staralliance85 From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 201 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6888 times:
Currently, UA is the only one to have a strong Asian network from their EWR hub. AA only has one flight to HND from JFK. I feel that they will do really well if they launch PVG and PEK from JFK and of course have the codeshare with CX on the flights to HKG. IF AA adds those flights Delta would have to add more asian non stops out of JFK and Not rely on NRT connections
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3592 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6018 times:
There is lots of Asian competition our of JFK that doesnt exist at EWR.
Also, keep in mind CO was a much smaller airline when they started the Asian gateway at EWR. It was a smart move to tap into the huge Asian market in NY/NJ. However, if they were a larger airline (like UA was) with gateways on the west coast, the Asian gateway likely wouldn't be as large as it was in EWR.
CO had three hubs to starts routes to Asia:
CLE-> no way
IAH-> limited connectors, smaller O and D
EWR-> caching $$$
I wouldnt expect AA or DL to add lots of flights Asia to JFK. They will limit the Asia routes to strong non-stop routes that will perform well with O and D.
1. Strong Asian competition
2. Better suited hubs further west for connectors
commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11819 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5966 times:
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 1): JFK-PVG would be the easier option for AA, as they are still having a tough time with the slots for ORD-PEK.
And it would also be a market more in line with AA's strategy, as JFK-PVG has more of a local business component (financials, industrials, etc.). Nonetheless, I'm not holding my breath for AA to announce it any time soon.
Quoting UnitedTristar (Reply 2): With the competition, I would say PHL to China after the merger is more likely
I wouldn't. The PHL market isn't large enough to support a nonstop flight to China, in my view. Given the soon-to-be-alliance connections, NRT seems to make more sense for PHL.
Quoting bobnwa (Reply 4): You don't think DL has a strong Asia network?
Compared to AA? Sure. Compared to UA? Not even close.
UA's network to Asia is vastly stronger than DL's - but of course UA has the benefit of multiple excellent U.S. gateway hubs to Asia, whereas DL has relatively few. And with regard specifically to NYC-Asia, which I believe was the original statement, UA definitely has a far superior network to DL - with 4 daily flights to 4 points in East Asia compared to DL's 1 flight to 1 point.
jayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1012 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5787 times:
The original post or question had nothing to due with the overall strength of AA, DL or UA Asian network because if that had been the question I think both DL and UA have a very strong presence in Asia. However the question dealt with the New York market to Asia only and in that regards both AA and DL have only one flight on their own metal to Asia.
So to answer the question will AA add service from JFK to PVG or PEK, I feel like AA probably would add service out of JFK to those destination ONLY IF the yields are right. American does not want JFK to become the next LAX and a lot of Asian and Chinese carriers already serve JFK nonstop so the market is there and AA would have no problem filling a 772ER on a JFK-PVG route but the problem AA would have would be the yields. Both AA and UA have no problem filling their 772ER on the LAX-PVG route but yields are horrible which is why UA is putting the 788 on the LAX-PVG route. So my feeling is probably once AA starts taking delivery of their 787's then they probably will take a hard look at JFK-PVG I don't really see AA being interested in JFK-PEK in the near future because they still need to sort out the horrible slots they have on the ORD-PEK route.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8696 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5781 times:
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 1):
JFK-PVG would be the easier option for AA, as they are still having a tough time with the slots for ORD-PEK.
I was gonna say, yes JFK-PEK and JFK-PVG would fit the traditional AA strategy. It is a glamorous cornerstone strategy. To amateurs it sounds great. But it's also a low-yield, very expensive plan, because it doesn't shield the airline from competition. Still, not saying it won't happen. In 5-10 years, it probably will, if not sooner.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26010 posts, RR: 50
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5679 times:
I think AA needs to fix and ensure its existing China services are profitable before venturing off on new long distance routes.
ORD-PEK is still hobbled with poor timings, while LAX-PVG seems to see endless fare sales and loads that are weaker than competitors.
Yes China is a huge market, but I don't see AA well positioned to take advantage of it directly at the moment especially from JFK.
I see chances higher for DL to add a JFK-China link first with its much better established presence, but considering even it seems to have sat out such opportunity probably means the market is a difficult one.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7751 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5533 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 12): ORD-PEK is still hobbled with poor timings, while LAX-PVG seems to see endless fare sales and loads that are weaker than competitors.
Those two routes alone make up a large portion of AA's loss in Asia.
As far as China is concerned, I dont see it being a priority from anywhere. The yields arent what they once were to China. AA really needs to get ORD-China and LAX-PVG stable before going from any other market. I dont see NYC-China (too much compeitition) nor DFW/PHL-China (not enough local demand).
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8451 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4809 times:
JFK to Shanghai would be the logical next route for AA to Asia from New York. Seoul, Osaka and Peking have problems for AA from JFK. HKG would be good too, but Cathay does well there from JFK with AA code share.
dtfg From China, joined Jan 2013, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 3179 times:
For PEK-LAX and PEK-JFK, the only carrier is Air China. They already doubled LAX and JFK will be the next soon I think. Now it is not unusual to see that CA's fare is higher than UA's EWR-PEK. Seems that the yield is very good. Hard to believe that no US carriers are taking hard look at these routes, though, I admit that AA is still struggling to secure a better slot at PEK and turn LAX-PVG into a profitable one.
oc2dc From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 407 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 12 hours ago) and read 2922 times:
Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 15): JFKPVG and LAXPEK are both being actively and seriously considered.
I have heard something similar.
Apparently AA will be enlarging its 777 pilot base out of LAX soon. The reason for the enlarging is route expansion.
Obviously we already heard about LAX-GRU(Pending government approval), however, there have been some serious talks about having up to 6 new international destinations (including GRU). I heard LAX-ICN, PEK, AKL and perhaps most random and unlikely, LAX-BKK( Pretty sure TG left the route b/c it was too long and unprofitable).
I really can't see LAX-BKK happening unless there is a stopover in NRT or ICN or something. I don't even believe AA has the equipment to complete such a flight.
PDX88 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 182 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2539 times:
AA's 772s currently aren't layed out properly to make profits on these routes, including the already existing LAX-PVG and ORD-PEK/PVG. 16F/37J/194Y is a lousy layout to rake in money with. Once the 777 refurbishments begin and premium seating goes to all J and Y goes 10 abreast, CASM will drop significantly and AA can be much more competitive in these markets, and then they can possibly start considering JFK-China flights.