Page 8 of 16

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

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:35 pm
by jbpdx
FA9295 wrote:
jbpdx wrote:
There are three US airlines/alliances (UA/Star Alliance, DL/SkyTeam, AA/OneWorld) and two Japanese airlines (JL/OneWorld, NH/Star Alliance). Who exactly is Delta supposed to partner with in Japan?

No one. That's the main argument that Delta is making as to why they should have the majority of the HND slots.



Makes sense. 4/12 for sure. KE PDX-ICN makes little sense with regard to Portland—Japan travelers.

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

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:44 pm
by luckyone
MSPNWA wrote:

DL's entire application is "woe is me, I don't have a JV to Japan" (although they do now to ICN - think DL is complaining about controlling that market?). It's pushing the the DOT to "right the wrong" of two JVs they failed to secure in Japan. The DOT's job is not to"fix" past business decisions, although I expect they will and improperly award at least 5 frequencies to DL.

As has been mentioned...ICN is not operating an arrangement of metering access and subjecting route approvals to a government applications. The US and South Korea have open skies and any airline is free to open any route to ICN any time they please. Given to the very nature of this topic that is clearly not the case with HND. Furthermore, nothing is stopping UA (or at a serious stretch AA) from forming a JV with Asiana. Delta, to my knowledge and please correct me if needed, has not complained about being "wronged" with regards to lacking a Japanese partner. They're merely observing that UA/AA effectively have access to more than the 12 slots nominally available to US carriers, and thus the revenue, and they aren't the only one with that disadvantage.

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 12:42 am
by nomorerjs
I doubt DL will get all 6 or even 5 requests.

My locks:

AA:
DFW (1)
LAS
LAX

DL:
ATL
DTW
PDX
SEA

HA:
HNL

UA:
EWR
IAD
ORD

Each of the big 3 get 3 with DL getting 4 and HA getting one. That leaves 1 open, let the games begin!

JL:
BOS
DFW (AA guaranteed 1, this will supplement)
LAX
ORD (AA drops NRT).
SEA

NH:
DEN
EWR
IAH
LAX
SFO

This leaves 2 open routes. GUM, HNL, MIA?

Sorry CLT, PHL, and PHX.

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 12:59 am
by klakzky123
jrkmsp wrote:
enilria wrote:
OA412 wrote:
Why go through all that when they could have just applied for SLC-HND in this round? As a brand new route in the US-Tokyo market, it would have a high likelihood of being selected. I think they applied for PDX-HND because they actually want to fly the route, and they probably have corporate contracts that depend on them serving Tokyo from PDX.


UA also has 5th freedom rights at NRT that they're not using at all. Would the Japanese even allow either carrier to sell those rights off at this point? I highly doubt it.

The rights are ultimately the property of the U.S. govt. I'm fairly sure that a foreign govt can't dictate which carrier uses rights allocated to the United States absent something like anti-trust.


US-Japan is an Open Skies market now. ANY carrier can fly 5th freedom ex-NRT. Haneda is a special carve-out because of the slot regime, but the rest of the Japan-US market, any flag carrier of either country is eligible to fly 5th freedom flights.

Same applies to US-S.Korea — if Delta wants to move its fifth freedom flights to ICN, it's just a matter of getting the slots from the airport operator (and making sure they don't infuriate their JV partner).


That's not true. Most airlines have to request the right to operate a particular fifth freedom route from the Japanese government regardless of whether the two countries have an Open Skies treaty. And consequently, the Japanese government has the ability to reject an airline's request to operate a particular fifth freedom route.

There is, however, two exceptions. The 1952 bilateral gave two passenger airlines (Pan Am and NW) and one cargo airline unlimited and unrestricted abilities to launch fifth freedom routes from Japan. Later revisions to the treaty granted reciprocal rights to ANA and JAL (which are still in effect) so both of those carriers can have fifth freedom routes from the US. But again, its only restricted to those two. Any other US carrier that wanted to launch fifth freedom routes via Japan would need approval from the Japanese government.

As an example, when Emirates launched its fifth freedom routes between the EU and the US (operating under an open skies treaty), EK still had to get approval from the intermediate country (Italy and Greece).

DL and UA still hold the unique rights of the 1952 treaty that prevent the Japanese government from restricting their ability to launch fifth freedom flights. This is in contrast to every other airline that still must request those rights from the Japanese government if they wanted to launch a new route. Similarly, DL does not have these special rights in South Korea and must request fifth freedom routes from the government which the Korean government can refuse to grant.

