boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:27 am

So I know NZ flies to in N. America:

LAX
SFO
YVR


With (4) direct and (4) 777-200ER from Boeing/ILFC and (4/3) 77W on order along with (8) 787-9... What are their goals for the 77W and 787-9?



I know they fly:

AKL-LAX 2x daily
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

AKL-SFO 1x daily

Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

NZ002 on final @ LAX.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:48 am



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

Not with 77W. They will be kept busy with AKl-LAX-LHR/AKL-HKG-LHR which takes 6 airframes and maybe AKL-SFO-MAN.

You MIGHT see ORD when the B787 arrives. BUT you have to remember NZ is a VERY small market (not quite 5 million, if everyone comes home for Christmas!) Some how I doubt AKL-ORD will really work. AKL-LAX/SFO-ORD MIGHT, but don't count on it. DEN, given its also a *A hub is a possibility.

Anything other than that would be a big, but pleasant surprise.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:53 am



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 1):
You MIGHT see ORD when the B787 arrives. BUT you have to remember NZ is a VERY small market (not quite 5 million, if everyone comes home for Christmas!) Some how I doubt AKL-ORD will really work. AKL-LAX/SFO-ORD MIGHT, but don't count on it. DEN, given its also a *A hub is a possibility.

Qantas had intentions of starting AKL-DFW with 744ERs a few years ago. I'm not sure why that didn't pan out, but AKL-ORD is a similar route, and the massive feed on the U.S. side just might make it work.
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:01 am



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

ORD is on the list of routes being looked at. But so are about 5 or 6 other North American cities. Like Gemuser said, I doubt anything concrete will happen until the 787 arrives.

NZ1
--
NZ1
Head Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:04 am

Boeing tried pushing the 77L for the AKL-JFK market just like the SYD-LHR. NZ haven't ordered any. I don't have any substance so I'll leave it for someone else to talk about.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

Actually, it doesn't fly daily. AKL-NAN/RAR-LAX comes to 5x weekly, 3 through NAN and 2 through RAR. And they have since closed the likes of AKL-PPT-LAX.

Did you forget HNL or isn't that exclusively part of North America?

I think NZ has plans for brand new markets such as South America, places in Asia where they don't currently operate to and maybe South Africa. The 77W is primarily a switch for the 744s when they pull them out of service sometime around 2010/11 IIRC, when the 77Ws start arriving. There are quite a few more options for the 787. One of the next routes we could see involving North America could be the continuation of AKL-YVR to LHR.

[Edited 2007-11-28 23:05:35]
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:20 am

Would NZ ever do a AKL-South Pacifc Island-SFO route, or add on MAN to SFO?

It seems like tourism alone could drive the Pacific Island route out of SFO.
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:34 am



Quoting Trvlr (Reply 2):
Qantas had intentions of starting AKL-DFW with 744ERs a few years ago. I'm not sure why that didn't pan out

Actually it was SYD-AKL-DFW because the aircraft didn't have the range for SYD-DFW. It didn't pan out because with the extra stop it offerred no advantage over LAX. SYD-DFW is expected to start with either A380/B787 when sufficient are delivered.

Quoting Trvlr (Reply 2):
AKL-ORD is a similar route, and the massive feed on the U.S. side just might make it work.

Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
rdwootty
Posts: 689
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:28 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:37 am

Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:04 am



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR.

I find this VERY hard to belive! It would be BIG news in this part of the world. Can't see anything in the NZ Aviation thread about it. It needs checking out.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9863
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:41 am



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

NZ is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9863
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:41 am



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

ORD is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:54 am



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes

As much as I like UA and the new seat products they are going to offer, I find this very hard to believe, although, with AF as well coming into the market who knows it might just be the case.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6812
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:20 am



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):

I might want to check that, I would imagine that it would be big news over here as mentioned before if thats the case.
 
Fly2CHC
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 10:35 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:36 am

Remember NZ already tried DFW on an AKL-PPT-DFW-LGW rotation in the late 80s. Didn't work then for several reasons.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR

I doubt NZ would ever give up LAX-LHR.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:09 am



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):

Can you give me any reasons at all why NZ might want to give up on the flight that brings a hell of a lot of dough for the company? Even repositioning this flight to the likes of SFO instead of LAX seems crazy. We'll see what happens soon.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:16 am

Last I checked, NZ schedules for summer 2008-09 were not available on their web site. The last dates for which schedules were available were in October. So maybe don't read too much into it at this stage?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:24 am



Quoting NZ1 (Reply 3):
ORD is on the list of routes being looked at. But so are about 5 or 6 other North American cities. Like Gemuser said, I doubt anything concrete will happen until the 787 arrives.

