User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:29 pm

chonetsao wrote:
So far DL is the public enemy number one? What did DL do to deserve this? (genuine puzzled, not a DL fanboy nor DLs hateman)

Well DL still hasn't published their response yet. They were also the last to submit their application when the proposed routes were initially submitted to the DoT.

I wonder if Delta purposely waits for AA and UA to publish their responses first, and then quickly skims over them and then tries to add in some quick responses to arguments made against their proposed routes. That would be pretty sneaky, but I doubt that's the case.
 
winginit
Posts: 2545
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:47 pm

FA9295 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
So far DL is the public enemy number one? What did DL do to deserve this? (genuine puzzled, not a DL fanboy nor DLs hateman)

Well DL still hasn't published their response yet. They were also the last to submit their application when the proposed routes were initially submitted to the DoT.

I wonder if Delta purposely waits for AA and UA to publish their responses first, and then quickly skims over them and then tries to add in some quick responses to arguments made against their proposed routes. That would be pretty sneaky, but I doubt that's the case.


They are notorious for this, and they're so consistently the last to file that I'm certain what you've alluded to at the end there is the case.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:50 pm

winginit wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
So far DL is the public enemy number one? What did DL do to deserve this? (genuine puzzled, not a DL fanboy nor DLs hateman)

Well DL still hasn't published their response yet. They were also the last to submit their application when the proposed routes were initially submitted to the DoT.

I wonder if Delta purposely waits for AA and UA to publish their responses first, and then quickly skims over them and then tries to add in some quick responses to arguments made against their proposed routes. That would be pretty sneaky, but I doubt that's the case.


They are notorious for this, and they're so consistently the last to file that I'm certain what you've alluded to at the end there is the case.


I wouldn't be surprised as well. Practical move, as far as these things are concerned though I doubt it moves the needle too much.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2112
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:44 am

ShinyAndChrome wrote:
winginit wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Well DL still hasn't published their response yet. They were also the last to submit their application when the proposed routes were initially submitted to the DoT.

I wonder if Delta purposely waits for AA and UA to publish their responses first, and then quickly skims over them and then tries to add in some quick responses to arguments made against their proposed routes. That would be pretty sneaky, but I doubt that's the case.


They are notorious for this, and they're so consistently the last to file that I'm certain what you've alluded to at the end there is the case.


I wouldn't be surprised as well. Practical move, as far as these things are concerned though I doubt it moves the needle too much.


Honestly, the hyperbole is ridiculous. First, as a corporate lawyer, these documents simply cannot be adjusted at their whims in the last hour. There are multiple layers of approval. Stop acting like DL is some nefarious corporation trying to be sneaky. Second, if anyone actually bothered to look, you will notice DL was actually filed *before* AA (https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrows ... -2019-0014). If you sort correctly you will notice DL was before AA. In fact, I was checking while filing and can confirm DL was before AA.
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:59 am

ITSTours wrote:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2019-0014-0013

Boy, I love this jetBlue answer.

"Delta’s various arguments support JetBlue’s pending requests that the Department take steps to ensure meaningful competition at these slot-restricted European airports."
"Yet, Delta cannot have it both ways. It cannot seek Department assistance for additional access at Haneda while seeking to deny it to JetBlue at LHR and AMS. Should the Department accept Delta’s rationale and grant it the additional Haneda slots it seeks based on the arguments advanced by Delta, then fundamental fairness and due process dictate that the Department also recognize JetBlue’s need for similar access at LHR and AMS."

JetBlue using Delta's own argument for HND to seek slots at LHR and AMS. Brilliant.



interesting that B6 is using this argument for frequencies that are not allocated at HND vs B6 wanting the DOT to remove slots and frequencies from airlines using existing routes. All the US airlines currently serving US-EUR purchased the slots and authorities to operate those routes, no idea why the DOT should give B6 LHR slots for free.
Boiler Up!
 
zuckie13
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:35 am

To summarize each of these:

UA/DL/AA/HL "All the other guys applications suck. Pick us!" (Stick out tongue at other airlines).

What is the point of these answers exactly?
Maybe only take responses from airlines that did not apply in future proceedings? Nothing wrong with the JetBlue response, but no point in the others.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:23 am

zuckie13 wrote:
To summarize each of these:

UA/DL/AA/HL "All the other guys applications suck. Pick us!" (Stick out tongue at other airlines).

What is the point of these answers exactly?
Maybe only take responses from airlines that did not apply in future proceedings? Nothing wrong with the JetBlue response, but no point in the others.


If you summarize it that way, then of course it would be like that.
But I like their (sometimes unreasonable) reasoning behind.

I'm now reading American's answer, and they are saying Delta's Northwest and United's Pan Am Narita slots disadvantaged them.
With the US-Japan open skies agreement in effect for 8 years, I think that's garbage.
If you wanted to grow in Japan then you had almost a decade to do so. You have had Narita always open and you even have JAL as an immunized JV partner.
If they had this argument 10 years ago it would have made sense. Not in 2019.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7267
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:35 am

B6's response should be tossed in the garbage and isn't even worth the electrons it was submitted on to the DOT.

Basically a giant non-sequitur.

Granted, I'd are each airline response to "trash" their competitors' application is almost about the same as well.
 
csgnyc
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:43 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:56 am

From what I've read of these answers, it seems like there isn't agreement on the criteria for selection. I always thought it was supposed to be which routes best served US consumers, which to me knocks out HNL, GUM, and LAS service. It also is not supposed to be about making things "fair" -- for example, I would give UA a LAX-HND slot sooner than I would give AA a 2nd slot on this route, because having AA, DL, and UA all compete on the route is better for consumers than only 2 carriers. Finally, I don't see much in either AA's or UA's answers on the benefit of the joint ventures -- awarding AA DFW-HND or UA IAH-HND also opens up connections to all of the Japan cities served by HND; because DL lacks a HND partner it doesn't offer any of these benefits.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:26 am

This claim by Delta is amazingly absurd.

