Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:07 am

United has started the second daily service between their hub at Washington Dulles and São Paulo Guarulhos International on November 1st.

On the last 4 days, the higher number of pax on GRU-IAD leg was 34 (yes, thirty-four). And incuded non-revenue tickets. Only 1 is First Class and 2 are Business, all other are Y. I don't have info on cargo.

The flight is available on the system since july and their competitors are doing a very good job on the route Brazil-US. Departure time is not good for connections so UA nowadays face strong competition of RG flights, one DL flight and one AA flight.

Looks like that the strategy to hold slots on the US-Brazil bilateral will cost them a lot of money and that the additional offer added this year (14 new DL flights to SP and Rio, 7 new UA flights, and also RG will add 6 frequencies to MIA, 4 to JFK and JJ the new service 4x GRU-JFK), drives loads down on the low season for some flights like the second ATL-GRU and the daily light GRU-MIA (AA).

Regards,
Felipe

Edited to change Flight number from 860 to 824. (my mistake)



[Edited 2005-11-06 00:11:37]
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:36 am

Like I said from the day it was announced, there is no market for more than one daily Washington-Sao Paulo flight. UA would be more wise using the slot from another gateway, like LAX.
a.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24735
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 2:28 pm

While the new flight 825/824 flights were a quick response by UA to hang onto Brazil route frequency authority, the flights are not doing as bad as your comments would make them seem.

The southbound flight UA825 which departs IAD at 630pm along with most of UA's European bank of departures is actually booking on par with the original GRU flight, and looking at bookings most days actually has more premium business class passengers then the 945pm departure.
On the northbound leg, however the new UA824 flight indeed has weaker loads, mostly likely due to its very late 0025am departure time and also its later IAD arrival missing the 8am IAD departure bank.
Prior to adding the 2nd flight, it had been planned to bring back the 777 to either the IAD or ORD-GRU flights due to demand exceeding the single 767 flight.

While many have suggested UA should have looked to operate the extra frequency to a destination like LA, the 767 simply could not perform the route for United. Besides slight payload penalties on the GRU-LA leg, the flights blocktime would have exceeded 12hrs, which is the FAA and ALPA contractual limit of the aircraft as the 763s do not have separate lay-flat crew rest facilities. The only aircraft that UA could operate in the market would be the 777 or B744, however both would be overkill from a seat capacity point of view. Also UA entering the California-Brazil market could very well knock Varig off the route as itself is marginal without the Japan tag flight.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 2:49 pm

How's the cargo load on the new flight?

Also, the season to Brazil won't kick in until the end of November. This is still the slow period. That flight will be sold out from Thanksgiving to Easter.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
laca773
Posts: 2081
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:07 pm

I hadn't thought about UA starting a NRT-LAX-GRU-LAX-NRT since RG dropped NRT. I bet UA would do very well with that with transiting passengers going on to NRT. Any UA insiders know if this is a possiblility??

LACA773
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:36 pm

Quoting LACA773 (Reply 4):
I hadn't thought about UA starting a NRT-LAX-GRU-LAX-NRT since RG dropped NRT. I bet UA would do very well with that with transiting passengers going on to NRT. Any UA insiders know if this is a possiblility??

United gets some passengers transferring from Star Alliance partner ANA at Dulles to the GRU flights. It's a lousy connection, however, because the ANA flight from Tokyo arrives in the morning and United's first flight to GRU doesn't depart until 6:30 p.m.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:45 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 2):
Prior to adding the 2nd flight, it had been planned to bring back the 777 to either the IAD or ORD-GRU flights due to demand exceeding the single 767 flight.

I also think SA)">UA would have handled the situation better with the introduction of the B777 on IAD-GRU or maybe using the second daily flight on IAD-GIG rather than the saturated GRU market. Note that GIG is RG's second biggest hub and SA)">DL's recent ATL-GIG nonstop is extremely successful so far and started in the middle of the low season (Oct/05).

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 5):
United gets some passengers transferring from Star Alliance partner ANA at Dulles to the GRU flights

I dont think SA)">UA would get traffic rights NRT-GRU. Also, RG's NRT connections in LAX will be done by ANA; other pax will be routed via FRA connectin onward to NRT with LH.

Interesting to note that SA)">UA still has 5th freedom rights GRU-JNB - with SA entering Star maybe we could see SA)">UA operating IAD-GRU-JNB in the future?

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
SA)">UA would be more wise using the slot from another gateway, like LAX.

Or maybe even better: SFO. In the past SA)">UA operated SFO-MIA-GRU. Nowayds flight options from US West Coast to Brazil are very poor.

Rgs,
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:02 am

Quoting LipeGIG (Thread starter):
United has started the second daily service between their hub at Washington Dulles and São Paulo Guarulhos International on November 1st.

Why am I not suprised. When the second daily flight was announced, my first thought was... Why? In the past Varig served Washington D.C., but it was via Atlanta. The demand is not there for a second daily flight. United Airlines cannot afford to break even on the route. It has to be dropped before United dumps more and more money into yet another foolish venture.

United Airlines should use its Brasilian resources elsewhere such as Chicago. The idea that Washington would go from no service to Sao Paulo to 2 daily is almost borderline insanity. United has not done well for years with the Brasilian market, it is time to cut your losses and make deal with what makes money. United could easily run 2 daily flights to Brasil with a more than healthy return. 3 flights, just does not make sense. If United were to solidify its presence at Chicago, they could slowly turn back Washington. A daily service non-stop ORD-GRU-BSB, and a daily service ORD-GIG-SSA would more than suffice the demand for Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro combined. All of the Washington connecting passengers could be routed via Chicago.