I'm told that the destinations under consideration are:

Denver: UA hub but no O+D traffic
Las Vegas: US hub, minimal O+D traffic
JFK: unlikely, as turned down opportunity for TN codeshare last year
Toronto: probably via HNL as AC codeshare
Chicago: UA hub, but less O+D traffic than Toronto

Dallas, Houston and Miami are ruled out by minimal Star Alliance feed.


Without wanting to get anyone in trouble, my understanding is that the following, in probable order, are the next most likely North American sectors to open:

1. AKL-YVR-LHR
2. AKL-LAX-MAN
3. SYD-LAX
4. AKL-SFO-MAN
5. AKL-HNL-YYZ
6. SYD-SFO
7. MEL-LAX
8. AKL-NAN-SFO
9. AKL-ORD
10. AKL-JFK

Personally, I think that SFO and LAX have such good connections that Las Vegas, Denver or Chicago offer no benefit to passengers flying to the eastern states.

I bet that the new Boeings are used on increased onward services to the UK, and that if there is any North American expansion it will be to Toronto.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR.

Air NZ only load their schedules 330 days in advance, which might explain why nothing is visible in "late 2008".

For your information, LAX-LHR has just been increased back up from a 777-200ER to a 747-400 due to high premium class demand.

In actual fact, if Air New Zealand offers new services to the USA it is not so much likely to be to a new destination as from a new port. My money is on the re-opening of Sydney-Los Angeles and the extension of Auckland-Los Angeles to Manchester.
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:46 am



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
My money is on the re-opening of Sydney-Los Angeles

I bet UA would have something to say about that, mind you I would love to see UA back on the LAX or SFO to AKL run as soon as, as well although again NZ m ight not be happy with that either.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3714
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:46 am



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
With (4) direct and (4) 777-200ER from Boeing/ILFC and (4/3) 77W on order along with (8) 787-9... What are their goals for the 77W and 787-9?

The 772ERs are all pretty much fully deployed although there is effectively some spare capacity there since SIN was dropped. The 773ER are to replace the 744 (which operate AKL-HKG-LHR, AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO, also AKL-MEL, AKL-BNE on occasion) from 2011... it is only 4 ordered but several insiders have confirmed that the options have effectively been guaranteed to be taken up. 7x773ER to replace 8x744 does not quite add up especially due to the smaller capacity... either NZ is waiting for the 7810 or is waiting to see what happens in the market as there is no real reason why they couldn't continue to operate at least a few of their 744s if they were needed for a few more years pas 2011.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

Possibly but not until the first 8x787s come on line. So not until 2012 I think at the earliest and even then it will be competing with the likes of JFK, DFW, DEN however I'd say ORD and JFK are the front runners.

BTW nice pics!
 Smile

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 5):
Would NZ ever do a AKL-South Pacifc Island-SFO route, or add on MAN to SFO?

It seems like tourism alone could drive the Pacific Island route out of SFO.

Possibly... but probably only if NZ were to switch its USA hub to SFO which is unlikely even tho SFO has a nicer airport. SFO itself is actually quite a small market, it just gets boosted by transit pax from other locations (Seattle etc), those pax can just as easily (although more painfully being LAX) fly via LAX to the islands.

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

The idea I think is that ORD would be taking some traffic for sure, but traffic is still expected to grow so its effectively only reducing the need for capacity growth thru LAX. ORD is a big hub for UA so basically the NE USA (which makes up about half the USA population), eg NY, and the other old states.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes

The timetable probably hasn't been made yet or is being altered is all. LAX-LHR is one of NZs most valuble routes and quite frankly the UA product is rubbish compared to NZ so NZ wouldn't want to be putting its pax thru that.
In fact part of the reason why NZ started up the AKL-HKG-LHR route was to free up seats on the LAX-LHR route which they can then command a premium on.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
QF108
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:29 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:08 pm



Quoting 777ER (Reply 10):
ORD is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Does NZ have the rights to carry cargo LAX-JFK like QF does with flight 107/108 and from all reports that is a very profitable sector because of the freight. If they do is there any chance we may see NZ 5/6 operate AKL-LAX-JFK.

