UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:50 pm

UA have announced that they are not going to bring back the 2nd LAX - LHR this year during summer. Last year I flew on it a few times and whilst it was only a 767, it alwayes seemed very busy particularly up front so i am surprised with this decision. My main question is what are they doing with this slot. Are they just going to leave it dormant or add a flight to another hub. I would guess the 955 to SFO will go to a 747 for summer as usuaul but I wonder if they might add extra frequency on this route as its always a good performer. Any information would be greatly appreciated.
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:53 pm

Proof that UA is short of long-haul aircraft and is having to make tough decisions on prioritizing their use.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:53 pm

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
My main question is what are they doing with this slot.

Probably sell it on for cash to someone as they have done with a fair few of their slots over the last couple of years.
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
vsflyer747400
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:34 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:17 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
I would guess the 955 to SFO will go to a 747 for summer as usuaul but I wonder if they might add extra frequency on this route as its always a good performer.

You guess correct, UA955 will be a 744 and will be backed up by the UA931 which will be a 777.
Being on: (in no order) VS BA AA EK CX MH DL EI BD KL HV NW RC LH AF DA TG QF US FR LX AC SK AZ PG SQ UA PA
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:05 am

Quoting Cornish (Reply 2):
Probably sell it on for cash to someone as they have done with a fair few of their slots over the last couple of years.

They sold the Newark slot, not sure they have sold any more, just leased them in the last couple of years.

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 1):
Proof that UA is short of long-haul aircraft and is having to make tough decisions on prioritizing their use.

With the massive debt payment they have just made, I just wish now they would go ahead and order/lease some new metal so they could avoid this situation.
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:18 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 4):
They sold the Newark slot, not sure they have sold any more, just leased them in the last couple of years.

As part of a major study i worked on last year, we identified that United was one of the largest shedder of slots over the last few years at LHR.
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:21 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 4):
With the massive debt payment they have just made, I just wish now they would go ahead and order/lease some new metal so they could avoid this situation.

Who is to say the debt payment was not to relieve the company of some restrictive covenants as to its ability to manage its other cash and debt?
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:30 am

This really doesnt surprise me at all. LAX seems to be UA's stepchild. The other hubs are shown much more preference over LAX. Who knows why? Probabaly competition. At least I highly doubt UA would ever cancel the year round nonstop to LHR (UA 934/935).
It is what it is...
 
Algoz
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 3:58 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:34 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
Last year I flew on it a few times and whilst it was only a 767, it alwayes seemed very busy particularly up front so i am surprised with this decision.

United realises it cannot compete, with its present product, in many markets ex LHR, with such strong competition as VS and BA. The business class product in particular is inferior. The 2nd LAX flight used 767, not ideal for 11.5hr flight. The F and C class product on the 767 is in itself inferior to the 777, which in turn is inferior to VS and BA. Yield on LAX route is very poor. UA wanted instead to put 747 on 935 LHR/LAX but any spare 747 is now slated for IAD/Beijing.........767 from LHR/LAX will be used IAD/FCO new route from October....
 
gemini573
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:53 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:43 am

UA could codeshare with NZ on this route. This route is quite competitive with AA, BA, VS, NZ.

Interesting how UA is trimming flights at LHR and NRT.
 
FL370
Posts: 239
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 2:25 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:14 am

all i need to say, UA NEEDS TO BUY SOME MORE PLANES!! say 773ER, 748, and maybe a couple of 787's



fl370
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4946
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:58 am

Quoting Gemini573 (Reply 9):
UA could codeshare with NZ on this route.

Does this tie in with NZ bringing the -400 back on the LAX-LHR route for the 3 June to 26 Oct period?
 
albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:36 am

hmmm it seems that UA have been for the past couple of years have got a smaller aircraft into LHR and also seem to be selling there slots (like there JFK routes to DL)
I remember the days when UA only had 744s into LHR with 777s. Now it seems that its a lot more 777s and 767s now.
Any reason why there losing business into an airport when there one of two American airlines that can fly into LHR????
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:32 am

Quoting Albird87 (Reply 12):
hmmm it seems that UA have been for the past couple of years have got a smaller aircraft into LHR and also seem to be selling there slots (like there JFK routes to DL)
I remember the days when UA only had 744s into LHR with 777s. Now it seems that its a lot more 777s and 767s now.
Any reason why there losing business into an airport when there one of two American airlines that can fly into LHR????

