Cjuniel From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 146 posts, RR: 1 Posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4182 times:
The rumor mill at Dulles has United taking over ANA's daily IAD-NRT flight due to the fact that United is dropping a Hawaii-Japan frequency and ANA adding one. In addition, (and this is ALL hearsay right now), there are rumors that United will end their JFK-NRT flight. Has anyone else heard anything to this effect?
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9134 posts, RR: 52 Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4027 times:
Lets provide some reasons for why UA wouldn't pick up the service over ANA rather than just flaming the poster with no better of an argument than he presented in the first place. I am actually curious why ANA flies the route, and there is no chance that UA would. An explanation would be nice if anyone knows or conjectures something.
[Edited 2005-01-13 05:14:23]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Boiler Special From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 135 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3920 times:
IAD-NRT will not happen any time soon with UA metal. The 2nd HNL-NRT is going to LAX-NRT #2 starting in June.
As for JFK-NRT, there will be many many other flights dropped before JFK-NRT even gets mentioned. It is strategically important to be in the New York market out of Japan to support the rest of the network.
DCAYOW From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 587 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3900 times:
The ANA IAD-NRT has performed well for NH over the years. The route has been around since the 1980s. In fact, right after 9/11 NH started doing IAD-ORD-NRT and quickly changed Dulles back to nonstop - dropping ORD from their schedule altogether. Rumor was the Japanese Govt (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) wanted the route restored - government traffic on it is sizable given the relationship.
Last full year load factors were in the high 70s. Fares comparable (if not a bit higher than out of JFK per OD1) and significantly higher versus EWR.
They have had trouble at times with the UA feeders at IAD - proper authorizations etc. I don't know if UA plans to replace NH on the route - nothing surprises me anymore - UA transfered the Latin America routes to IAD and now are performing temporary ops on behalf of SK to CPH - so I guess it could happen.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 23464 posts, RR: 50 Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3858 times:
While UA's JFK-NRT route is not a looser, it certainly is no "Cash Cow" for United. In reality the JFK routes is one of the weaker Japan routes for the carrier, hence the need to operate smaller B777 on the route versus previously operated B744s. The JFK-NRT routes has suffered increasingly over the years from competition, especially with American entering the market with its own daily nonstop. United is simply weaker in the New York market compared to AA.
Overall UA could benefit by swapping the route over to IAD, as it could also channel connecting feed for the route, something it cannot do at JFK were it must rely solely on NY O&D traffic.
United has done extremely well with its swap of South America service from JFK to IAD with both load factors and revenue having increased substantially over the last 3 years.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Cjuniel From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 146 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3746 times:
I was thinking the same thing regarding the cash cow statement. We have been checking the loads out of JFK to NRT for a while now and these planes fly out half full at best. There are days in the summer when the planes actually go out full, but it isn't the RULE, as is the case out of Chicago and San Francisco. There are at least 4 daily flights between New York and Tokyo, and most of that is O&D traffic as nobody really has feeder traffic on that route. Further, United can benefit from feeder traffic on UAX at Dulles to fill the flight, because while there is feeder traffic on the flight, quite a bit of the traffic on the IAD-NRT route is O&D, with United feeding much of its traffic through Chicago and San Francisco (routes that ROUTINELY have SOLD OUT double daily flights to Tokyo). Many of you think its preposterous but many managers at Dulles think its not a matter of IF but a matter of WHEN. We will see what happens. Don't shoot me though, I am just the messenger and wanted to know if anyone else had heard the rumors.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3657 times:
It would not surprise me that much if UA dropped the JFK-NRT flight. It used to be a 747-400 and I believe it is now a 777 flight. If you take into consideration that the route is operated by Northwest, JAL, and ANA, there is quite a bit of capacity. I think I may be omitting American or Delta from the list as well but am not sure. Also Continental flies from Newark as all of you surely know. Since the competition is fierce as it is, UA may find a better use for that triple-7 elsewhere.
I have no idea about ANA's plans though. Even though they are United's alliance partner, that does not oblige them to sacrfice own-company profits to help an ally.
AF022 From France, joined Dec 2003, 2120 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3552 times:
i would agree with BOILER SPECIAL that even if UA's JFKNRT is not regularly full, it is important to fill out the network from Japan, to offer a full option of destinations from NRT - HNL, JFK, ORD, LAX, SEA, SFO, plus destinations in Asia
this may also be why AA entered the market, to offer a wider range of options from JFK.
i'm surprised that notes above indicate that JL, NH and NW are strong competitors on the route. i thought NW had a lousy reputation. how is NW doing on the route?
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6243 posts, RR: 9 Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3504 times:
AF002, I thought NW had a lousy reputation. How is NW doing on the route
Care to elaborate on the first statement? NW has been flying the route longer than any of its competitors, so I guess it must be doing OK! The flight is booked at 76% for the next 5 days with business class booked at over 90%.
But I repeat, it is not a "cash cow" for any of them
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3481 times:
Many of you think its preposterous but many managers at Dulles think its not a matter of IF but a matter of WHEN. We will see what happens. Don't shoot me though, I am just the messenger and wanted to know if anyone else had heard the rumors.
I'm not going to shoot you, but I have to completely disagree with any assertion that ANA will simply give up NRT-IAD-NRT. In the near-long term NH plans to strengthen it's NA presence, and profitability, particularly in IAD, SFO and JFK. Within the next 15 months ANA will start 777-300ER service to JFK and/or IAD and possibly add frequency to SFO. The Bread and butter customers of ANA, first and business class passengers, simply will not accept United's lower level of service and would pick JAL out of JFK rather than take UA. Also cargo revenue is a very lucrative proposition for NH especially on the inbound flight from NRT where it is often 50% of the total revenues for the segment. NRT-IAD is the 1st or 2nd most profitable international route for NH. What possible incentive could UA provide them for giving it up? And as far as load factors go, NH load factor out of IAD ihas been much higher than 70% through the first 3q of fiscal 2004 and the JFK-NRT flight is doing a lot better than "half full".