Image

My answer: Just take a bus to Narita.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7267
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:48 am

Now that’s just silly and stuff like that discredits other elements that might have some merit.
 
tcaeyx
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 11:32 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:41 am

csgnyc wrote:
From what I've read of these answers, it seems like there isn't agreement on the criteria for selection. I always thought it was supposed to be which routes best served US consumers, which to me knocks out HNL, GUM, and LAS service. It also is not supposed to be about making things "fair" -- for example, I would give UA a LAX-HND slot sooner than I would give AA a 2nd slot on this route, because having AA, DL, and UA all compete on the route is better for consumers than only 2 carriers. Finally, I don't see much in either AA's or UA's answers on the benefit of the joint ventures -- awarding AA DFW-HND or UA IAH-HND also opens up connections to all of the Japan cities served by HND; because DL lacks a HND partner it doesn't offer any of these benefits.


Sure, but for all intents and purposes, UA already flies LAX-HND. Not sure how well their metal-to-metal argument will stand when they're metal-neutral with NH.
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:32 am

N174UA wrote:
Swadian wrote:
I doubt Doug Parker is going to get anything beside DFW #1 and LAS. Probably won't get DFW #2, or LAX because they'd already have 1 each to those.

Using their "no JV partner" argument DL may end up getting 5 frequencies except HNL #2, completely ditching NRT by deploying the biggest aircraft they can find to HND-HNL (A359 or 77E?).

As the only non-US3 carrier I bet HA will get at least 1 HNL.

The rest go to UA probably HND-GUM, HND-IAH, HND-EWR, HND-IAD. Probably not going to get LAX or ORD because NH already does those.

The wild card here is JL / NH. Each of them are going to get 6 frequencies and they'll likely backfill any destinations missing from their respective partners. JL probably going to go double-daily on ORD-TYO split HND / NRT with AA axing ORD-NRT. Possibly SEA, SAN, BOS, either LAX or DFW, and either PHL or MIA. Could even be both PHL and MIA with AA covering HND-LAX/DFW. That gives a well-balanced network for AA/JL JV. A lot of this has to do with how they schedule connections, because TYO is virtually the only reasonable hub for OW TPAC connecting pax, whereas UA/DL have partners in ICN and PEK.


Why would DL want to put their newest, largest aircraft like the A359 or 77E on low-yield beach market route like HNL? if it were a high-yield route, they would have made it a much higher priority in their application; yet HNL is #5 with an older aircraft that is long paid for. The A359 and 77E are way too much plane for HNL-HND.

In UA's application, they include several letters from senators and governors advocating for the routes, along with showing how strong their JV's are. In contrast, DL instead focused on the economic and competitive arguments for why they should receive their requests. DL and HA will be the big winners this round...with UA and AA getting a few crumbs for good measure.


DL's 77E are "new" and "large" aircraft? Not really. If they want to get out of NRT hell or high water, they may put a bigger plane on the route just to get rid of one HNL frequency.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:32 am

grbauc wrote:
Swadian wrote:
I doubt Doug Parker is going to get anything beside DFW #1 and LAS. Probably won't get DFW #2, or LAX because they'd already have 1 each to those.

Using their "no JV partner" argument DL may end up getting 5 frequencies except HNL #2, completely ditching NRT by deploying the biggest aircraft they can find to HND-HNL (A359 or 77E?).

As the only non-US3 carrier I bet HA will get at least 1 HNL.

The rest go to UA probably HND-GUM, HND-IAH, HND-EWR, HND-IAD. Probably not going to get LAX or ORD because NH already does those.

The wild card here is JL / NH. Each of them are going to get 6 frequencies and they'll likely backfill any destinations missing from their respective partners. JL probably going to go double-daily on ORD-TYO split HND / NRT with AA axing ORD-NRT. Possibly SEA, SAN, BOS, either LAX or DFW, and either PHL or MIA. Could even be both PHL and MIA with AA covering HND-LAX/DFW. That gives a well-balanced network for AA/JL JV. A lot of this has to do with how they schedule connections,[color=#FFFF40] because TYO is virtually the only reasonable hub for OW TPAC connecting pax, [/color]whereas UA/DL have partners in ICN and PEK.



And why does HKG not work? I use Cathay Pacific and get it more then I do JL when booking on AA.com


HKG is too far south and too far east. IF JL were stronger and had more slots TYO could handle everything HKG can and then some.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:35 am

FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...

To be honest, I can't say I really blame them. But almost all AA's argument against Delta's entire application had to do with PDX-HND. Very interesting.


Perhaps JL wants to launch PDX-HND or PDX-NRT right behind their SEA-NRT.

Anyone smell a tie-up between AA and HA? AA only said HA shouldn't get 4th and 5th HND frequencies before they get LAS, and HA only rebutted AA's 2nd LAX and DFW while questioning AA's "commitment" to LAS. Not to mention Ingram and Carty on the HA Board are both former AA.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 892
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:58 am

Swadian wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...

To be honest, I can't say I really blame them. But almost all AA's argument against Delta's entire application had to do with PDX-HND. Very interesting.


Perhaps JL wants to launch PDX-HND or PDX-NRT right behind their SEA-NRT.

Anyone smell a tie-up between AA and HA? AA only said HA shouldn't get 4th and 5th HND frequencies before they get LAS, and HA only rebutted AA's 2nd LAX and DFW while questioning AA's "commitment" to LAS. Not to mention Ingram and Carty on the HA Board are both former AA.


Currently HA and AA codeshare while HA/JL and AA/JL have their separate JVs. Is it possible that they could create one transpacific JV? Probably some stupid wishful thinking...
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:42 pm

Image
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
FSDan
Posts: 2480
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:37 pm

tcaeyx wrote:
csgnyc wrote:
From what I've read of these answers, it seems like there isn't agreement on the criteria for selection. I always thought it was supposed to be which routes best served US consumers, which to me knocks out HNL, GUM, and LAS service. It also is not supposed to be about making things "fair" -- for example, I would give UA a LAX-HND slot sooner than I would give AA a 2nd slot on this route, because having AA, DL, and UA all compete on the route is better for consumers than only 2 carriers. Finally, I don't see much in either AA's or UA's answers on the benefit of the joint ventures -- awarding AA DFW-HND or UA IAH-HND also opens up connections to all of the Japan cities served by HND; because DL lacks a HND partner it doesn't offer any of these benefits.