Hopefully not for my Super Shuttle drivers sake, he had never heard of Qantas, asked about 6 times the name of the airline, so is less likely to know NZ if they start service, to be fair he was battling Thanksgiving traffic !
Blessed are the Cheesemakers !
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:11 pm



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Many, many places in the Midwest and eastern U.S., and maybe even a couple better-timed connections to Canada, too.
 
FLYACYYZ
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 12:13 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:27 pm



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
Toronto: probably via HNL as AC codeshare



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
1. AKL-YVR-LHR
2. AKL-LAX-MAN
3. SYD-LAX
4. AKL-SFO-MAN
5. AKL-HNL-YYZ

There is a real demand for a direct YYZ/HNL/YYZ link, unfortunately it has always been a notoriously low yielding route. If NZ could use HNL as a "filler" while bulking out the majority of the load on the YYZ/AKL/YYZ sector it could work, however the whole marketing strategy of the 787 is point to point, direct non-stop service.

Recently flew NZ on their new YVR service, and every aspect of their service in Biz Premier was absolutely flawless and outstanding! It also appeared that they could easily increase their Pacific Premium Economy cabin from the current 18 seats. Several customers at the gate wanted to upgrade to the intermediate class of service, but was packed on both flights. Was speaking to one of the manager's, and just to further feed the rumor mill, AKL-YVR-MAN, is also under consideration as opposed to # 2 & #4 on the above list.

Staff on NZ are amazing ambassadors for their country which set the stage for an incredible holiday!
Above and Beyond
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:31 pm

Quoting Trvlr (Reply 20):
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Many, many places in the Midwest and eastern U.S., and maybe even a couple better-timed connections to Canada, too.

Except that thanks to the priorities of the American education system, hardly anyone in those places could even find New Zealand on a map of Australia and New Zealand. There is no market whatsoever.

The market from North America to New Zealand is basically the Pacific Coast and Canada. One of the reasons why Air NZ has just opened a YVR route is because its research showed that even in Montreal and Newfoundland there was more knowledge of New Zealand and interest in visiting than there was from any US location more than 50 miles from the Pacific Ocean. That's why Toronto might precede Chicago.

The market from New Zealand to the USA is basically to Los Angeles, San Francisco and Microsoft in Seattle. If there was a significant market to New York (which there isn't) then Air NZ would have accepted Air Tahiti Nui's offer to place its code on AKL-PPT-JFK.

Theoretical connections to Indianapolis, Cleveland, St Louis and Pittsburgh are irrelevent because nobody flies between New Zealand and those cities, or vice versa. Nobody even flies between NZ and Texas.

[Edited 2007-11-29 06:36:53]
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3247
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:54 pm



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
I know they fly:

AKL-LAX 2x daily
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

AKL-SFO 1x daily

AKL-NAN-LAX x 3
AKL-RAR-LAX x 2
AKL-TBU-APW-LAX x 1

All services (x) by week and served with 767-300ER. Services to Fiji used to be more regular before the coup. Flights were 3 x daily between AKL and LAX.

N.B. There are also thrice weekly 777-200ER services to YVR.

Personally, I'd like to see the 787-9's start MEL-AKL-JFK/EWR.

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
BA744PHX
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:42 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 3:02 pm

how about PHX? could NZ run AKL-PHX-ORD/YYZ? both PHX-ORD/YYZ are Star hubs
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:08 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 18):
7x773ER to replace 8x744 does not quite add up especially due to the smaller capacity

I remember NZ1 stating after they ordered the 7 that at least another one was going to be bought. I think it had something to do with the shareholders - they had to approve the purchase because it was so large.. Regardless, it was passed unanimously.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 22):
hardly anyone in those places could even find New Zealand on a map of Australia and New Zealand

:D how true

Quoting BA744PHX (Reply 24):
how about PHX?

I think you'd find that this flight wouldn't be viable. If you're sending a plane that far to somewhere like PHX, you may as well increase the flights to LAX where the demand is almost guaranteed.

[Edited 2007-11-29 12:19:28]
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5866
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:24 pm

Given New York's(JFK) importance to the world, I would think ANZ would fly there. ORD can be served via UA connections in LAX & SFO. ANZ flies half way around the world to LHR via LAX and HKG twice daily, it could fit JFK into a AKL-LHR flight.

