United suspends ORD-HKG

LAXintl · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:29 pm

Posted internally today:

We have seen a decline in demand between ORD and HKG. While our service between the United States and HKG remains a vital part of our network, we have decided to suspend service between ORD and HKG after the return flight from HKG on Sept. 9, 2019. We are also moving up our previously announced discontinuation of GUM-HKG service, with the final flight now scheduled for October 14. United has served HKG for more than 30 years, and we remain committed to the market.

GDS to be updated over the weekend.

Ishrion · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:35 pm

Wow, looks like the protests are taking a toll on the routes... So now there's only one daily flight on Cathay Pacific.

Anyone think American will pick up the route? Maybe, maybe not.

UPlog · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:36 pm

Makes one wonder if the 2nd daily SFO-HKG will really launch or even needed for the market during the coming winter?

Cubsrule · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:47 pm

Ishrion wrote:
Wow, looks like the protests are taking a toll on the routes... So now there's only one daily flight on Cathay Pacific.

Anyone think American will pick up the route? Maybe, maybe not.

If the protests cause difficulty for UA, which has decades of successful history in the market, why would you think AA would succeed?

Ishrion · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:50 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Wow, looks like the protests are taking a toll on the routes... So now there's only one daily flight on Cathay Pacific.

Anyone think American will pick up the route? Maybe, maybe not.

If the protests cause difficulty for UA, which has decades of successful history in the market, why would you think AA would succeed?

I don't think AA will go for the route. AA's ORD-Asia seems to be done, for now. AA doesn't play aggressively internationally against UA at ORD.

There's also connections through CX in HKG, which is something United didn't have.

BNAMealer · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:52 pm

So is this just a temporary suspension or is this a permanent cut?

RyanairGuru · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:02 pm

BNAMealer wrote:
So is this just a temporary suspension or is this a permanent cut?

Temporary.

This would indicate that ORD is their weakest HKG route, but can we please not have a repeat of the India conspiracy thread where a vocal cadre of posters were convinced that India was loss making for United and the airspace constraints were nothing but an excuse.

The situation in Hong Kong has had a real impact on bookings. A couple of days ago Qantas also said that they were cutting capacity to HKG as close-in bookings had dried up.

janders · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:15 pm

Move just reflects the reality that the ongoing protest actions on the ground are clearly hurting trade and tourism.

zakuivcustom · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:40 pm

I was originally going to book that flight going back to HKG next month. On the other hand, maybe that explain why UA's website seems to be pushing me to connecting at EWR instead of ORD.

The protests are certainly hurting demand, though. On the other hand, the fare doesn't exactly reflect that (It's not as cheap as I thought it would be).

P.S. UA's ORD-HKG depends heavily on the front from the last few times I was on that flight. The load in the back are nothing to write home about (~70% full usually).

Weatherwatcher1 · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:45 pm

They are running only 60% load factor (that includes upgrades and no revs) in business class. No long haul international route will last long on UA with so few business class seats sold. This route is likely hemorrhaging money given the low economy fares to Hong Kong and empty business class cabin

zakuivcustom · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:48 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
They are running only 60% load factor (that includes upgrades and no revs) in business class. No long haul international route will last long on UA with so few business class seats sold. This route is likely hemorrhaging money given the low economy fares to Hong Kong and empty business class cabin

The 60% LF in business explain the suspension to me. It was almost always 100% full every single time I fly on UA895/896 (before the current protests, that is).

LAXdude1023 · Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:53 pm

I flew the route twice. Both times lots of open seats in business class.

Still this is very disappointing. This route has been around for so long.

BNAMealer · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:04 am

janders wrote:
Move just reflects the reality that the ongoing protest actions on the ground are clearly hurting trade and tourism.

This. Considering how long the route has been around, I doubt it is based on performance and I assume it will be back if/when things return to normal in HKG.

BNAMealer · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:05 am

LAXdude1023 wrote:
I flew the route twice. Both times lots of open seats in business class.

Still this is very disappointing. This route has been around for so long.

How long ago was this?

Benni228 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:14 am

I was on 869 from SFO-HKG the other day and the load in J was shocking. Not even 30 seats sold in a 60 seat cabin, even after upgrades. Not surprised airlines are consolidating but it’s still a shame it’s come to that.

