Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): despite still showing it as a future route on their July route map |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): so we have to book with our miles in the next month or so to ensure Business Class. |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): (despite still showing it as a future route on their July route map.) |
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 1): Unfortunately, you cannot book the direct flight on NZ with miles through UA. But you can, as you mentioned, book through SYD on UA then SYD-AKL on NZ. |
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3): When did that change? Availability can be tight, but with both UA and NZ as star alliance partners, I didn’t know there was an embargo on North America routes for miles redemption. NZ flights don’t show when you try to book online through the UA’s website, but I didn’t realize they won’t sell them at all. |
Quoting United787 (Reply 2): I would be curious to know how many cities are served on UA via IAH that aren't served via SFO and LAX, I would imagine quite a few... |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): Any insight |
Quoting civetfive (Reply 9): Online booking of awards is UA metal + a few partners; everything else requires a phone call. |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): I know pmUA flew to AKL in the past, and it didn't last, but a 787 might be a lot more profitable on a route like this than the 744's they used to fly on that route. |
Quoting md3 (Reply 12): Having the ability to show partner inventory is very different than accurately producing true inventory for all the partners set up to run through the UA booking engine. Just compare with the results from SkyWeb, and you'll see UA.com results are less than 100% of what's actually available. Some award search engines are just better than others, whether it's programming or something else, I don't know. |
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13): UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003. |
Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13): UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003. UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747. |
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17): As I recall the count was almost 75 counting the airport staff, city office, admin, cargo, reservations etc. |
Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 16): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13): UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003. UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747. But what I think that demonstrates is that even with a smaller more efficient aircraft, UA couldn't get the LAX-AKL route to work for it and chose to codeshare with its alliance partner NZ instead |
Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 18): Its hard to say weather they will try AKL from LAX/SFO I think not myself, but hope i'm wrong |
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20): If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no? |
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20): If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no? |
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20): If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no? |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): (Side question, can you change planes in SYD without going through Australian Customs?) |
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 27): |
Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 22): Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20): If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no? It was in the contracts that people couldn't be layed off since many of them at AKL were from the PA days at AKL whom UA brought the route from along with there other Pacific routes in 1986. |
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 23): In essence the only way to get rid of the people contractually and within local regulations was to close the station. |
Quoting spink (Reply 24): There may of been various union issues that made it complicated to layoff people at that station. It was probably a lot less complicated to partner with NZ and just shutdown their station. |
Quoting cosyr (Thread starter): Any insight anyone has, or just wishful thinking, would be welcome. Thanks! |
Quoting PA515 (Reply 8): Prior to the codeshare NZ and UA competed on AKL-LAX and SYD-LAX and some NZ services included a LAX-HNL sector. Under the codeshare agreement UA ceased AKL-LAX and NZ ceased SYD-LAX and LAX-HNL. |
Quoting thegeek (Reply 30): uoting PA515 (Reply 8): Prior to the codeshare NZ and UA competed on AKL-LAX and SYD-LAX and some NZ services included a LAX-HNL sector. Under the codeshare agreement UA ceased AKL-LAX and NZ ceased SYD-LAX and LAX-HNL. Isn't that illegal collusion? Or did I mistake you. |
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 25): And, if UA re-starts service to AKL (on UA metal), are they free from the PA contractual shackles so they could now staff the station at appropriate levels and/or sub-contract operations to a third party? |
Quoting thegeek (Reply 30): Is it worth it? LAX-SYD-AKL just to use miles. If you flew NZ LAX-AKL you'd save 6+ hours of travelling and get some extra miles. Avoiding UA's 744 service is a good thing too. |
Quoting AVENSAB727 (Reply 28): Maybe, but it depends on the marker, there was a small market for IAH-AKL. |
Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36): BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves. |
Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36): BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves. |
Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15): UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747. |
Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36): BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves. |
Quoting sweair (Reply 39): What routes will the NZ 789s fly? |
Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13): UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003. UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747. |
Quoting Joeljack (Reply 41): On a side note, we arrived HNL and we were placed in a huge room without food and held there for customs processing. We literally spent 8-10 hours in this room waiting for customs with several thousand other people, extremely hot, crowded, so crowded you couldn't even find a place to sit on the floor...it was the worst customs experience of my life by far!!! I will NEVER enter via HNL ever again! |
Quoting sweair (Reply 39): What routes will the NZ 789s fly? |
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 42): It is expected that they will be introduced on the Asian routes with ~ 300 seats replacing the 77E and the 763. There had been mention of a 250-seater version which may be a possibility for long haul. |