FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

United Airlines Growth Rumor

Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:49 pm

There are more routes coming to Chicago in the next 3 years if all is true with the rumors from the United Airlines crowd. It has been discussed for some time that United Airlines may indeed be offer service to:

Milan from ORD(a current Alitalia route/an ex-American Airlines route)
Moscow from ORD(a current Aeroflot route)
Dusseldorf from ORD(a former United Airlines route)

These routes will come from the retrofit of domestic 2 class 767-300 equipment to 3-class international config and powerplant upgrade for the longer sectors. In any case good luck to United Airlines if any of this is true. These 4 767-300 ships would be pulled from the Hawaii flights and replacing the Hawaiian flights 4 Hawaiian routes with 767-300 with 6 757 ships for 4 new routes flights to Hawaii.

The reason for this has to do with the PHH contract and additional lift being discussed from additional airports to Honolulu and Maui. Rumoured routes and changes to be:

SAN-HNL going from 1x per week to 3x per week(Current HA route)
SEA-HNLto be going from 1x per week to 4x per week(Current HA/NW route)
SEA-OGG to be a new route 1x per week(Current HA/NW route)
PDX-HNL to be a new route 2x per week (Current HA/NW route)
PDX-OGG to be a new route 2x per week (Current HA route)
SMF-HNL to be a new route 2x per week (Current HA route)

Notice that none of the above mentioned routes interfere with Aloha Airlines traffic. There was discussion of SAN-OGG operating however it was rumored to be decided against as it would compete directly with Aloha Airlines, an airline United Airlines has a dedicated interest in. The other remaining 4 767-300 reductions from the Hawaiian flights ex-SFO/LAX-Hawaii would be downgraded to 757-200 service. In the end the number should wash with each other. The SFO and LAX downgrades would not effect United Airlines to Hawaii overall as the additional services would relieve seats and demand from the SFO/LAX to Hawaii flights. In the long-term United Airlines will be planning to invest more in the Hawaiian market, all the while eating into a number of routes key to Hawaiian Airlines. This would make the AQ/UA tieup even more interesting.

Has anyone else heard of these being discussed?

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
UnitedFirst
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2001 12:16 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:02 am

Frankly, I'm not sold on those trans-Atlantic services, with the possible exception of a return to DUS. However, in this industry, never say never.

However, your information about new service to Hawaii is quite interesting. United's always been a leader in the Hawaiian market, and clearly they're doubling their efforts now in conjunction with AQ. Although they are only rumored, it sounds like a sound decision if properly executed.
 
LHUSA
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:02 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Dusseldorf from ORD(a former United Airlines route)

I don't see this one happening. UA flew the route in the past and dropped it (which doesn't really mean they won't bring it back) but LH is upgrading thier business jet on ORD-DUS to a 3-cabin A333 this May.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Moscow from ORD(a current Aeroflot route)

SU doesn't fly the route any longer, but I think it would be a goldmine for UA. Do they have the authority to fly to SVO?
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:08 am

Quoting LHUSA (Reply 2):
SU doesn't fly the route any longer, but I think it would be a goldmine for UA. Do they have the authority to fly to SVO?

I have questioned SVO, but I am sure they would go for DME, as that is the Star Alliance airport for Moscow. I would also question whether or not they have the right to fly to Russia. What is the current US agreement for air service to Russia? Does anyone know?

Quoting LHUSA (Reply 2):
I don't see this one happening. UA flew the route in the past and dropped it (which doesn't really mean they won't bring it back) but LH is upgrading thier business jet on ORD-DUS to a 3-cabin A333 this May.

I've questioned this as well. That is why I posted the rumor. I thought that UAL suspended ORD-DUS due to poor yields and traffic, yet I also heard that Lufthansa may open the route, and lastly that United would restart the route. Has the route officially been announced by Lufthansa?

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
LHUSA
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:14 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 3):
Has the route officially been announced by Lufthansa?

LH currently flies the route 5 times per week with a 48-seat Business Jet (A319). I believe the route has been operated since 2003 or 2004.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:26 am

Nice rumor, however to bring people back to earth. IF United were to do the suggested additional Atlantic flying it would not be out of ORD, but IAD instead. Load and revenue performance from IAD outpaces ORD by some margin.

