UnitedTristar
Topic Author
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:32 am

United announced today they will move up the start date for NGO and add a second daily LAX NRT flight!

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041112/cgf012_1.html

I wonder if this means that the current LAX NRT flight will become a 777 so there would be two in the market...or if they will have one 777 and one 747?

Either way good stuff!

-m

 Big thumbs up
 
sdkualeb
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 2:13 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:57 am

I don't see that as good new being recently laid off. Im glad to see that other country's will benefit better than people state side. They need to find a better balance and stop concentrating on over seas and do something here. I know they say the money is in the Pacific but that didn't help me any! 8 long hard years and now have nothing to show for it, because our upper management cant make a decision that is best for the company and not there own pockets
 
nwcoflyer
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:55 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:05 am

Sdkualeb,

The reason they are expanding overseas is because that is where they can make money. UA (and the other majors) are under attack from the LCC's stateside, and it's much harder to make money over here. Fortunatley, WN cant run it's 73G's from LAX-NRT (yet...  Smile/happy/getting dizzy )
The New American is arriving.
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:17 am

Great news from my favorite airline.

Sdkualeb....Sure management may have made a few mistakes, but also you need to blame your neighbors, family members and other fellow travelers for buying lower and lower air fares. I don't blame them, of course, but low airfares come at a price....meaning lower salaries and benefits....especially at legacy carriers that were used to higher airfares. Just as consumers love the prices at Walmart, the low prices mean they can't have high overhead. Airlines are no different.

I had a discussion with a (liberal) friend who refused to shop at Walmart because they don't pay their employees well or provide benefits, yet he was bragging about the very low airfare he found on the Internet for a trip to California. He didn't seem to care that the same airline is cutting pay and benefits to its employees.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:36 am

Same tired argument! UA and the other so called majors do not need to match each and every low fare offered. Saks does not chase the KMart shopper. Maybe if UA and the likes stood behind there product and actually believed in it, and charged what they needed to be profitable then maybe they would not be in this position.
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:36 am

Im intersted to see how UA will do in NGO, I for one dont think that it will be a large success, but hey, who knows!
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2614
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:42 am

It's about time LAX-NRT got a second daily flight! The largest carrier at LAX only having one daily flight in the largest Trans-Pacific market never made sense to me. Anyone know if the second daily flight will be operated by a 747-400 or a 777? Would be cool to see 2 744s on the route. Hope UA makes it through and I hope these new services are good for them.

Jeremy
 
UnitedTristar
Topic Author
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:48 am

Jeremy,

The second daily flight is a 777  Smile I am personally curious if the other flight will remain a 744 or go to a 777 as well?

-m

 Big thumbs up
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3381
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:17 am

Burnsie - why do you think it won't do well?


AZJ
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 3:30 am

Luv2fly....I'm curious on why you think that. I'm open to good arguments. From what I've read, airline ticket prices are the most price sensitive thing around. Meaning that consumers, using the Internet and other competitive avenues to shop, usually make their decision based on the price before all other factors. Airlines need these consumers to fill their economy cabins.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 3:45 am

Slightly off topic...
I think they would probably keep the 744, just to keep a/c routing easy. UA does send a fair share of 744s to LAX (from IAD, ORD, DEN), either as equipment substitutions, or to send them to Australia or Japan. I agree though, it is strange that LAX's biggest carrier only has a few trans-pac flights. I think the reason for this is that like in that forum that said most people prefer SFO for convienence (on trans-pac flights), United is slowly reintroducing flights. If you look at it, LAX is the JFK of the west, in terms of intl' flights. There are a TON of airlines operating the same flights (SYD, HKG, NRT, SIN, Shanghai, and everywhere else). United has the advantage in SFO: They have a huge domestic and intl' hub there with all the facilities, including maintenence, and most travelers prefer to fly SFO because it is an easier airport (and the new intl' terminal is very nice).
ANYWAYS, (SORRY  Sad )
I hope they keep the 744 service
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:06 am

They are flying the 777 on the second LAX - NRT route:

Flight 872 will depart Narita at 5:25 p.m. on June 7, and arrive in Los Angeles at 11:20 a.m. the same day. Flight 873 will depart Los Angeles at 11:20 a.m. on June 7 and arrive in Narita at 2:55 p.m. the following day.* Flights also will be flown with a B777 aircraft.

