Back to GetFilings.com

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

Registrant's telephone number, including area code (817) 963-1234
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý    No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes ý No o

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 28, 2002, was approximately $2.6 billion. As of March 31, 2003, 156,363,115 shares of the registrant's common stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part III of this Form 10-K incorporates by reference certain information from the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held May 21, 2003.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

        AMR Corporation (AMR or the Company) was incorporated in October 1982. AMR's operations fall almost entirely in the airline industry. AMR's principal subsidiary, American Airlines, Inc., was founded in 1934. On April 9, 2001, American Airlines, Inc. (through a wholly owned subsidiary, TWA Airlines LLC (TWA LLC)) purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed certain liabilities of Trans World Airlines, Inc. (TWA), the eighth largest U.S. carrier. American Airlines, Inc., including TWA LLC (collectively, American), is the largest scheduled passenger airline in the world. At the end of 2002, American provided scheduled jet service to more than 152 destinations throughout North America, the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe and the Pacific. American is also one of the largest scheduled air freight carriers in the world, providing a wide range of freight and mail services to shippers throughout its system.

        In addition, AMR Eagle Holding Corporation (AMR Eagle), a wholly-owned subsidiary of AMR, owns two regional airlines which do business as "American Eagle"—American Eagle Airlines, Inc. and Executive Airlines, Inc. (Executive) (collectively the American Eagle carriers). In addition, American contracts with three independently owned regional airlines which do business as the "AmericanConnection" (the AmericanConnection carriers). The American Eagle carriers and the AmericanConnection carriers provide connecting service from eight of American's high-traffic cities to smaller markets throughout the United States, Canada, the Bahamas and the Caribbean.

        AMR Investment Services, Inc. (AMR Investment), a wholly-owned subsidiary of AMR, is responsible for the investment and oversight of assets of AMR's defined benefit and defined contribution plans, as well as its short-term investments. It serves as manager of the American AAdvantage Funds, a family of mutual funds with both institutional and retail shareholders, and provides customized fixed income portfolio management services. As of December 31, 2002, AMR Investment was responsible for management of approximately $29.6 billion in assets, including direct management of approximately $17.0 billion in short-term fixed income investments. The Company is actively pursuing a possible sale of AMR Investment.

A. Recent Events

        The past two years have had a large impact on the Company's finances. The Company incurred aggregate operating losses of $3.3 billion and $2.5 billion for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively. These losses reflect, among other things, the substantial decrease in the Company's revenues which began in early 2001. On reduced capacity since the events of September 11, 2001, the Company's revenues for the year ended December 31, 2002 were down 8.8 percent, with American's revenue per available seat mile down 7.2 percent on a capacity decrease of 1.4 percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2001, which included the results of TWA LLC beginning on April 10, 2001.

Revenues

        This revenue decrease has been driven by a number of factors, some of which the Company believes will persist indefinitely and others permanently, including:

•

A steep fall-off in the demand for air travel, particularly business travel, primarily caused by the continuing weakness of the U.S. economy and growing use of travel substitutes such as audio, video, and web conferencing. Because the Company has in recent years tailored its network, product, schedule and pricing strategies to the business travel market, reduced demand for business travel has affected the Company more than most other carriers. In addition, the war in Iraq has had a significant adverse impact on international and domestic revenues and future bookings. This adverse impact is expected to continue for the duration of the war and for an unknown period of time thereafter; however, the Company cannot reasonably predict the extent of such impact.

1

•

Reduced pricing power, resulting mainly from greater cost sensitivity on the part of travelers, especially business travelers, and increasing competition from low-cost carriers (LCCs). The percentage of the Company's routes on which it competes with carriers having substantially lower operating costs has grown significantly over the past decade, and the Company now competes with LCCs on over 80% of its domestic routes. LCCs generally operate with costs per available seat mile that are substantially lower than the Company's, and pursue a strategy of offering low fares that the Company must match or lose traffic. At the same time, the continuous increase in pricing transparency resulting from use of the Internet has enabled cost-conscious customers to more easily obtain the lowest fare on any given route. In addition, the Company must now compete with carriers that are reorganizing under the protection of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Historically, air carriers involved in reorganizations have undertaken substantial fare discounting to maintain cash flows and to enhance customer loyalty. Recent attempts at fare increases by the Company have generally not been successful, and fare sales (including fare sales initiated by carriers in reorganization) have been significant and widespread.



•

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 accelerated and exacerbated the trend of decreased demand and reduced industry revenues. Following September 11, flights to, from and within the United States were not permitted to resume until September 13, 2001 (except for Washington Reagan Airport, which partially reopened on October 4, 2001). When flights resumed, demand dropped sharply from already reduced levels, due in part to fears of further attacks and inconvenience to travelers caused by increased government-imposed safety measures.



•

American's international route network is directed to providing service to the U.K. (including London Heathrow), Latin America and the Caribbean, where demand has been weak compared to continental Europe and the Pacific. In addition, routes to San Juan, Puerto Rico, which are included in the Company's domestic results, have been particularly impacted by an increase in industry capacity and competition from new LCC service.



•

Security service fees imposed by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act increased the cost of travel to the passenger, thereby dampening the Company's ability to otherwise raise fares.

Costs

        In reaction to this harsh revenue environment, the Company has taken numerous steps to reduce its costs:

•

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in the third quarter of 2001 the Company reduced its operating schedule to approximately 80 percent of the schedule it flew prior to September 11, 2001. In connection with this schedule reduction, the Company eliminated approximately 20,000 jobs. However, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2001, in response to increasing demand, the Company began increasing its operating schedule from the significantly reduced schedule it flew immediately following the events of September 11, 2001. The trend towards increasing demand abated in the second quarter of 2002.



•

In response to the lingering effects of the terrorist attacks and the continuing economic downturn, on August 13, 2002, the Company announced a series of initiatives to reduce its costs, reduce capacity, simplify its aircraft fleet, and enhance productivity. These initiatives included, among other things, the de-peaking of the Company's Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport hub (following the de-peaking of its Chicago hub), gradually phasing out operation of its Fokker aircraft fleet, and reducing capacity in the fourth quarter of 2002. In addition, the Company eliminated an additional 7,000 jobs to better align its workforce with the planned capacity reductions, fleet simplification and hub restructuring.

        Despite the Company's on-going efforts to reduce its costs, the Company faces increased costs attributable to factors largely beyond its control, including:

•

Escalating fuel prices, which show no immediate signs of decreasing, in part due to the war in Iraq and domestic turmoil in Venezuela, Nigeria or other oil producing regions. American's average cost per gallon of fuel has risen from 66.5 cents in February 2002 to 91.0 cents in February 2003.

