New Competition to China

rotate

Member
Sep 2, 2002
75
0
What are the "Wizards of Whacker" going to do when they get real competition to China? US and WN are making profits without these "near monopoly" routes. UA's management is all talk.

· Airlines lining up to add flights/Deal could put an end to United's dominance (Chicago Tribune) Trade talks between the U.S. and China have yielded a large jump in the future number of flights between the two countries, opening up a lucrative market dominated by United Airlines. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters announced Wednesday that U.S.-China flights on U.S. air carriers would increase from 10 a day to 23 in five years. "We have a breakthrough agreement that opens the way for more frequent, affordable and convenient air service between China and the United States," Peters said in written remarks. She estimated the additional flights will create $5 billion in new business for U.S. airlines. The agreement on more flights came as part of high-level U.S.-China trade talks that concluded in Washington Wednesday. The two countries engage in a massive and increasing amount of trade and investment, and many travelers now must make multiple stops or fly on foreign carriers to reach China. Chicago-based United has the strongest position, offering two daily flights from both Chicago and San Francisco to Shanghai and Beijing, and a fifth flight from Washington, D.C., to Beijing. By contrast, American offers a single daily flight from Chicago to Shanghai, and Continental has a single daily flight from Newark, N.J., to Beijing. Northwest offers a connecting flight from Japan to China but no non-stop service. The accord also includes the right for Chinese carriers to add more flights to the U.S. Those airlines aren't using all of their existing U.S. flying rights. Flying to China can be expensive. Anyone booking a round-trip flight Wednesday for a five-day trip to Shanghai beginning Monday would pay $2,311 for an economy seat, $12,311 for business class and $17,338 for first class, according to United's online booking service. Observers predict that because demand is so great, business air fares won't fall despite an inevitable increase in competition. Business travelers are the most lucrative customers for airlines. "The demand for travel over there is so great, and the supply is so constricted, the price of the good seats will stay high," said Darryl Jenkins, an airline consultant. The deal comes up short of Washington's goal of fully liberalizing air travel between the two countries. Peters said both sides agreed, however, to begin talks in 2010 on a open-skies accord. Transportation officials said two new flights, one to be awarded this year and another in 2009, will go to airlines that do not serve China. That means, the likely winner would be either Delta Air Lines, the largest U.S. airline now shut out of China, or U.S. Airways, or both. They, plus the four airlines already serving China, account for the bulk of U.S. air travel abroad. Delta is trying to persuade the Transportation Department to grant it this year's route. "Delta flights to Shanghai will link the world's largest [airport] and the 55 million people in the Southeast to China," said Delta spokesman Kent Landers. US Airways executives could not be reached for comment. Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with the Teal Group, said that carriers with service to China will try to win more flights. "This is a tightly regulated market with booming demand and good profits from premium traffic passengers," he said. But Aboulafia said United's disproportionate number of flights might handicap the airline in its efforts to gain more access to China. United spokeswoman Jean Medina said some people using the same reasoning thought the airline would have difficulty when it applied to fly from Washington to Beijing. United began flying that route in March. "As we learned when we applied for Washington-Beijing service, the best route proposal that benefits the most customers wins the day," Medina said. American Airlines wants a bigger share of the China market as well. "American is looking forward to its turn to participate," said American spokeswoman Mary Frances Fagan. Northwest wants to add direct flights to China and said it believes the trade accord will make that possible. "The new agreement opens the door for important new routes, including Detroit-Shanghai, Detroit-Beijing and Minneapolis/St. Paul-Shanghai," the airline said in a statement. The trade agreement also benefits the air-cargo industry. It will lift all Chinese government limits on cargo flights and cargo carriers serving the two countries by 2011, the Trade Department said. While not as visible as the passenger business, airborne cargo plays a vital role in international commerce and is the source of thousands of jobs. "This is a large expansion of air-cargo business," Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), co-chair of a House group that focuses on U.S. and China trade issues, said about the agreement. "O'Hare is a substantial base, and this may open up additional business." - May 24, 2007
 
What are the "Wizards of Whacker" going to do when they get real competition to China? US and WN are making profits without these "near monopoly" routes. UA's management is all talk.