For 2008, the only added Atlantic flying that I can realistically see is DEN-LHR which has been eluded by the company, and possibly one additional "Capital to Capital" flight.

Hawaii anything is possible, however UA only has a 16 strong 757 ETOPS fleet, so getting and modifying additional airframes from the mainline fleet will be a costly venture. Add the fact that the carriers winglet plans specifically only call for the 13 p.s. and 16 etops aircraft starting October - additional shipsets were not purchased.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
UnitedFirst
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2001 12:16 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:40 am

With Lufthansa on the ORD-DUS route with an A330, an extra 767 flight seems rather unlikely.

Also, Laxintl makes a valid point about IAD.

Quoting LHUSA (Reply 2):
Do they have the authority to fly to SVO?

If I recall correctly, based on seeing a list of dormant UA authorities from a few years ago, there is an authority to fly to Moscow.

I agree that if Moscow service ever began, it would likely be to DME – not SVO.
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:42 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 5):
IF United were to do the suggested additional Atlantic flying it would not be out of ORD, but IAD instead. Load and revenue performance from IAD outpaces ORD by some margin.

Agreed but with the FCO route out of IAD, does it make sense to bring back the Milan flight from IAD?

Moscow IMHO should have started ages ago, so I hope that this is true.

The only think I know is that LHR-DEN is a gimme for next year transatlantic wise anyway thats the worst secret out there, anything else will be a bonus.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 876
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:51 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Dusseldorf from ORD(a former United Airlines route)

DUS is a tough market to size up. In 2000 CO had DC10 service and UAL had 767 service (approx 400 seats) - both cut post 2001. In theory, could DUS support one carrier's service now - probably. However, since then, CGN has picked up CO 757 and Privitair DUS service as mentioned above. DUS service would be affected by these factors (approx 223 daily seats). If it were plausible, 757 service by DL, CO, US would be the least risky, most economical option.
 
manny
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:59 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 7):
The only think I know is that LHR-DEN is a gimme for next year transatlantic wise anyway thats the worst secret out there, anything else will be a bonus.

I hope so.
Because when it comes to planning for trans ocean flights, UA always forgets they have a hub in DEN.
 
LH506
Posts: 246
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 9:48 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:59 am

Quoting FUN2FLY (Reply 8):
I don't see this one happening. UA flew the route in the past and dropped it (which doesn't really mean they won't bring it back) but LH is upgrading thier business jet on ORD-DUS to a 3-cabin A333 this May.

Could it be a possibility that LH and UA coordinate their schedules on DUS-ORD like e.g. UA 3 weekly and LH 4 weekly,

maybe same departure time and shared revenue?? They work pretty close together over the Atlantic. That way LH could fly to another destination from DUS just using one a/c.
NOT FLOWN: 707 717 736/9 764 77L 788 300B2 300B4 345 359 RJ70/146-100 F27 ATR72 CRJ1/4/10 E120/135/40 Q1/2/3 M87
 
aal0616
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:16 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:08 am

RE: SVO/DME:

United holds the [dormant] pre-1991 Pan Am certificate that ran through LHR and CPH, acquired via the 1991 UA/PA Heathrow transaction.

Delta flies the pre-1991 Pan Am certificate that ran through FRA and BER, acquired via the 1991 DL/PA Atlantic Division transaction.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4425
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:35 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
SEA-HNLto be going from 1x per week to 4x per week(Current HA/NW route)

That route could get crowded if your info is accurate.

AS starts flying it daily in a few months.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
addd
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:47 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:40 am

More on ORD-Moscow:

SU flew to ORD before 2001 and may still have a certificate, but the route has been dormant since late 2001.

IMHO, ORD to MOW is not a sure bet for United (especially in absence of a Star Alliance partner in Russia) - DL flies daily frequencies from JFK and ATL to SVO, and SU flies to JFK (daily), LAX and SEA also from SVO; both are doing well on all the routes, but not necessarily well enough to justify significant growth in capacity between US and Moscow.

CO has been trying to launch EWR-MOW (they supposedly are looking at both SVO and DME) for years, and has not done so mostly because they could not get permission from Russian authorities - at any rate, they are well ahead of United to launch a new service to Mowcow
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:54 am

Quoting LHUSA (Reply 2):
SU doesn't fly the route any longer, but I think it would be a goldmine for UA.