Quoting LACA773 (Reply 4):
I hadn't thought about UA starting a NRT-LAX-GRU-LAX-NRT since RG dropped NRT.

You seem to forget that Varig is still operating LAX-GRU-GIG with the MD-11. That will more than suffice for the number of passengers from Los Angeles. In addition United Airlines cannot afford to expend anymore 777's, their aircraft are at a maximum utilization, and cannot be put on routes that have not yet been proven to make a decent return.


KAHALA777
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:06 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 2):
On the northbound leg, however the new UA824 flight indeed has weaker loads, mostly likely due to its very late 0025am departure time and also its later IAD arrival missing the 8am IAD departure bank.

Another question....why have the second aircraft from IAD sit all day in GRU (the other goes on to Rio where it sits all day)? Couldn't United make it a daytime flight to make convenient evening connections at IAD??? Seems like poor equipment utilization, but what do I know?!
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:08 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
A daily service non-stop ORD-GRU-BSB, and a daily service ORD-GIG-SSA would more than suffice the demand for Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro combined.

The demand is nowhere close to being there for United to fly to Brasilia or Salvador de Bahia. Both markets are far too small for United's presence in Brazil, which you rightly characterize as small, weak, and gradually declining over the last few years. If any U.S. airline is going to be flying to either of those cities, or to Natal, Recife, Manaus, Belem, Fortaleza, Belo Horizonte, etc., it is going to be American from Miami. That is the only market that could support regularly scheduled flights to these smaller, albeit still important, outlying Brazilian points.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:16 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
It has to be dropped before United dumps more and more money into yet another foolish venture.

And do what with the valuable authority?

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
If United were to solidify its presence at Chicago, they could slowly turn back Washington.

They don't WANT to turn back Washington. The loads/yields on the 1 IAD-GRU flight were outstanding. They're doing this to hold a slot.

Granted, that slot should have been used for IAD-GIG nonstop.

N
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:18 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 9):
The demand is nowhere close to being there for United to fly to Brasilia or Salvador de Bahia

Something of interest to you. Some of the top destinations for travel from San Francisco/Los Angeles to Brasil include:

Belo Horizonte
Brasilia
Goiania

Dont knock it until you know it. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there is a huge Brasilian community that fills up United Airlines connecting flights to Varig from SFO via LAX. Dont under estimate the power of connections.

KAHALA777
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:22 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
You seem to forget that Varig is still operating LAX-GRU-GIG with the MD-11.

You're right. And also, Varig will add to this route a 5th frequency on january and will add another flight on may/june, giving LAX-GRU-GIG a 6 times per week. Varig expects to turn LAX a daily destination by the end of 2006.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 6):
I also think SA)">UA would have handled the situation better with the introduction of the B777 on IAD-GRU or maybe using the second daily flight on IAD-GIG rather than the saturated GRU market

Could be an option. Also the best connection from BSB is the BSB-GIG RG 777 service which also keep with UA code-share flight number. As Hardi noted, Rio is only 18% lower than GRU in terms of domestic pax.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 2):
The southbound flight UA825 which departs IAD at 630pm along with most of UA's European bank of departures is actually booking on par with the original GRU flight, and looking at bookings most days actually has more premium business class passengers then the 945pm departure.

LaxIntl, probably UA first departure (it arive GRU in the early morning) provides a better connection inbound IAD and the same at GRU (RG domestic connections at GRU after 11 AM is something terrible). But as you said, UA receive more pax on the first flights. The last flight IAD-GRU and GRU-IAD are not performing well (and as my comment above, 15% load is totally non profitable). If UA looks that the problem was only a matter of time, just adjust it, there are no demand for two IAD-GRU flights.

Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
DETA737
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2000 3:47 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:30 am

I wonder how well SFO-GRU would do. Probably not a very large O+D route but they have excellent connections to Asia and there is growing trade between China and Brazil so perhaps this route could be somewhat viable.
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:34 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
The idea that Washington would go from no service to Sao Paulo to 2 daily is almost borderline insanity.

Well, insanity would be too much. You have to keep into perspective that DL has been operating two daily ATL-GRU successfully. In addition, UA's daily IAD-GRU had VERY high loads and yields year-around.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 7):
United has not done well for years with the Brasilian market, it is time to cut your losses and make deal with what makes money

UA should have opened IAD-GIG instead of a 2nd IAD-GRU - look at DL!!!!

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 8):
Another question....why have the second aircraft from IAD sit all day in GRU (the other goes on to Rio where it sits all day)? Couldn't United make it a daytime flight to make convenient evening connections at IAD??? Seems like poor equipment utilization, but what do I know?!

All UA three daily aircraft used for the Brazilian market remain iddle during the day, 2 in GRU and 1 in GIG.

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 10):
They don't WANT to turn back Washington. The loads/yields on the 1 IAD-GRU flight were outstanding. They're doing this to hold a slot.

Granted, that slot should have been used for IAD-GIG nonstop.

Correct. UA should have opened IAD-GIG instead!!! This was UA mistake, I hope they realise this and change the flight next year. UA would have far better performance in GIG compared to DL ATL-GIG because it has a partner strong in GIG (RG). RG has strong operations in GIG. Again, it was a big mistake to open a 2nd IAD-GRU; their decision should have been IAD-GIG!!!!!

