Sdkualeb From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 129 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6115 times:
I don't see that as good new being recently laid off. Im glad to see that other country's will benefit better than people state side. They need to find a better balance and stop concentrating on over seas and do something here. I know they say the money is in the Pacific but that didn't help me any! 8 long hard years and now have nothing to show for it, because our upper management cant make a decision that is best for the company and not there own pockets
Nwcoflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 675 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6093 times:
The reason they are expanding overseas is because that is where they can make money. UA (and the other majors) are under attack from the LCC's stateside, and it's much harder to make money over here. Fortunatley, WN cant run it's 73G's from LAX-NRT (yet... )
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6052 times:
Great news from my favorite airline.
Sdkualeb....Sure management may have made a few mistakes, but also you need to blame your neighbors, family members and other fellow travelers for buying lower and lower air fares. I don't blame them, of course, but low airfares come at a price....meaning lower salaries and benefits....especially at legacy carriers that were used to higher airfares. Just as consumers love the prices at Walmart, the low prices mean they can't have high overhead. Airlines are no different.
I had a discussion with a (liberal) friend who refused to shop at Walmart because they don't pay their employees well or provide benefits, yet he was bragging about the very low airfare he found on the Internet for a trip to California. He didn't seem to care that the same airline is cutting pay and benefits to its employees.
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12019 posts, RR: 50 Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6007 times:
Same tired argument! UA and the other so called majors do not need to match each and every low fare offered. Saks does not chase the KMart shopper. Maybe if UA and the likes stood behind there product and actually believed in it, and charged what they needed to be profitable then maybe they would not be in this position.
SESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3436 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5985 times:
It's about time LAX-NRT got a second daily flight! The largest carrier at LAX only having one daily flight in the largest Trans-Pacific market never made sense to me. Anyone know if the second daily flight will be operated by a 747-400 or a 777? Would be cool to see 2 744s on the route. Hope UA makes it through and I hope these new services are good for them.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5753 times:
Luv2fly....I'm curious on why you think that. I'm open to good arguments. From what I've read, airline ticket prices are the most price sensitive thing around. Meaning that consumers, using the Internet and other competitive avenues to shop, usually make their decision based on the price before all other factors. Airlines need these consumers to fill their economy cabins.
UA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1693 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5721 times:
Slightly off topic...
I think they would probably keep the 744, just to keep a/c routing easy. UA does send a fair share of 744s to LAX (from IAD, ORD, DEN), either as equipment substitutions, or to send them to Australia or Japan. I agree though, it is strange that LAX's biggest carrier only has a few trans-pac flights. I think the reason for this is that like in that forum that said most people prefer SFO for convienence (on trans-pac flights), United is slowly reintroducing flights. If you look at it, LAX is the JFK of the west, in terms of intl' flights. There are a TON of airlines operating the same flights (SYD, HKG, NRT, SIN, Shanghai, and everywhere else). United has the advantage in SFO: They have a huge domestic and intl' hub there with all the facilities, including maintenence, and most travelers prefer to fly SFO because it is an easier airport (and the new intl' terminal is very nice).
ANYWAYS, (SORRY )
I hope they keep the 744 service
SFORunner From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 324 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5674 times:
They are flying the 777 on the second LAX - NRT route:
Flight 872 will depart Narita at 5:25 p.m. on June 7, and arrive in Los Angeles at 11:20 a.m. the same day. Flight 873 will depart Los Angeles at 11:20 a.m. on June 7 and arrive in Narita at 2:55 p.m. the following day.* Flights also will be flown with a B777 aircraft.
Where's the slot for this flight coming from - is an HNL route being dropped?
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25989 posts, RR: 78 Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5593 times:
I am guessing they will keep a 744 on the other flight, to keep AC rotation the same. Also, I bet NH will go year-round with the 777 to make up for the added capacity from its STAR partner. I am just waiting for UA to open up more than just NRT and Australia from LAX. How about SEL or TPE? Also, they are not "under attack" they are losing a war they tried to start.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
BigB From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 593 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5471 times:
Airlines have to change the way they do business to stay profitable in today's economic enviornment. You already aknowledge this fact. Now, Luv2fly was saying is that UA doesn't have to get into price wars with LCCs. (Hard to do since LCCs are everwhere in UAL's system compare to CO and NW.)
In my opinion, UAL needs to focus on their premium product and offer an competive economy product at the market price. (Equalibrium point on the Supply and Demand curve.) Why they started TED, I don't know, but wasn't a smart move.