Lastly, I'll note that the 2009 MoU between the US and Japan expressly states that the US Government has the right to determine which two carriers get the special fifth freedom rights so to enilria's point, the US government does technically have the ability to assign those routes to another carrier. UA certainly isn't using them and DL will soon stop using them as well. On the other side, ANA and JAL don't use their rights either and the Japanese government can reassign those rights as well (but US fifth freedom routes are pretty useless for the most part).

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:19 am
by PWMRamper
klakzky123 wrote:
jrkmsp wrote:
enilria wrote:
The rights are ultimately the property of the U.S. govt. I'm fairly sure that a foreign govt can't dictate which carrier uses rights allocated to the United States absent something like anti-trust.


US-Japan is an Open Skies market now. ANY carrier can fly 5th freedom ex-NRT. Haneda is a special carve-out because of the slot regime, but the rest of the Japan-US market, any flag carrier of either country is eligible to fly 5th freedom flights.

Same applies to US-S.Korea — if Delta wants to move its fifth freedom flights to ICN, it's just a matter of getting the slots from the airport operator (and making sure they don't infuriate their JV partner).


That's not true. Most airlines have to request the right to operate a particular fifth freedom route from the Japanese government regardless of whether the two countries have an Open Skies treaty. And consequently, the Japanese government has the ability to reject an airline's request to operate a particular fifth freedom route.

There is, however, two exceptions. The 1952 bilateral gave two passenger airlines (Pan Am and NW) and one cargo airline unlimited and unrestricted abilities to launch fifth freedom routes from Japan. Later revisions to the treaty granted reciprocal rights to ANA and JAL (which are still in effect) so both of those carriers can have fifth freedom routes from the US. But again, its only restricted to those two. Any other US carrier that wanted to launch fifth freedom routes via Japan would need approval from the Japanese government.

As an example, when Emirates launched its fifth freedom routes between the EU and the US (operating under an open skies treaty), EK still had to get approval from the intermediate country (Italy and Greece).

DL and UA still hold the unique rights of the 1952 treaty that prevent the Japanese government from restricting their ability to launch fifth freedom flights. This is in contrast to every other airline that still must request those rights from the Japanese government if they wanted to launch a new route. Similarly, DL does not have these special rights in South Korea and must request fifth freedom routes from the government which the Korean government can refuse to grant.

Lastly, I'll note that the 2009 MoU between the US and Japan expressly states that the US Government has the right to determine which two carriers get the special fifth freedom rights so to enilria's point, the US government does technically have the ability to assign those routes to another carrier. UA certainly isn't using them and DL will soon stop using them as well. On the other side, ANA and JAL don't use their rights either and the Japanese government can reassign those rights as well (but US fifth freedom routes are pretty useless for the most part).



Thanks for this post!

So does this mean, for example, that DL could move NRT-MNL to NGO-MNL without any issue whatsoever?

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:09 am
by jrkmsp
klakzky123 wrote:
jrkmsp wrote:
enilria wrote:
The rights are ultimately the property of the U.S. govt. I'm fairly sure that a foreign govt can't dictate which carrier uses rights allocated to the United States absent something like anti-trust.


US-Japan is an Open Skies market now. ANY carrier can fly 5th freedom ex-NRT. Haneda is a special carve-out because of the slot regime, but the rest of the Japan-US market, any flag carrier of either country is eligible to fly 5th freedom flights.

Same applies to US-S.Korea — if Delta wants to move its fifth freedom flights to ICN, it's just a matter of getting the slots from the airport operator (and making sure they don't infuriate their JV partner).


That's not true. Most airlines have to request the right to operate a particular fifth freedom route from the Japanese government regardless of whether the two countries have an Open Skies treaty. And consequently, the Japanese government has the ability to reject an airline's request to operate a particular fifth freedom route.

There is, however, two exceptions. The 1952 bilateral gave two passenger airlines (Pan Am and NW) and one cargo airline unlimited and unrestricted abilities to launch fifth freedom routes from Japan. Later revisions to the treaty granted reciprocal rights to ANA and JAL (which are still in effect) so both of those carriers can have fifth freedom routes from the US. But again, its only restricted to those two. Any other US carrier that wanted to launch fifth freedom routes via Japan would need approval from the Japanese government.

As an example, when Emirates launched its fifth freedom routes between the EU and the US (operating under an open skies treaty), EK still had to get approval from the intermediate country (Italy and Greece).

DL and UA still hold the unique rights of the 1952 treaty that prevent the Japanese government from restricting their ability to launch fifth freedom flights. This is in contrast to every other airline that still must request those rights from the Japanese government if they wanted to launch a new route. Similarly, DL does not have these special rights in South Korea and must request fifth freedom routes from the government which the Korean government can refuse to grant.

