DolphinAir747 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 220 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 16138 times:
I had heard that CZ was sending empty 380s to LAX; is this just an unbacked rumor?
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15730 posts, RR: 48 Reply 4, posted (4 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 15975 times:
Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 2): I had heard that CZ was sending empty 380s to LAX; is this just an unbacked rumor?
The 777 wasn't that full, and only recently increased to daily, and fares to CAN are terrible in general, so it wouldn't surprise me
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 5, posted (4 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 15901 times:
CZ barely maintained 60% LF with their 777 to LAX for the last decade.
Yes its true the A380s are now fuller, however its on the back of strong push of cheap fares.
For instance CZ is selling business class tickets to parts of Asia ~$2000 round trip which normally cost $4000-5000+
Ultimately I doubt CZ is even breaking even with a full plane at LAX due to the low fares which is making CZ the consolidators favorite airline of the month currently.
As CZ has said themselves they don't have the right routes for the A380, and until the CAAC allows them to add markets they requested (eg PEK-CDG), they must throw the A380 on what they have and hope for the best.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5531 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (4 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 15755 times:
CZ's A380 flight is probably subsidized by the PRC government anyway. So passenger performance is probably not a huge issue.
bogoss From China, joined May 2012, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 15035 times:
I remember this was once discussed in a Chinese forum so I did some digging... only 3 days from 30 November to 2 December and of course it didn't speak for the whole season. However, plus the first reply that justinlee has given, it's better than nothing or you know, how the 777 was doing...
CZ 327 CAN-LAX and CZ 328 LAX-CAN from 30 November to 2 December
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15730 posts, RR: 48 Reply 11, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 14881 times:
Quoting g500 (Reply 10): Why do you think they ordered the A380? To fly it where?
It's China. They order everything, so of *course* they had to have the 380, no matter the need for it, or more importantly the lack thereof.
as739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5820 posts, RR: 23 Reply 12, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 14251 times:
I don't know, I am not with their planning department. But please explain a load-factor of sub-70% on a route with a 777, then expect to make a profit with a A380.
I don't mean to be argumentative. It just doesn't make sense.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 13, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 14197 times:
Quoting g500 (Reply 10): Why do you think they ordered the A380? To fly it where?
I guess you don't know that China Southern did not wake up one day and order the A380.
The Chinese government (CASGC) did.
Government then opted to allocate the A380 to China Southern, when reportedly Air China did not want to model.
This is the manner large procurements are handled in China.
China Southern provided the Chinese government a list of routes they wished for to utilize the A380 on - namely PEK-CDG.
This authority has yet to be granted (probably blocked by CA). Matter of fact the Chinese did not even allow CZ to operate the model on longhaul routes which forced them to keep the mode on 3 loss making (RMB100 million) shorthaul routes for 1-year. http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...ation-still-faces-challenges-83737
The CEO of CZ had an interview a few months ago and explained this. The carrier at the moment does not have markets where the A380 was suitable per his own words.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 16, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13313 times:
Quoting United885 (Reply 14): How often does CZ serve LAX with their A380?
Every day?
Yes daily, similar to their previous 777 schedule.
Quoting g500 (Reply 15): Nope I did not know the Government ordered their A380s
I have no ego whatsoever, I immediately admit when I'm wrong or I in this case when I don't know something
No worries. Hopefully A.net is a place where people can come and learn in addition to having fun.
At the end, many people have doubts about CZ's A380 use as it hardly was based on commercial desires, but much more along the line of politics.
As another example, even when airlines in China order smaller things like 737s, the government places the order, and behind the scenes divides out the aircraft to multiple airlines. Not exactly the most transparent manner to acquire aircraft.
Same thing with routes, the government has divided the country up into spheres of influence by airlines, and limits their ability to openly compete against each other. Suppose its like the US pre-deregulation.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
surfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2588 posts, RR: 31 Reply 18, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11066 times:
On the positive side of things, CZ is a SkyTeam member - it can tap into DL's FFer base and network connectivity at LAX. CZ offers the only nonstop flight between LAX and CAN, which is in fact currently the only nonstop link between China's third largest city and the U.S. CAN serves as the gateway to the Pearl River Delta, already a major global manufacturing center with a massive population and booming local economy. Also keep in mind that the airline's costs are much lower than those of competing American and Northeast Asian carriers, so lower yields may not necessarily mean unprofitability.