Cointrin330 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:15 am

Ishrion wrote:
Wow, looks like the protests are taking a toll on the routes... So now there's only one daily flight on Cathay Pacific.

Anyone think American will pick up the route? Maybe, maybe not.

Not a chance. AA can't make ORD-Asia work. It can barely operate ORD-NRT 3 times per week. The situation in HKG is slowly beginning to take its toll, and ORD-HKG, though a very long standing route for UA, has been said to be the weakest of the US to HKG routes. Would not surprise me if there are other airlines that curb capacity to HKG if the situation worsens, including CX.

ITSTours · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:15 am

zakuivcustom wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
They are running only 60% load factor (that includes upgrades and no revs) in business class. No long haul international route will last long on UA with so few business class seats sold. This route is likely hemorrhaging money given the low economy fares to Hong Kong and empty business class cabin

The 60% LF in business explain the suspension to me. It was almost always 100% full every single time I fly on UA895/896 (before the current protests, that is).

But isn't 60% LF in business pretty good? Considering how much they charge for...

zakuivcustom · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:23 am

ITSTours wrote:
But isn't 60% LF in business pretty good? Considering how much they charge for...

60% LF in business, with all those seats sold in business fare, is good.
60% LF in business, including upgrades and no-revs, is not that great.

You also have to factor in the fact that UA's business class is actually fairly large.

From personal experience, I've yet to rode on a UA895/896 in which the business class has more than 2-3 empty seats.

LAXdude1023 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:50 am

BNAMealer wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
I flew the route twice. Both times lots of open seats in business class.

Still this is very disappointing. This route has been around for so long.

How long ago was this?

Once three years ago and once last year.

airbazar · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:04 am

janders wrote:
Move just reflects the reality that the ongoing protest actions on the ground are clearly hurting trade and tourism.

Which is ironic because the last thing the pro-democracy protesters should want is to isolate Hong Kong from the rest of the world, or at least cut links.
I've been looking a fares to Asia for the Xmas holidays and CX is by far the cheapest airline. They seem to be cutting fares aggressively to try and convince people to fly via HKG. They have no other alternative but for foreign carriers like UA it's a lot easier and cost-efficient to just cut capacity.

babastud · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:04 am

This is not a surprise... anyone aware of the news can see the toll it's taking especially since the HKG airport is being targeted. Many corporate businesses have suspended or delayed travel and many ethnic travel is being told not to visit now and vice versa, and tourism travel is essentially over for the time being.

I would not be surprised if this keeps up that EWR is also suspended and everything is routed through SFO. People saying that AA or DL could jump in is laughable. These airlines struggle to make HKG work under the best of times, let alone now. UA is the most well known and popular of the USA serving HKG. I'm sure things will recover eventually.

However, with all the economic instability in Mainland China and USA trade and things continually heating up. I think we are on the verge of seeing changes in routes with cuts coming to some of the newer and weaker markets. Lets see, this may only be the begging?

sincx · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:07 am

airbazar wrote:
janders wrote:
Move just reflects the reality that the ongoing protest actions on the ground are clearly hurting trade and tourism.

Which is ironic because the last thing the pro-democracy protesters should want is to isolate Hong Kong from the rest of the world, or at least cut links.
I've been looking a fares to Asia for the Xmas holidays and CX is by far the cheapest airline. They seem to be cutting fares aggressively to try and convince people to fly via HKG. They have no other alternative but for foreign carriers like UA it's a lot easier and cost-efficient to just cut capacity.

Not just CX.

I saw a $180 one-way/$360 round-trip SFO-HKG on UA/NH the other day.

I still paid hundreds more to route my trip through Taipei. The protestors are calling for more airport blockages at HKG this weekend, despite the court injunction. Regardless of what happens, the uncertainty of flying to/from/through HKG due to civil unrest will keep away anyone that doesn't absolutely have to go to Hong Kong.

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/pol ... uthorities

jayunited · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:14 am

RyanairGuru wrote:

Temporary.

This would indicate that ORD is their weakest HKG route, but can we please not have a repeat of the India conspiracy thread where a vocal cadre of posters were convinced that India was loss making for United and the airspace constraints were nothing but an excuse.