Lastly, I'll note that the 2009 MoU between the US and Japan expressly states that the US Government has the right to determine which two carriers get the special fifth freedom rights so to enilria's point, the US government does technically have the ability to assign those routes to another carrier. UA certainly isn't using them and DL will soon stop using them as well. On the other side, ANA and JAL don't use their rights either and the Japanese government can reassign those rights as well (but US fifth freedom routes are pretty useless for the most part).


I completely disagree with your interpretation of the bilateral. It's not consistent with the US government definition of an Open Skies agreement, nor is it consistent with a plain text reading of the bilateral.

Specifically, it says:

Section 1:
"The designated airlines of a Party shall, in accordance with the terms of their designation, be entitled to perform scheduled international air transportation between points on the following routes:

1. Routes for airlines designated by the Government of the United States:
From points behind the United States via the United States and intermediate points to a point or points in Japan and beyond."

"Section 4:
1. Each airline of a party may, on any or all of its flights and at its option:

serve behind, intermediate, and beyond points and points in the territories of the Parties on the routes in any order and in any combination."

It continues to outline that service is allowed with any aircraft provided the service continues to/from the country of origin.

Now you might throw back at me that it only talks about "designated airlines." But, if you go back to the very beginning of the 2009 MOU, it says:

"Rights of Airlines
The delegations noted that the 1952 Agreement and the 2009 MOU implementing the 1952 Agreement allow for unlimited designations by both Parties of airlines to operate pursuant to the Annex of the 2009 MOU."

In other words, by 2009 any airline could be designated by the Government of the US to operate in accordance with the rest of the 1952 and 2009 agreement.

Further, it is US government policy to negotiate Open Skies agreements inclusive of the first five freedoms of the air.

All that can be verified here: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/133720.pdf

It's also worth pointing out that in their 2010 MOU, they specifically repudiate and clarify that nothing in the 2009 MOU should be interpreted to allow seventh freedom flights, implicitly restarting that other freedoms are allowed. That's here:

https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/150284.pdf

And, just for good measure, here are several articles that state at various times and various ways that unlimited fifth freedom flights were negotiated as part of the US-Japan Open Skies Agreement:

First, that an airline can be in violation of an Open Skies agreement in the exercise of its negotiated right is patently false and grossly hypocritical. Indeed, the Japan-U.S. bilateral air transport agreement provides unlimited fifth freedom traffic rights for U.S. air carriers serving destinations in Far East Asia beyond Japan. For decades, U.S. airlines such as Northwest, United and Delta have offered Fifth Freedom flights when it made commercial sense to do so. In fact, Delta still has a significant Fifth Freedom operation at Tokyo Narita.
source: http://www.businesstravelcoalition.com/ ... lines.html

And US airlines have available to a wide array of open skies markets with fifth (and sometimes seventh) freedom rights, although, outside North Asia, the rights are rarely exercised. US policy has also permitted the formation of metal neutral JVs where open skies agreements exist, notably across the North Atlantic and in the US-Japan market.But there are signs that we may have passed the zenith of international liberalism in aviation. source: https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... eas-408370

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:17 am
by FA9295
MSPNWA wrote:
So PDX-NRT, a a flight that is currently isn't daily for most of the year, uses some connections on both ends (on the US side, that means because the fares are cheap. Cheap fares = weak demand that isn't serving the high demand), and still has trouble filling up sees an increase to daily, a loss of connections on one end, and an upgauge? No wonder DL wanted "flexibility" with frequencies.

Several things to point out here:
1). PDX-HND will have more demand due to the closer location to downtown Tokyo, in comparison to PDX-NRT.
2). It is daily for most of the year, just not during the middle part of the winter season.
3). The "flexibility" has to do with the departure/arrival times of the proposed flights, not the number of frequencies. In the proposal, they stated that all of their flights would be daily/year-round, etc.

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:46 pm
by MSPNWA
FA9295 wrote:
Several things to point out here:
1). PDX-HND will have more demand due to the closer location to downtown Tokyo, in comparison to PDX-NRT.
2). It is daily for most of the year, just not during the middle part of the winter season.
3). The "flexibility" has to do with the departure/arrival times of the proposed flights, not the number of frequencies. In the proposal, they stated that all of their flights would be daily/year-round, etc.



