It is truly baffling how E has been able to pull schedules and post schedule comparisons in the past and yet seems completely paralyzed at being unable to find the schedules or data that are under discussion, esp. since the topics have been discussed on sites like airlineroute.
It really is easy for me to make my points when they are based on facts which is precisely what this discussion is about.
Regarding NRT to the US, for Jan 2015 compared to Jan 2014, AA is flying the same amount of capacity. DL is flying 4.3% fewer seats on 4.9% fewer flights and 4.8% fewer ASMs while UA is flying 7.3% fewer flights, 8.6% fewer seats, and 7.9% fewer ASMs.
The percentage reduction in the number of seats UA is offering from NRT to the US is exactly twice what DL is offering.
Within Asia, DL is offering 27% fewer flights with 31% fewer seats and 26% fewer ASMs while UA is offering 33% fewer flights, 54% fewer seats, and 54% fewer ASMs.
Yet, the big 3 US carriers are flying more capacity from the US to East Asia as a whole, let by AA which is adding 29% more seats compared to about 6% for DL and 4% for UA.
It should be clear that DL and UA both continue to shift capacity from NRT to other points in Asia, with the biggest reductions in the NRT capacity coming from beyond NRT flying.
Regarding specific transpacific markets from NRT, DL changes are:
ATL down (downgauge)
DTW up (upgauge)
HNL up (upgauge)
JFK down (downgauge)
LAS up (upgauge)
LAX down (downgauge)
MSP up (upgauge)
SFO (cancelled)
And for UA
1 SFO cancelled, moved to HND
HNL down (downgauge)
IAH up (increased freq)
SEA cxld
If you factor in DL’s winter seasonal cancellation of SEA-HND and UA’s start of SFO-HND, DL and UA have comparable MAINLAND 48 changes to Tokyo service (both airports) with each operating 1 flight from the US to HND while AA and UA each have an additional frequency via their JV partners.
DL still has more capacity beyond NRT to Asia and has cut it less and also is increasing NRT and Japan flying to US island destinations.
Further, AA has cut more flying from Japan on its own metal over the past 3 years than either DL or UA have.
The biggest conclusion that can be made is that UA is working to eliminate its losses on the Pacific during the winter – something it has done for years while DL is slowing growing its overall market presence in Asia while continuing to move capacity out of NRT and maintain their local Japan presence. AA, OTOH, is content to continue to subsidize its Asian operations to the tune of several hundred million dollars per year in an effort to maintain and grow its market presence despite having not been profitable for years.
The data confirms that DL and UA continue to adapt to changes in the market while responsibly growing their overall Pacific networks and their Pacific profitability will very likely validate their strategies.
Finally, all of this data has to be seen in the context of a very strong dollar which particularly reduces the demand for leisure travel, exactly what a carrier such as AA that is trying to grow its market presence in Asia needs. DL and UA have a higher percentage of premium travel between the US and Asia as evidenced by their average fares while AA is filling planes using leisure passengers - most of which originate in Asia.
Factor in the deepening crisis in Argentina and Venezuela and the weakening Brazilian economy compounded again with the stronger dollar relative to the Real and Peso, it will become harder and harder for AA to use its Latin America revenues to subsidize its int'l growth elsewhere.