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Dont knock it until you know it. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there is a huge Brasilian community that fills up United Airlines connecting flights to Varig from SFO via LAX. Dont under estimate the power of connections.

Good point here. UA and AA have a significant share of their pax connecting onwards in GRU because they have the partnership of RG and TAM respectively. I could easily state that at least 40% to 50% (and I'm being conservative) of their total pax arriving in GRU are connecting to other domestic destinations - I'm sure Felipe can confirm this information.

Rgs,
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:47 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Dont knock it until you know it. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there is a huge Brasilian community that fills up United Airlines connecting flights to Varig from SFO via LAX. Dont under estimate the power of connections.

Forgive me, but United flying to BSB, CNF, SSA, etc. is a complete joke. It will never happen. United has nowhere near the amount of demand it requires to fly to those cities. The only markets in the U.S. that generate enough demand for flights to those places are JFK and MIA, and AA will have both covered soon enough with either its own flights or existing JJ codeshare connections. UA from ORD to either of these cities, nonstop or even via intermediate points like GRU and/or GIG, would be a complete a total waste, as it would miss the vast majority of U.S. travelers to these cities, who are coming from the eastern U.S. I don't care how big the Brazilian community is in SFO, LAX or anywhere else. It is nowhere near big enough to justify nonstop or through-flights to any of the aformentioned cities.
 
DAL767400ER
Posts: 5084
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:47 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:49 am

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 8):
Another question....why have the second aircraft from IAD sit all day in GRU (the other goes on to Rio where it sits all day)? Couldn't United make it a daytime flight to make convenient evening connections at IAD??? Seems like poor equipment utilization, but what do I know?!

That's what the market demands: Late evening departures/early morning arrivals in both directions on US-Brazil/Argentina/Chile flights, hence you see myriads of AA/CO/DL/UA 777s and 763s standing on the ground for hours at GRU/GIG/EZE/SCL, and RG/JJ doing the same at US airports. The only airport, to which daytime flights are viable, is Miami. Other than that, loads and yields on daytime departures would be very bad.
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:15 am

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 16):
AA/CO/DL/UA 777s and 763s standing on the ground for hours at GRU/GIG/EZE/SCL, and RG/JJ doing the same at US airports. The only airport, to which daytime flights are viable, is Miami. Other than that, loads and yields on daytime departures would be very bad

Varig will start 4x weekly daily-light GRU-JFK next summer and Tam will run a daily light sunday frequency on JFK-GRU leg. As Varig service will be seasonal, i imagine it can show good loads, but i can't imagine so good yields. As they will use a aircraft that use to be on ground during the day to generate revenue, its probably a good deal.

On january in fact, Brazilian airlines will upgrade their use on the bilateral from 32 weekly flights to 47 (+1 LAX, +6 MIA, +8 JFK)

Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
wdleiser
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 9:32 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:15 am

IT SEEMS as if people are forgetting that UAL is running this second flight to HOLD ON TO A SLOT.

Does anyone read all the responses these days?
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:21 am

Quoting Wdleiser (Reply 18):
IT SEEMS as if people are forgetting that UAL is running this second flight to HOLD ON TO A SLOT.

You have a point here; and a VERY expensive a fought-after slot! Of course, UA would have to pay a price for it! But what I'm stating is that it could have made better use of the slot opening IAD-GIG.

Rgs,
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8535
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:46 am

Firstly, I'm even surprised there is a demand for GRU-IAD. I bet UA gets tons of connections for that route.

IAD-GIG... doubt it. Not really a point to it. What are the connections between Rio and Washington anyway?

UA should fly something like XXX-MIA-MAO and maybe connecting onwards to BSB. Or even Flying XXX-MIA-REC-SSA. Probably best with a B757.

MAO = tons of cargo to say the least.
REC/SSA = significant market size + connections.

If DL is smart, after the peak season, they will switch that second GRU frequency to MAO/BSB/REC or a combination of them for the low season. Probably fly it with a B757 also.

Cheers

[Edited 2005-11-06 20:48:16]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:59 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 20):
Firstly, I'm even surprised there is a demand for GRU-IAD. I bet UA gets tons of connections for that route.

IAD-GIG... doubt it. Not really a point to it. What are the connections between Rio and Washington anyway?

UA should fly something like XXX-MIA-MAO and maybe connecting onwards to BSB. Or even Flying XXX-MIA-REC-SSA. Probably best with a B757.

MAO = tons of cargo to say the least.
REC/SSA = significant market size + connections.

If DL is smart, after the peak season, they will switch that second GRU frequency to MAO/BSB/REC or a combination of them for the low season. Probably fly it with a B757 also.

Sorry, but I consider the above post complete nonsense.

DL is doing excelent on its two daily GRU even in low season. BTW, the flight has excelente cargo loads (one of the best in DL wordwide network), and could fly with no pax that it would break even!

IAD is a connecting hub the same way ATL is for DL or IAH for CO, etc, etc Of course, there is demand for IAD-GIG connecting; the same way there is demand for ATL-GIG, buit almost zero O&D. In addition, UA has RG in GIG.

All the other markets you mentioned, BSB, SSA, REC, etc, are of NO interest to UA and DL, and dont stand a chance. No way DL or UA would land in any other destination in Brazil, except for GIG or GRU.