2

•

After the terrorists attacks of September 11, 2001 and continuing to the present, aviation insurers have significantly reduced the amount of insurance coverage available to commercial air carriers for liability to persons (other than employees or passengers) for claims resulting from acts of terrorism, war or similar events (war-risk coverage). At the same time, the insurance carriers significantly increased the premiums for such limited coverage, as well as for aviation insurance in general. However, the U.S. government has provided commercial war-risk insurance until June 13, 2003 covering losses to employees, passengers, third parties and aircraft. The Company believes this insurance coverage will be extended beyond June 13, 2003 because the Homeland Security Act provides for this insurance to remain in place until August 31, 2003. In addition, the Secretary of Transportation may extend the policy until December 31, 2003, at his discretion.



•

The Company has borne significantly increased security costs, mainly due to security measures imposed by the U.S. government following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.



•

On April 11-12, 2003, the Senate and House agreed to aviation-related assistance provisions in supplemental appropriations legislation to fund the war in Iraq. The legislation is expected to be signed by President Bush on April 14, 2003. The new law would authorize payment of (i) $100 million to compensate air carriers for the direct costs associated with the strengthening of flight deck doors and locks and (ii) $2.3 billion to reimburse air carriers for increased security costs which shall be distributed in proportion to amounts each has paid or collected as of the date of enactment in passenger security and air carrier security fees to the Transportation Security Administration. In addition, the new law would suspend the collection of the passenger security fee from June 1, 2003 until October 1, 2003, and extend war-risk insurance through September 30, 2004. The Company is not able to estimate its portion of this compensation at this time.

        The net effect of all of the above factors is that the Company's recent financial results are unsustainable. Given the severity of the Company's financial situation and the Company's belief that a permanent shift has occurred in the airline revenue environment, the Company continues to review its business model, particularly with a view towards identifying significant cost reductions. The Company believes that it must quickly reduce its annual operating costs by at least $4 billion in order to become competitive and sustain its operations. The Company has made progress in identifying more than $2 billion in annual operating cost reductions via initiatives involving: (i) scheduling efficiencies, including de-peaking certain of its hubs as referred to above, (ii) fleet simplification, (iii) streamlined customer interaction, (iv) distribution modifications, (v) in-flight product changes, (vi) operational changes and (vii) headquarters/administration efficiencies. Even with these initiatives, however, a large shortfall of approximately $2 billion remains between identified annual cost reductions and needed cost reductions.

3

Labor Agreements

        In February 2003, American asked its labor leaders and other employees for approximately $1.8 billion in permanent, annual savings through a combination of changes in wages, benefits and work rules. The requested $1.8 billion in savings is divided by work group as follows: $660 million—pilots, $620 million—Transportation Workers Union (TWU) represented employees, $340 million—flight attendants, $100 million—management and support staff, and $80 million—agents and representatives. On March 31, 2003, the Company reached agreements with the leaders of the three major unions representing American employees (the Labor Agreements) and announced changes in pay plans and benefits for non-unionized employees (including officers and other management) which will meet the targeted contributions. Of the approximately $1.8 billion in savings, approximately $1.0 billion are to be accomplished through wage and benefit reductions while the remaining approximately $.8 billion would be accomplished through changes in work rules which would result in additional job reductions. Wage reductions became effective on April 1, 2003 for officers and will become effective on May 1, 2003 for all other employees. Reductions related to benefits and work rule changes will be phased in over time. In connection with the changes in wages, benefits and work rules, the Labor Agreements provide for the issuance of approximately 38 million shares of AMR stock in the form of stock options which will generally vest over a three year period (see Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for additional information). Although these Labor Agreements enabled the Company to avoid an immediate filing of a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (a Chapter 11 filing), these Labor Agreements must still be ratified by the unions' memberships. At the time of the filing of this Form 10-K, the unions have put the Labor Agreements out for a ratification vote. It is anticipated that the official results of the voting will be formally announced on April 15, 2003. A group of pilots filed a lawsuit on April 14, 2003 contesting the union ratification process. The U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, Texas denied the request for a temporary restraining order. Failure of one or more of the unions to ratify its Labor Agreement would likely lead the Company to initiate a Chapter 11 filing.

        In addition, the Company continues to negotiate concessions from its vendors, lessors and suppliers; however, the Company cannot reliably predict whether it will obtain the necessary concessions or for what amount. In return for concessions, the Company plans to deliver shares of AMR common stock to its vendors, lessors and other creditors.

        Even if the Labor Agreements are ratified and the Company obtains concessions from its vendors, lessors and suppliers, the Company may nonetheless need to initiate a Chapter 11 filing because its financial condition will remain weak and its prospects uncertain. The fragility of the Company's financial condition is further illustrated by the going concern opinion of the Company's independent auditors (see page 47). Other negative factors include but are not limited to, the failure of the U. S. economy to soon begin a recovery, a prolonged war in Iraq, another terrorist attack, the failure of the Company to satisfy the liquidity requirement in certain of its credit agreements, or the inability of the Company to access the capital markets for additional financing.

B. Other Events

        While the Company was still recovering from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, American Airlines flight 587 crashed on November 12, 2001, shortly after take-off from John F. Kennedy International Airport en route to Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic. In addition to the loss of all lives on board the aircraft, there were several fatalities and injuries to persons on the ground as well as property damage. The National Transportation Safety Board is currently investigating the accident and a cause has yet to be determined. As a result of the accident, claims have been filed against American. It is anticipated that these claims will be covered under American's insurance policy.

4

C. Competition

        The domestic airline industry is fiercely competitive. Currently, any air carrier deemed fit by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is free to operate scheduled passenger service between any two points within the U.S. and its possessions. On most of its domestic non-stop routes, the Company faces competing service from at least one, and sometimes more than one, major domestic airline including: Alaska Airlines, America West Airlines, Continental Airlines (Continental), Delta, Northwest Airlines (Northwest), Southwest Airlines, United and US Airways, and their affiliated regional carriers. Competition is even greater between cities that require a connection, where all nine major airlines may compete via their respective hubs. The Company also competes with national, regional, all-cargo and charter carriers and, particularly on shorter segments, ground transportation. On all of its routes, pricing decisions are affected, in large part, by competition from other airlines. On over 80 percent of its domestic routes, the Company competes with airlines that have cost structures significantly lower than the Company's and can therefore operate profitably at lower fare levels.

