SFOtoORD
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 12:39 am

Ishrion wrote:
Game over. AA's dormancy ends today and is officially returning the 14 frequencies so other carriers may use them.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 28567-0736

Despite American’s efforts, American is unable to resume its two services in the near future. American is therefore returning its frequencies so that they are available for use by other carriers.


Not surprisingly the dormancy waiver was just to keep competitors out in the short term. Hopefully AA is given less leniency in any future dormancy requests.
 
carljanderson
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 5:29 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 12:52 am

so aren't there 21 frequencies available now?
 
Sightseer
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:39 am

carljanderson wrote:
so aren't there 21 frequencies available now?

Yes. Now we'll see how serious DL and UA were about their respective MSP- and EWR-PVG applications
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:27 am

enilria wrote:
jayunited wrote:
compensateme wrote:
I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.


Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by adding additional service to China from another U.S. gateway?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.

My guess is that DL files for the frequencies 5 minutes after the first carrier does, and no sooner. Could be wrong, but...


Delta originally filed for frequencies other than AA's - not sure why you think they will not only be reactionary.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:28 am

So... if AA returns these frequencies, are they allowed to apply for more from another hub?

Not saying they will, just wondering if they're theoretically allowed to do so.

Understandably, AA wanted the ability to transfer the frequencies to other hubs a few months ago but was rejected.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:29 am

Ishrion wrote:
So... if AA returns these frequencies, are they allowed to apply for more from another hub?

Not saying they will, just wondering if they're theoretically allowed to do so.


They were allowed to ask to move them, instead they decided to return them.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:30 am

jbs2886 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
So... if AA returns these frequencies, are they allowed to apply for more from another hub?

Not saying they will, just wondering if they're theoretically allowed to do so.


They were allowed to ask to move them, instead they decided to return them.


That was a fast response. I edited my original post before I realized you responded.

Their application to move PEK/PVG slots was rejected a few months ago.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:34 am

Ishrion wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
So... if AA returns these frequencies, are they allowed to apply for more from another hub?

Not saying they will, just wondering if they're theoretically allowed to do so.


They were allowed to ask to move them, instead they decided to return them.


That was a fast response. I edited my original post before I realized you responded.

Their application to move PEK/PVG slots was rejected a few months ago.


They never requested to move them. They supported a DL request (and perhaps filed a similar request) that frequencies be non-airport specific.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:50 am

jbs2886 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

They were allowed to ask to move them, instead they decided to return them.


That was a fast response. I edited my original post before I realized you responded.

Their application to move PEK/PVG slots was rejected a few months ago.


They never requested to move them. They supported a DL request (and perhaps filed a similar request) that frequencies be non-airport specific.



LAXintl wrote:
And AA today decided to copy DL playbook.

-

January 7, 2018

Motion of American Airlines for US-China Route Flexibility

American respectfully requests that the Department grant all US carriers that hold US-China Zone 1 combination frequencies the flexibility to use their frequencies on any US-China route where they hold underlying route authority. Delta and United currently hold many China Zone 1 frequencies that have this flexibility, while all of American’s China Zone 1 frequencies are route-specific and cannot be moved without the Department’s approval. To ensure that it can respond to changes in the U.S.-China market as effectively as Delta and United can, American seeks to replace the two-tiered licensing regime for China Zone 1 frequencies with uniform China route flexibility.

Delta and United have enjoyed their exclusive China Zone 1 flexibility to make significant changes to their US-China networks without the need for the Department’s approval. For example, in 2018, Delta used its flexibility to relocate its frequencies used for Tokyo (Narita)-Shanghai service to the Atlanta-PVG route (OST-1999-6323 (July 19, 2017)). Likewise, in 2004, United used its flexibility to launch its San Francisco-Beijing service by relocating frequencies previously used for NRT-PEK service. American cannot make similar changes to its own US-China network without filing a motion to transfer its frequencies, likely triggering a lengthy administrative proceeding and risking the possibility that its frequencies would be reassigned to another carrier instead, such as Delta or United.

Delta and United may also use their China Zone 1 route flexibility to respond to short term surges in demand. For example, this month Delta is using its “unrestricted, gateway-flexible US-China Zone 1 frequencies” to offer nonstop service between PVG and Las Vegas for the January 2019 International Consumer Electronics Show (OST-1999-6323 (September 14, 2018)). Again, American cannot launch similar services using its own frequencies without the additional step of seeking prior Department approval and the risk of opposition by other carriers that would delay or moot the request.