Where's the slot for this flight coming from - is an HNL route being dropped?
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:43 am

I was under the impression that slots have always been there--just dormant. SFO-NRT used to run 3x's daily and LAX-NRT 2x's daily...

Granted it was a few years ago, still couldn't have been replaced by the addt'l HNL-NRT flight.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L
 
NWAFA
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 10:30 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:45 am

I do not see how a NGO-LAX flight will help...NGO is a major car industry, thats why our (NWA) DTW-NGO does so well. I could see UA doing ORD-NGO, but not LAX-NGO.

THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:48 am

I am guessing they will keep a 744 on the other flight, to keep AC rotation the same. Also, I bet NH will go year-round with the 777 to make up for the added capacity from its STAR partner. I am just waiting for UA to open up more than just NRT and Australia from LAX. How about SEL or TPE? Also, they are not "under attack" they are losing a war they tried to start.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 5:42 am

Nagoya will be successfull. Nagoya region produces 16% of all industrial goods in Japan, Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto region 17%.

And Nagoya has the only Japan airport with a hub potential. Due to the traffic split that's not the case in Tokyo and Osaka.
 
bigb
Posts: 728
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:00 am

Bicoastal

Airlines have to change the way they do business to stay profitable in today's economic enviornment. You already aknowledge this fact. Now, Luv2fly was saying is that UA doesn't have to get into price wars with LCCs. (Hard to do since LCCs are everwhere in UAL's system compare to CO and NW.)

In my opinion, UAL needs to focus on their premium product and offer an competive economy product at the market price. (Equalibrium point on the Supply and Demand curve.) Why they started TED, I don't know, but wasn't a smart move.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
BH346
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2000 5:50 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:02 am

Always good to hear of additional transpacific service. Nagoya is a major industrial center for Japan which will bring business travelers. SFO provides connections as well as NGO with ANA. NGO was made to connect passengers to and from domestic Japanese flights and will actually be busier than KIX when it opens since Chubu will handle nearly all, if not all of Nagoya's airline service (heard they might put a 50-seat cap on flights to Komaki). ORD-NGO would be a possibility if it wasn't for AA already set to fly that route next summer. I don't think there would be enough room for two airlines to operate that route, but if it does really well with AA, who knows... I'm almost certain that we'll see someone fly LAX-NGO, personally I'm expecting JAL but we'll see.
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:09 am

NWAFA--

The Nagoya flight operates to San Francisco, not Los Angeles.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L
 
united
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:50 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:08 am

Ted is by no means a mistake to United. The mission of Ted is to gain back market share from Low cost competitors, which it has accomplished in the past months.

Ted registerd a load factor of 87% from March to July.

Local market share in Denver for Ted has increased by eight points, while Frontier has decreased by nine points. Note that even a two or three percent difference is an extremely large fraction when talking about market share.

In Denver, Frontier will pull down two daily flights to Ontario (Ted market)

Spirit will take down its twice daily service from DEN to FLL (Ted market)

Ted has an all A320 fleet with the same configuration, keeping costs down.

The Ted fleet has outperformed all maintenance reliability goals even though these planes have been flying 15% more than the mainline A320s.

There are more than 9,000 seats in Ted markets than last year (18 more seats per plane), yet Ted achieves outstanding load factors.

Modifications to transform UA A320s to Ted A320s were completed 'in house'20% faster than anticipated saving time and money.

Ted A320s have been testing various smart ideas such as flying at mach.78 rather than mach.80 to save fuel while not jeapordizing on time stats. All A320s will now adhere to this, saving 2 to 6 million dollars annualy.

Ground crews position power cords before the plane lands so pilots can shut down the engines earlier. This will save as much as 9 million per year.

Ted has six simplified fares, capped at 299 dollars.

Cargo will increase by 250 pounds of mail per flight, revenue will increase by 4.2 million dollars.

Premium customers are taking advantage of Ted. Mileage Plus flying is up 7 %, and on Ted is up 27%.

Marketing in ORD area and DEN area was relitavely cost efficient. Before Ted was flying, UA spent only $200,000 on advertising Ted in the Denver area.

Ted has and continues to exceed its goals while defending United's domestic leisure flying. How can this not be called a success so far?