        The airline industry is characterized by substantial price competition. Fare discounting by competitors has historically had a negative effect on the Company's financial results because the Company is generally required to match competitors' fares to maintain passenger traffic. During recent years, a number of new LCCs have entered the domestic market and several major airlines, including the Company, implemented efforts to lower their cost structures. In addition, several air carriers have sought to reorganize under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, including United and US Airways. (Effective March 31, 2003, US Airways emerged from its Chapter 11 restructuring.) Successful completion of such reorganizations has resulted or would result in significantly lower operating costs for the reorganized carriers derived from labor, supply, and financing contracts renegotiated under the protection of the Bankruptcy Code. Historically, air carriers involved in reorganizations have undertaken substantial fare discounting in order to maintain cash flows and enhance customer loyalty. Further fare reductions, domestic and international, may occur in the future. If fare reductions are not offset by increases in passenger traffic, changes in the mix of traffic that improve yields and/or cost reductions, the Company's operating results will be further negatively impacted. As discussed in Part A of Item 1, the Company has stated that its survival cannot be assured until labor and other costs are lowered significantly. See also Part E of Item 1.

        Most major air carriers have developed hub-and-spoke systems and schedule patterns in an effort to maximize the revenue potential of their service. American operates five hubs: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), Chicago O'Hare, Miami, St. Louis and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Delta Air Lines (Delta) and United Air Lines (United) also have hub operations at DFW and Chicago O'Hare, respectively.

        The American Eagle carriers increase the number of markets the Company serves by providing connections to American at American's hubs and certain other major airports. The American Eagle carriers serve smaller markets through Boston, DFW, Chicago, Miami, San Juan, Los Angeles, Raleigh Durham and New York's LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy International Airports. The AmericanConnection carriers provide connecting service to American through St. Louis. American's competitors also own or have marketing agreements with regional carriers which provide similar services at their major hubs.

        In addition to its extensive domestic service, the Company provides international service to the Caribbean, the Bahamas, Canada, Latin America, Europe and the Pacific. The Company's operating revenues from foreign operations were approximately 28 percent of the Company's total operating revenues in 2002 and 2001 and 30 percent of the Company's total operating revenues in 2000. Additional information about the Company's foreign operations is included in Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements.

5

        The majority of the tickets for travel on American and American Eagle are sold by travel agents. On March 18, 2002, American announced that it would no longer pay base commissions on tickets issued by travel agents in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. As discussed in Item 3 Legal Proceedings, the Company is subject to legal challenges related to these changes. Previously, domestic travel agents generally received a base commission of five percent of the price of the tickets they sold, capped at a maximum of $20 for a domestic roundtrip itinerary and $100 for an international roundtrip itinerary. American continues, however, to pay certain commissions to travel agents in connection with special revenue programs. American believes that other carriers also no longer pay base commissions on tickets issued by travel agents but pay certain commissions in connection with their own special revenue programs. Accordingly, airlines compete not only with respect to the price of the tickets sold but also with respect to the amount of special revenue program commissions paid.

        The growing use of electronic distribution systems provides the Company with an opportunity to lower its distribution costs. However, the continuous increase in pricing transparency resulting from use of the Internet has enabled cost-conscious customers to more easily obtain the lowest fare on any given route. The Company continues to expand the capabilities of its Internet website—AA.com—and the use of electronic ticketing throughout the Company's network. In addition, the Company, along with United, Continental, Delta and Northwest, owns an interest in Orbitz, a travel planning website. Orbitz provides online access to airline, hotel, car rental and other travel services. The Company also has marketing agreements with other internet travel services.

        International air transportation is subject to extensive government regulation. In providing international air transportation, the Company competes with foreign investor-owned carriers, state-owned carriers and U.S. airlines that have been granted authority to provide scheduled passenger and cargo service between the U.S. and various overseas locations. The Company's operating authority in these markets is subject to aviation agreements between the U.S. and the respective countries, and in some cases, fares and schedules require the approval of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and/or the relevant foreign governments. Because international air transportation is governed by bilateral or other agreements between the U.S. and the foreign country or countries involved, changes in U.S. or foreign government aviation policies could result in the alteration or termination of such agreements, diminish the value of such route authorities, or otherwise adversely affect the Company's international operations. Bilateral agreements between the U.S. and various foreign countries served by the Company are subject to renegotiation. In addition, at some foreign airports, an air carrier needs slots (landing and take-off authorizations) before the air carrier can introduce new service or increase existing service. The availability of such slots is not assured and the inability of the Company to obtain and retain needed slots could therefore inhibit its efforts to compete in certain markets.

        The major U.S. air carriers have some advantage over foreign competitors in their ability to generate traffic from their extensive domestic route systems. In many cases, however, foreign governments limit U.S. air carriers' rights to carry passengers beyond designated gateway cities in foreign countries. To improve access to each other's markets, various U.S. and foreign air carriers—including American—have established marketing relationships with other airlines and rail companies. American currently has marketing relationships with Aer Lingus, Air Pacific, Air Tahiti Nui, Alaska Airlines, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, China Eastern Airlines, EL AL, EVA Air, Finnair, Gulf Air, Hawaiian Airlines, Iberia, Japan Airlines, LanChile, LOT Polish Airlines, Qantas Airways, SN Brussels, SNCF, Southern Winds, Swiss International Air Lines, TACA Group, the TAM Group, TAP Air Portugal, Thalys, Trans States, and Turkish Airlines. American Eagle has codesharing programs with Continental, Delta, Midwest Express and Northwest, in addition to codesharing with some of American's codeshare partners. In the coming years, the Company expects to develop these programs further and to evaluate new alliances with other carriers.

6

        American is also a founding member of the oneworld alliance, which includes Aer Lingus, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Finnair, LanChile, Iberia, and Qantas. The oneworld alliance links the networks of the member carriers to enhance customer service and smooth connections to the destinations served by the alliance, including linking the carriers' frequent flyer programs and access to the carriers' airport lounge facilities. Several of American's major competitors are members of marketing/operational alliances that enjoy antitrust immunity. To the extent that American and British Airways, the largest members of the oneworld alliance, are restricted in their relationship because they lack antitrust immunity, the carriers could be at a competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis other alliances that have antitrust immunity. On November 18, 2002, American and British Airways submitted an application with the DOT for approval of certain codeshare services as permitted under the existing bilateral agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom. On April 9, 2003, the DOT issued an order tentatively giving American and British Airways permission to codeshare on a wide number of flights beyond the carriers' gateways in the United Kingdom and the United States. The ruling provides a comment period until April 21, 2003. The carriers plan to begin codesharing as soon as possible if the order is made final.

