Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16125 posts, RR: 57 Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2316 times:
I can't see UA selling the lucrative NRT slots & routes. This (along with LHR) is the crown of their network. The most likely purchaser would be AA and they don't have the cash. UA would not want to build up AA.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16313 posts, RR: 87 Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
I think the DOT would block AA getting any bigger.
DL is less threatening, directly, to UA in many ways. Not that DL could afford it either, but god DL seems to be flying MD-11s domestically right now more than ever. Those planes could sponsor an Asian buildup until new 777s could be sourced.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16313 posts, RR: 87 Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2275 times:
It would dimish the purpose yes, but there's other aspects to the route.
There's the cost of operating them as well. UA could really use a cutback in recurring costs right now, and that could help them.
Don't think that I want this to happen - I think selling the prestigious routes might be a bit premature compared to a massive rationalization of domestic routes. But it sure would make things interesting.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7873 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2257 times:
I think it would be very stupid for UA to dump their transpacific routes.
The reason is simple: they are very lucrative moneymakers. Pan Am's decision to sell their transpacific routes in 1985 was a huge factor in the demise of Pan Am six years later.
I think UA would be better served by cutting back their domestic service and South American international routes and putting more emphasis on their more lucrative transpacific and transatlantic routes.
Usairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3244 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2242 times:
Guys, were talking about UA selling a route or 2 when necessary, not selling off their entire pacific operation. DL will doubtfully have any interest since they are retiring their MD-11's and only have one or 2 pacific routes to begin with. UA will probably look for one of its Asian partners to buy a route or 2 IF they feel the need to sell it.
UAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2224 times:
Coming from United Airlines, I can tell you that there is a LONG, LONG, LONG way to go before United comes close to even considering selling the transpac network. It's the crown jewel of United Airlines, which has the best and most comprehensive route network of any airline.
Get your facts straight, and provide concrete proof next time.
Lindy field From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 3091 posts, RR: 15 Reply 13, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2182 times:
What routes does United operate in the Pacific region which are not operated by Northwest? NW is about the only US-based airline I can think of that might want to pick up a few additional routes in Asia or across the Pacific.
Airzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1151 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2139 times:
Some serious issues to consider:
1) The current bilateral is similar to the one with the UK, two designated US flag carriers with 5/6th freedom rights beyond Tokyo. Unless DL/AA/CO can support connection with their existing frequencies to NRT, those intra-Asian flights have little value to another carrier. NRT-HKG is certainly more attractive to airlines if they can pick up locals in Japan and carry them rather than relying on inbounds from the States. UA has to sell either all NRT rights, or none.
2) In addition, if UA would sell certain US in-bound frequencies to others, that would devastate their in bound US traffic over the NRT hub. So selling JFK-NRT to AA just cuts another connection point to send people over the hub. Similar with Pan Am, it is all of Asia or none. UA could support OZ, NZ, perhaps PEK/HKG flights from either LAX or SFO (which ever one survives) but probably not worth the effort. If they are going to, might as well dump the whole thing.
3) UA is in a very precarious position at the moment. If they are going to sell any assets (debatable whether they can in the first place) they have to be the ones with value. South American flights have little value since AA/DL and CO already fly there, and most are retrenching not expanding in the area. LHR and NRT are the only things that have real tangible value. UA may have to make a decision in order to get some cash in the door.
4) Nasty 747's. I am sure that UA would love to get rid of them completely, but as long as they fly to Asia/Australia they can't. Dump the Pacific, the 747 issue goes away.
5) AA can't buy the LHR slots, CO can't buy the Pacific ops (unless they dump the NW code share) DL probably can have either but doesn't have enough cash for both. Even if they do put those assets up for sale, who can legitimately buy them except Southwest? Again, it only has value if someone wants it.
TonyBurr From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1001 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2105 times:
If upper management seriously considers selling the trans Pacific routes ( esp NRT), then there is NO DOUBT of the mental illness of management! They have allowed "some" doubt ( not much) to exist as to their competnecy, but this would remove all duobts.
The Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1416 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2077 times:
SYD will be the 2nd last to go before NRT if they sell. I can't see it happening. The problem with the 747's is that often it's those pilots who are the highest paid, so by rationalising their 747 fleet they can retrench some highly paid pilots. Of course this opens another can of worms that has already been opened in no small way in another thread, but killing off NRT and SYD will undoubtedly kill UA. As has been mentioned, South and Central America looks like a place to trim down and rationalise.
UAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2039 times:
United proved they could get the 777-200ER from LAX to New Zealand...that is really the only "747 critical" flight to Asia that United has. They fly the 777 ORD-PEK, ORD-NRT, and from the west coast to Asia as well. Since CO used to do EWR-HKG, UA would be able to (range wise) put a 777 on ORD-HKG.
As much as I hate saying this, the above fact proves that United does not need to fly 747-400s really at all. They are the most expensive airplane United has to fly. Inside company sources indicate that United most likely will retire the vast majority, if not all, of the 747-400s.
ZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5133 posts, RR: 11 Reply 19, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2033 times:
I agree with Coachman here, if UA sell SYD and NRT routes that is the end of UA! I think as long as UA keep flying they will keep the 747-400!
NW doesn't fly to Australia or New Zealand other than that they probably fly most of the same routes UA fly. If UA goes I think NW sholud give these routes a try most likely with ex UA 744's. There is certainly room for more than 2 airlines (NZ and QF) on the pacific routes to SYD, MEL and AKL!
MEL From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 1092 posts, RR: 14 Reply 20, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2028 times:
I agree. I don't see a huge need to UA to operate B744s at all. I could see all B744 routes switching over to B777s with the exception of SFO-SYD and ORD-HKG. I think SEA-NRT might possibly be one of the only NRT flights that could see the axe. Anyone know if HNL-NRT is a high revenue-earning market for UA?
Thadocta From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 396 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
Is there really any need to operate non-stops SFO-SYD? I know it is a somewhat profitable route, but would eliminating the route along with eliminating an aircraft type be better off financially for UA? After all, nobody else operates on the route (at all, let alone non-stop) so UA could still operate it but stopping off somewhere - they would then keep the crowd who want the same plane right through. Can't really see them losing anyone from this, as who would want to transfer in LAX to a non-stop to SYD?
The fleet economics of this would be good, since if they can operate 777's on LAX-SYD, then they could effectively eliminate the 744 from their fleet. (Don't know enough about the ORD-HKG market to comment on this one).
As for HNL-NRT, given the demographics of the Hawaiian population I would have thought it would be a lucrative route - what competition is there on it?
UAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2007 times:
United's Honolulu-Narita route is currently a 747-400, but will transfer to a 777. United might also start Honolulu-Osaka service with a 777, but that is just company speculation. United has a great network to Hawaii, and seeks to keep it strong.
KaiTakFan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1587 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1993 times:
"...as who would want to transfer in LAX to a non-stop to SYD?"
You would probably be surprized how many people would rather go down to LAX for the non-stop on UA 815 then have to deal with a stop over in the Pacific during the middle of the night for 2 hours.
"The fleet economics of this would be good, since if they can operate 777's on LAX-SYD, then they could effectively eliminate the 744 from their fleet. (Don't know enough about the ORD-HKG market to comment on this one)."
Ok, so yeah the 777 can make it on LAX-SYD. But what I hear from LAX CSR's for UAL, flight 841 on LAX-AKL a 777 has had some very hard times in the past with weight restrictions. Same goes for CO with EWR-HKG. ORD-HKG would be no different. I think while the capacity is lower, it also has a pretty high risk of not turning a profit if it can not carry the extra passengers and cargo the whole way that a 747-400 can do!
"As for HNL-NRT, given the demographics of the Hawaiian population I would have thought it would be a lucrative route - what competition is there on it?"
Competition on this route comes from Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways. I believe this route runs strong in economy class frequently.