Rgs,
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:01 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 20):
Firstly, I'm even surprised there is a demand for GRU-IAD. I bet UA gets tons of connections for that route.

IAD-GIG... doubt it. Not really a point to it. What are the connections between Rio and Washington anyway?

UA should fly something like XXX-MIA-MAO and maybe connecting onwards to BSB. Or even Flying XXX-MIA-REC-SSA. Probably best with a B757.

MAO = tons of cargo to say the least.
REC/SSA = significant market size + connections.

If DL is smart, after the peak season, they will switch that second GRU frequency to MAO/BSB/REC or a combination of them for the low season. Probably fly it with a B757 also.

Sorry, but I consider the above post complete nonsense.

DL is doing excelent on its two daily GRU even in low season. BTW, the flight has excelent cargo loads (one of the best in DL wordwide network), and could fly with no pax that it would break even!

IAD is a connecting hub the same way ATL is for DL or IAH for CO, etc, etc Of course, there is demand for IAD-GIG connecting; the same way there is demand for ATL-GIG, buit almost zero O&D. In addition, UA has RG in GIG.

All the other markets you mentioned, BSB, SSA, REC, etc, are of NO interest to UA and DL, and dont stand a chance. No way DL or UA would land in any other destination in Brazil, except for GIG or GRU.

Rgs,
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:11 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 20):
IAD-GIG... doubt it. Not really a point to it. What are the connections between Rio and Washington anyway?

Washington provides excellent online connections to the entire New England area as well as Ohio, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia, even some NC pax and probably some Indiana pax. That represents a huge portion of the US population, with DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston represented.

DC is this country's 4th largest metro, it would provide a fair amount of O/D on its own, plus the connecting traffic mentioned.

N
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8535
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:15 am

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 22):

DL is doing excelent on its two daily GRU even in low season. BTW, the flight has excelent cargo loads (one of the best in DL wordwide network), and could fly with no pax that it would break even!

I odn't know about cargo, but from what i've heard DL's loads have droped since GIG began.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 22):
IAD is a connecting hub the same way ATL is for DL or IAH for CO, etc, etc Of course, there is demand for IAD-GIG connecting; the same way there is demand for ATL-GIG, buit almost zero O&D. In addition, UA has RG in GIG.

Yes, UA has RG in GIG, but so are they at GRU. GRU offers a lot more international connections and destinations than GIG.

I think whatever connecting demand for GIG UA may have does not warrant a separate service, and there is little, if any, benefits for GIG pax to connect onwards from IAD as opposed to GRU.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 22):
All the other markets you mentioned, BSB, SSA, REC, etc, are of NO interest to UA and DL, and dont stand a chance. No way DL or UA would land in any other destination in Brazil, except for GIG or GRU.

They are the two only carriers with "excessive" frequencies to Brazil. Maybe not DL, as you mentioned their cargo may be doing very well, but certainly UA.

RG can connect many pax for UA from MAO/REC/SSA.

Cheers
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:35 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 24):
I think whatever connecting demand for GIG UA may have does not warrant a separate service, and there is little, if any, benefits for GIG pax to connect onwards from IAD as opposed to GRU.

GIG does not handle so many non stops, IAD could be usefull for people from New York, Boston and even Chicago. Remember that IAD-GIG could provide an early morning arive at Rio. Nowadays UA arive GIG at 13:30 ! insane for connections or even people with commitments during the day. AA and DL flights arive early morning, allowing to their pax many connecting flights.
Also, PPVRA, GIG offer more flights to BSB, CNF, VIX, CPQ and SSA than GRU.

Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24735
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:58 am

First we need to keep things in perspective here.

The 2nd IAD-GRU flight was added basically to hang on to traffic rights. Demand was in place already to upgrade one of the GRU service from either ORD or IAD to a 777 this northern winter, but instead the 2nd flight was added from IAD for the gain in seat capacity.

For those that feel UA, should have added a IAD-GIG flight, this would have been an even poorer business decision on the carriers part.
As is, the clear majority of the airlines Brazil demand is destined to Sao Paulo. UA's current single GRU-GIG short tag flight which collects passengers from both the ORD and IAD flights is lucky to maintain a load of 75 people.

A nonstop IAD-GIG flight would not only deprive GRU of seat capacity, however would have affects like further weakening the GRU-GIG tag flight if it was maintained for the ORD passengers, or eliminating the ORD connectivity if the flight was dropped completely.
Running a 10hr IAD-GIG nonstop is a huge financial and market risk compared adding a 2nd frequency in an already established market which had a demand for capacity increase.

What UA has done is concentrate its flights to GRU, the market were the majority of its customers want to go, and continue operating a low cost tag flight for those wishing to continue onto GIG.

Also please all remember, high season has yet to start yet. I would venture to guess that at the of the day, UA's 2nd flight will see much improved loads and likely breakeven and help provide a positive contribution network wise, and have been a worthwile attempt to maintain the carriers bilateral Brazil traffic rights.

Lastly, as mentioned before UA cant operate a CA-Brazil flight unless it want to commit larger B777s to the market which at the moment cannot be supplied nor does the market warrant it. Varig as is barely manages nonstop LA-Brazil which no longer are daily.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:11 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 24):
I odn't know about cargo, but from what i've heard DL's loads have droped since GIG began.