American is filing this motion in conjunction with its answer in conditional support of the motion of Delta Air Lines, Inc. for US-Haneda gateway flexibility. Answer of American Airlines, Inc. in Conditional Support of the Motion of Delta Air Lines, Inc. As American explained in its answer to Delta’s motion, the reasons for the Department to grant flexibility to all carriers holding China Zone 1 frequencies are at least as compelling, if not more so, as the reasons for providing similar flexibility with respect to Haneda slots. To the extent necessary, American incorporates its answer to Delta’s motion herein.


Yeah... this was their request to have the flexibility to move their China slots while supporting Delta's HND flexibility.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:55 am

Ishrion wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:

That was a fast response. I edited my original post before I realized you responded.

Their application to move PEK/PVG slots was rejected a few months ago.


They never requested to move them. They supported a DL request (and perhaps filed a similar request) that frequencies be non-airport specific.



LAXintl wrote:
And AA today decided to copy DL playbook.

-

January 7, 2018

Motion of American Airlines for US-China Route Flexibility

American respectfully requests that the Department grant all US carriers that hold US-China Zone 1 combination frequencies the flexibility to use their frequencies on any US-China route where they hold underlying route authority. Delta and United currently hold many China Zone 1 frequencies that have this flexibility, while all of American’s China Zone 1 frequencies are route-specific and cannot be moved without the Department’s approval. To ensure that it can respond to changes in the U.S.-China market as effectively as Delta and United can, American seeks to replace the two-tiered licensing regime for China Zone 1 frequencies with uniform China route flexibility.

Delta and United have enjoyed their exclusive China Zone 1 flexibility to make significant changes to their US-China networks without the need for the Department’s approval. For example, in 2018, Delta used its flexibility to relocate its frequencies used for Tokyo (Narita)-Shanghai service to the Atlanta-PVG route (OST-1999-6323 (July 19, 2017)). Likewise, in 2004, United used its flexibility to launch its San Francisco-Beijing service by relocating frequencies previously used for NRT-PEK service. American cannot make similar changes to its own US-China network without filing a motion to transfer its frequencies, likely triggering a lengthy administrative proceeding and risking the possibility that its frequencies would be reassigned to another carrier instead, such as Delta or United.

Delta and United may also use their China Zone 1 route flexibility to respond to short term surges in demand. For example, this month Delta is using its “unrestricted, gateway-flexible US-China Zone 1 frequencies” to offer nonstop service between PVG and Las Vegas for the January 2019 International Consumer Electronics Show (OST-1999-6323 (September 14, 2018)). Again, American cannot launch similar services using its own frequencies without the additional step of seeking prior Department approval and the risk of opposition by other carriers that would delay or moot the request.

American is filing this motion in conjunction with its answer in conditional support of the motion of Delta Air Lines, Inc. for US-Haneda gateway flexibility. Answer of American Airlines, Inc. in Conditional Support of the Motion of Delta Air Lines, Inc. As American explained in its answer to Delta’s motion, the reasons for the Department to grant flexibility to all carriers holding China Zone 1 frequencies are at least as compelling, if not more so, as the reasons for providing similar flexibility with respect to Haneda slots. To the extent necessary, American incorporates its answer to Delta’s motion herein.


Yeah... this was their request to have the flexibility to move their China slots while supporting Delta's HND flexibility.


Which isn't a request to move the frequencies. Very different.
 
DeSpringbokke
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 3:27 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:20 am

How much longer will thrice weekly ORD-NRT last? I doubt it has much time left, especially with AA receiving additional HND slots. Once ORD-NRT goes, AA's Trans-Pacs will only be out of DFW and LAX. Even if AA did try CLT/PHL-Asia, they've must have run those numbers enough times to realise its not even worth trying, even with 787-8s, despite being fortress hubs and no Far East flights out of either hub. Better for AA to fly LAX-Asia for its west coast flyers than ORD and attempt to compete with UAL.