However, there are many negative things to consider. While most Asian airlines are revered for their excellent service, mainland Chinese carriers have a notorious reputation for poor service. The name "China Southern" is quite unknown in the U.S., as is "Guangzhou", which is not a hip international destination like Beijing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong. CAN is an overwhelmingly domestic hub, but if one is connecting to another Chinese market it will probably be much quicker to transit farther north (PEK, ICN, etc.). Also, the potential for U.S.-China travel is rather limited as Americans can't get visas on arrival (I believe this just changed, but only for those transiting through PEK) and it is very difficult for Chinese to get American visas. Overall, it seems the only viable Chinese markets nonstop from the U.S. are PEK and PVG, and even those are adequately served as is evident by the lack of American and Chinese carrier interest in starting new routes. There was a lot of hype over the scarce U.S.-China authorities (on the U.S. side) a few years ago, but now there are plenty of unused authorities available. In particular, the Chinese government has given preferential access to secondary markets (anything other than PEK/PVG) for U.S. carriers, but other than an unsuccessful NRT-CAN service by NW in the mid-2000s and a UA SFO-CAN proposal that never came to fruition, nobody is interested in them. Finally, there is a certain prestige factor with the A380. However, LAX has so many A380 options that the novelty of the type has probably already worn off. For those that do want to fly the A380, the choice is something like this: the pollution of a gritty Chinese manufacturing metropolis, or the beautiful beaches of Sydney? .
Bottom line: CZ is probably not doing well on this route today, but it could have great long term potential. Even if they are losing money it, they are probably losing *less* doing this than a bunch of domestic hops, or sending the A380 anywhere else... They don't have many options to use the A380 in their current network, this is the best option out of many bad options. I think they are banking on eventually being able to use it out of PEK and/or PVG...
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
jfidler From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 294 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10902 times:
Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 20): CAN is an overwhelmingly domestic hub, but if one is connecting to another Chinese market it will probably be much quicker to transit farther north (PEK, ICN, etc.).
I think this may have a lot to do with it. I was in CAN recently, and there were no great options for getting back to the US at a reasonable price (in C). I ended up flying back to PEK and heading to the US from there.
I took a CZ A380 on PEK-CAN about a month ago, and I had mistakenly assumed they used such a big plane on a domestic route due to high demand. It's interesting to read in this thread that their choice of such equipment on the route may have been due to restrictions from the Chinese government instead of market forces.
scottpilgrim From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2013, 3 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 9786 times:
Quoting peh (Reply 17): Nothing else in China has to make money. Why should its airline routes be any different?
I would also tend to think that CZ is not a wholly profit-oriented establishment like CX or virtually every airline in private hands. It follows that CAN-LAX route may exist not solely for the sake of money making but for such motives as prestige of having a direct flight to the USA, creating jobs for university graduates, etc that CZ/the Chinese government attaches greater importance to. I don't think the poor yields on this route particularly upsets them, so long as those motives are achieved.
bogoss From China, joined May 2012, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9202 times:
wow, I thought people are really more interested in data whatsoever and apparently I was somehow wrong, lot of things to learn in here including making a point out of assumption.
BestWestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6435 posts, RR: 58 Reply 22, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9002 times:
Quoting phxa340 (Reply 26): How come when a Chinese airline utilizes a European built aircraft on a route that makes no sense and we discuss it we all become Anti-China and Anti-A380. Reality check - the A380 isn't going to work for everyone so when it fails on a particular route, own it. Don't bash us for it and don't accuse of being nationalistic. Now back to the topic at hand ...
Americans not nationalistic - since when?
Sorry, but this thread is full of the usual Crap that comes with the A380 and China on airliners.net. You missed the entire Pre A380 launch hysteria. Chinese aviation threads here are full of badly informed rumours.
Bear in mind that if you read my posts on Hainan Air, they don't need the A380 - whilst CZ - which is Asia's largest airline - do. I've also said on many occasions that China international aviation isn't paved with gold.