PPVRA: even after the GIG flight, GRU is doing quite well (iof not excellent) for DL. GRU is highly profitable for GRU before and after GIG. Of course, DL's GIG flight was just launched, there were plenty of promotional fares before the flight started, high season, end of the year + carnaval, the big test will come in March/06. I do hope DL will keep its excellent loads and yields to GIG after March.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 25):
Nowadays UA arive GIG at 13:30 ! insane for connections or even people with commitments during the day

Correct. With such arrival time you can only attract very low-yielding pax (leisure).

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
The 2nd IAD-GRU flight was added basically to hang on to traffic rights. Demand was in place already to upgrade one of the GRU service from either ORD or IAD to a 777 this northern winter, but instead the 2nd flight was added from IAD for the gain in seat capacity.



Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
For those that feel UA, should have added a IAD-GIG flight, this would have been an even poorer business decision on the carriers part.
As is, the clear majority of the airlines Brazil demand is destined to Sao Paulo. UA's current single GRU-GIG short tag flight which collects passengers from both the ORD and IAD flights is lucky to maintain a load of 75 people.



Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
A nonstop IAD-GIG flight would not only deprive GRU of seat capacity, however would have affects like further weakening the GRU-GIG tag flight if it was maintained for the ORD passengers, or eliminating the ORD connectivity if the flight was dropped completely.
Running a 10hr IAD-GIG nonstop is a huge financial and market risk compared adding a 2nd frequency in an already established market which had a demand for capacity increase.

1. Yes, but UA would do better with a IAD-GIG flight instead of a second IAD-GRU. Demand for GRU would be accommodated opening GIG, especially taking into account that RG offers better connections in GIG rather than GRU for many important domestic destinations such BSB, VIX, CNF, SSA. This would entail that the daily IAD-GRU could focus on GRU market and South Brazil.

2. It was a huge risk for DL to open GIG; and now look at the result: a resound success! UA could count on RG connections in GIG plus UA already has establish facilties + staff in GIG, and in addition operates in the new T2! As for DL, GIG was a complete new fenture, a highly risky busienss, which is turing out to be a big victory. It seems that DL did better their market studies than UA.

3. By introducing IAD-GIG, UA could operate one IAD-GRU and terminate the ORD flight in GRU. RG could take care of any connections to GIG for pax arriving from ORD.

4. As for the daily 80 pax onboard UA's leg to GIG, I'm not surprised, with such a horrible timetable, only leisure pax would use UA to GIG. DL says thank you!

In sum, it is obvious that UA miscalculated and could have made more money if they had decided to open IAD-GIG instead of a second IAD-GRU. I hope they revise their decision next year.

Rgs,
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:19 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
As is, the clear majority of the airlines Brazil demand is destined to Sao Paulo. UA's current single GRU-GIG short tag flight which collects passengers from both the ORD and IAD flights is lucky to maintain a load of 75 people.

If you offer connections from GRU and the flight arrive GIG at 13:30 i can say it's a miracle keep 75 people. All other flights from US and Europe arive at Rio in early morning.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
Running a 10hr IAD-GIG nonstop is a huge financial and market risk compared adding a 2nd frequency in an already established market which had a demand for capacity increase

Sorry LaxIntl, i desagree. Sao Paulo does not hold a O&D market for this flight. All that flight receive are connections, and they get more pax from BSB than any other city (included São Paulo). The market for IAD in Brazil is sparse.
There is no market risk, you keep a plane, a full team in Rio, connections (UA keep code-share to CNF and BSB from GIG), and taxes in Rio is by far lower than GRU. Several people says the same about DL, look to the results for the first month in low season.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
Varig as is barely manages nonstop LA-Brazil which no longer are daily.

LAX is a very good route nowadays for RG. That's why they will upgrade next january to 5x weekly and may/june to 6x weekly. Expected a daily flight by 2006 end.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
Also please all remember, high season has yet to start yet. I would venture to guess that at the of the day, UA's 2nd flight will see much improved loads

With 15% loads on low season, i can't expect good contribution even with 100% loads on High Season. Also, this high season RG will provide more service to Miami (as well as AA) and New York (as well as a new JJ service). I doubt see IAD with good loads on High Season. As pointed above, main destinations to/from Brazil are Miami and New York, and people will try first to get direct flights.

Even the perspectives for the future are not so good IMO.

Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:20 am

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 27):
In sum, it is obvious that UA miscalculated and could have made more money if they had decided to open IAD-GIG instead of a second IAD-GRU. I hope they revise their decision next year.

Couldnt United Airlines move the route authority to operate a flight such as IAD-GIG-GRU?

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 27):
4. As for the daily 80 pax onboard UA's leg to GIG, I'm not surprised, with such a horrible timetable, only leisure pax would use UA to GIG. DL says thank you!

Continental Airlines service GRU-GIG on average has less passengers. So if United Airlines can fill 80 seats they are not doing to bad to Rio de Janeiro.

KAHALA777
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:43 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 29):
Continental Airlines service GRU-GIG on average has less passengers

Correct, but CO flight also arrives very late at about 11h30 in GIG. CO and UA timetable to GIG is very poor and not attractive for high-yielding pax. However, UA should be doing much better in GIG, especially because UA has a major partner in GIG (RG). I cannot understand why UA does not operate a nonstop to GIG; instead, DL had to open up this window opportunity with far less conditions. DL started GIG literaly from "zero", and their results in GIG are amazing to say the least.

Rgs,
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:48 am

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 30):
CO and UA timetable to GIG is very poor and not attractive for high-yielding pax.

