SCUMBAG
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:37 am

Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:58 pm

Looks like NWA is the ONLY United States Airline going to Manila. And every flight I've been on has been packed. UAL goes all over Asia and I wonder why not to MNL? Some compitition would be good here.
 
phoenixflyer
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:12 pm

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:08 pm

CO serves Manila albeit through their CO Micronesia devision.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:11 pm

Quoting Scumbag (Thread starter):
Looks like NWA is the ONLY United States Airline going to Manila. And every flight I've been on has been packed. UAL goes all over Asia and I wonder why not to MNL? Some compitition would be good here.

I've wondered that myself. The only reason I could come up with is that either the market is low-yielding, or that UA, being very tight for long-haul aircraft, simply can't squeeze in a tag-on to any of their flights to go to MNL.

Does the US have fifth-freedom with Taiwan? If so they could extend their SFO-TPE to MNL... else I believe they have a planes that go to HKG that could continue on (they have ORD-HKG-SIN and SFO-HKG-SGN (744) but I don't believe LAX-HKG continues anywhere, and for a while at least they had an additional 772ER flight doing SFO-HKG, thought I don't think it was daily, but it didn't seem to extend on to anywhere either.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:12 pm

NW has been serving Manila forever, I believe UA tried the market for quite a while and got crushed on it. CO Mike is an odd part because some don't consider it a US carrier, why I don't really know.
 
malaysia
Posts: 2615
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:17 pm

Did UA previously acquire the Pan Am MNL flight when it got the Pacific Routes, then shortly pull out?
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24557
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:17 pm

Not only does Continental Airlines fly to Manila, but, starting next year, Hawaiian Airlines will too.
a.
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4713
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:44 pm

Manila and the Philippines in general is not as high-yield as the rest of Asia. The majority of passengers are are VFR, and Philippine Airlines has a good lock on the market for most travellers. NW has served MNL since even before World War II, I believe - and they do make a good deal of money flying through their NRT hub.

China is the high-yielding destination in Asia at this point. Aside from UA and NW's services to Asia, U.S. airlines may have a flight to Tokyo, but other than the fights over Beijing or Shanghai rights, I doubt you'll see anyone expand into the Philippines, with the exception of Hawaiian. Their 763's might be able to turn a profit.

By the way, is there any word on the opening of the new international terminal at MNL? I know that it seems to have been "cleared up", but until pax start getting processed through there, I won't hold my breath.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
SCUMBAG
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:37 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:45 pm

Hawaiian to MNL? G R E A T ! what kind of equipment and from what location?
 
simairlinenet
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 2:24 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:47 pm

Quoting Malaysia (Reply 4):
Did UA previously acquire the Pan Am MNL flight when it got the Pacific Routes, then shortly pull out?

Yes, but they kept serving it for several years thereafter. I remember flying SFO-SEL in the late '80s/early '90s, and the flight continued onwards to MNL.
 
B742
Posts: 3562
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:51 pm

Quoting SCUMBAG (Reply 7):
Hawaiian to MNL? G R E A T ! what kind of equipment and from what location?

From HNL and with the 763s.

Rob!  wave 
 
SCUMBAG
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:37 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:16 pm

I spoke to a friend who just retired from the government in Manila, he said the situation at the phantom terminal was a Marcos style cash grab by the upper crust in office, and the buck is still being passed. Some Chinese billionaire named Lim offered 20% of the original cost of construction (no interest) to the European backers of this massive monument to backstabbing, and they laughed at his offer, it has caused the assassination of one judge, as well as the ruin of several contractors. Now the roof is falling in, and most of the baggage delivery equipment has vanished! I call it the Hawllowen terminal
 
UnitedTristar
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:45 pm

If you look at the fares published to MNL they are unbelievable CHEAP. How NW makes money (if they do) beyond me. Look at several things for UA not going to MNL.

First the most logical routing for UA would be over HKG or NRT, below are round trip business class fares I pulled from United.com:

ORD to HKG
Traveler
Adult 1

Base fare
USD $15,832.00

Taxes & fees*
USD $320.17

Total
USD $16,152.17

ORD to NRT
Traveler
Adult 1

Base fare
USD $8,909.00

Taxes & fees*
USD $288.10

Total
USD $9,197.10

ORD to MNL
Traveler
Adult 1

Base fare
USD $5,505.00

Taxes & fees*
USD $323.70

Total
USD $5,828.70


Why would UA wish to fill their seats to Asia with MNL people when they can fill them with NRT and HKG people at a much higher margin? I say let them go on NW.

Second consider that UA is going from a 73 seat C seats on the 744 to 53(?). UA publishes fares to MNL so they will take some one if they want to go but why encourage people to use UA for MNL? They can let them go to OZ (their *A partner).

It doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is that NW still flies there. They must make a killing on cargo!