No one flies Chicago-Moscow? I find that shocking considering that I would think the O&D traffic for both cities alone could support it!

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 5):
IF United were to do the suggested additional Atlantic flying it would not be out of ORD, but IAD instead.

I think either IAD or ORD, a flight to Moscow from UA would be a cash cow.

Quoting AAL0616 (Reply 11):
United holds the [dormant] pre-1991 Pan Am certificate that ran through LHR and CPH, acquired via the 1991 UA/PA Heathrow transaction.

Does this mean they have to go through LHR or CPH? Could they fly to Moscow from the US direct?

I really think United should order some 763ERs from Boeing to open up some lucrative international routes. I would bet they could get a pretty good deal from Boeing to help keep the line open until the tanker deal happens...and they could also get them pretty quick! I think the 763ER is still a great plane!

Even if United replaces it in 2025 with a 787, it will have 17 years of good use, and would convert nicely to a freighter for UPS.
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:56 am

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 12):
That route could get crowded if your info is accurate.

AS starts flying it daily in a few months.

United holds the PHH contract, that would be guaranteed business..

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
alphascan
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:04 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:02 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Has anyone else heard of these being discussed?

No.

I'd like to hear the sources of these rumors because they are delusional.

How much sense does it make to pull down service out of hubs and begin long and thin P2P routes against competition that offers superior service? UA would be nothing but a spill carrier with the frequencies you suggest. It would make more sense to fly wingtip 757 flights out of LAX and SFO where there is ample feed then to try to take on NW and HA out of their smaller established markets where they offer significantly more frequency.

By the way, just trying to figure out when you would have time to hear such rumors when you have posted 1286 times in three months. And that being with the time off from the admins for bad behavior.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4425
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:12 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 15):
United holds the PHH contract, that would be guaranteed business..

Understood, but that is still a lot of seats entering the market. And its not all being added simply for the PHH contract is it?

Between AS and UA it still is a lot of capacity that will also be chasing the other Hawaii business on SEA-HNL.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:13 am

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 16):
I'd like to hear the sources of these rumors because they are delusional.

Hate to break it to you, the source of the rumors is from inside United Airlines San Francisco base..

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 16):
How much sense does it make to pull down service out of hubs and begin long and thin P2P routes against competition that offers superior service? UA would be nothing but a spill carrier with the frequencies you suggest. It would make more sense to fly wingtip 757 flights out of LAX and SFO where there is ample feed then to try to take on NW and HA out of their smaller established markets where they offer significantly more frequency.

So you are saying that who offers a more superior product to United Airlines in the Hawaiian market?

You are aware that the PHH contract has done extremely well, and that more service is being looked at?

Maybe the people at PHH are dilusional? Maybe the people at the SFO UAL base are dilusional?

Your comments in the above are a bit tasteless.

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 16):
By the way, just trying to figure out when you would have time to hear such rumors when you have posted 1286 times in three months. And that being with the time off from the admins for bad behavior

Seems like you are having a bad day...  Smile

I certainly am not, I am en-route to the UAE this evening! Big grin

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
dl767captain
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:51 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:15 am

The United routes of SAN-HNL is a real let down, personally i do not like having a stop over on my way to hawaii, and now that i have flown hawaiian air, and how cheap their tickets are plus how much nicer the flight is in a 767 where you actually get treated like a customer in coach instead of cattle, UA's flights to hawaii are almost $900 for the dates i am flying next year, and HA is only $425, the only way i could consider flying UA to hawaii again would be if i had enough points, but they are losing out on SAN-OGG routes which are very popular, on my street at least 10 families have said they are going on HA because they want direct flights, so UA should step up, and when i asked why they didn't fly Aloha their reason was the same as mine, a little 737 for 5 hours doesn't work for me.
 
hnl-jack
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 10:34 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:19 am

It's hard to imagine that UA is going to add additional service out of SEA, PDX & SAN to Hawaii. HA is clearly entrenched in the Northwest and their 767 service is far superior to United. As mentioned, the entry of AS into the market would only add to Uniteds difficulty. And, the SAN market is too thin to sustain any more service. The only possiblity I could see is that UA has lined up some additional wholesaler contracts which would insure a certain number of seats.