The situation in Hong Kong has had a real impact on bookings. A couple of days ago Qantas also said that they were cutting capacity to HKG as close-in bookings had dried up.

I know UA is using the word suspend but I think canceled is probably more appropriate. UA continues to see strong demand to HKG from both EWR and SFO but ORD-HKG has seen demand drop and this was before the protest began. With all the equipment changes that will start this coming fall and coupled with the fact that 4 77E frames will be converted from international service to domestic HD configuration something had to go. UA's ORD-HKG-ORD utilizes (depending on how you look at it ) 1.5 or 2 frames and of UA's ORD-Asia flights the number one problem child flight has been ORD-HKG-ORD.
I'm not sure why UA in 2020 will relegate 4 77Es to domestic service after converting them to HD frames but it looks like ORD-HKG will be a causality of that planned reduction in the overall combined PW and GE 77E fleet. If this flight ever return it probably will be on a 789 which has a lower operating cost compared to the 77E but having said that as it stands right now UA has no plans to base any 787s at ORD. Looking at these facts I don't see this flight returning any time soon.

BNAMealer · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:31 am

jayunited wrote:
as it stands right now UA has no plans to base any 787s at ORD.

This is going to have to change eventually, and this situation magnifies why. There are a fair amount of UA international routes out of ORD that scream for the 787, but they refuse to put them there for some reason.

Internationally speaking, what is UA’s long term strategy for ORD? It seems like they haven’t had much of a strategy for a bit now. Are they just maintaining the status quo until the new T2 comes online in a decade?

waoz1 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:33 am

QF is cutting capacity too so going to be a growing problem for HKG as a whole

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/tra ... s-airlines

jayunited · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:39 am

BNAMealer wrote:
jayunited wrote:
as it stands right now UA has no plans to base any 787s at ORD.

This is going to have to change eventually, and this situation magnifies why. There are a fair amount of UA international routes out of ORD that scream for the 787, but they refuse to put them there for some reason.

Internationally speaking, what is UA’s long term strategy for ORD? It seems like they haven’t had much of a strategy for a bit now. Are they just maintaining the status quo until the new T2 comes online in a decade?

To answer your question quickly without taking the thread off course it all comes down to gates. UA could place a 789 on ORD-HKG because it departs around 13:15 and we have gates available. But as the day progresses UA effectively has 6 gates that can accommodate the wingspan of a 789 without impacting an adjacent gate. If I had to wager I would say no UA 787s will be based at ORD for quite some time. If this flight was important enough UA would find a way to make it work instead they are suspending the route which leads me to believe those 789s can be put to better use elsewhere in the network.

Antarius · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:42 am

Cointrin330 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Wow, looks like the protests are taking a toll on the routes... So now there's only one daily flight on Cathay Pacific.

Anyone think American will pick up the route? Maybe, maybe not.

Not a chance. AA can't make ORD-Asia work. It can barely operate ORD-NRT 3 times per week. The situation in HKG is slowly beginning to take its toll, and ORD-HKG, though a very long standing route for UA, has been said to be the weakest of the US to HKG routes. Would not surprise me if there are other airlines that curb capacity to HKG if the situation worsens, including CX.

This is slightly different given sizable feed on either side and UA vacating the route. AA has a chance at making this working far better than ORD-PEK/PVG thanks to the better yields at HKG and CX feed on the other end.

All this said, I highly, highly doubt (to the point of saying they wont like you do) that they will.

ORD Boy 2 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:42 am

I hope this is temporary. HKG was one of UA's first international routes to Asia out of ORD and has been around too long.

BNAMealer · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:52 am

jayunited wrote:
BNAMealer wrote:
jayunited wrote:
as it stands right now UA has no plans to base any 787s at ORD.

This is going to have to change eventually, and this situation magnifies why. There are a fair amount of UA international routes out of ORD that scream for the 787, but they refuse to put them there for some reason.

Internationally speaking, what is UA’s long term strategy for ORD? It seems like they haven’t had much of a strategy for a bit now. Are they just maintaining the status quo until the new T2 comes online in a decade?