Chris
The opinions expressed here are mine and not necessarily those of Delta Air Lines.
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:13 am

Load factors are not always a sure sign of a profitable flight! If they are selling the seats below cost, then it does not matter of the flight is full or not.
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
hoya
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 2:25 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:12 am

True, load factors are not a sign of a profitable flight, but when other airlines are matching your fares, it is somewhat a sign of success. If Frontier has fares at the same price and is losing market share to Ted, then I think Ted could be called a success, at least relatively speaking.
Hoya Saxa!!
 
bigb
Posts: 728
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:48 am

UniTED


As I stated earlier, I think TED is a bad idea for United. Yes, I understand it was created to win market share back, but it does the job with an extreme Cost Association. Load factors to me just tell me how full planes have been, but it doesn't tell me what kind of profits or losses was made.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2565
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:28 am

UA doesn't even serve TPE direct from SFO now.
UA can just codeshare with OZ on LAX-ICN, just as OZ does with UA on SFO-ICN.

With all these new services announced into KIX and NGO, the market probably can not support all these flights because Japan is a very mature market and growth will be minimal at best. Granted next year will be the Expo, so travelers will be numerous but in 2006 we will wait and see.
But then again, even with lightly loaded flights a 777 can carry more cargo than a 747, so maybe that's the hidden factor.

 
UA744KSFO
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:55 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:32 am

This is a wise move for UA. While it was once true that the legacy carrier offered a product much superior to the LCC (remember People Express!), so many people are preferring to fly the LCC not only because of price, but because of little things like PTV's or leather seats. I know some people may not like that, but it is true.

As to the business traveller market, they were once the mainstay of the US domestic market, but now that walk-up airfares are so much lower than before the LCC influx, they no longer have the incentive to enter into exclusive service agreements for domestic travel.

There also is a prevailing attitude in the US that people don't really care about amenities and the like on a domestic flight (with the possible exception of some CA-NY routes). When it comes to an International flight, however, that's a whole different story.

So, in order for United to compete, they have to offer a good product internationally and cheap fares domestically. However, they have had it with the bloodbaths that have gone on, and I think they're making a wise decision in focusing on less saturated markets where they might be able to yield a profit.
 
SegmentKing
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 7:16 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:11 am

Where did you get your info UniTED? Cause it's unfortunately wrong.

Frontier has not posted any decreases in traffic on any route flown by mainline Frontier aircraft.

Spirit only flew 2 daily FLL-DEN flights in the season. They had only been flying ONE flight to Ft. Lauderdale. Take this from a person who used to constantly fly FLL-DEN.

Its one thing to brag about how aweful.. err um good Ted is. Its another to make untruthful posts about its competitors.

From the Frontier Quarterly filing:

We began Frontier JetExpress service to Little Rock, Arkansas from our DIA hub with two daily round-trip frequencies and terminated our service to Ontario, California on October 10, 2004.

Wait.. United doesn't serve Little Rock anymore. Huh.

During the three months ended September 30, 2004, we had a net loss of $2,082,000.

Wait. How many hundreds of millions was United's loss??

We carried 1,750,000 mainline revenue passengers during the three months ended September 30, 2004 compared to 1,457,000 in the three months ended September 30, 2003, an increase of 20.1%

I don't see a decrease in Revenue Passenger Miles, as you state TED has taken "significant traffic from Frontier".

Here is the link. Try and find where Frontier is reporting lower traffic. http://edgar.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/921929/000092192904000030/ctf910q930.htm.

-n
~ ~ ~ ~ pRoFeSsIoNaL hUrRiCaNe DoDgEr ~ ~ ~ ~
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:53 am

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't OZ still fly to SFO? I believe that the UA SFO-ICN flight was the second OZ flight from SFO, but UA is flying it. Makes sense, as they are codeshare/alliance partners. I think that 4 carriers are currently flying that route-- SQ, KE, OZ, and UA.

-Copa
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 11:11 am

An interesting is that NRT seems to be the most important route from LAX for UA. They have a limited range of key long haul routes from LAX (compared with SFO). NRT is the only route which UA serves 2times from LAX.

And even more surprising for me is that UA will offer the same amount of seats from LAX to NRT than from from their main Asian hub SFO.

