Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam?

 > Seems like an obvious gap in their European network.

They also do not fly to Scandinavia or Eastern Europe, which
seems like a bigger gap in their network. Do you know that
they fly to Brussels?


Casey
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Casey" wrote in message


 > Do you know that they fly to Brussels?

Ummm....yeah. Hence my question.
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

  >> Do you know that they fly to Brussels?
 >Ummm....yeah. Hence my question.

Random speculation:

How expensive is it to get slots and gates at AMS? It's a very busy
airport, it already has flights from ORD on KL/NW UA/US and KU, and a
long-standing open skies agreement that keeps fares competitive. So
they might figure why bother?

BRU on the other hand has skimpy US service in general, no competition
for AA on ORD-BRU, and a fine supply of Eurocrats who don't care what
their tickets cost.
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Derek" wrote in
86.3499.RemoveThis@bignews4.bellsouth.net:

 > Seems like an obvious gap in their European network.
 >
 >

Amsterdam is a small town. KLM supports the large airport with transfer
business, as every small country's airline must do (eg Singapore, Gulf).
AA can't have a hub at Amsterdam or any European city.
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Chuckles" wrote in message



 >
  > > Seems like an obvious gap in their European network.
  > >
  > >
 >
 > Amsterdam is a small town. KLM supports the large airport with transfer
 > business, as every small country's airline must do (eg Singapore, Gulf).
 > AA can't have a hub at Amsterdam or any European city.

Then how come the other U.S. majors fly there...
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

John R. Levine wrote:
   >>>Do you know that they fly to Brussels?
  >>
  >>Ummm....yeah. Hence my question.
 >
 >
 > Random speculation:
 >
 > How expensive is it to get slots and gates at AMS? It's a very busy
 > airport, it already has flights from ORD on KL/NW UA/US and KU, and a
 > long-standing open skies agreement that keeps fares competitive. So
 > they might figure why bother?
 >
 > BRU on the other hand has skimpy US service in general, no competition
 > for AA on ORD-BRU, and a fine supply of Eurocrats who don't care what
 > their tickets cost.
 >

Not too big of a problem as the last time I flew AA to AMS, it was a BA
code share from LHR. I know people fly to AMS to get good fares to
Europe, but I don't think AA is missing that much profit (if any) there.
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Derek" wrote in
@bignews1.bellsouth.net:
  >>
  >> Amsterdam is a small town. KLM supports the large airport with transfer
  >> business, as every small country's airline must do (eg Singapore, Gulf).
  >> AA can't have a hub at Amsterdam or any European city.
 >
 > Then how come the other U.S. majors fly there...

By that logic, any place any one US airline flies to, all the other US
airlines must fly there also.

As I said, Amsterdam is a small town. It will not support so many flights.
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Chuckles" schreef in bericht

 >
 > As I said, Amsterdam is a small town. It will not support so many flights.

Amsterdam is indeed rather small (700,000 population) but Schiphol Airport
AMS serves an area with approximately 10 million people. (within a one hour
drive from AMS)

Sjoerd
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

Sjoerd wrote:
 > Amsterdam is indeed rather small (700,000 population) but Schiphol Airport
 > AMS serves an area with approximately 10 million people. (within a one hour
 > drive from AMS)

700,000 is within spitting distance of the population of San Francisco.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://travel.u.nu/" target="_blank">http://travel.u.nu/</a>
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

Miguel Cruz wrote:

 >
  >>Amsterdam is indeed rather small (700,000 population) but Schiphol Airport
  >>AMS serves an area with approximately 10 million people. (within a one hour
  >>drive from AMS)
 >
 >
 > 700,000 is within spitting distance of the population of San Francisco.
 >

How many non stop flights from SFO to Europe does AA have?

(I am thinking it is the same as the number of AA operated flights from
the US to AMS)
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"Chuckles" wrote in message




   > >>
   > >> Amsterdam is a small town. KLM supports the large airport with transfer
   > >> business, as every small country's airline must do (eg Singapore,
Gulf).
   > >> AA can't have a hub at Amsterdam or any European city.
  > >
  > > Then how come the other U.S. majors fly there...
 >
 > By that logic, any place any one US airline flies to, all the other US
 > airlines must fly there also.

By your logic, no airline except KLM should fly to Amsterdam since it is
such a small town.

 > As I said, Amsterdam is a small town. It will not support so many flights.

And yet, it has a huge number of airlines from all over the world flying
there, as well as every major U.S. airline.

How many "small towns" can say the same? Peoria should be so lucky...

Let me guess...you have some personal issue(s) with either Amsterdam, the
Netherlands, the Dutch, or all three...(?)
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

"John R. Levine" wrote in message

   > >> Do you know that they fly to Brussels?
  > >Ummm....yeah. Hence my question.
 >
 > Random speculation:
 >
 > How expensive is it to get slots and gates at AMS? It's a very busy
 > airport, it already has flights from ORD on KL/NW UA/US and KU, and a
 > long-standing open skies agreement that keeps fares competitive. So
 > they might figure why bother?
 >
 > BRU on the other hand has skimpy US service in general, no competition
 > for AA on ORD-BRU, and a fine supply of Eurocrats who don't care what
 > their tickets cost.

Thank you for the only reasonable response in this thread.

I've often wondered why AA flies to BRU but not AMS. As I'm sure you know,
the normal progression for overseas carriers (relative to Europe) is they
want to fly to London first, then Frankfurt or Paris, then Amsterdam. It's
not that usual to set up Brussels but not Amsterdam. And AA flies to
Manchester, a secondary city in UK, as well as used to fly to DUS and MUC in
Germany. It's kind of unusual for the largest U.S. carrier to overlook AMS
(esp. while flying to BRU, MAN, DUS, MUC, ZRH) especially when every other
U.S. major flies to AMS, and several have upgraded from 767 to 777, or in
the case of CO from 757 to 767 to 777 (shooting to hell some people's
theories that "it's such a small town", or "it's just not a profitable
place", etc.).
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam? 

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 06:12:01 GMT Chuckles wrote:

:>"Derek" wrote in
:>@bignews1.bellsouth.net:

:>>> Amsterdam is a small town. KLM supports the large airport with transfer
:>>> business, as every small country's airline must do (eg Singapore, Gulf).
:>>> AA can't have a hub at Amsterdam or any European city.

:>> Then how come the other U.S. majors fly there...

:>By that logic, any place any one US airline flies to, all the other US
:>airlines must fly there also.

:>As I said, Amsterdam is a small town. It will not support so many flights.

Perhaps planes have to be put out of service for a while after arriving from
Amsterdam to allow a full screen of the plane for drugs?

Or it may be a real pain to do connections since customs does more of a search
on people arriving from drug countries?

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com
 >> Stay informed about: Why doesn't AA fly to Amsterdam?