While I'm happy to see UA777's into LHR.. bigthumbsup 


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Jacobin777



its sad to see UA cutting flights to LHR from various locations.. Sad

Quoting Algoz (Reply 8):
United realises it cannot compete, with its present product, in many markets ex LHR, with such strong competition as VS and BA. The business class product in particular is inferior. The 2nd LAX flight used 767, not ideal for 11.5hr flight. The F and C class product on the 767 is in itself inferior to the 777, which in turn is inferior to VS and BA. Yield on LAX route is very poor. UA wanted instead to put 747 on 935 LHR/LAX but any spare 747 is now slated for IAD/Beijing.........767 from LHR/LAX will be used IAD/FCO new route from October....

Dont forget, UA also competes with a daily AA flight as well as a 2x/daily flight during the summers..those planes are jammed packed!
"Up the Irons!"
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:38 am

Quoting Algoz (Reply 8):
United realises it cannot compete, with its present product, in many markets ex LHR, with such strong competition as VS and BA. The business class product in particular is inferior. The 2nd LAX flight used 767, not ideal for 11.5hr flight. The F and C class product on the 767 is in itself inferior to the 777, which in turn is inferior to VS and BA. Yield on LAX route is very poor. UA wanted instead to put 747 on 935 LHR/LAX but any spare 747 is now slated for IAD/Beijing.........767 from LHR/LAX will be used IAD/FCO new route from October....

Unfortunately I think your correct, I wonder with the new upgrades that will start being installed in F & J beginning in the last quarter of 2007, will see UA become more competitive and see the flight or evevn flights come back in 2008........assuming they have the metal of course!!
 
Jammin
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:56 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:42 am

Quoting Albird87 (Reply 12):
Any reason why there losing business into an airport when there one of two American airlines that can fly into LHR????

I dont think it's so much that they're not making profit (or that yields are low) on that route and more to do with what Bicoastal mentioned above - that they probably need their long haul planes on other routes that they feel are more profitable (like Asia, maybe).

One might think that getting out of the LAX-LHR market is not good for market share, but route planners have probably been told to shuffle around flights to generate the most profit. I know, it's sad that they're out of the JFK-LHR market as well... what to do...
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery. None but ourselves can free our mind.
 
AEROFAN
Posts: 1406
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:52 am

just goes to show that flying to LHR is not the panacea that some people seem to think that it is!
 
commavia
Posts: 9623
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:53 am

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 16):
just goes to show that flying to LHR is not the panacea that some people seem to think that it is!

Well, not for United anyway. AA, by contrast, will continue to operate its double-daily 777 service LAX-LHR this summer, along with 14 other flights between the U.S. and Heathrow and another three daily flights from the U.S. to Gatwick.
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:56 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 17):
Well, not for United anyway. AA, by contrast, will continue to operate its double-daily 777 service LAX-LHR this summer, along with 14 other flights between the U.S. and Heathrow and another three daily flights from the U.S. to Gatwick.

Yep, UA will only have 10 with a 747 thrown into that mix so still a decent lift to LHR but I wish it was more!
 
mutu
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:04 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:11 am

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 16):
just goes to show that flying to LHR is not the panacea that some people seem to think that it is!

That is such a good point. A lot of people seem to think Bermuda II limits competition and pushes up fares. Whereas from a consumers perspective there is more than enough choice and price competition fierce particularly at low season. PLus of course there are numerous other London airports which in the main have many advantages over LHR in the new world of increased security (and queues). And increasingly people living in the UK regions prefer to connect to AMS or CDG rather than LHR.

But UA's decision does raise a simple question; Surely if one US or UK carrier does not want to use slots on Bermuda II routes, they should be handed over to an alternative US or UK carrier rather than being able to be sold. It is the abandonment of slots that aggrevates the whole debate about BII. VS and BA are being handed market share not by the restrictions of the agreement but by UA commercial policy.
 
gemini573
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:53 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:27 am

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 11):
Does this tie in with NZ bringing the -400 back on the LAX-LHR route for the 3 June to 26 Oct period?

It's probably just for the peak season, as the current 744 by NZ is used on the HKG-LHR run. Why anyone from NZ would want to transit at LAX to go to LHR seems strange to me, now that they have the option to do it in HKG. It's a much nicer airport and they don't treat every passenger like a potiential terrorist.
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:28 am

Quoting Mutu (Reply 19):
But UA's decision does raise a simple question; Surely if one US or UK carrier does not want to use slots on Bermuda II routes, they should be handed over to an alternative US or UK carrier rather than being able to be sold. It is the abandonment of slots that aggrevates the whole debate about BII. VS and BA are being handed market share not by the restrictions of the agreement but by UA commercial policy.

