Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
xwb777
Topic Author
Posts: 813
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:13 pm

UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:30 pm

United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:32 pm

xwb777 wrote:
United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook


I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.
 
kiowa
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:36 pm

spinotter wrote:
xwb777 wrote:
United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook


I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.


It looks like all UA wants is a second flight from Guam.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:41 pm

UA doesn’t want to fly SEA-MNL. They are claiming that the Filipino government is consistently denying UA’s request for more slots/facilities access at MNL and therefore the DOT should deny PR’s request until the Filipino government allows them more access.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:45 pm

kiowa wrote:
spinotter wrote:
xwb777 wrote:
United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook


I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.


It looks like all UA wants is a second flight from Guam.


So UA is trying to delay PR flights to the US mainland because it wants a second GUM-MNL rotation? Sounds unlikely on the face of it.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:51 pm

There are rumors that UA wants to start SFO-MNL along with second daily GUM-MNL flight.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2776
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:54 pm

spinotter wrote:
xwb777 wrote:
United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook


I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.


You are absolutely correct, UA is not interested in operating SEA-MNL.
SFO-MNL is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor that still exist. From what I've seen there has been no public indication that UA is interested in SFO-MNL.

What we know for sure is UA wants to go daily double GUM-MNL but their request has been consistently denied. What UA wants is for the DOT to defer PAL's request for their MNL-SEA route. Over the past few years the all of PAL's request for additional authorities here in the U.S. have been granted whereas all of UA's request for additional slots and infrastructure at MNL have been denied.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:10 pm

jayunited wrote:
spinotter wrote:
xwb777 wrote:
United Airlines has been lately unhappy with Philippines Airlines at Seattle. The airline is currently trying to delay PR’s expansion at SEA until it can secure its own flights from SEA to MNL, by ensuring that the U.S department of Transportation delays Philippines Airlines move to add 3 weekly flights to the city.

The Philippines and the United States do not have an open skies agreement in place. UA wants to serve Manila from US mainland.

Philippines Airlines is also planning to add extra flights to LAX.

Do you think that the DOT can take any actions considering UA’s request? They are operating in a competitive market and must fight their own.

Source: https://simpleflying.com/united-phillip ... m=facebook


I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.


You are absolutely correct, UA is not interested in operating SEA-MNL.
SFO-MNL is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor that still exist. From what I've seen there has been no public indication that UA is interested in SFO-MNL.

What we know for sure is UA wants to go daily double GUM-MNL but their request has been consistently denied. What UA wants is for the DOT to defer PAL's request for their MNL-SEA route. Over the past few years the all of PAL's request for additional authorities here in the U.S. have been granted whereas all of UA's request for additional slots and infrastructure at MNL have been denied.


If the Philippines are actually practicing such discriminatory bureaucratic techniques, then I hope the USA never approves PR's SEA-MNL.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2693
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:25 pm

American Airlines Seattle to Manila, anyone?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14427
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:29 pm

spinotter wrote:
jayunited wrote:
spinotter wrote:

I find it very unlikely that UA wants to operate SEA-MNL.


You are absolutely correct, UA is not interested in operating SEA-MNL.
SFO-MNL is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor that still exist. From what I've seen there has been no public indication that UA is interested in SFO-MNL.

What we know for sure is UA wants to go daily double GUM-MNL but their request has been consistently denied. What UA wants is for the DOT to defer PAL's request for their MNL-SEA route. Over the past few years the all of PAL's request for additional authorities here in the U.S. have been granted whereas all of UA's request for additional slots and infrastructure at MNL have been denied.


If the Philippines are actually practicing such discriminatory bureaucratic techniques, then I hope the USA never approves PR's SEA-MNL.


I’m not sure it’s discrimination as much as appallingly bad infrastructure at MNL. Are other carriers getting in to MNL with similar aircraft at similar times?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:35 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
spinotter wrote:
jayunited wrote:

You are absolutely correct, UA is not interested in operating SEA-MNL.
SFO-MNL is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor that still exist. From what I've seen there has been no public indication that UA is interested in SFO-MNL.

What we know for sure is UA wants to go daily double GUM-MNL but their request has been consistently denied. What UA wants is for the DOT to defer PAL's request for their MNL-SEA route. Over the past few years the all of PAL's request for additional authorities here in the U.S. have been granted whereas all of UA's request for additional slots and infrastructure at MNL have been denied.