And lastly it's interesting how they build their schedule. Instead of spreading their two flights over the day and giving passengers a wider range of possibilities, UA flies both flights only one hour apart. I am sure they have reasons for doing so. But this schedule could be done better by one A380 than by the mix they intend to offer now. So in this case UA choose not to offer frequency over sice. The proposed timetable is more guided by possibilities.
And it clearly shows (at least to me) that UA should buy some A380's and that they would make sense in their fleet. (Although I know that UA unfortunately doesn't have any money to buy any long haul for some time now.)
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2565
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:31 pm

JoFMO,
NRT-SFO has 2x744 and NRT-LAX will have 1x744, 1x777 daily. NRT-SFO will still have more seats.

Actually, there is only a narrow window of departure times out of each location because the traveler needs. If the flight out of LAX departs early enough, pax can connect to onward flights to Asia, while if the flight is later, UA is limiting to just US-Japan traffic.
Although the same is not true for the reverse, I really don't know why there aren't more later flights from Japan, such as departures after 1900. I again suspect the ability to connect is the case. If the departure time out of NRT is too late, pax would not be able to connect ideally to the US east coast.
 
SegmentKing
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 7:16 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:24 pm

United's strength will always be their international network.. they are quickly becoming the "Pan Am" of the US in terms of where they go, its just that United keeps turning its back on the US domestic market and forces many elites to get stuck in a CRJ-200 or CRJ 700 for upwards of 4 hours on a trip that was once flown in comfort with a 737. Regional routes keep getting tosses around with little to no consistency, and the airline keeps raping its employees -> the backbone of the business.

I used to love United and stand up for them a lot, but I have seen the light & the mistakes they have made and pray to dear God they are able to pull thru.

-n
~ ~ ~ ~ pRoFeSsIoNaL hUrRiCaNe DoDgEr ~ ~ ~ ~
 
Thrust
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:17 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:50 pm

Does UA plan to add more service to Europe as well? Because I noticed there is a new photo in the a.net database of N649UA, a Boeing 767-322(ER), at Copenhagen, Denmark. I cannot remember a U.S. airline serving Copenhagen since the late 1980s, early 1990s when TWA and Pan Am ruled the European skies.
Fly one thing; Fly it well
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:55 pm

UA is wet leasing the aircraft to SK.

N
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:12 pm

OZ's SFO -> ICN flight leaves at 1:00am in the morning at arrives at 6:45am: enough time to catch onward flights.

SQ and UA's SFO -> ICN flights leave around noon-ish, if I recall.
 
aussie747
Posts: 1005
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 11:15 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:59 pm

Considering we're discussing the increase in UA pacific services, UA is also increasing it's SYD-LAX services as well, by an extra 3 x 744 services weekly as well.
 
united
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:50 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:23 am

I received my Ted information from the Ted Pocket Guide (Version 2). While it is true that load factors do not always equal profits (which is becoming more and more common these days), Ted is not chasing customers with the rock bottom fares, yet Ted's fares are competitive.
I hope this answers your questions.

We began Frontier JetExpress service to Little Rock, Arkansas from our DIA hub with two daily round-trip frequencies and terminated our service to Ontario, California on October 10, 2004.
Wait.. United doesn't serve Little Rock anymore. Huh.


This appears that JetExpress was making a smart move and moving into a virtually untapped market. UA never served Little Rock from Denver. ORD-Little Rock and DEN-Little Rock are two very different flights.

During the three months ended September 30, 2004, we had a net loss of $2,082,000.
Wait. How many hundreds of millions was United's loss??


Comparing UA's loss to F9's loss is like saying it is fair if a teacher assigns one child in a class to read Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and another to read Romeo and Juliet.

Chris
The opinions expressed here are mine and not necessarily those of Delta Air Lines.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:59 am

UniTED:

I don't buy into UAL v. Frontier wars becaue I think both can live in harmony, and to each others benefit. And so I want UAL to survive and be healthy.

However, you say: "Ted is not chasing customers with the rock bottom fares."

Um - maybe not now, I haven't checked. But, during the summer, UniTed was offering $55 round trips DEN/ONT. It was similar for DEN/RNO.

Frontier was more than happy to admit that they could not make money on those fares.

And if Frontier, with lower costs, couldn't make money on those fares, I'm not sure how UniTed could.

You are correct about one thing - Ted is all about market share.

