacific missions like this than American.
If AA is barely profitable , why are the executives paid so much ?
"Go ahead, make my day"
DFW to MNL? Boring. El Paso to Manila. Now that's a route I'd fly!
@Phred They can't even operate a DFW-ELP flight without screwing-up. Ah yes, American Airlines' finest work: turn a routine DFW-ELP hop into a masterclass in self-inflicted chaos. Blow past the -15 Minute boarding cutoff, stuff on extra passengers, fumble the bags, create a paperwork disaster and then point at the approaching thunderstorms with a straight face and call it a weather delay. Nature didn't cause your delay. You handed nature a 45-minute head start.
DFW-MNL is a legitimate premium transpac corridor with massive diaspora demand, corporate traffic potential, strong cargo flows, and a hub at one of American’s core network anchors, among much more.... El Paso to Manila is just two points on a map with zero meaningful O&D demand, weak premium yield, and zero logic.
The fact you would even propose this shows to me a remarkably weak and narrow understanding of the commercial aspects of an airline....
DFW-MNL is a legitimate premium transpac corridor with massive diaspora demand, corporate traffic potential, strong cargo flows, and a hub at one of American’s core network anchors, among much more.... El Paso to Manila is just two points on a map with zero meaningful O&D demand, weak premium yield, and zero logic.
The fact you would even propose this shows to me a remarkably weak and narrow understanding of the commercial aspects of an airline. And frankly, business in general.
Truly heartbreaking to watch a bot mistake "running a keyword filter" for "having a personality." Don't worry, Darryl-bot, humor, irony, and the ability to recognize an ELP joke are all in the next patch. Right after they finish teaching you what a sense of humor is.
Piss off, you ignorant and self-righteous dummy! Also an inconvenient truth for you, buster - I am certainly not a "bot", as you absurdly claim (provide me one little shred of evidence - would love to see you try, yet you would fail miserably and sadly, wirthing around, while you LIE trying to create a story, like a pathetic and pedantic little sod). Since you enjoy humor so much, I am sure we are all...
Piss off, you ignorant and self-righteous dummy! Also an inconvenient truth for you, buster - I am certainly not a "bot", as you absurdly claim (provide me one little shred of evidence - would love to see you try, yet you would fail miserably and sadly, wirthing around, while you LIE trying to create a story, like a pathetic and pedantic little sod). Since you enjoy humor so much, I am sure we are all aligned the wonderful humor self-evident in such a risible situation!
@Darryl, wow. I am impressed. Perhaps our budding board Pinocchio will soon become human. You indeed have a future in being an AA customer self-service chatbot! If, in the odd chance you are human and you need a recommendation letter to a university in a few years, glad to set you up there, too. You've clearly been doing the heavy lifting on the vocabulary lately.
If you knew about the commercial aspects of an airline, you'd understand that ELP-MNL is a reference to Vasu Raja's "El Paso to the World" strategy. It's a joke.
Maybe Delta will fly to MNL. I won't say dogmatically that it won't. They need to fly planes somewhere.
but their "interest" seemed more about stopping competition on ORD-MNL than actual interest in flying to MNL.
A Route like... I don't know... London from LAX or Europe (they only serve CDG) or South America would seem more pressing on Delta metal but granted... they aren't TPAC destinations. But they do seem more worthwhile than...
Maybe Delta will fly to MNL. I won't say dogmatically that it won't. They need to fly planes somewhere.
but their "interest" seemed more about stopping competition on ORD-MNL than actual interest in flying to MNL.
A Route like... I don't know... London from LAX or Europe (they only serve CDG) or South America would seem more pressing on Delta metal but granted... they aren't TPAC destinations. But they do seem more worthwhile than MNL for building local credit cards.
but AA...
I don't really see it. UA is making MNL work, it seems, but MNL is famously low yield (just by reputation. I'm not saying I know that to be a fact) and AA would seem to be happy just to let PR take customers while LAX gates are still under construction.
No! No! Max, you mentioned the “D”-word. Wait for it now …. :-)
meh. it's Sunday and Tim has no life or family. He's welcome to waste his entire day here in the comments section, per usual
the hypocrisy is top level out of the park, mini brain.
I have no life but you are in here twice and already fixated on me.
get help.
Really.
and like clockwork... less than 4 minutes after I respond to someone else about you, here you are proving me right...
@MaxPower, spray seltzer randomly and a clown ALWAYS appears.
"I have no life"
I mean... you said it.
that was a quote of what you said.
Are you still arguing that you didn't make a comment before I ever joined the conversation?
Written English is certainly not your strong point Wayne. Do buck up old bean or you will find yourself on restriction of privileges.
Please note how to quote the words of others …. “One must use quotation marks and remember to start the quotation with a capital letter, just like a paragraph or sentence”.
Nice new profile pic MaxPower!!
(Season 10, Episode 13)
“Max Power, he's the man whose name you'd love to touch… But you mustn't touch... His name sounds good in your ear… But when you say it, you mustn't fear… ‘Cause his name can be said by anyONE!”
awwww, 1990! you noticed!
(Sorry, it took me a while. JonNYC had the “Eat Up Martha” Simpsons bit on his profile.)