Sure, but for all intents and purposes, UA already flies LAX-HND. Not sure how well their metal-to-metal argument will stand when they're metal-neutral with NH.


I'm kind of confused about what level of cooperation UA and NH have via their JV... In UA's rebuttal against DL, they go to significant lengths to downplay the JV and make it sound like they have no control over frequencies awarded to NH, and therefore request that they should get plenty of their own awards. Is that just misleading, or do they really not work with NH to put the two carriers' combined portfolio of frequencies to the best use? I'm assuming they're just trying to grab as many frequencies as possible by claiming that the JV isn't a significant factor...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
ShinyAndChrome
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:53 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:28 am

FSDan wrote:
tcaeyx wrote:
csgnyc wrote:
From what I've read of these answers, it seems like there isn't agreement on the criteria for selection. I always thought it was supposed to be which routes best served US consumers, which to me knocks out HNL, GUM, and LAS service. It also is not supposed to be about making things "fair" -- for example, I would give UA a LAX-HND slot sooner than I would give AA a 2nd slot on this route, because having AA, DL, and UA all compete on the route is better for consumers than only 2 carriers. Finally, I don't see much in either AA's or UA's answers on the benefit of the joint ventures -- awarding AA DFW-HND or UA IAH-HND also opens up connections to all of the Japan cities served by HND; because DL lacks a HND partner it doesn't offer any of these benefits.


Sure, but for all intents and purposes, UA already flies LAX-HND. Not sure how well their metal-to-metal argument will stand when they're metal-neutral with NH.


I'm kind of confused about what level of cooperation UA and NH have via their JV... In UA's rebuttal against DL, they go to significant lengths to downplay the JV and make it sound like they have no control over frequencies awarded to NH, and therefore request that they should get plenty of their own awards. Is that just misleading, or do they really not work with NH to put the two carriers' combined portfolio of frequencies to the best use? I'm assuming they're just trying to grab as many frequencies as possible by claiming that the JV isn't a significant factor...


UA won't have any control over how many slots the Japanese government allocates but seeing as there's only two carriers in the running and NH is considered the "favored child" politically, it's almost inconcievable that they'd end up with less than half at least.

As for what NH would do with their slots, the JV means that UA and NH can cooperate on route planning decisions like a single entity but to my knowledge it's not like they can force each other to do anything.

So it's not a lie but I'd put some asterisks on it all the same.
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2328
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:49 am

727200 wrote:
I find it amazing the typical DL fan boys salivating in their wildest dreams that 5 slots should go to DL because they couldn't find a JV partner and so for their mismanagement, they should be the big winner. Not going to happen. If you can't compete, get out of the business. Don't expect the great socialist State to bail your butt out.


I think the opposite is true. UA and AA can offer more than just o/d to Haneda, they can offer connections onward in Japan via their JV partners. Their routes are also more viable with feed to their routes from both ends vs. just US feed for DL. DL's past history of slot-squatting might hurt them, too.

If the DOT is looking out for the best interest of the flying public as they say, they should promote competition between the strongest. This means giving most if not all of the slots equally to AA and UA, and little or nothing to DL and HA.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:55 am

IPFreely wrote:
I think the opposite is true. UA and AA can offer more than just o/d to Haneda, they can offer connections onward in Japan via their JV partners. Their routes are also more viable with feed to their routes from both ends vs. just US feed for DL. DL's past history of slot-squatting might hurt them, too.

If the DOT is looking out for the best interest of the flying public as they say, they should promote competition between the strongest. This means giving most if not all of the slots equally to AA and UA, and little or nothing to DL and HA.

I certainly agree that AA and UA can provide feed beyond Haneda, and that it would be beneficial for both the two JV alliances and passengers alike. However, that traffic should honestly be flowed through Narita. At least for now. The reason that the U.S. airlines want access to Haneda in the first place is for it's closer proximity to downtown Tokyo. So starting routes to Haneda in which most of the traffic would end up connecting to other destinations in Asia would be a complete waste of slots. Meanwhile, connecting traffic with no slot restrictions should flow through Narita because that would free up slots at Haneda for the needed O&D traffic. I think Delta will get 4 slots, AA and UA get 3 each, and HA gets 2.

727200 wrote:
I find it amazing the typical DL fan boys salivating in their wildest dreams that 5 slots should go to DL because they couldn't find a JV partner and so for their mismanagement, they should be the big winner. Not going to happen. If you can't compete, get out of the business. Don't expect the great socialist State to bail your butt out.

Who would Delta partner with? There isn't a 3rd "legacy" airline in Japan that would make sense for Delta to partner with. NH and JL are already taken. The only airlines left in Japan that are open for possible partnership are mostly low-cost carriers, and obviously that's not going to happen.
 
User avatar
jbpdx
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:34 am

FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...


Whew. American lobbying for Portland to lose its longtime nonstop to Tokyo. Keep piling on and I could see AA running less than half full in and out of PDX.

DOT will give Delta a fair shake because of American’s relationship with JL and membership in OneWorld, United’s ties to NH/Star Alliance, and the fact that Delta doesn’t have an alliance partner in Japan.
 
User avatar
Pudelhund
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:06 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:31 am

I am a Delta frequent flyer, but I generally think United makes the most compelling case. The sheer gap in capacity between the proposals look most attractive for the American consumer and EWR/ORD/IAD look very solid for US-based metal to represent.
 
AS737MAX
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 1:48 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:58 am

jbpdx wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...


Whew. American lobbying for Portland to lose its longtime nonstop to Tokyo. Keep piling on and I could see AA running less than half full in and out of PDX.

DOT will give Delta a fair shake because of American’s relationship with JL and membership in OneWorld, United’s ties to NH/Star Alliance, and the fact that Delta doesn’t have an alliance partner in Japan.