To answer your question quickly without taking the thread off course it all comes down to gates. UA could place a 789 on ORD-HKG because it departs around 13:15 and we have gates available. But as the day progresses UA effectively has 6 gates that can accommodate the wingspan of a 789 without impacting an adjacent gate. If I had to wager I would say no UA 787s will be based at ORD for quite some time. If this flight was important enough UA would find a way to make it work instead they are suspending the route which leads me to believe those 789s can be put to better use elsewhere in the network.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to take it off course, it just seems from a distance UA’s ORD-Asia would do much better with 787’s, so the lack of ORD-based ones is a head scratcher for me, but you’re closer to the situation so you’d know more than me.

Anyway, sad to see this route go. My father took this route very often years ago.

zakuivcustom · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:57 am

airbazar wrote:
Which is ironic because the last thing the pro-democracy protesters should want is to isolate Hong Kong from the rest of the world, or at least cut links.

It's all about pressuring the gov't by hurting the local economy, with the airport specifically targeted b/c of that. Yes, on one hand it's ironic, on the other hand, the protesters fully know about the only thing that HK gov't really cares about is the overall economy (but certainly not the "common people"), and hurting the economy is a way to send the message across to basically tell the gov't to stop stalling and hiding behind the police, but rather, start responding to the demands (although I personally doubt they'll get all 5 of them) or at a minimum, begin to actually solve the problem.

P.S. For selfish reason I hope that this is temporary also. Last thing I want is for CX to have a monopoly on the route and charge even more than they currently do.

marcecar10 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:06 am

This is probably the last thing the protesters wanted honestly. To see their Hong Kong reduce airlinks to the rest of the democratic world. Hopefully UA returns but the situation in HKG is unbearable and probably won't stay like this for long.

grbauc · Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:17 am

Well it shows that AA draw down from ORD the weakness from the market.

tigerzhong13 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:25 am

BNAMealer wrote:
jayunited wrote:
BNAMealer wrote:

This is going to have to change eventually, and this situation magnifies why. There are a fair amount of UA international routes out of ORD that scream for the 787, but they refuse to put them there for some reason.

Internationally speaking, what is UA’s long term strategy for ORD? It seems like they haven’t had much of a strategy for a bit now. Are they just maintaining the status quo until the new T2 comes online in a decade?

To answer your question quickly without taking the thread off course it all comes down to gates. UA could place a 789 on ORD-HKG because it departs around 13:15 and we have gates available. But as the day progresses UA effectively has 6 gates that can accommodate the wingspan of a 789 without impacting an adjacent gate. If I had to wager I would say no UA 787s will be based at ORD for quite some time. If this flight was important enough UA would find a way to make it work instead they are suspending the route which leads me to believe those 789s can be put to better use elsewhere in the network.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to take it off course, it just seems from a distance UA’s ORD-Asia would do much better with 787’s, so the lack of ORD-based ones is a head scratcher for me, but you’re closer to the situation so you’d know more than me.

Anyway, sad to see this route go. My father took this route very often years ago.

They could send a 788/9 to ORD from somewhere else via a domestic flight. They just don’t have enough demand.

MSPNWA · Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:42 am

Sad to see 895/896 suspended. What a staple of UA's ORD network. Hard to believe honestly. Must be hemorrhaging money with a cut this close-in.

Interestingly this flight was being used as the staging flight for 777 interior mods. They're going to have to position from another flight now.

UAUA · Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:43 am

Back in the B747-400 days I heard that ORD-HKG was among the best performing flights

reply1984 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:01 am

In my opinion, the cancellation is driven by some fundamental changes instead of the short-term shock, i.e. the protests in Hong Kong. When airlines see some sbort-term events diminishing the traffic, they are more likely to decrease its frequency or use smaller plane.

For UA, they planned to launch the second daily SFO-HKG flight, and it seems that UA still has much confidence in the demand from/to Hong Kong and removing the flights completely from its schedule seems unnecessary.

Please keep in mind that, Chicago's Asian routes don't work well. AA cut Beijing and Shanghai, and Asiana Airlines cut Seoul. Please notice that the demand between Chicago and Asia is declining.

Pellegrine · Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:24 am

jayunited wrote:
BNAMealer wrote:
jayunited wrote:
as it stands right now UA has no plans to base any 787s at ORD.