25 Thadocta: Yes, I know it is closer - but I am thinking in terms of demand, LAX-SYD obviously has much more demand than SFO-SYD ever will. Isn't there an issue w
26 Gigneil: Thadocta- You know, I keep saying that. But its because I heard Concordeboy say it once a long time ago. Nobody knows for sure if the FAA allows ETOPS
27 KaiTakFan: Gigneil, I agree!! My brain hurts too after hearing so many different stories!! "Yes, I know it is closer - but I am thinking in terms of demand, LAX-
28 Thadocta: Doesn't it all have something to do with payload restrictions? The 744 is severely payload restricted due to prevailing headwinds when operating LAX-S
29 ZK-NBT: While UA is flying they will continue to operate the 747-400 for routes like LAX-SYD and ORD-HKG along with several NRT flights! AKL is going to see s
30 Gigneil: CO can carry max pax and bags plus 9t cargo, according to a previous post. The UA 744 was very heavily payload restricted JFK-HKG. That's why I was sa
31 KaiTakFan: "The 744 is severely payload restricted due to prevailing headwinds when operating LAX-SYD" I may not be 100% correct, but from my meteorology course
32 LJ: Maybe a stupid question but from where will UA get the 777 they need if UA is going to replace the 744 with the 777 on Trans Pacific flights? Can they
33 Donder10: I think their domestic 772s are non-ER or at least some of them.Do UA have the highest weight 772ER with P&W engines?
34 PW100: I can not stop feeling that UA is in a deep Catch 22 situation. Reading the aviation press [and more so the non-aviation], UA is still bleeding huge a
35 The Coachman: The thing with SFO-SYD is that UA's connecting traffic can run through this flight. It's also a convenient flight for businesses in the Bay area, incl
36 9844: Come Feb when UAL can't meet its D.I.P revenue targets. The banks WILL hawk the best routes to get their money back. ALL I read is emotional blather.
37 BBD: Additional pressure on UA's SYD flights will come in March when QF adds another three frequencies to its SYD-LAX schedule. Also interesting that QF's
38 Airzim: I am not certain, but I believe the restriction with LAX-SYD is solely due to lack of diversion points between LAX and Fiji. The LAX-AKL flight can ta
39 Blink182: Since no US airline is in a position to buy the slots financially, and most US airlines have asian partners that they can connect with and codeshare w
40 Bigo747: UAL1837: In a sense, I think I can see your frustration on the news (or rumour, in your POV) about this. I tried to translate this small articles care
41 A330_DTW: Posted 2002-12-29 02:10:57 and read 597 times. I disagree... most other airlines would probably like to be able to compete on the Pacific. NW and UA j
42 FLY777UAL: I'm sorry, but AA had horrible feed out of SJC...no way to get a plane full of people to either TPE or NRT... United Will Stand F L Y 7 7 7 U A L
43 Gigneil: AA's feed from SJC was better than a kick in the pants, and the local traffic from the SJC area is PRIME for cargo between those destinations. They st
44 ConcordeBoy: Ok, so yeah the 777 can make it on LAX-SYD. But what I hear from LAX CSR's for UAL, flight 841 on LAX-AKL a 777 has had some very hard times in the pa
45 AA717driver: Everyone here is forgetting that assets will be sold to fund the operation. If UA can make enough revenue to meet its profit goals as established BY T
46 Thadocta: "I may not be 100% correct," You aren't. "but from my meteorology course I have taken recently, I can voice this info. The flights that are truely aff
47 The Coachman: The thing is whether UA wants to run an Australian operation with B777's. I doubt it would be competitive, otherwise one would have seen B777's down-u
48 KaiTakFan: "You had better run off and tell QF and NZ and UA flight planning then" Haha... good one! "- Qantas aircraft regularly depart fully booked with 40 or
49 PropilotJW: I agree with UAL1837, UAL does not need the 747-400. the 777 can fill all the holes that the 747 would leave when taken out of the fleet. The 777 is m
50 ConcordeBoy: Its a shame UA does not have those nice GE90's or else there would be no problem here then right? But since they do not have them, UA will have to dea
51 RayChuang: My worry is that the creditors will force an instant shutdown of UA, and that would be a disaster in the making on an unprecedented scale. The biggest
52 AApilot2b: I recall another airline that sold off important routes to stay a float for a little while. It sold most of its important slots at LHR to AA. Can you
53 Cloudy: Are there any Star Alliance members who are able to buy and could benefit from some of UA's Pacific routes? Are some of UA's Japan rights only availab