'Skewered' is the word that came to mind. It seems that the common theme of the three legacies is that the other two are blatantly wrong, and that they're solely in the right, which is an interesting stance to take. AA argues that PDX-NRT is limited by O/D traffic, but there's already connectors to LAX as the flight numbers continue through, albeit on an A319, and there is no doubt overflow from SEA, etc.

AA's proposed network is perhaps the most surprising of all three, and it'll be interesting to see if they do get LAS-HND. If the market is so big and diverse as they claim, then why has no one else started even Narita? Has any carrier served LAS-TYO in the past? Strangely enough, they point out that UA+NH has greater market coverage in the US-North Pacific market than AA+JL, but only bid on LAS, LAX, and DFW. MIA is kind of out of the question, JFK is anti-Asia traffic, and UA has ORD. Maybe I'm missing something, but DL has built up an Asian (read: Japan, mostly, for the sake of these slot discussions) network in lieu of having a Japanese partner, and yet AA has the gall to bid out of left field and on only on 3 airports, but thinks DL is in the wrong for wanting to maintain PDX service.
 
slowrambler
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:07 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:41 am

jbpdx wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...


Whew. American lobbying for Portland to lose its longtime nonstop to Tokyo. Keep piling on and I could see AA running less than half full in and out of PDX.


Interesting misrepresentation. AA doesn't argue that DL should stop flying Portland-Tokyo, it argues that the flight should be to Narita and not Haneda.
 
sxf24
Posts: 856
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:21 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
Image


Well, Seattle had a HND flight and we all know how that worked out.
 
pdxav8r
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 3:15 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:39 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Image


Well, Seattle had a HND flight and we all know how that worked out.


Didn’t the original SEA-HND slot have awful ARR/DEP times?
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:32 pm

IPFreely wrote:
727200 wrote:
I find it amazing the typical DL fan boys salivating in their wildest dreams that 5 slots should go to DL because they couldn't find a JV partner and so for their mismanagement, they should be the big winner. Not going to happen. If you can't compete, get out of the business. Don't expect the great socialist State to bail your butt out.


I think the opposite is true. UA and AA can offer more than just o/d to Haneda, they can offer connections onward in Japan via their JV partners. Their routes are also more viable with feed to their routes from both ends vs. just US feed for DL. DL's past history of slot-squatting might hurt them, too.

If the DOT is looking out for the best interest of the flying public as they say, they should promote competition between the strongest. This means giving most if not all of the slots equally to AA and UA, and little or nothing to DL and HA.


This is an inaccurate characterization of Delta (and Northwest) history in Tokyo and Japan. DL/NW maintained a very large hub operation in Tokyo from 1952 until 2010, at which, at its high point provided nonstop TYO service from 9 U.S. gateways and onward to every major city in Asia on Delta metal. The hub was undermined by Japan's recent policy of opening the vastly preferred Haneda airport to international service, but not allowing sufficient frequencies for U.S. carriers to move their hubs. Delta tried (and almost succeeded) in securing JAL as its partner, which would have been the end of AA in Asia, and was causing serious heartburn for U.S. policy makers. As the deal fell out, AA and UA received joint venture partners, and Haneda was suffiecently opened to cause the collapse of DL's Narita hub. Tokyo became a "spoke" exactly as Delta predicted it would, and Delta was forced to re-orient its Asia network around SEA and ICN, albeit at a cost of some U.S. carrier flying in the Pacific.

At minimum, Delta gets the 5 frequencies it needs to preserve Tokyo flying from its current 5 U.S. gateways. It should be clear that any DL gateway not getting HND slots will no longer have Delta service to Tokyo. DOT is not going to want to deliver the news that Portland is losing service, and its almost as inconcievable that Delta would be denied the opportunity to compete on Haneda-Honolulu where every other U.S. carrier/JV partnership offers substantial service.

Likely awards are DL-5, UA-3, AA-3 and HA-1. This preserves DL as a significant competitor for U.S.-Tokyo travelers, and "spreads the wealth" among the other participants. Because JL and NH have and will continue to maintain large hubs at NRT, virtually all of the flow traffic claimed by AA, UA and HA have other alternatives for their connecting passengers.

While its likely that AA will receive 3 slots so as not to be slighted by DOT, they made life difficult for themselves by duplicating LAX and DFW with double daily. ORD would have been a more compelling alternative for at least 1 of their 4 requests. United might just edge them out for IAH vs. DFW #2.
 
slowrambler
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:07 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:52 pm

TigerFlyer wrote:
At minimum, Delta gets the 5 frequencies it needs to preserve Tokyo flying from its current 5 U.S. gateways. It should be clear that any DL gateway not getting HND slots will no longer have Delta service to Tokyo. DOT is not going to want to deliver the news that Portland is losing service, and its almost as inconcievable that Delta would be denied the opportunity to compete on Haneda-Honolulu where every other U.S. carrier/JV partnership offers substantial service.


Why exactly should DOT reward a threat to terminate PDX-Tokyo if DL is not allowed to move it to Haneda? Sounds extortionate.

I even buy the argument that DL should get some preferential treatment to ensure that it can provide an ex-HND schedule competitive with the two JVs. But IMO I find it hard to see the case for Portland to get Haneda being stronger than Las Vegas.

(Aside: as people have mentioned above, if AA and UA want to maintain international connectivity in Tokyo, they need to still fly to NRT; HND's use as an international connecting point is pretty minimal. But DL can't offer those connections from either.)
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:03 pm

slowrambler wrote:
jbpdx wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Dang, AA really argued hard against DL's proposed PDX-HND route...


Whew. American lobbying for Portland to lose its longtime nonstop to Tokyo. Keep piling on and I could see AA running less than half full in and out of PDX.


Interesting misrepresentation. AA doesn't argue that DL should stop flying Portland-Tokyo, it argues that the flight should be to Narita and not Haneda.

We all know that it's only a matter of time before DL stops flying to Narita altogether. If Delta doesn't get this slot, that route is probably a gonner.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:20 pm

="slowrambler"

Why exactly should DOT reward a threat to terminate PDX-Tokyo if DL is not allowed to move it to Haneda? Sounds extortionate.