With the 787-9, AKL to JFK nonstop is possible and why not Kiwis and New Yorkers are adventerous lots but distance and time away are the enemy. New Yorkers are among the richest Americans with lots to spend on adventure travel so a nonstop would let people from the US east coast fly to New Zealand for as little as a week.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:42 pm



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 26):
it could fit JFK into a AKL-LHR flight.

A direct flight would be more preferred, both LAX-LHR and AKL-JFK. I'm pretty sure they'll stick to that. LAX-LON has been in the schedule for a long time and I don't see why they would add in a JFK stop to this. It makes sense to either fly direct or to not fly at all (cabotage restrictions for the LAX-JFK), as shown by QF's LAX-JFK flight.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
sebring
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:08 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:48 pm



Quoting FLYACYYZ (Reply 21):

There is a real demand for a direct YYZ/HNL/YYZ link, unfortunately it has always been a notoriously low yielding route. If NZ could use HNL as a "filler" while bulking out the majority of the load on the YYZ/AKL/YYZ sector it could work, however the whole marketing strategy of the 787 is point to point, direct non-stop service.

A 767-300 could do it, and I don't AC to retire all of its 767s when the 787s arrive. Some of the newer ones were delivered at the beginning of this decade and will fly until the end of the next decade.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:13 am



Quoting Trvlr (Reply 20):
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?Many, many places in the Midwest and eastern U.S., and maybe even a couple better-timed connections to Canada, too.



Quoting Koruman (Reply 22):
The market from North America to New Zealand is basically the Pacific Coast and Canada. One of the reasons why Air NZ has just opened a YVR route is because its research showed that even in Montreal and Newfoundland there was more knowledge of New Zealand and interest in visiting than there was from any US location more than 50 miles from the Pacific Ocean. That's why Toronto might precede Chicago.

As well as Koruman's elegantly expressed comment on demand, there is also the fact that from ALL of the mid west ORD is a backtrack and so is the east coast south from about NYC. Don't know about USAians but Kiwis & Ozzies HATE to back track and won't do it unless the fare is great, but that kills yields. About the only connections that may work better from ORD are to eastern Canada, NY state and New England, none of which are exactly high demand markets to NZ/Oz, some demand yes, but enough to justify opening a new 7000nm long route, I don't really think so. If the new route is to depend on connections DEN might be a better choice than ORD.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
2travel2know
Posts: 2236
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:05 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:09 am

I really doubt that NZ would study an AKL-MEX and moreover, flying MEX-AKL could be quite restricted due to MEX altitude.
Bear in mind that a stop in MEX (or somewhere in México) enroute to Canada or U.K. wouldn't require passengers to hold U.S. Visas because their plane lands on a U.S. Airport.
I don't work for COPA Airlines!
 
bartond
Posts: 647
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 6:59 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:25 am



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 29):
DEN might be a better choice than ORD

Agreed to a certain extent. However, is there enough of a market for another new city for Air New Zealand? I think they would beef up their SFO flight to 10x weekly or 2x daily before they would look at doing something like Denver or Chicago. Denver would be great but would survive 98% on connections, which DEN has a ton of, but that's tough goin' to make a flight of that length go on virtually connections alone.

On a side note, I recently flew NZ on SFO-AKL and AKL-YVR and man, what an impressive airline! Coach service down to Auckland was very nice, very comforting with really good food, free cocktails, and super nice attendants. Then Biz class AKL-YVR about blew me away. It was my first transoceanic business class flight but the lie-flat seats, 5-course meal, and Inflight Service Manager made the 13 hour jaunt up to Vancouver fly by. Two thumbs up.
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:27 am

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 26):
Given New York's(JFK) importance to the world, I would think ANZ would fly there. ORD can be served via UA connections in LAX & SFO. ANZ flies half way around the world to LHR via LAX and HKG twice daily, it could fit JFK into a AKL-LHR flight.

Unfortunately, no way.

The LHR-LAX flight thrives because the length of the flight and number of time zones crossed mean that NZ's single daily flight is timed to be at virtually the same time as all of BA, VS and UA's flights, so the lack of mutiple daily frequencies is no loss.

In contrast, LHR-JFK is a medium-haul flight across far fewer time zomes, and premium passengers would stick with VS/BA/AA/UA who have far more frequencies. NZ could never attract the high-yield pax, just as Air Tahiti Nui got slaughtered on JFK-CDG for exactly the same reason. Worse still, JFK has very limited Star Alliance domestic feed.