With 21 weekly frequencies available, UA and DL can have them so to speak and start flying EWR/MSP-PVG respectively next year. As for the 7 weekly slots left, its up to UA and DL over who wants them and maybe one more competitive China slot allocation. Delta was pretty serious about trying LAX-PEK, almost catching AA off guard as it was widely assumed AA would apply for the route once they had enough 787-9s. Maybe Delta gives LAX-PEK another try. I am puzzled as to why UA won't instead apply for IAD-PVG with a 787-9 and upgauge EWR-PVG to a 77W. PVG is heavily served by the US3 and, assuming UA would apply and be awarded IAD-PVG, PVG would have a total of 14 daily nonstops from the US while PEK would only have 8. (This scenario assumed DL and UA would be awarded their prospective MSP-PVG and EWR-PVG.) Even though Shanghai is the financial capital of China, ASMs to PEK and PVG does not reflect demand. While demand to Shanghai is higher, its not nearly double. Further, UA is still the beneficiary of possessing a plurality of US-China slots. Right now, they have nine while Delta only has six.

Just as the armchair CEO, if I were Ed right now, I'd re-apply for both LAX-PEK and MSP-PVG, using A350-900s on both. See what UA does then. As for AA, they're stuck with 787-9s on DFW/LAX-PEK/PVG, although isn't DFW-PEK still operated by a 787-8?
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:24 am

DeSpringbokke wrote:
How much longer will thrice weekly ORD-NRT last? I doubt it has much time left, especially with AA receiving additional HND slots. Once ORD-NRT goes, AA's Trans-Pacs will only be out of DFW and LAX. Even if AA did try CLT/PHL-Asia, they've must have run those numbers enough times to realise its not even worth trying, even with 787-8s, despite being fortress hubs and no Far East flights out of either hub. Better for AA to fly LAX-Asia for its west coast flyers than ORD and attempt to compete with UAL.

With 21 weekly frequencies available, UA and DL can have them so to speak and start flying EWR/MSP-PVG respectively next year. As for the 7 weekly slots left, its up to UA and DL over who wants them and maybe one more competitive China slot allocation. Delta was pretty serious about trying LAX-PEK, almost catching AA off guard as it was widely assumed AA would apply for the route once they had enough 787-9s. Maybe Delta gives LAX-PEK another try. I am puzzled as to why UA won't instead apply for IAD-PVG with a 787-9 and upgauge EWR-PVG to a 77W. PVG is heavily served by the US3 and, assuming UA would apply and be awarded IAD-PVG, PVG would have a total of 14 daily nonstops from the US while PEK would only have 8. (This scenario assumed DL and UA would be awarded their prospective MSP-PVG and EWR-PVG.) Even though Shanghai is the financial capital of China, ASMs to PEK and PVG does not reflect demand. While demand to Shanghai is higher, its not nearly double. Further, UA is still the beneficiary of possessing a plurality of US-China slots. Right now, they have nine while Delta only has six.

Just as the armchair CEO, if I were Ed right now, I'd re-apply for both LAX-PEK and MSP-PVG, using A350-900s on both. See what UA does then. As for AA, they're stuck with 787-9s on DFW/LAX-PEK/PVG, although isn't DFW-PEK still operated by a 787-8?


DFW-PEK is the only one flying on the -8 while the other three are on the -9.

The DFW-PEK flight temporarily upgauged to the -9 last August but reverted shortly after.
 
kavok
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 11:08 am

Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:01 pm

kavok wrote:
Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.


No they aren’t, they tried to move frequencies formerly used at GUM. Only UA applies for AA’s frequencies.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:22 pm

kavok wrote:
Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.


Dl has advantage here with it's China eastern partnership. Also, I doubt dl would be much more profitable. Aa is just in a worse financial situation to be able to take on China routes.
 
kavok
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:25 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
kavok wrote:
Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.


No they aren’t, they tried to move frequencies formerly used at GUM. Only UA applies for AA’s frequencies.


How is it not?

AA drops MidwestCity(ORD)-PVG because they can’t make money on it, and Delta indicates it wants to start MidwestCity(MSP)-PVG because they think it will work.

Obviously no guarantee DL’s MSP-PVG will work, but it says something if you can get a smaller market in less geographically advantageous location to work (MSP) when one of your competitors can’t get ORD to work.
 
x1234
Posts: 506
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:32 pm

Again Delta through its SkyTeam partnership with China Eastern (and DL has someone on the MU/China Eastern board) has all the PVG revenue just like AA has all the HKG/NRT/HND revenue. Its simple in this age of airline alliances. Though UA's EWR-PVG could definitely use more capacity.
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 6786
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:58 pm

kavok wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
kavok wrote:
Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.