BH346 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3265 posts, RR: 15 Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5463 times:
Always good to hear of additional transpacific service. Nagoya is a major industrial center for Japan which will bring business travelers. SFO provides connections as well as NGO with ANA. NGO was made to connect passengers to and from domestic Japanese flights and will actually be busier than KIX when it opens since Chubu will handle nearly all, if not all of Nagoya's airline service (heard they might put a 50-seat cap on flights to Komaki). ORD-NGO would be a possibility if it wasn't for AA already set to fly that route next summer. I don't think there would be enough room for two airlines to operate that route, but if it does really well with AA, who knows... I'm almost certain that we'll see someone fly LAX-NGO, personally I'm expecting JAL but we'll see.
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
UniTED From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5366 times:
Ted is by no means a mistake to United. The mission of Ted is to gain back market share from Low cost competitors, which it has accomplished in the past months.
Ted registerd a load factor of 87% from March to July.
Local market share in Denver for Ted has increased by eight points, while Frontier has decreased by nine points. Note that even a two or three percent difference is an extremely large fraction when talking about market share.
In Denver, Frontier will pull down two daily flights to Ontario (Ted market)
Spirit will take down its twice daily service from DEN to FLL (Ted market)
Ted has an all A320 fleet with the same configuration, keeping costs down.
The Ted fleet has outperformed all maintenance reliability goals even though these planes have been flying 15% more than the mainline A320s.
There are more than 9,000 seats in Ted markets than last year (18 more seats per plane), yet Ted achieves outstanding load factors.
Modifications to transform UA A320s to Ted A320s were completed 'in house'20% faster than anticipated saving time and money.
Ted A320s have been testing various smart ideas such as flying at mach.78 rather than mach.80 to save fuel while not jeapordizing on time stats. All A320s will now adhere to this, saving 2 to 6 million dollars annualy.
Ground crews position power cords before the plane lands so pilots can shut down the engines earlier. This will save as much as 9 million per year.
Ted has six simplified fares, capped at 299 dollars.
Cargo will increase by 250 pounds of mail per flight, revenue will increase by 4.2 million dollars.
Premium customers are taking advantage of Ted. Mileage Plus flying is up 7 %, and on Ted is up 27%.
Marketing in ORD area and DEN area was relitavely cost efficient. Before Ted was flying, UA spent only $200,000 on advertising Ted in the Denver area.
Ted has and continues to exceed its goals while defending United's domestic leisure flying. How can this not be called a success so far?
Hoya From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 365 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5259 times:
True, load factors are not a sign of a profitable flight, but when other airlines are matching your fares, it is somewhat a sign of success. If Frontier has fares at the same price and is losing market share to Ted, then I think Ted could be called a success, at least relatively speaking.
BigB From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 593 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5199 times:
As I stated earlier, I think TED is a bad idea for United. Yes, I understand it was created to win market share back, but it does the job with an extreme Cost Association. Load factors to me just tell me how full planes have been, but it doesn't tell me what kind of profits or losses was made.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2879 posts, RR: 4 Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5057 times:
UA doesn't even serve TPE direct from SFO now.
UA can just codeshare with OZ on LAX-ICN, just as OZ does with UA on SFO-ICN.
With all these new services announced into KIX and NGO, the market probably can not support all these flights because Japan is a very mature market and growth will be minimal at best. Granted next year will be the Expo, so travelers will be numerous but in 2006 we will wait and see.
But then again, even with lightly loaded flights a 777 can carry more cargo than a 747, so maybe that's the hidden factor.
UA744KSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5017 times:
This is a wise move for UA. While it was once true that the legacy carrier offered a product much superior to the LCC (remember People Express!), so many people are preferring to fly the LCC not only because of price, but because of little things like PTV's or leather seats. I know some people may not like that, but it is true.
As to the business traveller market, they were once the mainstay of the US domestic market, but now that walk-up airfares are so much lower than before the LCC influx, they no longer have the incentive to enter into exclusive service agreements for domestic travel.
There also is a prevailing attitude in the US that people don't really care about amenities and the like on a domestic flight (with the possible exception of some CA-NY routes). When it comes to an International flight, however, that's a whole different story.
So, in order for United to compete, they have to offer a good product internationally and cheap fares domestically. However, they have had it with the bloodbaths that have gone on, and I think they're making a wise decision in focusing on less saturated markets where they might be able to yield a profit.