        The Company believes that it has several advantages relative to its competition. It operates a fleet that is efficient and quiet. It has a comprehensive domestic and international route structure, anchored by efficient hubs, which permit it to take full advantage of whatever traffic growth occurs. The Company believes American's AAdvantage frequent flyer program, which is the largest program in the industry, its More Room Throughout Coach program and its superior service also give it a competitive advantage. However, as discussed in Part A of Item 1 of this Report, these competitive advantages are not sufficient in the short-term to overcome the economic difficulties currently facing the Company.

D. Regulation

General    The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, as amended, eliminated most domestic economic regulation of passenger and freight transportation. However, the DOT and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) still exercise certain regulatory authority over air carriers. The DOT maintains jurisdiction over the approval of international codeshare agreements, international route authorities and certain consumer protection and unfair competition matters, such as advertising, denied boarding compensation and baggage liability.

        The FAA regulates flying operations generally, including establishing personnel, aircraft and security standards. As part of that oversight, the FAA has implemented a number of requirements that the Company is incorporating into its maintenance programs. These matters relate to, among other things, modifications to improve cockpit security on all fleet-types, enhanced ground proximity warning systems, McDonnell Douglas MD-80 metal-mylar insulation replacement, McDonnell Douglas MD-80 main landing gear piston improvements, Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 pylon improvements, Boeing 737 elevator and rudder improvements, inspections to monitor Airbus A300 vertical stabilizers and Airbus A300 structural improvements. Based on its current implementation schedule, the Company expects to be in compliance with the applicable requirements within the required time periods.

        The Department of Justice (DOJ) has jurisdiction over airline antitrust matters. The U.S. Postal Service has jurisdiction over certain aspects of the transportation of mail and related services. Labor relations in the air transportation industry are regulated under the Railway Labor Act, which vests in the National Mediation Board (NMB) certain regulatory functions with respect to disputes between airlines and labor unions relating to union representation and collective bargaining agreements. In addition, as a result of its international operations and alliances with international carriers, the Company is subject to the jurisdiction and regulations of various foreign agencies.

        In November 2001, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) was enacted. The ATSA created a new government agency, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which is part of the DOT and is responsible for aviation security. The ATSA mandates that the TSA provide for the screening of all passengers and property, including U.S. mail, cargo, carry-on and checked baggage, and other articles that will be carried aboard a passenger aircraft. The ATSA required all checked baggage to be screened by December 31, 2002. The TSA assumed most passenger screening functions in February 2002, largely by contracting with private-sector security providers. The TSA has since replaced these contractors with its own federal employees. The ATSA also provides for increased security on in cockpits of aircraft and requires federal air marshals to be present on certain flights.

7

        Effective February 1, 2002, the ATSA imposed a $2.50 per enplanement security service fee ($5 one-way maximum fee) which is being collected by the air carriers and submitted to the government to pay for these enhanced security measures. Additionally, for the years 2002, 2003 and 2004, air carriers are required to submit to the government an amount equal to what the air carriers paid for screening passengers and property in 2000. After 2004, this fee may be assessed based on the air carrier's market share. See Part A of Item 1 for a discussion of recent legislation which would provide for the suspension of the passenger security service fee from June 1, 2003 until October 1, 2003.

        In addition, the ATSA requires air carriers to honor tickets for suspended service on other air carriers that are insolvent or have declared bankruptcy within 18 months of the passage of the ATSA. To be eligible, a passenger must make arrangements with the air carrier within 60 days after the date on which the passenger's air transportation was suspended. This feature of the ATSA could have a significant impact on the Company. For example, if the Company is not reimbursed for honoring such tickets, the impact could be adverse.

        As described in Item 3—Legal Proceedings, the Antitrust Division of the DOJ and several purported classes of private parties are pursuing litigation alleging that American and American Eagle violated federal antitrust laws when competing with new air carriers. In April 2001, the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas granted American's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the government's case. The DOJ has appealed and in September 2002 oral arguments were heard before the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals. The private lawsuits have been stayed pending the outcome of the DOJ's appeal. Adverse court decisions could impose restrictions on the Company's ability to respond to competitors, or could result in awards of substantial money damages to private parties, in which case the Company's business could be adversely impacted.

Airline Fares    Airlines are permitted to establish their own domestic fares without governmental regulation, and the industry is characterized by substantial price competition. The DOT maintains authority over international fares, rates and charges. International fares and rates are sometimes subject to the jurisdiction of the governments of the foreign countries which the Company serves. While air carriers are required to file and adhere to international fare and rate tariffs, substantial commissions, overrides and discounts to travel agents, brokers and wholesalers characterize many international markets.

        Legislation (sometimes referred to as the "Passengers' Bill of Rights") has been discussed in various legislatures (including the Congress). This legislation could, if enacted: (i) place various limitations on airline fares and/or (ii) affect operating practices such as baggage handling and overbooking. Effective December 15, 1999, the Company, as well as other domestic airlines, implemented a Customer Service Plan to address a number of service goals, including, but not limited to, goals relating to: (i) lowest fare availability, (ii) delays, cancellations and diversion events, (iii) baggage delivery and liability, (iv) guaranteed fares, (v) ticket refunds, (vi) accommodation of customers with special needs, (vii) essential customer needs during extraordinary delays, (viii) flight oversales, (ix) Frequent Flyer Program—AAdvantage, (x) other travel policies, (xi) service with domestic codeshare partners, and (xii) handling of customer issues. In February 2001, the DOT Inspector General issued a report on the various air carriers' performance of their Customer Service Plans. The report included a number of recommendations which could limit the Company's flexibility with respect to various operational practices. In February 2001, a bill proposing an "Airline Customer Service Improvement Act" was introduced in the U.S. Senate. In addition, other items of legislation have been introduced that would limit hub concentration, reallocate slots at certain airports and impose higher landing fees at certain hours. To the extent legislation is enacted that would inhibit the Company's flexibility with respect to fares, its revenue management system, its operations or other aspects of its customer service operations, the Company's financial results could be adversely affected.

Airport Access    In 1968, the FAA issued a rule designating New York John F. Kennedy, New York LaGuardia, Washington National (now Washington Reagan), Chicago O'Hare and Newark airports as high-density traffic airports. Newark was subsequently removed from the high-density airport classification. The high-density rule limits the number of Instrument Flight Rule operations—take-offs and landings—permitted per hour and requires that a slot support each operation. In April 2000, the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21^st Century (Air 21 Act) was enacted which: (i) eliminates slot restrictions at New York John F. Kennedy and New York LaGuardia airports in 2007, (ii) shrank Chicago O'Hare's slot day from 0645 - 2114 hours to 1445 - 2014 hours starting July 2001, and (iii) eliminated Chicago O'Hare slots in July 2002. The Company does not expect the elimination of these slot restrictions to have a material adverse impact on the Company's operations or its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

8

        Currently, the FAA permits the purchasing, selling, leasing or transferring of slots except those slots designated as international, essential air service or Air 21 Act. Trading of any slot is permitted subject to certain parameters. Most foreign airports, including London Heathrow, a major European destination for American, also have slot allocations. Most foreign authorities do not permit the purchasing, selling or leasing of slots.

