justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 304 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6847 times:
From the official Weibo (the chinese vision of Twitter) of MU, they plan to extend their PVG-YVR service to JFK using 332. And they are actively applying for 5th Freedom on the YVR-JFK route. Passengers won't need a Canadian Visa to transfer at YVR. But personally I really doubt whether they can get the traffic rights.
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7170 posts, RR: 45 Reply 8, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6073 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6): This is an odd addition....I'm doubting they'll get 5th freedom though
Well, without 5th freedom rights, there is no point for this new service. MU already operates daily from PVG to JFK using an A346 and I am sure it could apply for additional nonstop frequencies.
yegbey01 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1678 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5876 times:
I flew HKG-YVR-JFK last year and there was a really good load of pax who got on the flight in YVR and many in business and one or two in first as a matter of fact. So I would think if it wasn't making money for CX, they would have dropped it by now as this has been operating for a very long time
dc1030cf From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 28 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5796 times:
I flew business on both CX888 / CX889 in Oct. The new business seat and inflight service were superb, Since I started and ended my trip at SEA, I had to take a Dash-8 between SEA/YVR/SEA. It was worth the extra hours. My other choices would be on either AA or AS. Neither comes close to what Cathay has to offer. BTW both CX888/CX889 had only two or three seats left in business. I will keep flying Cathay if I have to go New York or DC in the future.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 12, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5524 times:
Quoting CPA62 (Reply 9): Quoting jfk777 (Reply 5):
why does Cathay still fly YVR to JFK ? all its JFK flights should be nonstop to Hong Kong.
It is a money maker for CX! they do very well on this route both in terms of pax yield and cargo
If they operated it as a YVR turnaround there may not be enough demand year round for 2 daily HKG-YVR 77Ws, along with AC's daily 77W. By extending it to JFK they probably pick up enough additional traffic to make the 2nd YVR flight economic. It also gives YVR-HKG the option of an overnight westbound departure in addition to the daytime CX (and AC) flights.
spiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5468 times:
I hope they do get awarded the fifth-freedom rights! Will be a nice addition to complement the DL flight that starts up in June. Any idea what the timings will be? I assume the YVR timings won't change, so can anybody tell me what they are?
anrec80 From Canada, joined Jan 2011, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5443 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): If they operated it as a YVR turnaround there may not be enough demand year round for 2 daily HKG-YVR 77Ws, along with AC's daily 77W. By extending it to JFK they probably pick up enough additional traffic to make the 2nd YVR flight economic. It also gives YVR-HKG the option of an overnight westbound departure in addition to the daytime CX (and AC) flights.
The demand on YVR-NYC route certainly is there. Currently, there is only AC to EWR and CX to JFK fly non-stop.
I am curious why would CX not make an push for their 2nd daily YVR service to continue to JFK as well. If Canada is that restrictive on 5th freedom rights, I don't see how MU will get it. Who knows though.
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 13): there may not be enough demand year round for 2 daily HKG-YVR 77Ws, along with AC's daily 77W.
AC traffic is O&D - there is no strong Star presence in HKG to feed AC flight. For CX flights, there is vast Asia network beyond HK. So market segments do not completely overlap.
And that flight is the worst.
14:45 departure with a 23:50 arrival, it's well after midnight before you can get into Manhattan. You're way better of going to YYZ than on that flight. Hopefully this MU flight will be properly timed.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 16, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5372 times:
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 13): hope they do get awarded the fifth-freedom rights
I believe the Canada-China bilateral gives Chinese carriers 5th freedom rights to 2 points of their choice beyond Canada. If that's correct, then it's a question of whether the U.S.-China bilateral permits the 5th freedom rights. I believe there's a similar provision in that bilateral, but the U.S.-China bilateral also has frequency restrictions so would depend on whether the additional flights to JFK fit within the current frequency limits.
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5322 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16): I believe the Canada-China bilateral gives Chinese carriers 5th freedom rights to 2 points of their choice beyond Canada.
It says that AC will also have the same kind of 5th freedom if MU uses YVR-JFK traffic right. Let's see what will they do
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16): but the U.S.-China bilateral also has frequency restrictions so would depend on whether the additional flights to JFK fit within the current frequency limits.
Chinese companies haven't used up all the frequency on US-China bilateral so this will not be a problem.
anrec80 From Canada, joined Jan 2011, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4896 times:
Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 18): DL are starting JFK - YVR next year too, so things will begin to get a bit crowded.
I think DL 737 is a good addition to existing capacity in the market, though apparently DL product will probably be not competitive with that of even MU, let alone CX. Though, SEA nearby, a city of size similar to Vancouver, gets like 3x daily DL and 3x daily UA to EWR, plus B6 and AS services - overall at least 10x daily 737-757, which is much more capacity than 77W+332+738+319, which we will get if MU gets approved and decides to start the service.
steex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1423 posts, RR: 9 Reply 22, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4505 times:
Quoting anrec80 (Reply 21): I think DL 737 is a good addition to existing capacity in the market, though apparently DL product will probably be not competitive with that of even MU, let alone CX. Though, SEA nearby, a city of size similar to Vancouver, gets like 3x daily DL and 3x daily UA to EWR, plus B6 and AS services - overall at least 10x daily 737-757, which is much more capacity than 77W+332+738+319, which we will get if MU gets approved and decides to start the service.
The Seattle area is significantly larger than the Vancouver area, not to mention that JFK-SEA as a domestic market is noticeably larger than the international JFK-YVR market.
legacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1830 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4448 times:
On a side note, MU is to start PVG-SFO service this coming April and is showing on GDS but not bookable on MU's website. Are they still planning the service?
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (5 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3391 times:
Quoting legacyins (Reply 23): On a side note, MU is to start PVG-SFO service this coming April and is showing on GDS but not bookable on MU's website. Are they still planning the service?
MU want to use 332 to fly this route but it will need ETOPS 180. MU is still working on it.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1526 posts, RR: 2 Reply 25, posted (5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2130 times:
I always felt that this was a route that NZ should take up - extending its AKL-YVR route to JFK. Am I correct in thinking that no Canadian airline flies it, just CX?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 26, posted (5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2037 times:
Quoting anrec80 (Reply 14): Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 13):
there may not be enough demand year round for 2 daily HKG-YVR 77Ws, along with AC's daily 77W.
AC traffic is O&D - there is no strong Star presence in HKG to feed AC flight. For CX flights, there is vast Asia network beyond HK. So market segments do not completely overlap.
Airlines don't only interline with their alliance partners. I would bet that AC has many connections to/from CX (and Dragonair) at HKG every day, and also carries many CX connecting passengers within Canada.
For example, I believe CDG tried to force AC to move to T1 a few years ago (where virtually all other Star Alliance carriers are, on the opposite side of the airport), but AC refused to move from T2 since they have many connections to/from AF and thus wanted to stay close to AF.
Sponsor Message: 
From China, joined Aug 2012, 304 posts, 
From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 460 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1727 posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2012, 62 posts, 
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4954 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7170 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1526 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