HA is now a strong number two on the West Coast to Hawaii and with a couple of more airplanes could very well surpass UA. UA's comittment to the market ebbs and flows and the market has reacted to that and the fact that both HA and AQ offer superior service.
 
alphascan
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:04 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:29 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 18):
the source of the rumors is from inside United Airlines San Francisco base..

Yeah, I heard a rumor that was where all the decisions are being made lately.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
 
RDUDDJI
Posts: 1696
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 4:42 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:34 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 5):
Nice rumor, however to bring people back to earth. IF United were to do the suggested additional Atlantic flying it would not be out of ORD, but IAD instead. Load and revenue performance from IAD outpaces ORD by some margin.

You beat me to it. UA has shown that IAD is their primary European gateway and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I for one don't think IAD-MOW would be a good move for UA. SU struggled to fill IAD-SVO even when it dropped to 2x week. For a while, they tried stops at JFK, but all-in-all I just don't think it has the demand/yield for a non-stop, even with UA's IAD feed.

With regards to the Hawaiian expansion, I could see UA doing that, esp. with the stake in Aloha now. Admittedly, I don't know much about the pricing in the Hawaiian market, but I know UA already has the majority of U.S. Mainland-HA traffic.

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 19):
The United routes of SAN-HNL is a real let down, personally i do not like having a stop over on my way to hawaii, and now that i have flown hawaiian air, and how cheap their tickets are plus how much nicer the flight is in a 767 where you actually get treated like a customer in coach instead of cattle, UA's flights to hawaii are almost $900 for the dates i am flying next year, and HA is only $425, the only way i could consider flying UA to hawaii again would be if i had enough points, but they are losing out on SAN-OGG routes which are very popular, on my street at least 10 families have said they are going on HA because they want direct flights, so UA should step up, and when i asked why they didn't fly Aloha their reason was the same as mine, a little 737 for 5 hours doesn't work for me.

Using your logic, UA should stop charging $900 (which they are obviously getting or they wouldn't charge so much) and lower their price so that your street's families are happy. I hope you don't work in Revenue Management!
Sometimes we don't realize the good times when we're in them
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:36 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 18):
PHH

Btw - it has not been PHH for a few years now. Simply know as Pleasant Holidays instead.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
PlaneGuy27
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 12:38 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:36 am

Quoting Addd (Reply 13):
CO has been trying to launch EWR-MOW (they supposedly are looking at both SVO and DME) for years, and has not done so mostly because they could not get permission from Russian authorities - at any rate, they are well ahead of United to launch a new service to Mowcow

I believe CO has already announced in their DOT application that they would do EWR-DME. Of course, SU was pissed because why would a fellow SkyTeam partner not fly to SVO? Hmmm.... WHo knows where CO will end up now? The DME application went in around the same time as CO's other 762 apps into ACC and LOS.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4425
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:36 am

According to Hawaii tourism statistics, the SEA to HNL market is only up 12% in tourists in the first 6 months of this year. That is only an additional 6,000 people over 26 weeks or less than another 250 passengers per week.

And that is not the number of airline passengers but instead is the number of people from the Seattle MSA.

Since Alaska only announced their plans a couple of months ago I wonder if the UA planners have taken another look at the numbers and changed their plans. That 4X may have made sense a few months ago but does it still.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Milan from ORD(a current Alitalia route/an ex-American Airlines route)
Moscow from ORD(a current Aeroflot route)
Dusseldorf from ORD(a former United Airlines route)

I think MXP would be better off at IAD. IAD tends to be the favored hub for UA to Europe. DUS is being upgraded to a 333 next spring (last I checked). So im not sure UA would fly it. As fow MOW, I think UA could make a killing on ORD-DME (as opposed to IAD). This is probably the one time where I would say a TATL flight is better of for UA at ORD than IAD.
It is what it is...
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:50 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 26):
I think UA could make a killing on ORD-DME (as opposed to IAD). This is probably the one time where I would say a TATL flight is better of for UA at ORD than IAD.

ORD-Moscow would be a more ethnic and seasonal market, while IAD would provide steadier East Coast business and government traffic while still providing connectivity to UA's other large US markets. IAD can also attract some traffic away from the large NYC metro market, something no one will do back tracking to ORD.