1) As we've seen with other HND flights, there isn't an explosion of demand that automatically renders the HND flight much more viable. In one similar case it's quite the opposite (MSP-HND). The lost of onward SIN/MNL connections at NRT will affect PDX-TYO demand. It's only a matter of how much. And PDX-NRT already sees significant LAX connections (likely low yield) to help fill the plane, and that's not the traffic the DOT should prioritize with another HND frequency as it doesn't best serve the public's interest.
2) PDX-NRT is currently scheduled for daily service for about 5 months of the year - two weeks in March, and then late May through late October. Most of 2019 it is 5x weekly.
3) The "flexibility" I'm talking about was DL's earlier denied request to the DOT to grant gateway flexibility to any route authority.

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

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:22 pm
by N174UA
MSPNWA wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
Several things to point out here:
1). PDX-HND will have more demand due to the closer location to downtown Tokyo, in comparison to PDX-NRT.
2). It is daily for most of the year, just not during the middle part of the winter season.
3). The "flexibility" has to do with the departure/arrival times of the proposed flights, not the number of frequencies. In the proposal, they stated that all of their flights would be daily/year-round, etc.



1) As we've seen with other HND flights, there isn't an explosion of demand that automatically renders the HND flight much more viable. In one similar case it's quite the opposite (MSP-HND). The lost of onward SIN/MNL connections at NRT will affect PDX-TYO demand. It's only a matter of how much. And PDX-NRT already sees significant LAX connections (likely low yield) to help fill the plane, and that's not the traffic the DOT should prioritize with another HND frequency as it doesn't best serve the public's interest.
2) PDX-NRT is currently scheduled for daily service for about 5 months of the year - two weeks in March, and then late May through late October. Most of 2019 it is 5x weekly.
3) The "flexibility" I'm talking about was DL's earlier denied request to the DOT to grant gateway flexibility to any route authority.


True, the eventual loss of SIN/MNL connections may have an impact on the PD-TYO demand, but how much, really? In Delta's DOT application, it lists Passengers Daily Each Way (PDEW) for PDX to Asia at 169. Assuming this is an average, how many of that 169 per day that originate in PDX are going on to SIN or MNL? Delta certainly knows, but they don't share it; maybe someone else knows. But other efforts to increase demand will offset that.

Assuming the proposed 14:15 departure for PDX-HND stands, it would make it the last U.S.-Japan nonstop flight of the day to HND on Delta. That means that this route would be used to pick up feed from other Delta hubs, especially from SEA and SLC.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:41 am
by FSDan
MSPNWA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
I think the DOT will probably give UA one or two fewer awards than they give AA, just to try to maintain competitive balance. At some level it is the DOT's job to spread the wealth around, insofar as having a more level playing field benefits consumers through more competition and lower prices. Say the DOT granted all 5 of UA's mainland requests - then NH will get an additional 6 frequencies of their own, and the UA/NH JV would end up with 16 out of the total 36 U.S.-HND flights. Nearly half!


The fatal error in your logic is that NRT and HND have to be separate markets. They are clearly not separate markets. They are strongly complementary. Not fully of course, as HND demand is a little stronger, but they keep each other in check with prices. DL's application is horrible for competitive purposes. They've made no secret that HND flights will replace NRT flights, leaving essentially no increase in capacity to TYO. Not surprisingly they don't mention this desire in the application, unlike UA's honesty in which they label the flights that that are additions and substitutions. And not only is TYO capacity not significantly increased, NRT-SIN/MNL are sure to be gone as well, leaving a net negative capacity/competitive impact for the American consumer.


The NRT/HND dynamic is akin to the LGW/LHR dynamic (except NRT is further out of central Tokyo than LGW is out of central London), and we know how the preferences of high value customers have shaken out in London... UA even points out in their own application that they've noticed a preference among their customers for HND.

Is DL's application "horrible for competitive purposes" if the alternative is DL dropping any destinations they can't move to HND anyway, and ending up with a higher concentration of power in the already-dominant JVs? Because that's the realistic outcome. If DL gets SEA, DTW, and ATL to HND frequencies (an almost certain outcome), you think they'll keep flying PDX, HNL, MNL, and SIN from NRT? It's possible, but very unlikely. I think DL's trying to get out of NRT no matter what at this point, given the competitive realities they've seen so far with the opening up of HND.

MSPNWA wrote:
DL's entire application is "woe is me, I don't have a JV to Japan" (although they do now to ICN - think DL is complaining about controlling that market?). It's pushing the the DOT to "right the wrong" of two JVs they failed to secure in Japan. The DOT's job is not to"fix" past business decisions, although I expect they will and improperly award at least 5 frequencies to DL.