GIG, generally is not regarded as a high yield destination in South America. The highest yielding markets in South America include Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, and Santiago. Unfortunately United Airlines gave up on Santiago a number of years ago. In addition over the years a good number of airlines have pulled the plug on service to GIG due to both a drop in demand, and less than impressive yields.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 30):
DL started GIG literaly from "zero", and their results in GIG are amazing to say the least.

Delta flew to GIG from the late 1990s via the MD-11. They had presence, and they were missed. Delta has gained a loyal following in Brasil and has had loyal SkyMiles members in place for a good number of years.

KAHALA777
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:02 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 29):
Continental Airlines service GRU-GIG on average has less passengers. So if United Airlines can fill 80 seats they are not doing to bad to Rio de Janeiro.

Kahala, CO gets in general more pax than UA and also, they fill the Business Class with more pax from Rio. IAH-GRU-GIG is a oil route, different from IAD-GRU-GIG. 100% of oil related Business are located in Rio de Janeiro.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 31):
GIG, generally is not regarded as a high yield destination in South America. The highest yielding markets in South America include Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, and Santiago. Unfortunately United Airlines gave up on Santiago a number of years ago. In addition over the years a good number of airlines have pulled the plug on service to GIG due to both a drop in demand, and less than impressive yields.

Oil & Telecom Boom has started in the last 3 years. Before that, connections and international flights went to GRU and some domestic flights has been placed to/from SDU (downtown Rio). Afther the realocation from SDU and the recent oil & telecom boom, Rio become more important and with a good mix on High & Low Yield pax. I can't agree with you as we could see all the flights from GRU, but the airlines know they need to serve Rio, otherwise competitors can take care of the market.

Regards
Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:11 am

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 32):
I can't agree with you as we could see all the flights from GRU, but the airlines know they need to serve Rio, otherwise competitors can take care of the market.

Airlines do not need to serve Rio de Janeiro to be in the Brasilian market. Look at Alitalia, business shape aside, money was not to be made in serving Rio de Janeiro, it was made in serving Sao Paulo. In addition Air France chose the 747-400 to Rio de Janeiro for the high number of leisure travellers in the market. American pulled JFK-GIG, and Continental EWR-GIG. In the past we have seen the likes of KLM, MEA, and Royal Air Maroc all pull the plug on Rio de Janeiro as well.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 32):
CO gets in general more pax than UA and also, they fill the Business Class with more pax from Rio. IAH-GRU-GIG is a oil route

You are also forgetting that United Airlines maintains a three-class product to Rio de Janeiro, while Continental uses smaller equipment in a two-class product.


KAHALA777
 
AwysBSB
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:58 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:46 am

There is a significant demand between BSB and IAD.
Some people make a mistake when tell that Brasília has no market for UAL so that TransBrasil withdrew its nonstop services between those cities some years ago.
There is a significant number of public servants traveling between those cities and an increasing number of Brasilienses making leisure trips to Washington too.
On June 15 of this year, I went to an event that announced to the travel agents of Brasilia not only the new flight UA824/UA825, but also the IAD improvements and the tourist destinations of Washington, DC & The Capital Region USA.
For me such an event (which was sponsored by United, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, Washington, DC Convention & Tourism Corporation and Intervisa) made clear that Brasília is in the United`s focus and that IAD/BSB/IAD is practicable.
 
LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:46 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 33):
You are also forgetting that United Airlines maintains a three-class product to Rio de Janeiro, while Continental uses smaller equipment in a two-class product.

A 767-400 is smaller than 767-300 ? CO use to fly GIG with 767-200 but they change (use the 767-200 on EWR-GRU and the 767-400 on IAH-GRU-GIG). I only imagine that they need more space to IAH and GIG (as Sao Paulo is not an oil destination).

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 33):
Airlines do not need to serve Rio de Janeiro to be in the Brasilian market. Look at Alitalia, business shape aside, money was not to be made in serving Rio de Janeiro, it was made in serving Sao Paulo. In addition Air France chose the 747-400 to Rio de Janeiro for the high number of leisure travellers in the market. American pulled JFK-GIG, and Continental EWR-GIG. In the past we have seen the likes of KLM, MEA, and Royal Air Maroc all pull the plug on Rio de Janeiro as well.

This is past and some after 9/11. About AF they have better results in Brazil in Rio with "leisure" travellers. If you want a high yield flight, use the same points on Y to GIG or Business on Daily light CDG-GRU. AF is strong in connections, and they do not offer connections in Rio, just in São Paulo.

Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:50 am

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 35):
A 767-400 is smaller than 767-300 ?

It is a seasonal upgrade. Also keep in mind that United Airlines operates a three-class config while Continental is a two-class.

KAHALA777
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24735
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 9:42 am

Guys, it seems again this has turned into a Rio vs Sao Paulo slug match.


Let me just say the following as we are specifically taking about United and its 3rd frequency to Brazil.

United itself has stated that its hubs are very poorly located geographically to service South America. Delta Airlines has a better chance at successfully operating a ATL-GIG service then UA would ever have with a IAD-GIG service.
Delta's Atlanta super hub provides incredible connections from the entire country, while UA's IAD hub does not even connect more then half of United domestic cities.

In addition I know from having looked at boardings besides its smaller size Rio has a roughly 80/20 split in overall leisure versus business demand, while Sao Paulo not only is bigger but has close 60/40 split making it the more important destination.