UA's IAD Atlantic performance has been far superior to what they have experienced at ORD.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
B752OS
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:53 am

Didn't AZ have a terrible time on IAD-MXP. If that is the case, why would UA attempt it? I know people will say sonnections within the U.S., but bare in mind that MXP is a European hub and would have attracted people from all over Europe.

It seems as if UA does not really have the aircraft for any major trans Atlantic expansion, which is too bad. With AA tredding water when it comes to international expasnion, this would have been a good oppurtunity for UA to push themselves ahead of AA. One thing UA has that both AA and DL don't is a much larger alliance prescene is Europe with hubs by SK at CPH and ARN, BD at MAN, LX at ZRH, LH at FRA, MUC and DUS, OS at VIE, LO at WAW, and JK at MAD and BCN.

With that being said, I wonder why UA didn't jump on an IAD-MAD route before IB did.
 
User avatar
aloha73g
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:30 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:16 am

Quoting HNL-Jack (Reply 20):
And, the SAN market is too thin to sustain any more service. The only possiblity I could see is that UA has lined up some additional wholesaler contracts which would insure a certain number of seats.



Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 15):
United holds the PHH contract, that would be guaranteed business..

PHH: Pleasant Hawaiian Holidays or Pleasant Holidays

Also, AQ flies OGG-SAN and OGG-SMF daily which is probably why UA isn't since under their new agreement there will be a codeshare. I know AQ is now going through a special certification of some kind to allow them to do more codesharing with UA.

-Aloha!
Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:23 am

For those that bring up MXP lets remember consider the following.

UA served MXP for quite some time pulling the route in January 2003. (dropped CCS, DUS, SCL at the same time)

While yes Milan is the business center for Italy it is a very seasonal market. Look back at history and you'll see how TWA managed 747 in the summer but only 767s in the winter.

With UA's return to Italy this summer Milan was indeed considered however passed over in favor of resuming service to Rome instead. Some reasons as to why;
1) Milan offers limited (esp non AZ) beyond connectivity. The city is split between two airports MXP/LIN. Would mean flight would have to be geared for near all Milan O&D.
2) Milan is AZ (Skyteam) longhaul hub
3) While both Milan and Rome are seasonal, overall Milan market smaller than Rome
4) Milan is well connected particularly via MUC "Italy's Northern most airport" and the Air Dolomiti flights, in addition to connectivity via other Star hubs such as FRA and ZRH
5) Trans-Atlantic services are revenue share with LH, so they have a say also.
6) LH partner carrier Air-One based in FCO and can offer plenty of connectivity.

From all indications (incl management comments in earning calls) Rome service has exceeded everyones expectations, however even with this UA does not have the need to add a 2nd noncore/Star flight to Italy, especially one that was projected to perform worse.

Lastly remember, any added flying UA does comes at the loss of other flying. So in otherwords any new wishfull flying must produce more earnings than other current network routes.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:39 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 30):
3) While both Milan and Rome are seasonal, overall Milan market smaller than Rome



Quoting Laxintl (Reply 30):
1) Milan offers limited (esp non AZ) beyond connectivity. The city is split between two airports MXP/LIN. Would mean flight would have to be geared for near all Milan O&D.

If the above were true you would not see:

VR, AT, ME, SV, PK, EY, EK, JL, TG, SQ, JJ, CA, IR, QR, US and others serving MXP

None of the airlines I have mentioned offer seaonsal service to the Milan market. They serve the Malpensa market year round as their is market demand year round.

Also of mention the Milan Metro Area include 7.4 million people the largest in Italy, Rome is second after Milan with 2.7 million people in their Metro Area. I dont understand by what measure you are claiming Milan is a smaller market.

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:43 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
SEA-HNLto be going from 1x per week to 4x per week(Current HA/NW route)
SEA-OGG to be a new route 1x per week(Current HA/NW route)
PDX-HNL to be a new route 2x per week (Current HA/NW route)
PDX-OGG to be a new route 2x per week (Current HA route)

I don't see it. UA gave up on SEA-HNL a while ago and have since dipped their toes back in with Saturday only with a 757. With AS starting up, I don't give UA's service much of a chance.

