Joemugg From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 61 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7376 times:
How do you feel about this new routing? I think it's strange. Isn't this market already served to the nth degree? How much could AF possibly make on such an audacious route? If I was flying to England I'd fly BA or United (from LAX.) If I was flying to India, I'd fly BA or Lufthansa, both requiring stopovers. If I were flying to Asia I'd fly SA or Malaysian. I wouldn't fly AF to the UK. I'd fly AF to CDG or perhaps to Africa.
FlyingClrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 733 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7124 times:
Quoting Misbeehavin (Reply 3): And it's a joint op with DL, so DL's FF base in LAX has a non-stop to the UK now. Not a bad idea in principle - they're starting to try what KL+NW do - but let's see how well it works.
It allows all the Sky Team members to code share a flight from LAX-LHR. None of the US Sky Team members had a spare 777 they could allocate to the flight. It just adds another AF 777 to be handled at LAX every day.
LHRBFSTrident From UK - Northern Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 655 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6878 times:
I will try and dig up the source but I read a table that showed the top 5 routes in terms of pax numbers ex-LHR.
LAX came in at number 5... New York was number 1 and the others inbetween were European routes
With those kinds of pax numbers, the SkyTeam FFP connection, strong premium cabin O&D and a great onboard product, AF isn't so stupid to start this route.
IIRC, during the 1990s when BA flew LHR-LAX x2 daily the destination flightdeck crew briefing sheet stated it was their 'second most-profitable' route (after JNB)...
Also - their service offers a great late afternoon departure ex-LHR which I am always looking for when returning from UK - that basically gives an extra useful day in the UK, that on flights departing earlier in the day ends up being breakfast and a trip to the airport with virtually zero productive time...
Next up: LAX-LHR NZ002 Y SkyCouch! LHR-LAX NZ001 Y
Eugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6656 times:
As a teacher in accounting I use this example to explain key factor anaylsis. If you have limited number of slots then you will give priority to routes which give the most ABSOLUTE gross profit (not percentage gross profit). Using that particular slot to fly to Paris might yield 10% gross profit on an average fare of £200. If they fly to Los Angleses they might make just 5% gross profit but the average fare is probabley over £600. So flying to Los Angleses yields £30 gross profit compared to just £20 gross profit. And this is before considering capacity - I have assumed they use the same plane size.
If there was no limit to the number of slots then they would server BOTH routes (and all routes that yield positve gross profit) but if it is EITHER Paris OR Los Angeles then its is going to be Los Angeles because of the higher gross profit.
Obviously there are factors such as plane utilization but the basic principle remains!
However this route doesn't just cater for you, it caters for a whole market.
Rule changes mean AF can do this, just like Openskies can do the same from CDG. Whilst Openskies are not ready yet, AF are. They want to get in there as the trend setters, and of course to give their customers more options. Also AF are using regular planes, which keeps economy passengers happy with extra choice, not just premium pax.
Quoting Joemugg (Reply 2): If it returned directly to LAX that would be weird. Perhaps I'm a purist.
Basrabob From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6250 times:
I would go so far as to say that AF have been the most far-sighted of the EU carriers , they were the first of the EU carriers to amalgamate with another carrier . And they have stolen a march on the rest of the EU carriers with this flight from LHR - LAX . Now how it will play , will of course be very interesting . It will only be a matter of time before you get LH piling and doing the same thing .....now the specific route they would pick would be fascinating as they cover pretty much the same ground as BA...BA have already pitched their tents in the EU - NYC market with their open skies airline . And all of them are trying the same thing . Namely pinching the home based carriers traffic ....AF & BA have approached it in entirely different ways , AF have just made it another part of their mainline route structure whereas BA have launched an airline within an airline - basically chasing the premium passenger . So only time will tell which is the correct business model . And at the end of the day , the customer will decide . My money is very much against the BA open-skies airline still flying in 5 years time , it will go the way of "GO" , it will quietly be shut down or merged with another carrier .
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6226 times:
Quoting Basrabob (Reply 19): I would go so far as to say that AF have been the most far-sighted of the EU carriers , they were the first of the EU carriers to amalgamate with another carrier . And they have stolen a march on the rest of the EU carriers with this flight from LHR - LAX .
