Simpilicity From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1998 times:
UA should do a Qantas (QF is going to ramp up Jetstar International & use wide bodies for routes of less than 10 hours, that they can't make money on with their high overheads or have already pulled out of).
QF will drop SYD/HNL. This is not recent news. HNL is a good point of entry to USA, as it avoids awful LAX. SFO not much better.
HNL is also a good point of entry to Canada (why don't the US reintroduce transit lounges at HNL for Canadian bound flights from Australia. It's really annoying to have to go thru U.S. customs at HNL (these people must go thru SALES PREVENTION TEAM TRAINING or it it the time of day that flights from OZ arrive say as AC, that they seem so happy, NOT) & then have to go thru same bs at YVR.
UA could surely use some of "parked" aircraft, under a different banner, like a Jestar Int, but all under same AOC etc.
They could call it something completely different & even get rid of US flag on side of aircraft & somehow change registration to something else. Lots of people don't want to fly U.S. carriers & if you don't want to fly a US carrier from Australia, doesn't leave much ... QF, or, NZ via AKL, or, via Asia the long way, with overnight en route.
It could be run separately as a low cost long haul airline, but using all UA infrastructure, with res online or pay extra to do it over phone, UA checkin, maintenance, baggage handling.
Would be nice to fly from HNL to points in the USA/Canada (with only stop in HNL) without having to go via awful LAX !!!
Flights could go from various cities in Australia (not necessarily SYD or MEL) to HNL & if enough aircraft were used could all arrive at HNL at same time & hub there, eg. if they used a 747
CNS/HNL (old QF route)
BNE/HNL (old QF & 2T route)
PER/HNL (never flown before)
ADL/HNL (never flown before)
with flights HNL/4 north american cities, either not currently served from HNL or only served lightly.
Even if they used only 1 aircraft, it could still work as pax could stopover at HNL.
Aircraft could be configured in 2 (or 2 1/2 classes), a business/club class, Y class & possibly a Y class with a bit more legroom/seat width, ie. if a 747, instead of 3-4-3 in premium economy, could go say 3-3-3 ???
There must be hundreds of thousands of cheap seats sitting in aircraft in the desert ???
Anyway, lets here why it would or wouldn't work ???
If they handle it right, they'll grow the market enormously & steel a little market share from CX. There's going to be a lot of 744's entering the used market in the next year or 3 & volume will depress values.
Lots of groups looking at low cost long haul including QF, DJ, Ryanair etc. etc.
It has to be the next big thing !!!
Most of the world has now experienced short haul low cost & it's not that different from the legacy's short haul, so the natural extension is long cost long haul.
Is not new, but hasn't been done in a big way yet. Interestingly, Canada has had 2 long haaul low cost. 2T have gone but TS are still making money but doen't appear to be expanding much (or am I wrong). Would have thought they would have seen the potential for YVR/AUSTRALIA flights, especially as AC now have 2 x 767's 90 minutes apart up to 7 days a week this time of year. (gee that's effecient, NOT).
UA could start on routes to Australia & then expand to Asia & then Europe. This would partly counter any high density A380's that have been talked about.