No they aren’t, they tried to move frequencies formerly used at GUM. Only UA applies for AA’s frequencies.


How is it not?

AA drops MidwestCity(ORD)-PVG because they can’t make money on it, and Delta indicates it wants to start MidwestCity(MSP)-PVG because they think it will work.

Obviously no guarantee DL’s MSP-PVG will work, but it says something if you can get a smaller market in less geographically advantageous location to work (MSP) when one of your competitors can’t get ORD to work.


Does DL not have a very close relationship of MU? Whose largest hub happens to be in PVG. Maybe that’s a reason why they see a potential in a MSP-PVG flight. They would have plenty of connections on both ends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
jayunited
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:07 pm

Fargo wrote:
jayunited wrote:
compensateme wrote:
I wonder if DL will still pursue MSP-PVG, and maybe ATL-PEK.


Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by requesting to add additional service to China from another U.S. gateway perhaps IAD?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.


Why would DL want MSP-PEK when they already run from DTW? ATL-PEK would make more sense.


I'm sorry I don't understand your response. When did I ever mention MSP-PEK?
I posed a question because I don't know if DL has ever publicly stated their interest in ATL-PEK, or if this is insider information that DL intends to file for the rights to begin ATL-PEK in addition to their application for MSP-PVG.

With AA giving up both frequencies does anyone on this thread truly believe that either DL or UA will let that frequency go unused? With no other applications I think it is a given both DL and UA will be awarded MSP and EWR. However I also believe that the network planners at both these airlines probably would love to get their hand on the last frequency and could be coming up with proposals even as I type.
I don't think anyone expected AA to give up 2 frequencies. I think most people expected DL would be awarded MSP-PVG, and the DOT would take one frequency from AA and award it to UA for EWR. But allow AA to extend their dormancy waiver for the last frequency, or perhaps reconsider and allowing AA to move the frequency to another gateway which AA did request some time ago. For AA to give up completely is huge, for AA to not even try PHL-China says a lot about AA's US-China network. To not apply for any type of rights to serve PHL-China tells us a lot about AA's DFW-China flights. AA's DFW-China flights are now basically pulling in connections from the South, the Mid-Atlantic, the North East, the Plaines and the Midwest. Everyone east of the Rockies if they want to fly on AA metal to PEK/PVG is probably being routed through DFW and west of the Rockies is probably routed through LAX. But I suspect their LAX flights have a much stronger O&D than their DFW flights. So if AA were to launch PHL-China flights at this particular point in time they would basically be cannibalizing their DFW-PVG/PEK flights.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:41 pm

jayunited wrote:
Fargo wrote:
jayunited wrote:

Has DL shown any interest in starting ATL-PEK?

With AA returning their frequencies I think its safe to assume DL will be awarded MSP-PVG and UA will go daily double EWR-PVG. The big question is will either DL or UA go after the last remaining frequency? If so will DL apply for ATL-PEK as you have suggested and/or will UA apply try to secure that last frequency by requesting to add additional service to China from another U.S. gateway perhaps IAD?

I'm surprised AA is just willing to walk away and not at the very least try to hold on to one frequency.


Why would DL want MSP-PEK when they already run from DTW? ATL-PEK would make more sense.


I'm sorry I don't understand your response. When did I ever mention MSP-PEK?
I posed a question because I don't know if DL has ever publicly stated their interest in ATL-PEK, or if this is insider information that DL intends to file for the rights to begin ATL-PEK in addition to their application for MSP-PVG.

With AA giving up both frequencies does anyone on this thread truly believe that either DL or UA will let that frequency go unused? With no other applications I think it is a given both DL and UA will be awarded MSP and EWR. However I also believe that the network planners at both these airlines probably would love to get their hand on the last frequency and could be coming up with proposals even as I type.
I don't think anyone expected AA to give up 2 frequencies. I think most people expected DL would be awarded MSP-PVG, and the DOT would take one frequency from AA and award it to UA for EWR. But allow AA to extend their dormancy waiver for the last frequency, or perhaps reconsider and allowing AA to move the frequency to another gateway which AA did request some time ago. For AA to give up completely is huge, for AA to not even try PHL-China says a lot about AA's US-China network. To not apply for any type of rights to serve PHL-China tells us a lot about AA's DFW-China flights. AA's DFW-China flights are now basically pulling in connections from the South, the Mid-Atlantic, the North East, the Plaines and the Midwest. Everyone east of the Rockies if they want to fly on AA metal to PEK/PVG is probably being routed through DFW and west of the Rockies is probably routed through LAX. But I suspect their LAX flights have a much stronger O&D than their DFW flights. So if AA were to launch PHL-China flights at this particular point in time they would basically be cannibalizing their DFW-PVG/PEK flights.