· Airlines lining up to add flights/Deal could put an end to United's dominance (Chicago Tribune) Trade talks between the U.S. and China have yielded a large jump in the future number of flights between the two countries, opening up a lucrative market dominated by United Airlines. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters announced Wednesday that U.S.-China flights on U.S. air carriers would increase from 10 a day to 23 in five years. "We have a breakthrough agreement that opens the way for more frequent, affordable and convenient air service between China and the United States," Peters said in written remarks. She estimated the additional flights will create $5 billion in new business for U.S. airlines. The agreement on more flights came as part of high-level U.S.-China trade talks that concluded in Washington Wednesday. The two countries engage in a massive and increasing amount of trade and investment, and many travelers now must make multiple stops or fly on foreign carriers to reach China. Chicago-based United has the strongest position, offering two daily flights from both Chicago and San Francisco to Shanghai and Beijing, and a fifth flight from Washington, D.C., to Beijing. By contrast, American offers a single daily flight from Chicago to Shanghai, and Continental has a single daily flight from Newark, N.J., to Beijing. Northwest offers a connecting flight from Japan to China but no non-stop service. The accord also includes the right for Chinese carriers to add more flights to the U.S. Those airlines aren't using all of their existing U.S. flying rights. Flying to China can be expensive. Anyone booking a round-trip flight Wednesday for a five-day trip to Shanghai beginning Monday would pay $2,311 for an economy seat, $12,311 for business class and $17,338 for first class, according to United's online booking service. Observers predict that because demand is so great, business air fares won't fall despite an inevitable increase in competition. Business travelers are the most lucrative customers for airlines. "The demand for travel over there is so great, and the supply is so constricted, the price of the good seats will stay high," said Darryl Jenkins, an airline consultant. The deal comes up short of Washington's goal of fully liberalizing air travel between the two countries. Peters said both sides agreed, however, to begin talks in 2010 on a open-skies accord. Transportation officials said two new flights, one to be awarded this year and another in 2009, will go to airlines that do not serve China. That means, the likely winner would be either Delta Air Lines, the largest U.S. airline now shut out of China, or U.S. Airways, or both. They, plus the four airlines already serving China, account for the bulk of U.S. air travel abroad. Delta is trying to persuade the Transportation Department to grant it this year's route. "Delta flights to Shanghai will link the world's largest [airport] and the 55 million people in the Southeast to China," said Delta spokesman Kent Landers. US Airways executives could not be reached for comment. Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with the Teal Group, said that carriers with service to China will try to win more flights. "This is a tightly regulated market with booming demand and good profits from premium traffic passengers," he said. But Aboulafia said United's disproportionate number of flights might handicap the airline in its efforts to gain more access to China. United spokeswoman Jean Medina said some people using the same reasoning thought the airline would have difficulty when it applied to fly from Washington to Beijing. United began flying that route in March. "As we learned when we applied for Washington-Beijing service, the best route proposal that benefits the most customers wins the day," Medina said. American Airlines wants a bigger share of the China market as well. "American is looking forward to its turn to participate," said American spokeswoman Mary Frances Fagan. Northwest wants to add direct flights to China and said it believes the trade accord will make that possible. "The new agreement opens the door for important new routes, including Detroit-Shanghai, Detroit-Beijing and Minneapolis/St. Paul-Shanghai," the airline said in a statement. The trade agreement also benefits the air-cargo industry. It will lift all Chinese government limits on cargo flights and cargo carriers serving the two countries by 2011, the Trade Department said. While not as visible as the passenger business, airborne cargo plays a vital role in international commerce and is the source of thousands of jobs. "This is a large expansion of air-cargo business," Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), co-chair of a House group that focuses on U.S. and China trade issues, said about the agreement. "O'Hare is a substantial base, and this may open up additional business." - May 24, 2007
United will beg next for Washington-Shanghai so we get more of those old Denver and Chicago flight attendants commuting to Dulles to fly Asia. All they do is bid the trips and dump them. I hope United gets smart and makes them fly 65hr a month so they will leave ual. It's time for some less weightless flight attendants to fly these routes. The asian must laugh at these big girls who fly for ual far asian routes.
 
Say what you mean. If they are all dumping their trips, then how do you know their size? Maybe the ones dumping their trips are tiny and the ones picking them up are gigantic.
 
Speaking directly to your topic... "rotate", (and as an AAer) I believe VERY-VERY Strongly, that between UAL and AA,...CAN(ton) is the KEY piece to the (successful puzzle), meaning , since AA will have an advantage over UAL, (because they just received the last award,), that AA needs to come out STRONG/FAST and Very Forceful for ORD/CAN.
Since AA already has ORD/PVG, they can ease into a JFK/PEK, a year or two later.