A valid point but UA are not selling all the slots, most are leased as seems to be common practice at LHR. UA IMHO opinion is leasing them so that they can use them when the time is right, i.e when open skies are here.......well at LHR!!
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:34 am

Quoting Albird87 (Reply 12):
and also seem to be selling there slots (like there JFK routes to DL)

.......what JFK routes did UA sell to DL?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:37 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 22):
what JFK routes did UA sell to DL?

They sold the JFK-LON authority...its important to remember that it was not the slot at LHR sold.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:37 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 22):
.......what JFK routes did UA sell to DL?

they sold their JFK - LON route , but while UA could operate it to LHR DL can , of course , under Bermuda II only operate the route into LGW
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:46 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 17):
Well, not for United anyway. AA, by contrast, will continue to operate its double-daily 777 service LAX-LHR this summer, along with 14 other flights between the U.S. and Heathrow and another three daily flights from the U.S. to Gatwick.

A little birdie told me AA might try a 3rd flight from LAX this summer. Loads were 94%+ last season for #136 and #134.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:48 am

Quoting FXramper (Reply 25):
A little birdie told me AA might try a 3rd flight from LAX this summer. Loads were 94%+ last season for #136 and #134.

Out of curiosity does anyone know what kind of loads UA have for 934/935 (LAX-LHR)?
It is what it is...
 
gilesdavies
Posts: 2267
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:51 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:58 am

If BMI could have the opportunity, I am sure they would be happy to fly their metal on the LHR-LAX route in a code share agreement with United, under the Star Alliance agreement... Im sure the route would be more profitable than the MAN to US routes(?).

Would be nice to see an A330-200 in BMI colours at LAX.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Glenn Beasley
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman



They have been trying to get in on the US market for years and contesting in court on both sides of the Atlantic the Bermuda II agreement with little success.

Is there anyway they could operate the route for United through Star Alliance without infringing on the Bermuda II agrement?
 
UAL777UK
Topic Author
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:04 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 26):
Out of curiosity does anyone know what kind of loads UA have for 934/935 (LAX-LHR)?

Its only one flight a day of course but the loads are very high, pretty much consistantly!
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:40 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 28):
Its only one flight a day of course but the loads are very high, pretty much consistantly!

Thats good to hear. I like the idea of UA at least maintaining the international flights it has from LAX (NRT, SYD, LHR especially). I cant imagine they would stop any of those routes (especially SYD).
It is what it is...
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1471
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:45 am

Quoting FXramper (Reply 25):
A little birdie told me AA might try a 3rd flight from LAX this summer. Loads were 94%+ last season for #136 and #134.

Where would AA get the aircraft from, given their oft-discussed widebody shortage?
Seaholm Maples are #1!
 
gemini573
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:53 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:48 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 29):
I like the idea of UA at least maintaining the international flights it has from LAX (NRT, SYD, LHR especially). I cant imagine they would stop any of those routes (especially SYD).

Well, you never know in this business. Who would of thought they'd sell JFK-LHR? Who would of thought AA would give up a slot at NRT, by discontinuing SJC-NRT or UA with HKG-NRT? These are very slot restricted airports and getting a slot would seem to be a prized possession.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:52 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 26):
Out of curiosity does anyone know what kind of loads UA have for 934/935 (LAX-LHR)?

While full 2006 DOT data is not yet available, 2005 numbers show annual load factor for the route was 83%, while 2006 is shapping up to be about the same if not slightly stronger based on the partial numbers.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
BOAC911
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 9:47 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:56 am

UA does not have a strong partner at LHR to offer onward connections to Mainland Europe and farther. BMI is present at LHR but not as big as British Airways. For the past couple of years UA has been concentrating on FRA to offer more connections with *A partner LH, and 2½ years or so re-launched Zurich which now can feed into Swiss's network.

Although FRA still is not as big a UA operation as LHR, it has grown significantly.

In view of three major disruptions at LHR over the last 12 months, UA's decision to slowly drawdown its activity has not been so bad, although FRA is overburdened with traffic as well.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:01 am

Quoting Gemini573 (Reply 31):
Who would of thought they'd sell JFK-LHR? Who would of thought AA would give up a slot at NRT, by discontinuing SJC-NRT or UA with HKG-NRT?