My apologies, I misread your original post. I meant why would DL start MSP-PVG (or anywhere in China) due to DTW already handling most of DL's Asian traffic from the eastern US? MSP is doing well, but do they really need China flights?
 
HP69
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:48 pm

Yes, if DL needs more Midwest-China capacity, a new MSP flight makes more sense than double daily DTW. Don’t forget, going from 744s to A359s was a big drop in capacity.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 4:02 pm

Fargo wrote:
jayunited wrote:
Fargo wrote:

Why would DL want MSP-PEK when they already run from DTW? ATL-PEK would make more sense.


I'm sorry I don't understand your response. When did I ever mention MSP-PEK?
I posed a question because I don't know if DL has ever publicly stated their interest in ATL-PEK, or if this is insider information that DL intends to file for the rights to begin ATL-PEK in addition to their application for MSP-PVG.

With AA giving up both frequencies does anyone on this thread truly believe that either DL or UA will let that frequency go unused? With no other applications I think it is a given both DL and UA will be awarded MSP and EWR. However I also believe that the network planners at both these airlines probably would love to get their hand on the last frequency and could be coming up with proposals even as I type.
I don't think anyone expected AA to give up 2 frequencies. I think most people expected DL would be awarded MSP-PVG, and the DOT would take one frequency from AA and award it to UA for EWR. But allow AA to extend their dormancy waiver for the last frequency, or perhaps reconsider and allowing AA to move the frequency to another gateway which AA did request some time ago. For AA to give up completely is huge, for AA to not even try PHL-China says a lot about AA's US-China network. To not apply for any type of rights to serve PHL-China tells us a lot about AA's DFW-China flights. AA's DFW-China flights are now basically pulling in connections from the South, the Mid-Atlantic, the North East, the Plaines and the Midwest. Everyone east of the Rockies if they want to fly on AA metal to PEK/PVG is probably being routed through DFW and west of the Rockies is probably routed through LAX. But I suspect their LAX flights have a much stronger O&D than their DFW flights. So if AA were to launch PHL-China flights at this particular point in time they would basically be cannibalizing their DFW-PVG/PEK flights.


My apologies, I misread your original post. I meant why would DL start MSP-PVG (or anywhere in China) due to DTW already handling most of DL's Asian traffic from the eastern US? MSP is doing well, but do they really need China flights?


But where else would DL use another PVG slot on? Would they increase frequencies to existing flights on ATL/DTW/LAX/SEA-PVG? Or would they use it at other hubs like MSP/SLC/JFK?
MSP seems like the best next choice. I don’t think DL is going to let this frequency get away from them. So it’s either the next best hub as intended or an existing city.
 
LondonXtreme
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:24 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 4:37 pm

Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.
 
HP69
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 5:22 pm

I thought IAD-PVG was?
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:08 pm

LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


I didn't even think of this. Yes, this would be much more reasonable than MSP-PVG.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:09 pm

Ishrion wrote:
Fargo wrote:
jayunited wrote:

I'm sorry I don't understand your response. When did I ever mention MSP-PEK?
I posed a question because I don't know if DL has ever publicly stated their interest in ATL-PEK, or if this is insider information that DL intends to file for the rights to begin ATL-PEK in addition to their application for MSP-PVG.

With AA giving up both frequencies does anyone on this thread truly believe that either DL or UA will let that frequency go unused? With no other applications I think it is a given both DL and UA will be awarded MSP and EWR. However I also believe that the network planners at both these airlines probably would love to get their hand on the last frequency and could be coming up with proposals even as I type.
I don't think anyone expected AA to give up 2 frequencies. I think most people expected DL would be awarded MSP-PVG, and the DOT would take one frequency from AA and award it to UA for EWR. But allow AA to extend their dormancy waiver for the last frequency, or perhaps reconsider and allowing AA to move the frequency to another gateway which AA did request some time ago. For AA to give up completely is huge, for AA to not even try PHL-China says a lot about AA's US-China network. To not apply for any type of rights to serve PHL-China tells us a lot about AA's DFW-China flights. AA's DFW-China flights are now basically pulling in connections from the South, the Mid-Atlantic, the North East, the Plaines and the Midwest. Everyone east of the Rockies if they want to fly on AA metal to PEK/PVG is probably being routed through DFW and west of the Rockies is probably routed through LAX. But I suspect their LAX flights have a much stronger O&D than their DFW flights. So if AA were to launch PHL-China flights at this particular point in time they would basically be cannibalizing their DFW-PVG/PEK flights.