-m



[Edited 2007-10-14 15:08:35]
 
SCUMBAG
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:37 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:16 pm

You can get a "Z" class Business First fare from Portland or Detroit or other west coast cities to Manila on NWA for $2600 plus tax. Can do it in trash class for little over a grand if you have advance time. Anyone who would pay the asking price from an airline (Full Fare) must have just won the lotto or is good at writing bad checks.. any consolidator can get you up front everytime for less than the published full economy rate. PLUS>>> the Asian crews (females) on NWA will melt your drawers!  Wow!
 
UnitedTristar
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:45 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:21 pm

Quoting SCUMBAG (Reply 12):
You can get a "Z" class Business First fare from Portland or Detroit or other west coast cities to Manila on NWA for $2600 plus tax. Can do it in trash class for little over a grand if you have advance time. Anyone who would pay the asking price from an airline (Full Fare) must have just won the lotto or is good at writing bad checks.. any consolidator can get you up front everytime for less than the published full economy rate. PLUS>>> the Asian crews (females) on NWA will melt your drawers! Wow!

Exactly my point...if they have to sell their C seats at the Z rates...thats not a very ideal route!

-m

 airplane 
 
IADCA
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:00 am

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 6):
By the way, is there any word on the opening of the new international terminal at MNL? I know that it seems to have been "cleared up", but until pax start getting processed through there, I won't hold my breath.

It hasn't been cleared up entirely. There were two arbitrations related to the terminal. One got thrown out on a jurisdictional issue (basically, Fraport lost their right of action because they violated Philippine domestic law), but the other is still pending and goes to the panel next month, which means we could be still more than a year off from a resolution.

Quoting SCUMBAG (Reply 10):
I spoke to a friend who just retired from the government in Manila, he said the situation at the phantom terminal was a Marcos style cash grab by the upper crust in office, and the buck is still being passed. Some Chinese billionaire named Lim offered 20% of the original cost of construction (no interest) to the European backers of this massive monument to backstabbing, and they laughed at his offer, it has caused the assassination of one judge, as well as the ruin of several contractors. Now the roof is falling in, and most of the baggage delivery equipment has vanished! I call it the Hawllowen terminal

Nobody has any solid proof that it was a straight cash grab (or any that came out publically), but the behavior of a lot of the entities involved suggests it. Yes, the roof is falling in, and it wasn't just one assassination.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:49 am

The economic boom in Asia in the last 20 years has brought incredible wealth and GDP growth to many Far East Asian nations, but not the Philippines. As such, MNL remains a less than desirable destination for new US routes than destinations in South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong and China.

The US carriers will go to MNL when Philippine per capita income makes it worth their while.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
brandonfs88
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 2:13 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:17 am

But then theres the MNL Boxes............yuck
 
787kq
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 6:52 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:26 pm

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 15):
The US carriers will go to MNL when Philippine per capita income makes it worth their while.

They will go when the yield is good, of which per capita income is an indicator.... Seen India's per capita income recently?
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 pm

the yields are very very low.....UA pulled out back in 1998 or so
 
Lostmoon744
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:29 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:14 pm

Yep. NW is it. UA was there, and I preferred them. But as EXAAUADL points out, they bailed a long time ago. If memory serves, NW only has a few hours lay over from NRT to MNL, as opposed to some airlines that have several hours layover.

I truly do not like NW. I've been flying JA this whole time, and I am not looking back.
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2197
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:54 pm

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 6):
The majority of passengers are are VFR, and Philippine Airlines has a good lock on the market for most travellers.

What is VFR (I know it is not Visual Flight Rules)?


Something else to note, the only European airlines to serve MNL is KL and LH.

Even in Asia/Pacific, there are a couple of major airlines that do NOT fly to MNL including NH, GA and NZ.
 
9252fly
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:19 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:54 pm

Quoting United787 (Reply 20):
What is VFR (I know it is not Visual Flight Rules)?

VFR = Visit Family and Relatives. Typically lower yielding traffic as it is more price sensitive that business travel.
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:05 pm

I have a friend whose sister worked for UA at MNL and according to her, the yields were just too low, and that was before 9/11/01. UA (which still has route authority to MNL) and other airlines have better opportunities elsewhere in Asia and have limited aircraft to operate them. If "the sick man of Asia" rebounds there will be more flights but even places like SGN look better right now. MNL needs more call centers or something.

Also, the FedEx hub at Subic Bay fills most of the cargo demand, so the passenger airlines need to depend mostly on the passengers, making it not very desirable..
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18987
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Why Only NWA In Manila?

Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:40 pm

Quoting 9252fly (Reply 21):
Quoting United787 (Reply 20):
What is VFR (I know it is not Visual Flight Rules)?

VFR = Visit Family and Relatives.

The more usual definition is Visit Friends and Relatives.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 9vswr, a380787, AT72, Baidu [Spider], David L, Gemuser, Glidesloper, Jetstar315, Pbb152, The777Man, User001, usflyer123 and 234 guests