        Although the Company is constrained by slots, it currently has sufficient slot authorizations to operate its existing flights and has generally been able to obtain slots to expand its operations and change its schedules. However, there is no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain slots for these purposes in the future because, among other factors, domestic slot allocations are subject to changes in government policies.

Environmental Matters    The Company is subject to various laws and government regulations concerning environmental matters and employee safety and health in the U.S. and other countries. U.S. federal laws that have a particular impact on the Company include the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or the Superfund Act). The Company is also subject to the oversight of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) concerning employee safety and health matters. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), OSHA, and other federal agencies have been authorized to promulgate regulations that have an impact on the Company's operations. In addition to these federal activities, various states have been delegated certain authorities under the aforementioned federal statutes. Many state and local governments have adopted environmental and employee safety and health laws and regulations, some of which are similar to federal requirements.

        The ANCA recognizes the rights of airport operators with noise problems to implement local noise abatement programs so long as they do not interfere unreasonably with interstate or foreign commerce or the national air transportation system. Authorities in several cities have promulgated aircraft noise reduction programs, including the imposition of nighttime curfews. The ANCA generally requires FAA approval of local noise restrictions on aircraft. While the Company has had sufficient scheduling flexibility to accommodate local noise restrictions imposed to date, the Company's operations could be adversely affected if locally-imposed regulations become more restrictive or widespread.

        American has been identified by the EPA as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at the Operating Industries, Inc. Superfund Site in California. Along with numerous other PRPs at the Operating Industries Site, American has signed a series of partial consent decrees and a final consent decree with respect to the cleanup of contamination at that location. American is participating with other PRPs in a Joint Defense Group and has signed an EPA Consent Decree along with other group members. The decree will enable American to resolve its past and present liabilities at the Site in exchange for a one-time, lump-sum settlement payment. The Company expects the decree to become final in 2003 after completion of a public notice and comment period.

        The EPA identified American as a PRP at the Mattiace Petrochemical Superfund Site located near Glen Cove, NY. American's alleged volumetric contributions are substantial when compared with those of other PRPs. American is participating with other PRPs in a Joint Defense Group that is actively conducting settlement negotiations with the EPA and the State of New York. The Joint Defense Group seeks a settlement on behalf of its members that will enable American to resolve its past and present liabilities at the Site in exchange for a one-time, lump-sum settlement payment.

        American, along with most other tenants at the San Francisco International Airport (SFIA), has been ordered by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board to engage in various studies of potential environmental contamination at the airport and to undertake remedial measures, if necessary. SFIA is also seeking to recover its past costs related to the contamination from the tenants.

9

        Miami-Dade County (the County) is currently investigating and remediating various environmental conditions at the Miami International Airport (MIA) and funding the remediation costs through landing fees and various cost recovery methods. American and AMR Eagle have been named PRPs for the contamination at MIA. During the second quarter of 2001, the County filed a lawsuit against 17 defendants, including American, in an attempt to recover its past and future cleanup costs (Miami-Dade County, Florida v. Advance Cargo Services, Inc., et al. in the Florida Circuit Court). In addition to the 17 defendants named in the lawsuit, 243 other agencies and companies were also named as PRPs and contributors to the contamination. American's and AMR Eagle's portion of the cleanup costs cannot be reasonably estimated due to various factors, including the unknown extent of the remedial actions that may be required, the proportion of the cost that will ultimately be recovered from the responsible parties, and uncertainties regarding the environmental agencies that will ultimately supervise the remedial activities and the nature of that supervision. The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit.

        In 1999, American was ordered by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) to conduct remediation of environmental contamination located at Terminals 8 and 9 at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK). In 2002, American began negotiating an order with NYSDEC for the remediation of a JFK off-terminal hangar facility. American is seeking to recover a portion of the remediation costs from previous users of the Terminals 8 and 9 premises.

        Also in 1999, the Company entered a plea agreement with the U.S. Government with respect to a one count indictment relating to the storage of hazardous materials. As part of the plea agreement, the Company was placed on probation for three years and adopted a comprehensive compliance program. The probation period ended in 2002.

        In 1996, American and Executive, along with other tenants at the Luis Munoz Marin International Airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico were notified by the Port Authority that it considered them potentially responsible for environmental contamination at the airport. Since 1996, no further action has been taken against American or Executive.

        American Eagle Airlines, Inc. has been notified of its potential liability under New York law at an inactive hazardous waste site in Poughkeepsie, New York.

        The Company does not expect these matters, individually or collectively, to have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

10

E. Labor

        The airline business is labor intensive. Wages, salaries and benefits represented approximately 41 percent of the Company's consolidated operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2002. The Company's average equivalent number of employees for the year ended December 31, 2002 was 109,600.

        Because of, among other things, the continuing adverse economic climate, increased competition from LCCs, the continuing threat of terrorist actions and the war in Iraq, the airline industry, including American, continues to be in severe distress. This has already caused two major carriers, United Air Lines, and USAirways, to file for protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Through the Chapter 11 process, USAirways has reached permanent agreements with their unions and United has reached temporary agreements with their unions changing the rates of pay, benefits, and work rules applicable to their unionized employees. (Effective March 31, 2003, US Airways emerged from Chapter 11 reorganization.) Those changes give those carriers a significant cost advantage, as compared to American and their other competitors. All of these factors make it crucial that American dramatically and quickly reduce its costs to remain competitive. American has made a large number of business changes which will reduce its annual costs by more than $2 billion. However, it believes that at least an additional $2 billion in cost reductions must occur and that most of that must come from long-term labor cost reductions. In February 2003, American asked its labor leaders and employees for approximately $1.8 billion in permanent, annual savings through a combination of changes in wages, benefits and work rules. On March 31, 2003, the Company reached agreements with the leaders of the three major unions representing American employees and announced changes in pay plans and benefits for non-unionized employees (including officers and other management) which will meet the targeted contributions. Of the approximately $1.8 billion in savings, approximately $1.0 billion are to be accomplished through wage and benefit reductions while the remaining approximately $.8 billion would be accomplished through changes in work rules which would result in additional job reductions. Wage reductions became effective on April 1, 2003 for officers and will become effective on May 1, 2003 for all other employees. Reductions related to benefits and work rule changes will be phased in over time. In connection with the changes in wages, benefits and work rules, the Labor Agreements provide for the issuance of approximately 38 million shares of AMR stock in the form of stock options which will generally vest over a three year period (see Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements for additional information). Although these Labor Agreements enabled the Company to avoid an immediate filing of a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (a Chapter 11 filing), these Labor Agreements must still be ratified by the unions' memberships. At the time of the filing of this Form 10-K, the unions have put the Labor Agreements out for a ratification vote. It is anticipated that the official results of the voting will be formally announced on April 15, 2003. A group of pilots filed a lawsuit on April 14, 2003 contesting the union ratification process. The U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, Texas denied the request for a temporary restraining order. Failure of one or more of the unions to ratify its Labor Agreement would likely lead the Company to initiate a Chapter 11 filing. See Labor Agreements in Part A of Item 1 for a discussion of other factors that may adversely affect the Company.