I even buy the argument that DL should get some preferential treatment to ensure that it can provide an ex-HND schedule competitive with the two JVs. But IMO I find it hard to see the case for Portland to get Haneda being stronger than Las Vegas.

(Aside: as people have mentioned above, if AA and UA want to maintain international connectivity in Tokyo, they need to still fly to NRT; HND's use as an international connecting point is pretty minimal. But DL can't offer those connections from either.)


Delta and Portland have a long history of cooperation, and the Portland business community has been very supportive. But for that, Portland would not enjoy the substantial level of international service they have today. It's not extortionist; its just commercial reality. Portland is the smallest DL TYO gateway and will no longer be viable as a stand-alone orphaned NRT route (with massively increased HND competition) when the other DL services are all moved to HND. Delta PDX-TYO traffic would be routed via SEA, and PDX might receive DL Asia service via ICN. It would be a shame to see PDX-HND ceded to JAL or ANA after DL operated the route for so long and have the backing of the community.

LAS is America's lowest-priority "throw away" bid for its #4 request. They know they are not going to get 4 slots. Any "ask" not funded by DOT will be served by JAL if it is a priority for the joint venture. Since most LAS traffic is Japan point of sale, it makes more sense to JAL to operate with its stronger brand/service loyalty in Japan.

Contrary to what you think, HND is a huge international gateway for JAL and ANA. They have agreements with every major country in Asia to operate to/from HND. For example, the level of service to PEK and PVG dwarfs that operated at NRT. HND is a much larger, 4-runway airport the size of JFK (the 4th largest in the world by passenger volume). JAL and ANA would prefer to relocate most of their operations to HND if they could, but are forced to maintain NRT as an international hub of due to pressure from their Government. If the market were left to run its course, NRT would become purely LCC, charter and cargo.
 
slowrambler
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:07 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:27 pm

TigerFlyer wrote:
Contrary to what you think, HND is a huge international gateway for JAL and ANA. They have agreements with every major country in Asia to operate to/from HND. For example, the level of service to PEK and PVG dwarfs that operated at NRT. HND is a much larger, 4-runway airport the size of JFK (the 4th largest in the world by passenger volume). JAL and ANA would prefer to relocate most of their operations to HND if they could, but are forced to maintain NRT as an international hub of due to pressure from their Government. If the market were left to run its course, NRT would become purely LCC, charter and cargo.


I am quite aware of the size of HND versus NRT. I am also aware that as a matter of practicality, doing an I-I transfer at HND will involve incredibly long waits, and will not be possible for an enormous number of destinations that are served from NRT. Whether NH and JL would really like to move completely to HND in the future is irrelevant for operations now.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:57 pm

slowrambler wrote:

I am quite aware of the size of HND versus NRT. I am also aware that as a matter of practicality, doing an I-I transfer at HND will involve incredibly long waits, and will not be possible for an enormous number of destinations that are served from NRT. Whether NH and JL would really like to move completely to HND in the future is irrelevant for operations now.


Why do you predict difficulty and long waits in making I-I connections at HND? The terminal is well laid out, minimal walking, and plenty of service. For example, in the PM hours that would align with US-HND service, on HND-PEK JAL and ANA operate, respectively 5:15pm and 5:25pm departures, offering excellent connectivity. Its telling that Haneda has been renamed "Haneda International Airport." AA, UA and HA all claim HND connectivity as benefits. Do you doubt them?
 
airportlover
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:36 pm

TigerFlyer wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
727200 wrote:
I find it amazing the typical DL fan boys salivating in their wildest dreams that 5 slots should go to DL because they couldn't find a JV partner and so for their mismanagement, they should be the big winner. Not going to happen. If you can't compete, get out of the business. Don't expect the great socialist State to bail your butt out.


I think the opposite is true. UA and AA can offer more than just o/d to Haneda, they can offer connections onward in Japan via their JV partners. Their routes are also more viable with feed to their routes from both ends vs. just US feed for DL. DL's past history of slot-squatting might hurt them, too.

If the DOT is looking out for the best interest of the flying public as they say, they should promote competition between the strongest. This means giving most if not all of the slots equally to AA and UA, and little or nothing to DL and HA.


This is an inaccurate characterization of Delta (and Northwest) history in Tokyo and Japan. DL/NW maintained a very large hub operation in Tokyo from 1952 until 2010, at which, at its high point provided nonstop TYO service from 9 U.S. gateways and onward to every major city in Asia on Delta metal. The hub was undermined by Japan's recent policy of opening the vastly preferred Haneda airport to international service, but not allowing sufficient frequencies for U.S. carriers to move their hubs. Delta tried (and almost succeeded) in securing JAL as its partner, which would have been the end of AA in Asia, and was causing serious heartburn for U.S. policy makers. As the deal fell out, AA and UA received joint venture partners, and Haneda was suffiecently opened to cause the collapse of DL's Narita hub. Tokyo became a "spoke" exactly as Delta predicted it would, and Delta was forced to re-orient its Asia network around SEA and ICN, albeit at a cost of some U.S. carrier flying in the Pacific.

At minimum, Delta gets the 5 frequencies it needs to preserve Tokyo flying from its current 5 U.S. gateways. It should be clear that any DL gateway not getting HND slots will no longer have Delta service to Tokyo. DOT is not going to want to deliver the news that Portland is losing service, and its almost as inconcievable that Delta would be denied the opportunity to compete on Haneda-Honolulu where every other U.S. carrier/JV partnership offers substantial service.

Likely awards are DL-5, UA-3, AA-3 and HA-1. This preserves DL as a significant competitor for U.S.-Tokyo travelers, and "spreads the wealth" among the other participants. Because JL and NH have and will continue to maintain large hubs at NRT, virtually all of the flow traffic claimed by AA, UA and HA have other alternatives for their connecting passengers.

While its likely that AA will receive 3 slots so as not to be slighted by DOT, they made life difficult for themselves by duplicating LAX and DFW with double daily. ORD would have been a more compelling alternative for at least 1 of their 4 requests. United might just edge them out for IAH vs. DFW #2.