NH/BB's

Ps,

Hey FLY, which do you prefer for your Chinese takeout.
Mandarin...or..Cantonese ??
(Up here in the BEAN TOWN area....Cantonese is KING)
 
Speaking directly to your topic... "rotate", (and as an AAer) I believe VERY-VERY Strongly, that between UAL and AA,...CAN(ton) is the KEY piece to the (successful puzzle), meaning , since AA will have an advantage over UAL, (because they just received the last award,), that AA needs to come out STRONG/FAST and Very Forceful for ORD/CAN.
Since AA already has ORD/PVG, they can ease into a JFK/PEK, a year or two later.
Are you referring to this year's slot allocation, or next year when the Chinese city must be CAN?

UA won't win the next allocation because they just won and already have so many, but I don't think that disadvantage will carry over to 2008 and SFO-CAN. That doesn't mean I think they are guaranteed to win SFO-CAN as AA ORD-CAN would be a strong application, but with the DOT giving greater weight to a 744 than a 772 I think UA would win.
 
Are you referring to this year's slot allocation, or next year when the Chinese city must be CAN?

UA won't win the next allocation because they just won and already have so many, but I don't think that disadvantage will carry over to 2008 and SFO-CAN. That doesn't mean I think they are guaranteed to win SFO-CAN as AA ORD-CAN would be a strong application, but with the DOT giving greater weight to a 744 than a 772 I think UA would win.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I agree with you whindler on the 744 point, but I like AA's chances from ORD to CAN, simply because of the so many routes to China, that UAL already has, plus it would be AA's first attempted entry into CAN.

Hey COSMO, .... Get into the conversation. It's always a pleasure to hear the professor teach !! :up:

NH/BB's
 
Hey COSMO, .... Get into the conversation. It's always a pleasure to hear the professor teach !! :up:
OK, who could resist such a request?

I believe this year's award will go to Delta for ATL-PVG since a new entrant can be chosen. Of course, US will propose PHL-PVG and HA will propose HNL-??? (probably PVG) but I see this year's award as Delta's to lose.

For the 2008 award, I think UA is in the strongest position because, as noted, they will almost certainly propose operating SFO-CAN daily with B747-400s, SFO has no nonstop service to CAN, no U.S. carrier serves CAN nonstop from the U.S. mainland, and the vast majority of U.S.-CAN traffic travels to and from California. These factors were the DOT's primary considerations in the recent U.S.-China case where UA won IAD-PEK rights, and if that precedent holds, UA should win SFO-CAN rights next year.

I think that an AA proposal for ORD-CAN has a lot of surface appeal, but I don't think the traffic numbers are there to properly support it. Can AA even fly ORD-CAN nonstop under the current APA pilots agreement? And if AA decided to apply for LAX-CAN (the next most logical route for it IMHO), I think it will get the same DOT reaction that CO got last year with regard to its EWR-PVG proposal -- there's already nonstop service in the LAX-CAN market by China Southern while SFO has the most traffic of the other proposed U.S. gateways but no nonstop CAN service at all.

As for the other carriers (CO, NW and presumably DL), I don't think CO and DL will seriously pursue the 2008 award, and the DOT has essentially told NW that it won't get any new China routes as long as all of its current flights operate via NRT.

Going out one year further to 2009, I believe AA (ORD-PEK), CO (EWR-PVG) and DL (ATL-PEK) will each get their second China route, with either US or HA getting the next carrier designation. And if US doesn't get its act together, HA could easily win that designation.

All of this is JMHO.
 
After re-reading the earlier 2007 award (UA IAD-PEK) a couple times, I keep agreeing with whlinder; how on earth can CO, DL or AA (or any other new entrants, like US or F9) compete without 747s?!? CO was spanked for proposing to fly tiny little 777s instead of gargantuan 747s. Great big huge airplanes offering so much more capacity was deemed to be so beneficial for consumers. :rolleyes:

Or will that factor be given diminished weight now that so many new awards are on the horizon? Airlines without any 747s in their fleet can only hope. B)

I agree with everyone else about NW: Until it flies some of its current authority nonstop to China, its tearful claims that it so desparately wants to offer nonstops to its customers will fall on deaf ears.
 
After re-reading the earlier 2007 award (UA IAD-PEK) a couple times, I keep agreeing with whlinder; how on earth can CO, DL or AA (or any other new entrants, like US or F9) compete without 747s?!?
Buy some A380s... :D

I guess it depends on whether the DOT thinks there is a sufficient supply of seats to China to meet the demand. If the demand exceeds the supply by such a great amount (as it seems to right now) competition matters a lot less and capacity matters a lot more. What good is competition if they're all full and they can all gouge? But at least with a 744 an extra 100 people can be gouged on their way to China each day.

With the flights so full due to the restricted supply right now, IMHO adding a new carrier is less important than adding something else, like an extra 100 seats or new nonstop service in a market that generates a lot of traffic (EWR-PVG).
 