I have to admit I didnt see UA stopping NRT-HKG, but the others you mention I saw coming. UA is weak in NYC and was relying on O&D for the flight to LHR from JFK. With so much compeititon and no feed, I could see that coming. AA was winding down SJC as well. The economy in SJC was not as strong as it was in the 90's either. LAX-NRT/LHR/SYD all have high loads and would be willing to bet they are profitable as well.
It is what it is...
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:11 am

Quoting Cornish (Reply 5):
As part of a major study i worked on last year, we identified that United was one of the largest shedder of slots over the last few years at LHR.



Quoting Mutu (Reply 19):
It is the abandonment of slots that aggrevates the whole debate about BII. VS and BA are being handed market share not by the restrictions of the agreement but by UA commercial policy.

I believe that because UA is protected by a treaty, they should be REQUIRED to maintain their presence at LHR or forfeit their right to fly there to another carrier. Their cutbacks to JFK and LAX and selling of slots is an abuse of their oligopoly position, basically knowing that they can cut service to LHR and not worry about other carriers moving in on the route. As a STAR airline, they have less need to feed pax into LHR, and choosing STAR should have been a hint at what was to come from UA.

UA's BK should have left those authorities unprotected and other airlines should have been allowed to apply to buy them. Highest bidder would win, treaty would be ammended to replace UA with that new carrier (or UA would stay if the reorganization plan won the bidding). Instead, bankruptcy law protected UA only to have them turn around and sell off the assets to non-BII carriers. It's a sham.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
gemini573
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:53 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:16 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 34):
I have to admit I didnt see UA stopping NRT-HKG, but the others you mention I saw coming. UA is weak in NYC and was relying on O&D for the flight to LHR from JFK. With so much compeititon and no feed, I could see that coming. AA was winding down SJC as well. The economy in SJC was not as strong as it was in the 90's either. LAX-NRT/LHR/SYD all have high loads and would be willing to bet they are profitable as well.

As far as NRT, once an airlines gives up the slot, can they use the slot for a different routing? For example, AA SJC-NRT. Obviously, that has been discontinued. Can they use that slot for say another LAX-NRT flight?
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:29 am

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 30):

Where would AA get the aircraft from, given their oft-discussed widebody shortage?

IF there is a US carrier that is not in a shortage of widebodies, it's AA. They are flying their widebodies domestically all over the place, they are doing double-overnights on many of their 777 routes, their long haul utilization is very low.. their very large long haul fleet could certainly be covering more routes... i mean look at CO, everything that can make it over a body of water is doing international flying. 777, 767, 757, they have 737-700 going to south america, or DL who is preparing 757 tatl flying?

UA is hurting, but not too terribly. They have long haul capacity they could summon up if they needed it. UA isn't as hard up as CO or DL, but isn't quite as well off as AA or NW... cutting this route is a matter of optimizing.

UA is trying to focus on routes where they have better margins and aren't competing as fiercely, which is to say, not LHR and NRT.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
tgocean
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 6:17 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:59 am

Any thoughts on why UA abandoned LAX-HKG? CX does 3x each day with 744s. There's clearly a market there.
 
daron4000
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:17 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:33 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 35):
I believe that because UA is protected by a treaty, they should be REQUIRED to maintain their presence at LHR or forfeit their right to fly there to another carrier. Their cutbacks to JFK and LAX and selling of slots is an abuse of their oligopoly position, basically knowing that they can cut service to LHR and not worry about other carriers moving in on the route. As a STAR airline, they have less need to feed pax into LHR, and choosing STAR should have been a hint at what was to come from UA.

UA's BK should have left those authorities unprotected and other airlines should have been allowed to apply to buy them. Highest bidder would win, treaty would be ammended to replace UA with that new carrier (or UA would stay if the reorganization plan won the bidding). Instead, bankruptcy law protected UA only to have them turn around and sell off the assets to non-BII carriers. It's a sham.

UA can do what they want with their LHR routes because they paid for them from Pan Am, they weren't given to them as your post suggests. If, for example, you owned a car that you didn't use and someone else wanted that car, you wouldn't be forced to give it up to them just because. All the other carriers who want into LHR from the US, basically CO and DL, have NYC hubs. UA doesn't have as much of a feed into LHR because almost all of their onward traffic goes through Germany, thanks to their profit-sharing with LH. You don't see AA operate as many flights into FRA as UA does into LHR because for AA, FRA is just O + D, just like LHR is for UA. It just happens that LHR has a larger demand than FRA, which is why UA's operation at LHR is bigger than AA's at FRA. Also, UA and AA's product are inferior to BA/VS so not even counting onward feed, UA already has a disadvantage. In this respect, even if CO/DL complain about open skies, I don't see LHR helping their yields that much. Most people on the routes they are flying already have a carrier that they frequent and I doubt either would attract much business away from the current players already serving their respective markets. And lastly, you don't see UA complaining as much as CO/DL do that they can't fly LHR-DEN, something they've wanted for years. If they could, then you'd see their LHR presence increased too.
 