If the Philippines are actually practicing such discriminatory bureaucratic techniques, then I hope the USA never approves PR's SEA-MNL.


I’m not sure it’s discrimination as much as appallingly bad infrastructure at MNL. Are other carriers getting in to MNL with similar aircraft at similar times?

Why yes there is, that carrier’s name is Philippine Airlines ;).

I’m not sure what exactly is going on in MNL but if the government is allowing PR expansion to the US in MNL without having to give up any other flights or slots or whatnot than UA has a case.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14427
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:41 pm

Polot wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
spinotter wrote:

If the Philippines are actually practicing such discriminatory bureaucratic techniques, then I hope the USA never approves PR's SEA-MNL.


I’m not sure it’s discrimination as much as appallingly bad infrastructure at MNL. Are other carriers getting in to MNL with similar aircraft at similar times?

Why yes there is, that carrier’s name is Philippine Airlines ;).

I’m not sure what exactly is going on in MNL but if the government is allowing PR expansion to the US in MNL without having to give up any other flights or slots or whatnot than UA has a case.


Is that true, though? Is PR adding flights at the times UA wants for the new GUM flights? I’m not trying to be difficult; I genuinely don’t know.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5198
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:42 pm

That explains why there hasn't been any formal announcement of PR coming to SEA. I think the service will be delayed.
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 1106
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:03 pm

From previous thread ( viewtopic.php?t=1435343 ) - United wants to launch SFO-MNL but is being blocked in acquiring slots at MNL.

As such UA seeks to block further expansion of Philippine carriers to the U.S.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7791
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:14 pm

janders wrote:
From previous thread ( viewtopic.php?t=1435343 ) - United wants to launch SFO-MNL but is being blocked in acquiring slots at MNL.

As such UA seeks to block further expansion of Philippine carriers to the U.S.


Does MNL not operate by standard IATA slot allocation procedures?

The U.S. has a lot more tools at its disposal than just disallowing a PR flight.
 
J343
Posts: 311
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:40 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:34 pm

I take United Airlines' side on this issue. PAL have beefed up their services to the USA with additional frequencies to LAX and SFO. If this was the other way around, PAL would be the first to cry foul and ask the Philippine government to intervene like they always do. I hope PAL's MNL-SEA gets delayed until UA gets what they have been asking for.
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:10 pm

UA have two choices, like ALL other airlines wishing to enter MNL.
1. Buy primetime slots, plenty of other airlines have (UA had no issues with that at LHR)
2. Choose arrival/departure times where there are slots available at MNL

But instead of doing this they choose another way
3. Ask the government to interfere with a competitor to force that airline to give up slots at the times of UA wants and needs.

The oligopoly market that the US airline industry have become sure produce some undesirable effects. The airlines cant/dont want to compete, instead the first response is to ask the government to interfere. One reason I am always against governments that allow oligopolies to form.
This also shows that UA is weak in Asia. If they rely so heavily on VFR traffic to and from the Phiilippines (which mainly consist of rank and file US soldiers that's married 'province girls' and OFWs - non of those groups are high end to phrase it nicely...)

I fear that the margin in Asia are not favourable at all for UA and that presently quite a few routes are true basketcases. Something I truly hope isn't the case, since I have been quite happy to see UA build up a real Asian hub in SFO.
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1208
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:37 pm

MillwallSean wrote:
UA have two choices, like ALL other airlines wishing to enter MNL.
1. Buy primetime slots, plenty of other airlines have (UA had no issues with that at LHR)
2. Choose arrival/departure times where there are slots available at MNL

But instead of doing this they choose another way
3. Ask the government to interfere with a competitor to force that airline to give up slots at the times of UA wants and needs.

The oligopoly market that the US airline industry have become sure produce some undesirable effects. The airlines cant/dont want to compete, instead the first response is to ask the government to interfere. One reason I am always against governments that allow oligopolies to form.
This also shows that UA is weak in Asia. If they rely so heavily on VFR traffic to and from the Phiilippines (which mainly consist of rank and file US soldiers that's married 'province girls' and OFWs - non of those groups are high end to phrase it nicely...)

I fear that the margin in Asia are not favourable at all for UA and that presently quite a few routes are true basketcases. Something I truly hope isn't the case, since I have been quite happy to see UA build up a real Asian hub in SFO.