        The majority of the Company's employees are represented by labor unions and covered by collective bargaining agreements. The Company's relations with such labor organizations are governed by the Railway Labor Act. Under this act, the collective bargaining agreements among the Company and these organizations generally do not expire but instead become amendable as of a stated date. If either party wishes to modify the terms of any such agreement, it must notify the other party in the manner described in the agreement. After receipt of such notice, the parties must meet for direct negotiations, and if no agreement is reached, either party may request the National Mediation Board (NMB) to appoint a federal mediator. If no agreement is reached in mediation, the NMB may declare at some time that an impasse exists, and if an impasse is declared, the NMB proffers binding arbitration to the parties. Either party may decline to submit to arbitration. If arbitration is rejected by either party, a 30-day "cooling off" period commences. During that period (or after), a Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) may be established, which examines the parties' positions and recommends a solution. The PEB process lasts for 30 days and is followed by a "cooling off" period of 30 days. At the end of a "cooling off" period, unless an agreement is reached or action is taken by Congress, the labor organization may strike and the airline may resort to "self-help", including the imposition of any or all of its proposed amendments and the hiring of workers to replace strikers.

        American reached a new contract with the Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA) during 2001. The new contract becomes amendable on November 30, 2004.

11

        American reached new agreements with the TWU during 2001 concerning the eight employee groups represented by the TWU. The new agreements become amendable on March 1, 2004.

        The APA agreement became amendable August 31, 2001.

        However, if the Labor Agreements discussed above and in Part A of Item 1 are ratified, the new APFA, TWU and APA agreements will not become amendable until 2009.

        A provision in the scope clause of American's current contract with the APA limits the number of available seat miles (ASMs) and block hours that may be flown under American's marketing code (AA) by American's regional carrier partners when American pilots are on furlough (the ASM cap). To ensure that American remained in compliance with the ASM cap, American and American Eagle took several steps in 2002 to reduce the number of ASMs flown by American's commuter air carriers. As one of those measures, AMR Eagle signed a letter of intent to sell Executive Airlines, its San Juan-based subsidiary. In December 2002, American and the APA began discussions on the contract limitations found in the scope clause. The APA agreed that American would have temporary relief from compliance with the ASM cap while those discussions continued. That relief, coupled with other actions taken by American and American Eagle, will enable American Eagle to defer the sale until later in 2003.

        Another provision in the current APA contract limits to 67 the total number of regional jets with more than 44 seats that can be flown under the AA code by American's regional carrier partners. As AMR Eagle continues to accept previously-ordered Bombardier and Embraer regional jets this cap would be reached in early 2003. To ensure that American remains in compliance with the 67-aircraft cap, AMR Eagle has reached an agreement to dispose of 14 Embraer ERJ-145 aircraft from its fleet. The Company expects that these aircraft will be acquired by Trans States Airlines, an AmericanConnection carrier, which will operate these aircraft under the Trans States Airlines marketing code (AX) at its St. Louis hub.

        If the Labor Agreement reached with the APA on March 31, 2003 is ratified, the provisions in the APA contract described in the immediately preceding two paragraphs will be modified to give the Company more flexibility with its American Eagle operations.

        The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), which represents American Eagle pilots, reached agreement with American Eagle effective September 1, 1997, to have all of the pilots of the Eagle carriers covered by a single collective bargaining agreement. This agreement lasts until October 31, 2013. The agreement provides to the parties the right to seek limited changes in 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012. If the parties are unable to agree on the limited changes, they also agreed that the issues would be resolved by interest arbitration, without the exercise of self-help (such as a strike). ALPA and American Eagle negotiated a tentative agreement in 2000, but that agreement failed in ratification. Thereafter, the parties participated in interest arbitration. The interest arbitration panel determined the limited changes which should be made and these changes were appropriately effected.

        The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), which represents the flight attendants of the Eagle carriers, reached agreement with American Eagle effective March 2, 1998, to have all flight attendants of the American Eagle carriers covered by a single contract. The agreement became amendable on September 2, 2001. However, the parties agreed to commence negotiations over amendments to the agreement in March 2001. The parties are still engaged in direct negotiations. The other union employees at the American Eagle carriers are covered by separate agreements with the TWU which were effective April 28, 1998, and are amendable April 28, 2003. American Eagle and the TWU have already commenced negotiations.

12

        The non-union employees formerly with TWA LLC have largely been integrated into the Company's work force. The integration of unionized employees from TWA LLC who had to be integrated into unionized groups at American has been more complex. The Company first engaged facilitators to work with American's and TWA LLC's unions in attempting to reach integration agreements acceptable to all unions from both carriers. Unfortunately, those discussions were unable to produce agreements acceptable to the relevant unions at both carriers. American thereafter had separate discussions with the unions at American. It reached integration agreements with the APA (with respect to pilot integration) and the APFA (with respect to flight attendant integration). American and the TWU participated in arbitration, which process resolved certain unionized ground employee integration issues in late February and early March 2002. In early April, 2002, the NMB declared American and TWA LLC a single carrier for labor relations purposes and designated American's incumbent unions as the collective bargaining representatives of the relevant work groups at both American and TWA LLC. Since American's unions thereafter represented the relevant employees at both carriers, the integration mechanisms reached with the unions at American could then begin to be applied. The integration of the unionized work groups is occurring in accordance with those mechanisms.

F. Fuel

        The Company's operations are significantly affected by the availability and price of jet fuel. The Company's fuel costs and consumption for the years 2000 through 2002 were:

*

The amounts for 2002 and 2001 reflect the January 1, 2001 adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities" (SFAS 133); the 2000 amounts do not. See a further discussion of the impact of SFAS 133 to the Company in Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements.