unitednrt
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:43 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:00 pm

Quoting Gemini573 (Reply 36):

As far as NRT, once an airlines gives up the slot, can they use the slot for a different routing? For example, AA SJC-NRT. Obviously, that has been discontinued. Can they use that slot for say another LAX-NRT flight?

United has 224 weekly slots at Narita and does not have to give them up.
"...That's a lovely name. My name's Milton; Milton Ettenheim, but my friends call me Bubbles."
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:43 pm

Quoting Tgocean (Reply 38):
Any thoughts on why UA abandoned LAX-HKG? CX does 3x each day with 744s. There's clearly a market there.

I dont think they could compete. CX has better service and AA feed. It would be my DREAM to have UA serve LAX-HKG again. Thats the only route they are missing from UA's network. I also think they should try a seasonal LAX-MEL nonstop.
It is what it is...
 
planetime
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:45 pm

Quoting Cornish (Reply 5):
s part of a major study i worked on last year, we identified that United was one of the largest shedder of slots over the last few years at LHR.

Who do they sell it to mostly?
 
unitednrt
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:43 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:47 pm

Quoting Planetime (Reply 42):

Seem to be mostly leased to Air Canada and Lufthansa.
"...That's a lovely name. My name's Milton; Milton Ettenheim, but my friends call me Bubbles."
 
cba
Posts: 4228
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2000 2:02 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:29 pm

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 16):
just goes to show that flying to LHR is not the panacea that some people seem to think that it is!

Let CO and DL fly EWR-LHR and JFK-LHR respectively, and you'll see them fill those planes and make money. CO fills 2 dailies to LGW, and could do that or more to LHR.
 
luvflng
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 8:59 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:40 pm

Quoting Algoz (Reply 8):
United realises it cannot compete, with its present product, in many markets ex LHR, with such strong competition as VS and BA. The business class product in particular is inferior. The 2nd LAX flight used 767, not ideal for 11.5hr flight. The F and C class product on the 767 is in itself inferior to the 777, which in turn is inferior to VS and BA. Yield on LAX route is very poor. UA wanted instead to put 747 on 935 LHR/LAX but any spare 747 is now slated for IAD/Beijing.........767 from LHR/LAX will be used IAD/FCO new route from October....

What are you talking about? C class product in 777 and 747 is exactly the same as 767. The only difference is the F class that offers suites in 747 and 777.
Radar Contact Terminated, Squawk VFR
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:05 pm

Quoting Algoz (Reply 8):
767 from LHR/LAX will be used IAD/FCO new route from October....

I thought they're using a 777 (non ER) for the IAD-FCO route!
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
xpfg
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 1:17 pm

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:31 pm

Tinker ....
The new FCO route is a 777.... not sure where the plane came from...
 
IPFreely
Posts: 682
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:45 pm

Quoting Cornish (Reply 2):
Probably sell it on for cash to someone as they have done with a fair few of their slots over the last couple of years.

As I recall, UA used to fly to LHR from BOS, JFK, EWR, IAD, ORD, SEA, SFO, and LAX a few years ago. I believe the BOS, EWR, and SEA routes are all gone...were those all sold, and to whom?
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: UA Drops Second LHR-LAX For Summer '07

Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:19 pm

Quoting Tgocean (Reply 38):
Any thoughts on why UA abandoned LAX-HKG? CX does 3x each day with 744s. There's clearly a market there

To free up a 744 for the new IAD-PEK service beginning this spring.

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 46):
I thought they're using a 777 (non ER) for the IAD-FCO route!

FCO will get a 777, though I could see UA downgrading to a 763 in the winter.

Quoting Xpfg (Reply 47):
not sure where the plane came from...

777s that operate primarily out of IAD (and ORD) fly several domestic legs (2X DEN, LAX, occasionally SFO and ORD).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aflyingkiwi, AngMoh, ANZ346, blacksoviet, Google Adsense [Bot], headlessmike, JoeCanuck, L-188, qf789, readytotaxi, SAAB900, Scooter01, tacobell101, WIederling, Yahoo [Bot], zknzf and 198 guests