And there just isn't the demand for flights from NYC to Australia and New Zealand, which is why Air Tahiti Nui's SYD-PPT-JFK flight has been abandoned and converted to a much less convenient SYD-PPT-LAX-JFK.

So whereas Air New Zealand is a viable high-yield competitor on both AKL-LAX and LAX-LHR, it would find that AKL-JFK had no market and that it couldn't attract premium passengers on JFK-LHR.

At least new routes from AKL-LHR via PER or HNL offer the possibility of morning departures at either end to provide multiple round-the-clock daily frequencies from AKL-LHR and vice versa. But JFK's time-zone means that arrival and departure times from AKL and LHR would have to be virtually the same as for the flights via LAX and YVR.

And anyway, Air NZ is not covered by the EU-USA bilateral (whereas Air Tahiti Nui is) and so it would never be granted LHR-JFK traffic rights.

[Edited 2007-11-29 18:29:35]
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:56 am



Quoting Koruman (Reply 32):
And anyway, Air NZ is not covered by the EU-USA bilateral (whereas Air Tahiti Nui is) and so it would never be granted LHR-JFK traffic rights.

I thought that NZ had fifth freedom from anywhere in the US onward, with the sole restriction being the limitation to one daily flight from California to LHR. Or are there other restrictions I'm unaware of?

Re serving JFK, I acknowledge that it's hard going for the airlines in these parts that have tried it. QF is reputed to survive only on cargo loads, and has the disadvantage that they fly LAX-JFK without local rights. TN tried and didn't make a go of it - though I strongly suspect that a significant part of the problem there is that they just don't have enough brand awareness (anywhere except Tahiti) to make them an obvious choice for anyone.

NZ on the other hand has a significant advantage over QF or UA if it were to try to take on the JFK market. From SYD, MEL and BNE the airlines' routes are more or less equivalent in distance (though BNE is about 600mi longer through AKL) - with one stop (in LAX vs AKL). And we know that transiting LAX is a whole lot more hassle than transiting AKL. For NZ's other Australian ports, OOL and CNS would be two stops to JFK by QF, and only one stop by NZ. And if the timings could be worked out, PER-JFK could be one stop via AKL as well.

If NZ were to view the whole Aus/NZ market as its catchment for a JFK flight, then that might just work - three days a week with a 250-seater, at least.

There's also been discussion as to whether NZ could take on the JFK-LHR market as an extension of that route. Realistically, any European service run by NZ is going to have to stop somewhere en route from where it can exercise fifth freedom rights onward to Europe. Assuming such rights are not an obstacle in the case of JFK (see above) I can't see that JFK would be inherently any more problematic than so many other potential new transit points - the oft-mentioned ones are SFO, YVR and PVG (which seems now to be less likely). Realistically, though, to get a decent amount of the JFK-LHR market, it would have to be served daily - but even then, it's equivalent to only about 4x weekly with a 744.

And in terms of the market size from Aus/NZ to JFK, I think that remains to be seen. The prognostications of low pax numbers may partly be a reflection of the fact that there's currently no service provided. So many markets only develop when there's a service provided. And in the case of JFK, I think we can assume that this would be a high-yielding route (should make Koruman smile).

And another advantage for NZ on the LHR-JFK sector is that there is currently no Star Alliance service on that route whatsoever - a glaring, gaping omission. I can imagine there might be at least some alliance-loyal traffic that would be generated that NZ might not otherwise expect. The combination of NZ's superior high-end product with *A membership could potentially even give non-aligned VS a run for its money on the route. Better get in soon, though, because rumour has it that SQ wants "in" on the LHR-JFK route as well.

A disadvantage of the route would be its extreme length - at the kinds of distance involved in AKL-JFK, you're burning a lot of fuel just carrying the fuel for the rest of your journey - and there's a LOT of that. You'd almost certainly burn less fuel if you transited LAX, ironically, because of this factor.

Anyway, just wanted to put up some arguments to balance the score on this - while it's true that it looks to be potentially a "thin" route, there are factors which could make it fatter which are within NZ's grasp.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:10 am



Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 18):
either NZ is waiting for the 7810 or is waiting to see what happens in the market as there is no real reason why they couldn't continue to operate at least a few of their 744s if they were needed for a few more years pas 2011.