With PDX, maybe...but NW and HA have that one now. Perhaps UA is hoping to capitalize on NW's problems, who knows. Still, I think HA would boost service to prevent UA from having a chance. As with SEA, if AS introduces PDX-HNL or PDX-OGG, then good night. Very loyal AS base in the PDX area.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Thread starter):
Milan from ORD(a current Alitalia route/an ex-American Airlines route)

I could see this. One business center to another. FCO is more leisure. Those in ORD can always go to IAD first to get to FCO.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:44 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 31):
I dont understand by what measure you are claiming Milan is a smaller market.

Traffic data. Go ask other US carriers


Btw - I'm not here to argue with someone with 1300 post having joined 77 days ago.  Yeah sure
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Osprey88
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:13 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:45 am

I think that UA could do well with summer service such as IAD-VCE or ORD-VCE to give some competition to DL's JFK-VCE and ATL-VCE and soon CO's EWR-VCE.
"Reading departure signs in some big airports reminds me of the places I've been"
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:47 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 33):
Traffic data. Go ask other US carriers

US Airways recently added Malepnsa and Venice, were those because their was no traffic?

Delta Air Lines recently introduced Altanta to Venice, and JFK to Pisa, was that because of no traffic?

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:48 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 33):
Traffic data. Go ask other US carriers

US Airways recently added Malpensa and Venice, were those because their was no traffic?

Delta Air Lines recently introduced Atlanta to Venice, and JFK to Pisa, was that because of no traffic?

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:50 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 36):
US Airways recently added Malpensa and Venice, were those because their was no traffic?

Delta Air Lines recently introduced Atlanta to Venice, and JFK to Pisa, was that because of no traffic?

No, but in absolute terms Rome market is Bigger -- pretty simple.

Add in my other reasons listed Reply30, you might comprehend my FCO was more attractive for UA then MXP.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
panamair
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:50 am

Milan is a difficult market, Period. Delta has a tough time with JFK-MXP on a year-round basis (and has always had a tough go of it; even Pan Am didn't/couldn't quite make JFK-MXP work). Of all of DL's Italian destinations out of JFK (not including PSA which just started this year), MXP fares quite a bit worse than both FCO and VCE.
 
jcf5002
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:41 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:51 am

Well, I don't know about expanding their flight schedule, but I do know they've run out of furloughed pilots to bring back and just hired 100 brand spankin' new pilots. That sounds like growth to me...

-Jeff
Its always a sunny day above the clouds || CSEL, CMEL, CFI, CFII, MEI
 
User avatar
aloha73g
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:30 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:52 am

Quoting N174UA (Reply 32):
don't see it. UA gave up on SEA-HNL a while ago and have since dipped their toes back in with Saturday only with a 757. With AS starting up, I don't give UA's service much of a chance.

Once again, United has the contract for Pleasant Hawaiian Holidays, the #1 provider of Hawai'i vacation packages. They will not need to find passengers and will do just fine. Their presence int hese markets will probably do very little to the entrenched players (HA and NW).

-Aloha!
Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:18 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 37):
No, but in absolute terms Rome market is Bigger -- pretty simple.

What "absolute" terms?

Malpensa handles the majority of international traffic to and from Italy, Rome is second. As I have pointed out that while pax numbers are higher at FCO, that is due to all of the domestic service, not the international market.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 37):
Add in my other reasons listed Reply30, you might comprehend my FCO was more attractive for UA then MXP.

So it is more attractive to UA because of AP. While that is fine refrain from saying things such as:

"While both Milan and Rome are seasonal, overall Milan market smaller than Rome"

"Milan offers limited (esp non AZ) beyond connectivity. The city is split between two airports MXP/LIN. Would mean flight would have to be geared for near all Milan O&D"

Then as I have stated earlier why does fellow Star Alliance member US see the need to fly to MXP and VCE? Saying that UA cannot support the route with all of the competition in the Milan market would be acceptable. But saying that an airline needs O/D to make the route sustainable is totally different. The rality is more like it is a market that United left and other airlines have since enterprised on to the disadvantage of United Airlines.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 38):
Milan is a difficult market, Period. Delta has a tough time with JFK-MXP on a year-round basis (and has always had a tough go of it; even Pan Am didn't/couldn't quite make JFK-MXP work). Of all of DL's Italian destinations out of JFK (not including PSA which just started this year), MXP fares quite a bit worse than both FCO and VCE.