The demand in UA's case was for additional seats to Sao Paulo, hence the carriers initial plan to upgrade services with a 777, prior to the urgent need to use or loose its remaining Brazil authorities.
The added Sao Paulo flight while not strictly required on a pure O&D basis is a relatively lower cost and lower risk move on the carriers behalf compared to operating a 10hr trip solely to GIG, which not only has overall lower demand, but also suffers lower yields due to its stronger leisure tilt.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 10:58 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 29):
Couldnt United Airlines move the route authority to operate a flight such as IAD-GIG-GRU?

Sure. Why would they?

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 31):
In addition over the years a good number of airlines have pulled the plug on service to GIG due to both a drop in demand, and less than impressive yields.

And others have capitalized on that.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 33):
Airlines do not need to serve Rio de Janeiro to be in the Brasilian market.

True. But those that don't are missing valuable opportunity.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 36):
It is a seasonal upgrade. Also keep in mind that United Airlines operates a three-class config while Continental is a two-class.

So?

N
 
bayareapilot
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 3:53 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 11:24 am

Quoting DETA737 (Reply 13):
I wonder how well SFO-GRU would do. Probably not a very large O+D route but they have excellent connections to Asia and there is growing trade between China and Brazil so perhaps this route could be somewhat viable.

Given that both Chinese and Brazilians require a visa to transit the US, I'm sure they'd prefer to connect in a more reasonable country.
 
767-300ER
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:20 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:08 pm

CO 764 IAH-GRU-GIG is not a seasonal upgrade. It was permanently upgraded to a 764. Also why does it matter that its 2 class? The number of seats being filled is the argument.
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:29 pm

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 33):
Airlines do not need to serve Rio de Janeiro to be in the Brasilian market. Look at Alitalia, business shape aside, money was not to be made in serving Rio de Janeiro, it was made in serving Sao Paulo. In addition Air France chose the 747-400 to Rio de Janeiro for the high number of leisure travellers in the market.

Sorry, but I disagree. Over the last 3-2 years there has been a drastic chance in GIG market profile, as mentioned by Lipe, among them: 1) relocation SDU-GIG which means connections in GIG are now better than GRU for a number of important locations such as BSB, CNF, VIX, SSA, etc; 2) Booming industry, i.e. high yielding pax, from sectors such as shipping to telecom, marketing, conference, and of course oil and car. GIG is now the no. 1 destination for both the conference and oil sector.

Your point about AZ: AZ moved out of GIG because it has a codeshare with RG, which entailed RG moving out of FCO.

Your point about KL: KL has a codeshare with TAM for GRU-GIG; also with the AF-KL merger, and AF serving GIG nonstop, KL pax can easily fly via CDG with AF;

Your point about AF: It is a BIG mistake to say that AF uses the B747 to GIG to capitalise on the leisure market. This is WRONG! AF is always FULL in ALL classes to GIG. AF was operating the A340/A330 to GIG with one leg daylight, results were so excellent that they introduced the B747 and both legs are now red-eye. AF has two configurations for the B747: 40J/393Y or 17J/457Y. Guess which one they use to GIG? 40J/393Y, showing clearly that GIG is a high-yielding market for AF!!! Testimony of GIG's importance for AF is the fact that AF serves GIG with the NEV (its newest product).

[of course, in GRU they offer First class, something they cannot manage in GIG, but here nobody want to compare GIG and GRU, the point is that GIG market has substantially improved in recent years].

What I was just arguing is that I personally think UA would do better with IAD-GIG. UA already is a known brand in GIG, has staff and structure in GIG, operates in the new T2, got a partner in RG + connectins...they could capitalise on this new market. Of coure, it is a risk; DL took this risk and is showing strong performance in GIG. I'm also aware many airlines got burned in GIG in the past, but the market in GIG has changed drastically in recent years.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 37):
United itself has stated that its hubs are very poorly located geographically to service South America. Delta Airlines has a better chance at successfully operating a ATL-GIG service then UA would ever have with a IAD-GIG service.

Very good point here. AA's MIA, CO's IAH, DL' ATL are far better hubs for South America if compared to UA's ORD and IAD. However, UA has a strategic partner in deep South America: RG, something DL and CO dont have...so UA can caiptalise more on connections and FFs pax.

Rgs,
 
Glareskin
Posts: 1014
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:41 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 23):
DC is this country's 4th largest metro

Hmm, I suspect that you've only accounted for NYC, LA and Chicago to be larger but according to the latest revision of the World Urbanization Prospects report from the United Nations the following Metro's have more population than Washington DC: Boston, Houston, Philadelphia, Miami, Atlanta and Dallas F.Worth.

Still an important city and UA hub of course.
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
 
UA744Flagship
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 1999 1:55 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:16 am

LAXINTL... welcome to my RU list. Very sound explanation.

And hits particularly close to home with me as I had always asked planning why we didn't do a nonstop to GIG like DL does w/ATL.

The simplistic explanation given was always "two frequencies appeals to business travelers" and the whole S-Curve economics spiel.

Now my question for you is this: why aren't you with the company in planning, and how are you so privy to insider UA knowledge (PM me).
no wire hangers!
 
hardiwv
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:30 pm

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:33 am

Quoting UA744Flagship (Reply 43):
And hits particularly close to home with me as I had always asked planning why we didn't do a nonstop to GIG like DL does w/ATL.