China doesn't do things for the short term either. The A380 is a long term play for CZ - not a short term folly. CZ is also a very very profitable airline - so lets give them some benefit of the doubt.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 13): China Southern provided the Chinese government a list of routes they wished for to utilize the A380 on - namely PEK-CDG.
You are aware that China has a one carrier, one route rule. CDG PEK is already operated by CA. CZ is trying to get around this rule by proposing a quasi codeshare.
Quoting bogoss (Reply 28): making a point out of assumption
And then that assumption becomes reality.
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 3): Christmas everything is FULL.
Christmas, that Chinese festival.
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 3): How is it doing a onth from now ?
As Chinese New year will fall in early Feb it will be packed solid.
SA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 2916 posts, RR: 20 Reply 23, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 8965 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
Whilst everyone has the right to an opinion, we ask that this thread not be turned into yet another meaningless Airbus vs. Boeing thread with some users hurling unfounded insults around. Please stay on topic or this thread will be locked for further discussions.
Thanks for your co-operation.
Regards,
SA7700
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud
BestWestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6435 posts, RR: 58 Reply 24, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 8814 times:
Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 18): Bottom line: CZ is probably not doing well on this route today, but it could have great long term potential. Even if they are losing money it, they are probably losing *less* doing this than a bunch of domestic hops, or sending the A380 anywhere else... They don't have many options to use the A380 in their current network, this is the best option out of many bad options. I think they are banking on eventually being able to use it out of PEK and/or PVG...
From CAN, the A380 will eventually serve CDG, AMS and SYD alongside LAX. The config for domestic operations isn't right - too J class heavy, but to compete against the CASM of the high speed train, a higher density A380 may be the proper future on high long density long legged routes - today being flown by A346s 77Ws and 333's (Beijing to Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Chengdu, Urumqi)
From about 2017 (ish) - CZ will move to their own (SkyTeam) purpose built airport in Beijing, which will remove the slot constraints and route constraints. Then the A380 order will look inspired, as will the CA 748 order as it will free up both carriers, alongside Hainan Air who will move to terminal 2.
BestWestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6435 posts, RR: 58 Reply 26, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8884 times:
Quoting peh (Reply 17): Nothing else in China has to make money. Why should its airline routes be any different?
China Southern is a very profitable airline. It's subsidiary, Xiamen Airlines has the longest track record of Airline profitability in the world according to CAPA.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15730 posts, RR: 48 Reply 27, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6737 times:
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 22): China doesn't do things for the short term either. The A380 is a long term play for CZ - not a short term folly. CZ is also a very very profitable airline - so lets give them some benefit of the doubt.
You say that like there's some brilliant master fleet plan when the reality is the aircraft orders are made by the government and divided up among the carriers from there. No rational carrier under their own directive would come up with the motley fleets the Chinese carriers have.
It's a big holiday in the US, and people take the time off to fly to China.
Quoting bogoss (Reply 21): wow, I thought people are really more interested in data whatsoever and apparently I was somehow wrong, lot of things to learn in here including making a point out of assumption.
The CZ LAX LF data is publicly available but do tell us what data you have.
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 26): China Southern is a very profitable airline. It's subsidiary, Xiamen Airlines has the longest track record of Airline profitability in the world according to CAPA.
Pan Am was profitable in the 60s--not particularly meaningful in a hyper regulated environment.
bogoss From China, joined May 2012, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6028 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 27): The CZ LAX LF data is publicly available but do tell us what data you have.
See reply #9, that's what I can get from my position, 3-day LF from 2 months ago, and reply #1 by justinlee for the past 3 days. Until someone can manage to get an average number of this 380 route(please?), these are what we have on the table, and sadly, they are not as convincing as one's mind...
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 29, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5776 times:
Well here are the A380 loads so far.
Oct - 68.1% (only half month was A380)
Nov - 57.5%
LAX-CAN loads were significantly heavier then CAN-LAX during this period. Probably due lots of promotion on this end with discount fares.
The December statistics should be out before the end of January.
Also for the record their LF from Jan - Oct using the 777 averaged mere 54.1%. That's only about 150 passengers per flight. Too bad CZ A332s don't have the range for LAX as even the 777 was too much airplane for the market.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
bogoss From China, joined May 2012, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (4 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5011 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 29): Well here are the A380 loads so far.