25 SegmentKing: Where did you get your info UniTED? Cause it's unfortunately wrong. Frontier has not posted any decreases in traffic on any route flown by mainline Fr
26 Copaair737: Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't OZ still fly to SFO? I believe that the UA SFO-ICN flight was the second OZ flight from SFO, but UA is flying it
27 JoFMO: An interesting is that NRT seems to be the most important route from LAX for UA. They have a limited range of key long haul routes from LAX (compared
28 Carpethead: JoFMO, NRT-SFO has 2x744 and NRT-LAX will have 1x744, 1x777 daily. NRT-SFO will still have more seats. Actually, there is only a narrow window of depa
29 SegmentKing: United's strength will always be their international network.. they are quickly becoming the "Pan Am" of the US in terms of where they go, its just th
30 Thrust: Does UA plan to add more service to Europe as well? Because I noticed there is a new photo in the a.net database of N649UA, a Boeing 767-322(ER), at C
31 Gigneil: UA is wet leasing the aircraft to SK. N
32 SFORunner: OZ's SFO -> ICN flight leaves at 1:00am in the morning at arrives at 6:45am: enough time to catch onward flights. SQ and UA's SFO -> ICN flights leave
33 Aussie747: Considering we're discussing the increase in UA pacific services, UA is also increasing it's SYD-LAX services as well, by an extra 3 x 744 services we
34 UniTED: I received my Ted information from the Ted Pocket Guide (Version 2). While it is true that load factors do not always equal profits (which is becoming
35 Mariner: UniTED: I don't buy into UAL v. Frontier wars becaue I think both can live in harmony, and to each others benefit. And so I want UAL to survive and be
36 BigB: But market share and profit are not always the same thing I think you mean they always not the same thing.
37 Unitedtristar: Ted is indeed about market share. United has been running after F9 in many markets...thats what large carriers do with LCC's. They have driven F9 out
38 Mariner: UnitedTristar: "They have driven F9 out of many markets including ONT and BOS." Oh, whoa. That's an interesting rewrite of history. United drive not d
39 ZKOJH: so when are we likley to see ua return into akl then??
40 777ER: Can't see UA returning to AKL because NZ now operate to LAX and SFO. If UA do return to AKL then UA will most likly launch a new route as NZ have got
41 ZK-NBT: Don't no where else UA would fly into AKL from since SFO and LAX are their 2 main hubs on the West Coast. While they even codeshare with NZ I think th
42 AAplatnumflier: Now I can actually choose between to american based airlines that fly the 777. I think that UA should fly into AKL though with a 777. I think it is po
43 SFORunner: AAplatnumflier, UA did fly the 777 from LAX - AKL up until a few years ago. I don't recall why it was dropped.
44 AAplatnumflier: Man if only I had known that.... I would have flown them. But I think they should start that back up again. It would be a great flight. Thanks for the
45 ZK-NBT: UA flew the 777 into AKL for only a short time from June 2002 until March 2003. They say it was dropped because it was unprofitable, though I still ha
46 ClassicLover: Why on earth would you employ 96 staff for one daily flight?! Surely you would sub-contract out the ground work to other airlines and just have UA sta
47 Gigneil: Mariner - please email me via the a.net interface, I have an F9 question. While they even codeshare with NZ I think there would be a chance that they
48 Flyua: Early on in this thread, SFORunner asked whether United had the slots at Narita to support a second daily NRT-LAX flight. Well, currently we have two
49 Mariner: Gigneil: Sorry, I'm really not technically minded, I don't know how to do that. I'm not even sure what the "a.net interface" is. I'm not even sure how
50 Burnsie28: Burnsie - why do you think it won't do well? AZJ History, other US airlines have tried it in the past and have failed, I.E. America West. United has a
51 JoFMO: I think most of you underestimate the future success of NGO. The industrial production of region Nagoya is as big as in the whole region Osaka-Kobe-Ky
52 Uadc8contrail: ClassicLover, UA agreed it was insane......when ua started the akl ops supposedly they had to employ the same people that pa had there, something if i
53 Carpethead: First of all UA's service from NRT-CAN is not confirmed. It's competing with CO's application of EWR-PEK/PVG, DL's ATL-PEK & AA's ORD-PVG. Personally
54 N79969: I agree with Carpethead. NW is not a beloved company among Japanese people. United does not drop too many engines onto the runway at Narita so they ar