This is going to have to change eventually, and this situation magnifies why. There are a fair amount of UA international routes out of ORD that scream for the 787, but they refuse to put them there for some reason.

Internationally speaking, what is UA’s long term strategy for ORD? It seems like they haven’t had much of a strategy for a bit now. Are they just maintaining the status quo until the new T2 comes online in a decade?

To answer your question quickly without taking the thread off course it all comes down to gates. UA could place a 789 on ORD-HKG because it departs around 13:15 and we have gates available. But as the day progresses UA effectively has 6 gates that can accommodate the wingspan of a 789 without impacting an adjacent gate. If I had to wager I would say no UA 787s will be based at ORD for quite some time. If this flight was important enough UA would find a way to make it work instead they are suspending the route which leads me to believe those 789s can be put to better use elsewhere in the network.

Then they should have ordered enough 789s. To go from a 744 to nothing is pathetic.

eamondzhang · Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:35 am

Pellegrine wrote:

Then they should have ordered enough 789s. To go from a 744 to nothing is pathetic.

When UA flew 744 on ORD-HKG, it's either ORD or IAD for them - now you got EWR, a far better powerhouse in terms of # of pax to/from HKG. Makes 100% sense to route that via EWR.

Plus the opening of second daily SFO-HKG pretty much nails the coffin IMO.

UA today has just as much capacity to HKG compared to 744 days with both SFO/EWR-HKG on a 77W.

Michael

YYZORD · Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:37 am

UA customers can easily connect on AC flights to HKG at YYZ or YVR. It honestly seems like YYZ will one day beat ORD in asian traffic with the number of asian flights being discontinued at ORD.

panamair · Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:21 am

The challenges in the Hong Kong market have been around for a while now and the recent tensions have certainly contributed to them but are not the only cause of it. Yields have not been great even before recent events. Few noticed that in Q4 2018, United actually took an asset impairment charge on the value of its Hong Kong routes.

From the Q4 and YTD 2018 financial report:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 78886.html

"...Impairment of assets:

Routes: The company conducted its annual impairment review of intangible assets in the fourth quarter of 2018, which consisted of a comparison of the book value of specific assets to the fair value of those assets calculated using the discounted cash flow method. Due to increased costs without sufficient corresponding increases in revenue in the Hong Kong market, the company determined that the value of its Hong Kong routes had been impaired. Accordingly, in the fourth quarter of 2018, the company recorded a special non-cash impairment charge of $206 million ($160 million net of taxes) associated with its Hong Kong routes. The collateral pledged under the company's term loan, including the Hong Kong routes, continues to be sufficient to satisfy the loan covenants...."

This isn't to say that UA's HKG routes were/are necessarily loss-making but HKG has been under pressure (particularly in the pricing environment) before recent events.

worldranger · Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:39 am

In 1993 HONG KONGs GDP as a percentage of China’s was 27%. Today it is less than 3%.

This is by design by the Chinese govt.
It’s relevance in the overall China story - is not what it was and with the current political events - China will make sure it never will be again.

USAirALB · Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:01 am

Wow. I have flown 895/896 countless times (both ORD-HKG-ORD and then HKG-SIN-HKG when it still existed) and I always saw the route as a staple of UA’s long-haul route network from ORD. IIRC, I think it was the first HKG-North America nonstop to a destination that wasn’t on the West coast.

I’m scheduled to actually fly the route this October. Instead of changing to a EWR or SFO flight, I’ll probably take a refund. Air China is offering IAD-HKG flights for a jaw-dropping $508.

Themotionman · Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:29 am

Does anybody know when this route was launched?

MIflyer12 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 10:19 am

YYZORD wrote:
UA customers can easily connect on AC flights to HKG at YYZ or YVR. It honestly seems like YYZ will one day beat ORD in asian traffic with the number of asian flights being discontinued at ORD.