        The impact of fuel price changes on the Company and its competitors is dependent upon various factors, including hedging strategies. The Company has a fuel hedging program in which it enters into jet fuel, heating oil and crude swap and option contracts to protect against increases in jet fuel prices, which has had the effect of reducing the Company's average cost per gallon. During 2002, 2001 and 2000, the Company's fuel hedging program reduced the Company's fuel expense by approximately $4 million, $29 million and $545 million, respectively. To reduce the impact of potential fuel price increases in 2003, as of December 31, 2002, the Company had hedged approximately 32 percent of its estimated 2003 fuel requirements. Based on projected fuel usage, the Company estimates that a 10 percent increase in the price per gallon of fuel as of December 31, 2002 would result in an increase to aircraft fuel expense of approximately $205 million in 2003, net of fuel hedge instruments outstanding at December 31, 2002. The decline in the Company's credit rating, as discussed in Liquidity and Capital Resources of Item 7, has limited its ability to enter into certain types of fuel hedge contracts. A further deterioration of its credit rating or liquidity position may negatively affect the Company's ability to hedge fuel in the future. Due to the competitive nature of the airline industry, in the event of continuing increases in the price of jet fuel, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to pass on increased fuel prices to its customers by increasing its fares. Likewise, any potential benefit of lower fuel prices may be offset by increased fare competition and lower revenues for all air carriers.

13

        While the Company does not currently anticipate a significant reduction in fuel availability, dependency on foreign imports of crude oil and the possibility of changes in government policy on jet fuel production, transportation and marketing make it impossible to predict the future availability of jet fuel. In the event there is an outbreak of hostilities or other conflicts in oil producing areas or elsewhere, such as the war in Iraq or domestic turmoil, as recently seen in Venezuela and Nigeria, there could be reductions in the production and/or importation of crude oil and/or significant increases in the cost of fuel. If there were major reductions in the availability of jet fuel or significant increases in its cost, the Company's business, as well as that of the entire industry, would be adversely affected.

        Additional information regarding the Company's fuel program is included in Item 7(A)—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk and in Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements.

G. Frequent Flyer Program

        American established the AAdvantage frequent flyer program (AAdvantage) to develop passenger loyalty by offering awards to travelers for their continued patronage. AAdvantage members earn mileage credits for flights on American, American Eagle and certain other participating airlines, or by using services of other program participants, including bank credit card issuers, hotels and car rental and phone service companies. American sells mileage credits and related services to the other companies participating in the program. American reserves the right to change the AAdvantage program rules, regulations, travel awards and special offers at any time without notice. American may initiate changes impacting, for example, participant affiliations, rules for earning mileage credit, mileage levels and awards, limited seating for travel awards, and the features of special offers. American reserves the right to end the AAdvantage program with six months' notice.

        Mileage credits can be redeemed for free, discounted or upgraded travel on American, American Eagle or participating airlines, or for other travel industry awards. Once a member accrues sufficient mileage for an award, the member may request an award certificate from American. Award certificates may be redeemed up to one year after issuance. Most travel awards are subject to capacity controlled seating. Miles do not expire, provided a customer has any type of qualifying activity at least once every 36 months.

        American uses the incremental cost method to account for the portion of its frequent flyer liability incurred when AAdvantage members earn mileage credits by flying on American or American Eagle. American's frequent flyer liability is accrued each time a member accumulates sufficient mileage in his or her account to claim the lowest level of free travel award (25,000 miles) and such award is expected to be used for free travel. American includes fuel, food, and reservations/ticketing costs, but not a contribution to overhead or profit, in the calculation of incremental cost. These estimates are generally updated based upon the Company's 12-month historical average of such costs. The cost for fuel is estimated based on total fuel consumption tracked by various categories of markets, with an amount allocated to each passenger. Food costs are tracked by market category, with an amount allocated to each passenger. Reservation/ticketing costs are based on the total number of passengers, including those traveling on free awards, divided into American's total expense for these costs.

        Revenue earned from selling AAdvantage miles to other companies participating in American's frequent flyer program is recognized in two components. The first component represents the revenue for air transportation sold and is valued at current market rates. This revenue is deferred and recognized over the period the mileage is expected to be used, which is currently estimated to be 28 months. The second revenue component, representing the marketing products sold and administrative costs associated with operating the AAdvantage program, is recognized immediately.

        At December 31, 2002 and 2001, American estimated that approximately 9.3 million and 8.7 million free travel awards, respectively, were expected to be redeemed for free travel on American and American Eagle. In making the estimate of free travel awards, American has excluded mileage in inactive accounts, mileage related to accounts that have not yet reached the lowest level of free travel award, and mileage in active accounts that have reached the lowest level of free travel award but which are not expected to ever be redeemed for free travel on American. The resulting liability was approximately $1.2 billion and $1.1 billion, representing 16.2 percent and 14.9 percent of AMR's total current liabilities, at December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively.

14

        The number of free travel awards used for travel on American and American Eagle in 2002 was 3.5 million, representing approximately 8.1 percent of passengers boarded. Comparatively, the number of free travel awards used for travel on American and American Eagle (excluding TWA LLC) was 2.7 million in 2001 and 2.8 million in 2000, representing approximately 7.4 percent of total passengers boarded in 2001 and 7 percent in 2000 (excluding TWA LLC). The Company believes displacement of revenue passengers is minimal given the Company's load factors, its ability to manage frequent flyer seat inventory, and the relatively low ratio of free award usage to total passengers boarded.

H. Other Matters

Seasonality and Other Factors    The Company's results of operations for any interim period are not necessarily indicative of those for the entire year, since the air transportation business is subject to seasonal fluctuations.

        The results of operations in the air transportation business have also significantly fluctuated in the past in response to general economic conditions. In addition, fears of terrorism or war, fare initiatives, fluctuations in fuel prices, labor actions and other factors could impact this seasonal pattern. Unaudited quarterly financial data for the two-year period ended December 31, 2002 is included in Note 18 to the consolidated financial statements.

        No material part of the business of AMR and its subsidiaries is dependent upon a single customer or very few customers. Consequently, the loss of the Company's largest few customers would not have a materially adverse effect upon the Company.

Insurance    The Company carries insurance for public liability, passenger liability, property damage and all-risk coverage for damage to its aircraft, in amounts which, in the opinion of management, are adequate.

        As a result of the September 11, 2001 events, aviation insurers have significantly reduced the amount of insurance coverage available to commercial air carriers for liability to persons other than employees or passengers for claims resulting from acts of terrorism, war or similar events (war-risk coverage). At the same time, they significantly increased the premiums for such coverage as well as for aviation insurance in general.