UA is claiming they’ve been denied slots and other access at the airport for the second flight. Do you have proof otherwise?
 
georgiabill
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:44 pm

Is CEB slot restricted? If not could UA just give GUM-CEB-GUM a try while waiting for additional slots for a 2nd daily GUM-MNL-GUM? Would a 3x or 4x SFO-CEB-SFO be a root UA may consider in the future?

Any news on the new Manila airport? Has work began yet?
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1208
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:51 pm

georgiabill wrote:
Is CEB slot restricted? If not could UA just give GUM-CEB-GUM a try while waiting for additional slots for a 2nd daily GUM-MNL-GUM? Would a 3x or 4x SFO-CEB-SFO be a root UA may consider in the future?

Any news on the new Manila airport? Has work began yet?


What does CEB have to do with flying to Manila? It’s like saying that you can’t get a gate to fly into BOS so why not fly to IAD.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:59 pm

I was asking in terms of an option if UA could not get additional slots in MNL
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6123
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:18 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
georgiabill wrote:
Is CEB slot restricted? If not could UA just give GUM-CEB-GUM a try while waiting for additional slots for a 2nd daily GUM-MNL-GUM? Would a 3x or 4x SFO-CEB-SFO be a root UA may consider in the future?

Any news on the new Manila airport? Has work began yet?


What does CEB have to do with flying to Manila? It’s like saying that you can’t get a gate to fly into BOS so why not fly to IAD.


What UA wants is more GUM not necessarily SFO.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
x1234
Posts: 836
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:22 am

MNL is simply a clusterfark. PR flights to the USA are still at the old Terminal 1. I really hope UA gets slots so they launch SFO-MNL service. MNL has high end business traffic now due to the BPO/Call Center business. In fact after Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog (language of the Philippines) is the 3rd most spoken foreign language in the USA. There is some higher yielding demand to MNL.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14990
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:01 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
UA is claiming they’ve been denied slots and other access at the airport for the second flight. Do you have proof otherwise?


Do you have proof that UA is being denied anything, or is more of a case they are not willing to pay the commercial rates ??

UA already fly GUM-MNL sometimes twice a day UA183/UA193, that along with the PR111 they route is already overcapacity.

If this was really about GUM-MNL seats, UA could bring the HNL-GUM 777 UA201 service up to MNL, the timing would work out well to do HNL-GUM-MNL-GUM-HNL

If it was really about opening East coast-MNL, they could transfer a GUM-MNL slot internally.

None of this adds up.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1208
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:38 am

zeke wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
UA is claiming they’ve been denied slots and other access at the airport for the second flight. Do you have proof otherwise?


Do you have proof that UA is being denied anything, or is more of a case they are not willing to pay the commercial rates ??

UA already fly GUM-MNL sometimes twice a day UA183/UA193, that along with the PR111 they route is already overcapacity.

If this was really about GUM-MNL seats, UA could bring the HNL-GUM 777 UA201 service up to MNL, the timing would work out well to do HNL-GUM-MNL-GUM-HNL

If it was really about opening East coast-MNL, they could transfer a GUM-MNL slot internally.

None of this adds up.


So you’re just going to ask me the same question in reverse. Thanks. I’m sure if they’re willing to file that claim w DOT they’ll be asked to provide proof.
 
User avatar
Coal
Posts: 2588
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:55 am

x1234 wrote:
MNL is simply a clusterfark. PR flights to the USA are still at the old Terminal 1. I really hope UA gets slots so they launch SFO-MNL service. MNL has high end business traffic now due to the BPO/Call Center business. In fact after Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog (language of the Philippines) is the 3rd most spoken foreign language in the USA. There is some higher yielding demand to MNL.

BPO/Call centers have been around for 20+ years. And with RPA there’s significant erosion in demand for BPO.
Nxt Flts: SQ SIN-KIX | HD UKB-CTS | NH CTS-NRT | SQ NRT-SIN | AK SIN-DPS-SIN
 
dfw88
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:25 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:18 am

Ishrion wrote:
American Airlines Seattle to Manila, anyone?