My apologies, I misread your original post. I meant why would DL start MSP-PVG (or anywhere in China) due to DTW already handling most of DL's Asian traffic from the eastern US? MSP is doing well, but do they really need China flights?


But where else would DL use another PVG slot on? Would they increase frequencies to existing flights on ATL/DTW/LAX/SEA-PVG? Or would they use it at other hubs like MSP/SLC/JFK?
MSP seems like the best next choice. I don’t think DL is going to let this frequency get away from them. So it’s either the next best hub as intended or an existing city.


We'll see. DL doesn't really need another China flight. The above user stating IAH-PVG on UA is much more reasonable.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:31 pm

kavok wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
kavok wrote:
Everyone talks about AA’s weakness in the west, but to me, this move reflects how weak AA is becoming in the Midwest.

DL is effectively trying to “move” a USA-PVG flight from ORD to MSP. If the DL flight “works”, and remains going forward, this would mean:

1) DL can make a PVG flight work that AA can’t from a Midwest location with lower local OD and business traffic (MSP vs ORD) to PVG.

2) DL makes a PVG flight work filling it with connections from an airport in MSP that is not as geographically well located for connecting pax as ORD. (I.e. The vast majority of pax connecting on to PVG are not coming from places that are better served geographically from MSP vs ORD).

Again, it just goes to show how weak AA has become in ORD and the Midwest in general.


No they aren’t, they tried to move frequencies formerly used at GUM. Only UA applies for AA’s frequencies.


How is it not?

AA drops MidwestCity(ORD)-PVG because they can’t make money on it, and Delta indicates it wants to start MidwestCity(MSP)-PVG because they think it will work.

Obviously no guarantee DL’s MSP-PVG will work, but it says something if you can get a smaller market in less geographically advantageous location to work (MSP) when one of your competitors can’t get ORD to work.

You’re forgetting that United flies from ORD.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:32 pm

Fargo wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Fargo wrote:

My apologies, I misread your original post. I meant why would DL start MSP-PVG (or anywhere in China) due to DTW already handling most of DL's Asian traffic from the eastern US? MSP is doing well, but do they really need China flights?


But where else would DL use another PVG slot on? Would they increase frequencies to existing flights on ATL/DTW/LAX/SEA-PVG? Or would they use it at other hubs like MSP/SLC/JFK?
MSP seems like the best next choice. I don’t think DL is going to let this frequency get away from them. So it’s either the next best hub as intended or an existing city.


We'll see. DL doesn't really need another China flight. The above user stating IAH-PVG on UA is much more reasonable.


Of course it’s reasonable, and there’s no guarantee that MSP-PVG would be approved.

However, it’s the competitive market. DL will probably do anything to get that slot and prevent its competitors from getting it.

Besides, didn’t Delta already file an application proposing MSP-PVG if AA didnt get its dormancy a few months ago?
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5872
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 7:01 pm

LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


It’s significantly larger than DFW and ATL to PVG too and they are being flown. That said, UA seems to have no interest in growing IAH internationally so the foreign carriers pick up the slack.
"I dance and laugh among the rotten"
 
jayunited
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:22 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


It’s significantly larger than DFW and ATL to PVG too and they are being flown. That said, UA seems to have no interest in growing IAH internationally so the foreign carriers pick up the slack.


UA has grown IAH internationally, they've added mid and long haul destinations SYD, SCL, and MUC.
Just because the data states the O&D market from IAH is larger than DFW and ATL-PVG doesn't mean it's enough to fill a 787 or a 777 profitability. If UA is looking to add another gateway to PVG one of the first questions network planners have to answer is can they do it profitability. Whether that gateway is IAD, IAH, DEN or even LAX-PEK can it be done without loosing money and secondly can it be done without cannibalizing existing routes. ORD-China has a decent size O&D market but I know in order to make ORD-China work UA needs connecting traffic. When looking at IAH-PVG we have to ask is there sufficient demand in UA's overall U.S.network to support IAH-PVG or will the launch of an IAH-PVG flight have a negative impact on ORD-PVG. If UA has to route passengers away from ORD-PVG in order to make IAH-PVG work then launching IAH-PVG is not worth the cost. The cost would be no different than what AA has paid for their DFW-China flights which was the cancellation of all their ORD-China flights.
 