The explanation was as sound as UA results in its second daily flight to GRU: a complete failure, especially if contrasted to DL risky decision to venture into the GIG market with no local partner airliner and no established fascilities.

There is no explanation but to accept the fact that UA did not do its homework properly (market analysis) as DL did. Also, there are no excuses for UA not operating GIG nonstop in a destination where it already is well known, could capitalise on FFs pax base, and is the second biggest Brazilian market after GRU, not to mention that RG dominates the GIG market.

No explanation so far on UA's failure to serve GIG nonstop, while DL can serve GRU twice daily and GIG nonstop (all prime time). I'm sure UA deeply regreted its decision to put three daily GRU nonstop, while relegating GIG to one daily with stop and midday arrival...this is what Brazil's second biggest market gets from a Star partner...and it explains why SkyTeam is growing and getting a firm grip in GIG!

Rgs,
 
incitatus
Posts: 3380
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:09 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 33):
You are also forgetting that United Airlines maintains a three-class product to Rio de Janeiro, while Continental uses smaller equipment in a two-class product.

If you've ever been inside the "3-class" 767-300 of United, you'd call it the "2 1/2-class" product. Judge for yourself...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Matthew Lee - Contrails Aviation Photography



Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 34):
There is a significant number of public servants traveling between those cities and an increasing number of Brasilienses making leisure trips to Washington too.

For that number to be significant so that IAD-BSB warrants service, daily traffic has to be in the dozens, at least. Then BSB has to generate traffic to other destinations for the plane to fill up to an acceptable load. Routings such as BSB-IAD-MIA are very unatractive, so it is unlikely a US airline will enter BSB-IAD. Also consider this: BSB-EZE is a much larger market than BSB-IAD. Is there nonstop service BSB-EZE? And that market could be served with a small 737.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
The 2nd IAD-GRU flight was added basically to hang on to traffic rights.

That is the only acceptable explanation. However, it seems to be a losing proposition. United has no candidate market for a third flight, so this is a defensive strategy - that is, only prevent service additions from competitors.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
incitatus
Posts: 3380
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:26 am

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 41):
Your point about AF: It is a BIG mistake to say that AF uses the B747 to GIG to capitalise on the leisure market. This is WRONG! AF is always FULL in ALL classes to GIG. AF was operating the A340/A330 to GIG with one leg daylight, results were so excellent that they introduced the B747 and both legs are now red-eye. AF has two configurations for the B747: 40J/393Y or 17J/457Y. Guess which one they use to GIG? 40J/393Y, showing clearly that GIG is a high-yielding market for AF!!!

Hardiw - maybe it is time for you to concede this one? 40J/393Y is highly skwewed towards coach seats, so the 747 is there because of leisure traffic. I have no idea who's on the flight but my guess is that an awful lot of seats are filled with Club Med customers.

Rio does have its share of business traffic and XXX-CDG-GIG is as good a routing as XXX-GRU-GIG. Due to little competition on Europe-GIG nonstops, AF gets a lot of that business traffic. In that case, like you commented, 40 J seats is not a lot and the flight is frequently booked up in front. Were leisure traffic unimportant, they'd be using the 777-300 with 75 premium seats and still 235 coach seats. But they aren't because Rio has so much leisure traffic.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:41 am

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 42):

Hmm, I suspect that you've only accounted for NYC, LA and Chicago to be larger but according to the latest revision of the World Urbanization Prospects report from the United Nations the following Metro's have more population than Washington DC: Boston, Houston, Philadelphia, Miami, Atlanta and Dallas F.Worth.

The US census is in stark contrast with that.

N
 
Brasuca
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 12:09 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:42 am

Firstly, neither IAD or ORD pool as two O&D at Brazil and UA relies heavily on connections, which could be gotten anywhere: GIG, GRU, BSB.

But starting a new non-stop destination increases loads incredibly, specially when this destination is the current under-serviced Rio de Janeiro, which lacks non-stop to all the Northern USA and Southeast Canada > UA could much fill this gap.

Sao Paulo is no doubt the biggest market in Brazil, but people fail sometimes to recognise Rio hasn't got all the flights the city demands, as they pay the price of their proximity to GRU.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 45):
If you've ever been inside the "3-class" 767-300 of United, you'd call it the "2 1/2-class" product

 rotfl 
Varig, Varig, Varig
 
BigGSFO
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 5:27 am

RE: UA With Poor Loads On Flight 824 GRU-IAD

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:55 am

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 45):
Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
The 2nd IAD-GRU flight was added basically to hang on to traffic rights.

That is the only acceptable explanation. However, it seems to be a losing proposition. United has no candidate market for a third flight, so this is a defensive strategy - that is, only prevent service additions from competitors.

Could they sell these frequencies, or would they go back up for grabs if UA decides not to use them under the current US/Brasil bilateral?

If all UA is doing is holding the authority, not sure what the benefit is to keep it if they could sell it for cash. I understand route authority to Brasil is hard to come by but I would think if something is underperforming then it would be better to abandon it and allocate those resources elsewhere. I am sure UA can come up with better use of 2 767's than send them on a second IAD-GRU if it isn't making money.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 757236, Aerobrit, Arniepie, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Blerg, Bluebird191, c933103, Cyrus, dcs921, dolphinflyer, Eiszeit, Flaps, Flyscot, Oliver2020, Opus99, sunking737, TravelsUK, User001, ZKSUJ and 223 guests

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