So true. DL is leaving NRT no matter how many slots they get (barring they only get like 1 slot or something crazy happens). It makes sense for the DOT to award DL more slots because that will preserve US-Tokyo service better. I think DL-5, UA-4, AA-2, and HA-1. AA will get DFW once daily, definitely not twice. That is blatantly unfair if they get twice daily to DFW. And maybe the other AA slot will be for LA. I do think the DOT will find LAS compelling and interesting, but AA kinda just put LAS on there shooting for the moon. UA will definitely get EWR, ORD, and IAD. IAH seems likely, also.
 
kavok
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:08 pm

airportlover wrote:
TigerFlyer wrote:
IPFreely wrote:

I think the opposite is true. UA and AA can offer more than just o/d to Haneda, they can offer connections onward in Japan via their JV partners. Their routes are also more viable with feed to their routes from both ends vs. just US feed for DL. DL's past history of slot-squatting might hurt them, too.

If the DOT is looking out for the best interest of the flying public as they say, they should promote competition between the strongest. This means giving most if not all of the slots equally to AA and UA, and little or nothing to DL and HA.


This is an inaccurate characterization of Delta (and Northwest) history in Tokyo and Japan. DL/NW maintained a very large hub operation in Tokyo from 1952 until 2010, at which, at its high point provided nonstop TYO service from 9 U.S. gateways and onward to every major city in Asia on Delta metal. The hub was undermined by Japan's recent policy of opening the vastly preferred Haneda airport to international service, but not allowing sufficient frequencies for U.S. carriers to move their hubs. Delta tried (and almost succeeded) in securing JAL as its partner, which would have been the end of AA in Asia, and was causing serious heartburn for U.S. policy makers. As the deal fell out, AA and UA received joint venture partners, and Haneda was suffiecently opened to cause the collapse of DL's Narita hub. Tokyo became a "spoke" exactly as Delta predicted it would, and Delta was forced to re-orient its Asia network around SEA and ICN, albeit at a cost of some U.S. carrier flying in the Pacific.

At minimum, Delta gets the 5 frequencies it needs to preserve Tokyo flying from its current 5 U.S. gateways. It should be clear that any DL gateway not getting HND slots will no longer have Delta service to Tokyo. DOT is not going to want to deliver the news that Portland is losing service, and its almost as inconcievable that Delta would be denied the opportunity to compete on Haneda-Honolulu where every other U.S. carrier/JV partnership offers substantial service.

Likely awards are DL-5, UA-3, AA-3 and HA-1. This preserves DL as a significant competitor for U.S.-Tokyo travelers, and "spreads the wealth" among the other participants. Because JL and NH have and will continue to maintain large hubs at NRT, virtually all of the flow traffic claimed by AA, UA and HA have other alternatives for their connecting passengers.

While its likely that AA will receive 3 slots so as not to be slighted by DOT, they made life difficult for themselves by duplicating LAX and DFW with double daily. ORD would have been a more compelling alternative for at least 1 of their 4 requests. United might just edge them out for IAH vs. DFW #2.


So true. DL is leaving NRT no matter how many slots they get (barring they only get like 1 slot or something crazy happens). It makes sense for the DOT to award DL more slots because that will preserve US-Tokyo service better. I think DL-5, UA-4, AA-2, and HA-1. AA will get DFW once daily, definitely not twice. That is blatantly unfair if they get twice daily to DFW. And maybe the other AA slot will be for LA. I do think the DOT will find LAS compelling and interesting, but AA kinda just put LAS on there shooting for the moon. UA will definitely get EWR, ORD, and IAD. IAH seems likely, also.


Completely agree. It was all set up for UA and AA to get 3 slots each, and AA turned in a mediocre bid proposing second frequencies at LAX and especially at DFW. At least the LA market is big for Tokyo traffic. If AAs third bid was ORD or PHL instead of DFW#2, they’d be a lock for three. As a result, UA with a very solid proposal may very well get four.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:47 pm

airportlover wrote:
AA will get DFW once daily, definitely not twice. That is blatantly unfair if they get twice daily to DFW. And maybe the other AA slot will be for LA. I do think the DOT will find LAS compelling and interesting, but AA kinda just put LAS on there shooting for the moon. UA will definitely get EWR, ORD, and IAD. IAH seems likely, also.


Yeah, AA's LAS bid is definitely interesting. Clearly not what they want commercially, but a hedge bet if DOT balks at double daily from two AA gateways. I still think AA gets 3 on the basis of competitive balance. I wouldn't say its blatantly unfair to have two at DFW; its just what works best for AA. UA/NH are stronger and more powerful across the Pacific - and AA is in full retreat from ORD-Asia after the stinging losses last year. Its a pity they didn't use this opportunity to shore up ORD-Tokyo to daily on AA metal and ditch the 5x ORD-NRT. (No matter what the proposals say, AA and UA are going to roll back their NRT services if they receive HND awards from the same gateway).

Politics plays a roll in all route cases. Nevada narrowly went to Clinton in 2016, whereas Texas is solidly red. An award by the Administration for LAS might help curry favor in 2020, although both of Nevada's sitting senators are Democrats. Spreading the wealth to include Nevada may be more attractive than two in Texas, regardless of whether its 2x DFW, or 1x DFW and IAD.

For related reasons, I think that some form of "gateway flexability" makes sense. If I were Secretary of Transportation, I would provide for a 5-year sunset on all gateway restrictions on international awards. That is long enough to discourage purely politically motivated proposals, since it is unlikely that a carrier would commit to enduring losses for a prolonged period, but would allow carriers to optimize service patterns to best meet market demand in the long run. At the end of the day, carrier commercial interests and the public interest converge, since carriers want to fly the routes that are most profitable and benefit the most passengers. The Airline Deregulation Act provides for "maximum reliance on competitive market forces" and restricted route case awards that lock carriers into a particular gateway - forever - does not do that. Carriers still have a high degree accountability to the communities and customers they serve, and would not move gateways that have been operating for 5 years without a compelling reason. Hopefully after the dust settles on this route case, the carriers can get together and come up with a joint petition for DOT covering all restricted international markets. Everyone wants it for one situation or another, but no one wants a competitor to get an advantage you don't enjoy.
 
airportlover
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:15 pm

This is a little off topic, but NYC has 5 daily frequencies to Tokyo currently. So does Chicago. LAX has 9 frequencies, and SFO has 4 (plus 1 from SJC). Doesn’t it seem a little odd that NYC only has 5 daily flights? Shouldn’t there be more? This is why I think United will maintain EWR-NRT if they’re awarded EWR-HND.
 
chonetsao
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:55 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:18 pm

TigerFlyer wrote:
airportlover wrote:
AA will get DFW once daily, definitely not twice. That is blatantly unfair if they get twice daily to DFW. And maybe the other AA slot will be for LA. I do think the DOT will find LAS compelling and interesting, but AA kinda just put LAS on there shooting for the moon. UA will definitely get EWR, ORD, and IAD. IAH seems likely, also.


