American Airlines

[Hassaan]

It's a shame they're going so soon. But it was always key for this service - people should have used it and I expected them to. What went wrong? I always thought a service to JFK was in demand for a while?

 

[hammerb32]

It's a shame they're going so soon. But it was always key for this service - people should have used it and I expected them to. What went wrong? I always thought a service to JFK was in demand for a while?

The level of services on board was shockingly bad for a full service carrier charging a premium rate for a local service, no PTVs, moodiest flight crew I've come across in a while, in short a postage stamp in an email world.

 

[ethanegcc]

I agree with your comments about this but I ultimately agree with Hassaan. AA has the same product to JFK from MAN with much more competition than that at BHX and manages to operate (albeit with recent decreases) so, considering the route was very much desired in the area, you would have thought it would be more successful.

It is a shame that it is stopping though but, perhaps it gives United a chance to increase to daily all year-round, although they are clearly not exactly gushing on TATL expansion.

 

[DaveBham]

They need to take a leaf out of Emirates/Qatar's book. They offer a product of such quality and competitiveness that to fly east or to oz, flying from BHX is a no brainer. There's little reason to even consider MAN or LHR. But that takes vision, and deep pockets, and showing your customers some respect.

A reliable, up to date 737max or 787 flying to New York from BHX at a competitive price will sell tickets.

 

[Ray Finkle]

people should have used it and I expected them to

The thing is people did, they found out that it was crap and went back to what they had done before, namely using LHR and their 30 odd flights per day to NY, the majority of those offering a much better product. Just go back a few pages and see the evidence.

 

[David_itl]

That, I'm afraid is pretty much the standard for regional ops. Throw inferior product/unreliable aircraft onto a route and when people vote with their feet to go via LHR's multiple frequency/new aircraft. chop the regional route and come out with a statement such as we did try to serve the local market but there was insufficient premium demand. Should be all systems go to try and get Norwegian to offer routes.

 

[58terminus]

Loads have really picked up the AA JFK with 174 pax yesterday

Isn't the problem that few of the 174 would have used it a 2nd time? The airports growing profile is encouraging people
to fly from BHX and many would have felt let down by the rather shoddy service that seems to have been provided by AA.
I think the airport can feel very disappointed with AA's commitment .The market does seem to be there.They have to hope if another carrier takes up the route people don't think that last time i flew from there it wasn't very good.

 

[BHXsupporter]

'Isn't the problem that few of the 174 would have used it a 2nd time? The airports growing profile is encouraging people to fly from BHX and many would have felt let down by the rather shoddy service that seems to have been provided by AA.' (58 terminus)

That's it in a nutshell. Builders can move on and con the next customer. Airlines have a single chance with most customers to avoid a bad service. Jan Carlzon SAS's CEO 1981-1994 wrote a marvellous little book "Moments of Truth" where he said: "Last year each of our ten million customers came in contact with approximately five SAS employees, and this contact lasted an average of 15 seconds each time. The SAS is ‘created’ 50 million times a year, 15 seconds at a time. These 50 million ‘moments of truth’ are the moments that ultimately determine whether SAS will succeed or fail as a company. They are the moments when we must prove to our customers that SAS is their best alternative." (p3).

In AA's case it would seem that that first disinterested check-in agent or brusque stewardess times x000 has done it for them - and quite right. Brum X's post in Sept. that MAN's AA flight has survived is I would guess that they can hide in a larger catchment area responding to multiple operators (assuming that the service is equally poor from there and why wouldn't it be? - same staff sometimes but importantly same culture) but also that it's simply another hundred miles + for some MAN passengers to drive to LHR which as has being iterated many times here is the geographical challenge BHX carries (one of the snakes nicely referred to by the retiring NCL the Aviation Development Director of Newcastle International Airport that I mentioned recently in the general thread).

 

[Daza]

Just down M40 there are multiple daily choices for JFK and EWR, no other U.K. airport with long-haul services is so close to the worlds largest airline market (London). Sadly Midlands business call for new long-haul service then fail to use it. I guess old aircraft, poor service and high fares have added to the pressure too.
Daza

 

[thunderchild]

Just down M40 there are multiple daily choices for JFK and EWR, no other U.K. airport with long-haul services is so close to the worlds largest airline market (London).

Or just up the M6 people can fly to key American tourist destinations such as New York, Miami, Los Angeles and Boston non stop for a cheaper price and with a better in flight experience. It really is a no brainer. The way UA are cutting routes from the UK regions I really hope BHX-EWR isn't next on the hit list.

 

[ethanegcc]

UA certainly aren't beating around the bush in cutting regional routes e.g. BFS/NCL-EWR and MAN-IAD. BHX is down to 4 a week for the winter season, 757 operation and no increase for EWR flights on MAN or BHX flights seem likely now to compensate for lost capacity for IAD and JFK respectively, unfortunately. That said, as long as BHX can continue, however, I think we should be happy without any increases due to all the factors at play on TATL at the moment.

If BHX was to lose UA to EWR it would be a terrible day for them. Does anyone know the LFs for the winter season or recent months e.g. November? I don't think UA will leave BHX at all but, if UA continues it could go seasonal.

 

[justplanecrazy]

What people seem to forget with UA is the mail contract. That alone pays for the flight passengers are a bonus!

 

[DaveBham]

Plus, hasn't the United route been in service for 15 years or so? I think it would take a drastic drop in demand for them to withdraw, which would seem unlikely. If the AA experience has taught us anything, it's that there is further demand for flights to New York - just not with inferior planes with frequent cancellations. Also, the departure times for AA were similar to UA's - maybe a later flight could prove lucrative? That said, I found the AA flight was bang on timewise. When I used it I was able to get up at 6am, cab to BHX, and be in Manhattan in time for lunch. Moreso if I'd gone with UA as EWR is a faster route into Manhattan.

 

[TM3]

DaveBham, I agree with you over the flight times. Personally I hate those flight times for UA and the AA ones. Too early both going out and coming back. Its a factor both for flying direct and connecting.

 

[Hassaan]

American Airlines hasn't had the best approval ratings, to be fair. Maybe that has something to do with it. People have to want to travel with the airline. As it is, United have been here since 1997 (?), so nearly 20 years. People want to fly with them.

 

[DaveBham]

DaveBham, I agree with you over the flight times. Personally I hate those flight times for UA and the AA ones. Too early both going out and coming back. Its a factor both for flying direct and connecting.

I liked the flight times, but realise that not everyone will. Jet2's flights BHX - EWR in November are slightly better, departing at 0955 I think.