I really hate to hear unfounded rumors like this with nothing to back them up. Who cares what other managers at IAD think about the situation of airlines they don't run. The ANA management does not have any plans to fold up the tent anytime soon.
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Kkfla737 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1033 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
ANA has flown IAD-NRT since the mid 1980s- in fact IRC IAD was their first US destination. The flight did well without any UA feed for years. (The flight was fed by a single codeshare US Air domestic flight from Orlando to Dulles). I doubt ANA would give up this flight.
Cx750 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 155 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3447 times:
I don't think any of the US carriers do particularly well on JFK-NRT. A flight can be full (as in the case for NWA) but yield is key to the performance. It would be very difficult for either NWA or UA to make money on JFK-NRT year round, these routes are in place to keep JFK on the network.
AA/CO have enough feed and the strong O&D market to do well, but I believe the Japanese carriers probably make the most of the route.
As for NH increasing US service, I would see them adding capacity to non UA hub cities only - to take advantage of point of sale strength - UA has the advantage at its hubs (IAD is a legacy route, and it would be difficult to convince NH to give it up for UA).
25 RoseFlyer: Cx750, I am trying to understand your logic here. New York is one of the highest yielding markets in the entire world. Demand for premium travel is mu
26 Flyua: Admittedly, my information is... ohh, only five years old and from two UAL COOs ago, but there had been rumors of United dropping JFK-NRT back in 1999
27 Cjuniel: Widebodyphotog, A rumor is something that can be true or untrue. I am not going to divulge what I have heard and seen to confirm that this rumor may i
28 Cx750: RoseFlyer, You are correct about NY's large O/D base as well as the yields, however when you factor in KE, OZ, CI, CA, the yields drop significantly t
29 Rjpieces: It would be very difficult for either NWA or UA to make money on JFK-NRT year round, these routes are in place to keep JFK on the network. Ummmmm, ha
30 Cx750: Rjpieces, Premium pax will stay with the alliance of choice, which for NY is oneworld and skyteam. Oneworld flyers can fly JFK-HKG can nonstop on CX o
31 Ramprat74: UA actually has more seats on the JFK-NRT route with a 777, then it did with the 747-400. UA used the expanded business class configuration on that ro
32 Gigneil: Huh? The expanded business class 747 has 260 economy seats. N
33 STT757: "In terms of premium seats and connection opportunies, UA and NW win over AA and CO, hands down." CO's relationship with NWA helps them realize the sa
34 Widebodyphotog: I don't need time to tell what will happen in regards to this rumor. NH is not going anywhere as far as IAD is concerned. And as far as the relative s
35 Ramprat74: Huh? The expanded business class 747 has 260 economy seats. N I don't know what 747 you are talking about? We had a few 400's that had 124 business se
36 TokyoNarita: We had a few 400's that had 124 business seats and about 90 economy seats. I do remember UA used to have expanded premium seating configuration a few
37 Laxintl: UAL indeed had a premium B747 configuration. It was configured as F36C123Y142. As of 1999, there were 6 -400s in such a configuration. In addition UA
38 UA772IAD: UA is not dropping frequency between Japan and HI, that is a huge market for them... as Hawaii is the one of the top travel getaways for the Japanese,
39 Gigneil: IAD has signs for Korean Air, but I've never seen one of their jets here. I see it pretty much every day. Its a 744. N
40 Malaysia: Korean brought in a 747-300 also today, that was rare
41 N1120a: >UA used the expanded business class configuration on that route
42 Carpethead: I doubt UA will take-over NHfs NRT-IAD service but an additional frequency cannot be ruled out. There is a rumor that NH will re-start NRT-ORD servi
43 Gigneil: Korean brought in a 747-300 also today, that was rare Was it a cargo plane? They only have the one pax model. N
44 Ny-jfk-lga: Actually, AA would be the only loser on JFK>NRT route. Besides all the NRT connection that UA & NW have @ NRT, those two carriers also have big allian
45 StevenUhl777: Hmmm....interesting arguments both ways. UA has been getting their asses kicked in the NY area for a while now, and have wisely reduced their flights
46 Gigneil: The EWR route competes with JFK, so there's lot of competition for the route. N
47 NoMoreRJs: I've heard the rumor about NH starting ORD when the 773s arrive as a 772 will be flown ORD-NRT. As AF022 points out, load factors on ORD-NRT are stron
48 WIDEBODYPHOTOG: Korean brought in a 747-300 also today, that was rare It was a diversion from JFK, a freighter. -widebodyphotog
49 AF022: exhaustive summary, jan-jun2004, source DOT ALL GATES TO JAPAN NW 89.4% UA 86.6% DL 85.1% NQ 83.8% CI 80.6% CO 79.9% KE 79.8% AA 79.8% JL 79.1% NH 78.
50 Bobnwa: I don't understand the AA SEA-NRT numbers. How many flights was this? Also your previous numbers kind of dispute the feelings of one member that AA is
51 UA744Flagship: This doesn't make sense. AA pulled out of SEA-NRT a while ago. I don't think you analyzed the T-100s right.
52 AF022: the seanrt numbers on AA were for a miniscule number of flights - inconsquential, really, but they popped up for the first six months of 2004. af022
53 StevenUhl777: Thanks, AF022! It would be interesting to see July-Dec. #'s for Seattle, which would exclude AA, and then again for Jan-June '05, which would be an ev
54 MAH4546: Actually, AA would be the only loser on JFK>NRT route. Besides all the NRT connection that UA & NW have @ NRT, those two carriers also have big allian