Characterize it as "woe is me" if you'd like to, but that doesn't change the fact that DL is arguing a point that is worth considering. Not having a JV partner in Japan (and unlike how you make it out to be, it's not for a lack of attempt on DL's part...) is a valid reason to prioritize DL's requests in order to preserve the competitive balance at HND - certainly the preferred airport in TYO. I expect the DOT will properly award at least 5 frequencies to DL.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:15 am
by lavalampluva
My question, and I’m sure this has been addressed, but why the move from NRT to HND. I get that HND is closer to Tokyo, but NRT used to be a major hub, and now DL wants out.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:20 am
by SFOtoORD
lavalampluva wrote:
My question, and I’m sure this has been addressed, but why the move from NRT to HND. I get that HND is closer to Tokyo, but NRT used to be a major hub, and now DL wants out.


NRT used to be valuable for DL and UA for 5th freedom flights, but they aren’t that useful anymore with longer range planes and the DL/KE and UA/ANA partnerships. Both airlines would prefer to fly O&D passengers into HND ostensibly to get better yields.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:09 am
by lavalampluva
SFOtoORD wrote:
lavalampluva wrote:
My question, and I’m sure this has been addressed, but why the move from NRT to HND. I get that HND is closer to Tokyo, but NRT used to be a major hub, and now DL wants out.


NRT used to be valuable for DL and UA for 5th freedom flights, but they aren’t that useful anymore with longer range planes and the DL/KE and UA/ANA partnerships. Both airlines would prefer to fly O&D passengers into HND ostensibly to get better yields.

While I understand that imo it would be better if DL had agreements with carriers operating to Asia via HND.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:10 am
by 737max8
I don't get why people complain about the distance to NRT. My train from NRT to Nippori station this weekend took 39 minutes. I live in downtown Dallas and can't even get to DFW in under an hour on the DART.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:23 am
by mrwhistler
737max8 wrote:
I don't get why people complain about the distance to NRT. My train from NRT to Nippori station this weekend took 39 minutes. I live in downtown Dallas and can't even get to DFW in under an hour on the DART.


Getting to Western Tokyo (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Roppongi) is much much faster from Haneda and Western Tokyo is where most travelers want to end up. Not many tourists hanging out in Ueno. Cabs are somewhat reasonably priced and public transport runs frequently.

From the Japanese side, NRT is convenient to Chiba and parts of Eastern Tokyo but is murder to get to from Western Tokyo and Yokohama.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:37 am
by SFOtoORD
lavalampluva wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
lavalampluva wrote:
My question, and I’m sure this has been addressed, but why the move from NRT to HND. I get that HND is closer to Tokyo, but NRT used to be a major hub, and now DL wants out.


NRT used to be valuable for DL and UA for 5th freedom flights, but they aren’t that useful anymore with longer range planes and the DL/KE and UA/ANA partnerships. Both airlines would prefer to fly O&D passengers into HND ostensibly to get better yields.

While I understand that imo it would be better if DL had agreements with carriers operating to Asia via HND.


Sure. It would be great to carry a few people onward from HND, but Tokyo is a huge business market and home to 35M+ people so filling a few flights a day should be doable with mostly O&D.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:32 am
by Swadian
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.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:50 pm
by FSDan
Swadian wrote:
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.


With neither PHL nor MIA having a nonstop flight to East Asia at the time being, and with neither market having TYO as its largest East Asia O&D market, I think NRT flights would be more likely for both destinations. More connections available beyond Japan.

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

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:23 pm
by enilria
FA9295 wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
So PDX-NRT, a a flight that is currently isn't daily for most of the year, uses some connections on both ends (on the US side, that means because the fares are cheap. Cheap fares = weak demand that isn't serving the high demand), and still has trouble filling up sees an increase to daily, a loss of connections on one end, and an upgauge? No wonder DL wanted "flexibility" with frequencies.

Several things to point out here:
1). PDX-HND will have more demand due to the closer location to downtown Tokyo, in comparison to PDX-NRT.
2). It is daily for most of the year, just not during the middle part of the winter season.
3). The "flexibility" has to do with the departure/arrival times of the proposed flights, not the number of frequencies. In the proposal, they stated that all of their flights would be daily/year-round, etc.

According to data I see in MIDT, MSP-HND is the same or smaller than MSP-NRT was because a significant amount of traffic is still flying MSP-NRT, but before MSP-HND was flown there was basically nobody going MSP-HND. So the market is now split over non-stop HND and connects to NRT whereas before all the traffic was NRT. The combined market is about 10% bigger, but the growth is not on the non-stop, but rather the connect traffic.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:21 am
by N174UA
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.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:53 am
by 737max8
mrwhistler wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I don't get why people complain about the distance to NRT. My train from NRT to Nippori station this weekend took 39 minutes. I live in downtown Dallas and can't even get to DFW in under an hour on the DART.