Oct - 68.1% (only half month was A380)
Nov - 57.5%
The December statistics should be out before the end of January.
Voilà, that's what the OP was wondering at the first place... numbers and figures... although do you think you're able to tell us where it comes from?
I had read through some report saying 80% was the average and 60% was the C+F, didn't share it in here because I can't verify its credibility...
Quote: The passenger load factor in first class and business class is over 60%, not to mention the booming sales of economy class seats. The average load factor of CZ's Airbus A380 Los Angles service is over 80%.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 32, posted (4 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4930 times:
Numbers are from our local monthly airport statistics.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22054 posts, RR: 51 Reply 34, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4337 times:
The monthly statistics supplied by air carriers here at LAX.
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4285 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 34): Average per flight passenger count for the 11 months Jan - November was 145.9.
I got the total departure number of 2011 is 75,142 and arrival number is 75,072. Considering there are 365 days in 2011, the average daily departure number should be 75,142/365=206 while the average daily arrival number should be 75,072/365=205.
For the 772 CZ use in the CAN-LAX route, there are 284 seats. So the LF should be around 72% in 2011. For the figure in 2012, because CZ changed the plane they use so we can't get a exact number using this method.
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4174 times:
Quoting brilondon (Reply 36): The government orders all their aircraft and then they go to the airlines.
It's not the government who makes the orders but the AVIC Group. Of course you can say AVIC is a state owned company. Besides, the new trend is that leasing companies in China have the right to place orders by themselves. For example, ICBC Leasing made a 42 Airbus 320 order with Airbus directly in 2011.
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 39, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4014 times:
Quoting laca773 (Reply 38): Is CZ using LAX to showcase the A380? It seems to me the best a/c for this market would be the 787.
Actually when they brought the 380, they intended to put it in PEK and use it at PEK-AMS and PEK-CDG route. In fact, when the 380s were delivered, all 4 planes were put in CZ's PEK base. But CA used their resources and made it impossible. Then CZ had to try them on different routes, PEK-CAN, PEK-HKG and now CAN-LAX.
BestWestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6435 posts, RR: 58 Reply 40, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3907 times:
Quoting justinlee (Reply 39): they intended to put it in PEK and use it at PEK-AMS and PEK-CDG route.
PEK CDG was never possible because CDG was already operated by Air China. AMS-PEK was recently decoupled from CAN, so it was too early to put an A380 on that route. AMS and CDG - thanks to the strong relationship with AF/KL will go A380 from CAN. From my limited usage, Loads on CAN CDG with CZ are always pretty strong in Y and Y+. J is rarely full, and F seems to be nothing more than a very comfortable crew rest zone.
Quoting justinlee (Reply 39): Then CZ had to try them on different routes, PEK-CAN, PEK-HKG and now CAN-LAX.
PEK HKG A380 was only a short season route - it went from an A320 to A380.
Quoting justinlee (Reply 39): In fact, when the 380s were delivered, all 4 planes were put in CZ's PEK base.
The fourth aircraft was delivered on 15th Sept was placed into Guangzhou for the CAN PVG route on 17th Sept.
justinlee From China, joined Aug 2012, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 42, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3646 times:
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 40): PEK CDG was never possible because CDG was already operated by Air China. AMS-PEK was recently decoupled from CAN, so it was too early to put an A380 on that route. AMS and CDG - thanks to the strong relationship with AF/KL will go A380 from CAN. From my limited usage, Loads on CAN CDG with CZ are always pretty strong in Y and Y+. J is rarely full, and F seems to be nothing more than a very comfortable crew rest zone.
PEK-CDG is possible. But the condition of CA is to JV in this route, which CZ will never agree.
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 40): The fourth aircraft was delivered on 15th Sept was placed into Guangzhou for the CAN PVG route on 17th Sept.
It's like a cross utilization by both CAN and PEK base. The pilots are from the PEK base while FAs are half PEK and half CAN.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, 
From China, joined Aug 2012, 306 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2011, 30 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2006, 340 posts, 
.
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2013, 3 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6435 posts, 
From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 2916 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3175 posts, 
Actually it ranks the No.5 in Forbes 2000 global largest public companies.
From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1019 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