Yeah, AA's LAS bid is definitely interesting. Clearly not what they want commercially, but a hedge bet if DOT balks at double daily from two AA gateways. I still think AA gets 3 on the basis of competitive balance. I wouldn't say its blatantly unfair to have two at DFW; its just what works best for AA. UA/NH are stronger and more powerful across the Pacific - and AA is in full retreat from ORD-Asia after the stinging losses last year. Its a pity they didn't use this opportunity to shore up ORD-Tokyo to daily on AA metal and ditch the 5x ORD-NRT. (No matter what the proposals say, AA and UA are going to roll back their NRT services if they receive HND awards from the same gateway).

Politics plays a roll in all route cases. Nevada narrowly went to Clinton in 2016, whereas Texas is solidly red. An award by the Administration for LAS might help curry favor in 2020, although both of Nevada's sitting senators are Democrats. Spreading the wealth to include Nevada may be more attractive than two in Texas, regardless of whether its 2x DFW, or 1x DFW and IAD.

For related reasons, I think that some form of "gateway flexability" makes sense. If I were Secretary of Transportation, I would provide for a 5-year sunset on all gateway restrictions on international awards. That is long enough to discourage purely politically motivated proposals, since it is unlikely that a carrier would commit to enduring losses for a prolonged period, but would allow carriers to optimize service patterns to best meet market demand in the long run. At the end of the day, carrier commercial interests and the public interest converge, since carriers want to fly the routes that are most profitable and benefit the most passengers. The Airline Deregulation Act provides for "maximum reliance on competitive market forces" and restricted route case awards that lock carriers into a particular gateway - forever - does not do that. Carriers still have a high degree accountability to the communities and customers they serve, and would not move gateways that have been operating for 5 years without a compelling reason. Hopefully after the dust settles on this route case, the carriers can get together and come up with a joint petition for DOT covering all restricted international markets. Everyone wants it for one situation or another, but no one wants a competitor to get an advantage you don't enjoy.


Personally I think you read WAY TOO MUCHfor a simple slot request application.

Nevertheless, you may find some fans around this forum.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:52 pm

airportlover wrote:
This is a little off topic, but NYC has 5 daily frequencies to Tokyo currently. So does Chicago. LAX has 9 frequencies, and SFO has 4 (plus 1 from SJC). Doesn’t it seem a little odd that NYC only has 5 daily flights? Shouldn’t there be more? This is why I think United will maintain EWR-NRT if they’re awarded EWR-HND.


5 daily is more than enough for NYC local demand. That said, to be honest, I was surprised that DL did not bid JFK-HND as its #6 "throw away" proposal instead of HND-HNL #2. The danger was, I suppose, that if they were awarded it, they would have to fly it, and the P&L forecast was obviously deep in the red. NW tried it (NRT) and failed. DL tried it (NRT) and failed. AA tried it (HND) and failed. The journey is long enough that a loyal DL customer traveling NYC-HND is not terribly inconvenienced by making a connection in DTW, and can depart/arrive from DL's closer-in LGA hub. Still, they are the only major player without nonstop NYC-TYO service on their own metal or jv partner.

Geography does not favor NYC, whereas LAX, ORD, SFO all have both sizable local markets and large, non-circuitous catchment areas served via those hubs. Airport congestion, customs, etc. are all problematic at NYC.

United (at EWR) and ANA (at JFK) have NYC local traffic well covered. East coast flow traffic is well served via IAD or ORD, which is why EWR-NRT is likely to have a very limited shelf life. UA will probably fly it for summer 2020, but it will quietly disappear in winter 2020-21. They are very unlikely to be called on it as a route case default.

Japan's polulation is in decline, and its economy has been stagnant for years. There is zero justification for additive service as a result of HND opening. This is just shifting service from one airport to the other - though it will be a major improvement for Tokyo travelers.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:48 pm

chonetsao wrote:

Personally I think you read WAY TOO MUCHfor a simple slot request application.

Nevertheless, you may find some fans around this forum.


That's the way it works. Ever since route case awards were removed by DOT from the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) process 25 years ago (with live witnesses and cross exam of airline executives under oath), the decisions have become much more political. Its all up to the Secretary of Transportation who takes her direction from the White House and is influenced by the Hill. To be fair, I think DOT has done a pretty good job of balancing the political pressure vs. the merits, but anyone who does not think that politics plays a very substantial role in these decisions is seriously mistaken.

This is not a simple slot application. It will define U.S.-Japan service and competition for the next 20 years or more. NRT is done, HND is paramount. The way the U.S.-Japan bilateral works, "slots" are simply code for limited-entry "frequencies." Getting the slot allocation right, so that competition is fair and balanced is critically important. And, since these are the last HND slots US carriers are likely to get for a very, very long time, freezing the gateways forever does not make sense.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1857
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:53 am

chonetsao wrote:
So far DL is the public enemy number one? What did DL do to deserve this? (genuine puzzled, not a DL fanboy nor DLs hateman)


My guess is AA and UA realize that DL will be awarded at least an equal number of routes, if not more than either of them but if DL is allowed to get PDX in addition to SEA, DTW and ATL, DL will be able to close their ops at NRT and still operate all their existing Tokyo services since they already have MSP and LAX. If AA/UA can squash the PDX request, they can possibly force DL to keep a very expensive operation at NRT open for 1 or 2 daily flights (assuming DL doesn't get HNL #2) or they could see DL simply cancel the PDX service to Tokyo all together and consolidate the remainder at HND. I believe the PDX request is the weakest and therefore vulnerable.