Getting to Western Tokyo (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Roppongi) is much much faster from Haneda and Western Tokyo is where most travelers want to end up. Not many tourists hanging out in Ueno. Cabs are somewhat reasonably priced and public transport runs frequently.

From the Japanese side, NRT is convenient to Chiba and parts of Eastern Tokyo but is murder to get to from Western Tokyo and Yokohama.


Huh? I stayed in Shinjuku. It's not that far. You can get there in like an hour...it's not MURDER. I live 12 miles from DFW and can't get there by public transport in an hour.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:55 am
by 727200
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.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:08 am
by ShinyAndChrome
737max8 wrote:
mrwhistler wrote:
737max8 wrote:
I don't get why people complain about the distance to NRT. My train from NRT to Nippori station this weekend took 39 minutes. I live in downtown Dallas and can't even get to DFW in under an hour on the DART.


Getting to Western Tokyo (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Roppongi) is much much faster from Haneda and Western Tokyo is where most travelers want to end up. Not many tourists hanging out in Ueno. Cabs are somewhat reasonably priced and public transport runs frequently.

From the Japanese side, NRT is convenient to Chiba and parts of Eastern Tokyo but is murder to get to from Western Tokyo and Yokohama.


Huh? I stayed in Shinjuku. It's not that far. You can get there in like an hour...it's not MURDER. I live 12 miles from DFW and can't get there by public transport in an hour.


Agreed. Shinjuku/Shibuya will take noticeably longer from Narita but I wouldn't call it onerous by any stretch. Maybe if you're trying to go to Setagaya or one of the commuter towns to the west, then it becomes a pain.

I'll agree with what he said about Yokohama though, for obvious geographic reasons.

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.


Ah yes, those damn socialists wanting the government to *checks notes* not lock up slot pairs in a capacity constrained airport between two joint ventures.

Curious, how would you carve up these dozen slots? What rationale would you use?

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:31 am
by hkcanadaexpat
737max8 wrote:
Huh? I stayed in Shinjuku. It's not that far. You can get there in like an hour...it's not MURDER. I live 12 miles from DFW and can't get there by public transport in an hour.

Its 84 minutes on the Narita Express from Shinjuku to Narita Terminal 2/3. Add another 3 minutes to Narita Terminal 1. And that's Shinjuku station. Nobody lives in Shijuku Station. So you're looking at close to 2 hrs from people living in greater Shijuku ward.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:40 am
by a19901213
ShinyAndChrome wrote:
737max8 wrote:
mrwhistler wrote:

Getting to Western Tokyo (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Roppongi) is much much faster from Haneda and Western Tokyo is where most travelers want to end up. Not many tourists hanging out in Ueno. Cabs are somewhat reasonably priced and public transport runs frequently.

From the Japanese side, NRT is convenient to Chiba and parts of Eastern Tokyo but is murder to get to from Western Tokyo and Yokohama.


Huh? I stayed in Shinjuku. It's not that far. You can get there in like an hour...it's not MURDER. I live 12 miles from DFW and can't get there by public transport in an hour.


Agreed. Shinjuku/Shibuya will take noticeably longer from Narita but I wouldn't call it onerous by any stretch. Maybe if you're trying to go to Setagaya or one of the commuter towns to the west, then it becomes a pain.

I'll agree with what he said about Yokohama though, for obvious geographic reasons.

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.


Ah yes, those damn socialists wanting the government to *checks notes* not lock up slot pairs in a capacity constrained airport between two joint ventures.

Curious, how would you carve up these dozen slots? What rationale would you use?


Lived in Japan for quite a long time and indeed NRT isn’t that bad for toshin area( CBD inner circular area of Yamamoto line)

Jumped on Skyliner and you are in Ueno for less a hour. Shinjuku, Shibuya or any Minato ku areas aren’t that bad either.

I used to live in several Western Tokyo areas like Setagaya and Tama and travelling to NRT from these areas is like hell.

If you are rich enough to take the taxi every time then HND really is way superior than NRT.

I can be back in my unit in Setagaya from HND in around 30mins with fare of around 6000 yen. As for NRT it would be over 20,000 yen.

For people travelling to Japan NRT really isn’t that bad since most of them would be staying in Toshin.

Plus I really enjoy the 1hr ride to NRT on designated seat train. It gives you the time to cherish what happend during the trip and feel the reluctance of going back home (or Vice versa).

Nevertheless for Tokyo resident HND will probably always be superior choice than NRT.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:19 am
by sagechan
ShinyAndChrome wrote:

Curious, how would you carve up these dozen slots? What rationale would you use?