OK, I'll go along with the capacity theory with regard to the 744(I ABSOLUTELY IDOLIZE that A/C) !!

However,

"WHAT IF" the numbers don't add up TO CAN, from SFO, meaning the 744 is flying too many empty seat per week.(remember, we are talking China's THIRD largest city, not PEK or PVG)

Again(hypothetically) if MY numbers theory from SFO, do hold up, then I feel that would put AA on a level playing field to CAN, with UA. A "quick juant" to ORD, is not much of an Imposition for the thousand upon thousand's of CAN bound chinese, from places like NY/BOS/PHL/DCA/ATL/MIA area's !!

Only time will tell, but I only see UAL or AA(possibly NW) interested in CAN. PEK/PVG speak for themselves.

Interesting times ahead, to be sure.

NH/BB's


Ps,

BOY, this is EMBARRASSING !

I'm getting HUNGRY, with this "back and forth banter...about CANTON(like in Cantonese) !

COSMO.......Would you like your spare ribs with ..bone-in, or boneless ???
 
OK, I'll go along with the capacity theory with regard to the 744(I ABSOLUTELY IDOLIZE that A/C) !!

However,

"WHAT IF" the numbers don't add up TO CAN, from SFO, meaning the 744 is flying too many empty seat per week.(remember, we are talking China's THIRD largest city, not PEK or PVG)


CAN has a population of 4.6 million which would rank 2nd in the US after NYC. Not exactly chop liver or, better, chop suey. SFO has the largest Chinese population in the US.
UA has load factors in the 90's for virtually every SFO-Asia flight.
 
Not all routes cry out for the greatest capacity, and CAN may be one of them. Perhaps AA could apply and make it work with a 777. Although conventional wisdom is that AA has to fly to Asia from ORD or DFW, AA could easily make LAX or SFO to China work. Both are huge markets and both feature good connections to JFK, DFW, ORD, MIA and each other. Add in the AS codeshare service and there should be plenty of feed assuming the local O&D from LAX or SFO is insufficient (and I think either could make it on O&D).
 
Not all routes cry out for the greatest capacity, and CAN may be one of them. Perhaps AA could apply and make it work with a 777. Although conventional wisdom is that AA has to fly to Asia from ORD or DFW, AA could easily make LAX or SFO to China work. Both are huge markets and both feature good connections to JFK, DFW, ORD, MIA and each other. Add in the AS codeshare service and there should be plenty of feed assuming the local O&D from LAX or SFO is insufficient (and I think either could make it on O&D).

So if it could make it on O&D traffic with a 777, then why wouldn't it support a 747 with connections?

It would be idiotic for the government to give a route to an airline "for fairness" when it would result in a much lower reward for the travelling public and add less to the economy as a whole.
 
So if it could make it on O&D traffic with a 777, then why wouldn't it support a 747 with connections?

It would be idiotic for the government to give a route to an airline "for fairness" when it would result in a much lower reward for the travelling public and add less to the economy as a whole.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Well (seriously) boxer, (meaning NO disrespect), then(GOD FORBID) maybe Parker(LLC) should pick up a pair of 747's(any model) from Mojave, and apply for the route, from SFO......................or is your line of thinking, that the CAN route SHOULD be awarded to UAL, simply because they ARE the non-stop(US Legacy) king to Asia ???

I've been around AA long enough to know that, if there are SERIOUS about getting into China,(and I really believe they are), with no less than 3 destinations(PEK/PVG/CAN), I can assure you, that they're looking LONG and HARD at CAN.....BEFORE...PEK, which they know will come along automatically in less than 2 years.
I'll go futher to say, that IMHO, outfits like LCC/DL,HA, and perhaps even CO don't give a #### about flying to CAN.
AHH, but to AA/NW and UAL.....thats a whole nuther' story.

CAN, could be the BIGGEST plum out of all the awards, since "Everybody and their Brother" wants to fly PEK.

?????

NH/BB's
 
So if it could make it on O&D traffic with a 777, then why wouldn't it support a 747 with connections?

I didn't say (or imply) that it couldn't. With the proper hub and proper connections, maybe UA could make it work with even an A380. But I'm talking about whether AA could make it work without any 747s.

It would be idiotic for the government to give a route to an airline "for fairness" when it would result in a much lower reward for the travelling public and add less to the economy as a whole.

Who's talking about "fairness." Spreading the authorities around might cause greater competition than granting them to dominant incumbents. We'll see what the DOT says when presented with competing applications.
 

Latest posts