A week ago I would've said "NO WAY" but these days I'm not as convinced ... ;)
 
Philippine747
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:54 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:21 am

UA seems also to have successfully blocked a planned expanded PAL MNL-GUM service. They proposed adding two additional sectors opb PAL Express aircraft (I think they were going to use the inherited route authorities of Air Philippines), which were listed on the timetable, but was removed. IMO, as I've said on the Philippine aviation thread, the CAB should just grant the slots to UA, as neither airline would be severely affected. Both airlines have good feeds on their end (PAL from MNL and UA from GUM). Lobbying to block the route(s) seems a bit harsh though.

SFOtoORD wrote:
What does CEB have to do with flying to Manila? It’s like saying that you can’t get a gate to fly into BOS so why not fly to IAD.


Nobody serves CEB-GUM so they got the whole market to themselves. CEB is being touted as an alternative to MNL for pax flying out from Visayas/Mindanao, and they've had experience with complying with US terminal security standards.

x1234 wrote:
MNL is simply a clusterfark. PR flights to the USA are still at the old Terminal 1. I really hope UA gets slots so they launch SFO-MNL service. MNL has high end business traffic now due to the BPO/Call Center business. In fact after Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog (language of the Philippines) is the 3rd most spoken foreign language in the USA. There is some higher yielding demand to MNL.


Most of PR's US flights depart from T2 (except JFK). However, they arrive at T1 because of customs and immigration capacity issues at T2.
A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 AT75 AT76 B732 B733 B738 B744 B752(M) B763 B772 B77W DHC7 DH8C DH8D D328 MA60

2P 5J 6K CX DG EK GA KE MI PR VN OS QR A3 OK TG RA U4 JL GK UB K7 WE BR
 
carlokiii
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:03 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:01 am

x1234 wrote:
MNL is simply a clusterfark. PR flights to the USA are still at the old Terminal 1. I really hope UA gets slots so they launch SFO-MNL service. MNL has high end business traffic now due to the BPO/Call Center business. In fact after Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog (language of the Philippines) is the 3rd most spoken foreign language in the USA. There is some higher yielding demand to MNL.

Terminal 1’s arrivals is much better than Terminal 2 so I’m not sure what you were trying to prove.
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:06 am

x1234 wrote:
MNL is simply a clusterfark. PR flights to the USA are still at the old Terminal 1. I really hope UA gets slots so they launch SFO-MNL service. MNL has high end business traffic now due to the BPO/Call Center business. In fact after Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog (language of the Philippines) is the 3rd most spoken foreign language in the USA. There is some higher yielding demand to MNL.


As someone else pointed out in another post, call centers have been around in the Philippines for decades.
Also, not all call center workers are of the "high-yielding" types, I suspect most are of the "low yielding VFR" variety.

I also find it hard to believe that UA is after a SFO-MNL (or SEA-MNL) flight for that matter, considering most of their wide bodies can be used on "more higher yielding" routes where the return is greater. I have to agree with the others that UA is mostly after a second GUM-MNL flight.

Considering that PR has mopped up most of the limited high yielding market out of MNL, If anything if UA wishes to return to the likes of MNL or BKK from the US mainland, it'll likely be through a long-haul Low Cost Carrier subsidiary, where the operational costs and budget seating suits the largely low-yielding budget conscious Thailand and Philippine markets where most of the market are buying cheap budget tickets.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4905
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:02 am

Polot wrote:
UA doesn’t want to fly SEA-MNL. They are claiming that the Filipino government is consistently denying UA’s request for more slots/facilities access at MNL and therefore the DOT should deny PR’s request until the Filipino government allows them more access.

That's only Fair. Can't come to our House and then Deny access to yours. The PR will play the " Well your house is so much bigger than Ours" Card. And that is really true. But? Is that OUR Fault? NO!!
 
flyingdoc787
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:26 am

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:04 am

IIRC, UA used to have 2 flights a day between GUM and MNL. One flight in the morning and another in the evening... aside from the ROR/Chuuk flights.
Would they want to try CRK instead? There’s probably more slots available there, and it’s not too far from Manila.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7791
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: UA is unhappy with Philippines Airlines expansion at SEA

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:10 am

SCFlyer wrote:
If anything if UA wishes to return to the likes of MNL or BKK from the US mainland, it'll likely be through a long-haul Low Cost Carrier subsidiary, where the operational costs and budget seating suits the largely low-yielding budget conscious Thailand and Philippine markets where most of the market are buying cheap budget tickets.


What are you talking about? UA can't have low-cost subsidiaries unless unions agree to them - and unions won't in time of good profits.

Who is online

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