An auction, with minimum usage requirements.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:31 am
by FA9295
I see a lot of people on here making the argument that just because DL doesn't have a Japanese partner doesn't mean that they should get the majority of the slots. I'm not saying that this argument is not legitimate, but here's just a question for discussion:

Who would have Delta partnered with? I don't know why JL and/or NH would want to partner with DL when they're already partnered with AA and UA. Sure, JL is partnered with HA, but HA isn't currently in an alliance. Most of what's left for DL would be low-cost carriers, which is obviously not gonna happen...

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:42 am
by mpdpilot
This discussion is quite interesting indeed and I am excited about the outcome, I do however have to wonder...

With Delta wanting flexibility in its existing routes, and AA wanting flexibility in its China authorities, and everyone getting all up in arms about "the public good" of these assets. What is the public good?

It isn't like these HND flights have printed money in any market. Can you get from anywhere in the US to HND with a connection? Of course! Is there competition for that? Of course! So how much better off is the public if AA flies DFW-HND or DL flies MSP-HND? Unless you live in DFW or MSP, I would say that it is a wash. Does UA flying IAH-HND provide a noticeable improvement over a second DFW-HND on AA? Probably not.

While there is a lot of history of airlines making requests of the DOT and such, I don't think that matters. The DOT might say it does, but I doubt it plays too much into their decision to award flights because in the end it is mostly a wash and so they will pick the routes that are "best" for the public.

After reading this thread and the other one about DLs request and some other things about AA and China, it is amazing to me how many people disregard the JVs that AA and UA have. These are government approved collusion (which is fine in my opinion). If the DOT doesn't give DL 5/6 at minimum, I would be shocked. Remember these are airlines arguing over who gets to fly where, not passengers arguing about who is flying the route (that would a free market, not what we have here).

If DL can't make terrible hours work on SEA-HND, that isn't DLs fault that is the DOTs fault but that doesn't mean that DL should loose anything, it isn't as if the public is loosing something by DL not flying the route, if there was significant public out cry, DL would have enough passengers to fill the plane. Moving the flight to LAX on AA, might mean more people fly from LAX to HND on AA, but that doesn't mean more people will fly from the US to TYO. I doubt AA is going to offer lower fares out of kindness.

IF the DOT wants to make things as competitive as possible, they should take the what 5+12 slots and allocate them so that each competitor (JVs are counted together because they don't compete, Codeshares are counted seperately, because they do compete) and split them so that each competitor has roughly the same number of flights and airlines should be able to operate them from where ever they choose as long as they operate them. The DOT should really negotiate with the Japanese government due to the fact that Japan and the US both agreed to the JVs so I don't see how the 33 slots (by my count, please correct if I am wrong) shouldn't be split evenly between the JVs and any other carrier that would like to operate them, but that is unlikely :)

Here is my rough math:

Japanese Airlines:
8 - JL
8 - NH

US Airlines
8 - DL (DL only asked for 8, I would give them 10, one each from AA, and UA)
2 - HA (JL)
3 - AA (JL)
4 - UA (NH)

The airlines can operate them to whichever hubs/cities they see fit. Because if you force AA to operate LAS-HND with a 788, when they could change that flight to DFW-HND with a 77W, you are robbing the public of 25,000+ seats per year into HND, and we know from economics less supply, means higher prices.

Same thing applies to China, you get the slots, you operate the flights, from where ever you can as long as you are operating them, if you can't operate them, and someone else wants them, then you loose them. The new carrier gets the same flexibility.

I have ranted a bit here so thank you for reading this far. I do really enjoy these discussions, even the sometimes heated exchanges :)

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:49 am
by mpdpilot
FA9295 wrote:
I see a lot of people on here making the argument that just because DL doesn't have a Japanese partner doesn't mean that they should get the majority of the slots. I'm not saying that this argument is not legitimate, but here's just a question for discussion:

Who would have Delta partnered with? I don't know why JL and/or NH would want to partner with DL when they're already partnered with AA and UA. Sure, JL is partnered with HA, but HA isn't currently in an alliance. Most of what's left for DL would be low-cost carriers, which is obviously not gonna happen...


I think a lot of people are alluding to the possible tie-up between DL and JL from a few years ago before they signed a JV with AA. DL was going to help JL switch from One World to Sky Team and form a JV. In this senario, it is hard to see how AA would have been able to do much of anything in Asia. CX has never been able to be quite as close with AA due to the lack of open skies between HK and US. Though it is conceivable that Korean Air might have changed from ST to OW.