        The U.S. government has provided commercial war-risk insurance for U.S. based airlines until June 13, 2003 covering losses to employees, passengers, third parties and aircraft. The Company believes this insurance coverage will be extended beyond June 13, 2003 because the Homeland Security Act provides for this insurance to remain in place until August 31, 2003. In addition, the Secretary of Transportation may extend the policy until December 31, 2003, at his discretion. See Part A of Item 1 for a discussion of recent legislation which would provide for the extension of war-risk insurance through September 30, 2004.

        In the event the commercial insurance carriers further reduce the amount of insurance coverage available to the Company or significantly increase the cost of aviation insurance, or if the Government fails to renew the war-risk insurance that it provides, the Company's operations and/or financial position and results of operations would be materially adversely affected.

Other Government Matters    In time of war or during an unlimited national emergency or civil defense emergency, American and other air carriers can be required to provide airlift services to the Air Mobility Command under the Civil Reserve Air Fleet program (CRAF). The Air Mobility Command, which runs CRAF, has activated stage one of CRAF as part of the U.S. government's build-up for military action in Iraq and has notified American that it requires five airplanes including three 777s and two 767-300s with crews. American has been planning for the potential activation of stage one of CRAF and is having no problems meeting its current CRAF obligations. If the Air Mobility Command activates stage two of CRAF, American will be obligated to provide up to 18 additional aircraft. In the event the Company has to provide a substantial amount of additional services, its operations could be adversely impacted.

Available Information    The Company makes its annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 available free of charge on its website, www.amrcorp.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

15

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Flight Equipment

        Owned and leased aircraft operated by the Company at December 31, 2002 included:

*

American Airlines aircraft totals include 27 Boeing 757-200s and 103 McDonnell Douglas MD-80s that were formerly TWA aircraft

        In addition, the following owned and leased aircraft were not operated by the Company as of December 31, 2002: seven owned Boeing 727-200s, 14 operating leased Boeing 717-200s, 11 operating leased McDonnell Douglas DC-9s, six owned McDonnell Douglas DC-10-10s, four operating leased McDonnell Douglas MD-80s, eight operating leased Boeing 767-300s, six owned Embraer 145s and 16 capital leased and two owned Saab 340Bs.

        Of the non-operating aircraft discussed above, five McDonnell Douglas DC-10-10 aircraft were being leased to Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. (Hawaiian) as of December 31, 2002 and six Embraer 145 aircraft are currently being leased to Trans States Airlines (Trans States). Upon termination of the lease agreement with Hawaiian, the Company has agreed to sell the remaining six McDonnell Douglas DC10-10 aircraft to FedEx Corporation in 2003. In addition, Trans States has agreed to acquire a total of 14 Embraer 145 aircraft from the Company, including the six non-operating Embraer 145s discussed above, in 2003. The Company is actively marketing its remaining non-operating aircraft and does not anticipate bringing these aircraft back into its operations.

        Of the operating aircraft in the above table, 28 McDonnell Douglas MD-80s, eight Boeing 767-200s and six Boeing 767-200ERs will be placed in temporary storage beginning in 2003.

        For information concerning the estimated useful lives and residual values for owned aircraft, lease terms for leased aircraft and amortization relating to aircraft under capital leases, see Notes 1 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements.

16

        Lease expirations for the leased aircraft included in the preceding table as of December 31, 2002, are:

        Substantially all of the Company's aircraft leases include an option to purchase the aircraft or to extend the lease term, or both, with the purchase price or renewal rental to be based essentially on the market value of the aircraft at the end of the term of the lease or at a predetermined fixed amount. The Company does not intend to purchase or extend the lease term on any aircraft with lease expirations in 2003.

Ground Properties

        The Company leases, or has built as leasehold improvements on leased property, most of its airport and terminal facilities; maintenance and training facilities in Fort Worth, Texas; its principal overhaul and maintenance bases at Tulsa International Airport (Tulsa, Oklahoma), Kansas City International Airport (Kansas City, Missouri) and Alliance Airport (Fort Worth, Texas); its regional reservation offices; and local ticket and administration offices throughout the system. American has entered into agreements with the Tulsa Municipal Airport Trust; the Alliance Airport Authority, Fort Worth, Texas; the New York City Industrial Development Agency; and the Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago O'Hare, Newark, San Juan, and Los Angeles airport authorities to provide funds for constructing, improving and modifying facilities and acquiring equipment which are or will be leased to the Company. The Company also uses public airports for its flight operations under lease or use arrangements with the municipalities or governmental agencies owning or controlling them and leases certain other ground equipment for use at its facilities.

        For information concerning the estimated lives and residual values for owned ground properties, lease terms and amortization relating to ground properties under capital leases, and acquisitions of ground properties, see Notes 1 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements.

17

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

        On July 26, 1999, a class action lawsuit was filed, and in November 1999 an amended complaint was filed, against AMR Corporation, American Airlines, Inc., AMR Eagle Holding Corporation, Airlines Reporting Corporation, and the Sabre Group Holdings, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division (Westways World Travel, Inc. v. AMR Corp., et al.). The lawsuit alleges that requiring travel agencies to pay debit memos to American for violations of American's fare rules (by customers of the agencies): (1) breaches the Agent Reporting Agreement between American and AMR Eagle and the plaintiffs; (2) constitutes unjust enrichment; and (3) violates the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (RICO). The as yet uncertified class includes all travel agencies who have been or will be required to pay money to American for debit memos for fare rules violations from July 26, 1995 to the present. The plaintiffs seek to enjoin American from enforcing the pricing rules in question and to recover the amounts paid for debit memos, plus treble damages, attorneys' fees, and costs. The Company intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit. A final adverse court decision could impose restrictions on the Company's relationships with travel agencies which, restrictions could have an adverse impact on the Company.

        On May 13, 1999, the United States (through the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice) sued AMR Corporation, American Airlines, Inc., and AMR Eagle Holding Corporation in federal court in Wichita, Kansas (United States v. AMR Corporation, et al, No. 99-1180-JTM, United States District Court for the District of Kansas). The lawsuit alleges that American unlawfully monopolized or attempted to monopolize airline passenger service to and from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) by increasing service when new competitors began flying to DFW, and by matching these new competitors' fares. The Department of Justice seeks to enjoin American from engaging in the alleged improper conduct and to impose restraints on American to remedy the alleged effects of its past conduct. On April 27, 2001, the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas granted American's motion for summary judgment. On June 26, 2001, the U.S. Department of Justice appealed the granting of American's motion for summary judgment (United States v. AMR Corpor