I'm still very surprised that DL didn't apply for JFK.
Every zoo is a petting zoo......if you're a man!
 
User avatar
Icedragon23472
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:08 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:56 am

I'm seriously hoping that AA can get slots for DFW, although who was the wise guy in AA's BoD that thought that LAS was a good idea? I wish that AA could do JFK-HND again someday
MIA-HND WHEN
MIA-NRT WHEN
MCO-NRT WHEN
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:05 am

jetblastdubai wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
So far DL is the public enemy number one? What did DL do to deserve this? (genuine puzzled, not a DL fanboy nor DLs hateman)


My guess is AA and UA realize that DL will be awarded at least an equal number of routes, if not more than either of them but if DL is allowed to get PDX in addition to SEA, DTW and ATL, DL will be able to close their ops at NRT and still operate all their existing Tokyo services since they already have MSP and LAX. If AA/UA can squash the PDX request, they can possibly force DL to keep a very expensive operation at NRT open for 1 or 2 daily flights (assuming DL doesn't get HNL #2) or they could see DL simply cancel the PDX service to Tokyo all together and consolidate the remainder at HND. I believe the PDX request is the weakest and therefore vulnerable.

I'm still very surprised that DL didn't apply for JFK.


Why would DL want to keep an entire station like NRT open for just one (maybe two) routes? Makes no sense. DL has VERY CLEARLY STATED that they are leaving NRT. Period.

Why would UA or AA care about the PDX route? Neither carrier or their partners operate it today, nor do they have an interest in doing so. The PDX market has established business connections...all AA can offer is a connection for gamblers to fly across the ocean and lose their money. Are there a lot of people in LAS who want to go to Tokyo? Or is it just Japanese citizens wanting to return home after losing their money? What economic gain can be offered by giving AA daily LAS-HND authority? AA has no loyalty at all in PDX, so why are they so concerned? UA is a fraction of their former self in PDX, and in their response, gave only tepid opposition to PDX-HND.

JFK-TYO is saturated....UA from EWR, NH from EWR, and JL from JFK. It's a proven loser for DL. Don't you think that Delta's revenue and planning departments already know this? Clearly, they have data and analysis that strongly supports their choices for these slots.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:08 am

DL is closing NRT regardless of what any other carrier does. Ideally, DL moves all ex-NRT flights to HND. Less ideally, the flights that don't move to HND are cut. I would be surprised if DL has any NRT ops left at the end of this year. If there's demand, KE will go 2x daily NRT/HNL.

I also would not be surprised if DL requests 5th Freedom to MNL and SIN from HND.
 
steex
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:45 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:26 am

WPvsMW wrote:
DL is closing NRT regardless of what any other carrier does. Ideally, DL moves all ex-NRT flights to HND. Less ideally, the flights that don't move to HND are cut. I would be surprised if DL has any NRT ops left at the end of this year. If there's demand, KE will go 2x daily NRT/HNL.

I also would not be surprised if DL requests 5th Freedom to MNL and SIN from HND.


There is no avenue for DL to request slots to serve non-US destinations, so I think you can safely assume they won't do so. The only way they could maintain service to those destinations is over non-Tokyo cities if they close NRT.
Last edited by steex on Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:45 am

That's a slot problem, true, but not a 5th Freedom problem, and slots at HND are increasing.
"Haneda's slots (total, not slot pairs) will increase by 39,000 per annum, from 447,000 to 486,000. The additional slots will all be for international flights. There are an existing 90,000 available slots for international services (at daytime and night-time hours), so international will have 129,000 slots. Details of the allocation (day/night, airline, etc.) have yet to be announced, but the additional gate space is scheduled to be available from Mar-2020."
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ows-401552

Without a JP partner, I think DL will try to revive 5th freedom rights from HND as soon as it can get slots... probably post-2020 Olympics.
 
steex
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:45 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:33 am

WPvsMW wrote:
That's a slot problem, true, but not a 5th Freedom problem, and slots at HND are increasing.
"Haneda's slots (total, not slot pairs) will increase by 39,000 per annum, from 447,000 to 486,000. The additional slots will all be for international flights. There are an existing 90,000 available slots for international services (at daytime and night-time hours), so international will have 129,000 slots. Details of the allocation (day/night, airline, etc.) have yet to be announced, but the additional gate space is scheduled to be available from Mar-2020."
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ows-401552

Without a JP partner, I think DL will try to revive 5th freedom rights from HND as soon as it can get slots... probably post-2020 Olympics.


But how would they get slots for fifth freedom? US DOT is never going to choose a non-US destination for a slot award it controls if there is ANY other application, and neither Japan nor Singapore is going to provide a slot to a carrier from another country. At a minimum, this would require unfettered slot flexibility, and I think even then US DOT would restrict the slots to US destinations.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:11 am

IIRC, USDOT has never denied a US carrier beyond rights if the B and C authorities agree to it. A - B - C (DTW - HND - SIN) will have a single flight number, even if the equipment changes at B, as it now does on DL 166 /167.
 
steex
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:45 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:24 am

WPvsMW wrote:
IIRC, USDOT has never denied a US carrier beyond rights if the B and C authorities agree to it. A - B - C (DTW - HND - SIN) will have a single flight number, even if the equipment changes at B, as it now does on DL 166 /167.


You're going back and forth between rights and slots. The competitive awards at HND are for slots, and the USDOT is theoretically maximizing US economic benefit in its award of slots at HND. Even if there are more slots available in the future, USDOT will never see HND-SIN on DL as a greater benefit to US interests than any proposed HND-USA route being applied for simultaneously. Even if DTW-HND-SIN has a single flight number, the full routing would requite two HND slot pairs, not one.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:38 am

We disagree as to how USDOT may treat a future 5th Freedom request. Neither you nor I are USDOT, and the time is not yet 2020.

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