And they bought the 77W while no one else in the EU has (okay, now KL, but that's AF's decision). They also switched to the 777 even after buying a fleet of A340s because they realized twins are the way. They also limited their VLA size, and have decided to replace all with A380s. They also launched the 777F. The also started premium services to oil fields with A320 series aircraft.
AF is a really far-sighted airline and their decisions seem to be turning out positive for them.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Doona From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 3769 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6184 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 11): on LAX-LHR, AF will use a 777-200ER, and I thought all these were 9Y?
They are. AFAIK, AF only has 10 abreast in Y on the 777-300ERs that serve leisure markets, ie. not all 777-300ERs have 10 abreast seating in Y. Still, if they don't lose PAX over the configuration, I don't see why they wouldn't go EK and configure all their 777s with 10 abreast seating.
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
So you wouldn't fly AF even if it offered a better fare? Why only to CDG or Africa? Ever checked AF's network?
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20): And they bought the 77W while no one else in the EU has (okay, now KL, but that's AF's decision).
Probably because other EU 772ER operators simply haven't required the 77W (yet) for a number of different reasons? AF already had a large 772ER fleet and it was a logic choice to add 77Ws in order to expand and replace older aircraft. It's all about demand.
EXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6120 times:
Quoting Joemugg (Thread starter): How do you feel about this new routing? I think it's strange. Isn't this market already served to the nth degree?
It will never work financially and dont be surprised if AF axes it before it starts and blames high fuel prices. There isnt a large enough base of Skyteam FF in LAX to make this work without getting some LHR originating traffic
Speedbird10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6035 times:
Even thought it seems strange, the whole EU-US Open Skies concept might actually be quite useful as more airlines compete to see who can offer the lowest price. I've been on airfrance.com quite a few times and have noticed they are offering ridiculously low prices on the flight as well as more miles. Have any other airlines announced new OpenSkies flights? I'd be very interested to know,
: The route is being fairly heavily marketed by AF (at least here in Los Angeles). Looks like they are opening with very discounted Y fares to fill up t
: Well it starts on Sunday - and there will be plently of LHR originating traffic as it's been very heavily promoted here in the UK - I'm on the flight
: SkyTeam really does appear to be making a run on LAX. First DL built up the LAX mini-hub. Now this summer we'll see both LHR-LAX on AF as well as FCO-
: Yeah - while SkyTeam may be making a concerted push into LAX, the market response - thus far - has been less than inspiring. Much of Delta's LAX expa
: Yeah true, but that's because it's driven by folks flying to LHR from New Zealand for the most part; it's not an O&D reliant route, like AF's will be
: I didn't realize KL is going to fly 2X daily on LAX-AMS. I know the midday flight last summer didn't do all the well.
: Oops, you might be right. I may have jumped the gun on this one. I don't actually see it in the system right now, though I thought I had seen it befo
: AF has much better service than UA on longhaul flights, and LAX-LHR- is a major high-yield market. AF has always had a strong reputation for high qua
: Connections are still widely accepted if the price is right. And I wasn't specifically referring to LHR, but "England" and the "BA/UA-only-options" s
: DL's far better in J than AF. Roomier seats, more comfortable cabins and strangely enough, I've even had better meals on DL over the water over AF. O
: Nothing against AF but then again, of all the mainstream airlines offering first class, which one(s) is(are) not excellent?
: I would say there are some that make money or DL would cut them. give it time. For DL at least I wouldn't count on much more LHR. I can see ATL-LHR 2
: Once the AF flight starts up, there will be the following carriers on LAX-LHR 1. British Airways 2. Virgin Atlantic 3. Air New Zealand 4. Air France 5
: This is my point: consumer perception. Market feasibility/research/Sky Team alliance are all logical and prudent concerns; however, at the end of the
: I think it's more like 10 / day, with AF, AA, NZ = 1, UA, VS = 2, BA = 3.
: As I have said before, I will give AF a year on this route then they will pull it, they are up against a shed load of competition here, well establish
: Nah, it's at-risk flying for ExpressJet, so unless they have a better place to put those planes, they'll probably keep flying for DL unless it gets t
: Seats on offer by route out of LHR in the current (winter) timetable are, in a typical week: New York 102,141 Dublin 53,051 Amsterdam 52,932 Paris 49
: and NZ or NZ NZ beats them both. they can get the extra because of their superior product.