Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
China Eastern To Start PVG-YVR-JFK  
User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7924 times:

Latest information from China Eastern is that they will stop their PVG - JFK non-stop, and combine it to through YVR. Operation plans to start in late September, and MU would have Fifth Freedom out of YVR. So far schedule timing is to arrive YVR at 1130, depart for JFK at 1430. Return will depart JFK at 2300, lands at YVR at 0600, and depart to PVG at 0700, and arrives 0700 + 1. All the timing are not accurate, and are planning figures only. However, it is the basic pattern to follow, with final schedule to be announced later.
The current PVG - YVR use of A340-300 will be replaced by A340-600 on the 'new' PVG - YVR - JFK route. With the YVR - JFK route, MU will be competiting directly with CX, and AC. MU already hinted taht fares will comes down although not by too much. Interesting to see how MU would do on the route.

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7878 times:

Quoting Astral (Thread starter):
Return will depart JFK at 2300, lands at YVR at 0600, and depart to PVG at 0700, and arrives 0700 + 1. All the timing are not accurate

Yeah, how can you leave out of JFK at 2300 and arrive YVR at 0600 when CX arrives at 0100?


User currently offlineSHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7832 times:

Quoting Astral (Thread starter):
Return will depart JFK at 2300, lands at YVR at 0600

That's a heck of a lot of circling...either that, or Vancouver-bound passengers will be plenty-thrilled to find out that their plane arrived four-plus hours early...



Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7788 times:

Yes, indeed the timing is all wrong, but that was discussed at PVG last week on a basic concept format.
The theme pattern is to depart YVR in the afternoon before 1500 hrs, and depart JFK late evening around midnight. With a return to YVR very early morning, MU can then depart YVR to PVG at around 0700 - 0800 for a early morning arrival at PVG too, it can then connect to all cities in China easy.
The only problem is visa requirement in Canada, but as YVR is to have 'Transit Without Visa' facilities ready by September, then MU can make good use of it for their US bound passengers. MU is waiting for reply from Canadian Government if the new Transit Without Visa rule applies to Chinese passport holders or not. Confirmation is expected within next week, and if positive, then MU will proceed with detail planning for a late September start-up.
I was told by MU senior executives that their PVG - JFK load is rather 'poor', and this is why they plan to combine the route through YVR, given they do have Fifth Freedom advantages.
Once the correct timing is confirmed, I will post it here.


User currently offlineYVRSR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7788 times:

I concur with the previous posters. JFK -> YVR is about 6 hours and there is a 3 hour time difference. If the flight leaves JFK at 2300, it will arrive at YVR at about 0200.

User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7694 times:

That is bad news for CX, which enjoys a lucrative cargo business on JFK-YVR.

User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7563 times:

Quoting Astral (Reply 3):
I was told by MU senior executives that their PVG - JFK load is rather 'poor', and this is why they plan to combine the route through YVR

That does not solve their problem with pax in PVG/NYC not choosing MU. With one-stop, people will have many choices between PVG and NYC, eg. UA/AA thru ORD, CA/CO thru PEK, KE/OZ thru ICN, JL/NH thru NRT. In other words, it'll hurt their YVR-JKF even more.


User currently offlineFLYGUY767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7443 times:

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 5):
That is bad news for CX, which enjoys a lucrative cargo business on JFK-YVR

Cathay has a very loyal following in New York. There wont be to much of a dent in the YVR-JFK market of Cathay if any. However Air Canada may be the one to suffer in all of this as China Eastern are known to have very attractive airfares. This could very well hit the bottom line of Air Canada on the YVR-JFK service. Funny that they chose Vancouver since a lot of people here in NYC were talking about MU either dropping New York or combining it as a new route with a new Canadian gateway like PVG-YYZ-JFK.

-JD


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8709 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7414 times:

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 7):
However Air Canada may be the one to suffer in all of this as China Eastern are known to have very attractive airfares.

Never mind that... who has better looking flight attendants?  Smile


User currently offlineFLYGUY767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7414 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):
Never mind that... who has better looking flight attendants?

CATHAY!!!!!


-JD


User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7366 times:

I too agree that CX has its own unique followings, and MU won't dent their market share. AC could get hit a little more as MU has already strongly indicated during the meeting I attended, that they will be offering LOWEST air fares on the YVR - JFK run, especially J and Y cabin.
Their current non-stop PVG - JFK both load and yield is only acceptable during summer peak season, and the rest of the year, it is in a rather 'sad' mode. The flow pattern is too one sided with a lot more travelling China to USA, then USA to China. Putting a stopover with Fifth Freedom can be helpful in market development. CX did operated HKG - YVR - JFK for a number of years before starting the non-stop service, and they are still keeping the stop-over flight. So there is a definate value to such an operation.
If we take MU's average load (not revenue !!!) on the PVG - YVR run at 42%, combine with the PVG - JFK at 31%, the entire run could be on a more acceptable level, plus with the additional benifit of the Fifth Freedom traffic. As the outbound travel from China is increasing by leaps and bounce, tour operators in China could use the route to market Canada/USA combine tour products. Although both Canada and USA are not yet ADS countries, but the increase in number can still be an attractive option to move ahead with a Canada stopover.
Again this plan is hinged on the visa issue with Canada. If YVR's Transit Without Visa option is open to Chinese passport holders, then MU will proceed. If not, then they may have to rethink the JFK run.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7760 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7338 times:

Quoting Astral (Reply 10):
If we take MU's average load (not revenue !!!) on the PVG - YVR run at 42%, combine with the PVG - JFK at 31%, the entire run could be on a more acceptable level, plus with the additional benifit of the Fifth Freedom traffic

Out of curiosity, what are loads like on LAX-PVG? MU seems to do better here than anywhere else.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineFLYGUY767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7323 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 11):
Out of curiosity, what are loads like on LAX-PVG? MU seems to do better here than anywhere else.

I have a friend who works for a Asian Tour Operator and she could never find space on that flight. It was like pulling teeth. The waitlists were staggering. I am sure from what has been said over the few times she has dealt with their Los Angeles sales office the LAX-PVG is a hallmarked bread and butter route for MU. I myself havent flown them in years. In fact I havent flown them since they operated out of SFO on the MD-11. That is a rather long time ago!

-JD


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25871 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7314 times:

Quoting YVRSR (Reply 4):
I concur with the previous posters. JFK -> YVR is about 6 hours and there is a 3 hour time difference. If the flight leaves JFK at 2300, it will arrive at YVR at about 0200.

Does YVR have a night curfew?


User currently offlineKtachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1796 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7301 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
Does YVR have a night curfew?

Only on the north runway. I think the south runway is what takes care of all the landings and departures from around 10 pm until 6 am.



Flown on: DC-10-30, B747-200B, B747-300, B747-300SR, B747-400, B747-400D, B767-300, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7251 times:

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 12):
I have a friend who works for a Asian Tour Operator and she could never find space on that flight. It was like pulling teeth. The waitlists were staggering. I am sure from what has been said over the few times she has dealt with their Los Angeles sales office the LAX-PVG is a hallmarked bread and butter route for MU. I myself havent flown them in years. In fact I havent flown them since they operated out of SFO on the MD-11. That is a rather long time ago!

Perhaps MU can use a few A380s for this, also LAX-PVG can certainly handle double daily, current flight leaves around noon, another red eye perhaps.


User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7190 times:

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 7):
This could very well hit the bottom line of Air Canada on the YVR-JFK service

I'm sure they will if they are offering dirt cheap fares....AC's YVR-JFK and JFK-YVR flights are timed for connecting passengers though and are on a much smaller aircraft than an A346...MU will be able to compete against CX in that both will have a lot of cargo capacity on the route.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8709 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7138 times:

Quoting Astral (Reply 10):
If we take MU's average load (not revenue !!!) on the PVG - YVR run at 42%, combine with the PVG - JFK at 31%, the entire run could be on a more acceptable level

Good lord, are their load factors really under 50% on flagship Pacific routes??? Not surprising if true, but interesting.


User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7105 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):
Good lord, are their load factors really under 50% on flagship Pacific routes??? Not surprising if true, but interesting.

Not to mention they offer a steep discount for consolidator business class fare.


User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7027 times:

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 12):
LAX-PVG is a hallmarked bread and butter route for MU.

MU loese money on that route too. None of the China-US routes makes money for any Chinese airlines. EWR-PVG would be a cash cow for CO.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7760 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6966 times:

Quoting B2443 (Reply 19):
MU loese money on that route too. None of the China-US routes makes money for any Chinese airlines. EWR-PVG would be a cash cow for CO.

The Loads seem to do OK on it anyway.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6948 times:

btw, any updates on China Southern to Canada?

User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4999 posts, RR: 51
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 6321 times:

Astral,

MU runs much better than 40% odd percent on JFK-PVG.. I just had a look at the T100 load factors.


User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 6226 times:

Interesting Jimyvr asked about China Southern !! I have just landed another contract with them, similar to the one I have with China Eastern !!
CZ has already assigned a General Manager for Canada, and she is working with me in my Office most of the time. CZ will not fly into Canada (YVR or YYZ) until earliest end of 2008. There are multiple reasons, mainly they have insufficient international ETOPS qualified captains, plus waiting for delivery of more B777-200ER/LRs. Further more they are still studying the Canada market, if to decide either YVR or YYZ, even though YVR is still in the lead. There are many market concerns to consider, such as no interline links at all to other Canadian cities, very low yield Y cabin net fares, competition to CAN through HKG with CX and Oasis, etc. etc.
All that could change 180 degree overnight - IF again IF, Air Canada starts to fly into CAN !! then CZ will start service either soon after or best before AC's aircraft lands in CAN. So far AC's plan is to fly YVR-CAN in 2008, so it matches CZ's timing too. CZ was supposed to code share with HQ on the CAN run, but too bad HQ is now inactive, and the same all international carriers lost the best interline partner in Canada.
I will post more on CZ later.


User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6140 times:

To Flyyul,
MU was looking at the their quarters load on an an annual average actual vs projected. I must agree that their current load factor is over 60%, but that is only during summer. Their projected winter load PVG-JFK v v is very low, and this is why they are offering deep discounts on all cabins, especially USA originate traffic. This is total negative yield, and they don't see any future for it to sustain an A340-600 operations. There is no other long range non-stop capable aircraft for them, and the best option is to combine with YVR.
With deep discounts you can improve your load factor, but yield goes out of the window. For such a long haul route, with high fuel prices, the judgement day is not too far away if you continual. Both YVR and JFK are losing money for MU, but YVR has better hope than JFK, when in the winter at least YVR can pickup the India bound connecting passengers to substitute the small number of China bound souls.
No matter what happens, just looking at load factor figures is not sufficient, all airlines must look at yield - i.e. money. It must be positive or at least has the hope to turn positive. MU can combine YVR and JFK to turn a positive or at least balance yield, plus having the advantages in a Fifth Freedom traffic bonus. My advise to them was to go ahead.


25 Cslusarc : Even with codeshares, I didn't realize that Chinese carriers were significantly disadvantaged to their US competitors. I had hoped that AA's codeshare
26 YVR1968 : G'day Astral So what is holding up the ADS to Canada? Is it still the less than favourable political relationship between the two countries? I assume
27 Mirrodie : I was follwing along but request clarification. What is Fifth Freedom?
28 YVR1968 : Fifth freedom rights gives a foreign carrier the rights to transport local passengers between two other foreign countries. Eg in this case: China East
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Air China - Likely To Start Service To DEN posted Thu May 24 2007 16:40:47 by DIA
China Eastern To JNB posted Mon Apr 9 2007 18:02:56 by SA744
Metis TransPacific To Start MFM-YVR N/s? posted Sun Apr 1 2007 23:17:43 by YLWbased
China Eastern To Africa And Maldives posted Sat Feb 24 2007 15:35:05 by 777way
US Helicopter To Start EWR-JRB-JFK Service posted Wed Nov 29 2006 20:37:22 by Ewrw4co
China Southern To Start PEK/LOS posted Thu Nov 2 2006 16:13:17 by MaverickM11
China Eastern To Continue Dhaka Route posted Thu Oct 5 2006 20:09:29 by 777way
Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE posted Thu Sep 14 2006 15:40:43 by NYCAAer
Air Tahiti To Start PPT-YVR-CDG? posted Tue Aug 8 2006 22:41:40 by Jayce
China Eastern To Quit Bangladesh? posted Sun Aug 6 2006 18:22:55 by 777way