Indeed it is a difficult market, however more and more airlines are expanding into that market such as SQ, TG, EY, EK, QR, PK, US, JJ, and so forth. Pan Am, never fared as well in the Italian market as TWA did. Pan Am always focused its operations in Europe on FRA and LHR, while TWA focused on CDG, and FCO. This can be seen throughout the history of Pan Am and TWA. While Pan Am operated to Rome their market share was never as strong as TWA. Who at one time operated nonstop 2x per day from JFK with 747, and also offered service from BOS, and I believe PHL. TWA at times offered JFK-MXP 2x per day as was the case in 1996. The traffic and the demand was their, and has increased in recent years. In the New York market you no longer have only AZ, DL, and TW on the routes. Today you have AA, CO, AZ, DL, GJ all vying for the Italian market. Ten years ago your only options were MXP and FCO from New York, and the US in general. Air Europe and TWA flew charters TWA to VCE, and Air Europe to PSA.

Today you have a stronger network of routes from New York to Italy that include:

BLQ, PSA, VCE, PMO, NAP, FCO, MXP

The demand is their, or these routes would have never entered the game. Milan and Malpensa in general has grown by leaps and bounds in recent years. Singapore Airlines, Thai, Qatar, PIA, Emirates, Etihad, TAM, and others have only gone to show how much money can be made in the Malpensa market.


-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
FLYGUY767
Topic Author
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:37 am

Quoting Aloha73G (Reply 40):
Once again, United has the contract for Pleasant Hawaiian Holidays, the #1 provider of Hawai'i vacation packages. They will not need to find passengers and will do just fine. Their presence int hese markets will probably do very little to the entrenched players (HA and NW).

Agreed 100%

United Airlines has very, very strong Mileage Plus membership in the PDX, SEA, SMF, SAN, and Hawaii as a whole. I dont count anything until it is proven real. However, the rumor that I have heard and for what it is worth I have to wonder if it is true. It is no secret that United Airlines and Aloha Airlines have grown even closer. With the Code Share on the current Aloha Airlines flights I dont see why it would be so much to imagine that United Airlines would expand on that if it was in the best interest of both parties. It never ceases to amaze me how many people on Airliners.net doubt that two airlines or more can share a market.

Aloha competes with Hawaiian Airlines, so in turn by United if they do add the routes mentioned will force even more competition between the two with UA/AQ having the upper hand. The Hawaiian market has grown in recent years with additional flights by both Aloha and Hawaiian Airlines. Their is a reason that United Airlines and Aloha have formed a closer relationship. It wasn't formed just so United Airlines and Aloha Airlines were looking for bragging rights. It is a business deal, both parties can gain.

Saying that United Airlines shouldn't enter the routes listed above would be senseless as they have the Mileage Plus member and the brand recognition in not only the West Coast but Hawaiian market to make them work. Most of all the PHH contract is very lucrative to United Airlines and is guaranteed money in the bank for United Airlines.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Understood, but that is still a lot of seats entering the market. And its not all being added simply for the PHH contract is it?

It is a 50/50 the PHH contract form what I have heard is doing very well. Many people that have travelled to Hawaii in the past and are returning to Hawaii again are very loyal to the United Airlines brand. I wouldn't doubt that United Airlines combined with Aloha would force Hawaiian Airlines to a number 3 in their own market.

A lot of people in this topic jumped all up and down when I mentioned the rumor. In reference to what you said in the highlighted response. The actual number of seats would be a wash, please find the following:

4 Domestic Config 767-300
244 Pax x 4 = 976 Pax

6 757-200
182 Pax x 6 = 1092 Pax

In essence United Airlines would only be adding 116 seats per day in the West Coast to Hawaii market. I would hardly call such a thing flooding the market or a lot of seats. That would be nearly the equivalent of Aloha Airlines adding one more 73G on the West Coast to Hawaii market. What the rumor I have been told, and I have posted is doing is offering service from strong United Airlines Mileage Plus markets with very strong demand for O&D to Hawaii. It is not as if the rumor is that United Airlines would start something like FAT-HNL with a 767-300 or something like that. The addition of the flights would also further the Aloha Airlines and United Airlines route networks to Hawaii with a guaranteed revenue return in place by contracts. In essence UA/AQ codesharing could offer and market nonstop service to additional markets on the West Coast that are currently only served by HA, or NW.