LondonXtreme
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:24 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:23 am

jayunited wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


It’s significantly larger than DFW and ATL to PVG too and they are being flown. That said, UA seems to have no interest in growing IAH internationally so the foreign carriers pick up the slack.


UA has grown IAH internationally, they've added mid and long haul destinations SYD, SCL, and MUC.
Just because the data states the O&D market from IAH is larger than DFW and ATL-PVG doesn't mean it's enough to fill a 787 or a 777 profitability. If UA is looking to add another gateway to PVG one of the first questions network planners have to answer is can they do it profitability. Whether that gateway is IAD, IAH, DEN or even LAX-PEK can it be done without loosing money and secondly can it be done without cannibalizing existing routes. ORD-China has a decent size O&D market but I know in order to make ORD-China work UA needs connecting traffic. When looking at IAH-PVG we have to ask is there sufficient demand in UA's overall U.S.network to support IAH-PVG or will the launch of an IAH-PVG flight have a negative impact on ORD-PVG. If UA has to route passengers away from ORD-PVG in order to make IAH-PVG work then launching IAH-PVG is not worth the cost. The cost would be no different than what AA has paid for their DFW-China flights which was the cancellation of all their ORD-China flights.

You're right. Do you think DL's ATL-PVG will cannibalise existing DTW-PVG and proposed MSP-PVG?

I know it is reasonable for UA to choose 2nd EWR-PVG over IAH-PVG because this is a proven market.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5872
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:05 pm

jayunited wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


It’s significantly larger than DFW and ATL to PVG too and they are being flown. That said, UA seems to have no interest in growing IAH internationally so the foreign carriers pick up the slack.


UA has grown IAH internationally, they've added mid and long haul destinations SYD, SCL, and MUC.
Just because the data states the O&D market from IAH is larger than DFW and ATL-PVG doesn't mean it's enough to fill a 787 or a 777 profitability. If UA is looking to add another gateway to PVG one of the first questions network planners have to answer is can they do it profitability. Whether that gateway is IAD, IAH, DEN or even LAX-PEK can it be done without loosing money and secondly can it be done without cannibalizing existing routes. ORD-China has a decent size O&D market but I know in order to make ORD-China work UA needs connecting traffic. When looking at IAH-PVG we have to ask is there sufficient demand in UA's overall U.S.network to support IAH-PVG or will the launch of an IAH-PVG flight have a negative impact on ORD-PVG. If UA has to route passengers away from ORD-PVG in order to make IAH-PVG work then launching IAH-PVG is not worth the cost. The cost would be no different than what AA has paid for their DFW-China flights which was the cancellation of all their ORD-China flights.


Those routes were added years ago.

If you stack up routes that were added from the different UA hubs in the last two years domestic and international, IAH is in last place. I’m not bitter (I’m a 1K with UA and only fly them). It is what it is but spare me the PR piece. I’m fully aware of what goes into deciding a new market. In know IAH won’t see New Asia destinations because SFO (and to a lesser degree ORD) exist. IAH-PVG probably will be flown at some point, just not by United.
"I dance and laugh among the rotten"
 
bostonvancouver
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:41 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sun Jul 07, 2019 2:56 am

does UA and DL need to refile the previous application?
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2147
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sun Jul 07, 2019 3:39 am

bostonvancouver wrote:
does UA and DL need to refile the previous application?


Yes, they were both denied and told to file at a later date if they wanted.
 
Planeboy17
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:18 am

Re: UPDATED: AA drops ORD-PEK/PVG, reduces NRT

Sun Jul 07, 2019 4:43 am

LAXdude1023 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
Why UA doesn't apply for IAH-PVG and ? That is the biggest unserved US-China market.


It’s significantly larger than DFW and ATL to PVG too and they are being flown. That said, UA seems to have no interest in growing IAH internationally so the foreign carriers pick up the slack.

If it’s such a great route, how come no other carrier has picked it up?
Maybe it has something to do with the tier 1 routes but I remember threads about China Eastern looking at a few years ago.
Obviously no other US carrier would start it.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos