Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1215
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Thu Nov 21, 2019 11:12 pm

x1234 wrote:
The KEY question here is if Filipino businesses will pay a premium for a non-stop. SIN is a completely different story as its one of the few developed Asian markets. Philippine Airlines non-stops to the USA (SFO LAX JFK) have a price premium, will UA price it the same or higher with UA's higher labor costs!? DL has a loyal following in the Philippines that's why they decided to make ICN-MNL work, if UA can do a SFO non-stop that's even better.


I think UA would probably be most focused on US point of sale. There is a significant offshore call center presence there so definitely some business demand. From there they could fill the rest w local/VFR.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5233
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:35 am

x1234 wrote:
The KEY question here is if Filipino businesses will pay a premium for a non-stop. SIN is a completely different story as its one of the few developed Asian markets. Philippine Airlines non-stops to the USA (SFO LAX JFK) have a price premium, will UA price it the same or higher with UA's higher labor costs!? DL has a loyal following in the Philippines that's why they decided to make ICN-MNL work, if UA can do a SFO non-stop that's even better.

Where do you get the idea DL has loyal following in the Philippines?
 
babastud
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 1:38 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:45 am

tphuang wrote:
x1234 wrote:
The KEY question here is if Filipino businesses will pay a premium for a non-stop. SIN is a completely different story as its one of the few developed Asian markets. Philippine Airlines non-stops to the USA (SFO LAX JFK) have a price premium, will UA price it the same or higher with UA's higher labor costs!? DL has a loyal following in the Philippines that's why they decided to make ICN-MNL work, if UA can do a SFO non-stop that's even better.

Where do you get the idea DL has loyal following in the Philippines?



It's funny people are bringing up DL and AA, neither would stand a chance on a non-stop from the mainland. It's a tough route to make work, and I think only UA out of SFO could make this work.
 
Aceskywalker
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:26 am

x1234 wrote:
The KEY question here is if Filipino businesses will pay a premium for a non-stop. SIN is a completely different story as its one of the few developed Asian markets. Philippine Airlines non-stops to the USA (SFO LAX JFK) have a price premium, will UA price it the same or higher with UA's higher labor costs!? DL has a loyal following in the Philippines that's why they decided to make ICN-MNL work, if UA can do a SFO non-stop that's even better.


DL doing ICN-MNL is for the benefit of the joint-venture with KE and allows them to circumvent S. Korea - Philippines bilaterals by putting passengers on US-registered metal on a US-based airline. If KE were to get more frequencies for ICN-MNL, the DL 5th freedom flight is like going to get axed.

Furthermore, yields on US mainland to SE Asia bar SIN are trash courtesy of Mainland Chinese airlines. There won't be a UA SFO-MNL or an AA LAX-MNL or a DL SEA-MNL.
Most traffic going from the US to Manila will either fly PR or do a one-stop for either cheaper fares, wanting to avoid PR, and/or wanting better premium product that can be provided with JL/NH/CX/BR/etc.
 
carlokiii
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:03 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 6:21 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
4. Unfortunately, to date, United has been refused slots and other airport infrastructure necessary for its additional flight plans. While United has been unable to execute its Manila growth plans, Philippine carriers have increased capacity to the U.S.

OST-2019-0156


Is that a common problem for carriers seeking to increase service out of MNL, or is there evidence this is discriminatory? Or perhaps a bit of self-serving fiction by United? (Carriers do get creative in their filings.)

The airport is extremely slot limited, with available slots only in the wee hours. I doubt that UA was refused slots... the slots it probably wanted just weren't available. This is the same difficulty other airlines have with MNL, as cited by Air New Zealand for example.
 
Akiestar
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 6:51 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 6:21 am

tphuang wrote:
Where do you get the idea DL has loyal following in the Philippines?


DL has a very loyal following in the Philippines. I know because I'm part of that loyal following. Same with my dad and grandmother, and that's a following that dates back to the NW days. There are Filipinos, particularly those on the East Coast, who will only fly DL to MNL.

Aceskywalker wrote:
DL doing ICN-MNL is for the benefit of the joint-venture with KE and allows them to circumvent S. Korea - Philippines bilaterals by putting passengers on US-registered metal on a US-based airline. If KE were to get more frequencies for ICN-MNL, the DL 5th freedom flight is like going to get axed.


You know DL's flights use Korean entitlements, not American ones, right? DL had to cannibalize KE's entitlements in order to make room for it to fly to MNL. So no, no circumvention took place, despite what you're claiming here.

Aceskywalker wrote:
Furthermore, yields on US mainland to SE Asia bar SIN are trash courtesy of Mainland Chinese airlines. There won't be a UA SFO-MNL or an AA LAX-MNL or a DL SEA-MNL.
Most traffic going from the US to Manila will either fly PR or do a one-stop for either cheaper fares, wanting to avoid PR, and/or wanting better premium product that can be provided with JL/NH/CX/BR/etc.


I wouldn't discount the possibility of a US3 airline launching direct service at some point. There seems to be this notion that the Philippine market is notoriously low-yielding, but I'd argue that it's not as low-yielding as people make it out to be here on A.net. There is economic growth happening in the Philippines, and if there is sufficient market demand for PR to support 17x weekly ervice on MNL-LAX during wintertime, what's preventing any of the US3 from launching that service given the demand for it?

While yes, I primarily fly MU for cost reasons, I wouldn't hesitate to shift to DL if they were to fly LAX-MNL (or SEA-MNL) and I have a reason to fly them. I imagine many other Filipinos (and Fil-Ams, and other Americans) would do the same.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5233
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:36 am

Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge. Having a few people only flying DL to MNL isn't suddenly going to make this a higher yielding market. There is a reason why US3 only fly to Japan/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG/SIN. Just isn't enough business demand to anywhere else in Asia.
 
716131
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:51 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:50 am

How many Asian routes does UA served from SFO so far as of today?
If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
 
jfk777
Posts: 7358
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:27 pm

Pan AM used to be huge to Manila, after United took over those routes among the first changes was discontinuing Manila. It's still largely a VFR market, doesn't fit the profile of a UA destination these days. If UA has an extra 787 lying around maybe Brisbane or Christchurch could be a better option.
 
airlineaddict
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:37 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:45 pm

tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge. Having a few people only flying DL to MNL isn't suddenly going to make this a higher yielding market. There is a reason why US3 only fly to Japan/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG/SIN. Just isn't enough business demand to anywhere else in Asia.


DEL and BOM should be added to the list of Asian cities where US3 fly.
 
codc10
Posts: 2878
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:48 pm

Akiestar wrote:
You know DL's flights use Korean entitlements, not American ones, right? DL had to cannibalize KE's entitlements in order to make room for it to fly to MNL. So no, no circumvention took place, despite what you're claiming here.


DL’s right to operate to the USA from MNL via any intermediate point is its own, pursuant to the US-Philippines bilateral. The ICN stop is a replacement for NRT, not a new authority.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10639
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:55 pm

codc10 wrote:
Akiestar wrote:
You know DL's flights use Korean entitlements, not American ones, right? DL had to cannibalize KE's entitlements in order to make room for it to fly to MNL. So no, no circumvention took place, despite what you're claiming here.


DL’s right to operate to the USA from MNL via any intermediate point is its own, pursuant to the US-Philippines bilateral. The ICN stop is a replacement for NRT, not a new authority.

It actually gets a bit more complicated than that because it also depends on what bilaterals with the country involving the intermediate stop say, and whether beyond 5th freedom flights are allowed (and to where, how many, etc). Just because US/Philippines bilateral says a US carrier can fly US-Philippines via any intermediate point doesn’t actually mean the US carrier can just choose any point in the world they want and legally fly the flight.

I don’t know how things are involving Korea and this flight though, so I won’t get into the mess of who is right or wrong.
 
codc10
Posts: 2878
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 1:40 pm

Polot wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Akiestar wrote:
You know DL's flights use Korean entitlements, not American ones, right? DL had to cannibalize KE's entitlements in order to make room for it to fly to MNL. So no, no circumvention took place, despite what you're claiming here.


DL’s right to operate to the USA from MNL via any intermediate point is its own, pursuant to the US-Philippines bilateral. The ICN stop is a replacement for NRT, not a new authority.

It actually gets a bit more complicated than that because it also depends on what bilaterals with the country involving the intermediate stop say, and whether beyond 5th freedom flights are allowed (and to where, how many, etc). Just because US/Philippines bilateral says a US carrier can fly US-Philippines via any intermediate point doesn’t actually mean the US carrier can just choose any point in the world they want and legally fly the flight.

I don’t know how things are involving Korea and this flight though, so I won’t get into the mess of who is right or wrong.


I don’t know the contours of the authority between Philippines and Korea such that DL would be able to carry local traffic on the sector. In Japan, it could, but I’m not sure about ICNMNL. If there’s no 5th freedom rights, perhaps DL/KE would be looking to offload TPAC traffic on the well-timed Delta flight, freeing space on the bilateral-limited KE flights for local and intra-Asia traffic.

As far as the MNL-XXX-USA authority, the DAL traffic rights don’t specify an intermediate point, so those rights are transferable. Presumably the DL/KE JV will also need Philippine approval, if it does not have it already.

I am curious, though, and will do some digging to see what I come up with.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:51 pm

jfk777 wrote:
Pan AM used to be huge to Manila, after United took over those routes among the first changes was discontinuing Manila. It's still largely a VFR market, doesn't fit the profile of a UA destination these days. If UA has an extra 787 lying around maybe Brisbane or Christchurch could be a better option.


UA already serves MNL via GUM and UA also flies MNL-ROR.

You are correct UA did leave MNL after taking over for Pan AM , the reasoning behind that move I don’t know. Also until now UA did not have a widebody with the layout tailored to these markets, all of our widebodies are premium heavy, but the first 788 is already in modification and once all 12 788s are done (UA has targeted the end of May 2020) these 12 frames will be better suited for markets like MNL because they will have a smaller business class cabin and a larger coach cabin. The first of 13 additional 789s start arriving in January 2020 which will free up some 788s through upguaging so the end of October 2020 UA should have taken delivery of at least 7 additional 789s so theoretically we should have quite a few spare 788s enabling them to launch flights like MNL, or like you suggested BNE, or CHC.

While UA has announced a few new international routes for 2020, the biggest announcement was the shifting or additional flights to Tokyo. Seeing how many new widebody jets UA is schedule to take delivery of (789s, 78Js, and 77Ws) between December 2019 and October 2020 UA will either have a lot of spares or their might be another round of new international destination announced. After reading UA’s response I honestly think they are taking a serious look at an SFO-MNL nonstop flight only time will tell if it actually happens.
 
cityairline
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:33 pm

rnav2dlrey wrote:
LAX/SFO-SGN are more likely UA adds in the region than low-yield MNL, which already has nonstop service to both US coasts.

And please feel free to explain why on earth you think that SGN (also very low yield!) would be more viable than MNL from LAX/SFO?

1: The total Philippine economy is alot bigger than the Vietnamese, and also the GDP per capita is about 50% higher in the Philippines.

2: The population of the Philippines is higher than Vietnam. Not to mention greater Manila region, which has twice the population of Ho Chi Minh City.

3: The Filipino diaspora in California is almost twice the size of the Vietnamese one.

4: SGN is another two hours of flying time than MNL, adding a fuel burn of 10tons on the 787-8, or roughly $5,000!

5: And even though the Vietnamese Economy is growing very strong, the Philippines had the fastest growing one in Southeast Asia for at least five years during the last decade, outperforming all neighbours.

6: The Vietnamese demand is quite well split up between both SGN and HAN which makes it harder, while the Philippine demand is very focused around MNL.
I don't fly to live, I live to fly...
 
TryToFlySomeday
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:51 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:43 pm

airlineaddict wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge. Having a few people only flying DL to MNL isn't suddenly going to make this a higher yielding market. There is a reason why US3 only fly to Japan/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG/SIN. Just isn't enough business demand to anywhere else in Asia.


DEL and BOM should be added to the list of Asian cities where US3 fly.

Maybe just BOM. UA and DL have BOM in common, while only UA flies to DEL. Meanwhile, don’t see a reason to add SIN when only UA flies there
Pakistani American born and raised near CHI (ORD/MDW). Relatives are from both India and Pakistan
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:48 pm

TryToFlySomeday wrote:
airlineaddict wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge. Having a few people only flying DL to MNL isn't suddenly going to make this a higher yielding market. There is a reason why US3 only fly to Japan/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG/SIN. Just isn't enough business demand to anywhere else in Asia.


DEL and BOM should be added to the list of Asian cities where US3 fly.

Maybe just BOM. UA and DL have BOM in common, while only UA flies to DEL. Meanwhile, don’t see a reason to add SIN when only UA flies there


So United doesn’t count??? Why is that?
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7078
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 6:40 pm

TWA902fly wrote:
Is MNL part of the UA/ANA joint venture? If so, that's a much easier way to get to MNL on UA than via HNL/GUM as you say.

It's interesting though how that would play out given the PR/ANA minority partnership.


c933103 wrote:
The three main middle east carrier offer a total of ~7x daily flight to MNL, which I don't think that would be a significant contributor to congestion at the airport

Then, would you suggest the B- registered carriers instead? As noted above..... :stirthepot: .....

tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge.



jfk777 wrote:
Pan AM used to be huge to Manila, after United took over those routes among the first changes was discontinuing Manila.

Those were the days..... :old:


carlokiii wrote:
The airport is extremely slot limited, with available slots only in the wee hours. I doubt that UA was refused slots... the slots it probably wanted just weren't available. This is the same difficulty other airlines have with MNL, as cited by Air New Zealand for example.

Well...if they're patient enough to wait for the Magnificent 7 to get their act together and start cracking on NAIA's redevelopment..... :bored:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
airzim
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:40 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 6:53 pm

tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge. Having a few people only flying DL to MNL isn't suddenly going to make this a higher yielding market. There is a reason why US3 only fly to Japan/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG/SIN. Just isn't enough business demand to anywhere else in Asia.


And CTU, and TPE, BOM, DEL and TLV.

What's lost on this fact is the amount of direct services to even these cities. For example UA flies to TYO, PEK, HKG, and PVG from multiple hubs. SIN twice daily. The ASMs across the Pacific are significant despite the Chinese carriers yield trashing fares.
 
rnav2dlrey
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:10 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:04 pm

cityairline wrote:
rnav2dlrey wrote:
LAX/SFO-SGN are more likely UA adds in the region than low-yield MNL, which already has nonstop service to both US coasts.

And please feel free to explain why on earth you think that SGN (also very low yield!) would be more viable than MNL from LAX/SFO?

1: The total Philippine economy is alot bigger than the Vietnamese, and also the GDP per capita is about 50% higher in the Philippines.

2: The population of the Philippines is higher than Vietnam. Not to mention greater Manila region, which has twice the population of Ho Chi Minh City.

3: The Filipino diaspora in California is almost twice the size of the Vietnamese one.

4: SGN is another two hours of flying time than MNL, adding a fuel burn of 10tons on the 787-8, or roughly $5,000!

5: And even though the Vietnamese Economy is growing very strong, the Philippines had the fastest growing one in Southeast Asia for at least five years during the last decade, outperforming all neighbours.

6: The Vietnamese demand is quite well split up between both SGN and HAN which makes it harder, while the Philippine demand is very focused around MNL.


sure.

1. PAL already flies LAX/SFO/JFK-MNL. do you think UA would compete against a government-subsidized airline, or enter a market where they would have a monopoly?

2. LA has the largest vietnamese population in the US. LAX-SGN PDEW was almost 300 as of 2016 (the last year i can find OAG figures). OAG named the route in its top 10 longest underserved routes. the vietnamese manufacturing sector is booming, as companies increasingly look to countries other than china for production. the vietnamese government has continued to make economic reforms that appeal to manufacturing. this will drive front cabin sales.
 
TryToFlySomeday
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:51 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:18 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
TryToFlySomeday wrote:
airlineaddict wrote:

DEL and BOM should be added to the list of Asian cities where US3 fly.

Maybe just BOM. UA and DL have BOM in common, while only UA flies to DEL. Meanwhile, don’t see a reason to add SIN when only UA flies there


So United doesn’t count??? Why is that?

It’s not UA that doesn’t count. It’s just that US3 refers to UA, DL and AA. Logically it’d make more sense to include cities that the US3, or at least 2 of the US3 have in common. So saying JNB is a US3 destination is inaccurate: it’s just a DL destination.
Pakistani American born and raised near CHI (ORD/MDW). Relatives are from both India and Pakistan
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7078
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:30 pm

rnav2dlrey wrote:
sure.

1. PAL already flies LAX/SFO/JFK-MNL. do you think UA would compete against a government-subsidized airline, or enter a market where they would have a monopoly?

PR has been a privately owned airline since decades ago (besides, the government has no money to subsidise PR with). As to being a monopoly, the many carriers able to muscle in on PR's market and poach its customers belie that claim.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:31 pm

TryToFlySomeday wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
TryToFlySomeday wrote:
Maybe just BOM. UA and DL have BOM in common, while only UA flies to DEL. Meanwhile, don’t see a reason to add SIN when only UA flies there


So United doesn’t count??? Why is that?

It’s not UA that doesn’t count. It’s just that US3 refers to UA, DL and AA. Logically it’d make more sense to include cities that the US3, or at least 2 of the US3 have in common. So saying JNB is a US3 destination is inaccurate: it’s just a DL destination.


Fair enough I see how you read that. However I feel that in Airliners.Net world the US3 is a short cut to saying that a major US carrier serves a market.
 
Akiestar
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 6:51 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:06 pm

codc10 wrote:
Polot wrote:
codc10 wrote:

DL’s right to operate to the USA from MNL via any intermediate point is its own, pursuant to the US-Philippines bilateral. The ICN stop is a replacement for NRT, not a new authority.

It actually gets a bit more complicated than that because it also depends on what bilaterals with the country involving the intermediate stop say, and whether beyond 5th freedom flights are allowed (and to where, how many, etc). Just because US/Philippines bilateral says a US carrier can fly US-Philippines via any intermediate point doesn’t actually mean the US carrier can just choose any point in the world they want and legally fly the flight.

I don’t know how things are involving Korea and this flight though, so I won’t get into the mess of who is right or wrong.


I don’t know the contours of the authority between Philippines and Korea such that DL would be able to carry local traffic on the sector. In Japan, it could, but I’m not sure about ICNMNL. If there’s no 5th freedom rights, perhaps DL/KE would be looking to offload TPAC traffic on the well-timed Delta flight, freeing space on the bilateral-limited KE flights for local and intra-Asia traffic.

As far as the MNL-XXX-USA authority, the DAL traffic rights don’t specify an intermediate point, so those rights are transferable. Presumably the DL/KE JV will also need Philippine approval, if it does not have it already.

I am curious, though, and will do some digging to see what I come up with.


This should help clarify things. As mentioned in the thread for when DL announced closing NRT, an industry insider reported that Philippine authorities refused to allow DL to circumvent the restrictions imposed by the ROK-PH bilateral. The ROK-PH bilateral is effectively open skies save for MNL, where there are seat caps. DL service to MNL thusly is coming at the expense of KE.

That said, DL has full fifth freedom rights for ICN-MNL, and those seats are already being sold.
 
cityairline
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:20 pm

rnav2dlrey wrote:
cityairline wrote:
rnav2dlrey wrote:
LAX/SFO-SGN are more likely UA adds in the region than low-yield MNL, which already has nonstop service to both US coasts.

And please feel free to explain why on earth you think that SGN (also very low yield!) would be more viable than MNL from LAX/SFO?

1: The total Philippine economy is alot bigger than the Vietnamese, and also the GDP per capita is about 50% higher in the Philippines.

2: The population of the Philippines is higher than Vietnam. Not to mention greater Manila region, which has twice the population of Ho Chi Minh City.

3: The Filipino diaspora in California is almost twice the size of the Vietnamese one.

4: SGN is another two hours of flying time than MNL, adding a fuel burn of 10tons on the 787-8, or roughly $5,000!

5: And even though the Vietnamese Economy is growing very strong, the Philippines had the fastest growing one in Southeast Asia for at least five years during the last decade, outperforming all neighbours.

6: The Vietnamese demand is quite well split up between both SGN and HAN which makes it harder, while the Philippine demand is very focused around MNL.


sure.

1. PAL already flies LAX/SFO/JFK-MNL. do you think UA would compete against a government-subsidized airline, or enter a market where they would have a monopoly?

2. LA has the largest vietnamese population in the US. LAX-SGN PDEW was almost 300 as of 2016 (the last year i can find OAG figures). OAG named the route in its top 10 longest underserved routes. the vietnamese manufacturing sector is booming, as companies increasingly look to countries other than china for production. the vietnamese government has continued to make economic reforms that appeal to manufacturing. this will drive front cabin sales.

1: Very tired of hearing that PAL would be a government owned airline. It’s privately owned and driven by profits, so MNL-LAX/SFO is operating at high volume and frequency because of revenue, not prestige funded by the government!

2: Yes, Vietnam is booming, definitely! But with that said, so is the Philippines. And I use the same OAG report from 2016 as you when claiming:

PDEW:
LAX-SGN: 278 (one-stop and total)
LAX-MNL: 258 (one-stop)
LAX-MNL: 246 (non-stop)
LAX-MNL: 504 (total)

So even though LAX-MNL is served by double daily 77W by PR, there is still a one-stop market of the same size as the grand total of LAX-SGN.
And as many of the previous has already commented. Many American companies have established in the Philippines lately, which like you said drive Business demand.
I don't fly to live, I live to fly...
 
NZ321
Posts: 1216
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:43 pm

The market for nonstop Philippines - USA is a no brainer. The question is, can UAL make it work? PR are already doing so.
Plane mad!
 
drdisque
Posts: 1323
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 4:05 pm

US-Philippines is becoming a bigger business market as more US and Global companies are using offshore teams located in the Philippines.

My company has people there and it's a pain to go between them on a business-friendly schedule. Connecting over Japan adds a ton of time.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4266
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 9:48 pm

Odd, I just looked at routes to Manila from EWR on UA.com and seeing a 772 with ALL ECONOMY seats nose to tail - UA doesn’t have any 772’s in an all Y configuration (do they?)
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4993
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:01 pm

BWIAirport wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
With the reduction of premium seats in the 788 - this could be where they utilize that configuration.

With upwards of 15 hours westbound, would this route be more optimal for the 789? How many more of those are they expecting?

No, the 788 is just the right airplane for this exploratory route, they won't be flying that many empty seats. and? if the route is profitable? They have 789's and 777-200's to upgrade it to.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5717
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:35 pm

VC10er wrote:
Odd, I just looked at routes to Manila from EWR on UA.com and seeing a 772 with ALL ECONOMY seats nose to tail - UA doesn’t have any 772’s in an all Y configuration (do they?)


No, at least a domestic F product that I know of. UA offer multiple connecting partners, that sounds like a high density SR model of the 772 that may operate like the 742 SR's did for JL.
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
jumbojet
Posts: 2957
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:01 am

Re: Rumor: United seeking SFO-MNL route

Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:35 pm

tphuang wrote:
Of course flights to Philippines is low yielding. Flights to all of Asia is low yielding thanks to CN3. When you can fly in business to MNL from NYC for $2500 round trip on CA, there is only so much the competition can charge..


plenty of business class fares on CA for $1700 RT JFK - MNL

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