You can dream. U.S. services will continue to be more fractured than the simple xxx-YVR/YYZ services to Canada, but one of the things standing in the way of foreign carrier destination and capacity growth at YYZ is the antipathy of the government of Canada to Open Skies agreements. Count how many nations with which the U.S. has Open Skies (over 100). Compare to Canada (22).

https://2009-2017.state.gov/e/eb/tra/ata/

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/air-blu ... u-2989.htm

jasoncrh · Sat Aug 24, 2019 10:45 am

1996

Themotionman wrote:
Does anybody know when this route was launched?

raylee67 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 11:09 am

HKG traffic is definitely affected by the unrest. I have been advising my colleagues in US not to come. I also see SQ downgauging some of the flights to 788. I think OZ is redeploying the A380 to TPE as well.

But the trade war and the equipment used on HKG-ORD probably affected the demand too. UA's business class demand on the route would primarily coming from US firms, and those who would transit thru ORD are those based on Midwest, i.e. mostly manufacturing or consumer products, vs. those connecting thru EWR, which would mostly be financial and health care. The business demand from manufacturing or consumer products firms are a lot more affected by the trade war. Using 772 on the route probably discourage passengers who can choose between EWR and ORD connection from using ORD too. I believe the 772 has not been updated with the new business class seats yet?

raylee67 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 11:20 am

worldranger wrote:
In 1993 HONG KONGs GDP as a percentage of China’s was 27%. Today it is less than 3%.

This is by design by the Chinese govt.
It’s relevance in the overall China story - is not what it was and with the current political events - China will make sure it never will be again.

GDP is not relevant. It was when China was manufacturing plastic toys and garments. But not any more. The role of Hong Kong for China now is to be the conduit to attract foreign capital and investment into China. Foreign firms do not like to invest into China directly given the arbitrary nature of the policies and law enforcement in China.

The significant number is that 60% of foreign capital flow into China goes through Hong Kong.

That is why there is onshore RMB (CNY) and offshore RMB (CNH), where they have different exchange rate with USD, and the onshore one gives you much higher interest rate, if you are brave enough to put your RMB into a bank account inside China.

airbazar · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:18 pm

raylee67 wrote:
worldranger wrote:
In 1993 HONG KONGs GDP as a percentage of China’s was 27%. Today it is less than 3%.

This is by design by the Chinese govt.
It’s relevance in the overall China story - is not what it was and with the current political events - China will make sure it never will be again.

GDP is not relevant. It was when China was manufacturing plastic toys and garments. But not any more. The role of Hong Kong for China now is to be the conduit to attract foreign capital and investment into China. Foreign firms do not like to invest into China directly given the arbitrary nature of the policies and law enforcement in China.

The significant number is that 60% of foreign capital flow into China goes through Hong Kong.

That is why there is onshore RMB (CNY) and offshore RMB (CNH), where they have different exchange rate with USD, and the onshore one gives you much higher interest rate, if you are brave enough to put your RMB into a bank account inside China.

It's all smoke and mirrors. Hong Kong IS China. The government is in Beijing. Isolating HK is the plan so they can control the media and everything else. The goal is to shift the focus to Shanghai and make HK irrelevant and it seems to be working.
As for CX, they would love nothing more than to see it go extinct so the business can shift entirely to the government controlled airlines.

kngkyle · Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:57 pm

reply1984 wrote:
Please keep in mind that, Chicago's Asian routes don't work well. AA cut Beijing and Shanghai, and Asiana Airlines cut Seoul. Please notice that the demand between Chicago and Asia is declining.

I doubt this is true. I'm pretty sure overall capacity to Asia from Chicago has increased over the past 5 years despite the cuts you mentioned.

New(er) additions to offset the cuts:

EVA to Taipei
Hainan to Beijing
China Eastern to Shanghai
Cathay Pacific to Hong Kong
Hainan to Chengdu (starts next month)

LAXdude1023 · Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:12 pm

kngkyle wrote:
reply1984 wrote:
Please keep in mind that, Chicago's Asian routes don't work well. AA cut Beijing and Shanghai, and Asiana Airlines cut Seoul. Please notice that the demand between Chicago and Asia is declining.

I doubt this is true. I'm pretty sure overall capacity to Asia from Chicago has increased over the past 5 years despite the cuts you mentioned.

New(er) additions to offset the cuts:

EVA to Taipei
Hainan to Beijing
China Eastern to Shanghai
Cathay Pacific to Hong Kong
Hainan to Chengdu (starts next month)

Which is probably why AA/UA have had trouble competing in certain markets. Too much competition given the market size.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net