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
airlittoralguy
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:57 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:51 am

While combining MXP, LIN and BGY, is Milan not much bigger than FCO + CIA in Rome ? This both for cargo and pax figures . In fact, is Milan not one of Europe's top 5 metro market ??
Normandie : La r�©unification, maintenant ! http://www.mouvement-normand.com/
 
flybynight
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:59 am

How about Seattle - London? UA used to fly this route. I believe BA is now up to 2 daily flights to SEA from Heathrow.

You could argue a UA flight to London would compete against SK flying to CPH, but I don't really know about that. Plus this would give people going to Norway another connections to OSL since SK is not flying direct to Norway from anywhere in North America.
Heia Norge!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:05 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 41):
What "absolute" terms?

Look at boardings for US carriers at FCO vs MXP. FCO is the larger US-Italy market for those carriers.

If you are bored you can also take a look at historical winter load factors for US carriers out of Milan. You might be shocked to see how low they are. While FCO also has a strong seasonal swing also, it out performs in volume.

And yes MXP does offer less onward non-AZ connectivity then FCO does. One of the reasons why even AZ has had problems with its MXP hub has been the dual airport setup the city has.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4425
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:11 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 42):
In essence United Airlines would only be adding 116 seats per day in the West Coast to Hawaii market.

But the west coast to Hawaii is different than the specific SEA to Hawaii market I'm talking about.

The current market from the Seattle MSA to Oahu is 107,089 tourists (2006 number) plus whatever originates in Hawaii to Seattle. So that is 2,060 tourists per week to Oahu, using either non-stops or a connection. Visitors from the Seattle MSA to all the islands in 2006 was roughly 243,300.

AS is planning on 1,099 seats outbound/wk. Not all of Alaska's passengers will originate in SEA but given the very large Alaska FF presence in Seattle and the NW, AS will be a large draw in the market. AS/QX handles roughly 50% of SEA passengers now.

Now if UA adds 976 seats outbound that is over 2,000 SEA-HNL seats outbound/wk just on AS and UA. That puts us close to the current tourist market out of SEA for Oahu (the 2,060 per week).

Add in what NW and HA currently offer and it sure looks to me like the route would have a lot of capacity all at once. Someone will end up with empty seats.

I'm not saying UA shouldn't enter the market, its just that with Alaska announcing daily flights I wonder if the 4X week still makes sense. I wonder when the analysis was done and what new number crunching would show with the changing competitive situation.

It could get ugly on the route at these levels.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
UN_B732
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 12:57 am

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:33 am

I think Aeroflot will take SVO-ORD once they get the 787s (or the A330s)
AeroSvit had an application for KBP-ORD, but since Ukraine is CATII with the FAA, they aren't allowed to add any new US destinations in America, and the service is postponed indefintely.

I think ORD-Moscow has a lot of potential. I think they'd park at DME instead of SVO though, since Star carriers (including LH) are moving down to Domodedovo. I'm sure there'd even be paid F demand, lots of very rich Russians flying trans-atlantic.

-A

EDIT: I noticed someone mentioned CO. I heard the problem isn't Russian authorities, but a shortage of 767 equipment for the route.

[Edited 2007-08-09 22:34:31]
What now?
 
User avatar
aloha73g
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:30 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:59 am

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 46):
The current market from the Seattle MSA to Oahu is 107,089 tourists (2006 number) plus whatever originates in Hawaii to Seattle. So that is 2,060 tourists per week to Oahu, using either non-stops or a connection. Visitors from the Seattle MSA to all the islands in 2006 was roughly 243,300.

Hawaiian Airlines alone offers over 5,000 seats per week between Seattle and Hawai'i (250 seats x 21 weekly flights = 5,250). The connecting market must be substantial as well as the SEA being a big destinations for Hawai'i people.

-Aloha!
Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
 
ORD Boy 2
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 12:25 pm

RE: United Airlines Growth Rumor

Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:21 am

what happened to IAD-DXB and what about other routes that I am sure UA holds like to TLV which I assume they hold a right through the Pan Am Deal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alasizon, ASFlyer, AST1Driver, baqnav, BlueF9A320, caleb1, cvgComair, ehaase, Google Adsense [Bot], gstpa, HeeseokKoo, JAmie2k9, jpetekyxmd80, Miami, qf789, rangercarp, Stevecha, VS4ever, zknzf and 258 guests