But market share and profit are not always the same thing.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
bigb
Posts: 728
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 4:27 am

But market share and profit are not always the same thing

I think you mean they always not the same thing.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
UnitedTristar
Topic Author
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 4:32 am


Ted is indeed about market share. United has been running after F9 in many markets...thats what large carriers do with LCC's. They have driven F9 out of a few markets including ONT and BOS. Now that's just the way the industry is played. UA is playing the market. What can ya do...nature of the beast!

-m

 Big thumbs up

 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 5:21 am

UnitedTristar:

"They have driven F9 out of many markets including ONT and BOS."

Oh, whoa. That's an interesting rewrite of history.

United drive not drive Frontier out of BOS - 9/11 did that.

Shortly before 9/11, terminal A was closed, and Frontier was left without a gate. Massport wasn't much help, as they wanted Frontier to move to MHT, to ease congestion at BOS. Frontier found a gate with US Arways - but at such exhorbitant rates that the drop in loads after 9/11 made it extremely unprofitable.

Prior to 9/11 Frontier had been planning to add a 3rd daily.

BigB:

Sorry, didn't understand your point. Market share and profit can be the same thing. But they are not always the same thing.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1452
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:09 am

so when are we likley to see ua return into akl then??
Vietnam time..
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9855
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:50 am

Can't see UA returning to AKL because NZ now operate to LAX and SFO. If UA do return to AKL then UA will most likly launch a new route as NZ have got both LAX and SFO pretty well covered
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 4896
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:27 am

Don't no where else UA would fly into AKL from since SFO and LAX are their 2 main hubs on the West Coast.

While they even codeshare with NZ I think there would be a chance that they would return and add competition on the LAX-AKL run to NZ and QF. There were rumours about this a while back.
 
AAplatnumflier
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 1:40 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:29 am

Now I can actually choose between to american based airlines that fly the 777. I think that UA should fly into AKL though with a 777. I think it is possible... I am not sure though....correct me if i am wrong. But that would be interesting.....UA flying the 777 to AKL.
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:35 am

AAplatnumflier,

UA did fly the 777 from LAX - AKL up until a few years ago. I don't recall why it was dropped.
 
AAplatnumflier
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 1:40 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:39 am

Man if only I had known that.... I would have flown them. But I think they should start that back up again. It would be a great flight. Thanks for the prompt response SFOrunner!!
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 4896
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 12:22 pm

UA flew the 777 into AKL for only a short time from June 2002 until March 2003.

They say it was dropped because it was unprofitable, though I still have my doubts. UA employed 96 staff in AKL for 1 daily flight which would have cost a fair bit in itself the 96 staff that is. And also they could codeshare with NZ, otherwise I don't think they would of dropped it.
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3940
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 1:55 pm

Why on earth would you employ 96 staff for one daily flight?!

Surely you would sub-contract out the ground work to other airlines and just have UA staff there in a supervisory capacity or something?

That sounds insane!

Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Sun Nov 14, 2004 2:34 pm

Mariner - please email me via the a.net interface, I have an F9 question.

While they even codeshare with NZ I think there would be a chance that they would return and add competition on the LAX-AKL run to NZ and QF.

I would think that they would do best to just continue with the codeshare agreement with their *A partner.

N
 
flyua
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 9:23 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Mon Nov 15, 2004 1:21 am

Early on in this thread, SFORunner asked whether United had the slots at Narita to support a second daily NRT-LAX flight. Well, currently we have two daily 777 nonstops from Narita to Seoul. Guess how many we'll have beginning June 7th, the day before the second LAX flight begins? It seems one of our ICN flights will be traded in for the new LAX service. (I hope this might signal a possible future return of our nonstop to Seoul from Chicago! We haven't seen this for almost ten years, I think.)
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: UA Continues Pacific Expansion

Mon Nov 15, 2004 1:37 am

Gigneil:

Sorry, I'm really not technically minded, I don't know how to do that. I'm not even sure what the "a.net interface" is.

I'm not even sure how to send an email to airliners.net.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I can address any question about F9 here - although I may not know the answer.

If you prefer to do it off the boards, my email is: davywavy@mac.com

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: a380787, Aaron747, aflyingkiwi, Baidu [Spider], beachba, Bing [Bot], Bostrom, coolian2, CrimsonNL, Fiend, jay767, JerseyFlyer, Jetstar315, Kilopond, Prost, ThePointblank, tugpilot, Ugly51, ZKLOU and 281 guests