In the end, I think that people don't fully understand how integrated a JV is verse just a partner. For all intents and purposes, they are one airline from the US to Japan, and it was OK'd by both the Japanese and US governments. To say now, that they don't effect this situation is quite anti-competitive in my opinion. If they where just OW and Star members, I get it, but these are legal marriages for lack of a better term and should be treated as a single entity.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:56 am
by mpdpilot
mpdpilot wrote:
Here is my rough math:

Japanese Airlines:
8 - JL
8 - NH

US Airlines
8 - DL (DL only asked for 8, I would give them 10, one each from AA, and UA)
2 - HA (JL)
3 - AA (JL)
4 - UA (NH)



I forgot to mention, in this scenario, should a new carrier want to fly into HND, all they would have to do is apply and they would be allowed to operate at least one route, maybe more, as long as they could continue to operate the flight and slots would be taken back from existing airlines so as to keep things even (i.e. if star had the most slots, they would lose one first, then if OW had the most, they would loose one until everything was even)

its how I think slots at JFK and LGA should work too. You have to operate the flights, if you don't and no one wants them fine, but as soon as someone wants them, you loose it. Certainly DL, AA, and B6 could loose quite a few slots and not have a measurable affect on their "hubs" but that is for another thread.

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

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:58 am
by Freebie
Having flown into and thru NRT since the airport opened, I would like to see new slots at HND be accompanied by a decrease at NRT and ANA/JAL offering domestic flights in the afternoon to most of their in Japan destinations.

I am tired of the 3000 yen bus ride to NRT to catch a flight to my final destination. or the overnight in NRT to catch the first bus to HND.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:42 am
by Nicknuzzii
Anyone know what time the routes will be announced tomorrow?

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 1:47 am
by jbs2886
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Anyone know what time the routes will be announced tomorrow?


They won't be announced tomorrow. Answers by airlines to applications of other airlines are due tomorrow.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 1:56 am
by FA9295
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Anyone know what time the routes will be announced tomorrow?

The airlines are submitting formal responses to each of their opponent's route applications tomorrow (as required by the DOT). The official routes will be announced on March 7th.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:04 am
by Nicknuzzii
FA9295 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Anyone know what time the routes will be announced tomorrow?

The airlines are submitting formal responses to each of their opponent's route applications tomorrow (as required by the DOT). The official routes will be announced on March 7th.


What are "answers?"

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:47 am
by jrkmsp
FA9295 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Anyone know what time the routes will be announced tomorrow?

The airlines are submitting formal responses to each of their opponent's route applications tomorrow (as required by the DOT). The official routes will be announced on March 7th.


Actually, that’s not right either. Replies are airlines chances to rebut whatever their competitors said about their applications in the answers. The DOT decision will come some time perhaps in late March, but probably in April.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 3:08 am
by grbauc
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

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:51 pm
by kavok
We have two responses so far, one from PortAuthority of NYNJ and one from City of Houston. Both documents argue the benefits of United’s proposed HND flight from EWR and IAH respectively.

https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=DOT-OST-2019-0014

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:58 pm
by Ishrion

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:06 pm
by FA9295

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:09 pm
by ITSTours
It's the showtime! Look at the United response.

"Delta, one of the world’s largest airlines, continues to revise history to paint itself a victim of competition, when in fact it is a victim of its own Asia strategy."

"In addition, Delta continues to skew reality to match its narrative and its continued focus on United’s relationship with ANA distorts the facts. Repeating an untruth often enough does not make it the truth."

WOW. Look at these wordings.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:10 pm
by FA9295
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.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:13 pm
by Ishrion
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=DOT-OST-2019-0014

Three letters of support so far for American. The Governor of Nevada, the Mayor of Los Angeles, and two U.S. senators.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:20 pm
by FA9295
ITSTours wrote:
It's the showtime! Look at the United response.

"Delta, one of the world’s largest airlines, continues to revise history to paint itself a victim of competition, when in fact it is a victim of its own Asia strategy."

"In addition, Delta continues to skew reality to match its narrative and its continued focus on United’s relationship with ANA distorts the facts. Repeating an untruth often enough does not make it the truth."

WOW. Look at these wordings.

AA: "How Can United Claim with a Straight Face That American’s “U.S.-Japan Operations Are Competitive” with United’s?"

Just, wow... Stay classy AA.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:25 pm
by ITSTours
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -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.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:55 pm
by WPvsMW
IMO, B6's argument will be completely ignored as irrelevant to the HND route authorities. Besides being outside the scope of the HND proceeding, DOT isn't going to take RA's away from an operator who is actively using them. IIRC, DOT has never done that (other than in a JV or merger approval... not an issue here).

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:22 pm
by chonetsao
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)

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:29 pm
by FA9295
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.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:47 pm
by winginit
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.

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

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:50 pm
by ShinyAndChrome
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.