Remember, 4 are owned, and if a buyer can't be found, we could still fly them for a while until additional 773/789's are delivered.

NZ1
--
NZ1
Head Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3714
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:39 am



Quoting NZ1 (Reply 34):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 18):
either NZ is waiting for the 7810 or is waiting to see what happens in the market as there is no real reason why they couldn't continue to operate at least a few of their 744s if they were needed for a few more years pas 2011.

Remember, 4 are owned, and if a buyer can't be found, we could still fly them for a while until additional 773/789's are delivered.

NZ1

yup thats what I was referring to  Smile
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:52 am



Quoting 777ER (Reply 9):
NZ is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Would you say they would do this with what a/c? That is one hell of a long flight...

Where does DEN fall into the mix with having UA connections there?

Is NZ even looking at 77L or anything else like the 748i/787-10?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9863
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:19 am



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008.

Highly doubt NZ would give up LAX-LHR considering its the money maker route.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
Personally, I think that SFO and LAX have such good connections that Las Vegas, Denver or Chicago offer no benefit to passengers flying to the eastern states.

Have you ever waited for a flight to ORD or DEN in LAX? The only flights you can take after arriving on NZ is the red eyes to ORD, DEN from LAX, and that includes 9+ hours waiting. A flight to ORD or DEN would have great benefits for Eastern states

Quoting QF108 (Reply 19):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 10):
ORD is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Does NZ have the rights to carry cargo LAX-JFK like QF does with flight 107/108 and from all reports that is a very profitable sector because of the freight. If they do is there any chance we may see NZ 5/6 operate AKL-LAX-JFK.

Operating a B744 from LAX-JFK isnt cost effective as people might think. The costs of petrol and the short time in cruise altitude far out weighs the costs of using a B744.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 36):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 9):
NZ is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Would you say they would do this with what a/c?

NZ have said, that it would be done with B789s, so no new USA flights would be announced till then
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6812
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:42 am



Quoting 777ER (Reply 37):
Operating a B744 from LAX-JFK isnt cost effective as people might think. The costs of petrol and the short time in cruise altitude far out weighs the costs of using a B744.

I think its mainly to do with cabotage rules man. So only PAX continuing will be allowed on board. As for the short flight, they do trans tasman which is nearly two thirds to half the length of LAX-JFK...
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 2:45 pm



Quoting 777ER (Reply 37):
Have you ever waited for a flight to ORD or DEN in LAX? The only flights you can take after arriving on NZ is the red eyes to ORD, DEN from LAX, and that includes 9+ hours waiting. A flight to ORD or DEN would have great benefits for Eastern states

That is because the North American flights leave Auckland in the evening and arrive in North America too late for east coast connections. That would be the case for Denver or Chicago too, because many of the passengers connect into Auckland from Adelaide, Brisbane and Melbourne between 5pm and 7pm.

But it would make more sense to just have a morning departure to LAX allowing immediate connections there, rather than opening a flight to Denver in the morning.

And the same problem remains. No-one east of California wants to go to New Zealand. At least 70% of passengers flying into LAX and SFO terminate in California. I doubt that Air New Zealand could fill a 14 seat Twin Otter with passengers terminating in Colorado or Illinois.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3714
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:28 pm



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 36):


Quoting 777ER (Reply 9):
NZ is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Would you say they would do this with what a/c? That is one hell of a long flight...

Where does DEN fall into the mix with having UA connections there?

Is NZ even looking at 77L or anything else like the 748i/787-10?

They would use a 789 for AKL-JFK (or a 788ER/LR,789ER/LR if those are available) it is capable of doing it.

DEN would be useful except that it suffers major disruptions in winter due to snow, storms etc. It would be used as a transit hub for other destinations so would be a pain for NZ in disrupt situations. JFK on the other hand would be mostly local traffic so less of an issue even though JFK gets snow etc too.
NZ could have got the 77L but passed and got the 772ER insted and has just ordered 77W and not ordered the 748I. It is still a remote possibility that NZ could order the 748I in limited numbers (4) but highly unlikely (odds improve slightly if more customers sign on besides LH). The 77W just works more for the most part for NZ... ie 3x daily AKL-UK flights with 777 aircraft vs 2x daily AKL-UK with 744.
NZ has more 777 and 787 options. NZ will almost certainly order the 7810 at some stage as a 772ER replacement, however it is a matter of when to do that that is the question as the 772ERs are still quite new.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Burj
Posts: 745
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:46 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 7:51 pm



Quoting Koruman (Reply 39):
No-one east of California wants to go to New Zealand.

I live in upstate NY (east of CA) and I'd be interested in visiting NZ as I have family that just moved there.

Just how long would the flight be from New York City to AKL? Is there currently non-stop service between New York City and Australia?
 
bartond
Posts: 647
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 6:59 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:31 pm

You'd be looking at about 18-19 hours of actual flying time, but add layovers in there and you're probably up to about 24 total hours for your trip. Just depends on the timing of connections. NYC-SFO/LAX flights are around 5-6 hours and the flight to AKL (from SFO, at least and I don't think LAX is too much different) is around 13 hours.

NZ provides a fantastic level of service in either cabin, so after dealing with UA, AA, or DL across the States you will get to experience NZ's superior product on your transpacific flight. I will say that the seat pitch on NZ's 772 is very tight for someone like me (6'3"). Not much leg room but the seat itself was comfortable and the food and service was great.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3247
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:10 pm



Quoting NZ107 (Reply 25):
Quoting Koruman (Reply 22):
hardly anyone in those places could even find New Zealand on a map of Australia and New Zealand

:D how true

Most Americans can't find the U.S. on a world map if the borders and titles aren't drawn in (no offence to my American friends, just a PBS documentary I watched). No geography class in the high school curriculum might have something to do with it.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 39):
No-one east of California wants to go to New Zealand.

Gosh you come up with some sweeping generalisations.

I'm an ex New Yorker - grew up there and still have many friends there when I visit as well as a lot of family in the District of Columbia. People are very bullish about New Zealand and awareness is high, but access is restricted by ease of travel. A direct flight would be advantageous.

BTW, last northern winter's Pure NZ marketing on billboard and bus-stop (in NYC) has very high consumer recognition and recall. They may not be able to place us on a map, but they do associate us with things positive although some distance away.

MH
come visit the south pacific
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:31 pm



Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 43):
Most Americans can't find the U.S. on a world map if the borders and titles aren't drawn in (no offence to my American friends, just a PBS documentary I watched).

Dont believe all the BS you watch mate... Not an insult to me but many other anetters would  flamed  your A$$ for that.

Has/is NZ looking or ever looked at the 748i?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3247
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:41 pm



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 44):
Not an insult to me but many other anetters would flamed your A$$ for that.

LOL, that's if they could find it. But seriously, by virtue of our interest in aviation, we're very good with geography - so we've got the top echelon (in geographic terms) of the U.S. here in our a.net community.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 44):
Has/is NZ looking or ever looked at the 748i?

Yes, NZ's CEO said sometime ago that the 748i was under review as a 744 replacement. They went with the 777-300ER in the end - 7 in total.

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
Burj
Posts: 745
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:46 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:55 pm



Quoting Bartond (Reply 42):
You'd be looking at about 18-19 hours of actual flying time, but add layovers in there and you're probably up to about 24 total hours for your trip.

So a non-stop AKL-JFK is possible, right? There are non-stops between NYC and Singapore and NYC and Bangkok. Just wondering if a AKL-JFK-LHR would work...
 
darenw
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:55 pm

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:10 am



Quoting Bartond (Reply 42):
You'd be looking at about 18-19 hours of actual flying time

Wouldn't a non-stop flight to NY be closer to 16-17 hours? Its not as far as Singapore-New York which is around 18 hours
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3247
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:23 am



Quoting Burj (Reply 46):
Just wondering if a AKL-JFK-LHR would work...

It's certainly within the performance range of the 789, but I think it could only really work if NZ could get enough feeder traffic from Australia particularly MEL and SYD. I think the flight starting in MEL would be a bonus as QF already has a daily to NYC (JFK or EWR) via LAX; this would mean the only direct MEL flight to New York.

Mind you, QF could go SYD - NYC non-stop once they get their 787's.

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
Burj
Posts: 745
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:46 am

RE: NZ Expansion To N. America?

Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:56 am

So related to a theoretical NZ LHR-JFK-AKL-(MEL?) flight... would passangers from LHR have to go through US passport control/security at JFK if they were traveling on to AKL? I've been told that British citizens traveling from LHR to AKL via LAX on NZ have to go through security/passport control in LAX. Is this an issue with LAX or a U.S. government requirement?